Kamala Harris for President

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Oh, well if your "lifestyle costs have increased," then of course you need more money. Was it the fourth vacation home or the golden toilets?

Things are so expensive these days. I'm sure the regular American understands.

PP here. Nicer house in a nicer location. Nicer cars. Nicer vacations. Nicer clothes. Nicer everything. I did buy myself a small airplane as I'm avid private pilot. It's a very expensive hobby. My employees have also reaped the reward with higher profit sharing. Of course, if my business had failed would you have cared?

Everyone totally understands. Now I'm worried about your private airplane, though -- don't you think you need something bigger?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She supports a tax on unrealized capital gains.

Americans Overwhelmingly Reject Harris-Biden Unrealized Capital Gains Wealth Tax |

The 2025 Biden budget proposes to tax long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at ordinary income tax rates for taxable income above $1 million and tax unrealized capital gains at death above a $5 million exemption ($10 million for joint filers). If this tax proposal went through, investors would flee the stock market and potentially create a stock market crash effecting even pensions of middle class Americans.

Whoa— not good for most investors. This is why the Democratic Party has been dubbed “tax and spend” . No thank you!

Exactly what percent of the American public do you believe has an over 1 million dollar income or estates over 10M for married couples?

It doesn't matter. Even if ONE person is impacted it is a very bad idea.

Once the government starts taxing people on money they have not received we are going down a dark road. It may be only a few people now, but what will stop these progressive leaders from lowering the bar. When they need more money to fund their progressive projects, it will be lowered to those making $400,000.
It is a ludicrous idea and one that sane people should reject.

So you think the current tax structure with all off the changes from the 1980s works better from the average person than it used to?

What a red herring.
We are talking about the insane ideal of taxing unrealized gains. This has nothing to do with other changes to tax codes.

Why should any of us care about people who make 1 mil or have 10 mil in assets? We should be trying to reduce income inequality and pay for our government rather than crying about the wealthy. Can you explain why anyone (who has a normal income) should care about this?

Here's the difference. Money in the "hands" of the wealthy benefits the economy in a healthy, positive, but responsible, way. If a wealthy person puts her money in a bank, the bank loans it it to somebody who can buy a home, start a business, etc., with market driven interest rates paid by the borrower to the bank, and from the bank to the depositor. If a rich person's money is invested in stocks and mutual funds, those companies use the money to grow, create jobs, and so forth. Everyone in the chain is accountable to use the money responsibly. But if money is taken by the government by way of taxes, there is no way to track the legitimate uses from the waste and the politically motivated uses.

Bush41 called it Voodoo Economics and yet it has stuck around for 40 years to the detriment of the US economy, the debt and the deficit. It is so ironic that Trump calls for "making American great again" and yet the tax rates when "America was great" would mean the PP above with the $10M company would be paying like 70% in taxes instead of the 36% today. Trickle-down doesn't work. It isn't a thing. And the income inequality we have today rivals the worst of Feudal Europe. Our country is stronger with a bigger middle class. That is just facts.

Why didn’t Dem presidents after Reagan fix it?

Dems talk about the middle class each election but don’t really do anything. This is why they lost many working class and Rust Belt voters to Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She supports a tax on unrealized capital gains.

Americans Overwhelmingly Reject Harris-Biden Unrealized Capital Gains Wealth Tax |

The 2025 Biden budget proposes to tax long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at ordinary income tax rates for taxable income above $1 million and tax unrealized capital gains at death above a $5 million exemption ($10 million for joint filers). If this tax proposal went through, investors would flee the stock market and potentially create a stock market crash effecting even pensions of middle class Americans.

Whoa— not good for most investors. This is why the Democratic Party has been dubbed “tax and spend” . No thank you!

Exactly what percent of the American public do you believe has an over 1 million dollar income or estates over 10M for married couples?

It doesn't matter. Even if ONE person is impacted it is a very bad idea.

Once the government starts taxing people on money they have not received we are going down a dark road. It may be only a few people now, but what will stop these progressive leaders from lowering the bar. When they need more money to fund their progressive projects, it will be lowered to those making $400,000.
It is a ludicrous idea and one that sane people should reject.

So you think the current tax structure with all off the changes from the 1980s works better from the average person than it used to?

What a red herring.
We are talking about the insane ideal of taxing unrealized gains. This has nothing to do with other changes to tax codes.

