Elizabeth Warren 2020 Megathread v2 (pg 35 - Emily List support)

[GeneralMacArthur]

That's a completely nonsense comparison. Warren thinks of programs to help the middle class and is then overly scrutinized to how she will pay for it and she attempts an honest accounting of how she would.

 Paul Ryan advocated blowing huge holes in our budgets with endless tax cuts and then brutalizing the people who need the social safety net by shredding it to supposedly "pay" for these tax cuts. Or he would simply lie and say these tax giveaways would "pay" for themselves.

 The two are not comparable in any way and you are dishonest for even alluding to such a comparison.

It's like you live in a different world from the rest of us.  You're describing an idealized campaign that has little similarity with the reality of the Warren campaign.

You should try reading her campaign material sometime.  It's all hand-waving and wishful thinking.  That's fine if you're, like, Trump, and not claiming to do anything more than throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks.  But Warren is supposed to be Little Miss Wonk.  She could at least try to match Joe Biden's level of practical detail, if not exceed it.

Paul Ryan advocated blowing huge holes in our budgets

Warren literally can't decide whether M4A costs $30 trillion or $20 trillion.

[izixs]

That's a completely nonsense comparison. Warren thinks of programs to help the middle class and is then overly scrutinized to how she will pay for it and she attempts an honest accounting of how she would.

 Paul Ryan advocated blowing huge holes in our budgets with endless tax cuts and then brutalizing the people who need the social safety net by shredding it to supposedly "pay" for these tax cuts. Or he would simply lie and say these tax giveaways would "pay" for themselves.

 The two are not comparable in any way and you are dishonest for even alluding to such a comparison.

It's like you live in a different world from the rest of us.  You're describing an idealized campaign that has little similarity with the reality of the Warren campaign.

You should try reading her campaign material sometime.  It's all hand-waving and wishful thinking.  That's fine if you're, like, Trump, and not claiming to do anything more than throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks.  But Warren is supposed to be Little Miss Wonk.  She could at least try to match Joe Biden's level of practical detail, if not exceed it.

Paul Ryan advocated blowing huge holes in our budgets

Warren literally can't decide whether M4A costs $30 trillion or $20 trillion.

Behold! All proposals must be craft at campaign start perfectly formed, laying out in exact detail the full language that will for sure be pushed through congress with no change, fix, or improvement! And if such detail is not provided, we shall declare that the one proposing it knows now the full cost o' their plan, thus making them abomination unto the nation. Any variance in estimate based on updated information or improvement of a plan during a campaign are not allowed, as they are for sure a sign of falsehood and deception! Especially if the totality of the plan is reliant on creating a whole new foundation for which there is yet technical uncertainty in the here and now, unlike plans of others whom rely on moving thine deck chairs on the deck of the Titanic in order to produce mild improvements, for such alternative plans are always good and wonderful and filled with much joy.

Or in short: We know you don't like Warren, and your arguments seem to default to ridiculous, so why are you still here?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

That's a completely nonsense comparison. Warren thinks of programs to help the middle class and is then overly scrutinized to how she will pay for it and she attempts an honest accounting of how she would.

 Paul Ryan advocated blowing huge holes in our budgets with endless tax cuts and then brutalizing the people who need the social safety net by shredding it to supposedly "pay" for these tax cuts. Or he would simply lie and say these tax giveaways would "pay" for themselves.

 The two are not comparable in any way and you are dishonest for even alluding to such a comparison.

It's like you live in a different world from the rest of us.  You're describing an idealized campaign that has little similarity with the reality of the Warren campaign.

You should try reading her campaign material sometime.  It's all hand-waving and wishful thinking.  That's fine if you're, like, Trump, and not claiming to do anything more than throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks.  But Warren is supposed to be Little Miss Wonk.  She could at least try to match Joe Biden's level of practical detail, if not exceed it.

Paul Ryan advocated blowing huge holes in our budgets

Warren literally can't decide whether M4A costs $30 trillion or $20 trillion.

