Why do Republicans vote against their own economic interests?

Why do Republicans vote against their own economic interests?

Because they're gullible.

But I enjoy low taxes and good economic growth.

the economy has consistently done better under democrats than under republicans.

that's indisputable.

Because traps aren't gay?

We do not though.

>wanting lower taxes is against your economic interests
"no"

Identity comes before wealth.

>What don't white people vote for gibs?!?!? Don't they want some of dat?!?!?

I just want my own property, anwife and three kids. Enough room to let my dogs run around off the leash and to skeet shoot in the summer.

I just want to be left alone.

Republican voters used to be more wealthy so it made sense they would prefer candidates promising lower taxes and regulations.

Trump duped a ton of blue collar low income workers into voting for him though despite most of his policies benefiting their employers far more than them, although that had more to do with Hilary and the Dems completely losing the respect of the working class in the election.

You ask why a group of people people don't want to vote for a living and somehow reword it to make it sound like it's a bad thing.

When a bill is passed regardless of who the President is, the market reacts because and in spite. Obama bans offshore drilling, fracking starts to increase.
Equity markets don't have much to do with the President.

Because democrats say that they do but they never delivered

>what is supply side economics

You mean trickle down economics?

>Illegal immigration is in my best interest

Sorry, what benefits my employer benefits me. No more gibs me dat economics. Obamacare and city/state/federal/payroll are bleeding dry the American middle class; couple with third world countries that have nearly 0 regulation and extremely lax taxes and labor laws.

Economical policies have long term results.

If you vote purely on how you will benefit economically. You have no ethics or morals your not worried about anything but "what you get".

I personally value personal freedom more than any amount of money. If you don't agree your nothing but a cheap whore that can be bought

Correct. Usually 4-8 years. He rides the wave of the .com boom, and repeals Glass Steagall and installs CRA on roids. Effect happens 10 years later.

>what benefits my employer benefits me
That's true but it's not a 1:1 benefit. Likely a massive tax cut for a company's CEO will pay out few dividends to the ones at the bottom. And these tax cuts do not help the middle class as much as you think it does, if anything they'll just lead to further wealth concentration in the top 1% while leaving the rest of the country out to dry. But keep licking that boot.

But it still helps even if a little. This is opposed to raising taxes on them and theyll end up cutting jobs etc.

>that's indisputable.

Well; it's more enjoyable to live in a world where you can fantasize about being filthy fucking rich if you work really hard and tower over the peasant folk you grew up with... and when all the poor people think like that it makes for a very good environment to manipulate them and keep them complacent when everyone is equal you lose that

... Going to work, going to school bettering yourself in general you're actively trying to create an inequality where you're better than people who aren't doing the things you are.

Yes, the richer employers will have to cut jobs or raise prices to deal with a progressive tax system that focuses on them. Then the not-so-rich employers that won't be hit as hard can compete much better with their larger competitors and can grow and rehire those lost workers. In the end it's econ 101, in the long run we return to equilibrium except now we have a more competitive less concentrated market.

On the other hand, lowering taxes for those companies and persons at the top will only lead to further inequality, and I'm not talking about inequality in the liberal sense like 'oh no look at these poor nigs' but in the sense that we'll have more monopolies and oligopolies and such and far less competition.

woody

You're also looking from the scope of large cap companies. According to the SBA, 65% of new job creations are from companies 499 employees and less. There are about 15,000 publicly traded companies including OTC and about 2 million+ registered corps.

Kek So this must be the shill topic of the day huh just saw another thread just like this

wow look at all the proof you have

where is the upvote button

>vote for democrats who take your money and redistribute it to states full of rednecks
>claim the other side is voting against their interest

Yeah ok.

You're an idiot

jews

>taxfree income up to $47.000,- annum
>against their own economic interests
Kek, this is special.

>have Democrat president
>fuck up the economy
>takes time
>by the time people notice, elected republican president
>republican president fixes economy
>takes time
>people disgruntled by democratic economic policy blame republican president for their own economic illiteracy
>vote democratic president
>economic policy of republican president shows results
>people credit the democratic president
Rinse and repeat.

