Commie Mandami and the 2028 Election

Started by BLADEMDA
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
cittykat said:
San Diego considering it.


San Francisco and Berkeley too.

If they did it in a place like Irvine, they’d raise a lot of money. A lot of rich foreigners parking their money in homes there.
Click to expand...
5 million isn't that much in the bay area and some of those homes are generational homes.
It would have to be much more IMO. They also need to consider what it will do to the real estate market.
 
I think it would put a dent on STR that see seasonal fluctuations. I'd imagine that a lot of people who use STR like VRBO as a business will suffer.
I have a partner that does STR in San Diego. He's definitely not ultra rich but gets to say he has a home in San Diego that he rents out.
 
sevoflurane said:
5 million isn't that much in the bay area and some of those homes are generational homes.
It would have to be much more IMO. They also need to consider what it will do to the real estate market.
Click to expand...


The intention is to relieve local housing shortages by encouraging owners of vacant homes to either sell or rent out their homes to tenants. Lots of folks with lots of money let these homes sit empty. It’s their choice but they’d have to pay an additional tax.
 
sevoflurane said:
5 million isn't that much in the bay area and some of those homes are generational homes.
It would have to be much more IMO. They also need to consider what it will do to the real estate market.
Click to expand...
They already increased property taxes on inherited homes to encourage sales. $5 million is still a lot though. My in-laws have a 3,500 sq foot home in Marin County and it’s $2.3 million.
 
Johan321 said:
This will be a revolution. It was inevitable.
Click to expand...
1776536564189.gif
 
Johan321 said:
Click to expand...

Good while he’s at it.

Why doesn’t he ask his fellow democrats in congress if they win the nationwide election to get rid of section 1031 tax free exchanges. If people are rich enough to own more than one home. The are rich enough to start paying taxes on gains from properties they rent out to people.

Eliminating 1031 exchanges can raise billions a year. Easy cash for the govt.
 
aneftp said:
Good while he’s at it.

Why doesn’t he ask his fellow democrats in congress if they win the nationwide election to get rid of section 1031 tax free exchanges. If people are rich enough to own more than one home. The are rich enough to start paying taxes on gains from properties they rent out to people.

Eliminating 1031 exchanges can raise billions a year. Easy cash for the govt.
Click to expand...

Great idea, but it wound never pass through the congress.

Republicans will filibuster it immediately, and I doubt even any centrist democrat from swing state would go for it.
 
Taxing the wealth is the only way going forward. Taxing the income overwhelmingly impacts white collar W2 workers, while shielding the actual billionaires.

Whether it’s inheritance tax, land value tax (personal favorite), or consumption tax. These are really the only ways to make the top 0.1% of 1% pay their fair share.
 
On a subject of land value tax, I like it because it can’t be offshored to Cayman Islands. It would force the society to engage into responsible land use since everyone will be paying for every square feet they occupy. It would promote dense housing by building vertical cities and preserving our forests in the process. Moreover, it would boost innovation since there won’t be many empty lots just sitting there for years.. instead land will have to be in constant productive use (more businesses competing to generate revenue, or more housing being built to curb artificial shortage).
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Johan321 said:
Great idea, but it wound never pass through the congress.

Republicans will filibuster it immediately, and I doubt even any centrist democrat from swing state would go for it.
Click to expand...
Why not? Doesn’t hurt to try to pass it.

So you are saying you need to play it safe if you are a democrat in a swing state ?

That’s complete bs. It basically proves Congress has no balls to do real reforms.

Why play it safe? Safe doesn’t win the game. You forget how laws are passed. The house generally introduces the bills. The Dems have or will have control of the house. Go out on the limb and get the bill started. Or are they too chicken to do it?

Trump is not a chicken

Stand by ur morals if you want to raise taxes. Do it
 
Johan321 said:
Taxing the wealth is the only way going forward. Taxing the income overwhelmingly impacts white collar W2 workers, while shielding the actual billionaires.

Whether it’s inheritance tax, land value tax (personal favorite), or consumption tax. These are really the only ways to make the top 0.1% of 1% pay their fair share.
Click to expand...
And what happens about 9 months to 2-3 years after you seize all assets of the super rich?