Why should any of us care about people who make 1 mil or have 10 mil in assets? We should be trying to reduce income inequality and pay for our government rather than crying about the wealthy. Can you explain why anyone (who has a normal income) should care about this?

Here's the difference. Money in the "hands" of the wealthy benefits the economy in a healthy, positive, but responsible, way. If a wealthy person puts her money in a bank, the bank loans it it to somebody who can buy a home, start a business, etc., with market driven interest rates paid by the borrower to the bank, and from the bank to the depositor. If a rich person's money is invested in stocks and mutual funds, those companies use the money to grow, create jobs, and so forth. Everyone in the chain is accountable to use the money responsibly. But if money is taken by the government by way of taxes, there is no way to track the legitimate uses from the waste and the politically motivated uses.

Bush41 called it Voodoo Economics and yet it has stuck around for 40 years to the detriment of the US economy, the debt and the deficit. It is so ironic that Trump calls for "making American great again" and yet the tax rates when "America was great" would mean the PP above with the $10M company would be paying like 70% in taxes instead of the 36% today. Trickle-down doesn't work. It isn't a thing. And the income inequality we have today rivals the worst of Feudal Europe. Our country is stronger with a bigger middle class. That is just facts.

Why didn’t Dem presidents after Reagan fix it?

Dems talk about the middle class each election but don’t really do anything. This is why they lost many working class and Rust Belt voters to Trump

Well… this is a good point.

Milquetoast democrats like Chuck Schumer had the opportunity to get rid of the filibuster and they didn’t. Progress is slow but the issue with Republicans is that they actively roll back progress. As a modern country we just cannot afford to have these people govern us. We are spending so much time and energy on issues like abortion that should have been settled decades ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She supports a tax on unrealized capital gains.

Americans Overwhelmingly Reject Harris-Biden Unrealized Capital Gains Wealth Tax |

The 2025 Biden budget proposes to tax long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at ordinary income tax rates for taxable income above $1 million and tax unrealized capital gains at death above a $5 million exemption ($10 million for joint filers). If this tax proposal went through, investors would flee the stock market and potentially create a stock market crash effecting even pensions of middle class Americans.

Whoa— not good for most investors. This is why the Democratic Party has been dubbed “tax and spend” . No thank you!

Exactly what percent of the American public do you believe has an over 1 million dollar income or estates over 10M for married couples?

It doesn't matter. Even if ONE person is impacted it is a very bad idea.

Once the government starts taxing people on money they have not received we are going down a dark road. It may be only a few people now, but what will stop these progressive leaders from lowering the bar. When they need more money to fund their progressive projects, it will be lowered to those making $400,000.
It is a ludicrous idea and one that sane people should reject.

So you think the current tax structure with all off the changes from the 1980s works better from the average person than it used to?

What a red herring.
We are talking about the insane ideal of taxing unrealized gains. This has nothing to do with other changes to tax codes.

Why should any of us care about people who make 1 mil or have 10 mil in assets? We should be trying to reduce income inequality and pay for our government rather than crying about the wealthy. Can you explain why anyone (who has a normal income) should care about this?

Here's the difference. Money in the "hands" of the wealthy benefits the economy in a healthy, positive, but responsible, way. If a wealthy person puts her money in a bank, the bank loans it it to somebody who can buy a home, start a business, etc., with market driven interest rates paid by the borrower to the bank, and from the bank to the depositor. If a rich person's money is invested in stocks and mutual funds, those companies use the money to grow, create jobs, and so forth. Everyone in the chain is accountable to use the money responsibly. But if money is taken by the government by way of taxes, there is no way to track the legitimate uses from the waste and the politically motivated uses.

Bush41 called it Voodoo Economics and yet it has stuck around for 40 years to the detriment of the US economy, the debt and the deficit. It is so ironic that Trump calls for "making American great again" and yet the tax rates when "America was great" would mean the PP above with the $10M company would be paying like 70% in taxes instead of the 36% today. Trickle-down doesn't work. It isn't a thing. And the income inequality we have today rivals the worst of Feudal Europe. Our country is stronger with a bigger middle class. That is just facts.

Why didn’t Dem presidents after Reagan fix it?

