The GTP Unofficial 2020 US Elections Thread

[McLaren]

That's because you see the Tax issue not the policy issue.

I'll make it simple:

Bernie wants to raise Taxes on X so it can pay for Y.

Why is it pointless and invalid argument to say: "Well why doesn't he pay that rate he says because he is also an X."

Answer = because him doing that doesn't and will never pay for Y unless he gets his policy through.

It's surely not hard to understand.

Sorry, that remains nothing more than another excuse that can be turned on him when he goes on Twitter about why other rich people aren’t paying more.

 

[Danoff]

Are you serious? We have a wealth Tax (on assets, property, stock) of 1,2% in my countrysince 2001. You forget to calculate that from the late 90's their wealth growth greatly surpassed the accumilative wealth tax.

Nope, and yes I am serious.

The wealth tax is a particularly insidious tax because it is a 99% tax on whatever wealth it's targeted at. The tax rate just determines the length of time it will take to reach 99%.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Still hoping for some moderate with clout (Sup, Michael Bloomberg) to step into the race, if it's not too late.

Or Al Franken. That guy is awesome.

 

[PocketZeven]

They're not giving, they're being forced. I believe that's the issue Danoff has; it's technically their money & Warren/Sanders believes that money (which may have been taxed as income) then goes right back to the government.

Sanders remains a funny case brought up in another thread. He wants millionaires to give back, but he won't willingly abide by his own plan as a millionaire himself, only if he can make it a law to have others do so with him.

A millionaire can choose where he lives and pay taxes. Voluntarily giving or charity is not a subsitute.

edit:

Nope, and yes I am serious.

The wealth tax is a particularly insidious tax because it is a 99% tax on whatever wealth it's targeted at. The tax rate just determines the length of time it will take to reach 99%.

99% ? It depends if the proposal replaces the capital gains tax. Depending on which proposal, the wealth taxes starts at 50 million or
X amount. Most assets have more capital gains then 2-3% a year. Your theory suggests that milionairs dont receive any capital gains?

 

[BobK]

99% ? It depends if the proposal replaces the capital gains tax. Depending on which proposal, the wealth taxes starts at 50 million or
X amount. Most assets have more capital gains then 2-3% a year. Your theory suggests that milionairs dont receive any capital gains?

I believe you';re missing the point. Say the "wealth tax" is 25% of your wealth. In four years you will have paid 100% of your wealth. If it were "only" 20%, you would stiil pay all of your "wealth" except now it takes five years. So in the long run it amounts to a 100% tax, regardless of what the actual annual rate is.

 

[PocketZeven]

I believe you';re missing the point. Say the "wealth tax" is 25% of your wealth. In four years you will have paid 100% of your wealth. If it were "only" 20%, you would stiil pay all of your "wealth" except now it takes five years. So in the long run it amounts to a 100% tax, regardless of what the actual annual rate is.

That is how any tax works. You could do the same for income, estate tax, etc.

 

[ryzno]

A millionaire can choose where he lives and pay taxes.

They can! I could move to Florida and not pay income tax anymore. That said, the cost of living in Florida is considerably higher than Georgia.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I believe you';re missing the point. Say the "wealth tax" is 25% of your wealth. In four years you will have paid 100% of your wealth. If it were "only" 20%, you would stiil pay all of your "wealth" except now it takes five years. So in the long run it amounts to a 100% tax, regardless of what the actual annual rate is.

As far as I understand it, that's not totally true. You pay 25% each year, but 25% against your residual wealth. So it approaches 100%...but won't ever be 100%.

Still. It's aggressive.

 

[Dotini]

Predictions:
Biden will be the first casualty of this impeachment process.
Warren will be the Democratic Party's nominee.
The impeachment process will proceed tumultuously in the House, and either short-circuit or fall short of conviction in the Senate.
The TV coverage will be spectacular, the greatest reality show in TV history.
Division and conflict among the American people will increase in vitriol and violence.
Depression and suicide rates will continue to rise.
An Independent Party candidate will emerge.
The winner of the 2020 election will not be Warren.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Predictions:
Biden will be the first casualty of this impeachment process.
Warren will be the Democratic Party's nominee.
The impeachment process will proceed tumultuously in the House, and either short-circuit or fall short of conviction in the Senate.
The TV coverage will be spectacular, the greatest reality show in TV history.
Division and conflict among the American people will increase in vitriol and violence.
Depression and suicide rates will continue to rise.
An Independent Party candidate will emerge.
The winner of the 2020 election will not be Warren.

