Apoplectic Liberals Furious Over Trump’s Proposed Economic Freedom…

It is going to take years to break through the false constructs of radical left-wing economic principles which have been sold by modern academia and corporate media.  However, eventually people will recognize once again that being allowed to keep their own money, the outcome of their own labor, is not an expense on government.


The current Carrier HVAC story is an example of economic cognitive dissonance.  Allowing Carrier to keep a larger portion of their own income, to afford a larger labor force, is not a government expense. Government does not own the income, Carrier does.

The reason Mexico was the better play was simply because by changing locations the company could: A.) make more, and B.) keep more – of its own revenue.  Donald Trump is attempting to reverse this cancerous economic system and create the better play right here in the U.S.A.

The term “tax expenditure” is the left-wing lingo to describe a person, company or entity being allowed to keep its own earnings.   The implication within “tax expenditure” is the government owning the earnings, they don’t.  Period.

There is a big difference between a real tax expenditure vis-a-vis Solyndra where the government actually pays a private entity with taxpayer funds (crony capitalism) as part of the income within their P-n-L  – and a company like Carrier being allowed by government to keep a larger portion of its own revenue.

The former is an actual tax expenditure, the latter is not.  Left-wing ideologues who discuss economics conflate the two examples in order to advance their own illogical and false arguments.  Remember Obama’s infamous “your didn’t build that” speech?

Government allowing you to keep your own earnings, is not an expenditure – unless you align with the ideology that all earnings are the property of the state, a socialist principle, and the state can then apportion those earnings to whomever it desires, ie redistribution.

President-elect Donald Trump is a free marketeer; a Main Street capitalist.


To understand the change within the fundamental economic proposals of President-elect Donald Trump a person must be able to make the distinction between who owns your labor: you or the government?

Trump’s economic principles -to generate an expansive GDP- are dependent on entities, individuals and businesses being allowed greater financial freedom, by allowing them to keep a larger portion of their own earnings.   This is the fundamental economic paradigm shift.

Predictably, when you lessen the socialistic enterprise of confiscation and redistribution the left-wing ideologues, especially the media, will instantaneously shout “trickle down economics“.   This ridiculous liberalist economic mantra is similar to shouting “racist” against their opponents on social issues.

All economic activity is “trickle down” once the production value of labor is paid.  When you go grocery shopping, you are participating in trickle down by spending your paycheck at the supermarket.  The grocery store is benefiting from your trickle down distribution.  However, unlike confiscatory tax policy, your distribution is done freely as you engage in free-market commerce.

Consider this Bloomberg headline: “Trump kicks off ‘interventionist’ approach to keep jobs in America”:

No, actually the exact opposite is true.

Trump is REMOVING confiscatory government action to drive increased GDP and expand jobs in America.  Trump is allowing Carrier to keep their own earnings.  Trump is lowering the burden -in this case financially- created by government. However, you can see how the left-wing ideology is inherent in the Bloomberg presentation.

Bloomberg sees allowing the independent organization, Carrier Corp., to retain a larger share of it’s own earnings as “intervention”; the only actual intervention is the lessening of the governmental confiscation.  Bloomberg sees government as the owner, and Trump intervening in their confiscatory activity.   In other words, Bloomberg sees this activity as a tax expenditure.

It is going to take several years before people realize how much they have been hoodwinked, and through several decades slowly nudged toward allowing the government to control what should be their own free and private economic decisions (earnings and expenditures).

President-elect Donald Trump’s tax proposals begin to shift this paradigm.

The second set of economic proposals surround the regulatory environment within the manufacturing and production equation.   In the interim, Trump is highlighting the obvious contradiction within left-wing espoused manufacturing arguments.

If the need for manufacturing labor is reduced by technology and automation, then why are companies outsourcing manufacturing based on labor costs?

This is a question modern left-wing economic ideologues cannot reconcile.  The reason is simple, technology and automation does not remove the labor cost, it only increases the efficiency of labor and may lower the labor cost.

The need for labor is always retained because someone has to build, maintain, and oversee the systems (robotics and automation example).  As the manufacturing economy expands (making more stuff) the scope of the technological and automation needs necessarily expands.