Dems talk about the middle class each election but don’t really do anything. This is why they lost many working class and Rust Belt voters to Trump

Not really. They mostly just lost white working class voters. The rest of the working class stayed with the Democrats. And the white guys mostly didn't seem to be voting for economic policies so much as based on racial grievance. The proof of that is that measures pushed by Democrats that helped the working class mostly did not sway such voters and measures pushed by the Republicans that hurt the working class mostly did not repel them. Economic policy simply does not matter very much to poor and lower middle class white voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She supports a tax on unrealized capital gains.

Americans Overwhelmingly Reject Harris-Biden Unrealized Capital Gains Wealth Tax |

The 2025 Biden budget proposes to tax long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at ordinary income tax rates for taxable income above $1 million and tax unrealized capital gains at death above a $5 million exemption ($10 million for joint filers). If this tax proposal went through, investors would flee the stock market and potentially create a stock market crash effecting even pensions of middle class Americans.

Whoa— not good for most investors. This is why the Democratic Party has been dubbed “tax and spend” . No thank you!

Exactly what percent of the American public do you believe has an over 1 million dollar income or estates over 10M for married couples?

It doesn't matter. Even if ONE person is impacted it is a very bad idea.

Once the government starts taxing people on money they have not received we are going down a dark road. It may be only a few people now, but what will stop these progressive leaders from lowering the bar. When they need more money to fund their progressive projects, it will be lowered to those making $400,000.
It is a ludicrous idea and one that sane people should reject.

So you think the current tax structure with all off the changes from the 1980s works better from the average person than it used to?

What a red herring.
We are talking about the insane ideal of taxing unrealized gains. This has nothing to do with other changes to tax codes.

Why should any of us care about people who make 1 mil or have 10 mil in assets? We should be trying to reduce income inequality and pay for our government rather than crying about the wealthy. Can you explain why anyone (who has a normal income) should care about this?

Here's the difference. Money in the "hands" of the wealthy benefits the economy in a healthy, positive, but responsible, way. If a wealthy person puts her money in a bank, the bank loans it it to somebody who can buy a home, start a business, etc., with market driven interest rates paid by the borrower to the bank, and from the bank to the depositor. If a rich person's money is invested in stocks and mutual funds, those companies use the money to grow, create jobs, and so forth. Everyone in the chain is accountable to use the money responsibly. But if money is taken by the government by way of taxes, there is no way to track the legitimate uses from the waste and the politically motivated uses.

Bush41 called it Voodoo Economics and yet it has stuck around for 40 years to the detriment of the US economy, the debt and the deficit. It is so ironic that Trump calls for "making American great again" and yet the tax rates when "America was great" would mean the PP above with the $10M company would be paying like 70% in taxes instead of the 36% today. Trickle-down doesn't work. It isn't a thing. And the income inequality we have today rivals the worst of Feudal Europe. Our country is stronger with a bigger middle class. That is just facts.

Why didn’t Dem presidents after Reagan fix it?

Dems talk about the middle class each election but don’t really do anything. This is why they lost many working class and Rust Belt voters to Trump

Well… this is a good point.

Milquetoast democrats like Chuck Schumer had the opportunity to get rid of the filibuster and they didn’t. Progress is slow but the issue with Republicans is that they actively roll back progress. As a modern country we just cannot afford to have these people govern us. We are spending so much time and energy on issues like abortion that should have been settled decades ago.

Given Mitch forced Reid to ditch the filibuster to get court appointees through and the subsequent abuse the GOP foisted on the Senate with the SCOTUS, inmagine what the GOP would do to the country without the veneer of a filibuster if the Dems removed it entirely?

[Anonymous]

Hopefully she's come up with something better than forcing teachers to stay until 6:00 pm daily to cut family childcare expenses

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully she's come up with something better than forcing teachers to stay until 6:00 pm daily to cut family childcare expenses

Is that her responsibility if she was a president?

I'm not seeing that in the job description.

[Anonymous]

What those teachers really need is a bigger plane.

[Anonymous]

Hehehe - Apparently Jill Stein or the Green party are going to be on the ballot in around 20 states.

https://www.jillstein2024ballotaccess.com/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully she's come up with something better than forcing teachers to stay until 6:00 pm daily to cut family childcare expenses

Is that her responsibility if she was a president?

I'm not seeing that in the job description.

Her job description seems to be bring good vibes and joy. That is all. She has no policy prescriptions. She has no plans.
Just joy and good vibes. That seems to be the only qualification for president today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She supports a tax on unrealized capital gains.

