VAT is regressive and has no place in a Democratic primary.
Making the benefits an either/or proposition gives the game away. Once people are on Yang’s UBI they will dismantle welfare across the board and give the wealthy a big break from entitlement spending.
Yang is incredibly disingenuous about what he wants to do and why he is doing it.
A VAT in isolation is regressive, but in used in conjunction with a progressive income tax and generous transfer payments and social services can be a perfectly useful part of progressive policy. The EU by law requires that all its member countries have a VAT of at least 15%.
The core problem with Yang's proposal isn't the funding, it's that he's forcing people to choose between the UBI payment and their current benefits.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
+6
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
VAT is extremely regressive and harms most people. UBI will be inflationary, and it's not clear that stimulus will counteract that, especially with a VAT draining profit from every step of every purchase like a supercharged sales tax.
A 10% Value-Added Tax *on its own* is regressive. But, combined with a $1,000/month UBI for every adult, is very progressive. It represents an increase in buying power for roughly 87% of Americans. Those people who are getting more than $12,000/year from mutually exclusive benefits (like SNAP and TANF) already (which is a very small percentage) would be protected by having their programs compensate for the VAT.
When it comes to inflation, I’m not an economist, but according to the Quantity Theory of Money (QToM), no, because there is no more money in the system, it is simply moved around.
This is the first I've heard of the bolded.
The problem with Yangs idea is that because it is a sales tax, it must be set to be a rate such that the mean purchaser of VAT eligable goods pays the mean tax contribution and receives no net effect from the program. Someone who buys less than the mean amount of goods will receive a credit, someone who buys more will pay a tax, but that tax will be based on the amount of GOODS they purchase, not their income or wealth. It is trivially easy for the richest to avoid, considering they buy far fewer goods in the US than their income would 'predict', and have far more options to purchase, use, and store goods overseas.
UBI should be paid for by a wealth tax or an income tax. Otherwise it will always end up being a targeted transfer between those in the 60th-80th percentiles of wealth to those below them. You MIGHT be able to jerry rig some nonsense to make a VAT progressive, but it will NEVER be as progressive as an income tax would have been if it funded the same program.
Going overseas is an extremely effective way to avoid a wealth tax.
Umm, not really.
US citizens still need to file taxes every year, even if you're overseas. If you make enough money, you still need to pay taxes, on both your US income and any foreign earned income as well.
The only way the rich can fully avoid the tax man at all is by going overseas and renouncing their citizenship.
I think I'm picking up on undefined yet real anti-Warren sentiment in the party establishment. Am I way off base here?
The donors are terrified of her. The establishment and the consultants who live in perpetual fear of getting McGovern'd and think it is always either 1972 or 1984 think she will get crushed.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
+13
Options
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
Joe Biden had a town hall thingy on CNN last night. Let's see what he had to say.
Biden continued to characterize Warren as "angry" and "elitist," saying her health care plan is driven by a belief that "people can't make up their own mind."
Biden has escalated his criticism of Warren over that comment in recent days. In a Medium post published last week, he wrote that Warren, without naming her, was "condescending" and "representative of an elitism that working and middle class people do not share."
"You like your health insurance," he said, then dropped to a lower voice: "'But you shouldn't like your health insurance, you should have to give that up. I'm going to demand you not have that. We're going to give you something better.'"
"It's not about her, it's about the attitude out there -- the attitude that we know best, you do it my way."
He added: "I resent that. And I wasn't talking about her, I was talking about the attitude that if you don't agree with me, get in the other party."
Still, Biden said, "I honest to God believe, with Trump out of the way, you're going to find people screwing up a lot more courage than they had before to say, 'OK, OK, I can move now, I have more leeway.'"
Biden didn't explain why, if Republicans had been unbending before Trump due to concerns that they'd anger their conservative base, they'd be more willing to work with Democrats after his departure.
Fuck on off outta here Joe. You're using goddamn republican talking points to criticize Warren.
I think I'm picking up on undefined yet real anti-Warren sentiment in the party establishment. Am I way off base here?