In essence, more robots are needed, and more people are needed to oversee the robotics. Why can’t the U.S.A. be the builder of the robotics?

While some may automatically jump to the conclusion of a looming Skynet, the premise is never actually achieved because advancement and automation requires innovation.   Artificial Intelligence is just that, artificial.  Machines are not self-aware…. people are.


This entry was posted in Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Economy, Environmentalism, EPA, media bias, Mexico, Professional Idiots, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

191 Responses to Apoplectic Liberals Furious Over Trump’s Proposed Economic Freedom…

  1. Trump4President says:

    “It is going to take several years before people realize how much they have been hoodwinked, and through several decades slowly nudged toward allowing the government to control what should be their own free and private economic decisions (earnings and expenditures).”

    I’ve been living in a Through a Looking Glass world my whole life. Nothing I did ever gave me an increase in my standard of living. I’m beginning to understand why─The government controls it all! “Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.

    Thanks CTH.

    Liked by 6 people

  2. jbrickley says:

    Lately it seems there is another assault on the minimum wage pushing for $15/hr at fast food places like McDonalds. These snowflake morons going out protesting and walking off the job claiming it is not a living wage are the first ones to get fired if the minimum wage is pushed to $15/hr because they are not qualified for that level of pay. McDonalds will install additional automation, fire the entire base staff of low skilled workers and hire new people actually worth $15/hr. They will be expected to work harder and to do a much better job. There will be 1/3rd the number of workers. They will show up for work on time and they will work hard for $15/hr. Service at fast food places will quadruple, they will bring the food to your table, your order will be correct, they won’t burn the fries or make sloppy burgers, the place will be spotlessly clean, the trash will be emptied, the workers will be wearing clean and freshly pressed uniforms with an endless smile, etc., etc., etc.

    Raising the bar and not raising the responsibility laid upon the workers is not how it’s going to play out. The exact opposite will occur. Suddenly all those very unskilled workers at fast food will be out of a job and become unemployable because it will be all employers who hire minimum wage workers. Raising the pay to $15/hr is too fast a change. A worker who makes $15/hr can handle a lot more responsibility and each one is worth three of the old workers. The employer can get very picky about who is hired for a $15/hr job. The market dictates they will want the best workers.

    Just doing a job search for $15/hr jobs results in the following list:

    Customer Service Call Center Rep
    HVAC/Refrigeration Tech
    Entry Level IT
    Machine Operator Technician
    County Public School Registrar
    YMCA Office Assistant
    Help Desk – Entry Level 1

    You think those losers currently working in fast food part time jobs can do any of those jobs? I’m not talking about the kids, I’m talking about full blown adults with kids still working in fast food claiming they don’t make enough money who have been there for many years. All those people are going to end up on welfare unless someone explains the real world to them and gets them motivated to work and to build the necessary skills.

    Fast food employment was never intended for someone over the age of 30 unless they were a manager. Their workforce used to be high school and college kids and there were a large number of employees hired because they were all part time and frequently worked a moving schedule with lots of time off. Then kids got lazy and didn’t want to work so they hired older people due to a shortage of kids. Some were retired and looking for a little extra cash and something to do. Besides at McDonalds there’s always the old folks who come and hang out after rush hour. But in many neighborhoods you didn’t find those workers, you found the unskilled adults willing to do the job and the employer was desperate to keep them so they put up with a lot of crap. Well yeah you push the minimum wage to $15/hr and those folks will be quickly replaced cause there’s a lot of people that would do that job for $15/hr and they would do it a whole lot better.

    Chik-Fil-A is different. They opened one nearby and the franchise owners visit every church they could looking to speak with their youth groups to let them know they were hiring. They have a rather large kitchen and everything is made fresh onsite so there’s a lot going on behind the scenes. They train them and expect them to be top notch. They take applications from everyone but they hire the best people. The service is outstanding and the whole experience is many times better than any fast food joint. The place was mobbed with customers, they have two drive thru order taking windows and the cars stretched forever. The inside takeout orders were just as large and the tables were packed. Once the excitement calmed down they are still very busy every day, except Sunday they are closed.

