President Trumps first 100 days;

ridgerunner · Nov 26, 2017

ace's n 8's · Nov 26, 2017

Trump’s assault on the administrative state will benefit America

Occurring largely behind the scenes, President Trump’s most significant contribution to a more prosperous America is also his least understood: his assault on the administrative state.

The administrative state is the manifestation of a form of government that invests power in an unelected bureaucracy that can write the rules, enforce the rules and sit in judgment on the rules – essentially combining the power of three branches of constitutional government into one.

We are funding an army of 220,000 highly trained people, many of them lawyers, to develop new and more complicated ways to tell the rest of us how to work and live our lives. Were these regulators an actual army, they’d outnumber the army of France.

These 220,000 regulators deploy 185,000 pages of regulations that drain about $1.9 trillion a year out of the economy – about the same amount of money as the federal government collects in individual and corporate income taxes and equal to a little more than one-tenth of the nation’s economic activity.

President Trump has asked Congress to reduce and simplify our tax system in what would be the first major tax reform in 31 years. If successful, it would unshackle the American economy as much as will regulatory reform.

According to the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s annual publication “Ten Thousand Commandments – An Annual Snapshot of the Federal Regulatory State,” we spent some $63 billion in 2016 to pay for regulations and regulators.

These 220,000 regulators deploy 185,000 pages of regulations that drain about $1.9 trillion a year out of the economy – about the same amount of money as the federal government collects in individual and corporate income taxes and equal to a little more than one-tenth of the nation’s economic activity.

shootersa · Nov 26, 2017

And Obamacare enrollment is falling far short of CBO projections. Not that single payer supporters care to admit that.

ace's n 8's · Nov 26, 2017

shootersa said: ↑

And Obamacare enrollment is falling far short of CBO projections. Not that single payer supporters care to admit that.

Click to expand...

Hardly capable of funding itself through the ''fine'' system that was recinded.

earl69er · Nov 27, 2017

The only thing Trump has accomplished is to spend his time either golfing or twitting. His quote: "I wont have time to play golf, I'll be running the country from the White House".

conroe4 · Nov 27, 2017

It's a full time job undoing all the executive orders odumbass impaled us with, and regulations, and green shit that didn't work and never had the chance to work.
he pissed away more than all other presidents combined. fucker.

ace's n 8's · Nov 27, 2017

ace's n 8's said: ↑

Consumer watchdog chief Cordray resigns; he and Trump both name successors

The director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau resigned Friday and named his own successor, leading to an open conflict with President Donald Trump -- who announced a different person as acting head of the agency later in the day.

Under the Dodd-Frank Act that created the CFPB, English would become acting director. Cordray -- an Obama appointee -- specifically cited the law when he moved English, a longtime CFPB employee and ally of his, into that position.

Within a few hours, President Donald Trump announced his own acting director of the agency, Mick Mulvaney, who is currently director of the Office of Management and Budget. Mulvaney had widely been expected to be Trump's temporary pick for the bureau until a permanent one could be found.

Mulvaney is a long-time critic of the CFPB, and has wanted the agency's authority significantly curtailed. So the difference between English and Mulvaney running the agency would be significant.

Funding for this agency is NOT Congressionally authorized, the funding comes straight out of the Fed reserve.
Click to expand...

UPDATE;

Suit challenges Trump's pick for consumer financial bureau

President Donald Trump's appointment of his budget director as interim director of a consumer financial protection agency championed by Democrats was challenged in a lawsuit filed in federal court Sunday night.

Leandra English, the federal official elevated to the position of interim director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau by its outgoing director, filed the suit against Trump and his choice, White House budget director Mick Mulvaney.

English cited the Dodd-Frank Act, which created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. She said that as deputy director, she became the acting director under the law and argued that the federal law the White House contends supports Trump's appointment of Mulvaney doesn't apply when another statute designates a successor.

The White House, with the support of an opinion issued Saturday by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, maintained that the president has the power to appoint an acting director. Steven A. Engel, newly confirmed head of the office, wrote that, while the deputy director may serve as acting director under the statute, the president still has authority under the Vacancies Reform Act.

ace's n 8's · Nov 27, 2017

earl69er said: ↑

The only thing Trump has accomplished is to spend his time either golfing or twitting. His quote: "I wont have time to play golf, I'll be running the country from the White House".
Click to expand...

I stole this from JCP..

As JCP so elegantly put it;

Read 'em & weep, whiners!

stumbler · Nov 27, 2017

I meant to put this up a couple days ago when I read some PR bullshit that Trump promised not to cut social security and/or Medicare. But every time I was going to address that I would start laughing too hard to type.