Nope.

Andrew Yang will come out on top and bludgeon DT at the polls. And there will be much happiness and rejoicing in the streets.

#yangang

 

[PocketZeven]

As far as I understand it, that's not totally true. You pay 25% each year, but 25% against your residual wealth. So it approaches 100%...but won't ever be 100%.

Still. It's aggressive.

Yeah but the example is an exaggeration. The propositions vary between 2-4% and not 25%. Also people also forget that many billionaires have paid little tax for years, contributing to the increased wealth gap.

 

[BobK]

That is how any tax works. You could do the same for income, estate tax, etc.

No. An income tax is paid once (in theory) on any given amount of income. You don't pay income tax next year one you've paid the tax on this year's income. Likewise an estate tax is paid only once. The wealth tax would be paid every year on all holdings above a given threshold.

Yeah but the example is an exaggeration. The propositions vary between 2-4% and not 25%. Also people also forget that many billionaires have paid little tax for years, contributing to the increased wealth gap.

The exact percentage doesn't matter. It will still eventually eat up everything above the threshold; it'll just take longer at 2-4%. And like all taxes, I'm sure it'll be increased again and again.

And yes it approaches 100% as @Eunos_Cosmo says, but for all practical purposes it's close enough to an eventual 100%.

 

[Biggles]

His tax issue is there's too many rich people not contributing enough to society through their wallet; billionaires shouldn't exist. That's been a repeated point for him on Twitter. His entire tax plan is to make them contribute more to society. But now as one of those people, he's decided he doesn't have to lead by example of his proposal, because he's already "paid what he owed".

You do realize that Bernie Sanders isn't a billionaire? He's moderately well-off, but light years away from being a billionaire.

 

[Dotini]

Reports indicate an embarrassing case of premature ejaculation on the part of certain house Democrats. It appears no actual vote on impeachment is in the works. However, the Congress, currently going into recess, will be investigating Joe Biden.

 

[mustafur]

You do realize that Bernie Sanders isn't a billionaire? He's moderately well-off, but light years away from being a billionaire.

He is obviously dug a hole he can't get out of, I tried to explain to him the logic of what happened but apprently it's just an excuse.

He still is one of the poorest persons on the Senate as well, the logic is baffling.

 

[McLaren]

He is obviously dug a hole he can't get out of, I tried to explain to him the logic of what happened but apprently it's just an excuse.

Your explanation was that Bernie doesn't contribute to his own plan because he thinks his money could go in a system he thinks is broken. Here's a short, actual explanation of why that argument is weak:

Bernie - "Jeff Bezos & other rich people don't contribute enough to society through taxes."
Bezos - "Because I think the tax system is broken so I only paid what I owed."

End of Bernie's argument for himself not wanting to follow his own proposal voluntarily, and why no one else will.

The only person whose dug himself a hole is the old man (I guess you jumped in feet first with him) & taking Warren's plan and "doubling down" effectively putting her in a much better light among the wealthy seems to be his new shovel.

You do realize that Bernie Sanders isn't a billionaire? He's moderately well-off, but light years away from being a billionaire.

Bypassing the point. He is the thing he once rallied against until he became one.

At the end of the day, the 1 percent may have enormous wealth and power. But they are just the 1 percent. When the 99 percent stand together, we can transform society.

Mr. Sanders’s higher income in recent years has created some political awkwardness for the senator, who in his 2016 presidential campaign frequently railed against “millionaires and billionaires” and their influence over the political process.

His income now puts him within the top 1 percent of taxpayers, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service.

Ah, this aged well once he became one and said you can too.

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernard Sanders, a democratic socialist who has spent much of his political career railing against “millionaires and billionaires” and America’s “1 percent,” is making no apologies for his new millionaire status.

“I wrote a best-selling book,” the Vermont senator, who published “Our Revolution: A Future to Believe In” after his Democratic primary loss to Hillary Clinton in 2016, told The New York Times in a new interview.

“If you write a best-selling book, you can be a millionaire, too,” he said.

Edit* According to CNBC, Warren (& likely Bernie since he's proposing a similar plan) are causing some Democrat donors to consider sitting out or vote Trump.

Democratic donors on Wall Street and in big business are preparing to sit out the presidential campaign fundraising cycle — or even back President Donald Trump — if Sen. Elizabeth Warren wins the party’s nomination.