Behold! All proposals must be craft at campaign start perfectly formed, laying out in exact detail the full language that will for sure be pushed through congress with no change, fix, or improvement! And if such detail is not provided, we shall declare that the one proposing it knows now the full cost o' their plan, thus making them abomination unto the nation. Any variance in estimate based on updated information or improvement of a plan during a campaign are not allowed, as they are for sure a sign of falsehood and deception! Especially if the totality of the plan is reliant on creating a whole new foundation for which there is yet technical uncertainty in the here and now, unlike plans of others whom rely on moving thine deck chairs on the deck of the Titanic in order to produce mild improvements, for such alternative plans are always good and wonderful and filled with much joy.

Her tax proposals largely aren't even useful as starting points for discussion. As proposed, her wealth tax is clearly a direct tax based on previous SCOTUS precedent concerning ad valorem taxation of property that goes back to the era of the Founders. Those who assert otherwise are either fooling themselves or deliberately trying to fool others. Taxing unrealized capital gains not only is of zero long-term benefit to the public fisc, it in practice is far more likely to cause difficulties for middle class taxpayers than the wealthy as it will cause people to incur tax liability unlinked to cash flow that could be used to pay it. Raising tax revenues by elimination of fraud is usually the sort of fiscal smoke and mirrors that Republicans use to offset their own plans to stress the public fisc, albeit for different purposes.

[GeneralMacArthur]

That's a completely nonsense comparison. Warren thinks of programs to help the middle class and is then overly scrutinized to how she will pay for it and she attempts an honest accounting of how she would.

 Paul Ryan advocated blowing huge holes in our budgets with endless tax cuts and then brutalizing the people who need the social safety net by shredding it to supposedly "pay" for these tax cuts. Or he would simply lie and say these tax giveaways would "pay" for themselves.

 The two are not comparable in any way and you are dishonest for even alluding to such a comparison.

It's like you live in a different world from the rest of us.  You're describing an idealized campaign that has little similarity with the reality of the Warren campaign.

You should try reading her campaign material sometime.  It's all hand-waving and wishful thinking.  That's fine if you're, like, Trump, and not claiming to do anything more than throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks.  But Warren is supposed to be Little Miss Wonk.  She could at least try to match Joe Biden's level of practical detail, if not exceed it.

Paul Ryan advocated blowing huge holes in our budgets

Warren literally can't decide whether M4A costs $30 trillion or $20 trillion.

Behold! All proposals must be craft at campaign start perfectly formed, laying out in exact detail the full language that will for sure be pushed through congress with no change, fix, or improvement! And if such detail is not provided, we shall declare that the one proposing it knows now the full cost o' their plan, thus making them abomination unto the nation. Any variance in estimate based on updated information or improvement of a plan during a campaign are not allowed, as they are for sure a sign of falsehood and deception! Especially if the totality of the plan is reliant on creating a whole new foundation for which there is yet technical uncertainty in the here and now, unlike plans of others whom rely on moving thine deck chairs on the deck of the Titanic in order to produce mild improvements, for such alternative plans are always good and wonderful and filled with much joy.

Or in short: We know you don't like Warren, and your arguments seem to default to ridiculous, so why are you still here?

The point of Warren is supposed to be that she's a wonk.  It's supposed to be that she knows the details.  It's supposed to be that she's got it all worked out.  It's supposed to be that "she's got a plan for that."

And now you're ridiculing me for saying "hey, where's the plan?"

[GoTfan]

Long post about Warren's populist rhetoric

ok boomer

Devastating.  The heroic maroon avatar strikes again.  How will the anti-populists ever recover?

Buddy, you're in meltdown over the fact that the Democratic Party is finally growing a spine and standing for something other than "we're less bad than the other guys". If you think having a Democratic Party with a backbone is the worst thing that could happen to anything ever, you've not been paying attention to the world.

This isn't Chapo Trap House, you can't just win an argument by labeling your opponent as "spineless" or "having a meltdown" or "not paying attention" whatever other insult you think up.

Pretty typical of socialists to ignore the actual argument and just spam insults.  Reminds me of Trump.

You're lecturing me about ignoring an argument? 

The Democrats have been caving to everything, and I find it more than a little disturbing that a lot of Democrats voted to extend the Patriot Act. Several of them, including the supposed saviour Biden, voted to repeal Glass-Steagall and to invade Iraq. Then there was the borderline toothless Dodd-Frank bill, and the one thing it actually did was to create the CFPB.

Then again, I imagine Dodd-Frank was socialism to you.

