For example, Biden’s son Humper, has just pleaded guilty to 9 federal charges of tax evasion.
Another, Biden spent years at every public opportunity, blaming a man for the death of his FIRST wife and daughter, referring to him as a drunk driver. The man was not at fault. She rolled through a stop sign on a side road intersecting with a state highway. The on site investigator stated, there was no indication the tractor trailer
driver was drinking.
This man’s daughter stated he grieved over the crash.
She said, "He was haunted and was tormented by that for years," and the he died. Biden never apologized until after his death when the daughter went public and demanded an apology.
Kamala never worked at McDonalds.
Her statement that Goldman Sacs analyst said her plan would strengthen the economy and Trumps would weaken was false.
Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon said in a Wednesday appearance on CNBC with host Scott Wapner, "So, that report, which was mentioned last night in the debate, came from an independent analyst, and it's interesting, Scott, I think a lot more has been made of this than should be."
"What the report did is it looked at a handful of policy issues that have been put out by both sides, and it tried to model their impact on GDP growth," Solomon explained. "The reason I say a bigger deal has been made of it is what it showed is the difference between the sets of policies that they've put forward is about two-tenths of 1%."
In her interview with MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle, Harris said analysts at Goldman Sachs, a global investment and wealth management firm, “said my plan would grow the economy” and Trump’s “would shrink the economy.”
In fact, the analysts found that the economy would continue to grow under both candidates. If Trump wins, the growth would be a bit smaller in Trump’s first year, but that “abates in 2026,” the report said. If Harris wins, there would be at best a “very slight boost to GDP growth” in the first two years, the report said, referring to the real GDP, which is adjusted for inflation.
The company’s chief executive officer suggested the difference in the economic impact between the two candidates isn’t significant.
Penn Wharton Budget Model
In the campaign event with Winfrey, Harris cited the “Wharton School of Business.” She is referring to analyses performed by the Penn Wharton Budget Model of Harris’ and Trump’s tax and spending plans, and PWBM did not conclude that her plan “would strengthen the economy, his would weaken it,” as she said.
PWBM found that Harris’ plan would reduce the nation’s gross domestic product more than Trump’s, and would reduce workers’ wages more.
PWBM did conclude that Trump’s plan would add about twice as much to the nation’s debt, but PWBM warned that the debt added by both candidates’ plans would fall on “future generations who must finance almost the entirety of the tax decreases” each has proposed.
PWBM determined that under Harris’ tax and spending plan, “Relative to current law, GDP falls by 1.3 percent by 2034 and by 4 percent within 30 years (year 2054). Capital investment and working hours fall, thereby reducing wages by 0.8 percent in 2034 and by 3.3 percent in 2054.”
It also found that Harris’ plans would increase cumulative deficits by $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years on a conventional basis and by $2 trillion on a dynamic basis. (Dynamic forecasts take into account the policies’ expected effects on economic activity.)
More generally, PWBM concluded: “Lower and middle-income households generally benefit from increased transfers and credits on a conventional basis, while higher-income households are worse off.”
PWBM’s analysis of Trump’s tax and spending plans concluded that his would cause even bigger deficits.
“We estimate that the Trump Campaign tax and spending proposals would increase primary deficits by $5.8 trillion over the next 10 years on a conventional basis and by $4.1 trillion on a dynamic basis that includes economic feedback effects,” the analysis stated.
But it found that the Trump plan’s impact on the GDP, while still negative, was not as bad as Harris’.
Sources: Media responses and Factcheck.org
So Kamala and Joe have no class and are intellectually dishonest meaning they intentionally manipulate, exclude facts and evidence, which btw, Harris did as AG, etc. etc.
“47”
Responses
« Back to index | View thread »