|
Post by doctorquant on Jan 14, 2019 2:25:52 GMT
This is a very good post ...
|
|
|
Post by doctorquant on Jan 14, 2019 2:29:12 GMT
Has no idea whatsoever how to pay for any of the things she proposes, but truly believes they're possible. Hold on. Sure she does. By raising the marginal tax rate, no? On the uber rich? There’s not enough taxable income there. Not even close ... even at a 100% marginal rate. To do the things she wants you gotta pop the folks making $150K at about a 30% or 40% effective rate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 2:29:16 GMT
I definitely agree with your point that she can’t fuck up because people will pounce but I think her point about why are some statements just ignored while hers are seized upon fair. No one writes “The right needs to be careful that Tom Cotton doesn’t represent the party” but he’s as far right as she is left and he’s considered in the mainstream. I appreciate the input and info, but your statement that “no one” does such and such and “everyone” doesn’t do so-and-so are a little out of the YankeeFan debate playbook. (And probably out of the @dickwhitman playbook at times.) Ok let’s play this out with specifics. Can you find a piece in the mainstream media (we’ll call it anything to the right of Mother Jones or The Nation) that frets about the Republican Party becoming too much like Tom Cotton? That Republicans need to be careful that Cotton might be pulling the party to the right, and this could alienate voters? Cotton is extremely conservative. And he’s not a lunatic like Gomhert. He went to Harvard. He had a highly decorated military career and was elected to Congress at 34, not much older than AOC was when she was elected to Congress. He literally wants us to go to war with Iran now, thinks a CONSERVATIVE crime bill is too soft, he wrote to the mullahs of Iran asking them to ignore the president of the United States (when that pres was a Democrat) and wanted to put several journalists in jail for revealing illegal wire tapping. These are very conservative positions! I’m struggling to find the Politico piece that asks if the GOP should be concerned he might be the future of the party.
|
|
|
Post by ecwyanks on Jan 14, 2019 2:29:34 GMT
She's young and attractive. Loves the spotlight. Worked on Sanders campaign. She's left of Sanders. Unseated longtime Dem in primary. Has no idea whatsoever how to pay for any of the things she proposes, but truly believes they're possible. No idea? you don't think her idea is have the mega rich pay for the things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 2:31:47 GMT
Has no idea whatsoever how to pay for any of the things she proposes, but truly believes they're possible. Hold on. Sure she does. By raising the marginal tax rate, no? Yep. Also by cutting the defense budget and increasing corporate taxes. There's also the matter of (and I don't know if she has spelled it out but she appears to believe it) increasing taxes for universal healthcare, but obviously eliminating each family and employer's premiums along with it; although it would result in a higher line item for taxes, it would be a lower expense to each household. Whether it would work is up for great debate, and it seems like too much to pull off in the current structure of government. But she definitely has an idea of how to pay for those things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 2:33:38 GMT
She's young and attractive. Loves the spotlight. Worked on Sanders campaign. She's left of Sanders. Unseated longtime Dem in primary. Has no idea whatsoever how to pay for any of the things she proposes, but truly believes they're possible. This is simply you not paying attention. She’s made it clear how ahe’ll pay for them. By taxing the fuck out of the super wealthy. Now we can argue about whether or not this is good or bad, but let’s not lie about it. That’s one of her points and I think it’s quite good. Let’s have a debate instead of making shit up. How are we paying for the Space Force, btw? Conservatives don’t ask those questions but oh my god college for all, what a luxury we can never afford.
|
|
|
Post by lcjjdnh on Jan 14, 2019 2:36:24 GMT
This is a very good post ... I only wish I could have figured out how to post the very informative chart while using my phone...
|
|
|
Post by doctorquant on Jan 14, 2019 2:40:07 GMT
She’s made it clear how she’ll pay for them. Good Lord ... If I were to share with you that my goal for 2019 is to get rock-hard abs and a 36-inch waistline by eating two Domino's pizzas and drinking a case of Miller Lite a day, surely to God you wouldn't be saying, " doctorquant has made it clear how he's going to accomplish his goals for 2019"!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 2:40:39 GMT
I seriously doubt her proposal would keep the marginal rate at 37 percent for $500,000+ and jump it to 70 percent at $10 million.
