Harris Doubles Down On Failed Policies In Newly Unveiled Platform

[Hazelelponi]

Tax cut for the middle class: (any disagreement with this?)

Vice President Harris and Governor Walz believe that working families deserve a break. That’s why under their plan more than 100 million working and middle-class Americans will get a tax cut. They will do this by restoring two tax cuts designed to help middle class and working Americans: the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit. Through these two programs, millions of Americans get to keep more of their hard-earned income. They will also expand the Child Tax Credit to provide a $6,000 tax cut to families with newborn children. They believe no child in America should live in poverty, and these actions would have a historic impact.

Here's where I'm confused because Harris was not behind renewing Trump's 2018(?) tax cuts for the middle class, which has to be renewed or taxes go up on the middle class.

So, is she waiting for Trump's cuts to expire so she can say she lowered taxes when the reality will be much different? If she did that she can claim a tax "cut" on the middle class even though they would be paying more in taxes honestly...

What are the actual rates for middle class that she's proposing? I haven't seen her rates yet on that...

And - how does that track with jobs that her upper end tax hikes will cause Americans to loose.

She is proposing upper tier businesses investment rates go up a total of 10% from what they are right now. That is what drives businesses to invest in manufacturing overseas, not in America. It's not at all a competitive tax rate on the world stage if you want businesses to invest in America.

In the end, so far it's probably the least problematic program she has, but not even that is without it's flaws, fairly serious ones after I spend any time with it I'm sure.

But of course, just now seeing this so I will be researching all her speeches and going through it all for a few days.

 

[wing2000]

So far, one deflection. Anyone else have an issue with this tax cut policy?

"...That’s why under their plan more than 100 million working and middle-class Americans will get a tax cut. They will do this by restoring two tax cuts designed to help middle class and working Americans:

the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit. Through these two programs, millions of Americans get to keep more of their hard-earned income.

They will also expand the Child Tax Credit to provide a $6,000 tax cut to families with newborn children."

 

[probinson]

P.S. Harris is not the current POTUS

Is this to suggest that Biden isn't in favor of Harris' planned tax cuts?

 

[Hazelelponi]

So far, one deflection.

That was a deflection? Lol...

I take it that means no one knows what rates she is actually proposing to tax the middle class at either yet, huh? So, it could be a higher tax rate than what people now pay...

 

[Hammster]

It's a new way, right?

P.S. Harris is not the current POTUS

Her site says she advised on tough decisions in the oval office. So it would stand the reason that she suggested tax cuts for the middle class to Joe Biden. He must not have wanted tax cuts for the middle class. Is this why this is a new way forward?

 

[Hammster]

So far, one deflection. Anyone else have an issue with this tax cut policy?

"...That’s why under their plan more than 100 million working and middle-class Americans will get a tax cut. They will do this by restoring two tax cuts designed to help middle class and working Americans:

the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit. Through these two programs, millions of Americans get to keep more of their hard-earned income.

They will also expand the Child Tax Credit to provide a $6,000 tax cut to families with newborn children."

So far you haven’t addressed any issues in the OP. Talk about deflection.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Wait... I've been told by others in this forum that this is the Democrat's platform.

https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/FINAL-MASTER-PLATFORM.pdf

Of course, that one says Biden is running for office.

So which is the actual platform? The one that they voted on at the DNC that doesn't even list the correct candidate, or "A New Way Forward" that Harris has on her website?

The DNC != the Harris campaign

 

[Hazelelponi]

The DNC != the Harris campaign

Are you saying the policies she's just listed on her website are a lie?

 

[iluvatar5150]

Are you saying the policies she's just listed on her website are a lie?

No, I'm saying that her campaign is not the DNC, so they shouldn't be expected to have identical platforms.

 

[Hammster]

For those playing along at home, the thread isn’t about every policy listed in her platform. There is actually an OP to discuss.

 

[iluvatar5150]

For those playing along at home, the thread isn’t about every policy listed in her platform. There is actually an OP to discuss.

ok, let's go:

The roughly 4,500-word platform was heavy on platitudes, did not go deep on many policy issues, and gave few explanations about how she expected to implement her agenda other than repeatedly saying she would “fight” for it.

IOW, exactly like the Trump/RNC platform.

She branded her agenda as a “New Way Forward” despite her already being at the helm for nearly four years in the Biden-Harris administration. Nowhere in her platform did she explain how her approach would differ from what she is currently doing.

