Kamala Harris for Pres

[Bawse Dawg]

You do realize that isn't a comment on how good or bad Kamala's interview was, right? The coverage on the internet runs the full range. If you only took in one point of view everywhere you looked, that speaks to being in a silo. At least JF can provide some balance to your info diet, so that is good.

I've seen the interview. If someone grilled Trump half that hard or unfairly in an interview he'd flip a table, walk out, and bitch about it on Not Twitter.

Yet people here would have you believe Trump is constantly taking on tough interviews.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

I've seen the interview. If someone grilled Trump half that hard or unfairly ...

Which of those questions did you think was unfair?

 

[fishonjazz]

Quick interviews with a plan to cover a wide range of topics aren't a format that allows a deep dive into details. Even if Trump could give a detailed explanation on how those policies would work, and I don't think he could, that doesn't mean the details aren't available. The reason making tips free from taxes won't explode the deficit is because those paying tips contribute almost nothing to the federal budget. The bottom 50% of income earners make up only 2.3% of tax revenues. Generally speaking, those paying tips and those making overtime aren't the top 1%. They are the working men and women. A tax cut to overtime and tips would make a big difference to those in the bottom 50% of income earners while having almost no impact at all on the amount of tax revenue coming in to the federal coffers.

As for tariffs, use Trump's first term as an example of how they'd work. Most of the time they never become reality. He only uses them as a threat to get better terms in a deal. In the instances where he does impose them, everyone sees the wisdom in it as exemplified by his tariffs on Chinese electric cars which the Biden administration kept in place.

So tips and overtime do make a difference in government income. Just a small amount. He at the same time wants to cut taxes for everyone including the large amount of tax revenues. So cut tax on the large tax revenue and the small tax revenue. Your post didn't do anything to alleviate the concern of what cutting taxing on everyone all over the place would do to tax revenue.

As for tariffs, trumps first term and current tariffs used by the biden admin are a poor example of how they would work since those tariffs are just a drop in the bucket for what trump is saying he will do in a second term tariff wise. I guess you could say trump is simply lying about all this stuff and that would make complete sense. It would not however explain how his lies, if actually enacted, would not explode the deficit and increase inflation.

 

[fishonjazz]

To me, the most interesting thing about the Bret Baier - Kamala Harris interview wasn't in the questions asked or answers given. It was in the stage managing. Kamala clearly only has limited number of memorized talking points, and if you are already a Kamala supporter, the answers are fine. Kamala showed up 30 minutes late and informed Fox News the interview had to be cut short, which forced Bret to trim the number of questions thereby cutting the chances Bret would ask her something out of left field she was unprepared to answer.

That weird room they are in with a hard back wall reflected sound which allowed you to hear the people standing behind the camera. When Bret would ask a pointed question and Kamala would start to get angry, you could hear the rustling of her handlers, and finally at the end they put a stop to the interview. The people who know Kamala best, her campaign staff, knows there isn't anything behind the false front and they worked hard to keep that hidden. Part of me believes the Fox crew knew exactly what they were doing when they set the venue up that way.

Now contrast that with Trump in the Bloomberg interview, the NABJ interview, or any of his hostile interviews. There were no handlers seeking to contain Trump, no limits set by Trump on the amount of time, and no limits on questions. Trump walks out and Trump handles it how he sees fit. Some may detest the substance and other revere the substance, but everyone can see there is substance there. That is clearly not the case with Kamala.

lol

 

[Bawse Dawg]

Which of those questions did you think was unfair?

When did I mention unfair questions? She was treated unfairly in general. The first few minutes she is just being completely talked over. The interviewer obviously had an agenda. And she handled herself pretty well.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Your post didn't do anything to alleviate the concern of what cutting taxing on everyone all over the place would do to tax revenue.

It isn't on everyone all over the place, which is where the tariffs come in.

Aside from the genuine protectionism such as Chinese electric cars, and use to gain leverage in negations such as with Canada to negotiate NAFTA into USMCA, do you remember the conversation about tax avoidance by American megacorps using tax haven, and how it gave an unfair competitive advantage over Mom & Pop shops?

Hopefully that's another thing that gets cracked down on. Go after megacorp for that ******** as well

As for Mom and pop shop going out of business because they can't pay the corporate tax rate... Easy fix. Don't hit mom and pop shop with the corporate tax rate.

Tariffs are how you crack down on that and don't hit mom and pop shops. As it stands now, USA Megacorp can use an Irish subsidiary to avoid paying taxes to America. With the tariffs in place, a megacorp doing that will have to pay the tariff. If USA Megacorp manufactures and sells in the US then they'll pay taxes, and if they use a tax haven subsidiary then they'll pay tariffs, but either way they'll pay.

