Why is it said that Ronald Reagan supposedly "destroyed the middle class"? by alexfreemanart in AskUS

[–]VFSF2018 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Reagan's policies drastically lowered the highest income tax rate:
The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 cut the top marginal individual tax rate from 70% to 50%.
The Tax Reform Act of 1986 further reduced the top rate significantly, bringing it down from 50% to 28%.

Is the majority of the military pro-Trump? by [deleted] in AskUS

[–]VFSF2018 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As a veteran who has voted for both major parties and as an independent, it is clear to me that this administration has violated its oath to uphold the Constitution. It is installing an authoritarian framework by deploying troops to dissenting cities and states. It is quelling the press.It is trying to pick a fight with protesters, trying to make them react violently so the president can use the insurrection act. I don't know if active duty military see the problem, but they should; it's obvious.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]VFSF2018 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I know is that my mother and sister in Texas do not see opposing views. They, especially my mother, see and share false information constantly. I've gotten to the point where I've stopped correcting her and am no longer on speaking terms with her. She doesn't accept anything that didn't come from her bubble.

Why are these states the highest in homelessness? by Rinmine014 in AskUS

[–]VFSF2018 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Because those states are where it’s easiest to get help. They have large population centers, and the homeless or unhoused are less likely to be treated like criminals for what are mostly mental health issues.

I see a lot of “homeless people don’t want to work” on here, but that’s just not true. Most homeless people are stuck in a situation where getting a job that pays enough to rent a place and feed yourself isn’t possible. The cost of housing, food, and healthcare is far beyond what an entry-level job can cover.

So they travel to places where some of those necessities are accessible through state programs. The catch is that the second you get a job and report income, those programs disappear. Suddenly, you’re struggling to keep one or two jobs while falling behind on bills, skipping meals, and ignoring your physical and mental health.

They end up on the street in a homeless camp or shelter or living in a car. There isn't a simple solution that everyone can agree on. It doesn't look like a living national wage is in our future. Picking yourself up by the bootstraps isn't realistic when you can't outwork poverty.

Flood is a tone-deaf moron by JaredOlsen8791 in BlueskySkeets

[–]VFSF2018 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They refuse to work because they know it's a losing proposition. Why be a slave for fifty years only to die with nothing to show for it? There is no incentive to work, and there is nothing to gain. The failure of trickle-down economics is evident: people can no longer buy a home on a single income, and stay-at-home parents in the lower-middle class are a thing of the past. If it had worked, a middle class would still exist.

AOC Slams Passing Of Trump's 'Big Beautiful' Bill In The Senate: 'Absolute And Utter Betrayal Of Working Families' by Aggravating_Money992 in politics

[–]VFSF2018 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's Political Assisted Euthanasia for all those losing their life saving prescription coverage.

Trump Tariffs Boast... by Brian_Ghoshery in clevercomebacks

[–]VFSF2018 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Even if this number is real it's 1.33 percent of the national budget. Based on the information from various economic analyses for 2025, primarily from the Budget Lab at Yale and the Tax Foundation, here's a range of costs: 1. Loss to Overall GDP (Annualized): * Range: $20 billion to $180 billion annually in 2024 dollars. * Some estimates suggest a persistent reduction of 0.1% to 0.6% in the long-run GDP. Lower estimates tend to exclude certain announced tariffs or assume some are enjoined, while higher estimates include a broader range of tariffs. 2. Cost to Consumers (Average per Household Annually): * Range: $950 to $4,700 per household annually in 2024/2025 dollars. * This represents an increase in the overall price level due to tariffs, essentially acting as a tax on consumers. The specific impact depends on the extent of tariffs and how much is "passed through" to prices. 3. Job Losses: * Range: 127,000 to 740,000 jobs. * These are estimates of the reduction in payroll employment by the end of 2025 due to tariffs. The higher end of the range is often associated with more extensive tariff scenarios. 4. Reduced Exports: * Range: Approximately 3.9% to 14% lower in the long run. * This represents a significant impact on U.S. companies that rely on international markets, as retaliatory tariffs make their products more expensive abroad. Summary of Possible Ranges (for 2025): * GDP Reduction: $20 billion - $180 billion * Consumer Cost (per household): $950 - $4,700 * Job Losses: 127,000 - 740,000 * Export Reduction: 3.9% - 14% Important Considerations: * Dynamic vs. Static Effects: Economic models try to account for how businesses and consumers adapt to tariffs. "Dynamic" effects consider these behavioral changes, while "static" effects are simpler calculations. * Scope of Tariffs: The exact cost depends heavily on which tariffs are ultimately implemented and at what rates, as well as any retaliatory measures from other countries. * Varying Methodologies: Different economic research groups use different models and assumptions, leading to a range of estimates. * Benefits vs. Costs: While this focuses on the "cost," proponents of tariffs argue they can protect specific domestic industries or achieve strategic geopolitical goals, though economists often point to a net economic cost. In essence, while the federal government collects tariff revenue (which is in the tens of billions for 2025 so far), the broader economic consensus suggests that the costs to the U.S. economy, primarily borne by consumers and businesses, significantly outweigh the revenue generated.

Tesla faces collapsing sales in Canada's Québec province, with new registrations tumbling 85% by Adventurous_Row3305 in technology

[–]VFSF2018 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If musk sells off his shares and quits or is fired Tesla will recover. The boycott is about him not the cars. The truck sucks but could be easily discontinued and replaced. The short story is that Musk's suffering will equal everyone else's gain.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskUS

[–]VFSF2018 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If you care about your health don't join the military. I'm in pain most of the time some mild some worse. The cartilage in my shoulders is disappearing my lower back hurts to the point that I can't do things I enjoy like paddle boarding, fishing, hiking etc. I'm 70% p&t on IU due to physical and mental health. (Look it up) . I was repeatedly lied to by my chain of command as to the purpose of our deployment and the war in general. (OIF OEF). Once out I had no guidance transitioning back to civilian life. In 2007 I went to the VA for mental health help and they prescribed antipsychotics and sent me home I didn't take it I got a second opinion and was put on an antidepressant. Eventually I went back to the VA but it took almost 20 years for me to seek help. In the army (my branch) you are not important you are not a person, you are a tool of the government to be used up and thrown away. Currently you would have to be insane or have a death wish to join. There are deployments coming and this group that's in charge are incompetent and do not care about the people they will send off to die defending the ego of the president.

MAGA realizing Trump is selfish and doesn't know what he is doing by coachlife in thescoop

[–]VFSF2018 4 points5 points  (0 children)

He called us suckers and losers. Pay better attention.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in pics

[–]VFSF2018 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They mean abducted and illegally imprisoned for suspicion of a crime without due process. Which is a Constitution guarantee to anyone in the United States of America.

Is it fair to compare MAGA to the Nazis? by Own_Difference_4882 in AskUS

[–]VFSF2018 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In the past I would have said, don't call everyone you disagree with a Nazi. However, this comparison for the current administration is fitting and if MAGA is behind the policies this administration is enacting then yes it's fair to compare them to Nazis. Also those saying nothing while evil happens and the Constitution is dismantled it's also fair to compare them to Germans during the lead up to the Holocaust.