Seizing all wealth from the top 0.1% (approx.
trillion by late 2025) could theoretically fund the entire U.S. federal government for roughly 3 to 4 years
 
Taxing the super rich is a good theory. But The real facts are that this country depends on the middle and upper WORKING CLASS.

Look at the revenue generated by the tarrifs Trump made. He generated more money in ONE MONTH Under his plan then under Biden’s admin generated in 12 months. Think that over. Why? Becuase the tariffs collected by the common people paying into it is more effective.
 
aneftp said:
Why not? Doesn’t hurt to try to pass it.

So you are saying you need to play it safe if you are a democrat in a swing state ?

That’s complete bs. It basically proves Congress has no balls to do real reforms.

Why play it safe? Safe doesn’t win the game. You forget how laws are passed. The house generally introduces the bills. The Dems have or will have control of the house. Go out on the limb and get the bill started. Or are they too chicken to do it?

Trump is not a chicken

Stand by ur morals if you want to raise taxes. Do it
Click to expand...

“It basically proves Congress has no balls to do real reforms.”

I mean it’s the truth ???

“So you are saying you need to play it safe if you are a democrat in a swing state ?”

Nope! I fully expect Dems to try to pass some progressive bills if they get a trifecta. But there always will be Fettermans or Sinemas of the world who will side with republicans. That’s being pragmatic.
 
aneftp said:
Taxing the super rich is a good theory. But The real facts are that this country depends on the middle and upper WORKING CLASS.

Look at the revenue generated by the tarrifs Trump made. He generated more money in ONE MONTH Under his plan then under Biden’s admin generated in 12 months. Think that over. Why? Becuase the tariffs collected by the common people paying into it is more effective.
Click to expand...


But the money needs to be refunded.

www.scotusblog.com

The remaining questions after the Supreme Court’s tariffs ruling

Last month, the Supreme Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a 1977 law giving the president the power to regulate commerce during national emergencies created by foreign […]
www.scotusblog.com www.scotusblog.com
 
aneftp said:
And what happens about 9 months to 2-3 years after you seize all assets of the super rich?

Seizing all wealth from the top 0.1% (approx.
trillion by late 2025) could theoretically fund the entire U.S. federal government for roughly 3 to 4 years
Click to expand...

Oh poor billionaires will go bankrupt from just paying 10-15% of their wealth (while ignoring the fact that most of them have doubled, tripled or in some case quadrupled their wealth within last decade alone!).
 
Johan321 said:
Oh poor billionaires will go bankrupt from just paying 10-15% of their wealth (while ignoring the fact that most of them have doubled, tripled or in some case quadrupled their wealth within last decade alone!).
Click to expand...
Raising taxes on billionaires doesn’t solve the debt or budget. Or even taking 100% of their wealth. It makes it sound like a feel good story taking money away from them. Except it doesn’t solve our problems.

Don’t you get it? Tariffs generated more revenue. And where did that money come from? The common people paying into the tarrifs indirectly via higher prices passed down to them.
 
aneftp said:
Raising taxes on billionaires doesn’t solve the debt or budget. Or even taking 100% of their wealth. It makes it sound like a feel good story taking money away from them. Except it doesn’t solve our problems.

Don’t you get it? Tariffs generated more revenue. And where did that money come from? The common people paying into the tarrifs indirectly via higher prices passed down to them.
Click to expand...

“Raising taxes on billionaires doesn’t solve the debt or budget. Or even taking 100% of their wealth. It makes it sound like a feel good story taking money away from them. Except it doesn’t solve our problems.”

So, taxing the wealth of ultra-rich and using it to fund healthcare, education and public-safety wouldn’t benefit the society???

Sweden has higher number of billionaires per capita compared to US despite having some of the most progressive taxes in the developed world. They don’t have people who are worth $800 billion like we do, but they have plenty of people who are worth $2- 3 billion.. And what do you think is better for the society?

“Tariffs generated more revenue. And where did that money come from? The common people paying into the tarrifs indirectly via higher prices passed down to them.”

No, tariffs didn’t generate any “revenue”. All it did was to cripple the middle and lower class by forcing them to pay extra on everything. They won’t see a dime of that money going back into their pockets.
 
