It’s time to take off your MAGA hat, a new Koch-backed ad tells farmers

[Zippyjuan]

https://qz.com/1343840/a-new-koch-ba...r-and-tariffs/

Charles and David Koch seeded the low-tax, small government political movement in America that became the Tea Party, which eventually set the stage for Donald Trump’s presidency. Now, one of the wealthy industrialist brothers is using the same strategy to fight Trump’s trade policies.

In a new television advertisement, Freedom Partners, the conservative think tank funded and backed by Charles and David Koch, asks Americans to oppose Trump’s tariffs. (David, 78, retired from this year, leaving Charles, 82, in charge of their business and political network.)

“America’s farmers work hard to put food on our tables. But because of new tariffs, our farmers’ livelihoods are at risk. Carmakers, factory workers, and manufacturers too. And now taxpayers are on hook for billions to bail out desperate farms. Farmers want trade not aid. Tell the administration and Congress ‘Open markets and end tariffs,’ ” the ad says.



As the narrator says “because of new tariffs,” a weary-looking “farmer” takes off his red baseball had with white lettering, an apparent reference to the Make America Great Again hats that Trump popularized during his campaign.

Freedom Partners and its other Koch-funded partners, the Hispanic-business focused “Libre Initiative” and community organizers “Americans for Prosperity” also penned a letter to Trump urging him to drop tariffs and re-join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the massive trade deal he exited his first week in office:

Tariffs harm Americans and are unwise as a negotiating tactic to try to achieve better trade deals down the road. It is not possible to protect farmers, businesses, workers and consumers from them, unwind the damage they cause, or avoid the danger they provoke a full-out trade war where everyone loses.

Whether any of the Koch-backed efforts can convince Trump loyalists to speak out against him is uncertain—some supporters whose industries were directly hurt by tariffs said recently that they still support Trump.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/in...ump-tariffs-on

Caterpillar to raise prices due to Trump tariffs on aluminum and steel


https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...num/865736002/
Coca-Cola cites Trump's tariffs in raising prices on soft drinks

[Swordsmyth]

The Kochs made tons of money selling out America to crony trade deals and illegal aliens, they don't want to see that end.

[donnay]

I never like them from the beginning. They are for open borders because it brings in cheap labor for them to make money.

[spudea]

Ahahaha eat $#@! Koch brothers

[dean.engelhardt]

It's dangerous for people to blindly worship Trump. I read the Koch brothers pulled support of a (R) senate candidate because he supported an additional $1.3 trillion in deficit spending. I have to agree with the Koch's on that one. The national debt doubled under G.H. Bush and again under Obama. Trump promised to reduce it but it looks like he could make it much worse, maybe double it again himself. Most people don't care, but they should. I got to tip my hat to the Koch's for standing firm for limited government, even if I don't like everything they stand for.

[dean.engelhardt]

You gotta recognize socialism when you see it:

...They love my Tax & Regulation Cuts, Judicial picks & more. I made..... ....them richer. ...

When people believe that is it the government (or the president) that creates wealth, that is the beginning of socialism The start to the end of private property. I expect that type of language from Robert Reich.

[dannno]

You gotta recognize socialism when you see it:




When people believe that is it the government (or the president) that creates wealth, that is the beginning of socialism The start to the end of private property. I expect that type of language from Robert Reich.

The quote is about tax and regulation cuts.. that does create wealth, and it is not socialism.

[nobody's_hero]

No ads against president Xi?

[Zippyjuan]

The quote is about tax and regulation cuts.. that does create wealth, and it is not socialism.

What-- you favoring Keynesianism? Tax cuts to stimulate the economy and create jobs and wealth?

[dannno]

What-- you favoring Keynesianism? Tax cuts to stimulate the economy and create jobs and wealth?

Ron Paul favors tax cuts, not that they will necessarily create a lot of jobs and wealth without spending cuts, but taxing income aka production is the worst tax you can have so it is always favorable to have tax cuts.

[CaptUSA]

Looks like Trump finally succeeded in uniting the nationalists and the socialists - at least in their hatred of the Kochs. Wonder where this could be heading???

[Zippyjuan]

Ron Paul favors tax cuts, not that they will necessarily create a lot of jobs and wealth without spending cuts, but taxing income aka production is the worst tax you can have so it is always favorable to have tax cuts.

Ron wanted tax cuts offset by spending cuts to avoid increasing the debt. Trump wants tax cuts on top of more spending. Just like George W. Bush. Both led us to $1 trillion annual deficits.

