TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Better management of spending, which is very much needed indeed, does not preclude a better optimization of the taxation/revenue streams. We need to work on both sides of the equation.

Given that the income side is close to being tapped out, and that a very disproportionate amount of the wealth created over the past few decades has been accumulated by the ultrarich, the adoption of a shrewdly designed and calibrated wealth tax is a no-brainer.

WIAF: I appreciate you taking the time to share your professional experience in the field and present it in detail in a rational manner. Also I do understand that the editorial posted on the ABA page is not an official endorsement, nevertheless it does give the proposal some legal gravitas and dispels the notion that such a proposal would be a complete pipe dream from a purely legalistic perspective.

Also I would be opposed to a much more aggressive and wide-reaching form of the wealth tax as practised in France and other countries. The more recent forms of the wealth tax in France have even lumped in real estate assets and put in more loopholes for large financial assets, shifting the burden from the ultrarich (Macron's main constituency) to the upper middle class. So yes there is a risk of it becoming a trojan horse.

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Love these Reagan era fossils still trotting out the same lines after 40 years of failure

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

bearister said:

---

Would a wealth tax in America work? Yes, argues Berkeley economist Gabriel Zucman. - Big Think

---

Why would anyone trust a French guy with your money?

Are you kidding me?

---

Great. Let's assess people by their accent, their nationality, or their skin color.
Great job!

If you want to slam zucman, do so on basis of his proposals. Use arguments.

That's just so weak, and wrong.

---

I was being sarcastic.
But it looks like it triggered you.

Actually, if youre aware of Zucman's policies and assumptions, its not even worth debating his claims. You dont appear to be familiar with him, while "wifeisafurd" and I clearly are

Let us all know when you catch up and figure out how unrealistic and FLAWED Zucman's policies are, and the assumptions that those policies are based on.

---

You are one big typing insult machine. It's really boorish! You also are snobbish. Blckt!

And, that's always what I say when I judge someone based on race or national terms - I claim "I was joking!" "It was sarcasm."

Sounds like someone else I know.

And finally, you may recall my continued post of Zucman explaining how the USA has a flat tax, effectively - that's what I know about him. I'll re-post for you.

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Love these Reagan era fossils still trotting out the same lines after 40 years of failure

---

Seems you have no problem taking and spending other people's money.

What's your opposition to making sure the taxes already being collected are properly managed... BEFORE ASKING FOR MORE?

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Love these Reagan era fossils still trotting out the same lines after 40 years of failure

---

Seems you have no problem taking and spending other people's money.

What's your opposition to making sure the taxes already being collected are properly managed... BEFORE ASKING FOR MORE?

---

As I've said. At the Federal level that's been said for 40 years. It's a failure. I've asked you multiple times to name the programs and dollar amounts you think can be saved. For 40 years, that question goes unanswered as our debt balloons. At this point, it's a joke.

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

You clearly havent been to Concord, which has been consistently ranked as one of the Top 3 middle sized Cities that has the worst rated roads in the Country.

---

I suspect this is asinine!
#3 worst? Laughable!
I drive concord roads all the time. No problem!!

Have you ever been to Ann Arbor?

---

Whats comical is how out of touch you are Tom.

Apparently, you havent been on Monument, Meadow, Market, or Treat Blvd the last several years.

https://eastcountytoday.net/study-concord-and-antioch-have-roughest-roads-in-the-country/

https://patch.com/california/concord-ca/concord-roads-ranked-see-how-they-compare-rest-bay-area

---

You have no idea where I am or have been.
I'm there every month, sometimes every week. I own property in concord. I'll be there again in 3 hours.
I also even venture above Seeno's emus.
Shove that up your porsche and smoke it.

Or better yet, drive your shiny new sports car on roads that get carved up and re-patched every year for decades by snowplows, salt, and ice. Then come back and tell me how awful Treat is. What a f'ing joke that assertion is. And the only thing rough about Meadow are the economic conditions of the dozen people packed into 2 bedroom units.

-Concord legacy since 1882.

…I don't care what your links say. That's absurd. I have lived experience that say no way.



I looked at your link, and I do not believe they are nonpartisan. I suspect their reports are tilted toward funding by vested interest groups. Probably release reports right before votes for spending bills in various markets come up. I dunno, but that's BS. Look at the ktvu Antioch report. The person in there also disagrees with the report "finding".