>the economy has consistently done better under democrats than under republicans.

yeah but if true thats only because of the profits from slavery and manipulating the markets with the KKK

they arent stupid enough to vote because theyre being offered free shit that they wont end up getting

>Trump duped a ton of blue collar low income workers into voting for him

to be fair to the flyover people, one candidate promised jobs and the other didn't

knowing they're both shit which false promise would you accept?

that you would earn more collecting welfare or that you would get a job

How would democrats benefit workers? Opening borders?

Democrats
>take money
>give to unproductive niggers

Republicans
>take money
>give to high IQ productive people

smart people only vote democrats because they like cheap shit made by illegals

Why do libfags vote against their own racial interest?

When employers have a shortage of workers, the blue collar people can negotiate higher wages.
If they get them, their spending power increases and demand for products will rise.
This creates new jobs as the employers of the nation must expand to accommodate, and with the right worker/employer balance you get healthy economic growth.

Win win. Until you start importing low-skilled workers from nations where the US minimum wage is considered high-class. They're content with competing for lower wages.

>IQ
;)

If this were true democrats would have twice as many presidents as republicans.

Well nothing is as unpredictable as the economy.

Say there is a minimum wage worker why do democrats remove sll social assistance for poor workers?
Why is there no rent control, a higher minimum wage? Why are denocrats preoccupied with nonsense and wanting to flood with poor people? They are both owned by corporationd thrre is no party of yhe people...

The larger companies will be able to take those losses much easier than the smaller ones can. The taxes will hurt small businesses the most.

>economy
>unpredictable

Jaap pls.

If democrats stopped with all immigration and social politics and focissed on the worker havibg as mich benefits, wages, and rights as possible I will vote gor them but so far they are focussed on transgendered cis killing babies destroying families and borth rates then bringing more poor people from other countries.

Propaganda, thats about it
If anyone one of you is against `the death tax` you will prove my point.

how else r they gonna get votes.

By stopped talking of blacks, trans, immigration, abd talk of controlling rent, building houses, building industries, giving out loans for people to start a famiky in a home, increasing minimum wage to 13$ an hour, providing with free education, and nationalizing health care, they do this and stopped all social politics snd ill vote for them but they are owned by corps and only speak of irrelevant social politics to get votes from
them.

The financiers of democrats and republicans are the same.

shouting black lives matter is more effective at getting support than advocating well thought out economic policy.

Why do Democrats vote against their own freedom?

>red states
>good economic growth

Top fucking kek, republicuck flyover country is helpless without yankee tax dollars propping them up. Saying they have good economic growth would be like a child saying they make a good salary by receiving allowance from their parents for doing chores

Because paying more gibs to shitskins and immigrants is not best interest in long run

bump

>we expect 0,5% growth
>OH MY GOD IT'S ONLY 0,4% WE'RE CRASHING
>h-h-how are w-we going to surv-vive 0,3%?
>hahahaha, in hindsight it turns out we grew 2% and we don't really know why

Quite unpredictable.

As opposed to what? Gibs?

...

LOL no, but you are welcome to post some proof.

Distorting the economy to make it look better is not making the economy better.

this is the strangest thread. I see it all the time, and I feel like maybe the OP actually thinks this. Why do you think we should steal money from other people? Even if it's in "our own economic interest" to have free things given to us, we don't want that. We want to keep more of our own money. The democrats do not want to do that. The republicans don't really either, but at least they SAY they do. Honestly, if people would vote to keep their own money, only Republicans would win. It's too bad so many of them are liars. Better question, OP, would be: Why don't we kick people out when it turns out they've lied about taking less of our money?

Nice claim there bud, maybe you should back that shit up before invalidly shifting the burden of proof.

We vote FOR our interest lmao

Voting to hand out more gibs to NEETs, nogs, and spics is not in our interests

>Democrats support affirmative action
>Poor whites lose
>Republicans against affirmative action
>Poor whites have an equal chance

How is this not in poor whites best economic interests?

This

>consistently better under republicans
>forgets wilson
>forgets truman
>forgets roosevelt #2
>forgets carter
>forgets johnson
>forgets democrats started the civil war
>forgets democrats decided to piss off world leaders and involve us in both world wars

Democrats have done nothing but damage to the US

And Coolidge was the greatest president

sage

Because not all people are blinded by bribes to vote for the most corrupt of the two.

Obama didn't do well at all

>
mmmmmmkay