Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[lpetrich]

AOC continues to stay in touch with her constituents:
August Town Hall - YouTube
AOC: How to Organize a Childcare Collective - YouTube

She also mentioned this: so you want to talk about... on Instagram: “Let’s talk about the Green New Deal ” - linking to an Instagram slideshow on it


Selfies and sunsets be gone: The latest Instagram trend is PowerPoint-style presentations - The Washington Post

Avery Francis on Instagram: “Hey new + old friends just shy of 10,000 of you started following me recently! Hello and thank you for wanting to learn + grow with me …”

so you want to talk about... (@soyouwanttotalkabout) • Instagram photos and videos Mostly about politics, though I've found so you want to talk about... on Instagram: “Positive self-affirmations are important! Let’s talk ”

 

[angelo]

I do think that some on the left are very unrealistic when it comes to how much taxes the most wealthy should pay. If we want more social programs, we will all have to pay more taxes. The wealthiest should pay a higher percentage than they currently do, but, despite the things that I like about AOC and her followers, they need to have a better understanding of how expensive some of these programs would be and there aren't enough billionaires to support them.

Exactly!

 

[southernhybrid]

And yet they are still paying lower effective rates, and they still would be if these rates came to be today, so this is a pointless canard that doesn't address anything.

Everyone already knows that effective tax rates are lower than the nominal rate. There is no need to remind people.

People keep pointing out those old very high rates didn't cause catastrophe as evidence we can go to such rates again. I'm pointing out that it isn't such evidence as the rates never really existed in the first place.

Oddly enough, I have to agree with Loren, which is rare for me. . People often claim that the highest tax rates in the 50s were over 90%, but the reality is that the highest tax rates were around 50% because of all the tax breaks and deductions. I think we need to be more honest and not talk about what the highest rate was listed at, but what the highest rate was in reality.

Sure, it's lower now and I totally agree that it needs to be higher, but nobody in the US has ever paid a 90% tax rate, so why can't we all be honest about what the wealthiest really paid instead of making the false claims that they paid 90% in taxes. 90% is not realistic. If you have a lick of sense, you would realize or admit that. If the rate were that high in reality, most of the mega rich would apply for citizenship in one of the European countries that have much lower tax rates. And, you know damn well, that mega wealthy people are almost always welcomed in other countries. We have a few billionaires that give most of their money away to charity, but most don't do that. So, most would probably do whatever they have to do to hold on to their fortunes.

So, what is a reasonable tax rate for the mega wealthy? What is a reasonable tax rate for people who only make 20 -50,000 per year? If we are able to accomplish most of what people like AOC want, how much in taxes would you be willing to pay? From what I've read in the past, most people don't want to have their taxes increased in exchange for most of these social programs. I think that's unreasonable too. We should all be willing to pay more taxes in exchange for programs that would drastically decrease poverty, give better access to health care, better public education, and help for those who need it during childhood and old age, etc. We can't simply expect the wealthiest to be able to support the rest of us. We all need to pitch in and pay more. Most countries that have the type of social programs desired by people like AOC are very willing to pay more taxes in return for the security that these programs bring. I'm not sure that most Americans feel that way.

The problem that I've always had with Bernie, is that he never gives us any realistic details as to how to initiate and support the type of programs that people like him support. So, it ends up sounding like pie in the sky. If one wants change, one needs a detailed plan as to how to install these changes, as well as a plan as how to convince the majority of Congress to vote for these measures. We are supposedly a center right country. I'd like to believe we're more of a center left country, but either way, it's not going to be easy to make large changes without the support of the majority.

I don't oppose most of these changes. I just don't see a way to accomplish them rapidly, if at all.

 

[ZiprHead]

And yet they are still paying lower effective rates, and they still would be if these rates came to be today, so this is a pointless canard that doesn't address anything.

Everyone already knows that effective tax rates are lower than the nominal rate. There is no need to remind people.

People keep pointing out those old very high rates didn't cause catastrophe as evidence we can go to such rates again. I'm pointing out that it isn't such evidence as the rates never really existed in the first place.