PASTE:

Founded in 1971, TRIP is a private nonprofit organization that researches, evaluates and distributes economic and technical data on surface transportation issues. TRIP promotes transportation policies that help relieve traffic congestion and its impact on air quality, improve road and bridge conditions, make surface travel safer, and enhance economic productivity. TRIP is sponsored by insurance companies, equipment manufacturers, distributors, and suppliers, businesses involved in highway and transit engineering and construction, labor unions, and organizations concerned with an efficient and safe surface transportation network that promotes economic development and quality of life.

Our Vision

To be the essential source of strategic messaging achieved through innovation and collaboration with a diverse group of stakeholders to achieve sustainable transportation infrastructure funding.

Our Mission

TRIP is a credible source of data and information for a diverse group of transportation stakeholders; delivers news and social media coverage of transportation issues and messages; and, informs and promotes discussion of policies that improve the movement of goods and people, make surface travel safer, and enhance economic development and productivity.

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Love these Reagan era fossils still trotting out the same lines after 40 years of failure

---

Seems you have no problem taking and spending other people's money.

What's your opposition to making sure the taxes already being collected are properly managed... BEFORE ASKING FOR MORE?

---

As I've said. At the Federal level that's been said for 40 years. It's a failure. I've asked you multiple times to name the programs and dollar amounts you think can be saved. For 40 years, that question goes unanswered as our debt balloons. At this point, it's a joke.

---

There is only one answer to the question and that is to cut the budget for the Department of Defense. It consumes almost all of our discretionary spending. There isn't anything else to cut that would make a dent in the budget other than Medicare and Social Security and I think we know which party is subtly trying to kill those.

concordtom said:

---

I looked at your link, and I do not believe they are nonpartisan. I suspect their reports are tilted toward funding by vested interest groups. Probably release reports right before votes for spending bills in various markets come up. I dunno, but that's BS. Look at the ktvu Antioch report. The person in there also disagrees with the report "finding".

---

That photo you posted looks eerily similar to Willow Pass heading out towards Highway 4.
lol

dimitrig said:

---

There is only one answer to the question and that is to cut the budget for the Department of Defense. It consumes almost all of our discretionary spending. There isn't anything else to cut that would make a dent in the budget other than Medicare and Social Security and I think we know which party is subtly trying to kill those.

---

As I said previously, a single F-35 jet engine costs $6 Billion and including maintenance runs $40 Billion.

But Dajo is more concerned about taxing the rich and CEO compensation so that Govt can spend more of our money.

And for what it's worth, if every CEO in the Fortune 500 averaged making $40 million a year (sans outliars like Tim Cook and Elon Musk), that would still only add up to $20 Billion.

That's HALF of one single F-35 jet engine deal.

concordtom said:

---

…I don't care what your links say. That's absurd. I have lived experience that say no way.

---

Tom, you're terribly misinformed.

I speak to the Mayor of Concord (Laura Hoffmeister) and her Public Works Director (Will Tarbox) and his City Engineer (Carlton Thompson) and the Maintenance Supervisor (Jesse Crawford) who only has a crew of 3 for maintaining over 700 miles of streets, on a fairly regular basis.

Here, let me help you improve your knowledge base with ACTUAL FACTS.

The following graph is from the City of Concord.
It shows that the current Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is at a lowly 58.
58 is in the "At Risk" category.

If the City of Concord spends $20 million a year on their 700 miles of roads, they will be able to keep their Street Rating at 58. This will keep their roads in one of the lowest PCI conditions, from falling further.







The following link from the City of Concord (page #19) says that Concord's current need for maintenance (in an ideal world) is at over $471 MILLION DOLLARS.

5-Year-Expenditure-Pavement-Plan (cityofconcord.org)

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) shows Concord at the bottom of the barrel at 60 (3-year rolling average as of 2019) compared to other Bay Area cities.

PCI_table-2019_data.indd (ca.gov)

You should do some "homework" Tom, otherwise you sound like one of those angry middle-aged white guys who watches FAUX NEWS and cant accept FACTS.

The FACTS are all cited above.

DiabloWags said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

There is only one answer to the question and that is to cut the budget for the Department of Defense. It consumes almost all of our discretionary spending. There isn't anything else to cut that would make a dent in the budget other than Medicare and Social Security and I think we know which party is subtly trying to kill those.

---

As I said previously, a single F-35 jet engine costs $6 Billion and including maintenance runs $40 Billion.

