Kamala Harris for Pres

[fishonjazz]

I literally wrote out what the hypocrisy was. Do you need everything spelled out for you?

You’re willing to learn, and call out, a program that whether you believe it or not, Trump hasn’t been endorsed because you view it as likely.

When it comes to a policy that Harris has endorsed, you call it unlikely and are unwilling to do any research of your own on it, but you’re still willing to talk about how unlikely it is. That’s hypocrisy.

Nope. I discussed the information I had about trump and project 2025 (which was rather extensive)

I discussed the information I had about this policy you don't like (not extensive at all)

Did the same thing with both. I didn't hunt down info about either subject. (came across way more info about trump and project 2025 than I did about this tax policy without trying to. Which makes sense. One thing affects basically the entire country and one thing affects 1% of the country. One thing is close to 1,000 pages long and has been around for a number of years, one thing was mentioned by a person in a speech a week ago.)

I will admit that I'm not going to read everything about everything though. If that makes me a hypocrite then everyone is a hypocrite.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[Safetydan]

I realize it’s easy to hate the rich, but the idea isn’t to pull them down to our level.

Make them pay back to society in proportion to the amount they benefit. To bring them back to "our level" you'd need to tax them north of 99%

it’s to do promote ideas that pull us up to their level.

This is done through how we choose to spend our taxes.

And no matter what we do, there will always be those who have too much, those who have too little, those who are disenfranchised, those who aren’t.

Nobody is asking for equity of outcome. That's insane. I think we as a society need to work to acheive better parity of opportunity. Maybe you don't think the effort is worth the hassle.

But taking all incentive out of the stock market is going to hurt the middle class far, far, more than the ultra wealthy.

The incentive is still there and also just no:



In terms of a percentage of wealth, securities represent a far smaller amount of middle-class wealth. Most of their assets are in the form of a house, if they own one.

 

[MT Steve]

In the longterm, the stock market will be better with the middle and lower classes having more wealth proportionate to the upper class. Increased consumer spending is a good thing for an economy.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Tax policies are outcome-based. We obviously have high wealth inequality in this country. A tax on unrealized capital gains for the ultra wealthy only (people whose income exceeds $100 million for 3 straight years or people whose assets exceed $1 billion for 3 straight years) would help to reduce that.

And if you want to argue that's unfair, I can also argue back that it's just as unfair that the ultra wealthy have access to a vast amount of resources and tax breaks that most people do not. "Fairness" is not what should be on trial here.

I didn’t say anything about fair. And yeah, the wealthy have access to resources that others don’t…that’s life. And honestly, they should! Why should Joe Schmoe who makes $40k have the same resources that a person who makes $100 million have? One of them creates a lot more worth to the system than the other. I know it doesn’t make anybody feel good, but it’s the truth. And in regards to fair, the top 1% pay 46% of all income taxes while earning 26% of the income. Perhaps the problem isn’t that we need to tax more to get more to cover spending, perhaps the problem is that we spend too much.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Make them pay back to society in proportion to the amount they benefit. To bring them back to "our level" you'd need to tax them north of 99%



This is done through how we choose to spend our taxes.



Nobody is asking for equity of outcome. That's insane. I think we as a society need to work to acheive better parity of opportunity. Maybe you don't think the effort is worth the hassle.



The incentive is still there and also just no:

View attachment 17094

In terms of a percentage of wealth, securities represent a far smaller amount of middle-class wealth. Most of their assets are in the form of a house, if they own one.

If you put on a capital gain tax of 45%, there’s hardly any incentive for the middle class to even risk the stock market!

I mean, to put your post tax dollars into an investment that hopefully you get an 8-10% return on, but there’s always the chance of losing it, and see that when you take it out half of it’s going to be taxed again plus whatever you lose in regards to inflation? People will seriously consider whether the juice is worth the squeeze. So if the wealthy are getting taxed up the ying yang so they pull out for other avenues, and the middle class doesn’t think it’s worth it, what do you think happens?! And then you’ll have companies that are losing money because nobody is buying their stock, or it’s devalued, and I think you can see how that translates down to employees. Not great Bob!