Johan321 said:
“Raising taxes on billionaires doesn’t solve the debt or budget. Or even taking 100% of their wealth. It makes it sound like a feel good story taking money away from them. Except it doesn’t solve our problems.”

So, taxing the wealth of ultra-rich and using it to fund healthcare, education and public-safety wouldn’t benefit the society???

Sweden has higher number of billionaires per capita compared to US despite having some of the most progressive taxes in the developed world. They don’t have people who are worth $800 billion like we do, but they have plenty of people who are worth $2- 3 billion.. And what do you think is better for the society?

“Tariffs generated more revenue. And where did that money come from? The common people paying into the tarrifs indirectly via higher prices passed down to them.”

No, tariffs didn’t generate any “revenue”. All it did was to cripple the middle and lower class by forcing them to pay extra on everything. They won’t see a dime of that money going back into their pockets.
Click to expand...
You are pretty naive how revenue is generated

The Dems/communist Iike you talk a big game how to fund social programs.

Again I ask you. Once you take away 100% assets from the top 0.1% (which lasts as little as 9 months to 2-3 years) to fund the operations of the USA govt.

What is the next step when that money runs dry?

You see Vermont tried a single payor health system. They ran the numbers…guess what they ended up figuring how to fund it..,,take a lucky guess. They ran all their math and in the end they said they needed the common people to pay for it. Because taxing the ultra rich doesn’t get them the budget they needed to fund single payors for a tiny state like Vermont

Imagine trying to fund the entire USA govt.

So what the the next step once you take away all the money from the 0.1%? You roll down the line to the top 1%. Take away all their money? That lasts 1-2 year.

what next? You see it’s trickles down to the common people to have to pay for it
 
Johan321 said:
“Raising taxes on billionaires doesn’t solve the debt or budget. Or even taking 100% of their wealth. It makes it sound like a feel good story taking money away from them. Except it doesn’t solve our problems.”

So, taxing the wealth of ultra-rich and using it to fund healthcare, education and public-safety wouldn’t benefit the society???

Sweden has higher number of billionaires per capita compared to US despite having some of the most progressive taxes in the developed world. They don’t have people who are worth $800 billion like we do, but they have plenty of people who are worth $2- 3 billion.. And what do you think is better for the society?

“Tariffs generated more revenue. And where did that money come from? The common people paying into the tarrifs indirectly via higher prices passed down to them.”

No, tariffs didn’t generate any “revenue”. All it did was to cripple the middle and lower class by forcing them to pay extra on everything. They won’t see a dime of that money going back into their pockets.
Click to expand...


Tariffs do raise revenue but it is a consumption tax, the largest proportion of which are paid by middle class consumers.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
aneftp said:
You are pretty naive how revenue is generated

The Dems/communist Iike you talk a big game how to fund social programs.

Again I ask you. Once you take away 100% assets from the top 0.1% (which lasts as little as 9 months to 2-3 years) to fund the operations of the USA govt.

What is the next step when that money runs dry?

You see Vermont tried a single payor health system. They ran the numbers…guess what they ended up figuring how to fund it..,,take a lucky guess. They ran all their math and in the end they said they needed the common people to pay for it. Because taxing the ultra rich doesn’t get them the budget they needed to fund single payors for a tiny state like Vermont

Imagine trying to fund the entire USA govt.

So what the the next step once you take away all the money from the 0.1%? You roll down the line to the top 1%. Take away all their money? That lasts 1-2 year.

what next? You see it’s trickles down to the common people to have to pay for it
Click to expand...

First of all, no one is taking away 100% of billionaires money. You are just putting words in my mouth. Do you even understand how wealthy avoid paying any taxes in the first place? How people like Bezos pay lower income tax percent than even me and you???

www.propublica.org

More Than Half of America’s 100 Richest People Exploit Special Trusts to Avoid Estate Taxes

Secret IRS records show billionaires use trusts that let them pass fortunes to their heirs without paying estate tax. Will Congress end a tax shelter that has cost the Treasury untold billions?
www.propublica.org www.propublica.org

So if I am paying 35% in tax, while Musk is paying less than half of that, how’s that an effective system? Making him pay at what would essentially be that same tax rate as high income W-2 earner isn’t some communism.