    I will feel bad for the waitresses because a good waitress will make more than $15/hr with tips even though they are paid less than minimum wage under a labor law exception. They will lose their tips and lose that extra hustle based income advantage. Small businesses that cannot afford to pay $15/hr for workers will up and leave for another location that doesn’t have that high a minimum wage. Or they will just close up. Some will adapt and again, hire better workers.

    Liberalism is a Mental Disorder and they don’t know squat about economics nor business.

    Liked by 8 people

    • mdaush says:

      You are most deserving of the vaunted and most excellent “Post of the Day Award!
      One of the best posts ever on the treehouse!

      Liked by 3 people

    • dn421 says:

      You can’t “explain the real world” to people who don’t want to understand it. They need to learn about it the hard way and with no social welfare system to soften the lesson.


  3. It’s as if Trump took the Oath of Office two months early.

    Liked by 8 people

  4. Texian says:

    What happened here? Trump had to re-educate Carrier’s CEO on the basics of Free Enterprise Economics operating within a limited government framework.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sounds like Trump went to the Carrier CEO’s boss and apoealed to his humanity, patriotism, business sense, then promised to fix the tax and regulatory problems Obamunism imposed on them.

      Liked by 4 people

      • If Obama had made the effort to call Carrier the conversation would not have been about the jobs, he would have blathered on about himself.

        Liked by 1 person

        • To be fair, Trump spends some time praising himself. He, too, is a narcissist. But, I don’t think he’s a pathological one like Zero. He could not have pulled off his amazing victory without being able to connect with those who voted for him, especially those who were new voters or long inactive ones, and those who screwed up and voted for Zero a time or two.

          During his thank-you speech in Ohio yesterday, I sensed he was empathetically connected to the crowd, not just manipulating them.

          Yes, Trump is a narcissist (many Americans are), but not to the degree that he is out of touch with reality. Without a firm grasp of reality he could not have understood the needs of America despite being a billionaire, having the media and GOPe firmly against him, and being given losing advice from the Republican donor and consultant classes.

          Liked by 1 person

          • old_grouch says:

            Trump believes in winning. He is very driven, a workaholic. He sees himself as a winner, doing a top-notch job. He doesn’t want to settle for less than a great job. That seems to be very important to his self-image. I am not sure I would term that narcissistic, definition: having an excessive or erotic interest in oneself and one’s physical appearance. Synonyms: vain, self-loving, self-admiring, self-absorbed, self-obsessed, conceited, self-centered, self-regarding, egotistic, egotistical, egoistic.

            Liked by 1 person

            • We live in a “Me” era. Egocentrism is a form of mild narcissism. By pathological narcissism I mean narcissistic personality disorder, which was diagnosed based on the following criteria from DSM-IV:

              Diagnostic criteria for 301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder

              These criteria are obsolete.

              DSM IV – TR

              A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

              (1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

              (2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

              (3) believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

              (4) requires excessive admiration

              (5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

              (6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

              (7) lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

              (8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

              (9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

              I don’t see Trump fitting any of these criteria. Obama and Hillary fit many.

              I agree that Trump is a workaholic and judges himself by his results. His dad accused him of narcissism because he boldly displays his name on all his projects. But, in Donald’s defense, he was creating a brand, and using one’s family name as the brand forces one to work even harder and smarter.

              Trump doesn’t seek approval so much as he seeks doing the right thing. No one who needs pathological narcissistic approval is going to pick fights with the GOPe and media like Trump did. He knew what was right for the country, knew that neither party gave a damn about doing the right thing, so he plotted a course to do the right thing, sold his vision, and won.

              Yes, he sometimes seems unhinged, but he accepts credible feedback, and I trust that he is unabashedly patrioric and wise.


  5. Message from my Bride:

    This isn’t just a Trump Thank-You Tour.
    This isn’t just a Trump Demonstration of how to save and multiply Jobs.
    This is a Trump Shot across the FSM (Fake Stream Media) bow:

    Trump will GO DIRECTLY to the PEOPLE, and it will multiply his LEVERAGE to MAGA.

    Liked by 10 people

  6. Thank you Sundance! Thank you for elucidating on the Orwellian Economic Media-splainers better than I. Just beautiful.

