NYT Call Harris a phoney

QvQ · Aug 28, 2024

Bradskii said:
'Under Harris’ proposal the amount a married couple could pass to their family without estate tax would be reduced to $7 million.'

That is straight estate tax which is the total value of the estate, if it exceeds 7 million
However step up is unrealized capital gains by the deceased person.
That is my understanding and why it would be a double tax on an estate over 7 million
The democrats have been pushing to change the "step up" for quite some time. The amount that would be subject to step up would be an estate over 1 million as Biden proposed. That would be taxed at the same rate as income tax.
Harris hasn't proposed any amount that would be exempt.
And with rampant inflation, estates with 1 million are not so very uncommon.

Desk trauma · Aug 28, 2024

QvQ said:
That is straight estate tax which is the total value of the estate, if it exceeds 7 million
However step up is unrealized capital gains by the deceased person.
That is my understanding and why it would be a double tax on an estate over 7 million

Bit different from a tax on everyone, unless you think everyone inherits millions?

Bradskii · Aug 28, 2024

Desk trauma said:
The horror.

Just to throw some numbers in. From here: https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/the-number-of-super-luxury-homes-in-the-u-s-is-surging-85421

'In the last year, 0.28% of homes across the 100 largest metro areas in the country were valued at $5 million or more.'

Bradskii · Aug 28, 2024

QvQ said:
That is straight estate tax which is the total value of the estate, if it exceeds 7 million
However step up is unrealized capital gains by the deceased person.

If it exceeds $7 million.

QvQ said:
The democrats have been pushing to change the "step up" for quite some time. The amount that would be subject to step up would be an estate over 1 million as Biden proposed.

If you have a link to support that I'd be grateful to see it. That $1 million figure would be close to 10% of all homes in the US.

QvQ · Aug 28, 2024

Bradskii said:
If you have a link to support that I'd be grateful to see it. That $1 million figure would be close to 10% of all homes in the US.

Be aware that President Biden has proposed ending the ability to step-up the basis for gains in excess of $1 million.

There's Currently a “Stepped-Up Basis” If You Inherit Property — But Will It Last?? - Christianson PLLP

If you’re planning your estate, or you’ve recently inherited assets, you may be unsure of the “cost” (or “basis”) for tax purposes. The current rules Under the current fair market value basis rules (also known as the “step-up and step-down” rules), an heir receives a basis in inherited...

www.christiansoncpa.com

There are articles about which Bill the proposal was in as it wasn't enacted into law. The democrats have been trying to insert it in various forms since 2022 at least according to the articles I have read.

Bradskii · Aug 28, 2024

QvQ said:
Be aware that President Biden has proposed ending the ability to step-up the basis for gains in excess of $1 million.

There's Currently a “Stepped-Up Basis” If You Inherit Property — But Will It Last?? - Christianson PLLP

If you’re planning your estate, or you’ve recently inherited assets, you may be unsure of the “cost” (or “basis”) for tax purposes. The current rules Under the current fair market value basis rules (also known as the “step-up and step-down” rules), an heir receives a basis in inherited...

www.christiansoncpa.com

There are articles about which Bill the proposal was in as it wasn't enacted into law. The democrats have been trying to insert it in various forms since 2022 at least according to the articles I have read.

But that doesn't say there was a proposal for ending the ability to step up on properties worth $1m. It says for gains in excess of $1m. I read that to mean that a property would need to increase in value by at least that amount for the step up to end.

And I'd like to see some actual statements from any Democrat that deals specifically with that. And what Harris has determined to do.

QvQ · Aug 28, 2024

Bradskii said:
And I'd like to see some actual statements from any Democrat that deals specifically with that. And what Harris has determined to do.

It is ambiguous in this article. The other article from the New York Times was not ambiguous. The estate over 1 million total assets would be subject to unrealized capital gains. This article seems to state it had to be a gain over 1 million.
Although I read there was actual proposal offered in 2022 in proper legal legislative language in Bills.
It seems to be something the Democrats are tossing around but it has a tenacity suggesting it will eventually be part of the tax package.
Notice, the article I posted states "Be aware, Biden has proposed..." And Harris has also proposed as have Warren and Sanders.
Just a matter of finetuning how much and who is going to get gouged.

Hans Blaster · Aug 28, 2024

Tax the dead. They can't feel it.

Bradskii · Aug 29, 2024

QvQ said:
It is ambiguous in this article. The other article from the New York Times was not ambiguous. The estate over 1 million total assets would be subject to unrealized capital gains. This article seems to state it had to be a gain over 1 million.
Although I read there was actual proposal offered in 2022 in proper legal legislative language in Bills.
It seems to be something the Democrats are tossing around but it has a tenacity suggesting it will eventually be part of the tax package.
Notice, the article I posted states "Be aware, Biden has proposed..." And Harris has also proposed as have Warren and Sanders.
Just a matter of finetuning how much and who is going to get gouged.

