Watching the Democratic debates this week has been a long litany of trillions in promised reparations, free tuition, climate program, and other plans. At a statistical zero of support in polling and even a majority of New Yorkers opposing his presidential run, Mayor Bill de Blasio decided to go for open class warfare. While he stopped short of actually calling to eat the rich, he promised “we will tax the hell out of the wealthy.”
De Blasio pledged “When I am president we will even up the score. We will tax the hell out of the wealthy to make this a fairer country.”
It was part of a theme of the debate that wealthier Americans are not paying their fair share and that our problems can be eliminated through trillion dollar programs paid for with higher taxes.
De Blasio however is facing the loss of wealthy citizens who are going to lower tax states like Florida. Now that New Yorkers cannot write off their higher taxes on their federal forms, many are fleeing. The loss of these top earners can be devastating. The top 1 percent that is being constantly attacked by the Democrats pays for nearly half of the income tax revenue in New York City. A family of four in New York earning $175,000 will pay 25 percent of their income in New York in taxes as compared to 14 percent for the same family in Florida.
The top 1 percent in the country as a whole pay a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent).
The glee at taxing the rich was captured by Sen. Elizabeth Warren who rubbed her hands after talking about taxing primary opponent John Delaney who is worth $65 million. The image reaffirmed the stereotype of Democrats on taxes and spending.
New Yorkies. Bernie, DeBazio, Trump and others. We need them out of our national politics. Turdy turd and a turd.
Imagine this couple in the White House. Not gonna happen, but still, she delivered an epic Kamala smackdown. Keep singing about rainbows and throwing those punches Tulsi. —->
PS meant to say not gonna happen *this time around* 🙂
For anybody, regardless of party, who cares about free speech in this country.
“Google Screws Tulsi & She Sues For $50 million”
Social media, after an appropriate period bereft of effective competition, proving beyond a reasonable doubt that competition is impossible, should be “taken” under Eminent Domain and operated, preserving constitutional rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities, as a state regulated monopoly.
FEDERAL TAX WRITE-OFFS..
WERE FOR UPPER MIDDLE CLASS
In our biggest cities, the upper middle class is largely composed of single-digit millionaires. They are urban professionals with total assets of maybe $1-3 million. That sounds rich to Average Joe’s in smaller towns. But in N Y, L A and Chicago, that’s only upper middle class.
People in this group aren’t rich enough to quit their jobs. Nor do they have mansions. People in this group are paying cash for their children’s education which can be a major expense in the biggest cities.
Therefore the exemptions that allowed the write-off of Local Taxes on Federal Returns were very important to urban professionals and the cities they lived in. Republicans clearly understood that importance. Yet Republicans, goaded by Trump, eliminated that exemption as an act of spite towards urban America.
Urban professionals are less likely to be Republican voters. So the elimination of the exemption was essentially a partisan F U. “You dont vote for us so we’re going to screw you”. This gesture was made with the disingenuous argument that the Federal government “shouldn’t have to subsidize high local taxes”.
This argument pretends that small towns in smaller states have the same needs as big cities. They don’t! Big cities require extensive infrastructure. Big cities also have large ratios of low income residents requiring social and welfare programs. Small cities have nowhere near the same needs.
Donald Trump’s recent tweets referring to rats in Baltimore was highly symbolic of the GOP ‘s attitude towards urban America. It’s basically a big F U.
Peter, I so happen to be one of those that was hurt by the Trump tax cut and find it totally appropriate. Why should a middle class family support my lifestyle by having to pay higher taxes in order to provide me a bigger and more desireable home? If the tax bill is too high I can downsize but the other people are having enough trouble paying for one mortgage in a not so desireable neighborhood.
Peter, you are acting on behalf of the have’s rather than the have nots in trying to protect those with expensive homes or more than one home so that they have lower taxes.
I’m all for lower taxes but this is not the way to go.
I agree with Allan. Value is value. I live outside of Washington, D.C. in Montgomery Co, MD. I have a very average suburban home, built in the mid-60s, that cost me almost $500,000 four years ago. In term of house and land, it would be worth maybe $100,000 in most other places. But the value is in the access to a high-paying job, a top-rated public school system, excellent policing, cultural amenities,and restaurants that simply aren’t available in other lower-cost communities I’ve lived in. We also own very small, 1950s rental in a marginal neighborhood that’s assessed at $250,000. In the mid-west, it would sell for about $65,000. But again, it’s location that drives value. So yes, I took a hit on the Trump tax bill, but I have the option to move down to VA, a lower tax state, or move really far away from the Beltway, which would cut my housing costs significantly, but make my commute a nightmare. When I retire, of course I’ll move to a low-tax state, but for now, I’m in a tax situation that fits my other needs. As far as “poor people,” I’m amazed at how many young adults working in fast-food restaurants are sporting Apple watches, tattoos, $60 fingernail manicures, and so forth. Pissing their money away on bling and Starbucks. I’ve seen my yard guys who are immigrants and mow lawns for a living purchase starter homes even in this high-cost area, because they save money and put it towards something that will last a lifetime. So my advice to anyone, if you don’t like the situation you’re in, change it!