But Dajo is more concerned about taxing the rich and CEO compensation so that Govt can spend more of our money.
And for what it's worth, if every CEO in the Fortune 500 averaged making $40 million a year (sans outliars like Tim Cook and Elon Musk), that would still only add up to $20 Billion.

That's HALF of one single F-35 jet engine deal.

---

We can do both. But I haven't seen Reaganite cal79 talk about cutting defense spending. Just waste, fraud, and abuse.

Best Pavement Condition Cities in the Bay Area:

3 year moving average ending in 2020

The Very Good Category: ( 80 - 89 )

Cupertino 85
Dublin 84
Palo Alto 84
Brentwood 81
Clayton 81
Orinda 81
Woodside 81
Solano County 80
Danville 80
Foster City 80

The Worst: ( 25 - 49 )

Vallejo 49
Sebastopol 48
Napa County 45
Petaluma 44
Pacifica 42


Note:

Concord is 59
Berkeley is 58
Millbrae is 56
Oakland 52

Blah blah blah…
Not interested in carrying on with you. You're always so insulting to everyone here. You insult people left and right.
That's your MO.
Yeah, I know the hoffmeister family, too.
Whoopie do.

DiabloWags said:

---

Solid post Wife.

I believe the LA Times reported that the top 1% of Californian's paid 46% of all income taxes in 2016.

The State's Legislative Analyst Office reported it to be 50% in 2012. See link below.

https://lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/7

---

And I offer this as Equal Opportunity Reader Reaction:

Hey, look!!!
A compliment by Diablo Wags!
What a surprise! No, really!!!

DiabloWags said:

---

The Top 5% of American earners already pay 63% of all Federal income taxes.

---

So what? As incomes of the top 5% increase, of COURSE they're going to pay more tax. Math is hard. Ironically, they're still not paying enough, as we learn the more you make, the less tax you pay. A basic flat tax would increase their taxes even more.

A $50 trillion dollar flow of wages from the bottom 90% of American paychecks to the top 1%, and you STILL think the top 5% are getting a raw deal???

If these earnings were by ditch-diggers, that percentage would be far, FAR higher.

But nope the Ferrari crowd deserves a break. It's tough being really rich, flying private, and all the other privileges & entitlements that come along with it.

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Love these Reagan era fossils still trotting out the same lines after 40 years of failure

---

Seems you have no problem taking and spending other people's money.

What's your opposition to making sure the taxes already being collected are properly managed... BEFORE ASKING FOR MORE?

---

As I've said. At the Federal level that's been said for 40 years. It's a failure. I've asked you multiple times to name the programs and dollar amounts you think can be saved. For 40 years, that question goes unanswered as our debt balloons. At this point, it's a joke.

---

What's the problem starting with waste fraud, and abuse?

So you'll take what's behind door #1... continuing to balloon the debt?

dajo9 said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

One of the best solutions for our current economic woes is to go back to one of the policies that Made America Great (economically, for white men & their families): the 35+% Corporate Earnings Tax.

That rate is designed to be an incentive for corporations to invest in their own operations. Higher wages & salaries for Workers, greater investment in training & education, more investment in capital equipment, increased economic activity, and a stronger economy are all the result of increasing the Corporate Earnings Tax Rate.

With effective Corporate Earnings Tax Rates close to zero for many corporations, and with impoverished Consumer Markets, companies are buying back their shares because the expected ROI from investing in their own operations is so low.

So instead of investing in increasing capacity and increasing supplies to remedy supply shortages, corporations are saying, "Let the supply shortages continue, and let the Workers pay."

It'll be interesting to see how much of the current demand for shares is coming from corporate buybacks. A few years ago, it was 70%. It might be higher today.

---

I really don't think you can just re-create what worked in the past. Capital and business are much more mobile than they used to be. With its abundance of tech and entertainment business, I think California, in particular, would get ripped by corporate rates over 35%.

In the near term I think we need to tie acces to our capital markets to a wealth tax. Pay to play, if you will.

Dreaming bigger, it would be ideal to have an alliance of free nations that support each other in defense, trade, and tax policy. But truly free nations. No Saudi Arabias and Chinas. Then, possibly, we could go back to a 35+% corporate tax rate.

---

Why not? It's just policy.

Besides, why would California get "ripped" with a Federal corporate earnings tax of 35%??

The mobility of Capital and businesses increased dramatically starting in the early 1990s with GATT, then the WTO, NAFTA, and Globalism in general. But it's all policy. Theoretically, it can be undone just as easily as it was done in the first place.

