Absolutely insane: https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/paying...t-20191101

The whole thing is based on her desire to not increase taxes on anyone but 1%.

Some highlights:
35% tax on all foreign earnings, i.e. if you work in another country you have to pay their taxes plus 35% of your income back to US. Up from the current 5%.
A 6% 'wealth' tax, which is not clear if this is 1 time or multiple. Either way, no chance someone with billions or even millions sticks around to find out.
0.1% tax on every stock transaction (this one I don't think would matter except to high frequency traders, so I actually don't care that much, but they certainly would move). 
She wants to expand the IRS to crack down on tax avoidance. 

This is the perfect plan to run every wealthy person out of the US permanently and cause a recession. Completely ridiculous. Of course the middle class should pay some part of universal coverage if its going to exist, this idea of free healthcare via '1% only' taxation will not work and is highly unethical, not to mention stupid.

I know none of this will pass, but the fact that its even her platform is an economic nightmare. On the other hand Harvard does list her as a bankruptcy law expert, so I guess its not surprising she is so willing to cause it.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

6% "wealth tax" wow

---

So, where is the remaining 80% of the money coming from?

---

Don't forget the college tuition forgiveness plan that will also tax along these same lines.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

The financial transaction tax *might* get passed.
The others are so pie in the sky they are not worth discussing.
Elizabeth Warren may well be our next President.
But a federal wealth tax would require a constitutional amendment. Ain't happening.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The financial transaction tax *might* get passed.
The others are so pie in the sky they are not worth discussing.
Elizabeth Warren may well be our next President.
But a federal wealth tax would require a constitutional amendment.  Ain't happening.

The only kind of pie this plan resembles is a cow pattie. There is nothing to look upto here. I agree nothing is happening, but the fact that a major party candidate even suggested it shows how far off the rocker some (being nice) Dems have gone. I agree that a small financial transaction tax is kind of reasonable and I would be willing to do it, but its not the major mover in this plan.

If you want everyone to have health care coverage you have to have everyone pay for it. Would I personally trade 5% tax for single payer? Probably not, unless it had a cap like SS, but I think that's a reasonable proposal for those currently outside of the medicaid range and many people would like it.

What Warren is proposing is an old fashioned communist style 're-appropriation' of wealth and is tantamount to theft. That doesn't ever work out well, and we have plenty of examples of places that have given it a try.

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

Her "wealth tax" is unconstitutional, but so was the Income Tax, and that monstrosity is so ingrained in our hearts and wallets that I was forced to capitalize it or be audited.

Think about how her tax will be applied. Americans with a "net worth" over a certain dollar amount will be required to surrender a yearly cash payment of 6% of those holdings. This will require EVERY AMERICAN to document every asset they own and somehow manage to PRICE it every year and swear that price is accurate. I live in a modest home and drive a 15 year old Honda, but how does the WRS know I don't have 6 billion in offshore accounts or a chest of pirate gold? Also, how shall I value my 5% interest in a startup company that is not publicly traded? And by the way, how much is a spare tire worth? It still has some good tread on it. Does cat poop have a positive or negative value?

---

The financial transaction tax *might* get passed.
The others are so pie in the sky they are not worth discussing.
Elizabeth Warren may well be our next President.
But a federal wealth tax would require a constitutional amendment.  Ain't happening.

The only kind of pie this plan resembles is a cow pattie. There is nothing to look upto here. I agree nothing is happening, but the fact that a major party candidate even suggested it shows how far off the rocker some (being nice) Dems have gone. I agree that a small financial transaction tax is kind of reasonable and I would be willing to do it, but its not the major mover in this plan.

If you want everyone to have health care coverage you have to have everyone pay for it. Would I personally trade 5% tax for single payer? Probably not, unless it had a cap like SS, but I think that's a reasonable proposal for those currently outside of the medicaid range and many people would like it.

What Warren is proposing is an old fashioned communist style 're-appropriation' of wealth and is tantamount to theft. That doesn't ever work out well, and we have plenty of examples of places that have given it a try.