[dannno]

Ron wanted tax cuts offset by spending cuts to avoid increasing the debt.

Ron wanted to abolish pretty much every federal agency, but if a vote came up to just abolish the Dept. of Education even though it keeps all the other departments around he would vote for it.

Ron supports tax cuts if that is all that is on the table, he votes for it, don't lie. This is something we've been over multiple times before.

[CaptUSA]

Ron wanted tax cuts offset by spending cuts to avoid increasing the debt. Trump wants tax cuts on top of more spending. Just like George W. Bush. Both led us to $1 trillion annual deficits.

You don't "offset" tax cuts. And dannno is right, Ron Paul would never vote against a tax cut.

But Ron Paul has often correctly stated that, "SPENDING IS THE REAL TAX". If you cut taxes without cutting spending, you're just shifting the burden around - generally, onto future generations.

[Zippyjuan]

Ron wanted to abolish pretty much every federal agency, but if a vote came up to just abolish the Dept. of Education even though it keeps all the other departments around he would vote for it.

Ron supports tax cuts if that is all that is on the table, he votes for it, don't lie. This is something we've been over multiple times before.

http://www.campaignforliberty.org/cl...t-reform-taxes

Thus, all government spending is in essence a form of taxation. Therefore, cutting income and other taxes without cutting spending merely replaces one type of taxation with another. Instead of directly paying for big government via income taxes, deficit spending means citizens will be hit with an increase in the inflation tax. This tax, imposed on the people with the Federal Reserve's monetization of debt, is the worst form of tax because it is both hidden and regressive.

Unfortunately, while Congress may make some small cuts in domestic spending, those cuts will be dwarfed by spending increases on infrastructure Keynesianism at home and military Keynesianism abroad. As long as Congress refuses to make serious reductions in spending, the American people will be subject to the tyranny of the IRS and the Federal Reserve.

[axiomata]

Looks like Trump finally succeeded in uniting the nationalists and the socialists - at least in their hatred of the Kochs. Wonder where this could be heading???

Wherever it's heading, it sure sounds like a party.

[dannno]

http://www.campaignforliberty.org/cl...t-reform-taxes

Right, like I said, Ron Paul wants to abolish almost the entire government so he is always going to make the case for going a step further.

Do you deny that Ron Paul has also said that he would favor an income tax cut over no tax cut even if it didn't accompany spending cuts?

Would you be willing to make an agreement to stop posting on the forum if you are wrong? We've been over this multiple times.

[Zippyjuan]

Right, like I said, Ron Paul wants to abolish almost the entire government so he is always going to make the case for going a step further.

Do you deny that Ron Paul has also said that he would favor an income tax cut over no tax cut even if it didn't accompany spending cuts?

Would you be willing to make an agreement to stop posting on the forum if you are wrong? We've been over this multiple times.

He also said he wants to get rid of the income tax but that we have to deal with the size of government FIRST. Otherwise it will make things (the debt problem) much worse.

[dannno]

He also said he wants to get rid of the income tax but that we have to deal with the size of government FIRST. Otherwise it will make things (the debt problem) much worse.

Sorry, you are dead wrong. Ron Paul has NEVER said we should wait to get rid of the income tax. He would get rid of it tomorrow if he could, spending cuts or not.

You also didn't answer the question whether you would be willing to stop posting on the forum if you were proven wrong.

I'm tired of going over the same $#@! a dozen times with you when you don't know what the $#@! you are talking about, you get proven wrong and you are never willing to correct yourself in the future.

[Zippyjuan]

Sorry, you are dead wrong. Ron Paul has NEVER said we should wait to get rid of the income tax. He would get rid of it tomorrow if he could, spending cuts or not.

You also didn't answer the question whether you would be willing to stop posting on the forum if you were proven wrong.

I'm tired of going over the same $#@! a dozen times with you when you don't know what the $#@! you are talking about, you get proven wrong and you are never willing to correct yourself in the future.

He said it but I am having troubles finding it. I believe it was a video interview which is making it harder to locate. Something like "I would love to get rid of the income tax entirely but you have to deal with the problem of government spending first- otherwise you are going to make things worse."

Closest thing found so far: http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Ron_Paul_Tax_Reform.htm

Q: You have been saying on the campaign stump, “I’d like to get rid of the IRS. I want to get rid of the income tax.” Abolish it?
A: That’s a good idea. I like that idea.

