Several Democrats fighting for tax break for the rich

[Politesse]

Heh. In all seriousness, I am no longer shocked at how expensive the city is. I think I'm getting Stockholm syndrome... "only 11 dollars for a burger! What a steal!".

Funny what you can acclimate to. Because I'm always going back and forth between Bay and Valley for work, I find myself planning a bit strategically about when and where to eat, because everything really is double the price when you cross the coast ranges. It's usually worth it, though. Everything is better in Berkeley or Palo Alto than it is in Modesto or Stockton, and that is just stating a sad fact of life. Never mind San Francisco her glorious self, where, it seems, a curated sampling of all the excellent food in the world has been conveniently collected in two square miles of foodie heaven.

I love food, man.

I will defend Philz coffee here. It can be very expensive if you go for one of their fancy concoctions, but just a plain, small pour-over is under 4 bucks.

Okay so I think Philz is utterly ridiculous, but mostly because of all the theater they put you through to get your drink. I'm the first to admit they pour a nice brew. Good tea, too, despite the markup; if looking for a chamomile on a late work night out, they used to be my main bitches before the lockdown. This, I miss.

 

[Rhea]

Heh. In all seriousness, I am no longer shocked at how expensive the city is. I think I'm getting Stockholm syndrome... "only 11 dollars for a burger! What a steal!".

Funny what you can acclimate to. Because I'm always going back and forth between Bay and Valley for work, I find myself planning a bit strategically about when and where to eat, because everything really is double the price when you cross the coast ranges. It's usually worth it, though. Everything is better in Berkeley or Palo Alto than it is in Modesto or Stockton, and that is just stating a sad fact of life.

It is funny, because to me the idea of eating out regularly is very foreign. Because I live pretty far from things (for example there is no possibility of any meal being delivered to my house) and because I think eating out is expensive ( $15+ for an entrée!?) I am acclimated to cooking for myself and if I want different ethnicities in my menu, I make it.

We eat out (pre pandemic) on average 5-8 times a year. And half of those are a taco truck at the brew-pub.
We make breakfast at home, we brew our own coffee at home, we pack a lunch and we cook dinner at home 30 days a month.

Some people might find that intolerable, but - it's funny what you can acclimate to.

 

[Politesse]

Heh. In all seriousness, I am no longer shocked at how expensive the city is. I think I'm getting Stockholm syndrome... "only 11 dollars for a burger! What a steal!".

Funny what you can acclimate to. Because I'm always going back and forth between Bay and Valley for work, I find myself planning a bit strategically about when and where to eat, because everything really is double the price when you cross the coast ranges. It's usually worth it, though. Everything is better in Berkeley or Palo Alto than it is in Modesto or Stockton, and that is just stating a sad fact of life.

It is funny, because to me the idea of eating out regularly is very foreign. Because I live pretty far from things (for example there is no possibility of any meal being delivered to my house) and because I think eating out is expensive ( $15+ for an entrée!?) I am acclimated to cooking for myself and if I want different ethnicities in my menu, I make it.

We eat out (pre pandemic) on average 5-8 times a year. And half of those are a taco truck at the brew-pub.
We make breakfast at home, we brew our own coffee at home, we pack a lunch and we cook dinner at home 30 days a month.

Some people might find that intolerable, but - it's funny what you can acclimate to.

Naturally, I do too; I'd quickly go broke trying to eat out every night, even on my dear boyfriend's salary. But as good as my cooking is, I'm no match for a true expert chef! Anyways, it's fun to go out every now and then. I'm not one of these types to piss and moan over the quarantine, but I do miss the occasional night out on the town.

 

[Swammerdami]

From what I have seen so far of this thread, the last tax bill was a very sound tax plan targeting the very people most likely to afford to pay the tax. ...

That is what freedom and liberty is all about.

What?? The last tax bill gave a variety of massive tax cuts to the rich who, I think, were "most likely to afford to pay" tax HIKES instead of CUTS.

I've left in the final sentence of this quote, because this meme is so over-used and meaningless today as to be laughable. (Since the context was moving to Texas, are you sure you don't want to also throw "guns" into the "freedom" word salad?)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Heh. In all seriousness, I am no longer shocked at how expensive the city is. I think I'm getting Stockholm syndrome... "only 11 dollars for a burger! What a steal!".

Funny what you can acclimate to. Because I'm always going back and forth between Bay and Valley for work, I find myself planning a bit strategically about when and where to eat, because everything really is double the price when you cross the coast ranges. It's usually worth it, though. Everything is better in Berkeley or Palo Alto than it is in Modesto or Stockton, and that is just stating a sad fact of life.

It is funny, because to me the idea of eating out regularly is very foreign. Because I live pretty far from things (for example there is no possibility of any meal being delivered to my house) and because I think eating out is expensive ( $15+ for an entrée!?) I am acclimated to cooking for myself and if I want different ethnicities in my menu, I make it.

We eat out (pre pandemic) on average 5-8 times a year. And half of those are a taco truck at the brew-pub.
We make breakfast at home, we brew our own coffee at home, we pack a lunch and we cook dinner at home 30 days a month.