The donors are terrified of her. The establishment and the consultants who live in perpetual fear of getting McGovern'd and think it is always either 1972 or 1984 think she will get crushed.
Even worse, she and Bernie also challenge the status quo in a way that might cost them some money.
VAT is extremely regressive and harms most people. UBI will be inflationary, and it's not clear that stimulus will counteract that, especially with a VAT draining profit from every step of every purchase like a supercharged sales tax.
A 10% Value-Added Tax *on its own* is regressive. But, combined with a $1,000/month UBI for every adult, is very progressive. It represents an increase in buying power for roughly 87% of Americans. Those people who are getting more than $12,000/year from mutually exclusive benefits (like SNAP and TANF) already (which is a very small percentage) would be protected by having their programs compensate for the VAT.
When it comes to inflation, I’m not an economist, but according to the Quantity Theory of Money (QToM), no, because there is no more money in the system, it is simply moved around.
This is the first I've heard of the bolded.
The problem with Yangs idea is that because it is a sales tax, it must be set to be a rate such that the mean purchaser of VAT eligable goods pays the mean tax contribution and receives no net effect from the program. Someone who buys less than the mean amount of goods will receive a credit, someone who buys more will pay a tax, but that tax will be based on the amount of GOODS they purchase, not their income or wealth. It is trivially easy for the richest to avoid, considering they buy far fewer goods in the US than their income would 'predict', and have far more options to purchase, use, and store goods overseas.
UBI should be paid for by a wealth tax or an income tax. Otherwise it will always end up being a targeted transfer between those in the 60th-80th percentiles of wealth to those below them. You MIGHT be able to jerry rig some nonsense to make a VAT progressive, but it will NEVER be as progressive as an income tax would have been if it funded the same program.
Going overseas is an extremely effective way to avoid a wealth tax.
Umm, not really.
US citizens still need to file taxes every year, even if you're overseas. If you make enough money, you still need to pay taxes, on both your US income and any foreign earned income as well.
The only way the rich can fully avoid the tax man at all is by going overseas and renouncing their citizenship.
Also, most people don't want to live overseas. Complain as much as they want, a wealth tax wouldn't actually affect the super rich in any way they'd notice. Certainly not compared to uprooting their whole lives to go live somewhere else.
It's one thing to leave your life behind because you actually want to live somewhere else. Quite another because you want your net worth to be 1.4 billion instead of 1.3 billion.
Biden continued to characterize Warren as "angry" and "elitist," saying her health care plan is driven by a belief that "people can't make up their own mind."
Biden has escalated his criticism of Warren over that comment in recent days. In a Medium post published last week, he wrote that Warren, without naming her, was "condescending" and "representative of an elitism that working and middle class people do not share."
"You like your health insurance," he said, then dropped to a lower voice: "'But you shouldn't like your health insurance, you should have to give that up. I'm going to demand you not have that. We're going to give you something better.'"
"It's not about her, it's about the attitude out there -- the attitude that we know best, you do it my way."
He added: "I resent that. And I wasn't talking about her, I was talking about the attitude that if you don't agree with me, get in the other party."
Still, Biden said, "I honest to God believe, with Trump out of the way, you're going to find people screwing up a lot more courage than they had before to say, 'OK, OK, I can move now, I have more leeway.'"
Biden didn't explain why, if Republicans had been unbending before Trump due to concerns that they'd anger their conservative base, they'd be more willing to work with Democrats after his departure.
Fuck on off outta here Joe. You're using goddamn republican talking points to criticize Warren.
Honestly can we just get Bloomberg to run just to tank Biden? Like, let's solve the rat problem with snakes, let's just see what happens.
Biden continued to characterize Warren as "angry" and "elitist," saying her health care plan is driven by a belief that "people can't make up their own mind."
Biden has escalated his criticism of Warren over that comment in recent days. In a Medium post published last week, he wrote that Warren, without naming her, was "condescending" and "representative of an elitism that working and middle class people do not share."
"You like your health insurance," he said, then dropped to a lower voice: "'But you shouldn't like your health insurance, you should have to give that up. I'm going to demand you not have that. We're going to give you something better.'"
