Lexicus
Deity
If she had to imply that his position was because of racism, then she did not "openly" call him racist, period, end of discussion. And btw she accused him of not supporting a policy, not of supporting a racist policy.
2020 US Election (Part Two)
- Thread starter Lexicus
- Start date
- Status
If she had to imply that his position was because of racism, then she did not "openly" call him racist, period, end of discussion. And btw she accused him of not supporting a policy, not of supporting a racist policy.
Berzerker
Deity
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/kamala-harris-ancestor-slaves/
Kamala's father said he was descended from a slave owner
Kamala's father said he was descended from a slave owner
EnglishEdward
Deity
The BBC has tried to downplay this, it is actually a very important decision.
The logical Trump, Republican and Fox news response may be:
Joe Biden won't last four years, he has already agreed to step down a year after inauguration.
It won't really be sleepy Joe, it will be the black dominatrix Kamala.
Well as a limey, I don't know how that would go down with the yanky-doodles.
Written by bernie Sanders:
The pandemic is helping the rich get even richer. It's time to tax their obscene wealth
Inequality is becoming worse as tens of millions of Americans face unemployment, loss of healthcare, evictions and hunger
We are in the middle of an extraordinary moment in American history: a public health crisis, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, the existential threat of climate change and a president who is moving our country in an authoritarian direction.
In the midst of all these crises, there is another issue of major concern that is receiving very little attention. And that is the obscene level of income and wealth inequality which exists in our country and the fact that, during the pandemic, that inequality is becoming much worse.
While tens of millions of Americans are now facing economic desperation – unemployment, loss of healthcare, evictions, hunger – the very rich are becoming much richer. Here are three figures that should come as a shock to everyone in America:
$13,000,000,000. That’s how much Jeff Bezos, the wealthiest man alive, made in one day while the companies he owns denies paid sick leave, hazard pay and a safe workplace to hundreds of thousands of his workers.
$21,000,000,000. That’s how much the Walton family, the richest family in America, made over the past 20 weeks while US taxpayers continue to subsidize the starvation wages at Walmart, the largest private employer in America.
$731,000,000,000. That’s how much the wealth of 467 billionaires increased since the Federal Reserve started taking emergency actions to prop up the stock market in March.
Incredibly, thanks to President Trump’s tax giveaway to the rich signed into law a few years ago, billionaires now pay a lower effective tax rate than teachers, nurses, firefighters or truck drivers.
The extraordinary wealth gains that billionaires have made during the pandemic come at a time when 92 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured and tens of millions of Americans are facing evictions or foreclosures.
At a time when so many of our people are struggling economically, it is morally obscene that a tiny handful of billionaires – the top 0.0001% – are using a global pandemic as an opportunity to make outrageous profits after receiving a de facto bailout by the Federal Reserve.
It is time to change our national priorities. Instead of allowing multibillionaires to become much richer, Congress needs to stand up for working families. A good place to start would be to tax the enormous gains billionaires have made during the pandemic and use that money to guarantee healthcare as a right for the duration of the public health emergency.
According to Americans for Tax Fairness, imposing a 60% tax on the wealth gains made by just 467 billionaires in America would raise over $420bn. That’s enough money to empower Medicare to pay all of the out-of-pocket healthcare expenses of every American in this country, including prescription drugs, for an entire year.
Think about that for a moment. By imposing a 60% tax on the wealth gains made by just 467 billionaires, healthcare would be extended to everyone in America through Medicare and no one, regardless of their coverage, would have to pay any out-of-pocket medical bills over the next 12 months. That’s exactly what the Make Billionaires Pay Act I recently introduced with Senators Ed Markey and Kirsten Gillibrand would accomplish.
Under this legislation, no one who is diagnosed with cancer would have to beg for money from strangers on GoFundMe. No one with diabetes would die because they could not afford their insulin. No one with coronavirus symptoms would be afraid to go to a doctor because of the cost, and risk infecting their neighbors, colleagues, family or friends.
While the fight for Medicare for All continues, for at least the next 12 months, every American would be able to get the healthcare that they need during this public health crisis. And it could all be paid for by a 60% tax on the outsized fortunes the wealthiest people in America accumulated during this horrific pandemic.
Now, I understand that there are some people out there who may believe that a 60% tax sounds like a pretty steep tax increase. Well, let me ease those concerns. Even after paying this tax, these 467 billionaires will still come out ahead by $310bn. Trust me. Their families will survive.
As a nation, the time is long overdue for us to finally address the grotesque level of income and wealth inequality that exists. In my view, we can no longer tolerate the three wealthiest people in America owning more wealth than the bottom 50%, the top 1% owning more wealth than the bottom 92% and 45% of all new income going to the 1%.