In recent weeks, CNBC spoke to several high-dollar Democratic donors and fundraisers in the business community and found that this opinion was becoming widely shared as Warren, an outspoken critic of big banks and corporations, gains momentum against Joe Biden in the 2020 race.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/wall-street-democratic-donors-may-back-trump-if-warren-is-nominated.html?__source=twitter|main

 

[mustafur]

and again it misses the issue explaining countless times, about the policy issue(heck it was even in the tweet you posted).

Why do you think he says they don't pay enough Tax is it because he hates rich people or it's because of the income inequality, that has exploded since Reaganomics(granted people have different takes on how or why that happened but he has been consistent on his solution well before he become a ''millionaire'' on that issue).

According to CNBC, Warren (& likely Bernie since he's proposing a similar plan) are causing some Democrat donors to consider sitting out or vote Trump.

Shows how Little you understand of his campaign, He never took those donors to begin with, same thing in 2016.

When his Net Worth is 2 Million and he is in the top 1% of Tax Payers, you can tell people are avoiding tax by the plague, Net worth is a combination of all assets not what someone makes in a Year.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Just made a calculator. If a billionaire was taxed at 2% annually...

After 100 years, they would still have over $100M. And I'm pretty certain if I can get a 2% return on my savings as a non-billionaire, so can they.

Still, I would rather tax automation. Those pesky robots.

#yanggang.

 

[mustafur]

The Poor Billionaires, they would still have a tonne of deductibles because it's unlikely they are a Billionaire employee with no extra income.

 

[Dotini]

I'll be satisfied as long as they don't tax entertainment to death. Entertainments such as auto racing, reality TV with skimpily clad actresses, drugs and alcohol are vital to human happiness, peace and orderliness on the planet.

 

[McLaren]

and again it misses the issue explaining countless times, about the policy issue(heck it was even in the tweet you posted).

What you're missing "countless times" is that the explanation you gave for why Bernie will not follow his proposal at this moment, is an explanation a wealthy person could give in return when Bernie makes remarks about their wealth being unnecessary.

Skirt around all you like about what his proposal is, it was obvious he didn't like being asked that particular question on TV or else he would've answered your explanation, instead basically saying, "No U".

Shows how Little you understand of his campaign, He never took those donors to begin with, same thing in 2016.

Shows how much you don't read the obvious. Bernie getting the nomination would receive the same response because his wealth tax is much like her own, just heavier against them.

Wall Street Democratic donors warn the party: We’ll sit out, or back Trump, if you nominate Elizabeth Warren

Warren is a critic of big banks and corporations, and has called for a wealth tax.

“You’re in a box because you’re a Democrat and you’re thinking, ‘I want to help the party, but she’s going to hurt me, so I’m going to help President Trump,’” said a senior private equity executive, who spoke on condition of anonymity in fear of retribution by party leaders. The executive said this Wednesday, a day after Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that the House would begin a formal impeachment inquiry into Trump.

 

[mustafur]

What you're missing "countless times" is that the explanation you gave for why Bernie will not follow his proposal at this moment, is an explanation a wealthy person could give in return when Bernie makes remarks about their wealth being unnecessary.

Skirt around all you like about what his proposal is, it was obvious he didn't like being asked that particular question on TV or else he would've answered your explanation, instead basically saying, "No U".

Shows how much you don't read the obvious. Bernie getting the nomination would receive the same response because his wealth tax is much like her own, just heavier against them.

So unless your poor and don't give extra in tax because that's what your proposing in policy means your a hypocrite?

It's an invalid argument.

Also you missed the point about the Donors, Bernie doesn't need corporate backers, Warren has committed to getting them if she wins the nomination(which basically says she will go into a Neo-Liberal direction if she gets the nomination) and Bernie has committed to never needing them, he has more individual donors then everyone else by a Massive margin, that is a non Issue for him.

 

[PocketZeven]

No. An income tax is paid once (in theory) on any given amount of income. You don't pay income tax next year one you've paid the tax on this year's income. Likewise an estate tax is paid only once. The wealth tax would be paid every year on all holdings above a given threshold.



The exact percentage doesn't matter. It will still eventually eat up everything above the threshold; it'll just take longer at 2-4%. And like all taxes, I'm sure it'll be increased again and again.

And yes it approaches 100% as @Eunos_Cosmo says, but for all practical purposes it's close enough to an eventual 100%.

No it wont. Mathmatically that isnt possible. Close enough is not 100%.