"It's not about her, it's about the attitude out there -- the attitude that we know best, you do it my way."
He added: "I resent that. And I wasn't talking about her, I was talking about the attitude that if you don't agree with me, get in the other party."
Still, Biden said, "I honest to God believe, with Trump out of the way, you're going to find people screwing up a lot more courage than they had before to say, 'OK, OK, I can move now, I have more leeway.'"
Biden didn't explain why, if Republicans had been unbending before Trump due to concerns that they'd anger their conservative base, they'd be more willing to work with Democrats after his departure.
Fuck on off outta here Joe. You're using goddamn republican talking points to criticize Warren.
Honestly can we just get Bloomberg to run just to tank Biden? Like, let's solve the rat problem with snakes, let's just see what happens.
Who is the metaphorical Gorilla?
+2
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
VAT is extremely regressive and harms most people. UBI will be inflationary, and it's not clear that stimulus will counteract that, especially with a VAT draining profit from every step of every purchase like a supercharged sales tax.
A 10% Value-Added Tax *on its own* is regressive. But, combined with a $1,000/month UBI for every adult, is very progressive. It represents an increase in buying power for roughly 87% of Americans. Those people who are getting more than $12,000/year from mutually exclusive benefits (like SNAP and TANF) already (which is a very small percentage) would be protected by having their programs compensate for the VAT.
When it comes to inflation, I’m not an economist, but according to the Quantity Theory of Money (QToM), no, because there is no more money in the system, it is simply moved around.
This is the first I've heard of the bolded.
The problem with Yangs idea is that because it is a sales tax, it must be set to be a rate such that the mean purchaser of VAT eligable goods pays the mean tax contribution and receives no net effect from the program. Someone who buys less than the mean amount of goods will receive a credit, someone who buys more will pay a tax, but that tax will be based on the amount of GOODS they purchase, not their income or wealth. It is trivially easy for the richest to avoid, considering they buy far fewer goods in the US than their income would 'predict', and have far more options to purchase, use, and store goods overseas.
UBI should be paid for by a wealth tax or an income tax. Otherwise it will always end up being a targeted transfer between those in the 60th-80th percentiles of wealth to those below them. You MIGHT be able to jerry rig some nonsense to make a VAT progressive, but it will NEVER be as progressive as an income tax would have been if it funded the same program.
Going overseas is an extremely effective way to avoid a wealth tax.
Umm, not really.
US citizens still need to file taxes every year, even if you're overseas. If you make enough money, you still need to pay taxes, on both your US income and any foreign earned income as well.
The only way the rich can fully avoid the tax man at all is by going overseas and renouncing their citizenship.
Don't even get me started. Promising to do something about that would pique my interest in virtually any of the candidates. Right now between the foreign earned income exclusion and the foreign tax credit the whole thing means that a lot of people do a lot of paperwork in order to not pay anything to the IRS. Even just letting people sign a single page document that says that they lived overseas for 330 days in the past year and made less that some dollar value so they're in the clear would be a huge improvement on the situation.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
I'm fact this is not the first time she's seems to be on friendly terms with one of Trump's earliest supporters, having given him her support when he was appointed to the ambassador job.
I'm not sure what to think of this. Seems like it got some people upset, but maybe it's just what politicians do?
"Simple, real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time." -Mustrum Ridcully in Terry Pratchett's Hogfather p. 142 (HarperPrism 1996)
VAT is regressive and has no place in a Democratic primary.
Making the benefits an either/or proposition gives the game away. Once people are on Yang’s UBI they will dismantle welfare across the board and give the wealthy a big break from entitlement spending.
Yang is incredibly disingenuous about what he wants to do and why he is doing it.
A VAT in isolation is regressive, but in used in conjunction with a progressive income tax and generous transfer payments and social services can be a perfectly useful part of progressive policy. The EU by law requires that all its member countries have a VAT of at least 15%.
The core problem with Yang's proposal isn't the funding, it's that he's forcing people to choose between the UBI payment and their current benefits.
