Kamala finally adds policies to her web page, do you support her new agenda? (Poll)

[Nostra]

It only affects taxpayers with a net wealth over $100 million.

Did you seriously not know this?

Yeah, and the income tax was supposed to only be paid by the top 1%.

Moron

 

[Nostra]

Thanks for admitting you’re wrong.

I’d tax all capital gains as ordinary income if it were up to me. I am sick of bullshit games we play because of arbitrary differential treatment of income.

So you think all income should be treated the same?

Glad to know you support a flat tax on every dollar.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Here is Kamala's recently updated web page with her POLICIES

The Office of Kamala D. Harris

Learn about Kamala D. Harris's journey as a leader and advocate for the people—from District Attorney to Vice President of the United States. Stay connected with her office and contact Vice President Harris.

kamalaharris.com

Its primarily a leftist view of Federal government policies, except there are no new taxes to pay for the new benefits.

It took them a while because they had to craft them.

Her values haven't changed, but nobody can figure out what values are.

 

[kyzr]

It took them a while because they had to craft them.

Her values haven't changed, but nobody can figure out what values are.

As Bernie said, she needs to move to the middle to get elected, but after that, if elected, she will govern as a radical Leftist.

 

[DBA]

Not that many people have enough money to invest outside of tax sheltered accounts, so it wouldn’t affect most of the country.

Keeping your money out of the market gets you nowhere. What else would you do with it?

I would put money in a decent yield, zero risk savings or CD at 5-6%. I would still have to pay capital gains, but there is a guaranteed return. Even investing in real estate would slow as investors wouldn't want to take the risk of losing money vs only getting 60% of any gains they may have.

Why not tax capital gains at 95%?

 

[Marener]

I would put money in a decent yield, zero risk savings or CD at 5-6%. I would still have to pay capital gains, but there is a guaranteed return. Even investing in real estate would slow as investors wouldn't want to take the risk of losing money vs only getting 60% of any gains they may have.

Why not tax capital gains at 95%?

There aren’t CDs at 6%. You can’t even find one year CDs at 5% anymore. The best savings accounts are 4% or maybe 4.25%. The interest on those aren’t taxed by capital gains but regular income anyway.

An index fund is going to get you double that long term.

It’s a huge loss.

 

[Nostra]

It took them a while because they had to craft them.

Her values haven't changed, but nobody can figure out what values are.

Craft them? She lifted them off Tater's website.

 

[DBA]

There aren’t CDs at 6%. You can’t even find one year CDs at 5% anymore. The best savings accounts are 4% or maybe 4.25%. The interest on those aren’t taxed by capital gains but regular income anyway.

An index fund is going to get you double that long term.

It’s a huge loss.

I am getting 4.85% APY on a savings account at Citbank and 4.30% at Citibank. You should check them out.

I am currently invested in several index funds, mainly S&P funds. Like any stock market investment, it is subject to corrections and crashes. People have to weigh that risk against their gains, after taxes. If risk/reward wasn’t a factor, why not raise capital gains taxes to 95%? That would raise even more revenue, right?

 

[Marener]

I am getting 4.85% APY on a savings account at Citbank and 4.30% at Citibank. You should check them out.

I am currently invested in several index funds, mainly S&P funds. Like any stock market investment, it is subject to corrections and crashes. People have to weigh that risk against their gains, after taxes. If risk/reward wasn’t a factor, why not raise capital gains taxes to 95%? That would raise even more revenue, right?

So not 5-6% but better than 4.25 I said. Those rates are not going to last, you know. The only time you’re really worried about market correction is when you’re near or at retirement and shouldn’t be all in equities anyway, regardless of tax treatment.

All this and we haven’t even mentioned that the tax rate is 22% up to about 200k AGI. So the vast majortiy of people aren’t even seeing any significant difference.

I pay a higher marginal tax rate and it wouldn’t affect my decisions whatsoever.

 

[DBA]

So not 5-6% but better than 4.25 I said. Those rates are not going to last, you know. The only time you’re really worried about market correction is when you’re near or at retirement and shouldn’t be all in equities anyway, regardless of tax treatment.

All this and we haven’t even mentioned that the tax rate is 22% up to about 200k AGI. So the vast majortiy of people aren’t even seeing any significant difference.

I pay a higher marginal tax rate and it wouldn’t affect my decisions whatsoever.

You still didn’t answer my question. If doubling the capital gains tax, as Biden(and presumably Harris) has proposed, doesn’t have any effect on your decision, why not raise it to 95%? Would that affect your decision?