    They want to control our minds….every aspect of it, even down to buying a loaf of bread.

    Liked by 8 people

    • So right, Bluto! This was a wonderful, clear explanation of the economics of idiocy.

      In addition to “tax expenditure” and oxymoron if I ever saw one, I would add the term “tax loophole,” so often hurled as businesses, especially the oil depletion allowance. Now I happen to think we will never run out of oil (topic for a post on my own blot some day), but for the people who are constantly predicting Peak Oil, these allowances are exactly the right thing to do.

      Oh, and BTW, Peak Oil was predicted to occur in more or less the same year Global Warming was to destroy the world. Now that it is Climate Change, I don’t know what they are going to do regarding the coming Doomsday.


      • Oh, I just found another term for SD’s “tax expenditure.” It is called by the Chicago Tribune a “tax SUBSIDY.”

        Yep – the company doesn’t get a single dollar from the govt, butr CT calls it a Subsidy. Grrrrr


  7. And Trump just set the precedent: Announcing NEW NEWS DIRECTLY to the PEOPLE.

    MAD DOG MATTIS for SecDef.

    Liked by 6 people

  8. cactusclyde says:

    If the tax cost of repatriation of profits is 35%, then it makes sense for a company to relocate outside the U.S. The company can then use those profits to invest in new equipment and technology. This has potential to increase worker productivity and company profits. If the repatriation tax is lowered significantly or dropped entirely, more of that money would be invested in the U.S.


  9. Trump was also giving us instructions. We all need to be informed and ready to help when the time comes. It may be calling your congress person when a bill needs to be passed. It may be protesting for a cause or to remove a cause. Trump wants us involved because then we will be able to help keep this movement alive and moving forward.

    In a long enough timeline, the mortality rate is zero. He knows this and that is why it is important that we the people learn what to do and how to keep moving this great county forward.

    My one concern is that when folks begin to dig themselves out, that the banks do no note suck them dry. I.e., buying a new car on credit, credit card debt, buying ,ore house then you can afford. All the trick that money lenders use to sell you more then you can bare.

    Digging the America people in more debt is a trap. Eventually they will default and boom, an other recession or worse. Eventually someone will have to eat the losses. The Dodd Frank bill includes language where the US Govt (you and I tax payers) will bail the banks out. Trump has mentioned the Dodd Frank bill needs to be revised. I hope that they remove the banks safely net and lay the responsibility back into the banks to make responsible loans.

    We’ve been propagandised to believe that stuff will give you happiness. Who benefits from this false belief? Who is hurt by it?

    Liked by 2 people

  10. TrustyHaste says:

    Thanks to CTH and Sundance and everyone here. I am re-learning economics. I have been busy with life, kids, aging parents, work, going back to school later in life, etc. etc. I found myself guiltly of spouting off buzz words and talking points, not fully understanding the concepts. So, when someone on the left presents their points, I have to go back and learn to make sure that I truly understand.

    Frustratingly, in searching concepts online, I find the politicized views and sites float to the top from Google. So, when someone says Trickle Down Economics never worked, I go to Google and type in “Trickle Down Economics”. What I get is pages of “why it is bad” and ‘why Trump will fail.” Is there a different search engine? I only have so much time. I can’t really trust Wikipedia, can I? I need to understand these concepts.

    I know and trust Trump, but I want to learn more. So much is opinion and I trust this site. Also, I will admit that I truly enjoy the animated explanations of concepts, such as this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUY16CkS-k

    Liked by 2 people

  11. “If the need for manufacturing labor is reduced by technology and automation, then why are companies outsourcing manufacturing based on labor costs?”

    This is the key question. Thanks for pointing it out.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Illegal says:

    Here is food for thought to help MAGA

    Open Letter to Trump: Weigh the Costs of Regulation
    By Thomas P. Vartanian
    November 11, 2016
    Dear President-Elect Trump:

    You will undoubtedly receive endless advice about the issues your administration will face. As you consider the economy, I hope that your administration will assess the state of financial services regulation with five years of experience since the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act.