The GOP Tax Plan Could Force Trump to Break His Promise to Seniors

Big changes are afoot in Washington. After more than 10 months in the White House, tax-reform momentum is building for President Trump after House Republicans passed, by a 227-to-205 vote, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Following the failure of Congress to come to an agreement on healthcare reforms earlier this year, Trump is looking for his first major legislative victory as president, and he views tax reform, a key campaign pledge, as a means to get it.

As for corporations, the peak marginal income-tax rate would be lowered to 20% from 35%. The thinking here is that putting more money into the pockets of businesses will lead to job creation and higher wages. Since the U.S. economy relies on consumption for about 70% of GDP, both lower taxes on the middle class and corporations should help boost spending, as Republicans see it.

The GOP tax plan comes with a price
But there's a price to be paid for this massive overhaul to the U.S. tax code. According to an analysis conducted by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the GOP tax plan would add about $1.5 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. Yes, that figure includes the positive impacts of lower tax rates on consumers and corporations. It means that the GOP needs to find ways to boost revenue and/or cut expenses to bridge this gap. Otherwise, the results could be disastrous.

Should Republicans pass the House GOP tax bill in its current form but fail to reduce the long-term (i.e., 10-year) deficit, the paygo budget rule, which was introduced in 1990, would be triggered. Paygo, which is short for "pay as you go," is a budget rule requiring that tax cuts, as well as increases in entitlement and mandatory spending categories, be covered by tax increases and/or cuts in mandatory spending -- though it doesn't apply to discretionary spending. In other words, if the 10-year cost of a program is greater than $0 -- in the case of the GOP tax plan, it's close to $1.5 trillion -- as determined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), it would trigger sequestration.

What's sequestration? It's the process of applying across-the-board spending cuts to mandatory spending programs. According to estimates from the CBO, sequestration would require $136 billion worth of cuts in mandatory spending in 2018 if the GOP doesn't find a way to raise additional capital or make further cuts in spending.

President Trump might be forced to break a key promise on entitlements
The Hill. It's possible the OMB may not be able to scrape enough from these mandatory programs to cover the entirety of the $136 billion. " data-reactid="65">Where would this $136 billion come from? Glad you asked. Most of it -- say, $85 billion to $90 billion -- would be derived from cuts to agricultural subsidies, Customs and Border Patrol operations, Student Loan Administration funding, and some of the health funds for the Affordable Care Act, according to The Hill. It's possible the OMB may not be able to scrape enough from these mandatory programs to cover the entirety of the $136 billion.

More importantly, $25 billion would need to be cut from Medicare, the healthcare program that covers about 58 million Americans, of which five out of six are senior citizens aged 65 and up. If there's a silver lining here, paygo can't cut Medicare by more than 4% in a year.

But here are the two issues at hand. First, if the deficit remains in 2019, 2020, and beyond, paygo would kick in and continue to reduce mandatory spending to counter the increase in the deficit caused by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Thus, a 4% cut to Medicare spending could become the norm year after year until the deficit is resolved.

Second, it would require Trump to break perhaps his most important campaign promise: the pledge that he wouldn't cut funding to so-called "entitlement programs" like Social Security and Medicare. Seniors are the primary beneficiaries of these programs, and they'd be none too pleased if their funding was cut to pay for tax reforms.

Trump has broken a promise before
technically already been broken. Back in May, the president released his outline for the fiscal 2018 federal budget, and in that proposal was a $72 billion cut over the next 10 years to the Social Security Disability program. Even though this failed to make it into the final budget, the mere fact that Trump attempted to pass along a cut to any part of Social Security goes against his pledge to leave these vital programs alone.

While I don't believe we'll see Medicare subjected to paygo-induced sequestration, the GOP tax plan and previous attempts at health reform do lay down a few clues on where Republicans are looking to save money. Within healthcare reform, the GOP had been looking to slash Medicaid funding by up to $800 billion over the next decade.

Meanwhile, the current GOP tax bill contains a provision allowing the federal government to tether tax provisions to the Chained Consumer Price Index (CPI). Unlike the standard CPI, the Chained CPI takes into account something known as substitution bias. This is the idea that consumers will trade down to cheaper goods or services as others become more expensive. Switching to the Chained CPI would result in smaller annual inflationary increases. Though it doesn't specifically mean that the Chained CPI would be used as a measure for Social Security or Medicare, it certainly opens the door for that to happen. And if it did happen, it would mean smaller cost-of-living adjustments for Social Security recipients that'd save the federal government money.