Americans Overwhelmingly Reject Harris-Biden Unrealized Capital Gains Wealth Tax |

The 2025 Biden budget proposes to tax long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at ordinary income tax rates for taxable income above $1 million and tax unrealized capital gains at death above a $5 million exemption ($10 million for joint filers). If this tax proposal went through, investors would flee the stock market and potentially create a stock market crash effecting even pensions of middle class Americans.

Whoa— not good for most investors. This is why the Democratic Party has been dubbed “tax and spend” . No thank you!

Exactly what percent of the American public do you believe has an over 1 million dollar income or estates over 10M for married couples?

It doesn't matter. Even if ONE person is impacted it is a very bad idea.

Once the government starts taxing people on money they have not received we are going down a dark road. It may be only a few people now, but what will stop these progressive leaders from lowering the bar. When they need more money to fund their progressive projects, it will be lowered to those making $400,000.
It is a ludicrous idea and one that sane people should reject.

So you think the current tax structure with all off the changes from the 1980s works better from the average person than it used to?

What a red herring.
We are talking about the insane ideal of taxing unrealized gains. This has nothing to do with other changes to tax codes.

Why should any of us care about people who make 1 mil or have 10 mil in assets? We should be trying to reduce income inequality and pay for our government rather than crying about the wealthy. Can you explain why anyone (who has a normal income) should care about this?

Here's the difference. Money in the "hands" of the wealthy benefits the economy in a healthy, positive, but responsible, way. If a wealthy person puts her money in a bank, the bank loans it it to somebody who can buy a home, start a business, etc., with market driven interest rates paid by the borrower to the bank, and from the bank to the depositor. If a rich person's money is invested in stocks and mutual funds, those companies use the money to grow, create jobs, and so forth. Everyone in the chain is accountable to use the money responsibly. But if money is taken by the government by way of taxes, there is no way to track the legitimate uses from the waste and the politically motivated uses.

Bush41 called it Voodoo Economics and yet it has stuck around for 40 years to the detriment of the US economy, the debt and the deficit. It is so ironic that Trump calls for "making American great again" and yet the tax rates when "America was great" would mean the PP above with the $10M company would be paying like 70% in taxes instead of the 36% today. Trickle-down doesn't work. It isn't a thing. And the income inequality we have today rivals the worst of Feudal Europe. Our country is stronger with a bigger middle class. That is just facts.

Why didn’t Dem presidents after Reagan fix it?

Dems talk about the middle class each election but don’t really do anything. This is why they lost many working class and Rust Belt voters to Trump

Well… this is a good point.

Milquetoast democrats like Chuck Schumer had the opportunity to get rid of the filibuster and they didn’t. Progress is slow but the issue with Republicans is that they actively roll back progress. As a modern country we just cannot afford to have these people govern us. We are spending so much time and energy on issues like abortion that should have been settled decades ago.

Given Mitch forced Reid to ditch the filibuster to get court appointees through and the subsequent abuse the GOP foisted on the Senate with the SCOTUS, inmagine what the GOP would do to the country without the veneer of a filibuster if the Dems removed it entirely?

They would pass legislation- which is their jobs. If people didn’t like the laws they pass, they would stop voting for them. Republicans get to ride wedge issues and dysfunction and occasionally sneak in some crappy laws and judges.

Call the voting public’s bluff- let the Republicans pass laws when they have the majority. That’s how democracy is supposed to work!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: She has no policy prescriptions. She has no plans.

She has plans to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights; pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act; adopting universal background checks, red flag laws, and an assault weapons ban; protecting the Affordable Care Act; raising the minimum wage; eliminating taxes on tips for service & hospitality workers; enforcement of laws against illegal price-fixing schemes; and passing the bipartisan border security bill.

That's just what I know about from watching her speeches in Philadelphia and Las Vegas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: She has no policy prescriptions. She has no plans.

She has plans to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights; pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act; adopting universal background checks, red flag laws, and an assault weapons ban; protecting the Affordable Care Act; raising the minimum wage; eliminating taxes on tips for service & hospitality workers; enforcement of laws against illegal price-fixing schemes; and passing the bipartisan border security bill.

That's just what I know about from watching her speeches in Philadelphia and Las Vegas.

"Plans?" Or, empty promises?