Peter, an appropriate reform of the general income tax has the following features:
1. Fewer deductions and exemptions. Ideally, you tax anything and everything the Bureau of Economic Analysis defines as income except for Medicare, Medicaid, and some deferred compensation. No deductions, no exemptions. Also ‘interest income’ is understood to mean real interest, not nominal interest.
2. Simpler rate structure. Ideally, one marginal rate.
3. Protection of the impecunious through a general credit. The dollar-value of the credit would be adjusted automatically each year according to the year-over-year change in nominal personal income per capita. Should your credits exceed the product of the assessment rate and your adjusted gross income, you get a net rebate. The net rebate would be capped at a particular % of your earned income as a rule, but said cap would be relaxed if you’re elderly or have been adjudicated as disabled.
4. Taxing only real capital gains. Real gain = sale price – (purchase price x change in the GDP deflator since the year of purchase). If you have a real loss, you build up a credit with the IRS and state tax authorities which can be worked off with future capital gains tax liabilities. The assessment rate on real capital gains should be equal to the mean collection rate on discoverable personal income (i.e. 12% to the federal tax collectors and a mean of 3% to state tax collectors).
5. Gifts and bequests received in excess of a certain sum should be registered with the IRS and state tax collectors, but not taxed except in certain contingencies. Tax collectors track your gifts and bequests received much as the Social Security Administration tracks your wages received. A synthetic value we’ll call ‘receipts to date’ is calculated. The value of what you receive in a given year is multiplied by an index to give a ‘current year’ equivalent. The index is the change in nominal personal income per capita since the gift or bequest was received. The sum of all of your ‘current year equivalent’ is your synthetic ‘received to date’. Should the value of your ‘receipts to date’ exceed a certain threshold, future receipts should be taxed. The value of the threshhold would be adjusted each year according to the year-over-year changes in nominal personal income per capita. Ideally, your federal liability would be a particular assessment less whatever you paid to the state tax collectors, in effect conceding this revenue source to the states.
If a reform brings you closer to this state of the world, it is agreeable. If it does not, it should be opposed.
“They are urban professionals with total assets of maybe $1-3 million. ”
Really? I could retire on 1-3 million.
“People in this group are paying cash for their children’s education”
Stop using private school then.
” Big cities require extensive infrastructure. ”
So your logic is, if you get yourself in debt, you deserve special breaks. Good grief, are you for real? If cities can support themselves, that is not the rest of the countries problem. It’s called living within your means.
Good grief, are you for real?
Unfortunately he is. His whining should sound familiar. The big government types complain about the revenue not covering expenses and so the most logical solution to them is…scheme for more revenue instead of cutting expenses. Can’t afford to live in the big cities? Can’t afford the nice car? Nice clothes? Nice apartment? Dining out? Travel? The last I checked, we are still free to pursue our own happiness. Change careers. Get another job. Get better at your current one. Downsize. Take the bus. Move. Go back to school. It’s called being self-reliant.
Jim you can recognize Peter on the street. He is the one with his hand out.
This argument pretends that small towns in smaller states have the same needs as big cities. They don’t! Big cities require extensive infrastructure. Big cities also have large ratios of low income residents requiring social and welfare programs. Small cities have nowhere near the same needs.
1. When ever you state a ‘need’, you have an implicit purpose in mind. The purpose is not a given.
2. All places require some infrastructure, albeit in different proportions.
3. Actually, loci outside of metropolitan commuter belts are less affluent than metropolitan commuter belts. I suspect if you unpacked the data you’d discover that exurban zones are less affluent than suburban zones and perhaps core city zones. They really should not be subsidizing metropolitan centers.
4. The ‘social welfare programs’ properly financed and administered by local government include subsidies to the mass transit service, the public defender’s office, the legal aid society, the child protective and foster care service, and the school system. Except for the schools, these are properly the province of county governments or multi-county authorities, not municipalities. With the schools, extant institutions vary from place to place. Only the school system among the foregoing is a big money sink. The rest could be financed with a 1c county sales tax.
5. With regard to the school system, the state government can distribute to each district a general grant which functions as a riser, with the rest of a district’s budget financed out of local property taxes and (in core cities) a district sales tax. The most affluent districts would get no riser, the most impecunious would receive larger risers. The state legislature would determine the global appropriation which would then be distributed among school districts according to formulae. The grant would be unrestricted and could be used for any function within the scope of the enabling legislation for local schools set down into state law. Core city districts would be adequately financed.
6. Again, county governments could be financed by such a general grant as well, supplemented with local sales and property taxes. Again, the legislature determines a global budget, which is then distributed among the county governments according to formulae. Affluent suburban counties get very little, impecunious rural counties the most.