Q: What would happen to all those lost revenues? How would we fund our government?

A: We have to cut spending. You can’t get rid of the income tax if you don’t get rid of some spending.

Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series , Dec 23, 2007

[dannno]

He said it but I am having troubles finding it. I believe it was a video interview which is making it harder to locate. Something like "I would love to get rid of the income tax entirely but you have to deal with the problem of government spending first- otherwise you are going to make things worse."

Closest thing found so far: http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Ron_Paul_Tax_Reform.htm



Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series , Dec 23, 2007

All of your statements have been out of context.

Yes, Ron Paul believes that spending is the "bigger" issue and particularly in front a Republican audience he likes to take the time to educate fiscally minded people about reducing government spending... however, he has said MANY times that he will ALWAYS vote for a tax cuts everything else equal because the income tax is the most insidious tax.

[dannno]

Even in this segment about how the Trump tax cuts need to have spending cuts, he says, "the talk on tax is important, we should do whatever we can to lower them" and then goes on to say how important spending cuts are.



But there are other times where he has been specifically asked, if he would vote for a tax cut if it didn't accompany any spending cuts - his answer is always "yes" to a tax cut.

[Zippyjuan]

All of your statements have been out of context.

Yes, Ron Paul believes that spending is the "bigger" issue and particularly in front a Republican audience he likes to take the time to educate fiscally minded people about reducing government spending... however, he has said MANY times that he will ALWAYS vote for a tax cuts everything else equal because the income tax is the most insidious tax.

He called debt an insidious tax too.

Thus, all government spending is in essence a form of taxation. Therefore, cutting income and other taxes without cutting spending merely replaces one type of taxation with another. Instead of directly paying for big government via income taxes, deficit spending means citizens will be hit with an increase in the inflation tax. This tax, imposed on the people with the Federal Reserve's monetization of debt, is the worst form of tax because it is both hidden and regressive.

http://www.campaignforliberty.org/cl...t-reform-taxes

[dannno]

There Is No Such Thing As A "Fair Tax" 6/22/2016 By Ron Paul The income tax is the worst kind of tax because it's based on the assumption that the government owns you and all of your income. Whether the rate is 1% or 99%, the principle behind the tax is the same. Instead of bickering about what the rate should be, we should be attacking the philosophy that underpins this nefarious tax. I discuss on Fox Business: http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/...-as-a-fair-tax

[Zippyjuan]

He has called income tax the most insidious tax...

mine is more betterer!

So he doesn't like taxes and he doesn't like debt. He said both were the worst kinds of taxes. Agreed.

The income tax is the worst kind of tax

deficit spending means citizens will be hit with an increase in the inflation tax. This tax, imposed on the people with the Federal Reserve's monetization of debt, is the worst form of tax because it is both hidden and regressive.

[dannno]

“Abolish the Income Tax & The IRS, & Replace Them With NOTHING!” – Ron Paul

June 28, 2017 1 1458

‘When I say cut taxes, I don’t mean fiddle with the code. I mean abolish the income tax and the IRS, and replace them with nothing’…

[dannno]

mine is more betterer!

So he doesn't like taxes and he doesn't like debt. Agreed.

Do you disagree that Ron Paul would vote for an income tax cut without any spending cuts?

He has said he would vote for an income tax cut without accompanying spending cuts many times. Going through all of Ron Paul's videos in the last 11 years to find it is not easy, but he has said it many times regardless. Do you think I'm making it up?

Would you be willing to stop posting here if you are proven wrong?

[Swordsmyth]

Ron wanted tax cuts offset by spending cuts to avoid increasing the debt. Trump wants tax cuts on top of more spending. Just like George W. Bush. Both led us to $1 trillion annual deficits.

Paul I know; but who are ye?

[dannno]

mine is more betterer!

So he doesn't like taxes and he doesn't like debt. He said both were the worst kinds of taxes. Agreed.

Yes, but he has said many times that he would get rid of the income tax or cut the income tax without accompanying spending cuts. Do you deny this?

[dannno]

mine is more betterer!

So he doesn't like taxes and he doesn't like debt. He said both were the worst kinds of taxes. Agreed.

Let me make a correction:

Ron Paul said that the income tax is the "worst" tax, while the inflation tax is the most "insidious". The income tax is still "worse" than the inflation tax, however the inflation tax gets its status as "most insidious" because it is a hidden tax. But it is not "worse" overall than the income tax, it is just more sneaky, according to Ron Paul.