 

[RandyForRubio]

In the longterm, the stock market will be better with the middle and lower classes having more wealth proportionate to the upper class. Increased consumer spending is a good thing for an economy.

Agreed! So to get them involved, incentivize it! Don’t create policy to encourage people to do otherwise.

 

[MT Steve]

I didn’t say anything about fair. And yeah, the wealthy have access to resources that others don’t…that’s life. And honestly, they should! Why should Joe Schmoe who makes $40k have the same resources that a person who makes $100 million have? One of them creates a lot more worth to the system than the other. I know it doesn’t make anybody feel good, but it’s the truth. And in regards to fair, the top 1% pay 46% of all income taxes while earning 26% of the income. Perhaps the problem isn’t that we need to tax more to get more to cover spending, perhaps the problem is that we spend too much.

We're talking specifically about resources that enable them to take advantage of tax loopholes. Somebody who was born into wealth and makes $100 million in passive income while having to work minimally still gets a free step-up in the tax basis of the assets they inherited from their parents. That step-up will never be taxed. It's lost tax revenue to the country, all for the benefit of the person inheriting the ultra large wealth.

Agreed! So to get them involved, incentivize it! Don’t create policy to encourage people to do otherwise.

First off, I have no idea how a tax that only impacts the unrealized gains of the ultra wealthy would "encourage people to do otherwise". We're talking about consumer spending, not investing.

A country's overall wealth is a finite pool, mostly owned by the ultra wealthy. This tax has the ultimate net effect of changing that proportion in favor of the middle/lower classes. And as you acknowledged in this post, the stock market will be better with the middle and lower classes having more wealth proportionate to the upper class.

 

[str8line]

I didn’t say anything about fair. And yeah, the wealthy have access to resources that others don’t…that’s life. And honestly, they should! Why should Joe Schmoe who makes $40k have the same resources that a person who makes $100 million have? One of them creates a lot more worth to the system than the other. I know it doesn’t make anybody feel good, but it’s the truth. And in regards to fair, the top 1% pay 46% of all income taxes while earning 26% of the income. Perhaps the problem isn’t that we need to tax more to get more to cover spending, perhaps the problem is that we spend too much.

There's a finite amount of assets in the system. Hoarders of the assets building billion dollar yachts and stashing them around the world takes assets out of the system. When more and more of the pie ends up in fewer and fewer hands eventually something has to give.

 

[Safetydan]

I think we're getting to the crux of the issue. R4R thinks that we live in a meritocracy (a lie) and the best measure of merit is the amount of wealth somebody has. People who have more money have it because they're better at life than those who don't. They deserve it.

On my end, I don't think they're entitled to the amount that they've profited off of the backs of their workers. I don't blame them necessarily. I'm not expecting them to give money out to the poor out of the kindness of their hearts. I'm hoping to restructure society in a way that values those who contribute more equitably and allows everyone an opportunity to contribute.

 

[RandyForRubio]

I think we're getting to the crux of the issue. R4R thinks that we live in a meritocracy (a lie) and the best measure of merit is the amount of wealth somebody has. People who have more money have it because they're better at life than those who don't. They deserve it. They're like demi-gods and it's really hard to talk with Elon Musks fat dick in his mouth.

On my end, I don't think they're entitled to the amount that they've profited off of the backs of their workers. I don't blame them necessarily. I'm not expecting them to give money out to the poor out of the kindness of their hearts. I'm hoping to restructure society in a way that values those who contribute more equitably and allows everyone an opportunity to contribute.

A fair measured response. Appreciate it.

