From the event last night

[mule_eer]

Again, Larry Kudlow doesn't speak of Trump's economic policy objectives or beliefs on his own. He speaks for Trump! In case you haven't noticed, we're in the middle of an election cycle where these issues will be front and center. Trump needs super majorities in both Houses to have any chance of implementing these ideas since Democrats (and some Republicans) will NEVER support privatization of any Government run programs.

However as I mentioned, this is Trump's governing philosophy...from Health Insurance, to Education, to Space exploration, all the way up to and including Social Security and Medicare. You correctly mentioned there is the political reality that Americans must be convinced privatization works better than Government funding before legislation proposing such can be supported and passed.

This is why we vote. You're arguing something about Trump you claim doesn't exist, I'm arguing something about him that's part of his core philosophy regarding his views on Government's role in our lives.

Again, where's the activity on it? Where's the push for it? Not on the campaign website, not in his speeches, not in his tweets. He had a stance in 2000 that is markedly different than the approach he was touting in 2011 and beyond.

And you probably missed my edit (not your fault) that Trump supported a single 14.25% tax on all people worth more than $10 million to pay off the national debt in 2000. If you believe his comments in 2000 about retiree benefits are not nixed by his more recent comments on that exact issue, why do you believe that he has moved off the one-time tax of the 1% to fix the debt? maybe he's waiting for a super majority of democrats to work with him on that issue.

 

[atlkvb]

Again, in 2000 he was all about privatization. He's changed lanes on that since, evidenced by quotes you have referenced. I have no argument that this was his stance in 2000. In 2013 he was telling the GOP that making chanes to Soc Sec and Medicare were bad politics. The fix was to improve the economy, hence income, hence money flowing into the fund.

You are correct in terms of his immediate "strategy" based on the political reality he faced (and still does). I'm saying his long term solution for addressing the fiscal disarray of both programs is for Privatization. I agree with you he's not out there running on that today, but I'm telling you this is his longer term objective which he believes is the ultimate answer towards making both programs financially sustainable. Short term, I do agree with you about what his strategy so far has been to address the current red ink both programs are running. ie: a stronger economy.

 

[mule_eer]

You are correct in terms of his immediate "strategy" based on the political reality he faced (and still does). I'm saying his long term solution for addressing the fiscal disarray of both programs is for Privatization. I agree with you he's not out there running that today, but I'm telling you this is his longer term objective which he believes is the ultimate answer towards making both programs sustainable. Short term, I do agree with you about what his strategy so far has been to address the current red ink both programs are running.

That's your opinion of his stance. You can find pictures of me from the late 90's wearing a St Louis Cardinals hat. That means nothing about where I stand on that team today.

 

[atlkvb]

That's your opinion of his stance. You can find pictures of me from the late 90's wearing a St Louis Cardinals hat. That means nothing about where I stand on that team today.

Well, if you're arguing Trump today isn't committed long term to privatization not just of Social Security and Medicare but a whole array of Government run programs you'd be wrong. I gather you don't agree with him on that or support that, but many of us who agree with him do and it's a big reason why he enjoys such strong support among Republican base voters, most of whom are firmly committed to seeing those types of structural long term reforms in most Government run boondoggles.

This upcoming election will indeed represent a stark contrast between two governing philosophies (someone in this thread called it Socialism vs Capitalism) and under which direction Americans prefer to be governed?

To me it's very clear, you disagree?

 

[mule_eer]

Well, if you're arguing Trump today isn't committed long term to privatization not just of Social Security and Medicare but a whole array of Government run programs you'd be wrong. I gather you don't agree with him on that or support that, but many of us who agree with him do and it's a big reason why he enjoys such strong support among Republican base voters, most of whom are firmly committed to seeing those types of structural long term reforms in most Government run boondoggles.

This upcoming election will indeed represent a stark contrast between two governing philosophies (someone in this thread called it Socialism vs Capitalism) and under which direction Americans prefer to be governed?

To me it's very clear, you disagree?

I disagree that you have any evidence that Trump wants to move toward privatization of Soc Sec and Medicare from the last decade. You are free to believe what you choose, but you are believing that without evidence to support it.

 

[atlkvb]

I disagree that you have any evidence that Trump wants to move toward privatization of Soc Sec and Medicare from the last decade. You are free to believe what you choose, but you are believing that without evidence to support it.

I'm certainly not going to argue with you about why I'm supporting Trump. If you think I do because he wants to expand those Socialist programs I can't talk you out of it. However I can promise you my support for him is NOT because I don't believe he's committed to their long term reforms which include privatization. I support him on that effort, as well as his efforts to reform/privatize operations in education, health care, the VA, Air traffic controllers, Housing and Urban development, EPA, energy, commerce, Telecommunications, even the IRS!

Trump's agenda is to eliminate as much Government as we possibly can and if you don't think he's genuine in that or I'm supporting him because of his phony agenda on all of that you Sir would be 100% dead wrong.

 

[Shirley Knott]

Still waiting for Don Jr.s indictment.

I heard somewhere it would be on the 15th....

 

[atlkvb]

you probably missed my edit (not your fault) that Trump supported a single 14.25% tax on all people worth more than $10 million to pay off the national debt in 2000. If you believe his comments in 2000 about retiree benefits are not nixed by his more recent comments on that exact issue, why do you believe that he has moved off the one-time tax of the 1% to fix the debt? maybe he's waiting for a super majority of democrats to work with him on that issue.

As he explained in that plan I linked to, with sustained economic growth and a healthy balance sheet in terms of federal revenues v outlays, that idea (IMO) deserves some consideration as part of an overall comprehensive proposal to reform both programs. (entitlements btw are the biggest drivers of our debt) Honestly, I'm not opposed to the general concept, so long as the objective is long term reform away from mandatory Government funding of these types of programs and towards individual private investments.

However, some serious re-education of Americans is needed along with reliable funding of existing beneficiaries who are due promised benefits. The public won't accept the latter without some assurances (especially for older Americans at or near retirement) and the former requires deeper commitment as well as understanding of some basic fundamentals behind how most wealth in this nation is generated under our Capitalist system. Quite frankly not enough Americans are even minimally informed about that. My own personal opinion is I believe it's by design from Government educators & media propagandists who have no desire to see vast majorities of Americans non-dependent on Government programs for their economic well being.

 

[bamaEER]

I didn’t realize he was running against Hillary again. Seems like a good strategy.

He can't stop talking about HRC. He's obsessed.

 

[dave]

He can't stop talking about HRC. He's obsessed.

Probably because of who is on the other side of those 33k emails.