I would agree that there's nothing "wrong" with a VAT as a source of funding. However, if your goal is to reduce inequality, poverty, etc., then *both* the funding source and the choose-your-poison nature of the plan hurt the goals. Yang's plan has multiple really dumb things about it, all making it less effective at what it wants to do without reducing the political effort required to do it.
I'm fact this is not the first time she's seems to be on friendly terms with one of Trump's earliest supporters, having given him her support when he was appointed to the ambassador job.
I'm not sure what to think of this. Seems like it got some people upset, but maybe it's just what politicians do?
I'm fact this is not the first time she's seems to be on friendly terms with one of Trump's earliest supporters, having given him her support when he was appointed to the ambassador job.
I'm not sure what to think of this. Seems like it got some people upset, but maybe it's just what politicians do?
Either to avoid being painted as "petty" or to more easily paint Brown as the same.
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Not acting like a petulant toddler towards a political opponent is in fact normal behavior, despite what the last 3 years might make you think.
+30
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Warren is either too nice to her political opponents or she’s an angry elitist partisan fighter
One of the main ways sexism operates is by setting up these damned if you do, damned if you don’t traps, so that it can hammer you no matter what direction you go in but always tell you it’s your fault for not going in the other direction.
Why the heck are so many people looking to jump in now despite Biden support still being pretty steady?
If I didn't know any better, especially with what's getting thrown at the race, I'd think they're trying a different strategy to break that steady support. Not by offering major differences but by offering similar options to biden that aren't biden.
Why the heck are so many people looking to jump in now despite Biden support still being pretty steady?
Because they think his numbers are soft, because his fundraising was kinda shit last quarter and because they've watched the same shit we have over the past many months with Biden and his performance. They are terrified he's going to blow it and terrified someone like Sanders or Warren is gonna run away with it and since none of the other options are doing well they are looking for someone within the circle of upper level democratic politics to fly in and save them.
+9
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Why the heck are so many people looking to jump in now despite Biden support still being pretty steady?
Assuming a post early state Biden collapse and positioning to inherit his constituency on the supposition that Pete can't pull it off?
Pete's not super popular with African American voters, but I'm pretty sure that Bloomberg isn't going to do any better there. Not sure about this ex-Gov. Patrick dude. He worked at the NAACP and was in the DoJ as the AAG for civil rights. Fun thing is that he's currently an MD at Bain, so that'll be sure to win him fans. Plus there's a few skeletons in his closet from his time as Governor, so that's just great.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
+1
Options
KoopahTroopahThe koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered Userregular
At least it's not another old white man but OH MY GOD COME ON STOP IT
Tweet Text. Jonathon Martin is a journalist for the New York Times.
NEWS: @DevalPatrick is considering a last-minute entry into the presidential race
And his Mass allies are already putting out feelers in early states.
Decision imminent: NH filing deadline is Friday
Deval Patrick, Ex-Governor of Massachusetts, Is Considering 2020 Presidential Race
Days after Michael Bloomberg began taking steps to enter the 2020 race, Mr. Patrick’s conversations with top Democrats are the latest evidence of an unsettled presidential primary field. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/us/politics/deval-patrick-2020-president.html
mentions A little more:
One potential hire: Jen Liu, an old Deval aide who had been national finance dir for Kamala but was laid off.
A pitfall: two of his longtime aides are spoken for. Doug Rubin is w Steyer, John Walsh w Markey
Anncmt day being considered if it happens: Thursday.
Here we go: Deval told Biden in a phone call last week that he was thinking about getting in at last-minute, per a Dem familiar.
Not a heads up that he’s in but telling him he’s thinking about it
A two-term Mass governor, Deval could pose a challenge to Warren w the southern NH voters who know them both from the Boston market. But he also may be a factor in S Carolina, where over half the primary electorate will be African-American.
Deval has personally been in touch w potential staffers, said he’s likely to do it but has kept some wiggle room.
Deval and his advisers had a meeting in Boston Sunday to map out potential campaign, per two Dems familiar.