Again, like the Trump/RNC platform and it's lack of specificity with regards to what it did in 2016 2017-2020 and what it's currently doing in red states.

Harris doubled down on her plan for how she will get people in homes with her “comprehensive plan to build three million more rental units and homes that are affordable to end the national housing supply crisis in her first term.”

Nowhere does she explain who will build the units and she once again insisted on jacking up demand and housing costs by giving first-time buyers $25,000 in down payment assistance.

Again, like the Trump/RNC platform, its lack of specificity, and its demand-juicing support for low interest rates and support for first time homebuyers:

"1. Housing Affordability​

To help new home buyers, Republicans will reduce mortgage rates by slashing Inflation, open limited portions of Federal​

Lands to allow for new home construction, promote homeownership through Tax Incentives and support for first-time​

buyers, and cut unnecessary Regulations that raise housing costs."​

She also declared that she will sign legislation to “outlaw new forms of price fixing by corporate landlords” without mentioning that it will first have to pass Congress.

Again, like the Trump/RNC platform that fails to mention Congress aside from two brief passages in the preamble, making no contingencies for what they'll do if they don't win the WH, House, and Senate.

Harris plans to magically create an “Opportunity Economy” in which people will submit 25 million new business applications by the end of her first term.

Is this a bad thing? 1.) She said that was the goal. 2.) She explained some of the measures she intends to undertake to achieve that goal:

"To help achieve this, she will expand the startup expense tax deduction for new businesses from $5,000 to $50,000 and take on the everyday obstacles and red tape that can make it harder to grow a small business. She will drive venture capital to the talent that exists all across our country including in rural areas, and increase the share of federal contract dollars going to small businesses.​

She once again doubled down on Soviet-style price controls

Where did she do that?

“She will go after bad actors who exploit an emergency to rip off consumers by calling for the first-ever federal ban on corporate price gouging on food and groceries,” her platform states. “And she’ll keep fighting to bring down prescription drug costs by taking on pharmacy middlemen, who raise consumers’ prices for their own gain and squeeze independent pharmacies’ profits.”

Those aren't "soviet-style price controls."

She doubled down on the socialist agenda of making health care “a right” and “not a privilege” — which is unconstitutional and incredibly stupid.

There's nothing unconstitutional about it. Our rights are whatever we decide them to be.

Harris signaled that she will continue to fight against the oil and gas industry and try to expand green energy, which is one of the top reasons that energy costs have skyrocketed under the Biden-Harris administration.

Blatantly incorrect.

She will magically enact an agenda that “advances environmental justice, protects public lands and public health, increases resilience to climate disasters, lowers household energy costs, creates millions of new jobs, and continues to hold polluters accountable to secure clean air and water for all,” her platform stated.

Another complaint about lack of specificity. k

Harris will support abortion and her platform gave no indication that she supports any kind of limits on it, meaning that she will support abortion up until the moment of birth.

Trump/RNC have purged abortion from their platform except to say that they oppose late term abortions.

Immediately after the section titled, “SAFEGUARD OUR FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS,” Harris declared that she will go after Americans’ Second Amendment rights.

This is what her page actually says: "She’ll ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, require universal background checks, and support red flag laws that keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people."

There are plenty of firearms that don't fall into that category. Your 2A rights will still exist.

Her campaign tried to paint her disastrous border record as strong despite overseeing the worst 4-year period of illegal immigration in recorded U.S. history in which more than 10 million illegal aliens have flooded into the U.S.

Harris proposes in her platform rewarding the millions who broke federal law by illegally coming into the U.S., where they have wreaked havoc on communities across the country, by rewarding them with a “pathway to citizenship.”

She also points out that she supported the bipartisan deal that Trump nuked.

Edits for clarity.

 

[Hammster]

ok, let's go:



IOW, exactly like the Trump/RNC platform.



Again, like the Trump/RNC platform and it's lack of specificity with regards to what it did in 2016 and what it's doing in red states.



Again, like the Trump/RNC platform, its lack of specificity, and its demand-juicing support for low interest rates and support for first time homebuyers:

"1. Housing Affordability​

To help new home buyers, Republicans will reduce mortgage rates by slashing Inflation, open limited portions of Federal​

Lands to allow for new home construction, promote homeownership through Tax Incentives and support for first-time​

buyers, and cut unnecessary Regulations that raise housing costs."​

Again, like the Trump/RNC platform that fails to mention Congress aside from two brief passages in the preamble, making no contingencies for what they'll do if they don't win the WH, House, and Senate.