Oddly enough, I have to agree with Loren, which is rare for me. . People often claim that the highest tax rates in the 50s were over 90%, but the reality is that the highest tax rates were around 50% because of all the tax breaks and deductions. I think we need to be more honest and not talk about what the highest rate was listed at, but what the highest rate was in reality.

Sure, it's lower now and I totally agree that it needs to be higher, but nobody in the US has ever paid a 90% tax rate, so why can't we all be honest about what the wealthiest really paid instead of making the false claims that they paid 90% in taxes. 90% is not realistic. If you have a lick of sense, you would realize or admit that. If the rate were that high in reality, most of the mega rich would apply for citizenship in one of the European countries that have much lower tax rates. And, you know damn well, that mega wealthy people are almost always welcomed in other countries. We have a few billionaires that give most of their money away to charity, but most don't do that. So, most would probably do whatever they have to do to hold on to their fortunes.

So, what is a reasonable tax rate for the mega wealthy? What is a reasonable tax rate for people who only make 20 -50,000 per year? If we are able to accomplish most of what people like AOC want, how much in taxes would you be willing to pay? From what I've read in the past, most people don't want to have their taxes increased in exchange for most of these social programs. I think that's unreasonable too. We should all be willing to pay more taxes in exchange for programs that would drastically decrease poverty, give better access to health care, better public education, and help for those who need it during childhood and old age, etc. We can't simply expect the wealthiest to be able to support the rest of us. We all need to pitch in and pay more. Most countries that have the type of social programs desired by people like AOC are very willing to pay more taxes in return for the security that these programs bring. I'm not sure that most Americans feel that way.

The problem that I've always had with Bernie, is that he never gives us any realistic details as to how to initiate and support the type of programs that people like him support. So, it ends up sounding like pie in the sky. If one wants change, one needs a detailed plan as to how to install these changes, as well as a plan as how to convince the majority of Congress to vote for these measures. We are supposedly a center right country. I'd like to believe we're more of a center left country, but either way, it's not going to be easy to make large changes without the support of the majority.

I don't oppose most of these changes. I just don't see a way to accomplish them rapidly, if at all.

It was Loren that brought up the rates. No one else.

 

[southernhybrid]

I was thinking of much earlier when the primaries were still in progress. There were quite a few people where who kept saying that the rates were 90% in the 50s. Anyway, I think we all know better now, or at least I hope we do.

 

[Worldtraveller]

You all are talking about two different things (or you don't understand how taxes work).

The highest marginal tax rates were, indeed, in the 90% ranges (94% was the highest even in 1944-45).

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-highest-marginal-income-tax-rates

The effective tax rate for even the highest earners tended toward the 60% range at most. With the current wealth inequality, we could potentially see higher effective tax rates if we had 1950s level marginal tax rates. That's not a bad thing though, because as your effective tax rate tends toward the highest marginal rate, that means one is making so much more than they could ever spend that it is ridiculous. Honestly, the US could put a cap of, say $500M in total wealth on an individual/couple, and just tax the rest at 100% and these vultures wouldn't exactly suffer. (That's wealth, not income).

 

[ZiprHead]

You all are talking about two different things (or you don't understand how taxes work).

The highest marginal tax rates were, indeed, in the 90% ranges (94% was the highest even in 1944-45).

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-highest-marginal-income-tax-rates

The effective tax rate for even the highest earners tended toward the 60% range at most. With the current wealth inequality, we could potentially see higher effective tax rates if we had 1950s level marginal tax rates. That's not a bad thing though, because as your effective tax rate tends toward the highest marginal rate, that means one is making so much more than they could ever spend that it is ridiculous. Honestly, the US could put a cap of, say $500M in total wealth on an individual/couple, and just tax the rest at 100% and these vultures wouldn't exactly suffer. (That's wealth, not income).

I'm not big on taxing accumulated wealth but I'm open to listening to ideas on how to do it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And yet they are still paying lower effective rates, and they still would be if these rates came to be today, so this is a pointless canard that doesn't address anything.

Everyone already knows that effective tax rates are lower than the nominal rate. There is no need to remind people.

