Tax reform, debt ceiling, and budget

In case, one hasn’t read over Trump’s budget proposal, you can find it here.

While the various political ideology supporters surrounding the generalized left-center-right and Conservative-Moderate-Liberal respectively are appalled or elated in reference to Trump’s budget proposal; the political ideological battlefield surrounds tax reform, debt ceiling, and budget ultimately determine the path trend direction of the Trump administration.

The central issue behind Trump’s budget proposal isn’t that it reduces or eliminates Agency or non-governmental organization funding, and it isn’t its increase in Defense and Military spending. The proposal is rather open ended.
How is this a problem? For starters, it means that for instance tax reform can simply strengthen governmental fiefdoms, public-private partnerships, and aspiring public-private mergers as Too Big To Fail institutions can be further enhanced through bipartisanship as shown by over 20 years worth of domestic and international policy. For another example, the economy is based on an Agricultural-Consumerist-Service economy, so it’s not in governmental fiefdoms, public-private partnerships, and aspiring public-private mergers to promote raising the debt ceiling to prioritize capital structure in the budget. It will promote the Agricultural-Consumerist-Service economy that caters to them.
“For the Texas Republican, that means finding new ways to expand agriculture, manufacturing and services trade between the three countries, as well as addressing a number of newer issues, such as digital trade and state-owned enterprises, which weren’t on any trade negotiator’s agenda in the early 1990s.”

Please re-read that
“In a rare shift, Representative Mark Meadows of North Carolina, whose House Freedom Caucus effectively torpedoed the health legislation, said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” that he would not protest if tax cuts were not offset by new spending cuts or new streams of revenue, such as an import tax.”

“Since last summer, Mr. Ryan and Representative Kevin Brady of Texas, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, have been aggressively pitching a reform blueprint that includes a “border adjustment tax.” It would be a 20 percent tax on imports that, by making imports more expensive, would spur domestic production, they say. They think the plan would raise $1 trillion to compensate for the lower revenue that much lower tax rates would probably bring in.”

“Many Senate Republicans are also skeptical, raising the prospect that Mr. Ryan’s tax vision could suffer the same fate as his health plan, toppling under the weight of divisions within his party.”

1). Recall State is derived by Nation-State, so State-Owned enterprises is a government-private public-private merger regardless of the precise nature of power-structure hierarchy. It also means as a public-private merger such as China’s public-private mergers of vital economic infrastructure’s security falls under an arm of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

2). The import tax is largely an import tariff that in old school was the traditional method of governmental revenues outside the claim of ownership of percentages of an individual’s labor known as income taxes.

3). Have anyone else heard the phrase ‘role reversal’? If you examine Ways and Means Committee who led the ACA ‘reform-tweaks’ on this issue, the Freedom House Caucus is reversing roles on tax reform and ultimately impacts the debt ceiling that ultimately impacts the budget.



America2050 is a pro-globalization and open border think-tank

Please examine these two images one is the Counties 2016 Election cycle while the other is from America2050’s


America2050’s assessment to improve under-performing counties is a subject for another post.

If one really wants to examine the 2016 election cycle, this requires:
1). Sander’s was the favorite in primary exit polls even in a Trump V Sanders match up whose loss resulted in Sander’s supporters crossing the aisle against Clinton.

2). Globalization has little to no benefit in these under-performing regions. In some of these areas, globalization is a severe negative. What’s truly interesting is Agricultural-Consumerist-Service economies were the norm for the Confederacy, Holy Roman Empire, and etc that by adding technological advancement doesn’t translate to magically making those economies anymore prosperity for the Working or Impoverished Classes than it did dating back to 1492 and prior. In simple terms, it argues from a position of authority ‘this time is different’, and the results tend to parallel those of the past.

These tie into tax reform, debt ceiling, and budget issues. These issues will ultimately state where the Trump administration stands.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s