We don't know what the impact would be until we see an actual proposal.
|
|
|
Post by doctorquant on Jan 14, 2019 2:58:38 GMT
I can't get current numbers very quickly, but we can get a sense of what I and others are getting at with what I can get ... There were about 235,000 $1 million filers in 2010 ... individuals or households reporting $1 million plus in adjusted gross income. That's 1 ... ONE! ... million bucks. In total, those entities took home about $727 billion. Let's assume that every such entity was taxed 100% at the top marginal rate of 39%. And let's further assume that every such entity will be taxed, under the AOC regime, similarly ... the top marginal rate is equal to the effective rate. At 70%, AOC's "plan" (applied thusly to this cohort) would bring in about $225 billion more than is currently collected. Let's say that's 20% more in today's dollars ... about $270 billion.
At present the current deficit looks to be about ... $985 billion. And that's without the first. fucking. penny. of any of the lefty pipe dreams (e.g., Medicare for All) that are "on offer."
AOC thinks there's this very, very small cluster of people who're getting all the money and keeping the rest of us from being happy. Any wonder why she reminds some people of a certain tangerine buffoon in the White House?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 3:05:01 GMT
That isn't the only part of the plan, though. But it's certainly a revenue source worth looking at.
Politics is a negotiation, right? In effect, she's making the opening bid. The response is "no, that won't solve every problem we have so we won't even consider it." And a lot of scare tactics. Paul Ryan's tax plan RAISED the deficit, and none of the deficit-cuts-or-death crowd had any fucking problem with that. So AOC is a lightweight but Paul Ryan is a learned man?
There's a huge point to be made regarding Pentagon spending too. Not a $21 trillion point, but there's money there.
|
|
|
Post by lcjjdnh on Jan 14, 2019 3:09:41 GMT
I can't get current numbers very quickly, but we can get a sense of what I and others are getting at with what I can get ... There were about 235,000 $1 million filers in 2010 ... individuals or households reporting $1 million plus in adjusted gross income. That's 1 ... ONE! ... million bucks. In total, those entities took home about $727 billion. Let's assume that every such entity was taxed 100% at the top marginal rate of 39%. And let's further assume that every such entity will be taxed, under the AOC regime, similarly ... the top marginal rate is equal to the effective rate. At 70%, AOC's "plan" (applied thusly to this cohort) would bring in about $225 billion more than is currently collected. Let's say that's 20% more in today's dollars ... about $270 billion.
At present the current deficit looks to be about ... $985 billion. And that's without the first. fucking. penny. of any of the lefty pipe dreams (e.g., Medicare for All) that are "on offer."
AOC thinks there's this very, very small cluster of people who're getting all the money and keeping the rest of us from being happy. Any wonder why she reminds some people of a certain tangerine buffoon in the White House?
Here are 2016 numbers, by the way. www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/16in11si.xls
|
|
|
Post by doctorquant on Jan 14, 2019 3:11:18 GMT
The response is "no, that won't solve every problem we have so we won't even consider it." That's not my response ... My response is, that's not even enough to get us a quarter of the way towards breaking even now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 3:14:04 GMT
The response is "no, that won't solve every problem we have so we won't even consider it." That's not my response ... My response is, that's not even enough to get us a quarter of the way towards breaking even now.Nor was the Paul Ryan tax plan. In fact it put us far far in the other direction. Rescinding that and enacting a higher marginal rate all the way up the income ladder would certainly make a dent. I don't understand why that tax plan wasn't seen as complete useless folly, but this one is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 3:15:06 GMT
That's not my response ... My response is, that's not even enough to get us a quarter of the way towards breaking even now.Nor was the Paul Ryan tax plan. In fact it put us far far in the other direction. Rescinding that and enacting a higher marginal rate all the way up the income ladder would certainly make a dent. I don't understand why that tax plan wasn't seen as complete useless folly, but this one is. But but but Ryan was a ... serious thinker.
|
|