You pay property taxes whether or not you have children in public schools, so the argument she's making doesn't make sense either. Property taxes are a wealth tax. I don't think they are equivalent, because this is closer to estimated tax payments towards when the gains are realized. She's right that the way the proposal would work just moves the tax forward, so I'm not sure how revenue positive it would be long-term. The only reason it is being proposed though is because of the way the ultra-rich have found to get around income tax. Avoiding taxable compensation. Avoiding paying Dividends. Avoiding selling stock. It's smart, but it is definitely a long-term problem.
I will add that I REALLY dislike how vindictive Trump is. The way he treated McCain and his family, even beyond death, was disgraceful. Again, there are many reasons not to like Trump the person. But based on the policies, I hope the Republican side wins. And regardless who wins, I hope that sensible decisions will be made, and that the worst fears of either side about the other side do not come true.
I honestly can't tell anymore. That level of belief isn't far from this: "If Jesus came down and was the vote counter, I would win California" - Trump
Your statements are contradictory. There is a huge machine at work. She is the leader. The fact that the large machine is working efficiently, effectively, and successfully are signs that she is successful at managing large organizations or at least not getting in the way. The RNC is also a large machine. It isn't being run as successfully, efficiently, or effectively. She is the better manager. Her team is doing a better job producing.
The issue is that wealthy people can borrow against their equity and functionally "realize" a portion of their wealth without actually paying taxes on it. Billionaires can maintain a lifestyle without ever realizing any capital gains because of this. The interest paid on the loan is far less than the capital gain that would have been owed if they realized the gains. And they get the benefit of holding onto their equity and having it appreciate further. The issue is that this sort of option doesn't exist for the average person. Average Americans rely on earned/wage income that is taxed immediately at source. Instead, a select group of rich people get the benefit of having a backdoor path to realize a portion of their equity without ever paying taxes on it due to these lending facilities. Bill Ackman (who I otherwise despise) did have an interesting solution for this. He proposed requiring that if you borrow against your equity, the amount you borrow should be realized. In effect, you'll pay capital gains on the amount you borrowed. So rather than taxing unrealized gains (regardless of whether someone borrowed against it, his proposal is to tax the unrealized gains tied to the loan). To me that's probably a fairer approach to this problem. But this absolutely is an issue and I think its fair to address it (along with certain industries having their entire income being classified as capital gains instead of earned income).
My expectation is a Harris administration will govern as a center-left Democrat, like every other Democratic administration. I am not swayed by the uproar over "critical race theory" and "gender theory" and "DEI" that has taken over your social media feeds and which you've decided to spam onto this forum. My expectation is a Trump administration will pursue policies in line with Project 2025. There will be less checks against his worst tendences, because (compared to his first term) he will appoint more unprincipled yes-men to important positions to do his bidding. His deeply flawed character, which you dismiss as unimportant, poses significant risks to the country and the world. Besides all of that, his behavior after he lost the 2020 election is (in my view) disqualifying. He wanted to cast away voting results and have hand-picked electors give him the Presidency, and he had people on his side working to make that happen. As a voting citizen of this country (and I understand you are not one, so maybe you just don't care about this), I find that deeply offensive. That's reason enough for my vote to never go to him.
Yeah, I won't vote in this election. Maybe in the next one . Thanks for your perspective. Agree to disagree.
A Harris admin will want to get abortion rights and a few other landmark bills passed. They will likely lose the senate in 2024 given the map. Even if they hold it the vote margins will be too close to get huge pieces of legislation passed without support from swing or red state senators. She will govern accordingly because she wants to pass legislation to leave a legacy and she can’t pass legislation without swing state senators. With Trump there will be not one senator who will stand in his way on something as extreme as a national abortion ban, and might even push him further than he wants to go. All of them will push him to cut taxes deeper for billionaires. Rick Scott is likely to be senate majority leader. This along with Trump in the White House, and Mike Johnson in the house should freak out every American who isn’t a billionaire or a Christian white nationalist.
Don't call her "sis"... I don't think you mean how it comes across. Also - no most of the democrats have not been against expanding or building parts of a wall on the border. They have been against building "the wall" and have called for spending more money or drones, cameras and other deterrents as part of a more multi-facetted approach. It was late last year or early this year when the Democrats and some Republicans put forward a bi-partisan border security bill and the Republicans in the Senate blocked it. There are certainly difference between the Republicans and Democrats on the issue of border security... but there is also a situation where more Republican and Democrats outside of Washington do not understand where the other party stands. The Democrats think that Trump and the Republicans want to complete stop immigration and the Republicans think that the Democrats in Washington want to have no border control - the reality is that both are wrong.