The GOP looks to expedite tax reform, but questions remain
Another factor that comes into play is that the GOP is hard-pressed to pass tax reforms, given that one of their 52 seats in the Senate is up for election in Alabama. Without any expected Democratic support, they can only afford to lose two votes at present and still have tax reform pass in the Senate. If they lose their seat in Alabama, the margin for error becomes just one GOP Senator. They couldn't pass healthcare reform with a two-seat majority in the Senate, so a one-seat majority for tax reform could be impossible if they're looking to approach things unilaterally.

What taxpayers and especially seniors should keep in mind at the moment is that tax reform often means compromise, either within a party or with the other political party. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act probably won't look the same once it's been voted on in the Senate, which means there's a chance of no sequestration whatsoever to Medicare and other mandatory spending programs in the years that lie ahead.

Only time will give us more answers.
Click to expand...

Distant Lover · Nov 27, 2017

stumbler said: ↑

I meant to put this up a couple days ago when I read some PR bullshit that Trump promised not to cut social security and/or Medicare. But every time I was going to address that I would start laughing too hard to type.

The GOP Tax Plan Could Force Trump to Break His Promise to Seniors
Click to expand...

But! But! Trump promised not to cut Social Security and Medicare. He's never been known to lie before.

Right? Right?

shootersa · Nov 27, 2017

Proving a much bigger point;
That which Government gives, Government can take away...

RandyKnight · Nov 27, 2017

White House Christmas

stumbler · Nov 27, 2017

Poll: Majority of small businesses oppose GOP tax bill

A majority of small businesses in a new survey opposes the GOP tax plan.

A Public Policy Polling poll, released by Businesses for Responsible Tax Reform, a group opposed to the GOP tax bills, finds 51 percent of small businesses are against the plan. About one-third, 34 percent, support the GOP tax plan.

Slightly more than 50 percent of the small business owners surveyed think the GOP tax plan supports large corporations over small businesses.

A majority of small business owners also said the plan will benefit wealthy corporations the most.

The survey was conducted from Nov. 17 to 18 by the Democratic firm. It included responses from 794 small business owners.

Senate Republicans are rushing to pass their tax plan this week, after it was voted out of the Senate Finance Committee along party lines.

Republicans can lose only two GOP senators, if every Democrat votes no, if they want to get the legislation passed. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) has announced his opposition to the plan.

Several GOP senators have raised concerns about the impact the tax plan could have on the deficit.

If the Senate passes its plan this week, Republicans will still need to work out a deal in conference committee to reconcile the differences between the Senate version and the House bill passed before Thanksgiving, and pass that final conference legislation.
Click to expand...

JimmyCrackPorn · Nov 27, 2017

stumbler said: ↑

Poll: Majority of small businesses oppose GOP tax bill
Click to expand...

Yep. Always believe a poll when the person who posts it offers not one freakin' link.

Distant Lover · Nov 27, 2017

JimmyCrackPorn said: ↑

Yep. Always believe a poll when the person who posts it offers not one freakin' link.
Click to expand...

Do an internet search for one of the sentences. If anyone posts a web address the web site might have a photo of a minor, or it might put one there later. In that case the poster might be suspended.

Distant Lover · Nov 27, 2017

RandyKnight said: ↑

White House Christmas

Click to expand...

I do like that picture.

RandyKnight · Nov 27, 2017

Distant Lover said: ↑

I do like that picture.
Click to expand...

well then watch this and look for the Nativity Scene

DNN Deplorable News Network
Published on Nov 27, 2017

The most beautiful Whitehouse Christmas EVER!!!
"The decorations are up! The White House is ready to celebrate! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and joyous holiday season!"
~Melania Trump

JimmyCrackPorn · Nov 27, 2017

HaydenProfitt said: ↑

Mr Trump got on twitter and boasted that he thought that Time magazine was probably going to name him man of the year, with no evidence that there was any basis for this assumption by the way and ended his tweet by saying that he would pass on an interview. Time was quick to correct him by saying that they do not discuss this honor with potential recipients until a specific date and went on to basically say he was chasing dust bunnies again and has denied his claims. Maybe it has something to do with all of the fake Time magazine covers he hangs in his golf courses/resorts.
Click to expand...

Maybe not. Maybe Time just didn't like getting the brush off.

