Policy Talk - Kamala

[TruePatriot]

Dislike:

Mortgage assistance for first time homeowners. This will only increase the cost of homes to first time home buyers.

Tax credits for newborns. We need to be teaching financial responsibility and planning, not government reliance.

Unrealized capital gains for those with over $100mm. This is a proposal to punish the rich, not help those in need. If we need additional revenue for the govt (I would argue we need to cut spending), then there are many tax loopholes for corporations that we could close.

Border - I don’t know why our politicians are focused on building a wall that has been proven time and time again to be expensive and not deter any crossings. But expediting asylum seeker cases is a must. It should not take so long to decide whether someone should be allowed to live and work in the USA.

Erasing health care debt is another mistake we keep making. It only creates perverse incentives when you say you are going to wipe someone’s debt. Focus instead on reducing health care costs, of which ours are insanely high.

Climate funding for clean energy is another mistake we keep making. Let the market sort this out.

Like -

Abortion laws should not prevent a doctor from saving a woman’s life.

2A - Universal background checks and bans on high capacity magazines.

Decriminalize cannabis at the federal level.

Medicare at home program - this should’ve been part of Medicare long ago.

Raising taxes on the wealthy - I’d prefer she close loopholes instead of actually raise taxes but Warren buffet should not pay a lower tax rate than his secretary.


In general not much terribly exciting but outside of the taxing of unrealized capital gains, it seems fairly harmless and if we have a R controlled house, then it’s probably a non-event.

I’ll start one of these for Trump too.

 

[leetp]

Dislike:

Mortgage assistance for first time homeowners. This will only increase the cost of homes to first time home buyers.

Tax credits for newborns. We need to be teaching financial responsibility and planning, not government reliance.

Unrealized capital gains for those with over $100mm. This is a proposal to punish the rich, not help those in need. If we need additional revenue for the govt (I would argue we need to cut spending), then there are many tax loopholes for corporations that we could close.

Border - I don’t know why our politicians are focused on building a wall that has been proven time and time again to be expensive and not deter any crossings. But expediting asylum seeker cases is a must. It should not take so long to decide whether someone should be allowed to live and work in the USA.

Erasing health care debt is another mistake we keep making. It only creates perverse incentives when you say you are going to wipe someone’s debt. Focus instead on reducing health care costs, of which ours are insanely high.

Climate funding for clean energy is another mistake we keep making. Let the market sort this out.

Like -

Abortion laws should not prevent a doctor from saving a woman’s life.

2A - Universal background checks and bans on high capacity magazines.

Decriminalize cannabis at the federal level.

Medicare at home program - this should’ve been part of Medicare long ago.

Raising taxes on the wealthy - I’d prefer she close loopholes instead of actually raise taxes but Warren buffet should not pay a lower tax rate than his secretary.


In general not much terribly exciting but outside of the taxing of unrealized capital gains, it seems fairly harmless and if we have a R controlled house, then it’s probably a non-event.

I’ll start one of these for Trump too.

I think there's a few false dichotomies in there, but you're certainly no leftist. Or maybe a leftist of the Old Guard.

 

[GDead_Tiger]

Tax credits for children is one of the best policy proposals she had. The expanded CTC passed during the early Biden administration had a major impact on reducing child poverty. It is also a very pro-life policy.

 

[leetp]

[...] had a major impact on reducing child poverty. It is also a very pro-life policy.

That's a very bold statement. I'm not sure you can measure something like that in a short run. Don't you think these programs potentially promote single parenthood and grow dependency?

 

[TruePatriot]

Tax credits for children is one of the best policy proposals she had. The expanded CTC passed during the early Biden administration had a major impact on reducing child poverty. It is also a very pro-life policy.

I’d rather attack poverty at its core. I think reducing regulation to build more housing would lower the cost of living. Give tax breaks for work from home so people can move to lower cost of living areas.

 

[firegiver]

I’d rather attack poverty at its core. I think reducing regulation to build more housing would lower the cost of living. Give tax breaks for work from home so people can move to lower cost of living areas.

Y
How you gonna do that when deregulation allows corporations to behave like citizens only they live forever and hoard all their wealth?

 

[TruePatriot]

Y
How you gonna do that when deregulation allows corporations to behave like citizens only they live forever and hoard all their wealth?

It’s a fair point. Im no expert, but there is a lot of regulation around required parking spaces, height restrictions, traffic improvements, etc. the easier and lower cost we make it to build housing, the more that will be built. And housing seems to be the biggest issue for cost of living.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Dislike:

Mortgage assistance for first time homeowners. This will only increase the cost of homes to first time home buyers.

Tax credits for newborns. We need to be teaching financial responsibility and planning, not government reliance.

