Kamala's New Economic Agenda (A disappointment)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jp1

Has anyone crunched the numbers on what would happen if investment income was charged the same tax rate as ‘earned’ income and if that same investment income also had to pay social security and Medicare taxes? And if people who have high ‘earned’ income had to pay social security taxes on all their ‘earned’ income? Just those changes could probably go a long way towards solving the budget concerns that ‘balanced budget’ people worry about.

As someone who only pays social security taxes the first half of the year I’d rather pay the full year if it meant social security wouldn’t go broke at the same time I’m ready to start collecting. No I can’t live off social security but I also can’t live comfortably in retirement without it.

---

i’m not dismissing your proposal out of hand, and I’m not being disrespectful, but I can assure you that billions of words have been written in proposals and studies having to do with new tax strategies. I’m sure your ideas have been examined. Why don’t you search for them and tell us what you find.

Quote:

---

and fill the job vacuum with American citizens, which I can guess comes down to us white folk who generally won't do cement work, roofing, or landscaping.

---

won't at this point but that wasn't always true. It was a deliberate switch to immigrants. So I've known people who fled back to the construction trades from office work when they got sick of office work back when there was some employment there. Not saying it's better than office work, that's individual, who am I to say. But there may just be enough other work at this point (employment nearly full) that people don't have to do construction etc. if they don't want to. But I bet that unionized construction work (for govt) is not running off illegal immigrants even now. I do think construction is different than say agriculture, agriculture has been immigrants for a very very very long time. That is work you won't get people to do maybe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore

won't at this point but that wasn't always true. It was a deliberate switch to immigrants. So I've known people who fled back to the construction trades from office work when they got sick of office work back when there was some employment there. Not saying it's better than office work, that's individual, who am I to say. But there may just be enough other work at this point (employment nearly full) that people don't have to do construction etc. if they don't want to. But I bet that unionized construction work (for govt) is not running off illegal immigrants even now. I do think construction is different than say agriculture, agriculture has been immigrants for a very very very long time. That is work you won't get people to do maybe.

---

there is already a well established pipeline for “green “immigrant workers meaning people in the green industry. If additional workers are needed, just push through more worker applications in the already established process.

I don’t know if there is a similar process for low skilled construction work workers.

I’m going to start another separate thread about immigration because it’s a big topic.

On investment income, particularly capital gains, it is "complicated".

For example:

https://taxfoundation.org/research/a...capital-gains/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

On investment income, particularly capital gains, it is "complicated".

For example:

https://taxfoundation.org/research/a...capital-gains/

---

Very true. A real loss can get transformed into a nominal gain for tax purposes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

i’m not dismissing your proposal out of hand, and I’m not being disrespectful, but I can assure you that billions of words have been written in proposals and studies having to do with new tax strategies. I’m sure your ideas have been examined. Why don’t you search for them and tell us what you find.

---

https://www.alternet.org/the-real-fi...cial-security/

I see the candidate’s press bodyguards are scolding us for thinking she’s proposing price controls.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/21/b...groceries.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...Q9lSFdsDty1fbQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

I see the candidate’s press bodyguards are scolding us for thinking she’s proposing price controls.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/21/b...groceries.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...Q9lSFdsDty1fbQ

---

It's just a much-needed attempt at clarification which I imagine will be explained in greater depth over time. I, too, am mystified as to how a ban on price-gouging will be executed but I don't consider myself scolded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

It's just a much-needed attempt at clarification which I imagine will be explained in greater depth over time. I, too, am mystified as to how a ban on price-gouging will be executed but I don't consider myself scolded.

---

I somehow doubt clarity is the objective.

They want to generate vaguely positive feelings without revealing how the sausage will be made. At least until after the election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

I somehow doubt clarity is the objective.

They want to generate vaguely positive feelings without revealing how the sausage will be made. At least until after the election.

---

Kamala's embryonic policies are still questionable to be sure, at least to me, but I go back time and time again about the contagion of a positive outlook on the wellbeing of the country. Policies matter, and of course "it's the economy stupid" in large part, but right now I'm anticipating a tasty sausage over the reheated TV dinner that Trump is serving.