People keep pointing out those old very high rates didn't cause catastrophe as evidence we can go to such rates again. I'm pointing out that it isn't such evidence as the rates never really existed in the first place.

Oddly enough, I have to agree with Loren, which is rare for me. . People often claim that the highest tax rates in the 50s were over 90%, but the reality is that the highest tax rates were around 50% because of all the tax breaks and deductions. I think we need to be more honest and not talk about what the highest rate was listed at, but what the highest rate was in reality.

I even disagree on the 50%--the reality is we do not know the rate--the worst loopholes kept money from ever showing up on one's tax return in the first place so we have no way to measure them. (And that's not even counting the abuses with "business" expenses that were really personal.)

Sure, it's lower now and I totally agree that it needs to be higher, but nobody in the US has ever paid a 90% tax rate, so why can't we all be honest about what the wealthiest really paid instead of making the false claims that they paid 90% in taxes.

There probably were a few with major windfalls who didn't know how to protect themselves from the taxman.

Personally, I think 50% is a good upper bound, but I would like to see the tax code explicitly encode this. We have the alternative minimum tax (meant to limit deductions), I'd like to also see an alternative maximum tax, if you can show that your top dollars (or your total) are being taxed above this rate you pay only that rate on those dollars. This generally only happens with phaseouts ($1 over the limit can raise your tax bill far more than $1), but I've heard of situations where multiple fingers in the pie cause big problems. (The worst I heard of was with estate taxes and out-of-state assets, tax rates above 100% were possible.)

 

[ZiprHead]

I even disagree on the 50%--the reality is we do not know the rate--the worst loopholes kept money from ever showing up on one's tax return in the first place so we have no way to measure them. (And that's not even counting the abuses with "business" expenses that were really personal.)

What are you talking about. Of course we know.



https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/effective-income-tax-rates-have-fallen-top-one-percent-world-war-ii#:~:text=The%20effective%20tax%20rates%20on,all%20taxpayers%20was%2014%20percent.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I even disagree on the 50%--the reality is we do not know the rate--the worst loopholes kept money from ever showing up on one's tax return in the first place so we have no way to measure them. (And that's not even counting the abuses with "business" expenses that were really personal.)

What are you talking about. Of course we know.

View attachment 28976

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/effective-income-tax-rates-have-fallen-top-one-percent-world-war-ii#:~:text=The%20effective%20tax%20rates%20on,all%20taxpayers%20was%2014%20percent.

We do not know--there's a big unknown that taints all such data: many of the loopholes kept the money from showing up as income in the first place. We don't know how much money never made it to the 1040 and thus we can't calculate the actual tax rate.

 

[ZiprHead]

I even disagree on the 50%--the reality is we do not know the rate--the worst loopholes kept money from ever showing up on one's tax return in the first place so we have no way to measure them. (And that's not even counting the abuses with "business" expenses that were really personal.)

What are you talking about. Of course we know.

View attachment 28976

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/effective-income-tax-rates-have-fallen-top-one-percent-world-war-ii#:~:text=The%20effective%20tax%20rates%20on,all%20taxpayers%20was%2014%20percent.

We do not know--there's a big unknown that taints all such data: many of the loopholes kept the money from showing up as income in the first place. We don't know how much money never made it to the 1040 and thus we can't calculate the actual tax rate.

The effective tax rate is after the loopholes. And concerning your second sentence, the same can still be said today.

 

[lpetrich]

AOC recently had this curious inspiration:

she is proposing a widespread penpal program to encourage stamp buying to help save the post office : AOC
full video: AOC pen-pals IG story - Album on Imgur

Happy Sunday! I've got an idea to help you help the post office - tell me what you think

One of the best ways to support @uspostalservice is to buy stamps.

What would you think if Team AOC set up a national progressive pen pal program?

(Poll) What do you think if we set up a national pen pal program?

• Yes, love it! Sign me up!
• Maybe not this time

We would:

• connect you to a pen pal partner to use your stamps with
• offer some conversation prompts & best practices
• provide some printable postcards for you to use (if you'd like)

What are your thoughts? Any details you'd like to add?