Well, without something definite from the Dems in general or Harris in particular it's difficult to comment. Although I would argue strongly against an inheritance tax on properties in the million dollar bracket.

eleos1954 · Aug 31, 2024

hislegacy said:
The New York Times turns on Kamala Harris and slams her as 'a phony'

The reliably liberal New York Times was among the first to suddenly change tack on Friday, taking aim at what many perceive to be Harris's fatal lack of clear policy with a brutal headline that read: 'Joy Is Not a Strategy'. In a sour commentary, NYT Deputy Opinion Editor Patrick Healy said he'd 'cringed' when former president Bill Clinton took the convention stage on Tuesday to claim that Harris would be 'the president of joy'

The Democratic party plays heavily on "emotion" ... they always have ... we have some serious issues going on with the country that require good soild policy/plans and I have yet to see almost no actual polices/plan of how Harris/Walz will actually address them. Mostly I/we will do this or that ... but not HOW

iluvatar5150 · Aug 31, 2024

eleos1954 said:
The Democratic party plays heavily on "emotion" ... they always have ... we have some serious issues going on with the country that require good soild policy/plans and I have yet to see almost no actual polices/plan of how Harris/Walz will actually address them. Mostly I/we will do this or that ... but not HOW

lol, the only reason Trump won the primaries is because he gives off ToughGuy vibes, not because he was a policy wonk. After one term in office characterized largely by its internal chaos and his ineffectiveness as an executive, his campaign is still driven largely on vibes, with many of his policies plans being largely unworkable (e.g. mass deportation) and/or exacerbating problems that he complains about (e.g. high tariffs and inflation).

Dems have their issues, sure, but there’s a reason that educated professionals have been headed there for a while. It’s because intelligent ideas still have purchase in the Democratic party, while the Republicans have largely ceded control to populists and cranks. Nobody is following Trump because of his thoughtful policy ideas.

Always in His Presence · Aug 31, 2024

iluvatar5150 said:
Dems have their issues, sure, but there’s a reason that educated professionals have been headed there for a while. It’s because intelligent ideas still have purchase in the Democratic party, while the Republicans have largely ceded control to populists and cranks. Nobody is following Trump because of his thoughtful policy ideas.

Really? And what about Democratic policies draws the amount of extremist they have?

iluvatar5150 · Aug 31, 2024

hislegacy said:
Really?

Yes, really.

2. Voting patterns in the 2022 elections

American Trends Panel: Pew Research Center’s online probability survey panel, which consists of more than 12,000 adults who take two to three surveys each

www.pewresearch.org

Regarding the decline in Dem college-grad vote share since 2018:
"Much of the lagging Democratic performance compared with previous elections is attributable to differential partisan turnout rather than changing candidate preferences among voters."

hislegacy said:
And what about Democratic policies draws the amount of extremist they have?

I don't know which policies you're referring to, but either way, I said they had their issues.

eleos1954 · Sep 1, 2024

iluvatar5150 said:
lol, the only reason Trump won the primaries is because he gives off ToughGuy vibes, not because he was a policy wonk. After one term in office characterized largely by its internal chaos and his ineffectiveness as an executive, his campaign is still driven largely on vibes, with many of his policies plans being largely unworkable (e.g. mass deportation) and/or exacerbating problems that he complains about (e.g. high tariffs and inflation).

Dems have their issues, sure, but there’s a reason that educated professionals have been headed there for a while. It’s because intelligent ideas still have purchase in the Democratic party, while the Republicans have largely ceded control to populists and cranks. Nobody is following Trump because of his thoughtful policy ideas.

We have a comparison

Under Trump

No wars
No mass migration
Lower taxes
Better economy

The first two are very significant.

The democratic playbook is this.

iluvatar5150 · Sep 1, 2024

eleos1954 said:
We have a comparison

Yeah, this take is about as thin and factually accurate as your one criticizing Dems for voting on vibes.

eleos1954 said:
Under Trump

No wars

Not true. He initiated the pullout of Afghanistan that ultimately failed under Biden. He wanted to pull out even faster and with even less planning.

He also launched the strike against Soleimani in Iraq, which followed ongoing violence in the region and could easily have led to an escalation.

He launched drone strikes in north Africa and air strikes against Syria.

Foreign policy of Donald Trump - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

eleos1954 said:
No mass migration

Again, not true. If there was no mass migration, what was he complaining about all the time?

eleos1954 said:
Lower taxes

Lower than what? Biden hasn’t raised taxes.

eleos1954 said:
Better economy

Right up until it tanked, right?

eleos1954 said:
The first two are very significant.

The democratic playbook is this.

View attachment 354096

You’ve never read “Rules for Radicals,” have you?

You know who else likes following Alinksy’s playbook?

https://www.politico.com/story/2010/03/right-loves-to-hate-imitate-alinsky-034751

eleos1954 · Sep 1, 2024

iluvatar5150 said:
Yeah, this take is about as thin and factually accurate as your one criticizing Dems for voting on vibes.

