Vice-President Kamala Harris
Probably requires her own thread at this moment, lock/delete etc if someone else wins the nom
And yet, she remains a far better choice.
I'm just gonna keep repeating this because, a) I doubt that ever gets through congress and she probably knows this, and b) dictatorships will ruin wealth faster than you can blink an eye
And yet, she remains a far better choice.
I'm just gonna keep repeating this because, a) I doubt that ever gets through congress and she probably knows this, and b) dictatorships will ruin wealth faster than you can blink an eye
A) is correct, because of polls mainly (senate still 75:25 republican) but the proposal itself is indefensible and you should be able to say it is, and you still think Trump is worse, than would be fine
Asset owners in the UAE aren't going bad btw
A better path forward is probably trying to tax loans against assets as income for people above an income or net worth threshold.
A number of states tried to work out some sort of unrealized tax and they were all shot down last year. Vermont is probably going to figure out a way to implement this as they are currently a corporate haven.
Ultimately I don't have much sympathy for the ultra rich having to contribute more.
A) is correct, because of polls mainly (senate still 75:25 republican) but the proposal itself is indefensible and you should be able to say it is, and you still think Trump is worse, than would be fine
Asset owners in the UAE aren't going bad btw
No, I don't think I would support a wealth tax but I also wouldn't dismiss a candidate that does. Especially when the alternative is much worse. Sometimes we hold our nose.......
A better path forward is probably trying to tax loans against assets as income for people above an income or net worth threshold.
A number of states tried to work out some sort of unrealized tax and they were all shot down last year. Vermont is probably going to figure out a way to implement this as they are currently a corporate haven.
Ultimately I don't have much sympathy for the ultra rich having to contribute more.
Why tax loans against assets.
Why do you hate successful people so much, they are the only reason you aren't Canada or worse the UK. The rest of the population is the same (or worse). The elite is the only thing that is better and saves the day and makes the USA exceptional.
The elite and the ability to keep poaching the best people worldwide every generation.
And they come because they can make shitloads of money otherwise they would go to Florence or Paris , they aren't coming for the quality of life in your cities lol
No, I don't think I would support a wealth tax but I also wouldn't dismiss a candidate that does. Especially when the alternative is much worse. Sometimes we hold our nose.......
So you say yes, not no.
The proposal is disgusting but far from being enough to make her worse than Trump.
This is the honesty I am looking for
So, what do we do with the ever-increasing wealth and income gap? The defenders of the wealthy have created an unsustainable system of funneling of wealth to the top. If you don't think this is a problem, you aren't paying attention.
So, what do we do with the ever-increasing wealth and income gap? The defenders of the wealthy have created an unsustainable system of funneling of wealth to the top. If you don't think this is a problem, you aren't paying attention.
I tried to tell you already, the income gap you are looking at is the top 10-25% vs the 75%, not the billionaires.
Check the ****ing numbers.
The people earning 400k/year in the USA earn 80-100k in Europe.
The people earning 60k earn 35-40.
This is your income gap. No the billionaires.
The USA defends the upper middle class not the billionaires.
Billionaires in Germany or Italy or Sweden don't pay more taxes.
People earning 300k or 1m year pay double or more.
This issue is the same as forgiving student loans. The problem with both is we have a broken system. But since we haven't figured out a way to tackle it on the front end, we look for solutions on the back end. I would much prefer the former.
My sister has a cum laude degree in telecom engineering and a PhD and works hereand she doesn't gross 100k Eur with 10 years of seniority.
And she pays like 40% in taxes.
That's why inequality in Italy is lower, it's not about what you do to Berlusconi
This issue is the same as forgiving student loans. The problem with both is we have a broken system. But since we haven't figured out a way to tackle it on the front end, we look for solutions on the back end. I would much prefer the former.
Student loans is easy: stop lending to trash programs and low quality students. Start filtering by quality of the student and of the topic he wants to study (in terms of wages after graduation).
Like any private lender would do.
There is no broken system for incomes though
I agree with nearly all of this but I hope you're joking about "elitist liberal homeowners." NIMBYism is about the most bipartisan activity I can think of for douchebag busybody locals over 45 short of bingo and I don't care how blue the state or district is, D+10, D+20, doesn't matter I've been there and seen it. You will absolutely and consistently see plenty of representation from all types. And I mean literally anywhere you might build
Fair enough. I think my phrasing of it was wrong, because this is what I was trying to say, but I get what you are saying. The right-wing nimbys are definitely a lot more prevalent in other areas, especially san francisco. My point moreso is that its been a bipartisan thing and not a matter of evil democrats stopping developers like Luciom was trying to say.
Lol no to what, you think lending 150k to someone who is pursuing a major that is terrible , and who himself is very stupid and you can prove it with tests, is morally indispensable?
This isn't even close to the reality of our student debt problem.
Just to humor you though, even if this was the case 1 out of 10 times and the other nine people benefit from getting a good education (which benefits us all) then I'll take it.
Why tax loans against assets.
Why do you hate successful people so much, they are the only reason you aren't Canada or worse the UK. The rest of the population is the same (or worse). The elite is the only thing that is better and saves the day and makes the USA exceptional.
The elite and the ability to keep poaching the best people worldwide every generation.
And they come because they can make shitloads of money otherwise they would go to Fl
I'm in the top 15% of individual US earners so would be hard to say I hate successful people.
At a certain point, hoarding nearly infinite wealth is objectively awful for society and the world
This isn't even close to the reality of our student debt problem.
Just to humor you though, even if this was the case 1 out of 10 times and the other nine people benefit from getting a good education (which benefits us all) then I'll take it.
If 9 out of 10 benefit what's the current problem? if they benefit they should easily be capable to pay off their loans
I'm in the top 15% of individual US earners so would be hard to say I hate successful people.
At a certain point, hoarding nearly infinite wealth is objectively awful for society and the world
What do you mean with "hoarding", people can't own 10% of their very succesful company??? you hate the idea that founders can keep control? i don't understand.
If your company is really good it's going to be worth hundreds of millions easily or much more. Control is going to be worth 50m+ . What is hoarding? keeping your own company????
What do you mean with "hoarding", people can't own 10% of their very succesful company??? you hate the idea that founders can keep control? i don't understand.
If your company is really good it's going to be worth hundreds of millions easily or much more. Control is going to be worth 50m+ . What is hoarding? keeping your own company????
Well in your example, 50 million wouldn't even reach the cutoff for the "proposed" 100 million limit. Even using your imagination to come up with a hypothetical you aren't coming close to level of wealth we are talking about. That should give you pause to think about it a bit deeper
Well in your example, 50 million wouldn't even reach the cutoff for the "proposed" 100 million limit. Even using your imagination to come up with a hypothetical you aren't coming close to level of wealth we are talking about. That should give you pause to think about it a bit deeper
I gave you the hypothetical in a previous post, for kamala proposal. You proposed a different thing, taxing loans,you didn't write a cutoff for that