7. Within counties, the county council can settle according to their discretion on a distribution to component municipalities. Again, the distribution would occur according to formulae which would include population and per capita income as arguments.
8. The appropriate venue for providing local police and and allied services is the county or multi-county consortium. County governments would finance these out of general revenues. The propensity to offend against public order is invariably more pronounced in metropolitan centers, and small cities are not more orderly than larger cities in an uncomplicated and systematic way. You have seven dimensions to local law enforcement:
1. Civil: the enforcement of court orders
2. Court security – which can be extended to security at public buildings generally and dignitary protection.
3. Jail service
4. Probation and parole consequent to decisions of the municipal court
5. School security
6. General patrols (the meat).
7. Child protective and foster care.
These can be ordered into two or three departments which assemble divisions with different financing pipelines. What’s crucial is that municipalities not be responsible for police services except in odd circumstances and the cost of local law enforcement be socialized over the whole metropolitan settlement.
Bill de Blasio and the communists in America will be in treasonous violation of the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8 provided Congress the power to tax merely for “…general Welfare…” omitting and, thereby, excluding, any power to tax for individual welfare.
The entire American redistributionist welfare state is unconstitutional. Given the blatant acts to nullify the Constitution, act of subversion and acts of insurrection of the communists in America, President Trump is fully justified in seizing power to “Save the Republic” as “Crazy Abe” Lincoln seized power to “Save the Union.”
Well, this is what Socialists do. Of course he declared class warfare.
Perhaps unsavvy voters will usher in the destruction of our country. It’s too bad we did not root out Leftism in the public education system K-12, as well as strip public funding from universities that allow political indoctrination to become part of their classes.
We have produced a generation of graduates utterly ignorant of the structural deficiencies of socialism and the benefits of capitalism.
Socialism is one of the forms of slavery, only instead of one master, your owned by the government. You don’t own the product of your labor. The government does. Selling a good or service is capitalism, and illegal. The government takes your business and your home. Puts you in an ugly concrete government apartment. Grants you some Roos and clothing rations. May tell you where to work and wear to live. Keeps you from leaving the country. To escape, you have to defect, often using an Underground Railroad to get smuggled out.
People are fools to support socialism. We’ve already had the leaders of Scandinavia explain to our uninformed politicians and voters that they are not socialist.
Autocorrect. The government doesn’t grant kangaroo rations. It was supposed to be food rations. I wish the feature would just underline typos instead of boisterously getting creative.
Hmmm, kangaroo rations might actually be a good idea. Instead of using food stamps at Subway, able bodied adults would either have to eat minced kangaroo rations or get off their butts and go to work!
this Dysplasio guy is a fraud and a bore. Why talk about him at all.
One has to try hard to outdo real communist party members, but this guy hit the mark
Taxing billionaires is no way to handle them. That just drives them abroad. No the thing to do, is what Putin did, and that is occasionally lock them up. That clips their wings just fine. And usually they have so many irons in the fire, you could find colorable dirt on nearly any of them.,
I suspect the last time he said so much as hello to a poor person was when someone came in to clean out his wastebasket.
there was a fracas over a cop who is a union member and the union has protected him as a member, even as the rabid protesters call for his firing and would lynch him too if they could. where is the Dysplasio on this? thank God for police unions
Eric Garner had at least 100 pounds on the cop. Eric Garner was grossly overweight. Like most overweight people Eric Garner had a cardiac problem. Eric Garner resisted arrest. It’s very unfortunate and sad Eric Garner died as a result of his arrest and trying to ruin a cop for life will not bring him back.
I have watch the video many times. his left arm was around his neck. his right hand was on his shoulder, the hands were next to each other but not locked. this was not a “stranglehold.” it was not a rear naked choke, even though if you haven’t looked at many, or done them or wrestled much, you might think so. I have wrestled and observed countless rear naked chokes and this was not one of them.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/01/us/eric-garner-officer-career-ruling/index.html
Fair enough in some ways. But you’re agreeing with De Blasio on this. I mean taking 8 or so of New York’s fines to cart a guy in for selling singles doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.
Unless you like the cigarette tax, which is all De Blasio was interested in.
Dysplasio is a tard, I’m sure the cops hate him anyways
the Garner thing is sad, but resisting arrest is not ok. I watched the whole video, they took their time talking to the guy, he was worked up as hell before they tried to cuff him, and he immediately resisted. they swarmed him. which is standard tactics. at no point did Pantaleo even look mad. it’s sad that it turned out how it did. firing Pantaleo and ruining his life won’t bring Garner back. protesters are just making hay out of all this stuff
the BLM type protesters are not based in fact. here is a new study. read it, seriously
https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-america/2019/07/24/white-cops-are-no-likelier-to-shoot-dead-african-americans-than-black-ones-are
they have a massive cigarette tax in chicago too.
i know somebody who regularly um “Transports” cigarettes from Down South to NYC. Then “gives” them away. Money may or may not change hands, I would not know. No names mentioned here, of course.
people will always weasel out of onerous taxes. that is a simple fact historically proven time and time again. these taxation zealots at the debate lack historical perspective.