And have you ever heard of the concept of recycling money? Like physicians who heavily rely on Medicare/ Medicaid patients to pay the bills? Conversely, if more money is spent in public education by raising tax revenues, then more people will have money to buy Teslas or Apple Watches..

Do you know what period saw the greatest economic growth in US? And can you guess what were the tax rates during that time?
 
cittykat said:
Tariffs do raise revenue but it is a consumption tax, the largest proportion of which are paid by middle class consumers.
Click to expand...

Middle class won’t see a dime of that money.. Not with current administration anyways:

fortune.com

Meet the quiet winners of the Supreme Court tariff ruling: hedge funds creating a $100 billion market snapping up rights to importers’ tariff refunds | Fortune

The market gained attention following allegations Brandon Lutnick, the son of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, participated in the otherwise legal trade with conflicts of interest.
fortune.com fortune.com
 
Johan321 said:
First of all, no one is taking away 100% of billionaires money. You are just putting words in my mouth. Do you even understand how wealthy avoid paying any taxes in the first place? How people like Bezos pay lower income tax percent than even me and you???

www.propublica.org

More Than Half of America’s 100 Richest People Exploit Special Trusts to Avoid Estate Taxes

Secret IRS records show billionaires use trusts that let them pass fortunes to their heirs without paying estate tax. Will Congress end a tax shelter that has cost the Treasury untold billions?
www.propublica.org www.propublica.org

So if I am paying 35% in tax, while Musk is paying less than half of that, how’s that an effective system? Making him pay at what would essentially be that same tax rate as high income W-2 earner isn’t some communism.

And have you ever heard of the concept of recycling money? Like physicians who heavily rely on Medicare/ Medicaid patients to pay the bills? Conversely, if more money is spent in public education by raising tax revenues, then more people will have money to buy Teslas or Apple Watches..

Do you know what period saw the greatest economic growth in US? And can you guess what were the tax rates during that time?
Click to expand...
And you know there were so many loopholes in the tax code. Very few people paid 90% tax rate during those glorious years after ww2. It got so bad. The dems had to invent the AMT in the late 1960s to make the rich pay some taxes. Because the rich were deducting so much they had no federal tax liabilities.

I know my tax history.

And guess who ended up paying amt taxes. A tax the democrats invented to punish the rich…the upper middle classes end up generating the vast majority of the amt revenue over the last 40 years! The irony. Right?

35% of amt tax revenue came from those making 100-200k. Another 35% of amt tax revenue came from those making 200-500k. Only 15% of amt tax revenues actually came from those making more than 500k.
Trump and bush 43 actually helped the upper middle class with amt fixes.

Again. The super rich are pretty much untouchable.

I don’t know if you live in a fantasy world where you think the other guy will pay for stuff. It doesn’t work. Even Obamacare surtax hurts the ….upper middle class because it starts at 200k and NOT INDEXED for inflation. Only any idiot would not realize Obama and Pelosi and Reid wrote the laws becuase they knew in order to capture tax revenue it must come from the middle and upper middle classes

Don’t you find it strange both the amt and Obamacare tax were not indexed for inflation? Both major tax bills written by the democrats and passed.
 
aneftp said:
And you know there were so many loopholes in the tax code. Very few people paid 90% tax rate during those glorious years after ww2. It got so bad. The dems had to invent the AMT in the late 1960s to make the rich pay some taxes. Because the rich were deducting so much they had no federal tax liabilities.

I know my tax history.

And guess who ended up paying amt taxes. A tax the democrats invented to punish the rich…the upper middle classes end up generating the vast majority of the amt revenue over the last 40 years! The irony. Right?

35% of amt tax revenue came from those making 100-200k. Another 35% of amt tax revenue came from those making 200-500k. Only 15% of amt tax revenues actually came from those making more than 500k.
Trump and bush 43 actually helped the upper middle class with amt fixes.

Again. The super rich are pretty much untouchable.

I don’t know if you live in a fantasy world where you think the other guy will pay for stuff. It doesn’t work. Even Obamacare surtax hurts the ….upper middle class because it starts at 200k and NOT INDEXED for inflation. Only any idiot would not realize Obama and Pelosi and Reid wrote the laws becuase they knew in order to capture tax revenue it must come from the middle and upper middle classes

Don’t you find it strange both the amt and Obamacare tax were not indexed for inflation? Both major tax bills written by the democrats and passed.
Click to expand...