Unrealized capital gains for those with over $100mm. This is a proposal to punish the rich, not help those in need. If we need additional revenue for the govt (I would argue we need to cut spending), then there are many tax loopholes for corporations that we could close.

Border - I don’t know why our politicians are focused on building a wall that has been proven time and time again to be expensive and not deter any crossings. But expediting asylum seeker cases is a must. It should not take so long to decide whether someone should be allowed to live and work in the USA.

Erasing health care debt is another mistake we keep making. It only creates perverse incentives when you say you are going to wipe someone’s debt. Focus instead on reducing health care costs, of which ours are insanely high.

Climate funding for clean energy is another mistake we keep making. Let the market sort this out.

Like -

Abortion laws should not prevent a doctor from saving a woman’s life.

2A - Universal background checks and bans on high capacity magazines.

Decriminalize cannabis at the federal level.

Medicare at home program - this should’ve been part of Medicare long ago.

Raising taxes on the wealthy - I’d prefer she close loopholes instead of actually raise taxes but Warren buffet should not pay a lower tax rate than his secretary.


In general not much terribly exciting but outside of the taxing of unrealized capital gains, it seems fairly harmless and if we have a R controlled house, then it’s probably a non-event.

I’ll start one of these for Trump too.

No undecided left.

 

[TheValley91]

Dislike:

Mortgage assistance for first time homeowners. This will only increase the cost of homes to first time home buyers.

Tax credits for newborns. We need to be teaching financial responsibility and planning, not government reliance.

Unrealized capital gains for those with over $100mm. This is a proposal to punish the rich, not help those in need. If we need additional revenue for the govt (I would argue we need to cut spending), then there are many tax loopholes for corporations that we could close.

Border - I don’t know why our politicians are focused on building a wall that has been proven time and time again to be expensive and not deter any crossings. But expediting asylum seeker cases is a must. It should not take so long to decide whether someone should be allowed to live and work in the USA.

Erasing health care debt is another mistake we keep making. It only creates perverse incentives when you say you are going to wipe someone’s debt. Focus instead on reducing health care costs, of which ours are insanely high.

Climate funding for clean energy is another mistake we keep making. Let the market sort this out.

Like -

Abortion laws should not prevent a doctor from saving a woman’s life.

2A - Universal background checks and bans on high capacity magazines.

Decriminalize cannabis at the federal level.

Medicare at home program - this should’ve been part of Medicare long ago.

Raising taxes on the wealthy - I’d prefer she close loopholes instead of actually raise taxes but Warren buffet should not pay a lower tax rate than his secretary.


In general not much terribly exciting but outside of the taxing of unrealized capital gains, it seems fairly harmless and if we have a R controlled house, then it’s probably a non-event.

I’ll start one of these for Trump too.

Some things I agree with and some I disagree but I get the sense you are someone that can give and take when having a discussion on these ideas. That I appreciate a lot.

 

[TruePatriot]

Some things I agree with and some I disagree but I get the sense you are someone that can give and take when having a discussion on these ideas. That I appreciate a lot.

American first. Republican second.

 

[fatpiggy]

No comment necessary. Just totally backwards

 

[baltimorened]

Y
How you gonna do that when deregulation allows corporations to behave like citizens only they live forever and hoard all their wealth?

I doubt you'll ever end poverty by giving money to the poor. I know that sounds counterintuitive, but we started the ar on poverty in 1964...created all these programs for the "less fortunate". In 1964 we had an estimated 36 million people living in poverty...to day the number is about 34 million. We have welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, housing/rent support, home heating support, free phones, child care etc and have spent trillions of dollars. Is there a point where we relook our policies....

Now before I'm attacked as heartless or cruel...sure there is a part of our society that truly needs help and are unable to support themselves...they need and deserve our support. But I really have a difficult time believing that all 34 million are in that category.

 

[FLaw47]

I doubt you'll ever end poverty by giving money to the poor. I know that sounds counterintuitive, but we started the ar on poverty in 1964...created all these programs for the "less fortunate". In 1964 we had an estimated 36 million people living in poverty...to day the number is about 34 million. We have welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, housing/rent support, home heating support, free phones, child care etc and have spent trillions of dollars. Is there a point where we relook our policies....

Now before I'm attacked as heartless or cruel...sure there is a part of our society that truly needs help and are unable to support themselves...they need and deserve our support. But I really have a difficult time believing that all 34 million are in that category.

Good Lord, Ned.

• 1964
  • Population: 191.9M
  • People in Poverty: 36M
  • Rate: 18.8%
• Today
  • Population: 349M
  • People in Poverty: 34M
  • Rate: 9.7%
• Reduction:
  • 48.1%

So we've nearly halved the percentage of people living in poverty (by your numbers AND you're somehow claiming that the current number is even lower than that) and you're calling that a failure?