Yep.
If you look at the European countries that Bernie wants us to imitate, they have higher tax rates on the middle class and the poor than we do.  But they give the middle class and the poor more benefits, like subsidized healthcare and childcare.  That's a bigger role for government than I would like, but at least it works.

Anyhow, this is part of a pattern in this country.  The drawn out and closed primary elections divide us and encourage the candidates to promise unreasonable stuff.  2000 mile long walls.  Wealth taxes.  A ban on all Muslim immigration.  If you like your plan you can keep it.  All part of the same story.
If a candidate had to play to the middle from the beginning, we'd be less divided and we'd be discussing more reasonable proposals.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Absolutely insane: https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/paying...t-20191101

The whole thing is based on her desire to not increase taxes on anyone but 1%.

Some highlights:
35% tax on all foreign earnings, i.e. if you work in another country you have to pay their taxes plus 35% of your income back to US. Up from the current 5%.
A 6% 'wealth' tax, which is not clear if this is 1 time or multiple. Either way, no chance someone with billions or even millions sticks around to find out.
0.1% tax on every stock transaction (this one I don't think would matter except to high frequency traders, so I actually don't care that much, but they certainly would move). 
She wants to expand the IRS to crack down on tax avoidance. 

This is the perfect plan to run every wealthy person out of the US permanently and cause a recession. Completely ridiculous. Of course the middle class should pay some part of universal coverage if its going to exist, this idea of free healthcare via '1% only' taxation will not work and is highly unethical, not to mention stupid.

I know none of this will pass, but the fact that its even her platform is an economic nightmare. On the other hand Harvard does list her as a bankruptcy law expert, so I guess its not surprising she is so willing to cause it.

Totally insane.  Absurd.  Stupid.  I could keep going, but eventually, I'd run out of words to describe it.

---

When Bill Gates says a liberals plans suck, you know they suck.

---

All Tax and Spend politicians are after the Middle Class, that's where the money is. They just won't admit it, even when the math clearly demonstrates otherwise.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Nobody cares about tax plans, etc. People like good slogans. That was proven in 2016

---

Nobody cares about tax plans, etc.  People like good slogans.  That was proven in 2016

Slogans gave me more take home pay starting February 2018, so if that is what you call a good slogan, then I am on board!

---

Absolutely insane: https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/paying...t-20191101

The whole thing is based on her desire to not increase taxes on anyone but 1%.

Some highlights:
35% tax on all foreign earnings, i.e. if you work in another country you have to pay their taxes plus 35% of your income back to US. Up from the current 5%.
A 6% 'wealth' tax, which is not clear if this is 1 time or multiple. Either way, no chance someone with billions or even millions sticks around to find out.
0.1% tax on every stock transaction (this one I don't think would matter except to high frequency traders, so I actually don't care that much, but they certainly would move). 
She wants to expand the IRS to crack down on tax avoidance. 

This is the perfect plan to run every wealthy person out of the US permanently and cause a recession. Completely ridiculous. Of course the middle class should pay some part of universal coverage if its going to exist, this idea of free healthcare via '1% only' taxation will not work and is highly unethical, not to mention stupid.

I know none of this will pass, but the fact that its even her platform is an economic nightmare. On the other hand Harvard does list her as a bankruptcy law expert, so I guess its not surprising she is so willing to cause it.

Totally insane.  Absurd.  Stupid.  I could keep going, but eventually, I'd run out of words to describe it.

This is when the saying, "you can't fix stupid" is truly horrifying in a real world way.

---

Nobody cares about tax plans, etc.  People like good slogans.  That was proven in 2016

How about "I'm going to give you everything you ever wanted, and the rich are going to pay for it."  

She pulled it from Trump's playbook.  Like Trump claiming Mexico was going to pay for the wall.  Now the rich are going to pay for everything you ever wanted.  

The problem with democracy is that most people don't recognize BS.

---

You know there's a problem when Florida puts 12 amendments up for vote, and 11 out of 12 pass. Oddly enough, the only one that didn't is the one that would have saved the tax payers money and cost local governments money. People are sheep.

To be fair, the average citizen shouldn't know much about politics. It's hard to be a good parent, worker, spouse, etc and know all of what's going on in government, too. This wasn't a problem when there were more media sources, but now that major companies own 93% of the media, it's hard to get alternate information. We need to be able to trust our media.