ATF regularly busts ppl who transport cigarettes from VA and KY (the lowest tobacco tax states), to high tax states. They also bust retailers who sell “untaxed” cigs, mostly inner-city stores run by immigrants. These guys have friends or relatives buy a trunkful of cigs in VA and drive them up north. Sometimes they get away with it; sometimes the “T” cops from ATF bring them up on federal charges. I don’t know if there is a de minimus, “personal use” exemption for ppl who buy cigs in VA or KY and take them back to high tax states……but your “friend” should be careful.
The thing is you don’t get a black market without the onerous tax on the product in the first place. So you put a tax on it, then you get a bunch of police and feds, who combined cost more money than the tax, to hunt down the black marketers — who wouldn’t exist if you hadn’t put on the tax in the first place.
Agreed. The “cure” is worse than the problem.
Kurtz, when you think of NYC unions don’t think so highly of them. The newly built 2nd Ave Line cost $2.5Billion for one mile. Compare that to other major cities that also overpay tremendously. No one comes close and this in great part is due to union rules which means that the number of workers not working is exceptionally high, I believe multiples of the numbers used in comparitive projects in Paris and Canada as are the salaries. This money in part gets taken out of money used to repair the already existing subway lines that are in total disrepair.
The cost to taxpayers is huge in money, aggravation, wasted time etc.
NY has a lot of money but not that much and when spending continues to rise taxes go up and the wealty flee causing revenues to fall causing more highly taxed people to leave and the cycle continues. NYC itself is starting to run out of other people’s money.
You have to admit Allen, taking 8 or so cops off the beat to haul this guy in — how did that get to be the new normal.
Time was when a cop on the beat would see someone like Garner, and he’d simply say: “Eric, you’re embarrassing me. You know you can’t sell singles in plain sight while I’m walking by. Take it somewhere where I don’t see it.” And that would be the end of it. And then the cop could continue on his way looking for real crime. You know like murders and robberies.
There is much to agree with in what you say. However, the Broken Windows Theory (involving crime rather than economics) in NYC was to stop crime in its tracks and it worked. They would go area by area even getting rid of street hookers and squeegy guys.
I I were in charge everyone in that video remotely involved in the incident would have been searched for drugs, illegal guns, parole violation, etc. and everyone found involved in that crime or other crimes arrested and jailed. That would immediately stop the crowds and put the police in a better position.
Ah yes the broken windows bit. I’m pretty skeptical of this. Sounds like a way for a cop to take himself off the beat and take some peon downtown so he can eat doughnuts all night. And it’s also a way to inflate the so-called “crime” rate.
it sounds goofy and dumb to me too except they say it worked. that seems to be pretty well agreed. if that’s inaccurate i would like to know
You haven’t read the articles advancing the concept, ex ante and after its effectiveness was demonstrated.
Steve, to my understanding it worked fantastically along with targeting areas in a very systematic way. Do you travel in NYC much? I saw the results and it was impressive.
One of the things they found was that disrepair created more disrepair and minor crimes permitted bigger crimes. That is why they would put pictures in abandoned housing and commercial space to improve the appearance.
Well you yourself added an additional variable. “Targeting areas in a very systematic way.”
That the police force grew by 35% is another one. Unemployment fell dramatically during the 1990s. And there are several other variables.
So I’m just not all there with it. Plus is it really all that fair to the people who were overcharged?
The labor market was tight as could be during the period running from 1960 to 1970 and the index crime rate doubled. It was perfectly wretched during the period running from 1979 to 1982, when the crime rate finally hit a plateau. Unemployment rates are at best a weak vector influencing crime rates.
You couldn’t be more wrong. Order maintenance functions were one means of getting police back on foot patrols.
i agree with your thought there steve. overall.
but there was a calm colloquy between them in the video, if you caught the longer version
try and find it. garner got all worked up long before they tried to cuff him
it’s really a shame, sad for all of them
cops are just taking orders and the order in NYC that helped clean it up was make arrests for small crimes. and in fact that worked reasonably well. i am not a fan of that kind of policing but i don’t live in NYC. maybe if I did then I would find it more legit.
to me its a sad tragedy and they just make overmuch of it
No argument there. I’m not saying the cops were at fault. I’m just skeptical that there needed to be this kind of confrontation in the first place. And I appreciate that your comment was about de Blasio blaming the cops — which was out of line. I just think it’s due to people like de Blasio that this situation happened in the first place.
i have sympathy for garner not because I am black. i am not i am white. but i am a fat middle aged old guy and I can imagine suffocating with a bunch of cops on my back and one with his knee on my head and my face on the pavement. i was surprised he could say “I cant breath” at all.
but, they didn’t shoot him, they didn’t baton stroke him, they didnt tase him, they just swarmed him. it was pretty by the book use of force, it just went badly. any wrestling match can end badly just like one punch to the head can kill a person. heck two boxers have died in the past month this year or so i heard.
