It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scam alert: Trump's $1tn 'infrastructure plan' is a giveaway to the rich.

page: 3
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 06:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: smurfy




This story is from mid 2017, it is an opinion column in The Guardian. 


Erm...

I wonder what they think in 2018?


Good question. Yes that would be nice, (sorry for the late reply BTW...I had a plethera of MS driver updates to deal with)
Any way the concept seems to have gone underground, but I will keep looking, there is no doubt though that the original proposed concept is a pocket liner for wealthy people to become even wealthier, and still lacking the overall amount needed just to get back to neutral ground, and I have a big feeling that even the like of AT&AT and Verizon will soon get out of their old commitment to provide a wire service in big rural areas for instance, it's also part of infrastructure..old as it may be, unprofitable as it may be, however without the landline duty, there is no commitment to provide a service, and that means market forces taking over in the other fields of communication in the absence of any government intervention of capping prices.
The rural areas, and/or big states with small populations will be hard hit in the interim, and will probably need to pay high prices in the not too far future, and that's just one piece of the infrastructure puzzle. Roads, bridges, railways, airports, water and power and more all need serious makeovers, Trump's proposals don't go anywhere near enough, and have no vision. Okay while the big work goes on there will be jobs, for as long as they last, there will be much fewer jobs tasked to maintenance, and of course the question is who will do those jobs,
where even those jobs become more and more the subject of robotics as it is in manufacturing?...Putting the clock back for a while won't help anyone in the long run.
Trump has no vision, and totally unfocussed except about himself, he spends most of his time broadcasting from the White House about beautiful this I can make, and beautiful that I can make with a fiscal policy that doesn't add up for the country as a whole, nor can a longterm solution be appropriate unless both American parties get over policy making that might break through a change in government in between, that's something that Obama, rather Bernie's plan came up against with his infrastructure plans,

"Mike Enzi said he and other Republicans are all for more infrastructure spending. They take issue, however, with Sanders essentially dictating tax reform policy to the Finance Committee by setting a long-term funding target. “That’s not the way we do it around here,” Enzi said Tuesday. “That’s why that went down.”
That was 2015..yet Obama's was much more modest, Bernie wanted to close the tax breaks that allowed the big corps to avoid taxes and allowing stashing their loot offshore, to offset the cost. That the GOP didn't like that is the best answer, and neither did they come up with anything on their own initiative in the interim...you see how it works or rather, doesn't work.

edit on 13-2-2018 by smurfy because: Text.




posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Be rich



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 06:16 PM
link   
To whom did Obama's trillion dollar infrastructure money go? Why do we need to do this again only after 8 years?



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

You are repeating trump. It was not a trillion dollar infrastructure bill:

“The stimulus was not primarily an infrastructure bill

In February 2009, Obama signed into law a stimulus package that ultimately cost just over $800 billion. (Earlier estimates had been higher, so we won’t quibble with Trump’s rounding it up to $1 trillion.)

The "shovel-ready" aspects of the stimulus tended to attract the most attention. But officially, that was only one of the act’s goals, and if you look closely at how the funds were allocated, only a fraction of the total was ever intended to go to infrastructure.”

www.politifact.com...



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: DanDanDat

You are repeating trump. It was not a trillion dollar infrastructure bill:

“The stimulus was not primarily an infrastructure bill

In February 2009, Obama signed into law a stimulus package that ultimately cost just over $800 billion. (Earlier estimates had been higher, so we won’t quibble with Trump’s rounding it up to $1 trillion.)

The "shovel-ready" aspects of the stimulus tended to attract the most attention. But officially, that was only one of the act’s goals, and if you look closely at how the funds were allocated, only a fraction of the total was ever intended to go to infrastructure.”

www.politifact.com...


No, I was there, I'm not repeating anyone but my self.

WMDs tended to attract the most attention. But officially, that was only one of the Iraq war goals ...

See how that works.


edit on 13-2-2018 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Murgatroid

...it is an opinion column in The Guardian...


Enough said...

Another 'Scam Alert': the MSM is anything BUT a credible source of truth.

NOT drinking the KoolAid...

