didnt seem that obvious to me pacino, but yes, she is your favorite. we know!

CalvinBall wrote:didnt seem that obvious to me pacino, but yes, she is your favorite. we know!

I agree. Not obvious to me either. I haven't read the actual proposals yet but if you are using an annual tax measured on property as your example, then I would have assumed she was referring to annual tax on property. Not a tax on income.

We have a personal property tax here in Arkansas. While it doesn't cover Rembrandts (at least as far as I'm aware) it does cover your vehicle. I believe it's limited to vehicles since through registration, the state knows what you own.

I wonder how many people in the audience flipped it in their head and said, "That's right, it's crazy, we should also get rid of property taxes."

Squire wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:didnt seem that obvious to me pacino, but yes, she is your favorite. we know!

I agree. Not obvious to me either. I haven't read the actual proposals yet but if you are using an annual tax measured on property as your example, then I would have assumed she was referring to annual tax on property. Not a tax on income.

It would apply to those things. Elizabeth Warren Wants a Wealth Tax. How Would That Even Work?

It would work a little like the property tax that most cities and states impose on real estate, an annual payment tied to the value of assets rather than income. But instead of applying just to homes and land, it would apply to everything: fine art collections, yachts and privately held businesses.

Other countries do have wealth taxes. In France, there's a cap, so the wealth tax doesn't exceed more than 75% of income.

CalvinBall wrote:didnt seem that obvious to me pacino, but yes, she is your favorite. we know!

I apparently missed him posting about AOC. What now?

Monkeyboy wrote:I wonder how many people in the audience flipped it in their head and said, "That's right, it's crazy, we should also get rid of property taxes."

Or that renters should be taxed, too.

Renters are taxed, and at least some places, landlords are permitted to increase rents without notice if there's a property tax increase.

saw a beto for america sign on the way to work this morning. first sign of any dem candidate i have seen.

CalvinBall wrote:saw a beto for america sign on the way to work this morning. first sign of any dem candidate i have seen.

You live near Beto?

i live in pennslyvania

Was it one of his left over signs from his Texas run? There were a bunch in NoVa. That felt really weird to me.

No it was a Beto for America sign as I said

CalvinBall wrote: Beto for America

Doesn't mean anything to me. Guess I wish him luck becoming America. A continent is a big aspiration. Though he was one of the pantheon running for president.

slugsrbad wrote:Stolen Fromm Dave Weigel’s twitter feed.

Warren explaining the wealth tax: "How many people here own a home?" Most hands go up. "You’ve been paying a wealth tax for years. They just call it a property tax. I just want their tax to include the diamonds, the yachts, and the Rembrandts."

I forget if I had #1 but she’s moving into that spot for me I think.

"Don't worry, it won't have much of an effect on you. Just really rich people. It will be awhile before this particular tax gets twisted around and harms the middle class."

Please, just fix carried interest and roll back the tax breaks on high incomes. And communicate how healthcare will be protected. Running on a wealth tax might be the only way that Trump wins.

For someone so intelligent it's a pretty harebrained political idea.

It's a good idea if its enforceable and it's only on the top 1 or 0.5% or whatever. No reason the rich should be able to park wealth in millions of dollars of stocks that pay them 100k in dividends a year. Yes, I know those are taxed but it's sometimes not enough to only go after the passive income.

Overall it's a sound message. The system is rigged against you if you are in the 90, 95, 99%. It's time to take some back from those who have benefited the most.

It’s a political loser. One thing the Republicans have shown us since Reagan is that most Americans vote not as the workers they are and are likely to remain but as the wealthy business owners they expect to be someday. The Republicans will have a field day with this proposal, convincing the average American (whether true or not) that their campers, jet skis and those diamond earrings they inherited from their Aunt Helen are going to be taxed. They’ll label is something like “Taxing the American Dream” and convince voters it’s just another step towards socialism. It’s playing right into their hands.

Makes sense in the Reagan era. That will resonate less and less with younger people who have never seen even a glimmer of hope to get to that point.