But then again i was warned at an early age not to resist arrest, to keep my hands where they could see them, and never to raise my voice at a cop. i was also taught not to incriminate myself and to clam up if they accused me of something, and only ask for a lawyer. it can all be sorted out in front of the judge.
but i had lawyers teaching me things long before law school so I guess I’m lucky that way.
I know that’s not how regular people operate.
Most of what you say is pure courtesy or a protection of your rights.
When a policeman stops you he is at risk for his life and a family is at risk for losing a husband and a father. Since the police are the ones that run towards the violence and we run away we should afford them the courtesy of immediately proving we are not a threat.
Therefore when stopped by a police officer while driving it is appropriate to place one’s hands on the top of the steering wheel and for the passengers not to reach into a pocket or pocketbook keeping their hands in sight. Anyone that doesn’t teach their children to do so is negligent and possibly responsible for any actions that occur when those simple rules aren’t followed.
If one is being arrested then one should not look threatening and permit the police to do their job. Get a lawyer and let things get straigtened out in an orderly fashion. I don’t even get angry at the police if they give me a ticket and at the end I thank them and wish them well. I will get the ticket either way but if everyone treats police officers better we will all be safer.
I participated in some heated demonstrations when I was young and some friends of mine have participated at an older age. One has to recognize that the right to protest is an act that can cause an arrest or at least temporary restraints. NYC learned decades ago that peaceful actions create peaceful reactions. I remember one of the protests I was at where similar protests led to violence and injury but the police changed their policy. They permitted the men to grow facial hair and placed unarmed men in the front to keep the protestors in line. Some of the protestors intentionally create violence but I remember how the leaders of the protest kept yelling at everyone to keep their hands to themselves and not one person was touched by the opposing side. My friends who have been arrested simply let the police put the cuffs on and everyone smiled. They got what they wanted and the police got peace.
Unfortunately today the arrogance of the crowds makes many of these events violent. That is aided by the rhetoric we hear coming form crazies, Nazi types, the left, etc.
He isn’t that much at risk, but you do yourself no favors by being non-compliant.
Garner wasn’t mistreated. He was subject to an ordinary police tackle and held for just nine seconds. His problem was that he was diabetic and morbidly obese and had a peculiar reaction which included a fatal heart attack. The response of people like Bill di Blasio is that the officers in question should have had a telepathic understanding of his medical history with a predictive component Garner’s own doctors likely couldn’t have mustered.
but i am a fat middle aged old guy
It’s a good thing you’re not my patient for as much time as you spend trolling these forums, you have no excuse to be fat. Get on it man.
All of you are glossing over the facts.
Eric Garner weighed 395 lbs at 6’3″ height. That results in a BMI of 50. Normal BMI is 18-24. Anything over 45 is severe morbidly obese. There is a CMS code for a BMI over 45 for a reason. Red flags galore
Garner had cardiomegaly which is usually caused by hypertension and/or hyperlipidemia. He died not on the sidewalk where the police tackled him but in the ambulance en route to the hospital due to an MI (heart attack).
Returning to our previous discussion on transgender, genes map a structural template for all of our tissues including our organs. Organs are programmed genetically to grow to a specific size in concert with other genetic architecture that dictates the size of our skeleton, head, feet, hands, all organs, overall frame, and so forth. However if you choose to grow your body (e.g. increase in stores of fat, muscle) beyond its genetic predetermined template, the organs will not grow with it. Thus you are placing the organs at a severe disadvantaged by forcing them to perform at a level for which they are not programmed. At 395 lbs Garner pushed his heart to levels with taking mundane steps on a sidewalk. He knew better as did his family
Garner was asthmatic. At his age he knew that was abnormal (asthma lessens in frequency as we age) and he knew what he had to do: lose weight. Obesity makes asthma far worse.
other medical issues:
Diabetes Types II
use of illegal Drugs (selling and possession)
Cigarette smoking
Sleep apnea
Pulmonary collapse (due to obesity)
Had Garner (and his family?) cared about his own health and the 6 children, Garner would have (and the following applies to all Americans with a BMI > 25):
Dropped weight (200 pounds for Garner) to BMI: 24
Taken his multiple meds for hypertension
Taken his multiple meds for high cholesterol
Taken his multiple meds for diabetes
Carried meds for asthmatic attacks
Worn a bracelet indicating he was asthmatic (police and first responders often carry the drugs to control asthmatic attacks)
Stopped smoking
Stopped drugging
Stopped with his 30 year history of criminal behavior
Lastly, Garner, knowing he was an absolute mess medically speaking, could have put away the attitude, followed the instructions from the cops and avoided any stress.
The settlement the family got was outrageous. It reinforced all of the poor choices Garner made. Now people like Eric Garner will do whatever they want, live however they want, break all the laws they want, and blame the cops for their self-inflicted problems.