Also: Deval has talked w Obama in the past about a run and was in Chicago late last month w the former prez for meeting of the Obama Foundation
Again, quote and source your tweets please.
...but I agree ...what the fuck? We really need less candidates, not more.
I think they're seeing is that there isn't really a frontrunning consensus candidate who appeals to all parts of the coalition, and thinking "I could be that person!" Biden appeals to the older, more conservative, working/middle class parts of the base; Warren to the college-educated progressives; Bernie to younger voters. I thought maybe Harris would become that person who can hit on all quadrants, but that doesn't seem to have worked out.
Hard to see a Bain executive getting any traction in the current climate though.
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
I wonder who they could possibly put up that would actually siphon votes away from Warren or Sanders? These Hail Mary candidates really feel like they're going to drink Biden's (and each other's) milkshakes with little overlaps.
At least it's not another old white man but OH MY GOD COME ON STOP IT
Tweet Text. Jonathon Martin is a journalist for the New York Times.
NEWS: @DevalPatrick is considering a last-minute entry into the presidential race
And his Mass allies are already putting out feelers in early states.
Decision imminent: NH filing deadline is Friday
Deval Patrick, Ex-Governor of Massachusetts, Is Considering 2020 Presidential Race
Days after Michael Bloomberg began taking steps to enter the 2020 race, Mr. Patrick’s conversations with top Democrats are the latest evidence of an unsettled presidential primary field. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/us/politics/deval-patrick-2020-president.html
mentions A little more:
One potential hire: Jen Liu, an old Deval aide who had been national finance dir for Kamala but was laid off.
A pitfall: two of his longtime aides are spoken for. Doug Rubin is w Steyer, John Walsh w Markey
Anncmt day being considered if it happens: Thursday.
Here we go: Deval told Biden in a phone call last week that he was thinking about getting in at last-minute, per a Dem familiar.
Not a heads up that he’s in but telling him he’s thinking about it
A two-term Mass governor, Deval could pose a challenge to Warren w the southern NH voters who know them both from the Boston market. But he also may be a factor in S Carolina, where over half the primary electorate will be African-American.
Deval has personally been in touch w potential staffers, said he’s likely to do it but has kept some wiggle room.
Deval and his advisers had a meeting in Boston Sunday to map out potential campaign, per two Dems familiar.
Also: Deval has talked w Obama in the past about a run and was in Chicago late last month w the former prez for meeting of the Obama Foundation
Again, quote and source your tweets please.
...but I agree ...what the fuck? We really need less candidates, not more.
Honestly once voting in primaries start happening the winnowing will happen fast enough so it does not much matter how many are running at the moment.
+2
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
I wonder who they could possibly put up that would actually siphon votes away from Warren or Sanders? These Hail Mary candidates really feel like they're going to drink Biden's (and each other's) milkshakes with little overlaps.
I don't even see them hitting Biden's vote share that much. Bloomberg is just a non-starter, and Patrick might do better but he's still getting in way late. Unless Biden really faceplants, they might be more of a threat to Pete.
Starting to get a bad feeling about Biden's continued lack of fading.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Scott Brown is an absolute scumbag whose tenure in the Senate fought against literally everything Warren supposedly wants to accomplish while President.
I'd rather she say nothing, since a previous government official accepting a private sector job isn't relevant or noteworthy.
Posts
A VAT in isolation is regressive, but in used in conjunction with a progressive income tax and generous transfer payments and social services can be a perfectly useful part of progressive policy. The EU by law requires that all its member countries have a VAT of at least 15%.
The core problem with Yang's proposal isn't the funding, it's that he's forcing people to choose between the UBI payment and their current benefits.
Umm, not really.
US citizens still need to file taxes every year, even if you're overseas. If you make enough money, you still need to pay taxes, on both your US income and any foreign earned income as well.
The only way the rich can fully avoid the tax man at all is by going overseas and renouncing their citizenship.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
The donors are terrified of her. The establishment and the consultants who live in perpetual fear of getting McGovern'd and think it is always either 1972 or 1984 think she will get crushed.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/11/politics/joe-biden-cnn-town-hall-takeaways/index.html
Fuck on off outta here Joe. You're using goddamn republican talking points to criticize Warren.