At a time of enormous economic pain and suffering, we have a choice to make. We can continue to allow the very rich to get much richer while most everyone else gets poorer. Or we can tax the winnings a handful of billionaires made during the pandemic to improve the health and wellbeing of tens of millions of Americans.
The time has come for the Congress to act on behalf of the working class who are hurting like they have never hurt before, not the billionaire class who are doing phenomenally well and have never had it so good.
Making billionaires pay to expand Medicare to all during a public health emergency is a good place to start.
Inequality is becoming worse as tens of millions of Americans face unemployment, loss of healthcare, evictions and hunger
We are in the middle of an extraordinary moment in American history: a public health crisis, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, the existential threat of climate change and a president who is moving our country in an authoritarian direction.
In the midst of all these crises, there is another issue of major concern that is receiving very little attention. And that is the obscene level of income and wealth inequality which exists in our country and the fact that, during the pandemic, that inequality is becoming much worse.
While tens of millions of Americans are now facing economic desperation – unemployment, loss of healthcare, evictions, hunger – the very rich are becoming much richer. Here are three figures that should come as a shock to everyone in America:
$13,000,000,000. That’s how much Jeff Bezos, the wealthiest man alive, made in one day while the companies he owns denies paid sick leave, hazard pay and a safe workplace to hundreds of thousands of his workers.
$21,000,000,000. That’s how much the Walton family, the richest family in America, made over the past 20 weeks while US taxpayers continue to subsidize the starvation wages at Walmart, the largest private employer in America.
$731,000,000,000. That’s how much the wealth of 467 billionaires increased since the Federal Reserve started taking emergency actions to prop up the stock market in March.
Incredibly, thanks to President Trump’s tax giveaway to the rich signed into law a few years ago, billionaires now pay a lower effective tax rate than teachers, nurses, firefighters or truck drivers.
The extraordinary wealth gains that billionaires have made during the pandemic come at a time when 92 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured and tens of millions of Americans are facing evictions or foreclosures.
At a time when so many of our people are struggling economically, it is morally obscene that a tiny handful of billionaires – the top 0.0001% – are using a global pandemic as an opportunity to make outrageous profits after receiving a de facto bailout by the Federal Reserve.
It is time to change our national priorities. Instead of allowing multibillionaires to become much richer, Congress needs to stand up for working families. A good place to start would be to tax the enormous gains billionaires have made during the pandemic and use that money to guarantee healthcare as a right for the duration of the public health emergency.
According to Americans for Tax Fairness, imposing a 60% tax on the wealth gains made by just 467 billionaires in America would raise over $420bn. That’s enough money to empower Medicare to pay all of the out-of-pocket healthcare expenses of every American in this country, including prescription drugs, for an entire year.
Think about that for a moment. By imposing a 60% tax on the wealth gains made by just 467 billionaires, healthcare would be extended to everyone in America through Medicare and no one, regardless of their coverage, would have to pay any out-of-pocket medical bills over the next 12 months. That’s exactly what the Make Billionaires Pay Act I recently introduced with Senators Ed Markey and Kirsten Gillibrand would accomplish.
Under this legislation, no one who is diagnosed with cancer would have to beg for money from strangers on GoFundMe. No one with diabetes would die because they could not afford their insulin. No one with coronavirus symptoms would be afraid to go to a doctor because of the cost, and risk infecting their neighbors, colleagues, family or friends.
While the fight for Medicare for All continues, for at least the next 12 months, every American would be able to get the healthcare that they need during this public health crisis. And it could all be paid for by a 60% tax on the outsized fortunes the wealthiest people in America accumulated during this horrific pandemic.
Now, I understand that there are some people out there who may believe that a 60% tax sounds like a pretty steep tax increase. Well, let me ease those concerns. Even after paying this tax, these 467 billionaires will still come out ahead by $310bn. Trust me. Their families will survive.
As a nation, the time is long overdue for us to finally address the grotesque level of income and wealth inequality that exists. In my view, we can no longer tolerate the three wealthiest people in America owning more wealth than the bottom 50%, the top 1% owning more wealth than the bottom 92% and 45% of all new income going to the 1%.
At a time of enormous economic pain and suffering, we have a choice to make. We can continue to allow the very rich to get much richer while most everyone else gets poorer. Or we can tax the winnings a handful of billionaires made during the pandemic to improve the health and wellbeing of tens of millions of Americans.
The time has come for the Congress to act on behalf of the working class who are hurting like they have never hurt before, not the billionaire class who are doing phenomenally well and have never had it so good.