Cue Al Sharpton
Well one of the facts is that he kept getting arrested for not much — at a lot of expense. I just don’t think he was worth the time.
I work in the same office as a black woman whose father was shot and killed by D.C. police when she was a child. The father was beating the crap out of his wife, and when the police showed up, he charged at them. End of his story. So the surviving wife and three kids got a huge financial settlement, and the three kids all wisely used the structured settlement to go to college. Low-rated colleges, but college nonetheless. This woman now has a B.A. in Computer Information Systems. She’s ghetto as all get out, being morbidly obese, loud, garish wigs, and so forth, but she’ll always have a good job and the ability to support her two kids from two different worthless “baby daddies.” Point being, is sometimes these situations work out for the better. The loser father made a typical loser decision, but it got his wife and kids and grandkids off welfare, ultimately saving the taxpayers from funding generational welfare.
Kurtz, once the people know the cops are serious most of the garbage actions disappears. That means that the offenders have to act without the encouragement of mobs. They behave better and the police most of the times just shoo them away without contact or arrest. If one goes to certain parks one sees people illegally selling Rolex watches and Gucci bags. Patent laws have been violated but these types of things are difficult to stop so one can watch one of the sellers displaying his wears on a sheet and when the police start rolling by they close up the sheet and walk in the opposite direction. No problem for anyone, no arrests unless it is a sweep, nothing. No one is even angry.
Kurtz, the above was Allan
i was just defending the cop unions. they are the only union democrats don’t want to praise. so i will.
i hear mayor pete is not all that well liked by his cop union. isn’t that interesting. but it’s cops versus cops there in a long term lawsuit over supposed racism and violation of cop civil liberties by the former police chief. you will hear about it if his candidacy goes much further, I am sure
OK. Cops need protection so I understand.
Mayor Pete is Michael Dukakis. He doesn’t care about law enforcement because PLU just don’t. Violent crime has gotten marginally worse on his watch and the numbers weren’t great when he took office.
OT:
Kurtz, we have a difference of opinion regarding Iran. I thought you might want to read this article. https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Two-attacks-on-two-borders-in-one-day-Is-IDF-ready-for-war-on-3-fronts-597410 Then consider the topography and geography recongizing that in minutes major Israeli cities can be hit by the Iranian missiles that are sophisticated.
You like history so consider a three front war with very little space to maneuver.
It says something about the New York electorate that they’ve put this cretin into office twice. It’s as if there was a collective feeling now that the Giuliani and Bloomberg administrations had corrected so many problems, we can now have what we really want, which is a perfectly worthless individual in the Mayor’s chair. Check out the recent machinations of his schools chancellor, Richard Carranza. These people are both stupid and malicious.
The yammer about ‘inequality’ (as opposed to examining the quality-of-life problems which have an impact on the impecunious, or looking at how readily the impecunious can acquire a competence in their late adolescent and young adult years) is that the justifications for state intervention (and for the employment of the sort of professionals and lumpen-professionals who are the Democratic Party’s real constituency) is just endless. Some of us who dissent from the regnant leftoid consensus in the media and in academe (and now in many corporate venues) have occasion to ask when enough is enough. Those yapping about ‘inequality’ are implicitly telling you ‘never’.
Read the rubbish coming off of Bernie Sanders Facebook feed. So and so many people have more assets than umpteen billion other people. Of course this is absurd. Normal people don’t give a rip about Melinda Gates’ life; her life is her problem. Divvy up the assets of the Forbes 400 among the rest of us and each household in America gets a windfall of $24,000. Invest that in municipal bonds, and you’ll have an income stream of about $500 a year extra; I’m sure that’ll make all the difference. (Of course, if you make a habit of mass property seizures like that, all sorts of unsalutary social adjustments will ensue as people abstain from agreeable economic activity and hide assets, but don’t expect Facebook consumers of the wit and wisdom of Mr. Sanders to think too many steps ahead).
Another favored tactic is to discuss marginal tax rates in effect ca. 1959. Even a Democratic Party hack like Bradford deLong will admit that marginal rates in excess of 70% are self-defeating, the tax code in 1959 was littered with social suboptimal preferences and shelters, and the ultimate marginal rates only applied to quite narrow segments of the population. Grisly marginal rates are completely unnecessary for any purpose other than harassing disfavored social segments. That’s the one thing Democrat politicians (and witless street-level Democrats) are inclined to do the way other people breathe.
Whatever one says about President Trump, it is beyond serious debate that he has brought the Democrats out of the closet. That closet being that of reasonable policy positions. Consider, would open boarders, free college tuition, gun confiscation, ruinous taxation, post birth abortions or the outright silly Green New Deal ever have been uttered by anyone seeking public office? Our duly elected President had driven the left mad.
First, Trump was not duly elected, not by any Constitutional process. Second, Parties don’t make Policy, and the President doesn’t make Policy or lead the Country. Besides those inconsistencies in your statement, I guess you are right, the Trump is driving the Democrats, and we are paying for tickets to watch! What does that make us?
