this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2024
112 points (93.8% liked)

politics

18852 readers
4470 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
112
Harris to break with Biden on capital gains tax, proposing a smaller increase (www.cnn.com)
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Vice President Kamala Harris proposed increasing the long-term capital gains tax rate to 28% for wealthy Americans during an economic speech in New Hampshire on Wednesday, breaking with the policy laid out by President Joe Biden in his 2025 budget by suggesting a lower rate.

The current long-term capital gains tax rate – 20%, plus an additional 3.8% tax on higher earners – is paid when an investment is sold, or gains are realized. The Biden budget proposes raising that rate to the top rate he wants to levy on ordinary income – 39.6% – for households with taxable income over $1 million. Harris, the people familiar with the matter say, believes 39.6% is too high.

While Harris still supports taxing the wealthiest individuals and corporations at higher rates – as Biden’s budget also calls for – she believes that a lower capital gains rate would incentivize investors to put more money into startups and small businesses. She has also proposed increasing the corporate tax rate to 28%, up from the current 21% rate set by Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.

top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 101 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Harris, the people familiar with the matter say, believes 39.6% is too high.

for people already millionaires.

hey dems, you know why regular people hate you? this is why you conservative fucks

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago

Long term capital gains isn't as big a problem as asset backed borrowing which needs to be fixed. No point in cranking realized gains that hard when unrealized loopholes are far worse and don't affect venture capital the same.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

True - but understand - this is exactly what corporate news is trying to elicit. They’ve been trying things and waiting for the time to pounce to separate Harris from her momentum.

CNN, remember, is the new Fox News.

This is the latest. They know it’s going to work. When it does expect to see it more in other outlets.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

By her saying she's not raising taxes high enough on the extremely wealthy?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

So would you prefer the capital tax rate is lower or that CNN didn't report it?

As someone voting for Dems, I'm still confused why progressive policies are becoming more moderate

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

That and because the republicans will keep claiming they want to raise taxes and peopke dont like being taxed. Does it matter that its a tax increase that only affects the wealthy? No, as they too are a temporarily embarrassed millionaire.

I do agree that capital income and earned income should be treated equally, but the politics of that make it more difficult.

It might have been better to reduce the higher income tax by an equivalent amount to match a higher rate, so that the overall tax take is roughly similar, somewhere in the middle, but then shed be accused of helping billionaires.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I really don't believe in the temporarily embarrassed millionaire. I just think people are that stupid. They hear tax increase and never look further.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

These are the same people who believe getting a raise means you end up with less due to taxes

Mind you, there is a hell pit where you make too much to qualify for assistance but not enough to afford existing, but that's not what I'm talking about.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Oh yeah, I was in that hell pit growing up and trying to get through college. The hell pit is awful. There is an even worse hell pit for disability benefits.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

That and because the republicans will keep claiming they want to raise taxes and peopke dont like being taxed.

Gotta move to the right or the people who want us to move to the right will say mean things about us. Like they do no matter what.

[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Capital gains tax being lower than income tax inverts the economy and just leads to a glut of capital owners. External capital ownership shouldn't exist in the first place, but if it does, it shouldn't be the cheapest way to earn money.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I actually really agree with the removal of external debts backed by capital being a saleable item - market socialism where corporate ownership is forcefully devolved to the actual employees would enable much higher economic efficiency.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yup, that's why I'm a Mutualist. I think Spain has a pretty good setup that incentives ownership to be sold to it's employees.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Yup, that’s why I’m a Mutualist.

Dozens of us.jpg

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Can you point me to a related law in spain about this?

I've always figured that political democracy can't co-exist with capitalist plutocracy (when the corporate hierarchy is structured the opposite, top-down) but if there was a mandatory divestment where every business had to return x% of profits to the staff per annum and x% of ownership (e.g. based on a mix of value/wage/tenure) then that would reorient corporations to financially benefit a community and workers, and mitigate wealth inequality. The mandatory part is important as — like a strong minimum wage — it means all are competing on a level playing field and not with some inherent advantage/disadvantage.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Just abolish capital gains tax and treat income as income.

Don't discuss tip exemption. Just treat income as income.

Then adjust the graduated scale to give low earners a fair relative burden and close off loop holes or set tax minimums.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Ok, how about those who borrow against the value of stocks? Let's treat that as income too. Unrealized gains? Tax it.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's a tough one - borrowing against stock value has essentially become a cheat code for the rich to live lavish lifestyles without ever actually spending their own money so it'd be nice to close that hack... I'm just concerned there may be some side effect to such a policy that'd punish regular-ish folks - that might hit retirees hard, for example, by (effectively) forcing people to actually sell stock to meet expenses - even during market downturns.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

Cool. Have a minimum on the tax then. Elon et al shouldn't be able to borrow millions or billions against their assets without paying a massive tax on it. Encourage them to sell the asset, realize the gains, pay the tax, and spend their money.

Zero reason for Tesla to have the valuation it does.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Any time money goes into your account, it should be taxed

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Any time money changes hands or is conjured from the ether, it should be tax if it's above a certain level.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Whew! I thought we were gonna have a wildfire on our hands with all that red hot enthusiasm. Glad Kamala doused it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago

Of all the things to proactively announce you're different from Biden on, this was the issue she chose? Not saying anything and letting people assume what they'd like has been doing a lot of good work for the campaign, but there are definitely some issues she needs to break on. This wasn't one of them. Be optimistic while campaigning and let it be killed in the senate like we all know it will.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

A neoliberal defending rich people? Say it ain't so! 🙄

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Gotta keep those campaign contributions flowing in.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Lol, like she's going to U-turn on this if she's elected?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

More likely is that even if she was a raging socialist at heart or something, she still has to get elected and because of Americas broken system that means she has to appeal to a very specific demographic of people in a select few states, because no one else really matters. And that's who statements like this is for, moderate republicans in swing states that are put off by Trumps incompetence but are scared about voting for a """" left wing""" candidate.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

Motherfucker.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

And the donor class will force her to completely kill it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

WTF

Edit: Not that it will do any good but I just left a message at her campaign website.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm VERY GLAD Kamala Harris mentioned she supports Genocide and Helping the Rich! For a Second there I was actually OPTIMISTIC about the Future of this Country!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

That and the full throttle oil policy. Sigh of relief knowing I won't have to rethink my outlook.