    While it is undisputed that federally insured institutions should be closely regulated, since the enactment of the Dodd-Frank, the cost of regulatory compliance has increased exponentially. In 2015, the American Action Forum estimated the cost of Dodd-Frank at roughly $895 billion in reduced gross domestic product, or $3,346 per working-age person between 2016 and 2025. Such costs may be warranted and appropriate, but neither the Congress nor the federal government assessed the cost of the Dodd-Frank Act either before or since its enactment.

    With this backdrop, here is a checklist of seven priorities that, as a former regulator and now a practicing attorney, I believe your administration should immediately consider in the evaluation of whether the current financial regulatory system is effective and efficient, understanding the overriding importance of keeping institutions as safe and sound as possible.

    Balance Costs and Benefits of Regulation
    All laws and agency rulemaking should include standardized, rigorous cost benefit analyses to empirically demonstrate that the costs that they will create are reasonable when compared to their overall impact on safety and soundness and the corresponding benefits to the public. The reasonability of a governmental decision should ultimately include whether it will have a positive, negative or neutral impact on the economy.

    Assess Impact of the Volcker Rule
    The Volcker Rule should be re-evaluated to consider whether it should be repealed or revised. The complex restrictions that it imposes on the activities of all kinds of banking entities are adding unanticipated costs to market liquidity and capital formation, which may impact future economic growth.

    Regularly Review Existing Laws, Regulations
    Given the velocity of change in the financial services business, you should encourage your regulators to build a system in which no regulation sits on the books for more than five years without its continued existence being challenged and legitimized. Similarly, no new rule should be adopted without also including a built-in obsolescence date.

    Develop a Coherent Financial Services Strategy
    Dodd-Frank hurled regulatory spaghetti at financial institutions after the crisis on the theory that any and all increased regulation would necessarily lead to a safer and sounder financial system. It created a regulatory bias against large institutions, an operational obstacle course for community-based institutions, and a regulatory tax on growth. But it failed to provide a vision of how financial services will be permitted to be delivered in this country on a long-term basis. Financial executives deserve a clear and consistent picture of government policies so that they can steer a course to profitability.

    Make Use of Real-Time Exam Tools
    Effective bank regulation that has traditionally relied on annual onsite examinations should be further enhanced by supplementing the hands-on approach with state-of-the-art real-time electronic monitoring. Many businesses throughout the country value their assets and liabilities each and every day, underscoring that access to real-time data significantly improves decision-making and monitoring of safety and soundness.

    Re-evaluate Regulation of Systemic Firms
    The purpose and goals of the Financial Stability Oversight Council should be re-evaluated. After five years, the FSOC has designated four nonbank financial companies as “systemically important financial institutions,” but only two remain as such. One sold its banking assets to avoid FSOC jurisdiction, and a federal district court invalidated FSOC’s designation of another. Since anticipating and avoiding systemic financial duress is the statutory goal, if FSOC continues in some form, its time might be better spent focusing less on SIFI designations and more on developing comprehensive data and effective early warning mechanisms that can provide regulators with the opportunity to take remedial actions before the next crisis unfolds.

    Streamline the Regulatory Enforcement Structure
    Depending on the charter, size and locus of a bank, too many agencies are involved in the regulatory process. The Federal Reserve Board, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., Securities and Exchange Commission, Treasury Department, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Department and 50 state agencies and attorneys general may assert jurisdiction with regard to the same facts at the same time. While strong regulation of financial institutions is necessary, regulatory piling-on is wasteful and counterproductive.

    You should ask your team to answer the following question: If we were going to build the perfect regulatory system today from scratch, what would it look like? To the extent it is different from the one we have you will have a goal to shoot for..



  13. UKExpat says:

    The LEFT does not THINK it merely EMOTES


  14. In my view, its not so much the tax breaks themselves that are any sort of problem – it’s the appearance that one company is getting special tax breaks while other companies are not. So it’s a problem with equal treatment under the law and government picking winners and losers, albeit indirectly.

    So while there’s no problem with lower taxes and keeping more of what’s yours, I expect the lower taxes to be legislated for all companies, not just Carrier. Propagating a regime of special tax breaks for favored companies is not a great idea and will distort the structure of production in the country according to who is getting what tax break.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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