What Trump is proposing is to reduce the tax burden of Sarah the waitress, and making it up 50x over by finally getting Google, Apple, Microsoft, Intel, and every other Silicon Valley company who has been offshoring profits to start paying in to US tax revenue.

 

[Eminence]

Tariffs are significantly passed onto the consumer (largely at the lower classes because that's the majority of people), you're living in lala land if you think Mega Caps are going to absorb the majority of the hit from any tariffs (unless you're also introducing price control on those mega caps at the same time).

Tips are stupid in every form, sure axe the tax and axe the social practice while we're at it.

Trumps Tariffs that I've seen proposed (10-20% on everything and 50%+ on China) are particularly dumb. Tariffs could be effective when focused on certain industries we're looking to mainting/return/build stateside (eg electric cars/semiconductors in recent years).

 

[fishonjazz]

It isn't on everyone all over the place, which is where the tariffs come in.

Aside from the genuine protectionism such as Chinese electric cars, and use to gain leverage in negations such as with Canada to negotiate NAFTA into USMCA, do you remember the conversation about tax avoidance by American megacorps using tax haven, and how it gave an unfair competitive advantage over Mom & Pop shops?



Tariffs are how you crack down on that and don't hit mom and pop shops. As it stands now, USA Megacorp can use an Irish subsidiary to avoid paying taxes to America. With the tariffs in place, a megacorp doing that will have to pay the tariff. If USA Megacorp manufactures and sells in the US then they'll pay taxes, and if they use a tax haven subsidiary then they'll pay tariffs, but either way they'll pay.

What Trump is proposing is to reduce the tax burden of Sarah the waitress, and making it up 50x over by finally getting Google, Apple, Microsoft, Intel, and every other Silicon Valley company who has been offshoring profits to start paying in to US tax revenue.

You said the tariffs are already in plus. PLUS we haven't got rid of taxes on tips, or the rich, or social security, or overtime, etc. So the deficit is certainly dropping like crazy right now. Thats nice at least.
Also, you seem to be putting words in trumps mouth. I have yet to hear trump propose to get the rich (google, apple, microsoft, intel, etc) to start paying in to US tax revenue. That would be such an easy response for him to provide when asked these questions about how his tariffs will not hurt the economy. Interesting...
But ya, im sure that google, apple, microsoft, intel, etc will simply start paying into the tax revenue without trying to offset that loss of profit in some way............... Sure.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

You said the tariffs are already in plus.

I said the tariff on Chinese electric cars is already in place. Trump put it in place before he left office and the Biden administration has kept it while at the same time complaining about Trump wanting tariffs.

There are no broad tariffs on tax haven countries currently in place. Those would be a game changer.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Tariffs are significantly passed onto the consumer

So are taxes.

What I object to is the ability of megacorps to corner the market via the cost advantage of not having to price in taxes due to offshoring profits while mom and pop shops do have to price in the cost of paying taxes. I fully acknowledge that such a move to make the products of megacorps price in taxes the same as mom and pop shops do will lead to higher prices from megacorps, prices that will be in line with the products from mom and pop shops. I am all for closing this loophole to make a more completive market where start-ups aren't being shut out by structural tax laws intended to ensure the dominance of trillion dollar multinationals.

 

[Eminence]

So are taxes.

What I object to is the ability of megacorps to corner the market via the cost advantage of not having to price in taxes due to offshoring profits while mom and pop shops do have to price in the cost of paying taxes. I fully acknowledge that such a move to make the products of megacorps price in taxes the same as mom and pop shops do will lead to higher prices from megacorps, prices that will be in line with the products from mom and pop shops. I am all for closing this loophole to make a more completive market where start-ups aren't being shut out by structural tax laws intended to ensure the dominance of trillion dollar multinationals.

Mega Caps corner the market through scale, not tax evasion through tax havens. Go after those Mega Caps that are. Go after those havens enabling it, don't kneecap global trade and the American working class while you're at it.

 

[fishonjazz]

I said the tariff on Chinese electric cars is already in place. Trump put it in place before he left office and the Biden administration has kept it while at the same time complaining about Trump wanting tariffs.

There are no broad tariffs on tax haven countries currently in place. Those would be a game changer.

Also, you seem to be putting words in trumps mouth. I have yet to hear trump propose to get the rich (google, apple, microsoft, intel, etc) to start paying in to US tax revenue. That would be such an easy response for him to provide when asked these questions about how his tariffs will not hurt the economy.