I'd only want to do it with someone that I already knew online.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We do not know--there's a big unknown that taints all such data: many of the loopholes kept the money from showing up as income in the first place. We don't know how much money never made it to the 1040 and thus we can't calculate the actual tax rate.

The effective tax rate is after the loopholes.

In other words, you're conceding my point.

And concerning your second sentence, the same can still be said today.

Now we don't have much in the way of loopholes that legally keep things off the 1040. Of course we don't know how much evasion is going on.

 

[ZiprHead]

In other words, you're conceding my point.

And concerning your second sentence, the same can still be said today.

Now we don't have much in the way of loopholes that legally keep things off the 1040. Of course we don't know how much evasion is going on.

Every cash transaction can be off the books.

 

[lpetrich]

'Teaching Is Tough, but I'm Inspired by My Former Student AOC' by Mai Jacobs

You may have heard about a viral moment on Twitter that happened recently. A freshman congresswoman recognized her former elementary school teacher in a tweet of encouragement. The rest, as they say, is history—at least my 15 minutes of it.

The teacher was me. The congresswoman was my former student, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, representative for New York's 14th congressional district.

AOC, as she is known by many, had posted a poem titled "Just One Minute" on Twitter. It reminded me of all the poems we'd read together in my second grade classroom. I sent her a tweet of encouragement that read: "You've got this," and she responded almost immediately with words that melted my teacher's heart: "Thank you for believing in me as a child.

"Wow" was just about all I could muster, after I picked myself up from the sobbing mess I had become. You may wonder, why the crying? It was a sweet moment to be sure, but was it one that should have prompted tears?

Nice. It's an experience that I never had.

 

[lpetrich]

AOC is the future of the Catholic Church | National Catholic Reporter

As I listened to her 10-minute address on the House floor, I was struck by how often it referenced Catholic values.

Ocasio-Cortez repeatedly railed against the "dehumanizing" of others and instead called for treating people with dignity and respect. These are themes often repeated by Pope Francis, who has specifically cautioned about gossip and urged the use of respectful language, saying "it is possible to kill someone with the tongue."

The Democratic congresswoman who represents New York's 14th District also universalized the need to treat all people with dignity and respect, noting that Yoho's behavior gave "permission to other men to do that to his daughters."

"I'm here to say that is not acceptable," she said.

Three weeks later,
AOC embraces reproductive justice, and other Catholics should, too | National Catholic Reporter

"If there is to be a future for the Catholic Church in the United States," Schlumpf wrote, "it must also resemble Ocasio-Cortez in her passion for justice and human dignity, and in her courage and integrity, even in the face of vulgar attacks."

The piece aroused the indignation of some Catholics who oppose the right to access abortion care, arguing that, Ocasio-Cortez's pro-choice position is untenable with the Catholic faith.

What they don't consider, however, is that Ocasio-Cortez doesn't view the issue of abortion simply as an issue of reproductive rights. She views it through the more comprehensive lens of reproductive justice.

Then noting Reproductive Justice | Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Representative Ocasio-Cortez believes that every person has the right to bodily autonomy.

In her first six months, Representative Ocasio-Cortez advocated for the repeal of coverage bans that restrict women and pregnant people from making their own reproductive health choices. She also is a proud co-sponsor of the Each Woman Act, a historic piece of legislation that would lift the Hyde Amendment and make reproductive health accessible and affordable to all women, despite their income.

The author continued with reproductive justice more generally:

The National Black Women's Reproductive Justice Agenda explains the framework succinctly on its website:

Reproductive Justice means the human right to control our sexuality, our gender, our work, and our reproduction. That right can only be achieved when all women and girls have the complete economic, social, and political power and resources to make healthy decisions about our bodies, our families, and our communities in all areas of our lives.

What struck me when I read this description is how much it overlaps with parts of Catholic social justice teaching, even as it obviously disagrees with the official doctrine of the Catholic Church on abortion.

noting Reproductive Justice – In Our Own Voice

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sells Catholics on abortion as 'reproductive justice' - Washington Times - asking what kind of a Catholic defends abortion.