 

[Mongoose]

View: https://x.com/nicksortor/status/1826320298503012789?s=46&t=PfGBft52CF1a98VsjZzilw

It’d be another testament to how corrupt the Democratic Party is if Trump and RFK jr joined forces. I’d like to see RFK as the attorney general so he can have power over the purse to keep our taxes from flowing so freely into the corrupt military industrial complex and the medical industrial complex with no oversight. It’d sure be nice to know how our Ukraine and Israel funds are actually being spent. Let alone the tax dollars the government sends to private companies creating addictive poison pills that kill people by the thousands.
They both will want to beef up security even more if they are going to join forces. The assassination attempts won’t end even after the election either. We’ve seen presidents murdered before.

 

[RandyForRubio]

View: https://x.com/nicksortor/status/1826320298503012789?s=46&t=PfGBft52CF1a98VsjZzilw

It’d be another testament to how corrupt the Democratic Party is if Trump and RFK jr joined forces. I’d like to see RFK as the attorney general so he can have power over the purse to keep our taxes from flowing so freely into the corrupt military industrial complex and the medical industrial complex with no oversight. It’d sure be nice to know how our Ukraine and Israel funds are actually being spent. Let alone the tax dollars the government sends to private companies creating addictive poison pills that kill people by the thousands.
They both will want to beef up security even more if they are going to join forces. The assassination attempts won’t end even after the election either. We’ve seen presidents murdered before.

Please keep RFK away from any important jobs.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

this means that middle class Americans foot way more of the bill to run the country than the ultra-billionaires who profit off the system the middle class pays to support.

Wow! That is so unfair, or it would be if you didn't pull it from your backside. In reality, the top 10% of income earners are the source of 60% of all federal tax revenue and 76% of all income taxes. The middle class pays little and the bottom half of earners pay nothing.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

I think we're getting to the crux of the issue. R4R thinks that we live in a meritocracy (a lie) and the best measure of merit is the amount of wealth somebody has. People who have more money have it because they're better at life than those who don't. They deserve it.

On my end, I don't think they're entitled to the amount that they've profited off of the backs of their workers.

Agreed. That is the crux of the issue. R4R is centered on creating and building which brings in wealth. You are centered on taking away and redistributing based on what you think people are entitled to.

History is full of example of economies created by those who think like R4R, and examples of economies created by people who think like you do. Creating and building is the better model. The economies created around taking away and redistributing reliably end in genocide, famine, or both.

 

[Mongoose]

Please keep RFK away from any important jobs.

Haha! Ya we need more dementia riddled brain dead puppets with important jobs. Am I right dems?

 

[RandyForRubio]

Haha! Ya we need more dementia riddled brain dead puppets with important jobs. Am I right dems?

RFK doesn’t like agriculture. He’s out for me.

 

[fishonjazz]

Haha! Ya we need more dementia riddled brain dead puppets with important jobs. Am I right dems?

What a weird post. Dems literally just got rid of their dementia candidate and the Repubs dementia candidate is still in the running.
Also, the person you responded to isn't a liberal or Democrat.
Big time swing and a miss

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[BENTLEY]

Look in the mirror, gang.
This is many of you:



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mongoose]

What a weird post. Dems literally just got rid of their dementia candidate and the Repubs dementia candidate is still in the running.
Also, the person you responded to isn't a liberal or Democrat.
Big time swing and a miss

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

Haha I haven’t spent decades here learning nothing and circle jerking with morons so I’ll take your word for it. Have you thought about who’s running the country if Joe has dementia? We still have four months of brain dead Pedo Peter in charge. Thanks democrats.

 

[fishonjazz]

Haha I haven’t spent decades here learning nothing and circle jerking with morons so I’ll take your word for it. Have you thought about who’s running the country if Joe has dementia? We still have four months of brain dead Pedo Peter in charge. Thanks democrats.

Who is running the county? Literally thousands of people are in government.
There are a bunch in federal government. And then a whole bunch more in state governments (50 of em!)

If you think, or ever thought, that the president runs the country then you are/were wrong.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk