The Real timschochet

I try to be an optimist about most things. I think the fact that conservatives and liberals alike agree almost unanimously on the prosecution of this father is a great sign for our society. It shows, I believe, that despite our differences on so many issues we share similar feelings on most of the really important questions of right and wrong.

But I thought she was a socialist! How can this be?

No, normal people tell you that.

Bullsh!t on the coordination and the rest of your post as well. PERHAPS the criticism of Vance is unfair. I say perhaps because the fact is the criticism works because conservatives like Vance constantly refuse to address the root cause of these mass shootings which is, in the opinion both of liberals and the vast majority of the public, that we don’t have enough reasonable federal gun laws. Conservatives go out of their way to avoid discussing it.

Not the same. Politicians are taken out of context all the time. But the right makes up complete falsehoods like the supposed undocumented immigrants who attacked a school bus in San Diego. Be better.

Apparently the San Diego school bus story turned out to be bogus? And the Aurora story is not what it seems either?

Putting aside the first two points (we’ve discussed them ad naseum) I agree in principle with your third point. And yet- under Democratic administrations when the taxes on the wealthy have been significantly higher, the economy has tended to do better and grow faster. Thats been pretty consistently true for the last 50 years and it gives me pause. How about you?

I’m sure you think I’m terribly naive. And I think you’re incredibly cynical.

I don’t blame Kamala for acting exactly like 100% of all Republicans and Democrats before her, but damn it would be so refreshing to just ONCE have a candidate say “you know what? I’m going to face opposition in Congress so most of what I would like to do I probably won’t get done. So here’s a more realistic series of proposals.” But of course that never energizes the base, and that’s where you get the most votes. But personally I would love it.

I’m betting this is something that 99% of conservatives and liberals can all agree on.

You’re preaching to the choir. I’m not for government decisions on behalf of fairness. I’m for whatever improves people’s lives. Screw fairness. That’s why I am in favor of forgiving student loans, because I believe it will lead to more home purchases and therefore a more stable society. Conservatives say it’s unfair. That’s why I’m for giving amnesty to most undocumented immigrants already here, because I think it’s good for our economy. Conservatives say that’s unfair to those who came here “the right way.” But I don’t care about fairness. I’m pretty consistent about that. In this case it’s liberals that are whining about fairness and I still don’t give a crap. If I believed taxing the rich more would benefit the economy I’d be all for it. But I’m skeptical. It might work but again it might not.

If we’re going to discuss Kamala’s proposals we need first to accept a very important truth: Jon Tester is not going to win Montana. Tester is way behind, his opponent is popular, Montana is redder than red. It’s not gonna happen. And that means that the Senate is going to be Republican. So you can forget about capital gains taxes, and laws against price gouging, and stopping fracking, and a lot of other stuff conservatives are so opposed to. None of it is real. It’s just a lot of talk. What’s real is the small business proposal; that might go through. What’s real is Kamala’s more moderate ideas.

I don’t think it’s a good idea either in principle but there is context here: Kamala is not really imposing new taxes so much as she is reversing part (not all) of Trump’s tax cuts. So using Europe’s example in which the percentages were a lot higher is not really apt. Still again I agree with your argument in principle. But the whole tariff idea makes all of these considerations kind of moot.

It is a wealth tax. And Trump’s tariffs will be a tax on all consumers. Again take your pick. To me it’s an easy choice (especially since, assuming one disapproves of both ideas, the reality is that Kamala will have a very difficult time getting her proposal through Congress, while Trump doesn’t need Congress to impose his tariffs. That makes it a no-brainer IMO. P

Meanwhile Trump was asked today about lowering child care costs. He says his new tariffs will pay for it!! Honestly if you are a right wing free market conservative, you have to face the facts here: Kamala will do things you will no doubt dislike, and a few things you may actually approve of (like the small business tax cut.) Meanwhile the other guy is a complete moron who is apparently determined to collapse our economy. Take your pick.

I think it’s still mild if it’s limited to 100 million or more.

Here are the details on unrealized gains: https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/09/05/harris-economic-plan-tax-unrealized-gains.html Basically a 25% tax on those with assets over 100 million. Thats not anyone I know (well one guy I think.) But it’s not a whole lot of people.

OK I was referring to ALL capital gains- not specifically unrealized capital gains. My bad.

Yes she gave a speech yesterday where she stated exactly where she stands. 28%, an increase from Trump’s reduction down to 20%. Again this is very mild stuff.

1. It’s not legit because gun confiscation is not on the table, never been on the table , never will be. 2. I don’t have blind faith in the government but I also don’t begin with the belief that they are out to do harm to us. In a free country the government is made up of people who for the most part try to do their best to serve the rest of us. Sometimes they screw up, sometimes large bureaucracy can lead to Kafkaesque outcomes which can be downright scary. But deliberate intent to do harm is pretty rare.

It is this irrational fear that will cause you to lose on this issue.

It’s not legit. and while the 2A protects your right to own a firearm it does not protect you from regulations. Otherwise why would the words “well-regulated” be included?

I agree. But as I wrote I think AR-15s will be banned too. Part of the reason is because the extremists on the conservative side of this issue refuse to give an inch on anything. If they would simply concede universal background checks for example, that would be enough. But they won’t because they believe that if you allow any restrictions then eventually it will lead to confiscation. So because of their intransigence the extremists on the other side will win eventually.

That was me. Or at least I was one of them- I think there were several.

I don’t care. But then I don’t care about George Soros either.