 

[Rifler]

Good Lord, Ned.

• 1964
  • Population: 191.9M
  • People in Poverty: 36M
  • Rate: 18.8%
• Today
  • Population: 349M
  • People in Poverty: 34M
  • Rate: 9.7%
• Reduction:
  • 48.1%

So we've nearly halved the percentage of people living in poverty (by your numbers AND you're somehow claiming that the current number is even lower than that) and you're calling that a failure?

The failure lies within in the stated current population figure of 349M,... Remove the roughly 10% of that number that shouldn't even be here and the US poverty rate would show even more improvement.

 

[FLaw47]

The failure lies within in the stated current population figure of 349M,... Remove the roughly 10% of that number that shouldn't even be here and the US poverty rate would show even more improvement.

So you're saying that our anti-poverty programs have been working even better, then.

 

[Rifler]

So you're saying that our anti-poverty programs have been working even better, then.

That's exactly what I'm saying,.. Remove the illegals and we, as a country, are doing better than numbers would indicate.

 

[dpic73]

The failure lies within in the stated current population figure of 349M,... Remove the roughly 10% of that number that shouldn't even be here and the US poverty rate would show even more improvement.

35 million people shouldn't be here?

Unauthorized immigrants make up approximately 4.1% of the U.S. population
.
Population Size: According to data from the Pew Research Center, there were about 14 million unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. as of mid-2023

Share of Total Population: This total represents roughly 4.1% of the entire U.S. population and about 27% of all foreign-born residents.

Temporary Statuses: Nearly one-third of this population (around 6 million people) hold some form of temporary deportation protection or legal status, such as asylum applicants, humanitarian parolees, or DACA recipients, which can be subject to change.

Which drops this number to 9.3 million.

U.S. Unauthorized Immigrant Population Reached a Record 14 Million in 2023

The number of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. reached an all-time high after two consecutive years of record growth.

www.pewresearch.org

 

[Rifler]

35 million people shouldn't be here?

Unauthorized immigrants make up approximately 4.1% of the U.S. population
.
Population Size: According to data from the Pew Research Center, there were about 14 million unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. as of mid-2023

Share of Total Population: This total represents roughly 4.1% of the entire U.S. population and about 27% of all foreign-born residents.

Temporary Statuses: Nearly one-third of this population (around 6 million people) hold some form of temporary deportation protection or legal status, such as asylum applicants, humanitarian parolees, or DACA recipients, which can be subject to change.

Which drops this number to 9.3 million.

U.S. Unauthorized Immigrant Population Reached a Record 14 Million in 2023

The number of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. reached an all-time high after two consecutive years of record growth.

www.pewresearch.org

Easily 35 million, and when you count US citizens birthed by illegals inside this country over the past 50 years that 10% is likely a low figure,... Hell, nearly 15 million entered under the Biden administration alone and they're procreating as we speak.

 

[dpic73]

Easily 35 million, and when you count US citizens birthed by illegals inside this country over the past 50 years that 10% is likely a low figure,... Hell, nearly 15 million entered under the Biden administration alone and they're procreating as we speak.

Weird math man. CMS estimated between 14.6 million to 15.8 million TOTAL in mid-year 2024 but somehow 15 million came through under Biden alone? Wanna know how I know you lie?

Undocumented immigration population reached as high as 15.8M, report finds

www.gilmermirror.com

And it doesn't matter that you don't approve of birthright citizenship, you don't get to count people who were born here, full stop.

 

[baltimorened]

Good Lord, Ned.

• 1964
  • Population: 191.9M
  • People in Poverty: 36M
  • Rate: 18.8%
• Today
  • Population: 349M
  • People in Poverty: 34M
  • Rate: 9.7%
• Reduction:
  • 48.1%

So we've nearly halved the percentage of people living in poverty (by your numbers AND you're somehow claiming that the current number is even lower than that) and you're calling that a failure?

well seems to me if we have 34 million people in poverty that's not much success. Are you pleased with that number? It just seems to me that's too high a number

 

[FLaw47]

well seems to me if we have 34 million people in poverty that's not much success. Are you pleased with that number? It just seems to me that's too high a number

I think you're being either obtuse or dishonest if you refuse to acknowledge that we've nearly halved that number. Yeah it's too high but using that number without context to say "what we're doing isn't working" should be beneath you.

 

[baltimorened]

I think you're being either obtuse or dishonest if you refuse to acknowledge that we've nearly halved that number. Yeah it's too high but using that number without context to say "what we're doing isn't working" should be beneath you.

well not to sink even lower in your esteem, I looked it up 36 million in 1964 and 34 million today. Now sure we've had a lower % of the American population, but the actual number is the actual number...

