Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
A certain poster has been going wild posting anti-Biden, pro-Trump threads for several days. I doubt if he has won any converts but he has certainly lowered my view of him. Does this forum have an ignore function? I don’t come here to see this drivel.
If you're looking only for fund discussions and wish to ignore all off-topic posts then you could click on "Fund Discussions" in the list under CATEGORIES. Hopefully this helps.
Regardless of one's political leanings we seem to have reached a new low in misusing and abusing MFO as a relay for Zero Hedge trash. Then again, considering the destruction of national civility in the last three years, I suppose that it's just more of the same, and to be expected if not appreciated.
Folks I got tired of reading all the post that bashed Trump ... Now, those that were active in doing this can read, or at least have to look at title lines, that bash Biden and crew. Have a good day as many of you brought this to the board and now you simple can't stand it that others are posting opposing views. Get use to it because I plan for it to continue. Good Day!
By the way ... Trump is pro business ... Biden is pro taxation. Vote for Pro Business we will all be better off.
Folks I got tired of reading all the post that bashed Trump ... Now, those that were active in doing this can read, or at least have to look at title lines, that bash Biden and crew. Have a good day as many of you brought this to the board and now you simple can't stand it that others are posting opposing views. Get use to it because I plan for it to continue. Good Day!
- I may have started all this with my “Biden’s VP Pick” thread last week. It was intended as a guessing game - just for fun. I thought it would remain civil and end relatively soon. I’m so sorry. Using the forum for frequent partisan debate doesn’t do anyone any good and detracts, IMHO, from the board’s stated goals and purposes.
- After the VP thread turned partisan, I called for civility, citing a passage from Desiderata about respect and tolerance of / for others with different opinions. One poster later dismissed the entire work as “drivel”.
- While Desiderata may not be considered religion, it’s the nearest thing to religion I possess. I grew up with it and try to follow its precepts. For those who would trample on my religion, I’ll cite another even more relevant passage - this from the Bible. Anyone care to trample on that?
* “He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool shall be servant to the wise of heart” (Proverbs 11:29).
There are two possible solutions to the angst some of us feel. The first, as @Mark and @carew388 suggest, is to ignore all “off-topic” threads. That sounds a bit like opening your home to a party and telling folks “stay out of that corner if you don’t like what they’re talking about over there”. The second is perhaps simpler - Stay away from MFO at least until after November 3. Stay away even longer if election results are contested.
By the way ... Trump is pro business ... Biden is pro taxation. Vote for Pro Business we will all be better off.
I know this will fall on deaf ears but . . .
It’s hard to say that Biden is anti-business considering how long he carried water in the Senate for all the financial institutions with major operations here in Delaware.
@Old_Skeet Biden was a senator representing Delaware from 1973 to 2009 before becoming Vice President. Delaware is arguably the most pro-business state in the union and he helped make it that way, pushing through legislation to help it become the incorporation capital of the U.S. Do you honestly think business leaders in Delaware would've helped him get elected all those years if he was truly anti-business? I am asking you to put partisan politics aside for a moment and answer that question honestly. Here are some stats on Delaware today: https://corp.delaware.gov/stats/
Delaware’s business entity franchise saw another year of healthy growth in 2019. The total number of LLCs registered in the First State crossed the one million mark and we continue to be the domicile of choice for members of the Fortune 500 and newly public companies, with approximately 89% of all U.S. initial public offerings last year.
If taxation is your problem, I have another question: Can any significant business function without the benefits of the infrastructure taxation provides? The labor force public schools educate, the public roads trucks drive on, the military helping to protect American business interests both in the U.S. and abroad, the court systems protecting business interests, retirement benefits supplementing the ones provided by the private sector, the bailouts of the banking sector in 2008 and the entire business community and investors in 2020. I'm beginning to believe that the only difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Republicans want all the benefits the public government sector provides. They just don't want to pay for them with taxes. The current president has bankrupted his businesses six times by borrowing a ton and refusing to pay his creditors. That seems to be his current model for the country too.
Why do I get the feeling that @Old_Skeet lives in a beggar state? How about if we cut the amount of federal funds that flow to his state and we’ll see how that helps its economy?
Although Trump has never filed for personal bankruptcy, hotels and casino businesses of his have declared bankruptcy six times between 1991 and 2009 due to its inability to meet required payments and to re-negotiate debt with banks, owners of stock and bonds and various small businesses (unsecured creditors).
During a press briefing on August 12, Trump outlined what he would seek to do if reelected.
"At the end of the year, with the assumption that I win," Trump said, "I'm going to terminate the payroll tax."
Trump went on to say that Social Security would be paid for through the General Fund. "It works out very nicely," he said.
The next day Kayleigh McEnany, the White House press secretary, added confusion, telling reporters that Trump meant that "he wants permanent forgiveness of the deferral" instead of permanently eliminating the payroll tax. But that's not what Trump said. Only Congress can terminate the payroll tax and it's unclear, with the House controlled by Democrats and the difficulty of rallying Senate Republicans behind such a proposal, how Trump would get rid of the tax by the end of the year.