Is this a bad thing? 1.) She said that was the goal. 2.) She explained some of the measures she intends to undertake to achieve that goal:

"To help achieve this, she will expand the startup expense tax deduction for new businesses from $5,000 to $50,000 and take on the everyday obstacles and red tape that can make it harder to grow a small business. She will drive venture capital to the talent that exists all across our country including in rural areas, and increase the share of federal contract dollars going to small businesses.​

Where did she do that?



Those aren't "soviet-style price controls."



There's nothing unconstitutional about it. Our rights are whatever we decide them to be.



Blatantly incorrect.



Another complaint about lack of specificity. k



Trump/RNC have purged abortion from their platform except to say that they oppose late term abortions.



This is what her page actually says: "She’ll ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, require universal background checks, and support red flag laws that keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people."

There are plenty of firearms that don't fall into that category. Your 2A rights will still exist.



She also points out that she supported the bipartisan deal that Trump nuked.

It’s not about Trump either. So please stay on topic.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It’s not about Trump either. So please stay on topic.

A significant portion of the article in your OP are criticisms of the lack of specificity in her platform. By comparing hers to Trump's, I'm illustrating how that lack of specificity is typical for a public campaign platform like this.

Would you like to "double down" on your author's double standards or would you rather acknowledge that they're non-issues?

 

[Hammster]

A significant portion of the article in your OP are criticisms of the lack of specificity in her platform. By comparing hers to Trump's, I'm illustrating how that lack of specificity is typical for a public campaign platform like this.

Would you like to "double down" on your author's double standards or would you rather acknowledge that they're non-issues?

Again, it’s not about Trump. If you want to discuss him and his policies, start a thread.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Again, it’s not about Trump. If you want to discuss him and his policies, start a thread.

I already explained that I'm addressing the complaints in your article.

To put a finer point on it - many (perhaps most) of your author's complaints are built on double standards that only trick people who haven't read and compared both platforms. They are not substantive critiques; they are lazy complaints intended to rile up the ignorant in his audience whom he has successfully duped. Would I love more substance in the platforms? Absolutely. But shallow platitudes are, unfortunately, normal.

How's that for addressing the OP w/o mentioning Trump?

 

[Hammster]

I already explained that I'm addressing the complaints in your article.

To put a finer point on it - many (perhaps most) of your author's complaints are built on double standards that only trick people who haven't read and compared both platforms. They are not substantive critiques; they are lazy complaints intended to rile up the ignorant in his audience whom he has successfully duped. Would I love more substance in the platforms? Absolutely. But shallow platitudes are, unfortunately, normal.

How's that for addressing the OP w/o mentioning Trump?

I guess a genetic fallacy is on topic.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I guess a genetic fallacy is on topic.

I didn’t commit a genetic fallacy.

 

[wing2000]

Is this to suggest that Biden isn't in favor of Harris' planned tax cuts?

You can suggest all you want. I didn't think we were discussing Biden in this thread (?)

 

[probinson]

You can suggest all you want. I didn't think we were discussing Biden in this thread (?)

I thought that's what you were suggesting by pointing out that a potential reason that the tax cuts weren't implemented is because Harris isn't the President. Do you think that Biden and Harris have very different ideas and policies concerning these proposed tax breaks?

 

[wing2000]

I thought that's what you were suggesting by pointing out that a potential reason that the tax cuts weren't implemented is because Harris isn't the President. Do you think that Biden and Harris have very different ideas and policies concerning these proposed tax breaks?

I was responding to the Op who quoted:

Harris Doubles Down On Failed Policies In Newly Unveiled Platform

Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz doubled down on supporting failed policies in their newly released policy platform, which they unveiled just hours before this week’s presidential debate against former President Donald Trump.The roughly 4,500-word platform was heavy on...

www.dailywire.com

She branded her agenda as a “New Way Forward” despite her already being at the helm for nearly four years in the Biden-Harris administration. Nowhere in her platform did she explain how her approach would differ from what she is currently doing.

The op want's it both ways:
Harris is not proposing anything different. And when I highlighted the tax credits, he ask why isn't she doing it now.

Vice Presidents do not set policy. The President does. Of course a VP can influence a POTUS, but it is the exception. Most notably that occurred with Dick Cheney and George W Bush (i..e the Iraq invasion), but there no indication that Harris has the same influence over BIden.