In our country taxes are devided by 3 "boxes". 1 box is for income, 1 for capital gains and the last one for wealth (1.2%) these are assets excluding income from wages or capital gains. Do you have a link to the exact proposal? I am not sure if there deductables etc. It is hard to judge without the full details. Does it replace capital gains tax? It is designed to prevent the most wealthy to pay very little or close to 0% tax, because of the current tax regulations.

 

[Biggles]

Bypassing the point. He is the thing he once rallied against until he became one.

You're ignoring the second part of that tweet. Bernie Sanders says not that there shouldn't be millionaires & billionaires, but there shouldn't be an increasing number of billionaires (obviously not statistically many people) or millionaires while there are more people living in poverty than ever. So he advocates a tax policy that would redistribute some of the wealth through a more progressive tax system. It's pretty straightforward & something that all developed countries (including the US) have done. Sander's own personal tax rate would make no difference whatsoever to the situation - he's not focused on personal gestures or dispensing charity - but on creating systemic change. You may not agree with this policy, but attacking him because of his personal (relatively modest) assets is & deflection & more fake news.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I would rather see a better effort on balancing the budget than extra taxation. Want lower poverty, then allocate more funds towards that instead of something else. The tweet links two exclusive issues to justify increasing taxes on the rich.

 

[Rallywagon]

No it wont. Mathmatically that isnt possible. Close enough is not 100%.

In our country taxes are devided by 3 "boxes". 1 box is for income, 1 for capital gains and the last one for wealth (1.2%) these are assets excluding income from wages or capital gains. Do you have a link to the exact proposal? I am not sure if there deductables etc. It is hard to judge without the full details. Does it replace capital gains tax? It is designed to prevent the most wealthy to pay very little or close to 0% tax, because of the current tax regulations.

There are some forms of taxation I can get behind. But two I really dislike are sales tax, and wealth tax. I feel they are a sort of "double jeopardy" tax. Even triple jeopardy. If your money is taxed when you receive your pay check. Then its taxes when I buy something, then it is taxed again when they business claims its sales. That's a whole lot of a dollar going to the gov with even decreasing returns on representation. Now you are proposing to tax money that I've earned, paid taxes on already, and want to save? I would rather see current tax codes fixed properly rather than bandaids being applied.

 

[Biggles]

There are some forms of taxation I can get behind. But two I really dislike are sales tax, and wealth tax. I feel they are a sort of "double jeopardy" tax. Even triple jeopardy. If your money is taxed when you receive your pay check. Then its taxes when I buy something, then it is taxed again when they business claims its sales. That's a whole lot of a dollar going to the gov with even decreasing returns on representation. Now you are proposing to tax money that I've earned, paid taxes on already, and want to save? I would rather see current tax codes fixed properly rather than bandaids being applied.

Well, the devil is in the details, but "your pay check" isn't anything like the pay check (LOL) of the Jeff Bezos of this world. Once you have assets in the hundreds of millions you don't need a "pay check" - you've got more money than you could possibly spend in a lifetime. In the past there was a more graduated tax system with higher rates in higher income brackets. From what I understand, the highest US federal tax bracket currently is 37% over $500,000. There's a huge difference between someone making $500,000 - $800,000 & someone making hundreds of millions. Compounding that is the reality that people making hundreds of millions are unlikely to be making "earned income", but dividends, capital gains etc. which are often taxed at a much lower rate than earned income.

 

[PocketZeven]

There are some forms of taxation I can get behind. But two I really dislike are sales tax, and wealth tax. I feel they are a sort of "double jeopardy" tax. Even triple jeopardy. If your money is taxed when you receive your pay check. Then its taxes when I buy something, then it is taxed again when they business claims its sales. That's a whole lot of a dollar going to the gov with even decreasing returns on representation. Now you are proposing to tax money that I've earned, paid taxes on already, and want to save? I would rather see current tax codes fixed properly rather than bandaids being applied.

You are looking at it with the perspective of someone who does not have 50 million in assets. The superrich do not pay taxes like you and I. The wealth tax in its current proposition will not effect the vast majority of people ever in their life.

 

[ryzno]

You are looking at it with the perspective of someone who does not have 50 million in assets. The superrich do not pay taxes like you and I. The wealth tax in its current proposition will not effect the vast majority of people ever in their life.

So that justifies taking more from them? They pay more in taxes than Rally or I will probably make in our lifetimes combined.

 

[Biggles]

So that justifies taking more from them? They pay more in taxes than Rally or I will probably make in our lifetimes combined.

You don't know that. Think positive rynzo!