 

[fishonjazz]

So are taxes.

What I object to is the ability of megacorps to corner the market via the cost advantage of not having to price in taxes due to offshoring profits while mom and pop shops do have to price in the cost of paying taxes. I fully acknowledge that such a move to make the products of megacorps price in taxes the same as mom and pop shops do will lead to higher prices from megacorps, prices that will be in line with the products from mom and pop shops. I am all for closing this loophole to make a more completive market where start-ups aren't being shut out by structural tax laws intended to ensure the dominance of trillion dollar multinationals.

Why doesn't trump say, like you did, that these tariffs will lead to higher prices? I mean all the economic experts tell him that and he disagrees with them (and you). Is he just super dumb or something?

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Why doesn't trump say, like you did, that these tariffs will lead to higher prices? I mean all the economic experts tell him that and he disagrees with them (and you). Is he just super dumb or something?

Sorta. He is not a super genius. Many of the things he talks about he understand at a surface level, and sometimes not even that. A few weeks ago he addressed as issue in California that is a real issue, but it is three different issues all working in tandem to each create part of the problem having to do with California's water supply. I can tell that someone explained the issue to him, and he got the prescription correct, but in his telling the three issues were put in a mental blender that made no sense and sounded like he thought there was a secret canal from Canada. He is not the Trump of 2016, and definitely not the Trump of the 1990's.

The issues of offshoring profits is an issue that is difficult to combat due to limits on jurisdiction, the boatloads of cash being dumped into politics by those taking advantage of the loopholes, and the friendly relationships we have with some of the countries involved. Bombing Ireland because their corporate tax rates are too low isn't reality. Generally speaking, I am in staunch opposition to protectionism. I have always opposed tariffs, but I can see how if tailored correctly they could be used to stop the issue of offshoring profits.

 

[fishonjazz]

Sorta. He is not a super genius. Many of the things he talks about he understand at a surface level, and sometimes not even that. A few weeks ago he addressed as issue in California that is a real issue, but it is three different issues all working in tandem to each create part of the problem having to do with California's water supply. I can tell that someone explained the issue to him, and he got the prescription correct, but in his telling the three issues were put in a mental blender that made no sense and sounded like he thought there was a secret canal from Canada. He is not the Trump of 2016, and definitely not the Trump of the 1990's.

The issues of offshoring profits is an issue that is difficult to combat due to limits on jurisdiction, the boatloads of cash being dumped into politics by those taking advantage of the loopholes, and the friendly relationships we have with some of the countries involved. Bombing Ireland because their corporate tax rates are too low isn't reality. Generally speaking, I am in staunch opposition to protectionism. I have always opposed tariffs, but I can see how if tailored correctly they could be used to stop the issue of offshoring profits.

trump disagrees with you regarding tariffs

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Go after those Mega Caps that are. Go after those havens enabling it

Let's hear a realistic proposal on how you think it should be addressed if not via tailored tariffs. How would you stop Google, who is the biggest lobbyist there is, from offshoring profits to Ireland?

 

[Al-O-Meter]

trump disagrees with you

Doesn't bother me at all. I don't vote for or against Trump because of what he says. I vote for him because of the policies he puts in place.

 

[fishonjazz]

Doesn't bother me at all. I don't vote for or against Trump because of what he says. I vote for him because of the policies he puts in place.

But in the past you seemed to not like policies that cause inflation. In this instance you do.
I think you vote for trump because R
You love your party more than your country. Nothing more

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[Al-O-Meter]

But in the past you seemed to not like policies that cause inflation. In this instance you do.
I think you vote for trump because R
You love your party more than your country. Nothing more

My party is Libertarian. That is undoubtedly a major contributor to what makes me so insufferable.

 

[Mongoose]

Also, you seem to be putting words in trumps mouth. I have yet to hear trump propose to get the rich (google, apple, microsoft, intel, etc) to start paying in to US tax revenue. That would be such an easy response for him to provide when asked these questions about how his tariffs will not hurt the economy.

He talked about this today on PBD's broadcast. Trump mentioned that when he was president he imposed tariffs on apple and provided them a 1 year waiver on the tariffs for building phones in China. Trump spoke with Cook and they had concerns about Apples ability to compete with Samsung because Samsung phones were being built in Korea and didn't have the same tariffs. Trump provided the waiver with the understanding that Apple would start to manufacture phones in America. Apple built a facility in Texas, but they haven't moved much else because there's been a change in management within the USA.