That's the business man you guys voted for flunking economics 101.
I'm surprised ChristieFan isn't all over this being the stock guru here.
I'm surprised ChristieFan isn't all over this being the stock guru here.
Last edited:
Trump just said he reduced the US Debt because the Stock Market went up
- Thread starter reluctant_to_comment
- Start date
Reluctant, you're stepping in it once again, but such is the life of a media-influenced individual. First of all, when Trump makes a statement that is open to even any kind of criticism, your media is going to report it to you; conversely, when Incapabama said "57 states" and "profits and earnings ratios are good", they didn't make a big deal of it. Ever wonder why? Just a small amount of second-level thinking might help you to solve this mystery.
Now, to the question. Trump makes a lot of wild statements, but this one might not be off the mark. Question for you: When the stock market goes up, what happens? What do some investors do? I doubt you'll answer, but maybe you'll give it a shot.
Now, to the question. Trump makes a lot of wild statements, but this one might not be off the mark. Question for you: When the stock market goes up, what happens? What do some investors do? I doubt you'll answer, but maybe you'll give it a shot.
Stay on topic. Does the stock market increase or decrease the national debt? It's a simple yes or no.
You answered, but not really. It's hard to deal with people who can't think for themselves, but here goes:
Q: When the market goes up, what happens?
A: People sell some of their stocks.
Q: When people sell some of their stocks (at profits, because remember, the market is going up),, what happens?
A: They pay taxes on the gains, more for short-term gains (their tax bracket, up to 39.6%) to ~ 20% for long-term gains.
Q: So what! (reluctant to think says)
A: So, the taxes on the profits flow into the treasury and reduce the amount of the debt.
Let's say someone has $150,000 in gains year-to-date. If all of the gains are short-term, they will be taxed at the person's income tax rate (39.6%). In this example, $59,400 in taxes would be paid to the treasury.
I know your immediate thought might be that this person should be shot for having the audacity to make so much money. That's a liberal. All I can say is that you should work a little harder, post a little less, and open up your mind a whole lot more.
Now, you will put up any number of nonsensical arguments, as always, and will only know how to "attack" this issue based on what the media tells you, and that's surely not going to be good reporting. But there is no refuting it. Additional debt spending could offset inflows from stock market capital gains, and thereby increase the debt level, but the point of this argument is, in a vacuum, whether a healthy stock market generates revenue to the treasury. It's not debatable, but why would we be surprised that the media would not understand this? They, after all, didn't report on the largest theft in history when Incapabama raided Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and stole billions. Of course, there is more to the reporting angle of this story, as it's not just lack of intelligence; it's more a case of political bias by the media that are your high priests. Admit it, you have no idea that this theft happened and you think I am making it up. Dig deep and you might find out the truth.
To the point of whether it's a clumsy statement by Trump, of course it is. So, maybe you can take solace in that. Whether it's right or wrong? Not debatable.
That's your reply? That's it? Must be the weakest reply I've ever seen. You can't even refute with facts one thing that I said?It's an intentionally clumsy statement meant to mislead his fans, which is easy to do.
It's pretty apparent that it was you who was misled by the media. But if you're that ignorant, all is well!
You already concede your weak point. The national debt does not get paid off by the stock market. Period.
Reluctant, the way this normally works (with adults) is that you would refute my argument by picking it apart, point-by-point. Instead, you come back and claim victory without making even a single counterpoint. Amazing! Basically a forfeit, but ignorance is bliss.
However, if, as you say, I already concede the point, where in my argument do I do so?
Your statement indicates the mind of a simpleton. "The national debt does not get paid off by the stock market." Maybe you should stay away from stock market-related issues and financial issues altogether!
However, as always, I do need to thank you for the entertainment!