She has been in the office for over 3 1/2 years. Why has she not done any of those things while she has been in office if they are so important?
No, instead her administration hired a shitload more IRS agents to ensure that employees pay tax on their tips. And, there are ample laws against price fixing.... if this is what is happening, why hasn't she done anything yet? She still has 5 months. She could start working on that now. The voting acts you cite take elections away from states, where they constitutionally belong. They will never pass for that reason alone.

Face it.... this administration has done nothing when it comes to these things.
And, don't even get me started with their record on the border. It is deplorable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: She has no policy prescriptions. She has no plans.

She has plans to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights; pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act; adopting universal background checks, red flag laws, and an assault weapons ban; protecting the Affordable Care Act; raising the minimum wage; eliminating taxes on tips for service & hospitality workers; enforcement of laws against illegal price-fixing schemes; and passing the bipartisan border security bill.

That's just what I know about from watching her speeches in Philadelphia and Las Vegas.

"Plans?" Or, empty promises?

She has been in the office for over 3 1/2 years. Why has she not done any of those things while she has been in office if they are so important?
No, instead her administration hired a shitload more IRS agents to ensure that employees pay tax on their tips. And, there are ample laws against price fixing.... if this is what is happening, why hasn't she done anything yet? She still has 5 months. She could start working on that now. The voting acts you cite take elections away from states, where they constitutionally belong. They will never pass for that reason alone.

Face it.... this administration has done nothing when it comes to these things.
And, don't even get me started with their record on the border. It is deplorable.

1. She's currently Vice President. Not the President.
2. You're mad that the Biden administration hired more IRS agents? That had a net benefit of collecting $1billion. NOT from tips - from unpaid taxes from the uber-rich. How is this a bad thing? https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/07/11/millionaires-unpaid-taxes-irs/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She supports a tax on unrealized capital gains.

Americans Overwhelmingly Reject Harris-Biden Unrealized Capital Gains Wealth Tax |

The 2025 Biden budget proposes to tax long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at ordinary income tax rates for taxable income above $1 million and tax unrealized capital gains at death above a $5 million exemption ($10 million for joint filers). If this tax proposal went through, investors would flee the stock market and potentially create a stock market crash effecting even pensions of middle class Americans.

Whoa— not good for most investors. This is why the Democratic Party has been dubbed “tax and spend” . No thank you!

Exactly what percent of the American public do you believe has an over 1 million dollar income or estates over 10M for married couples?

It doesn't matter. Even if ONE person is impacted it is a very bad idea.

Once the government starts taxing people on money they have not received we are going down a dark road. It may be only a few people now, but what will stop these progressive leaders from lowering the bar. When they need more money to fund their progressive projects, it will be lowered to those making $400,000.
It is a ludicrous idea and one that sane people should reject.

So you think the current tax structure with all off the changes from the 1980s works better from the average person than it used to?

What a red herring.
We are talking about the insane ideal of taxing unrealized gains. This has nothing to do with other changes to tax codes.

Why should any of us care about people who make 1 mil or have 10 mil in assets? We should be trying to reduce income inequality and pay for our government rather than crying about the wealthy. Can you explain why anyone (who has a normal income) should care about this?

I have over $10M and I care. I created a successful IT business with my own and borrowed funds that now employs over 163 people. My skilled employees enjoy excellent salaries, healthcare benefits that my company pays over half the premiums for, 401K matching so they can eventually retire with a good next egg, business class travel, and other benefits. My company provides a service that is in demand. I took the risk....I should reap the reward.

You will reap the reward. How much is enough? 30 million? 100 million 500 million? How much do you need or can you spend in a lifetime? And no one is sayig your take away is capped at $10 million. It is just that over that amount, you will pay a tax on it. Guess what, you can put some of the monies into trusts for your kids to lower your estate. There are all sorts of gimmicks the rich have to shield money. Is this really the thing you want to cry about? Or I suppose living in an authoritarian state where someone like Trump can simply confiscate your company, your money etc without raising an eyebrow. take a look at how other authoritarians operate. Is that what you want here?

Actually, if you have been paying attention, which you clearly have not, the Democrats want us living in an authoritarian state. They want to control out speech, suppress free expression, and turn this great country into a failed socialist "utopia".

The democrats are not the one banning books or telling you what to do with your body.
The GOP are the ones using government to control business (see DiSantis and Disney or Trump with Boeing)
If you want to use the N word, go for it. Just be prepared for the social blowback.

Please stop with the gaslighting.

Agree