And, I didn't talk %s someone else did, I'm taking numbers. So, I assume from your posts that you believe what we're doing now we should just continue to do....I don't I think we need a review of policies..

 

[FLaw47]

well not to sink even lower in your esteem, I looked it up 36 million in 1964 and 34 million today. Now sure we've had a lower % of the American population, but the actual number is the actual number...

And, I didn't talk %s someone else did, I'm taking numbers. So, I assume from your posts that you believe what we're doing now we should just continue to do....I don't I think we need a review of policies..

There are over 40 million Americans without Internet today. There were only 5 million in 1800! America is falling apart! Our rural broadband policies are a waste!

 

[Rifler]

doesn't matter that you don't approve of birthright citizenship, you don't get to count people who were born here, full stop.

Of course I do, as my position on birthright citizenship has nothing to do with this math,... Illegals that don't enter the country don't create citizens.

 

[dpic73]

Of course I do, as my position on birthright citizenship has nothing to do with this math,... Illegals that don't enter the country don't create citizens.

The Supreme Court has ruled that you don't get to count them among your 35 million that should be deported. A number that still doesn't make sense when the real number of undocumented is less than half that number.

 

[Rifler]

The Supreme Court has ruled that you don't get to count them among your 35 million that should be deported. A number that still doesn't make sense when the real number of undocumented is less than half that number.

SCOTUS hasn't ruled on anything we are discussing, as my count is people who should not be here today,... When you remove the illegals that should have never been allowed to enter the country you automatically eliminate their spawn as well...

 

[baltimorened]

There are over 40 million Americans without Internet today. There were only 5 million in 1800! America is falling apart! Our rural broadband policies are a waste!

don't know how to break this to you, Al gore wasn't alive in 1800 to invent the internet

 

[FLaw47]

don't know how to break this to you, Al gore wasn't alive in 1800 to invent the internet

I'm not sure if you've noticed this about yourself or not but when you're absolutely wrong about something, you make a joke instead of staying on topic. Almost as if you'd hope we forget.

 

[baltimorened]

I'm not sure if you've noticed this about yourself or not but when you're absolutely wrong about something, you make a joke instead of staying on topic. Almost as if you'd hope we forget.

not a joke. I thought you made one when you talked about the limited number of people with internet in 1800.

One thing I've noticed about you, since we're offering constructive criticisms, is that when the numbers go against your argument you change numbers....on this topic I pointed out specific numbers....you then turned it into percentages of population, which wasn't my point.

But hey, we're civil....I'd bet we could solve most of the problems of the world over a beer....and there would be even more compromise after about 6 each. I don't always agree with you no you, me, but neither of us tells the other to STFU.. I'd bet you're really a nice guy.

 

[FLaw47]

not a joke. I thought you made one when you talked about the limited number of people with internet in 1800.

One thing I've noticed about you, since we're offering constructive criticisms, is that when the numbers go against your argument you change numbers....on this topic I pointed out specific numbers....you then turned it into percentages of population, which wasn't my point.

But hey, we're civil....I'd bet we could solve most of the problems of the world over a beer....and there would be even more compromise after about 6 each. I don't always agree with you no you, me, but neither of us tells the other to STFU.. I'd bet you're really a nice guy.

My post wasn't so much a joke as it was using something farcical to point out how raw numbers divorced from context isn't particularly useful. I honestly don't understand what point you could have been trying to make other than "this isn't working let's stop" and I really struggle when people use (what I perceive to be) flawed analysis to support their argument. I hope that I've criticized people on my own side as well (I know I get especially irritated with the pro-vaccine "You'd rather your kid be dead than have autism", as an example).

If there was a point you were trying to make beyond what I outlined up above, please do let me know. As it stands, I don't think the fact that the raw number of Americans living in poverty than in 1964 is compelling.

I'd absolutely have some beers with you (and others on the board) though.

 

[baltimorened]

My post wasn't so much a joke as it was using something farcical to point out how raw numbers divorced from context isn't particularly useful. I honestly don't understand what point you could have been trying to make other than "this isn't working let's stop" and I really struggle when people use (what I perceive to be) flawed analysis to support their argument. I hope that I've criticized people on my own side as well (I know I get especially irritated with the pro-vaccine "You'd rather your kid be dead than have autism", as an example).

If there was a point you were trying to make beyond what I outlined up above, please do let me know. As it stands, I don't think the fact that the raw number of Americans living in poverty than in 1964 is compelling.

I'd absolutely have some beers with you (and others on the board) though.

nope, no there point other than the numbers of people living in poverty