-
Posts
6231 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
35
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by J.C.MacSwell
-
What are everyones thoughts on the effect of any independents running for election in 2020? Or even the threat of them running on the political positioning and debate, or who might get the Democrat ticket? Do they have any chance, or what circumstances might allow them to be elected? Some Democrats seemed quite upset at Howard Schultz suggesting he might run, as he would tend to draw more votes from Democrats than from Trump and that it would also favour Trump in the electoral college voting if there was no clear winner. My personal point of view is that it would be healthy to have someone moderate stating the case for the so-called middle, especially initially, though the danger would be ultimately drawing voters from one side more than the other, and rendering their votes to be ineffective. If it was the right candidate and they could win, I would be all for it.
-
So...now you seem to be arguing what is fair to assume, as opposed to what was stated. If this was from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rather than Warren, would you have made the same assumptions based on reading that link?
-
Municipal real estate is most commonly a fixed percentage, Commercial is often a different rate from residential, but neither are marginal.
-
I know what they are. I also see that it is not stated in that link that it applies, You assumed that it did, and the other link indicated your assumption was correct. I am continuously amazed at how people that have impeccable logic in science threads do not seem to have the same in political ones.
-
I explained the difference. I am sure you would understand this if it was a single lump sum tax of, say 1 million, that would only apply to Americans with more than 50 million in assets. The link referred to the percentage of total wealth in the US that this group owned. They said nothing as to what percentage might be exposed to the tax. I would expect a considerable difference in the two numbers. Edit: 1 million was probably a poor choice for example, as it is exactly 2% of 50 million Also with regard to the "difference in the two numbers", that was not directed at "how are they different", but to why what you assumed (correctly) was actually unstated and not clear in the link.
-
I had a number of questions on it. I expect they will be debated over time, if the idea has legs. I am only somewhat familiar with some of the current candidates. I think Warren comes off a little awkward, but I like her. I am interested in Beto O'Rourke, but I don't expect he will be officially in the race for a while. I already commented on Harris.
-
Exactly what I read. I read it literally, which does not support your interpretation, but wondered if they really meant...your interpretation. I was surprised how much they said it without clarifying. They didn't. Ten oz provided another link that did. So your interpretation is correct, as it turns out, and as I suspected it should, but it was not clear in that link "Americans with more than 50 million in assets" are are an identifiable group. That's how that phrase reads. There was nothing in that first link that stated the first 50 million was not taxed. I would not be surprised to find out the author did not assume it was, and based the projected revenue on 2% of all of that groups assets.
-
For his hard core base, it might depend on how he chose to spin it.
-
What I intended to describe was Trump stepping aside with regard to the 2020 ticket, while completing his current mandate. His base would then stay intact on the GOP side, wouldn't you think?
-
If he has enough pressure on him and bad enough ratings, he might possibly serve out the current term rather than lose, and thus open things up for Republican primaries. Of course he would declare himself the best President ever having accomplished more in one term than anyone else in two... This I think would be the best scenario for the Republicans.
-
It's a good list. I wasn't trying to throw any shade on it. I was thinking that if you told my story 5 years ago most would say "yah, right Trump elected President... Seriously I would like to see this (by the right challenger of course): I see this as more likely (I see INow has already said the same):
-
An invading caravan enters the US, Trump declares a state of emergency but to no avail, as members of the caravan take over the US Government. Trump feels vindicated as he was of course right all along, and the Democrats accept full responsibility. Trump escapes to Russia where they grant him asylum. He is last seen off on a wild boar hunt with Putin.
-
The drag is much lower as you get significantly below the surface, as wave making drag disappears, leaving essentially the form drag and skin friction. On the surface you have that extra energy loss from the pressure differential creating gravity waves, a surface effect that disappears with depth, without which much of that energy would be recovered. In fact all of it would be recovered if not for surface effects (wave making), and viscous effects which is drag in itself but also triggers separation. Furthermore depending on the length of the hull, the wave making drag starts increasing substantially as "hull speed" is approached unless enough lift is created to allow the hull to plane and skim across the water. This of course does not happen with submarines due to there weight and hull shape.
-
Thanks. I wonder who all has to file a list of assets. Businesses have book values and accepted depreciation practices. It will be interesting to see how they might try to regulate it. I wouldn't want to pay 2% on all my stuff, but if someone had to value it and I got to give up the 2% of my choice, I might be more than happy to have them come and get it, LOL.
-
Odd. I keep reading that it is a wealth tax on Americans with more than 30 million in assets. I don't doubt you should be correct, but I don't see your wording once never mind several times.
-
So a person with 50 million in assets pays 1 miilion, and a wife and husband with 49 million each avoid the tax? I didn't see the answer to that, but thank you for the rates.
-
My first thoughts on Warren's wealth tax are: At what rate? How much revenue becomes available? Do you just pay based on the excess over 50 million? Can a wife and husband with 100 million in assets avoid the tax? How do you do the accounting? What are the costs involved of doing the accounting for everyone and policing by the Government? What will the costs be to the economy if it is necessary to liquify business assets to pay for doing the accounting, and to make payments if the 50 million threshold is reached? How long before it's 1 million? (Then you get questions like "what is the value of a tenured position at a University, a commercial fishing license, the real vs book value of a small business etc. which could contribute to the totals) In principle, I'm not against it. It is a matter of doing it efficiently and fairly (There won't be much agreement on that, but that is true of taxes in general.) Hard conservatives will of course see it as "stealing" even more of their money.
-
Trumpty Dumpty had a great fall!
-
...biggest since the midterms? Seriously, I don't know what they might have on him that's concrete enough...but time will tell. If you're right, the timing will be interesting. The closer it gets to November 2020, the less time the GOP will have to get someone else on the ticket.... to get a wall or fence. (my weak pretence as to staying on topic)
-
...and give it away? (actually hadn't heard of a sarcasm font)
-
No doubt. I also wasn't suggesting you meant political reasons alone. Anyway, I think we can all agree this is Trump's biggest victory since the midterms...
-
Is it correct to assume workers pays would get all caught up by then? It lead to Trump caving after he read it...
-
I guess we have at least one exception in Ten oz. So for political reasons you do not want to let Trump off the hook, and you have additional points with regard to negotiating a complete end. I can't completely say I disagree, but I would find it hard not to vote for getting the workers paid immediately. I do think it is risky though, as the Democrats could end up wearing this more than they otherwise might.
-
Agree. To all of this. And with regard to the bold, who here has not advocated for this, never mind merely conceded it? However, in the scenario that this does not happen immediately (let's say it is all Trumps fault, as everyone I think has conceded at least a large part of the blame is on him), do you want the workers paid in the interim? Assuming the answer is yes, why can that not get done quickly? The short answer is politics.
-
Which is exactly why he questioned it? There is a current reality where they are not getting paid, and he asked why that one thing could not be changed. Any insinuations he made are pretty innocuous relative to what has been directed at him lately. Please don't ask for examples.