Top 1% paid 42% in tax during 50s, which is higher than 36% of today. I wasn’t even going by that 90% number.

“Again. The super rich are pretty much untouchable.”

That’s because of people who make significantly less keep voting against their own interest. In their mind, “it doesn’t work”. Although, it works just fine in many other countries.

Solutions are there. But…

“What if I become a billionaire one day?”

- Some 55 year old truck driver in Idaho.
 
are we really comparing mr hush hush money and and “i don’t know epstein” with mamdani? lol what a joke.
 
BLADEMDA said:
“Mayor-Elect Mamdani has promoted antisemitic narratives, associated with individuals who have a history of antisemitism, and demonstrated intense animosity toward the Jewish state that is counter to the views of the overwhelming majority of Jewish New Yorkers. We are deeply concerned that those individuals and principles will influence his administration at a time when we are tracking a brazen surge of harassment, vandalism and violence targeting Jewish residents and institutions in recent years,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, ADL CEO and National Director.

www.adl.org

ADL Launches Initiative to Track and Monitor Mamdani Administration Policies and Appointments, Protect Jewish New Yorkers

www.adl.org www.adl.org
Click to expand...
what right does ADL have to do this, because this is against freedom of speech even if he is anti-semitic - which he’s not. he can likely sue ADL over this especially if they cause harm. I am not a lawyer but you can’t privately track and professionally harm an individual over their opinions. It would be different if he directly acted in an anti Semitic manner and cause physical harm. our laws punish actions, not necessarily speech and opinions.

you can’t punish the guy just because he thinks that two state solution is the only viable long term strategy for peace and wants indigenous palestine population to have same rights as israel - just like majority of the countries in the un security council. just like italy, france and spain recently. am i missing something here? IS ADL going to track minority of the countries that hold this view? i’m puzzled.

secondly, he’s the mayor of nyc and he has made it clear that he will restrict his opinion and activities to people of nyc - jewish or non jewish. completely reasonable stance for a local mayor.

he was elected on merit in a legal and democratically held election. he earned those votes and beat the competition.

he’s receiving hate because of his ethnicity.

it’s bigoted.
 
Johan321 said:
Top 1% paid 42% in tax during 50s, which is higher than 36% of today. I wasn’t even going by that 90% number.

“Again. The super rich are pretty much untouchable.”

That’s because of people who make significantly less keep voting against their own interest. In their mind, “it doesn’t work”. Although, it works just fine in many other countries.

Solutions are there. But…

“What if I become a billionaire one day?”

- Some 55 year old truck driver in Idaho.
Click to expand...
Lawmakers want to save their own jobs

That’s why they try to pass major legislation especially as major ones as early in the term as possible.

Has any major piece of legislation ever been passed 2 months before a major election. Heck no.

Cause they want to pass laws as quickly as possible so hope the public forgets about it 18 months later
 



This is gold:

“Samey 4-6 storey apartments built by greedy developers will ruin the character of the neighborhood

Sidewalks so close to building will let criminals walk near my house and ruin the character of the neighborhood

Shopping so close to residential buildings ruins the character of the neighborhood

Water features will let mosquitoes lay eggs and ruin the character of the neighborhood

No parking means we can't have friends over and people have to drive longer to find parking which ruins the character of the neighborhood

Trees will cast shadows and ruin the character of the neighborhood.”

- NIMBY
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Low national sales tax on luxury items in the face of decreasing income taxes might not be suicide… scoot that way slowly, don’t flip the script right away.
Or a flat tax…. We have to find some way to make corporations and billionaires pay more
 
Johan321 said:



Crown prince has officially gotten the blessing from lord savior himself.. Tell you what y’all? This is the destiny.
Click to expand...

If he’s so good. He should try to run for state wide office next like governor

AOC in Brooklyn is afraid to run for state wide office.

It’s easy to win election from ur district is 80% one party.

Much harder to win state wide election

In California’s case. Much harder for galvin newsom to use excuses he doesn’t want to affect his family life and that’s why he’s not running

People don’t want to get exposed when they step out of the natural enclosed district or even state
 
aneftp said:
If he’s so good. He should try to run for state wide office next like governor

AOC in Brooklyn is afraid to run for state wide office.