It’s difficult watching these debates without picturing each of them having a history of running for student council president. Their platform back then wasn’t considered “radical”. They just knew they could get the votes if their promises were more convincing. No homework. Free lunch. 4 hour school days. Free vending machines. Everyone gets an A. No more P.E. and so on.
You can’t tax the poor
We already tax the poor, at a very disproportionate rate. No matter how much you earn, you will have 20% withdrawn from your check before you get the first penny, then you still have to pay taxes in your State, even if it’s only for consumption. The rich rarely pay these taxes!
If you’re taxing assets, no, because the poor by definition have no assets beyond some personal property. You certainly can tax the impecunious and general sales taxes do just that. And, of course, a portion of the rent you pay is deployed to pay your landlord’s property taxes.
Warren Buffet said something like this many years ago: yes there is a class war and my class is winning. I think DeBlasio is a fool but he didn’t start the class war! Buffet was right billionaires own our cities and our government. They’ve won the class war. The rest of us are just squabbling over the scraps that they will allow us to have because it’s better to keep us fighting amongst ourselves than focusing on their overreach and their power.
Warren Wilhelm, Jr. is his real name. He changed it twice before settling on Bill DeBlasio. What was wrong with Warren Wilhelm? We can see what’s wrong with DeBlasio. He gives off a bad creepy vibe, big time. When cops in New York City despise you and turn their backs on you, and your constituents can’t stand you because they all know you are ruining their fine city, sure, why not go ahead and declare a presidential run? It’s good for ‘business’ eh, Warren?
I think you’re confusing “birth name” with “real name.” DeBlasio was given his father’s name at birth. Thus Warren Wilhelm, Jr. is his birth name. Unfortunately, the father was an alcoholic who abandoned his family when DeBlasio was age 7, and committed suicide when DeBlasio was a teen. His mother’s family name was DeBlasio, and he was raised by his mother’s family. His father was absent from his life and he didn’t know him. Thus he adopted his maternal family name. No big deal, and understandable. The name change was legal, so DeBlasio is his “real” name. Millions of people change their names, for all kinds of reasons. Adoption, marriage, personal or professional reasons…..so long as the change is legal under state law, the new name is the individual’s real name, and the name given at birth is thereafter the “birth name” but no longer the “real,” or legal name.
No big deal, and understandable.
It is? Fathers and sons, sons and fathers. Half the time, it’ll never work. However, few people not slapped with their mother’s name at birth feel compelled to change theirs. Not buying diBlabbio’s explanation. Recalling also Gary Hart’s explanation of why he changed his name, offered at a time when reporters undertook more due diligence. It didn’t survive interviews with family members or genealogists.
I don’t believe he felt compelled to change his name, he just preferred to. I went to high school with a girl named Carol Screws. When she was 18, she went to court and legally dropped the “S,” becoming Carol Crews. Ever since then, I have wondered why ppl with odd or embarrassing names don’t change them. Just adding or dropping a letter or two can avoid a lifetime of snickering every time you say your name….
I don’t believe he felt compelled to change his name, he just preferred to.
You’re a tad too literal-minded.
Defensible name changes I can think of:
1. Shirt-tails of mine who were stuck with awkward double-barrelled names by their mother and father following 1970s feminist fashion (something their cousins also got stuck with). Grisly awful results made worse by their mothers’ bad taste in selecting Christian names. Four of the six youngsters in question adopted their father’s name when they came of age. (Curiously, the two who did not had the ugliest names of all). None of them, for whatever reason, have unloaded their Christian name.
2. Performers and authors, though I think most have the option to retain their legal name even if they are marketed under a different name.
3. Jeffrey Dahmer’s younger brother.
Changing your name to ding your father is cheap. (And I’m wagering given what I know of the liberal mentality that his fathers personal shortcomings were not the reason).
I’m sure I’ve never met anyone named ‘Screws’ but evidently 645 people with that surname were located by census enumerators in 1940.
Former NYC Mayor & billionaire Mike Bloomberg posted this:
The Bloomberg Global Business Forum is a unique opportunity for world leaders to build new partnerships, share ideas, and combat the greatest current threats to global prosperity – the rise of economic and environmental instability.
But 2020 presidential candidate, NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio has other plans. It’s the “what’s mine is yours, yours is mine plan”
DeBlasio is a feckless poseur in the political sphere. I also have it on reliable sources that he is an A-Hole in the personal sphere. He should drop out of the race. This is no-brainer. But I fail to see what is wrong with taxing the rich at a higher rate than the “middle class” (to advert to the awful trope). It is only in a country which worships wealth, and where the very controversial proposition that rich people have earned everything they own in a purely one-to-one correspondence with their economic inputs is a sacred cow (and the corollary, that everyone earns exactly what they deserve), that this idea would be disturbing to anyone. I know that this is a vastly minority view (not even Warren or Sanders will go this far), but I don’t think anyone should be allowed to “earn” more than $20,000,000.