Some people might find that intolerable, but - it's funny what you can acclimate to.

For people in the high pay tech jobs eating out very well might be a better deal than preparing their own meals.

 

[repoman]

Don't let demagogues like this get a good shot in, but the DNC earned this shot

 

[Rhea]

Don't let demagogues like this get a good shot in, but the DNC earned this shot

“Fortune 500” is too clumsy, IMHO, but i support “all companies whose top management makes more than 50x the lowest wage earner.” Might be the same companies, but would easily exclude all small startups.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Close enough. Not worthy of it's own thread.

Going After the Billionaires' Loophole

The Internal Revenue Service characterizes carried interest as capital gains, rather than ordinary income. That’s the difference between paying the 23.8% total investment rate, including a levy that funds Obamacare, versus the 37% rate for salaries and wages.

But now the Biden administration wants to label both as ordinary income, effectively doubling the capital gains tax for the highest earners, and meaning that profitable perk—the Billionaires’ Loophole—might vanish at last. The combo of rising income and capital gains taxes, scrapping the carried interest break, and paying additional state and local taxes could push total levies for some to 60%.

And the proposed changes may come on top of more scrutiny. A Treasury Department report released Thursday estimated that wealthy taxpayers as a group are hiding billions of dollars of income, bolstering the Biden administration’s call for Congress to approve expanded IRS funding.

Left with a mere 40% of a gazillion dollars.

 

[Emily Lake]

The last tax bill was about punishing blue states - the deductions that were used most by households in the blue states were targeted. There are more open and more efficient methods to raise revenue than by arbitrarily limiting deductions based on geographical pain.

From what I have seen so far of this thread, the last tax bill was a very sound tax plan targeting the very people most likely to afford to pay the tax. Yes, that does happen to be the blue states. But their political ideology has nothing to do with the fact that they indeed are the richest people who not only should pay more tax but most importantly are able to pay more tax. The most efficient way to collect money is to go after the most people who have the money.

Sorry, but if you actually paid attention to the debates, it was about punishing the residents of blue states. BTW, there are rich people in red states as well. Some of those red states do not tax income and are first at the federal trough to suck up revenue so that they are net gainers in the revenue -tax contributions.

Take two households with the same income and same expenditures on private goods and charitable contributions. It is possible that the household in the red state saw their tax liability stay the same or fall while the household in the blue state saw it stay the same or rise. One's residence should not affect one's federal tax liability. The change in federal tax law should treat households that are identical in every relevant respect but geography the same.

Okay, am I missing something here? Prior to limiting the deduction, the federal tax law DID NOT treat households the same. If a person with the same income and same family composition lived in a more expensive house, in a state with higher state taxes and higher property taxes... they paid LESS in federal income tax than someone in a less expensive house in a less expensive area. That's not treating them the same, that's giving preferential treatment on the basis of geography, isn't it?

 

[Emily Lake]

If you actually took your words to heart, you'd be advocating that federal gov't tax residents of states with no income tax even higher, since they have great ability to pay than similar households in states with state income tax.

Isn't that how it works though? If you live in a state without income tax, you don't get to deduct that income tax, you get taxed on the entirety of your income. So you do pay a higher federal tax, don't you?

 

[Emily Lake]

Heh. In all seriousness, I am no longer shocked at how expensive the city is. I think I'm getting Stockholm syndrome... "only 11 dollars for a burger! What a steal!".

Funny what you can acclimate to. Because I'm always going back and forth between Bay and Valley for work, I find myself planning a bit strategically about when and where to eat, because everything really is double the price when you cross the coast ranges. It's usually worth it, though. Everything is better in Berkeley or Palo Alto than it is in Modesto or Stockton, and that is just stating a sad fact of life.

It is funny, because to me the idea of eating out regularly is very foreign. Because I live pretty far from things (for example there is no possibility of any meal being delivered to my house) and because I think eating out is expensive ( $15+ for an entrée!?) I am acclimated to cooking for myself and if I want different ethnicities in my menu, I make it.

We eat out (pre pandemic) on average 5-8 times a year. And half of those are a taco truck at the brew-pub.
We make breakfast at home, we brew our own coffee at home, we pack a lunch and we cook dinner at home 30 days a month.

Some people might find that intolerable, but - it's funny what you can acclimate to.

Pretty much this. Pre-pandemic, we ate out when company came to visit and wanted some local food. Or when we visited someone else.

I make a pretty good income, I was affected by SALT, and it really was not that big a deal.

I'm honestly a bit baffled at a large pile of progressives bitching that they have to pay more taxes on their considerably-higher-than-median incomes... and wanting to push their tax burden onto lower-earning people. Just wow. It's the upside down now.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If you actually took your words to heart, you'd be advocating that federal gov't tax residents of states with no income tax even higher, since they have great ability to pay than similar households in states with state income tax.

Isn't that how it works though? If you live in a state without income tax, you don't get to deduct that income tax, you get taxed on the entirety of your income. So you do pay a higher federal tax, don't you?

In practice you normally pay either income tax, property tax, or sales tax. Some states distribute the burden very differently than others, but all of these are deductible.