During the briefing, when pressed by Fox News' John Roberts on his assertion that the general fund would finance Social Security after the payroll tax was eliminated, Trump claimed that strong economic growth would cover the loss of the payroll taxes.
But with the general fund already incurring trillions of dollars in debt, paired with the fact that the payroll tax brings in more than a third of federal revenue, some see Trump's belief that economic growth could recoup these loses as fantastical.
My question concerning how to fund social security still exists as economic growth may last a while, but not indefinitely.
"Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Fox News Sunday that, if reelected, Trump would 'push through legislation to forgive that so, in essence, it will turn into a payroll tax cut,' adding the lost revenue would be offset by 'an automatic contribution from the general fund to those trusts funds.'"
Trump deals in vagueness and uncertainty. Things that the stock market and CEOs dislike. "Employers considering President Trump’s plan to allow deferred payment of payroll taxes face a series of costs, uncertainties and headaches."
As I wrote recently, replacing payroll tax revenue with general tax revenue is what Obama already did. There are lots of concerns with doing this. See other thread for more detail.
Comments
By the way ... Trump is pro business ... Biden is pro taxation. Vote for Pro Business we will all be better off.
- After the VP thread turned partisan, I called for civility, citing a passage from Desiderata about respect and tolerance of / for others with different opinions. One poster later dismissed the entire work as “drivel”.
- While Desiderata may not be considered religion, it’s the nearest thing to religion I possess. I grew up with it and try to follow its precepts. For those who would trample on my religion, I’ll cite another even more relevant passage - this from the Bible. Anyone care to trample on that?
* “He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool shall be servant to the wise of heart” (Proverbs 11:29).
There are two possible solutions to the angst some of us feel. The first, as @Mark and @carew388 suggest, is to ignore all “off-topic” threads. That sounds a bit like opening your home to a party and telling folks “stay out of that corner if you don’t like what they’re talking about over there”. The second is perhaps simpler - Stay away from MFO at least until after November 3. Stay away even longer if election results are contested.
It’s hard to say that Biden is anti-business considering how long he carried water in the Senate for all the financial institutions with major operations here in Delaware.
I thought Trump's businesses filed bankruptcy six times, primarily his casinos.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_career_of_Donald_Trump#:~:text=Although Trump has never filed,small businesses (unsecured%20creditors).
Except:
Although Trump has never filed for personal bankruptcy, hotels and casino businesses of his have declared bankruptcy six times between 1991 and 2009 due to its inability to meet required payments and to re-negotiate debt with banks, owners of stock and bonds and various small businesses (unsecured creditors).
http://labor411.org/411-blog/here-are-all-of-trump-s-bankruptcies-and-failed-businesses
You are right to a point. Here is an excerpt from CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/19/politics/trump-biden-social-security-funding-fact-check/index.html
Trump's current plan:
During a press briefing on August 12, Trump outlined what he would seek to do if reelected.
"At the end of the year, with the assumption that I win," Trump said, "I'm going to terminate the payroll tax."
Trump went on to say that Social Security would be paid for through the General Fund. "It works out very nicely," he said.
The next day Kayleigh McEnany, the White House press secretary, added confusion, telling reporters that Trump meant that "he wants permanent forgiveness of the deferral" instead of permanently eliminating the payroll tax. But that's not what Trump said.
Only Congress can terminate the payroll tax and it's unclear, with the House controlled by Democrats and the difficulty of rallying Senate Republicans behind such a proposal, how Trump would get rid of the tax by the end of the year.
During the briefing, when pressed by Fox News' John Roberts on his assertion that the general fund would finance Social Security after the payroll tax was eliminated, Trump claimed that strong economic growth would cover the loss of the payroll taxes.
But with the general fund already incurring trillions of dollars in debt, paired with the fact that the payroll tax brings in more than a third of federal revenue, some see Trump's belief that economic growth could recoup these loses as fantastical.
My question concerning how to fund social security still exists as economic growth may last a while, but not indefinitely.
Here is a Forbes piece, White House Walks Back ‘Permanent’ Payroll Tax Cut Amid Social Security Concerns, quoting people ranging from a Trump reelection advisor to Mnuchin giving various reinterpretations.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/08/09/white-house-walks-back-permanent-payroll-tax-cut-amid-social-security-concerns/#7ae718b66b3b
"Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Fox News Sunday that, if reelected, Trump would 'push through legislation to forgive that so, in essence, it will turn into a payroll tax cut,' adding the lost revenue would be offset by 'an automatic contribution from the general fund to those trusts funds.'"
Trump deals in vagueness and uncertainty. Things that the stock market and CEOs dislike. "Employers considering President Trump’s plan to allow deferred payment of payroll taxes face a series of costs, uncertainties and headaches."
WSJ, Employers Cast Wary Eye on Trump Payroll-Tax Deferral
https://www.wsj.com/articles/employers-cast-wary-eye-on-trump-payroll-tax-deferral-11597138201
As I wrote recently, replacing payroll tax revenue with general tax revenue is what Obama already did. There are lots of concerns with doing this. See other thread for more detail.