 

[angelo]

AOC is the future of the Catholic Church | National Catholic Reporter

Three weeks later,
AOC embraces reproductive justice, and other Catholics should, too | National Catholic Reporter

Then noting Reproductive Justice | Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Representative Ocasio-Cortez believes that every person has the right to bodily autonomy.

In her first six months, Representative Ocasio-Cortez advocated for the repeal of coverage bans that restrict women and pregnant people from making their own reproductive health choices. She also is a proud co-sponsor of the Each Woman Act, a historic piece of legislation that would lift the Hyde Amendment and make reproductive health accessible and affordable to all women, despite their income.

The author continued with reproductive justice more generally:

The National Black Women's Reproductive Justice Agenda explains the framework succinctly on its website:

Reproductive Justice means the human right to control our sexuality, our gender, our work, and our reproduction. That right can only be achieved when all women and girls have the complete economic, social, and political power and resources to make healthy decisions about our bodies, our families, and our communities in all areas of our lives.

What struck me when I read this description is how much it overlaps with parts of Catholic social justice teaching, even as it obviously disagrees with the official doctrine of the Catholic Church on abortion.

noting Reproductive Justice – In Our Own Voice

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sells Catholics on abortion as 'reproductive justice' - Washington Times - asking what kind of a Catholic defends abortion.

A very poor, or not really a Catholic in the first place I'd say!

 

[lpetrich]

AOC never backed down on the Amazon HQ2 issue.

Sen. Mike Gianaris on Twitter: "So let’s see...
In 1.5 yrs since Amazon “pulled out” of NYC, they announced 1 mil sq ft of new office space and added or announced 5,000 new office jobs.
HQ2 was over 15 yrs, so they’re on pace to exceed what was planned.
All without massive subsidy. https://t.co/mZ9M8YoMM7" / Twitter
noting
Amazon adding 2,000 jobs at NYC's Lord & Taylor building


Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Listen to Ms. Jacobs " / Twitter
noting
Dimi Reider on Twitter: "This is just such a lovely, thoughtful piece from @AOC's elementary school teacher, Mai Jacobs. Makes me think of my partner and her teacher colleagues: doggedly fighting the good fight, a letter, a classroom, a question, a poem, a student at a time. https://t.co/zszrESEldo" / Twitter
mentioning the recent Newsweek article by her.

 

[lpetrich]

(AOC as a Catholic...)

A very poor, or not really a Catholic in the first place I'd say!

She seems a lot like some generalized liberal Xian, or else spiritual but not religious. She's had some recent opportunities to brag about what a great Catholic she is, but she has not done so.

Spencer Ackerman on Twitter: "ICE is feeding Muslim detainees pork at its Krome detention center in Miami and its chaplain dismisses this basic, deliberate dignity violation by saying “it is what it is.” https://t.co/UldZTZWL2h" / Twitter
then
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "These horrifying ICE reports are not one-off incidents.
ICE, like many unjust structures, is not “broken.” It is operating in the logical conclusions of its founding.
ICE is structured for dehumanization. Experts warned abt this in its creation in ‘03.
Another way is possible." / Twitter

 

[angelo]

(AOC as a Catholic...)

A very poor, or not really a Catholic in the first place I'd say!

She seems a lot like some generalized liberal Xian, or else spiritual but not religious. She's had some recent opportunities to brag about what a great Catholic she is, but she has not done so.

Spencer Ackerman on Twitter: "ICE is feeding Muslim detainees pork at its Krome detention center in Miami and its chaplain dismisses this basic, deliberate dignity violation by saying “it is what it is.” https://t.co/UldZTZWL2h" / Twitter
then
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "These horrifying ICE reports are not one-off incidents.
ICE, like many unjust structures, is not “broken.” It is operating in the logical conclusions of its founding.
ICE is structured for dehumanization. Experts warned abt this in its creation in ‘03.
Another way is possible." / Twitter

She would swear black & blue what a deeply religious Catholic she is if she needed their vote.