---

Medicare For All is a nonstarter, but a public option for Medicare Advantage For All has a real chance if we can get past Impeachment Kabuki Theater.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

You know there's a problem when Florida puts 12 amendments up for vote, and 11 out of 12 pass. Oddly enough, the only one that didn't is the one that would have saved the tax payers money and cost local governments money. People are sheep.

To be fair, the average citizen shouldn't know much about politics. It's hard to be a good parent, worker, spouse, etc and know all of what's going on in government, too. This wasn't a problem when there were more media sources, but now that major companies own 93% of the media, it's hard to get alternate information. We need to be able to trust our media.

Amendment 1 increased the homestead exemption for everyone. 
Most cities and counties would adjust their millage rates up to avoid budget cuts.  Some homeowners pay more, some pay less, all commercial owners pay more.
But it would have also diverted extra state funds to "financially constrained" rural counties.  But with Amendment 5, the state couldn't raise taxes unless they got a 2/3 vote to do so.  So the state would have to provide that rural subsidy by cutting existing spending.
Amendment 1 would have created far more losers than winners.  
Why did you want it to pass? Do you own a homestead in a rural county?

That said, I agree with you that there is very little state level media explaining these amendments.  

In Orange County, in 2016, we passed a county charter amendment by about 300,000 votes to 150,000 votes.  
Then in 2018, we passed a state amendment to cancel the charter amendment, 270,000 to 180,000.  Almost identical vote totals.  Probably the same people voting each time. Hardly any undervotes.  Just looks like about 120,000 just vote "yes" to everything without understanding it.  Those people probably behave the same way even if the media tries to explain the amendments.  They either don't care, or can't understand. But voting "yes" makes them feel good.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I don't get those claiming her plan wouldn't work. It's simple, you just don't pay the doctors, hospitals, or drug companies; no tax increases needed.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

You know there's a problem when Florida puts 12 amendments up for vote, and 11 out of 12 pass. Oddly enough, the only one that didn't is the one that would have saved the tax payers money and cost local governments money. People are sheep.

To be fair, the average citizen shouldn't know much about politics. It's hard to be a good parent, worker, spouse, etc and know all of what's going on in government, too. This wasn't a problem when there were more media sources, but now that major companies own 93% of the media, it's hard to get alternate information. We need to be able to trust our media.

Amendment 1 increased the homestead exemption for everyone. 
Most cities and counties would adjust their millage rates up to avoid budget cuts.  Some homeowners pay more, some pay less, all commercial owners pay more.
But it would have also diverted extra state funds to "financially constrained" rural counties.  But with Amendment 5, the state couldn't raise taxes unless they got a 2/3 vote to do so.  So the state would have to provide that rural subsidy by cutting existing spending.
Amendment 1 would have created far more losers than winners.  
Why did you want it to pass? Do you own a homestead in a rural county?

That said, I agree with you that there is very little state level media explaining these amendments.  

In Orange County, in 2016, we passed a county charter amendment by about 300,000 votes to 150,000 votes.  
Then in 2018, we passed a state amendment to cancel the charter amendment, 270,000 to 180,000.  Almost identical vote totals.  Probably the same people voting each time. Hardly any undervotes.  Just looks like about 120,000 just vote "yes" to everything without understanding it.  Those people probably behave the same way even if the media tries to explain the amendments.  They either don't care, or can't understand. But voting "yes" makes them feel good.

Put your cats away, dude. I have no interest in a debate about Amendment 1. The point was that 11 of 12 amendments passed, except the one that would cost counties money. I suspect a disproportionate amount of coverage for the latter, but don't even know where to begin researching that. Even if we exclude the aforementioned amendment, it's completely improbably that informed, partisan citizens approve 11 out of 12 amendments. It is far more likely that people tend to vote yes when they are unsure (even though I would have thought the opposite is more intuitive), or they vote for the position that gets the most coverage. I would imagine the same people with the power to put it on the ballot have the money to push that position. Either way, people aren't informed, and there is very little interest from the powers that be to change that.

---