Not true. He initiated the pullout of Afghanistan that ultimately failed under Biden. He wanted to pull out even faster and with even less planning.

He also launched the strike against Soleimani in Iraq, which followed ongoing violence in the region and could easily have led to an escalation.

He launched drone strikes in north Africa and air strikes against Syria.

Foreign policy of Donald Trump - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Again, not true. If there was no mass migration, what was he complaining about all the time?

Lower than what? Biden hasn’t raised taxes.

Right up until it tanked, right?

You’ve never read “Rules for Radicals,” have you?

You know who else likes following Alinksy’s playbook?

https://www.politico.com/story/2010/03/right-loves-to-hate-imitate-alinsky-034751

Democrats have been in power 12 out of the last 16 years ... yet everything is Trumps fault? Nonsense

iluvatar5150 · Sep 1, 2024

eleos1954 said:
Democrats have been in power 12 out of the last 16 years ... yet everything is Trumps fault? Nonsense

That’s not what I said, but since this is your third fact-challenged post, congrats on the hat trick.

Always in His Presence · Sep 1, 2024

iluvatar5150 said:
Yeah, this take is about as thin and factually accurate as your one criticizing Dems for voting on vibes.

Oh, fact check time.

No wars

iluvatar5150 said:
Not true. He initiated the pullout of Afghanistan that ultimately failed under Biden. He wanted to pull out even faster and with even less planning.

Not a war

Joe’s failure not Trumps

Fact check fail #1

iluvatar5150 said:
He also launched the strike against Soleimani in Iraq, which followed ongoing violence in the region and could easily have led to an escalation.

No escalation no war

Fact check fail #2

iluvatar5150 said:
He launched drone strikes in north Africa and air strikes against Syria.

Foreign policy of Donald Trump - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Also not a war

Fact check #3 fail

iluvatar5150 said:
Again, not true. If there was no mass migration, what was he complaining about all the time?

His policies drew it to a historic low.
See the chart from the attempted assassination
Fact Check #4 fail

iluvatar5150 said:
Lower than what? Biden hasn’t raised taxes.

The Trump tax cuts that the IRS reported helped over 85% of tax payers

Fact check #5 faiL

If three fact check fails are a trifecta. What are five?

Here is a chance of redemption

What were Trump four Nobel Peace Prize nominations for?

iluvatar5150 · Sep 1, 2024

hislegacy said:
Oh, fact check time.

No wars

Not a war

Afghanistan absolutely was a war. Trump didn’t start it, but he also didn’t end it. And he didn’t leave a plan in place to end it. Trump had four years to strengthen the Afghan government that capitulated to the Taliban, but he apparently didn’t.

hislegacy said:
Joe’s failure not Trumps

It was a joint effort. The agreement that Trump brokered had us leaving even sooner.

hislegacy said:
Fact check fail #1

No.

hislegacy said:
No escalation no war

Fact check fail #2

Okay, so launching missiles isn’t a war. Got it

hislegacy said:
Also not a war

Fact check #3 fail

That absolutely was part of the Syrian Civil War. Try again.

hislegacy said:
His policies drew it to a historic low.

Which was not what was claimed.

hislegacy said:
See the chart from the attempted assassination

What chart was that?

hislegacy said:
The Trump tax cuts that the IRS reported helped over 85% of tax payers

Fact check #5 faiL

The only fail there was you in failing to read and comprehend my response. I asked “lower than what?” and said that Biden didn’t raise taxes.

hislegacy said:
Here is a chance of redemption

What were Trump four Nobel Peace Prize nominations for?

Sycophancy, mainly, but also for brokering a deal between Israel and countries it wasn’t fighting.

Nominations from national-level politicians are automatically accepted. Three of his nominations were from a right-wing legislator in Norway. One was from Claudia Tenney.

eleos1954 · Sep 5, 2024

iluvatar5150 said:
lol, the only reason Trump won the primaries is because he gives off ToughGuy vibes, not because he was a policy wonk. After one term in office characterized largely by its internal chaos and his ineffectiveness as an executive, his campaign is still driven largely on vibes, with many of his policies plans being largely unworkable (e.g. mass deportation) and/or exacerbating problems that he complains about (e.g. high tariffs and inflation).

Dems have their issues, sure, but there’s a reason that educated professionals have been headed there for a while. It’s because intelligent ideas still have purchase in the Democratic party, while the Republicans have largely ceded control to populists and cranks. Nobody is following Trump because of his thoughtful policy ideas.

Yeah ... well both parties are corrupt ... so we pick our poison.

NYT Call Harris a phoney

Member

[redacted]

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Member

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Member

I march with Sherman

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

God is Love

The New York Times turns on Kamala Harris and slams her as 'a phony'​

Well-Known Member

Jesus is the only Way

Well-Known Member

God is Love

Well-Known Member

God is Love

Well-Known Member

Jesus is the only Way

Well-Known Member

God is Love

Similar threads

The New York Times turns on Kamala Harris and slams her as 'a phony'