I know you are talking here about taxing it as ordinary income. To that end, Democrats also want to increase taxes on everyone, including the top tax brackets, which would effectively raise the marginal rate unless people who itemize like myself could find some additional deductions. Also, remember that people earning between 41k and 459k currently pay a 15% capital gains taxes. Many, if not most, investors fall somewhere in this income range. Even using your marginal rate of 22%, they would see a 7% increase in taxes, which is substantial and most certainly would negatively affect those that dabble in the markets. That market dabbling times millions of people is a substantial hit to the markets. Again, keep in mind that both Biden and Harris both plan on letting the Trump tax cuts expire which would raise that marginal rate for virtually everyone and most certainly for those who have money to dabble.

Taxing people does not encourage spending. Never has and never will. Some taxes are necessary. I think most understand that, but letting people keep more of the money they earn encourages spending/investment, thus grows the economy, organically. Funneling even more money through, what is considered by most, a woefully inefficient government to disperse as they see fit is a temporary and artificial way to grow the economy and is not the answer to our long term success.

 

[kyzr]

You still didn’t answer my question. If doubling the capital gains tax, as Biden(and presumably Harris) has proposed, doesn’t have any effect on your decision, why not raise it to 95%? Would that affect your decision?

I know you are talking here about taxing it as ordinary income. To that end, Democrats also want to increase taxes on everyone, including the top tax brackets, which would effectively raise the marginal rate unless people who itemize like myself could find some additional deductions. Also, remember that people earning between 41k and 459k currently pay a 15% capital gains taxes. Many, if not most, investors fall somewhere in this income range. Even using your marginal rate of 22%, they would see a 7% increase in taxes, which is substantial and most certainly would negatively affect those that dabble in the markets. That market dabbling times millions of people is a substantial hit to the markets. Again, keep in mind that both Biden and Harris both plan on letting the Trump tax cuts expire which would raise that marginal rate for virtually everyone and most certainly for those who have money to dabble.

Taxing people does not encourage spending. Never has and never will. Some taxes are necessary. I think most understand that, but letting people keep more of the money they earn encourages spending/investment, thus grows the economy, organically. Funneling even more money through, what is considered by most, a woefully inefficient government to disperse as they see fit is a temporary and artificial way to grow the economy and is not the answer to our long term success.

Not to jump into the middle of a good discussion, but here is my take on the fiscal mess:

Trump's solution: tariffs paid by foreign manufacturers, not US consumers, to raise revenue, combined with drastic spending cuts as Elon Musk studies the Federal government and makes serious recommendations to make Budget serious cuts. Trump does not put up a proposed Budget. Trump does not say how he plans to fix Social Security or Medicare. Trump's tax cuts were supposed to spur growth, but they did not. The US economy is too big to grow quickly, it cruises along at about 2%, it will NOT grow out of DEBT. The other GOP lie is that tax cuts increase tax revenue, they do slightly, but borrowing increases way more, so tax cuts just add to the DEBT.

Kamala's solution: is somewhat muddy. Lots of tax increases, but lots of spending increases. I do like that she said she would lift the cap to fix SS, but no firm Budget to see if she cuts spending.

My solution:
Financial Transaction Tax
Remittance Tax on money sent out of the US to pay for the wall and CBP
Make capitol gains regular income, take Medicare deduction out of all income
Every US citizen must pay Social Security tax, and Medicare Tax on all income, no exceptions.
Send Welfare back to the states, saves $1.1T. (to pay interest on Debt)
Cut the Budget back to $4T as it was during Trump's 1st term
Implement all of Elon's recommendations to cut government spending.

 

[DBA]

I do like that she said she would lift the cap to fix SS

I hate this idea, unless it is coupled with an equivalent increase in the payout. This would amount to a very large tax increase on higher earners on top of the higher taxes already proposed.

At some point, the government has to stop spending so much.

 

[kyzr]

I hate this idea, unless it is coupled with an equivalent increase in the payout. This would amount to a very large tax increase on higher earners on top of the higher taxes already proposed. At some point, the government has to stop spending so much.

Right now the budget deficit is about $2T. That means serious cuts and revenue increases.
Sending Welfare back to the states saves $1.1T, enough to cover interest on the Debt
Putting the budget back to the 2019 levels takes it from $7.3T to $4.0T
That should get a surplus to start reducing the $35T Debt.