This suggests that respected liberal media like the New York Times and Guardian are key battlegrounds in the relentless elite efforts to control public opinion. When the Guardian Media Group is owned by The Scott Trust Limited, a 'profit-seeking enterprise'?


Okay I saw your beautiful collages the first time.

Just a point of information,
The Guardian, is a stated, non profit paper, if you have beef with that, take it up with them, and prove otherwise, I tell you what though, they have exposed a lot of much more awful crap going on, than many of those papers in the graph you added, so I take it you are an ignorant soul...enough said.
edit on 13-2-2018 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: smurfy

"Sorry, Donald. The only way we get this is if big corporations and the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes to support it."

They a;ready pay the majority of taxes.

A Pew Research Center analysis of IRS data from 2015, the most recent available, shows that taxpayers with incomes of $200,000 or more paid well over half (58.8%) of federal income taxes, though they accounted for only 4.5% of all returns filed (6.8% of all taxable returns).

And up until Trump, the US corporate tax rates was one of the highest on Earth.

Sorry, but your opinion piece and your OP is a scam.

Do they? big corp...well over a $trillion offshore, and likely much, much more, of tax free money, and Trump only wants less than a quarter of it..obviously, (a scam in itself) and that's it. Dyuh think my name is Lamb? Bernie would have took the 35% off them, and he would have been fecking right!
BTW, my Thread is as given, and you are the chancer, those over the 200,000 threshold are mostly working honest taxpayers, and in effect cover the one percenters, big corps creaming it overseas....disgusting.

edit on 13-2-2018 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 10:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: DanDanDat
To whom did Obama's trillion dollar infrastructure money go? Why do we need to do this again only after 8 years?


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Obama's, so called stimulus package hardly invested in infrastructure. This is why Trump's approach to rebuilding U.S. infrastructure is worth keeping an open mind about. Getting the ball rolling on rebuilding highways and airports would demonstrate to the voting public that actual infrastructure improvement can and are taking place. People could than demand that Trump's infrastructure go beyond the tip of the iceberg.

It remains to be seen if Congress is institutionally capable of implementing Trump's basic infrastructure package, little alone, coming to grips with the full extent of the country's needs.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 06:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: xpert11

originally posted by: DanDanDat
To whom did Obama's trillion dollar infrastructure money go? Why do we need to do this again only after 8 years?


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Obama's, so called stimulus package hardly invested in infrastructure. This is why Trump's approach to rebuilding U.S. infrastructure is worth keeping an open mind about. Getting the ball rolling on rebuilding highways and airports would demonstrate to the voting public that actual infrastructure improvement can and are taking place. People could than demand that Trump's infrastructure go beyond the tip of the iceberg.

It remains to be seen if Congress is institutionally capable of implementing Trump's basic infrastructure package, little alone, coming to grips with the full extent of the country's needs.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


People don't need demonstrations, it's absurdly obvious that many areas of infrastructure need serious TLC, while the tax money is spent on god knows what, but I can guess.
Any president knows exactly what is needed, but Trump's MO is more about lining pockets, grandiose schemes with his name on it on high, and a toll booth below more like.
Why can't these big guys pay their fair share of taxes, instead of hiving it away offshore, and help contribute to the country's well being as a whole.
edit on 14-2-2018 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 03:13 AM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Sorry, I meant the U.S. Federal Government must demonstrate to voters that they are institutionally capable of undertaking the rebuilding of the country's infrastructure. I didn't mean to imply that there was need to prove that investing in infrastructure is desperately required. If Obama's so called stimulus package had been a combination of Trump's plan, 750 billion dollars of funding and privatisation of airports/air traffic control, his legacy would have fared somewhat better.

Trump's infrastructure plan has flaws. There doesn't appear to be enough funding available for projects that aren't profitable for the private sector to take on board. Constructing the infrastructure behind fiber internet in the Rust Belt states, is the kind of project that the private sector will benefit from, but never want to undertake themselves. This is one of the reasons why I think it is important to get the ball rolling on rebuilding American infrastructure. The ideal infrastructure package won't get through Congress all in one go.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Feb, 15 2018 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: xpert11
a reply to: smurfy

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Sorry, I meant the U.S. Federal Government must demonstrate to voters that they are institutionally capable of undertaking the rebuilding of the country's infrastructure. I didn't mean to imply that there was need to prove that investing in infrastructure is desperately required. If Obama's so called stimulus package had been a combination of Trump's plan, 750 billion dollars of funding and privatisation of airports/air traffic control, his legacy would have fared somewhat better.