It’s easy to win election from ur district is 80% one party.

Much harder to win state wide election

In California’s case. Much harder for galvin newsom to use excuses he doesn’t want to affect his family life and that’s why he’s not running

People don’t want to get exposed when they step out of the natural enclosed district or even state
Click to expand...

I think he will eventually run for the governor. But he needs to build the resume first (like being a two term NYC mayor).

Nothing official yet but buzz on the left is that AOC will either run for presidency in 2028, or primary Chuck Schumer. I will be very surprised if that doesn’t happen.
 
Last edited:
And for the record, I don’t agree with his rent-freezing policy (almost every published economist is against it).

But tax on a second home worth over $5 mil is very much something I am on board with. It’s a form of land value tax, which I am a big fan of.
 
Johan321 said:
And for the record, I don’t agree with his rent-freezing policy (almost every published economist is against it).

But tax on a second home worth over $5 mil is very much something I am on board with. It’s a form of land value tax, which I am a big fan of.
Click to expand...
Too many loopholes in the proposed tax. If he just keeps is straight. Second homes regardless of tenant or not. He would have my support.

That’s the delicate balance he has to maneuver.

Once u start making exemptions. It doesn’t become a good tax.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
coffeebythelake said:
Citizens United ****ed everythjng up. All these rich people dumping money into political campaigns to steer elections
Click to expand...
It's election day in Virginia today (the redistricting scheme), and I have never ever in my life been called and spam texted so much. Someone's paying for the media blitz.
 
pgg said:
It's election day in Virginia today (the redistricting scheme), and I have never ever in my life been called and spam texted so much. Someone's paying for the media blitz.
Click to expand...
Just curious...Do the texts seem equally distributed Pro/Con?
 
UscGhost said:
Well i hope it passes. Trump started this whole redistricting BS..so i hope the GOP gets screwed
Click to expand...
That’s fine. Let the Dems win some times
Let the republicans win some times.
Look at the last 60 plus years and who’s been in charge. It’s swings back and forth.
 
Lab Lover said:
Just curious...Do the texts seem equally distributed Pro/Con?
Click to expand...
90% of them are STOP THE STEAL messages about the democrats rigging things to force people to trade in their guns for abortions while giving welfare to illegal aliens. Breathless doom.

Lots of duplicate messages starting off with "Hi, [fake name] here ..."

Like this one:


Hi, Olivia here. Today is Election Day.

Abigail Spanberger and the Democrats in Richmond are trying to rig our elections with maps designed to send 10 Democrats and just 1 Republican to Congress.

That means higher taxes, welfare for illegals, attacks on our gun rights, and more liberal control in Washington.

Don't sit this one out. Polls are open now.

Vote NO on rigged maps before it's too late.

VOTE TODAY AT:
(my polling site)

Paid for by Virginians for Fair Maps RC

Reply STOP to end




I've had a handful of texts just reminding me that it's election day and that I should make my community's voice heard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pgg
DocMcCoy said:
100 million dollars

time.com

‘Dark Money’ Floods Virginia Redistricting Fight, With Millions Linked to Peter Thiel

The results of Tuesday's referendum could reshape the midterms this November.
time.com time.com
Click to expand...
We're never going to get any kind of campaign finance reform.

Neither party wants it. And just as important, if not more so, the media especially doesn't want it. Whether left or right, no media organization wants to see coverage that might let the people kill their $multi-multi-billion ad sales. They don't care how dark or dirty or undemocratic the money is.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BLADEMDA
Stocks and The Economy for 2026
2
Replies
87
Views
8K
sevoflurane
sevoflurane
Dawkter
Safety Net Hospitals and the GOP Bill
Replies
44
Views
4K
GassYous
GassYous
circleK
The AI CEO
Replies
39
Views
2K
amyl
A
BLADEMDA
  • Locked
Inflation, Interest Rates and the Economy for 2025
51 52 53 54 55
Replies
3K
Views
142K
Mman
M
L
Total Joints and the “fluid situation”
2 3
Replies
106
Views
8K
NightyNight
N