Biden will raise taxes by 4.3 Trillion, Trump will cut by 1.7 Tr.

[Dragonlady]

Your rolling blackouts are happening because the your "for profit" utilities haven't made any infrastructure investments in 40 years. Their equipment is old, and under capacity for the level of useage in today's technological society. Additionally, global warming means higher temperatures and more summer useage for A/C.

Our rolling blackouts are happening because almost 1/3 of our electricity comes from "green energy" which has one major problem, it cannot be turned on/off according to demand like coal or nuclear. In fact, when we have too much electricity in our grid we run the risk of blowing a gasket (metaphorically) and CA actually PAYS Arizona to offload some of our electricity. What a foolish waste of money, and all because we have an unproven theory called "Climate change" invented by Democrat Al Gore.

By the way - where do live, you don't know much about California utilities? Right now our main electrical provider is just emerging from Bankruptcy after so many lawsuits being levied for the damage caused by Forest Fires. Our government can't manage the forests because of some obscure law that requires them to find a buyer for any dead wood before they can clear it out. Ironically, if there is no buyer the wood just sits and rots and becomes unsellable. That dead wood is what eventually burns down our forest fires.

Brings a new meaning to the term "dead wood," right?

And I was right. All of the players in the power business blame the others, but the reliability of the basic electical grid run by the privately owned corporations lack the infrastructure or the ability to manage infrastructure.

California has first rolling blackouts in 19 years — and everyone faces blame

While California braced for another round of rolling blackouts Monday night, the state's grid operator held off for a second straight night.

www.politico.com

 

[BrokeLoser]

That debt is not going to pay itself off.

“We need to pay down the debt”
BUT
“We need more pet human wetbacks that cost Americans BILLIONS.”

Your thoughts Mac1958 ?

I am sorry, but every economist worth two shits agrees, immigrants, both legal and illegal, contribute more to the economy than they take away, they are a positive force in our economy and have been since the founding of this country. Just so you know, although I doubt it will make a difference, Apple, Google, Amazon, eBay, Intel, Tesla, Yahoo, Capital One and Kohl's were all founded by immigrants or children of immigrants. They represent three trillion dollars in net worth and employ over one million people. Pretty big stack of dollars to weigh against any cost you might be misrepresenting

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/articles/2018-02-06/from-an-economic-and-civic-standpoint-immigrants-are-good-for-society

Don’t be sorry...Most stupid people can’t stop themselves from being stupid.
Educated ambitious “IMMIGRANTS” can be good for this nation...nobody would argue that....Desperate, ILLEGAL, uninvited, illiterate third world savages have no place in a civil first world society....They simply do not have the capacity to improve and enhance our nation.
There’s a reason that every community city and state inhabited by these subhumans is a complete shithole...and it’s not because they are awesome human beings,

 

[BS Filter]

Democrats think they're so slick by saying "invest" blah, blah, blah.

 

[Winston]

The difference between now and the 1950's and 1960's is that back then, our tax code punished rent seeking and encouraged investment. Today, our tax code encourages rent-seeking and discourages investment. Come on, unearned income is taxed at a lower rate than earned income, WTF. How does that make sense. Go out and EARN money, pay a higher tax rate than RENT SEEKING. Look, this is really simple, in regards to the corporate tax rate. The weighted average cost of capital is INVERSELY related to the tax rate. A lower tax rate means capital is MORE EXPENSIVE. That means companies will sit on cash instead of take the risk of a capital investment. Look around, corporations have tons of cash and are investing very little. That is because the "risk" premium is too high. It would be lower if tax rates were higher. And don't get me started on stock buybacks. Until 1981 they were ILLEGAL, seen as stock price manipulation. If we can point to one thing that started this economic stagnation, the legalization of corporate stock buybacks would be the primary suspect and a lower corporate tax rate would be a close second.

You do make interesting points. How do you feel about Corporate taxes? In truth the laws appear to be designed so a C-corporation is supposed to come out at break-even - no loss or income, after all the profits and expenses are calculated including salaries. So, raising corporate taxes would increase investment as you say, but would it increase tax revenue? Not unless one of their "investments" was in higher salaries where the earners pay more personal income taxes.

But when it comes to "unearned income" like stock dividends or sales, most of those investments are made with money that has already been taxed (if we are talking about individuals). It is a little like taxing estates - that is money that is left over after taxes were already paid.

Just going to point out that you are wrong concerning the taxing of estates. Most of the value of an estate that qualifies for estate taxes is from untaxed capital gains. For instance, I inherited a couple hundred acres of land. The cost basis for that land was zero, it was a King's grant. The value of that land was two million dollars. Tell me, where did someone pay the taxes on that almost two million dollars in capital gains?

You said it was a "King's Grant" which I assume is like a free grant. Most assets (including real estate) that are taxed under capital gains come from investments made from earned income. For example, if I work and save money, I pay taxes on all my income. If I use some of what is left over to buy a bond that investment comes from money that has already had a tax levied on it. Not that I am against capital gains taxes or any earned income taxes, I just don't think all capital gains should be taxed like earned income.

And if you use that money you earned to buy groceries you pay a sales tax, If you use that money to purchase gas, you pay the gas tax. If you use that money to pay your cell phone bill, you still pay a tax. Are you starting to see how damn ignorant that "double taxation" argument really is?