Trump's infrastructure plan has flaws. There doesn't appear to be enough funding available for projects that aren't profitable for the private sector to take on board. Constructing the infrastructure behind fiber internet in the Rust Belt states, is the kind of project that the private sector will benefit from, but never want to undertake themselves. This is one of the reasons why I think it is important to get the ball rolling on rebuilding American infrastructure. The ideal infrastructure package won't get through Congress all in one go.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



That's fair enough, while there are a couple of points, from my view as complete outsider, with no axe to grind...just what I see and perceive.
Obama's plan was modest, but was forward looking, the rub was that the Republican side of the house blocked near if not all proposal for the most stupid of reasons.
they opposed his $50 billion “roads, rails and runways” proposal in 2010, and then again when it was expanded and incorporated into his American Jobs Act in 2011. They've blocked Obama's plans for an infrastructure bank and a national high-speed rail network, and his idea of a one time14% tax on those billions overseas, (same idea as Trump is proposing now) The Republicans blocked all that then, just because it was a six-year plan and probably because it would run into a new administration, in fact they said as much...jaw dropping, and even business interests were flummoxed by all that. Really, in all of Obama's run there is little they didn't block, he tried his best and got no thanks.
So I think it is reasonable enough to say that it's one side of the Federal government that were no help then.
As for the rust areas, well, if it's infrastructure, it's pretty much the whole country, and no, they don't want to undertake the work, but under Trump's plan, they can get it done at a rate of only 18cents on the dollar of their own money spent, with the rest coming out of Federal taxes..your money...as well as any benefit drawn from new construction/aka tolls. the states are saying that their money is all tied up just as they are, so a question mark there.
It seems to me that big business in the US always has the begging bowl at home, while they salt away trillions overseas...Trump knows that all to easily, and his plan really is helping that continue...except for the one off, also small, tax bill. Sanders though would have let big business away with nothing, and charged them the full tax on the unpatriated money in tax havens, and if you look around the world, many governments are seeking to do the same at some level because there is so much criminality involved.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 03:59 AM
link   
a reply to: smurfy
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Living in New Zealand I also view the matter as a outsider. I think on the matter of infrastructure the GOP was wrong in political and real terms. But that does not explain why Obama chose failed health care reforms and the wasted stimulus bill over infrastructure. However, the GOP establishment who is crying rivers over Trump's presidency need to take a good look in the mirror. The GOP establishment's opposition to rebuilding America's infrastructure was the sign of a political party that stands for nothing but opposition to the Obama presidency, yet they also managed to fuel the future Trump candidacy as well.

Did Trump's tax reform package go far enough in directing money away from off shore havens and the latest insane crazes (the last being subprime mortgages!) and into infrastructure? I am uncertain of the answer, but I lean towards, no.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: xpert11
a reply to: smurfy
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Did Trump's tax reform package go far enough in directing money away from off shore havens and the latest insane crazes (the last being subprime mortgages!) and into infrastructure? I am uncertain of the answer, but I lean towards, no.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.




Well, I'm not really a cynical person, but I have read a lot about Trump in other fields well before any stab by him was made for the American Presidency, and my truth there, is that you couldn't believe one word he says.
Trump's package was never intended to repatriate really big money back to the US, just a few bob to make things look good...or rather make him look good.
I have very bad feeling about this Presidency, so many people are locked into him, and he is just not worth it, and he is misleading them big time. Trump is all about money, and there's no show without Punch...getting a cut as well.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Using taxpayer money to line the pockets of your political cronies? It's a story as old as time. In fact, I'm not sure why anybody would even want to be President if they couldn't do this.



posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Its no surprise this so called " infrastructure" bill is a giveaway to the rich, everything Trump does is a giveaway to the rich.

He already busted the budget with his massive tax giveaway to them, he cant spend any real money for the whole country's sake.

Everything this scammers does and will do is to the benefit of the rich.

Trump will end up looting the country to make himself and his rich friends richer




top topics



 
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join