Completely stop ILLEGAL immigration. You gotta emphasize that brother I don't think anyone is against LEGAL immigration, country like USA actually needs immigrants, but you need to know who's coming into the country. Its not that hard. The wall needs to go up, its getting ridiculous out here, even if Kamala gets elected, the great state of Texas needs to do it on its own.
Wow - talk about taking things out of context.... but that is the point of the author of the tweet... still it is deceptive. Not wanting a border wall that extends from Texas across California, is not the same as Harris is talking about.... portions of border wall have been used for a long time and not been opposed by either party... what the Democrats and Republicans both supported in Washington before "The Wall" was a multi tiered approach at the border where partial border walls were used, as well as drones, camera, motion detectors.... etc. Then Trump wanted to build a wall that would be almost 2,000 miles long and claimed that Mexico would pay for it. It was a profoundly stupid and unrealistic idea. Having said that, once pictures came out showing alleged abuses of children and women at the border - the Democrats jumped on it for political reasons and ran with the idea that Trump was abusive at the wall. Trump has also claimed he built 500 miles onto the border when he was President - the reality is that he actually only expanded the border 52 miles - the border in place was 450 miles when he took office.... so he didn't expand the wall 500 miles like he has claimed before...... but the Democrats are stupid too. The gladly attacked Trump for the treatment of people at the border, when it was very similar under Obama and now Biden - some differences, but not a lot in how people are treated at the actual border when it comes to food, sleeping, "cages" etc. The Democrats started to lose on the border issue (after winning initially) so Biden sent word to further restrict asylum seekers let into the USA and that was all because of politics......... but the Democrats and Republicans in the House passed a bill that would increase security and spending on security at the border, that was a multi -tiered approach and the Republicans in the Senate 6 months ago or so decided to block it because Biden was politically hurt by the status quo. All of this political BS and most Democrats and most Republicans in the Senate and House actually are not all that different in the approach to the border.... indeed we would have Border Reform but Trump blocked it over "Dreamers". Both parties have played politics on this topic at the expense of the American people - however this idea that Harris has flopped on this topic isn't accurate.
First - Harris did not flop or switch on border control or the need for walls...... it was early this year that the Border Bill had building additional walls, which is what has been done for 60 years... Harris supported that bill. What Harris and the Democrats have not supported is building a 2,000 mile wall along the entire border. The bipartisan approach (back when politicians agreed on some things) always had strategic sections of walls with other deterrents. Second - Trump did not come up with the idea to not tax tips. It is something that has been around for sometime - and a bill actually was authored about months before Trump said anything about it. So - it wasn't some sort of novel idea. Third - the plan by Harris and Trump both make exemptions for tips, but how they go about it is difference - so they are not the exact same. Fourth - will Harris say anything to get elected? Yeah that is likely true, but we know that Trump will --- I cannot think of the last politician that won the Presidency that refused to do that. I am tired of how it has become the last decade.
I don't think you understand what I wrote or I did not do a good job explaining it. I wrote that some democrats pushed that Trump wanted to stop immigration. As for "legal" versus "illegal", when Trump made comments about wanting immigrants from countries like Denmark and not shithole countries like Haiti - it makes people rightfully nervous. As for a "wall" - no, the USA does not need a two thousand mile border wall .... but it does need to increase spending on the border security and it needs to have immigration reform, and an avenue for those long term in the USA illegally to get citizenship - something that almost happened 8 years ago but Trump killed it. Trump is calling for the deportation of 15-20 million people in the USA - that is not realistic and would be a disaster. First, where do you send them? Second, many of them have children born in the USA, have long term families etc. Third the cost of rounding up that many people would be absurd and it would profoundly impact the economy. All of this is smart politics by Trump - he has an advantage on the issue of the border, and has spent a lot of time crafting his responses and how to appeal to voters on the topic - Harris hasn't and can lose ground on this topic.
She did actually - you can read a copy of the bill if you want..... I know it doesn't fit on a three line tweet, but it is out there.