I figured that was a given when I said republican talking points.
Also, most people don't want to live overseas. Complain as much as they want, a wealth tax wouldn't actually affect the super rich in any way they'd notice. Certainly not compared to uprooting their whole lives to go live somewhere else.
It's one thing to leave your life behind because you actually want to live somewhere else. Quite another because you want your net worth to be 1.4 billion instead of 1.3 billion.
Honestly can we just get Bloomberg to run just to tank Biden? Like, let's solve the rat problem with snakes, let's just see what happens.
Who is the metaphorical Gorilla?
Don't even get me started. Promising to do something about that would pique my interest in virtually any of the candidates. Right now between the foreign earned income exclusion and the foreign tax credit the whole thing means that a lot of people do a lot of paperwork in order to not pay anything to the IRS. Even just letting people sign a single page document that says that they lived overseas for 330 days in the past year and made less that some dollar value so they're in the clear would be a huge improvement on the situation.
I'm fact this is not the first time she's seems to be on friendly terms with one of Trump's earliest supporters, having given him her support when he was appointed to the ambassador job.
I'm not sure what to think of this. Seems like it got some people upset, but maybe it's just what politicians do?
I would agree that there's nothing "wrong" with a VAT as a source of funding. However, if your goal is to reduce inequality, poverty, etc., then *both* the funding source and the choose-your-poison nature of the plan hurt the goals. Yang's plan has multiple really dumb things about it, all making it less effective at what it wants to do without reducing the political effort required to do it.
Well
He does drive a truck
Either to avoid being painted as "petty" or to more easily paint Brown as the same.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
One of the main ways sexism operates is by setting up these damned if you do, damned if you don’t traps, so that it can hammer you no matter what direction you go in but always tell you it’s your fault for not going in the other direction.
At least it's not another old white man but OH MY GOD COME ON STOP IT
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Let's not forget he did a stint at Bain Capital after he was governor, so he'd be a darling of the wall street elites if he runs.
I assume they've MET Biden and noticed he's not what he used to be.
If I didn't know any better, especially with what's getting thrown at the race, I'd think they're trying a different strategy to break that steady support. Not by offering major differences but by offering similar options to biden that aren't biden.
Assuming a post early state Biden collapse and positioning to inherit his constituency on the supposition that Pete can't pull it off?
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Because they think his numbers are soft, because his fundraising was kinda shit last quarter and because they've watched the same shit we have over the past many months with Biden and his performance. They are terrified he's going to blow it and terrified someone like Sanders or Warren is gonna run away with it and since none of the other options are doing well they are looking for someone within the circle of upper level democratic politics to fly in and save them.
Pete's not super popular with African American voters, but I'm pretty sure that Bloomberg isn't going to do any better there. Not sure about this ex-Gov. Patrick dude. He worked at the NAACP and was in the DoJ as the AAG for civil rights. Fun thing is that he's currently an MD at Bain, so that'll be sure to win him fans. Plus there's a few skeletons in his closet from his time as Governor, so that's just great.
Again, quote and source your tweets please.
...but I agree ...what the fuck? We really need less candidates, not more.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Hard to see a Bain executive getting any traction in the current climate though.
Honestly once voting in primaries start happening the winnowing will happen fast enough so it does not much matter how many are running at the moment.
I don't even see them hitting Biden's vote share that much. Bloomberg is just a non-starter, and Patrick might do better but he's still getting in way late. Unless Biden really faceplants, they might be more of a threat to Pete.
Starting to get a bad feeling about Biden's continued lack of fading.
I'd rather she say nothing, since a previous government official accepting a private sector job isn't relevant or noteworthy.
Dave Weigel is a WaPo reporter.
Tulsi Gabbard: Shadowboxer
personally I think performative comity with people who want to kill all the brown folks is probably not a great thing to do
I really don't see any difference between Warren being nice to Scott Brown and Chuck Schumer praising Steve King
Brown is no longer in government, and thus has no power to do so.