The general tax proposition asserted above, i.e. “The top 1 percent in the country as a whole pay a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent)”, may be true, but in addition to this spread still not being enough to satisfy simple justice, this datum is misleading because the individual taxpayer, qua an individual, at the top echelons of income is not primarily where tax injustices are located. It is in the capital gains rate, the corporate tax privileges, the trusts, and the various other evasions of their fair share of taxes that rich people are able to game the tax system with, which Trump himself has pointed to, that enable the EFFECTIVE tax rate for such people and businesses to be much less than their fair share, e.g. Apple, Jeff Besos, and so on.
Wrong professor. The rich declared class warfare on us many years ago and are winning big time. Still a stupid statement from De Blasio. And yes Tulsi was right.
Agreed.
The rich declared class warfare on us many years ago and are winning big time.
No, you’re having problems in living which you elect to attribute to machinations by people who are abstractions to you. Machinations by people who are abstractions to you are seldom the cause of anyone’s problems.
Someone like “This is absurd” needs to have his or her life upended, just to see how it feels.
What do you recommend, Diane? Divorce papers, identity theft, illness, dementia, malicious bosses, or double-digit increases in medical insurance premiums every year? In my household and households adjacent, just about all of these have happened in the last dozen years. None of them were caused by rich people.
We are in a state of exponential growth of the Federal debt which was zero in 1920, $1 Trillion, in 1980, and now $22 Trillion and climbing at a rate of over $1 Trillion a year. This condition is unsustainable and could catastrophically fail at any time.
This is a signal that we have totally lost control of all phases of the revenue process. We’ve lost control of taxation, spending, and the process that controls the flow of revenue, and taxing the hell out of the rich will do nothing because we are at a point of only servicing the interest on that debt, which is increasing, but doing nothing to control the spending that is driving it.
What needs to be done? The States must retake control of the flow of revenue! The States are the only taxpayers in the federal system, and they also have the power over their Purse which contains the collective revenue generated in their State. All revenue generated in every State must be intercepted and diverted to their State Treasury, then only the amount they approve for expenditures they determine are in the Federal Interest will be provided through proportional direct taxes on the States Themselves.
To deal with the debt we must punish those who created and are benefiting from the debt by writing off all debt that is not associated with debt to foreign nations, not companies operating in foreign nations, and that foreign debt will be paid as it comes to normal maturity, with no new debt until the spending for Federal Collective services has been established at the minimum.
Collective services for the people must be established and controlled within each State and is a State responsibility, only the collective services of the States as the Union are the responsibility of the States as the Federal Government.
This is a simple problem, but you cannot tax your way out, you must Reestablish the system for the Apportionment of Representation and Direct taxes of Article 1 of the Constitution to Reestablish the controls and protections over the revenue and spending process!
Stossel sums it up well:
https://youtu.be/XA3b-omI5mE
Stossel’s an idiot.
Thanks for the video monument. It was an eyeful. Many that do not think will hate this video because they have no responses to it and they have no idea how to pay for it. Those are the Venezuela types that think about today but forget all about tomorrow.
Tulsi Gabbard Calls Kamala Harris a Drug Warrior and Dirty Prosecutor. She’s Right.
“The bottom line is, when you were in a position to make a difference and an impact in these people’s lives, you did not.”
https://reason.com/2019/07/31/tulsi-gabbard-calls-kamala-harris-a-drug-warrior-and-dirty-prosecutor-shes-right/
Tulsi wins. What a fantastic lady.
The Kamala smackdown was awesome. But….
She also said Trump is “supporting Al Qaeda”….I’m sorry, whaat?
twitter and cnn and msnbc and the other feckless fake media are bashing TULSI today and calling her Assad appeaser and claiming all her supprot comes from Russian bots. i kid you not. this is deja vu all over again
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-01/liberal-media-freaking-out-over-gabbards-destruction-harris
she is a fine candidate. yang is also advancing. the old guard will try and crush them. sad!
A nice laugh to start off the day. Thanks.
I love it when you get a stage-full of Liberals. Their true colors flow.
Mostly it’s the mendacity and the manufactured social resentments that hit you. You’re not doing blacks any favors by babbling on about phantoms like ‘voter suppression’ and ‘white privilege’.
How much fun it would be to see you emerge after a few years as a black man.
You mean like in Finian’s Rainbow? I’ve got a couple of unattached neighbors who might find me marginally more interesting, FWIW.
I have a number of family members that would have gladly traded places.
steve martin in THE JERK
GUESS WHAT! OJ agrees with me in liking Tulsi in Yang.
https://twitter.com/TheRealOJ32/status/1156735722033954816?s=20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tcwz8-EfFYE
I open an LA phone book and put my finger down and it lands on ‘Peter Hill’. ‘Die, Sucker!’
De Blasio is paraphrasing Dick The Butcher — “First, we’ll kill all the rich people”.
GRAMPS IT WAS “FIRST THING WE KILL THE LAWYERS”