And mate, you are melting down over Warren having a serious shot at the nomination. Honestly, I'm ready to believe you'd vote for Trump instead of Warren or Sanders.

[GoTfan]

As a side note, Warren's merch game is on point:

[credit: Yakanak News]

[Heebie Jeebie]

When Warren calls for a wealth tax, you should understand it as her calling for a consumption tax.  Remember that "wealth" is basically the present value of future expected consumption.  So why does she use the wealth tax framing?  Because most people mistakenly regard consumption as being much more equal than income, which is then much more equal than wealth.  She's adapting her messaging to this widespread illusion.

[Heebie Jeebie]

https://twitter.com/sangerkatz/status/1195750157054337027

[Sorenroy]

What an apt title. Tens of millions of people in the United States struggle with hunger, wildly expensive healthcare, and just general cost of living, but I'm glad y'all can all come together and make sure that billionaires aren't losing 2 to 6% of their pile of gold coins. Thanks guys.


Edit: To be clear, I am referring to the bevy of posts by GeneralMacArthur and co. which prove the ironic title. I actually like the title.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

As a side note, Warren's merch game is on point:

[credit: Yakanak News]

$25 mugs 
#populism

[GeneralMacArthur]

What an apt title. Tens of millions of people in the United States struggle with hunger, wildly expensive healthcare, and just general cost of living, but I'm glad y'all can all come together and make sure that billionaires aren't losing 2 to 6% of their pile of gold coins. Thanks guys.


Edit: To be clear, I am referring to the bevy of posts by GeneralMacArthur and co. which prove the ironic title. I actually like the title.

It's not 6% of their wealth.  Bill Gates said he wants to lose 10% of his wealth.

It's 6% per year, compounded annually, on the same $1.  By the time Bill+Melinda Gates are Warren Buffet's age, that would be 90% of their wealth.

You guys keep acting like you're defending a 6% tax, and then when pressed on the fact that it's actually far larger than that, half of you go hide in a corner and the other half just try to ridicule me into shutting up.

And that nicely mirrors Warren's strategy.  "LOL BILLIONAIRE TEARS"

At least the bona-fide socialists have the balls to defend eliminating billionaires.  You Warrenites just want to do it sneakily and hope that nobody notices when I call out your "it's only 6%" rhetoric.

[GP270watch]

As a side note, Warren's merch game is on point:

[credit: Yakanak News]

$25 mugs 
#populism

 Trump's mug is $30.

https://shop.donaldjtrump.com/products/official-trump-pence-2020-mug-red

[Heebie Jeebie]

What an apt title. Tens of millions of people in the United States struggle with hunger, wildly expensive healthcare, and just general cost of living, but I'm glad y'all can all come together and make sure that billionaires aren't losing 2 to 6% of their pile of gold coins. Thanks guys.


Edit: To be clear, I am referring to the bevy of posts by GeneralMacArthur and co. which prove the ironic title. I actually like the title.

It's not 6% of their wealth.  Bill Gates said he wants to lose 10% of his wealth.

It's 6% per year, compounded annually, on the same $1.  By the time Bill+Melinda Gates are Warren Buffet's age, that would be 90% of their wealth.

You guys keep acting like you're defending a 6% tax, and then when pressed on the fact that it's actually far larger than that, half of you go hide in a corner and the other half just try to ridicule me into shutting up.

And that nicely mirrors Warren's strategy.  "LOL BILLIONAIRE TEARS"

At least the bona-fide socialists have the balls to defend eliminating billionaires.  You Warrenites just want to do it sneakily and hope that nobody notices when I call out your "it's only 6%" rhetoric.

I'll quote the Mercatus Center's (a free-market-oriented think tank) Scott Sumner:  "In my view the strong presumption of sharply decreasing marginal utility at high levels of consumption means that the baseline tax policy is highly progressive, and to deviate from that assumption conservatives need to make arguments based on second order effects...I don’t really have any idea what the top rate should be, but for extremely high levels of consumption it’s certainly plausible that an 80% rate might be appropriate. I’d support that rate in a deal for a pure consumption tax and abolition of income taxes.  A $40 million dollar yacht will motivate a financier just as well as a $200 million yacht, in a world where financiers mostly care about how they are doing relative to other rich guys.  And they’d still be able to put expensive paintings on their walls—prices would fall and who else would buy them?"  https://www.themoneyillusion.com/the-case-for-80-tax-rates-on-the-rich/

Anyway, the system is rigged the rich don't deserve their money.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

As a side note, Warren's merch game is on point:

[credit: Yakanak News]

$25 mugs 
#populism

 Trump's mug is $30.

https://shop.donaldjtrump.com/products/official-trump-pence-2020-mug-red

does it say "rIcH pEoPle BAD!!" ?