Making billionaires pay to expand Medicare to all during a public health emergency is a good place to start.
Berzerker
Deity
my former rep Willie Brown said Harris should decline and ask to be AG instead
You do know that she quit before any primaries and did so because she couldn't raise enough money? There were 20+ candidates and the big money went elsewhere. The best you can say is that she lost the competition for big money to others.
Berzerker
Deity
but the big money would have flowed her way had she polled better... thats why Biden was having trouble raising money early on
Old Hippy
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2011
- Messages
- 3,606
but did the big money go elsewhere,
the best you can say is that she now has the backing of big money to be in line to be the first woman president of the USA...
EnglishEdward
Deity
The way I see it the big money goes to candidates who are perceived as corrupt(able) and who,
if elected, will amply repay their campaign donors with far greater amounts of taxpayers money.
This makes me look more favourably on candidates such as Bernie or Kamala.
if elected, will amply repay their campaign donors with far greater amounts of taxpayers money.
This makes me look more favourably on candidates such as Bernie or Kamala.
Lexicus
Deity
You really think there is a substantial cohort of voters who might be open to backing Biden but won't because she picked Kamala? Because I don't.
Old Hippy
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2011
- Messages
- 3,606
feel free to go ahead and make the argument that Kamil will not be the benificary of big money now that she is VP pick...
EnglishEdward
Deity
That would be a separate argument, that I am not making.
The time for seed corn investment in a largely unknown political prospect has passed.
It is now a case of backing the Democrat or Republican double ticket.
Old Hippy
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2011
- Messages
- 3,606
but it IS the argument you made just 2 posts ago
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,418
I do. Between this pick and trump's takeover of unemployment payments, I now think he's the likely winner of the October election. The one thing he has strongly against those odds is his incompetent handling of the virus. But if he's lucky things will go badly in Europe again by the time of the election in the US, allowing hum to claim his performance is no worse that that of (some) other governments. Never mind if it's false, it can stick.
Tho pathetic offers, it's down to luck now which one will look the lesser evil to most voters. And the guy has been consistently lucky.
EnglishEdward
Deity
Not at all. Consider it in terms of investment appraisal.
The business case for investing in a longshot outsider (whether
political or tech) is different from investing in the front runner favourite.
The first being to gain an advantage, the second to not losing out.
Old Hippy
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2011
- Messages
- 3,606
yet with biden being so old Kamil is no longer a long shot of being president, so now by your own resoning she will get the benifit of being '' perceived as corrupt(able) and who, if elected, will amply repay their campaign donors with far greater amounts of taxpayers money
so my point is why was she percived as a long shot and not just as a very smart cookie who knows where the smart money goes now that she is apparently ''the front runner favourite.'
'
That is not likely at all.
Lexicus
Deity
I am highly skeptical. I strongly doubt there is, you know, virtually anyone who looks at Joe Biden and says "I was gonna vote for him until he picked Kamala".
The unemployment thing is a whole different story. Trump has not "taken over" unemployment benefits, but if he were to actually strong-arm his way through the separation of powers in the Constitution, a policy like that, clearly needed quite desperately, would be the best way to do it. His allies in Congress ensure its dysfunction and he can claim that since Congress cannot or will not, he must act.
(FYI, Trump has hardly "taken over unemployment payments" The states administer the unemployment systems, not the federal government, and the issue here has been the extra money the federal government was adding to the state unemployment benefit).
Yikes, that possibility is frightening. I suppose it's hardly impossible for that to happen, but it might be useful to show American liberals that Europe is hardly the quasi-socialist candyland they imagine...
EnglishEdward
Deity
The way I see this is:
The smart money rarely goes on the favourite horse to win.
I suspect that when she declared herself as a candidate
it was not because she expected to win the primary, but
merely to raise her own profile and obtain an important post.
That was probably less attractive to speculative investors.
How much money she will now get as a VP candidate (does the
VP candidate have a campaign account separate from the POTUS
candidate account?) is an interesting, but a separate question.
If there are separate accounts, and she gets more than Joe Biden,
it would imply that the market sees Joe Biden as likely POTUSINO.
The smart money rarely goes on the favourite horse to win.
I suspect that when she declared herself as a candidate
it was not because she expected to win the primary, but
merely to raise her own profile and obtain an important post.
That was probably less attractive to speculative investors.
How much money she will now get as a VP candidate (does the
VP candidate have a campaign account separate from the POTUS
candidate account?) is an interesting, but a separate question.
If there are separate accounts, and she gets more than Joe Biden,
it would imply that the market sees Joe Biden as likely POTUSINO.
- Status