JimmyCrackPorn · Nov 27, 2017

Distant Lover said: ↑

Do an internet search for one of the sentences. If anyone posts a web address the web site might have a photo of a minor, or it might put one there later. In that case the poster might be suspended.
Click to expand...

Fuck that! Let him post proof of his own damned post!

stumbler · Nov 28, 2017

Senate GOP tax bill hurts the poor more than originally thought, CBO finds

The Senate Republican tax plan gives substantial tax cuts and benefits to Americans earning more than $100,000 a year, while the nation’s poorest would be worse off, according to a report released Sunday by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Republicans are aiming to have the full Senate vote on the tax plan as early as this week, but the new CBO analysis showing large, harmful effects on the poor may complicate those plans. The CBO also said the bill would add $1.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, a potential problem for Republican lawmakers worried about America’s growing debt.

Democrats have repeatedly slammed the bill as a giveaway to the rich at the expense of the poor. In addition to lowering taxes for businesses and many individuals, the Senate bill also makes a major change to health insurance that the CBO projects would have a harsh impact on lower-income families.

By 2019, Americans earning less than $30,000 a year would be worse off under the Senate bill, CBO found. By 2021, Americans earning $40,000 or less would be net losers, and by 2027, most people earning less than $75,000 a year would be worse off. On the flip side, millionaires and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations. (In the CBO table below, negative signs mean people in those income brackets pay less in taxes).

The main reason the poor get hit so hard in the Senate GOP bill is because the poor would receive less government aid for health care.

The Senate Republican tax bill eliminates the requirement that almost all Americans purchase health insurance or else pay a penalty. The CBO has calculated that health insurance premiums would rise if this bill becomes law, leading 4 million Americans to lose health insurance by 2019 and 13 million to lose insurance by 2027.

Many of the people who are likely to drop health insurance have low or moderate incomes. If they drop health insurance, they will no longer receive some tax credits and subsidies from the government. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), the other official nonpartisan group that analyzes tax bills, put out a similar report showing how lower-income families are hurt by the loss of the health-care tax credits. But the CBO goes a step further than the JCT. The CBO also calculates what would happen to Medicaid, Medicare and the Basic Health Program if the Senate GOP plan became law. The CBO is showing even worse impacts on poor families than the JCT did.

Republicans, including Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), have argued that their bill helps Americans across the income spectrum. They say the JCT and CBO analyses are misleading because buying health insurance is a choice. If an individual or family no longer wants to do it, then that is their decision. They also argue that lower-income families are not losing any money in their wallets.

The CBO and JCT analyses make it seem as if a family is actually getting money taken away from them, but in reality, most of these families making under $30,000 don’t pay any income tax. The credits and subsidies they received to help them buy health insurance were typically sent directly from the government to the insurance company. So these families are unlikely to see any changes to their tax bills.

But Democrats and advocates for the poor say these lower-income Americans are going to be worse off if they no longer have health insurance.

Senate Republicans asked the JCT to calculate what happens to families across the income spectrum if only the tax impacts of the Senate bill are taken into account (so assuming zero impacts from the individual mandate repeal). The JCT sent the table below to Senate Republicans. It shows that all income groups — including people earning less than $30,000 — receive a tax cut.

But that changes in 2027 because the Senate GOP bill currently allows the individual tax cuts to expire in 2026. In 2027, people earning less than $75,000 would end up paying more, according to the JCT. Republicans say Congress will likely extend those cuts, but that counts on future lawmakers taking action.
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

ridgerunner gardener of stone

ace's n 8's Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

ace's n 8's Porn Star

earl69er Amateur

conroe4 Lake Lover In XNXX Heaven

ace's n 8's Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

Distant Lover Master of Facts

shootersa Frisky Feline

RandyKnight Have Gun, Will Travel

stumbler Porn Star

JimmyCrackPorn Porn Star

Distant Lover Master of Facts

Distant Lover Master of Facts

RandyKnight Have Gun, Will Travel

JimmyCrackPorn Porn Star

JimmyCrackPorn Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

President Trumps first 100 days;

Log in or Sign up

ridgerunner gardener of stone

ace's n 8's Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

ace's n 8's Porn Star

earl69er Amateur

conroe4 Lake Lover In XNXX Heaven

ace's n 8's Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

Distant Lover Master of Facts

shootersa Frisky Feline

RandyKnight Have Gun, Will Travel

stumbler Porn Star

JimmyCrackPorn Porn Star

Distant Lover Master of Facts

Distant Lover Master of Facts

RandyKnight Have Gun, Will Travel

JimmyCrackPorn Porn Star

JimmyCrackPorn Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

Useful Searches