[GP270watch]

does it say "rIcH pEoPle BAD!!" ?

 It has Donald Trump's name on it, so as a matter of fact yes!

[Progressive Pessimist]

As a side note, Warren's merch game is on point:

[credit: Yakanak News]

We could use something like that to combat the (less creative) crap that Trump shills on his website.

[John Dule]

Between "okay boomer" and now this, the left's arguments for socialism are in danger of becoming just as anti-intellectual and trollish as the arguments for Trump.

[KaiserDave]

Between "okay boomer" and now this, the left's arguments for socialism are in danger of becoming just as anti-intellectual and trollish as the arguments for Trump.

>Thinking Warren is a socialist


Ok boomer is peak foolish though

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Not shelling out $25 for that thing, but it beats Jeb!'s guac bowl.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Not shelling out $25 for that thing, but it beats Jeb!'s guac bowl.

And JEB!'s guac bowl beats Beto's guac bowl.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

I'm still a Warren supporter (for now) but the "Billionaire Tears" mug is so incredibly embarrassing. Not quite disqualifying but still a pretty shameful signal. There was such indignation about Beto's "punitive" comment but doesn't his mug prove that he's at least partially right? I'm so disappointed that Warren would steal rhetoric from the dirtbag left and white feminists like this. The lack of smug and self-satisfied indignation is part of why I initially supported her over Sanders in the first place.

And for the "lmao populism" crowd: Trump's MAGA hats were also $25. For a one-time charge that gets you a decade (at least) of insignia in the class/identity war that's a steal.

(presumably containing hard liquor, since urbane Millennials have brought alcoholism back into fashion)

Maybe my midwestern roots are showing but when did alcoholism ever go out of style?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Yes, I know it’s still early—at least for normal, healthy people who are perhaps only just now thinking about tuning in to presidential politics—but there’s a clear shift in Elizabeth Warren’s polling momentum. She was surging in Iowa. Now, she’s not. She was surging nationally. Now, her momentum seems to have stalled. The polling in New Hampshire is still all over the place, but one post-November 1 poll has Joe Biden back in the lead.

Why did I single out November 1? Because that’s the date she released her Medicare for All funding plan. And November is the month when the New York Times splashed the cold water of reality into the faces of the Democratic primary electorate.

....

Oh, and there are some new indications that Warren herself might be uncomfortable with her Medicare for All funding rollout. She announced a transition plan—she pledges first to pass a public option (the Buttigieg plan), then three years later, pass true Medicare for All. Make no mistake, this is a thinly disguised climbdown.

https://thedispatch.com/p/from-david-french-how-warren-blew

[GP270watch]

 Warren is facing a full onslaught from the corporate media. The fact that she has the billionaire class shook up means she's probably still the real front runner. If the "smart money" is wasting their time and money to attack her they're doing so for a reason.

[izixs]

Warren is facing a full onslaught from the corporate media. The fact that she has the billionaire class shook up means she's probably still the real front runner. If the "smart money" is wasting their time and money to attack her they're doing so for a reason.

They'll fight the biggest target whom threatens their gold. Sanders has stopped being a threat as he's demonstrated that he can't grow beyond his shrinking core support, and thus can be easily contained. So that leaves Warren as the sole relevant target of their fire, independent of if she's doing well or not in the moment. Expect such attacks to continue until either she's been defeated in a string of primaries such that she's out of contention in the primary, or its a few years after she's left the presidency and they focus on a more immediate target.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Between "okay boomer" and now this, the left's arguments for socialism are in danger of becoming just as anti-intellectual and trollish as the arguments for Trump.

>Thinking Warren is a socialist


Ok boomer is peak foolish though

Warren is clearly , cleary a socialist. No capitalist would propose insane things like her wealth tax or her capital gains tax proposal