Under the Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton administrations, the U.S. went from the world's leading manufacturer & creditor (under FDR's New Deal policies) to the world's leading debtor and importer. The U.S. Middle Class had $trillions of its wealth transferred from its own balance sheets to the balance sheets of large corporations & oligarchs.

It's taken decades, but it we're finally taking a look at all the policy changes of the last few decades, and realizing that they made a few people fabulously wealthy -- but they absolutely demolished the standard of living, the life expectancy, and the good will for about 90% of Americans.

What were we thinking??

All the promises of increased wealth under "Free Trade" and globalism have faded from memory. Instead of building the wealth of our own Middle Class, we've built a Middle Class in China.

So why not go back to the trade policies that served us so well since the founding of our nation -- the ones created by Alexander Hamilton: tariffs on imports. Yes, that's called "Protectionism." So if your company wants to sell products to Americans, are you going to move your factory somewhere else, exploit cheap Labor (with a much lower cost of living), and pay a significant tariff on those products when you import them into the U.S.?? No, you aren't.

It took nearly four years after the market crash of October, 1929, to replace the unsustainable, low-tax/low-wage policies of "trickle-down" Capitalism with a form of Capitalism that was sustainable, and that worked well for nearly everyone. Those policies were known as FDR's New Deal. They directly led to steady, sustainable growth for decades -- with no financial crises -- until Reagan & the Neoliberals took over in 1980, with their deregulation, monopolization, and austerity policies.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Cal88 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Better management of spending, which is very much needed indeed, does not preclude a better optimization of the taxation/revenue streams. We need to work on both sides of the equation.

Given that the income side is close to being tapped out, and that a very disproportionate amount of the wealth created over the past few decades has been accumulated by the ultrarich, the adoption of a shrewdly designed and calibrated wealth tax is a no-brainer.

WIAF: I appreciate you taking the time to share your professional experience in the field and present it in detail in a rational manner. Also I do understand that the editorial posted on the ABA page is not an official endorsement, nevertheless it does give the proposal some legal gravitas and dispels the notion that such a proposal would be a complete pipe dream from a purely legalistic perspective.

Also I would be opposed to a much more aggressive and wide-reaching form of the wealth tax as practised in France and other countries. The more recent forms of the wealth tax in France have even lumped in real estate assets and put in more loopholes for large financial assets, shifting the burden from the ultrarich (Macron's main constituency) to the upper middle class. So yes there is a risk of it becoming a trojan horse.

---

You do realize what I proposed many posts ago about a use tax on "luxury"assets owned by the ultra wealthy is essentially the same at the Spain "wealth tax" that you referenced? I just didn't call it a wealth tax. The other thing is Sanders, and to a lesser degree Warren, has wealth tax plans that looked nothing like the European asset taxes, which "Frenchie" from Bearister's article dismissed with the view the wealthy in Europe just go to low EU tax countries. I'm not so sure how true that is, except in Switzerland where everyone buys their way out of the tax by keeping assets in the Swiss financial institutions (the "Swiss Way").

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Love these Reagan era fossils still trotting out the same lines after 40 years of failure

---

Seems you have no problem taking and spending other people's money.

What's your opposition to making sure the taxes already being collected are properly managed... BEFORE ASKING FOR MORE?

---

As I've said. At the Federal level that's been said for 40 years. It's a failure. I've asked you multiple times to name the programs and dollar amounts you think can be saved. For 40 years, that question goes unanswered as our debt balloons. At this point, it's a joke.

---

What's the problem starting with waste fraud, and abuse?

So you'll take what's behind door #1... continuing to balloon the debt?

---

Listen, Bob Dole. We did start with waste, fraud, and abuse. 40 years ago. We've been doing it your way for 40 years. You've given us nothing but debt.

cbbass1 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

One of the best solutions for our current economic woes is to go back to one of the policies that Made America Great (economically, for white men & their families): the 35+% Corporate Earnings Tax.

That rate is designed to be an incentive for corporations to invest in their own operations. Higher wages & salaries for Workers, greater investment in training & education, more investment in capital equipment, increased economic activity, and a stronger economy are all the result of increasing the Corporate Earnings Tax Rate.

With effective Corporate Earnings Tax Rates close to zero for many corporations, and with impoverished Consumer Markets, companies are buying back their shares because the expected ROI from investing in their own operations is so low.

So instead of investing in increasing capacity and increasing supplies to remedy supply shortages, corporations are saying, "Let the supply shortages continue, and let the Workers pay."

It'll be interesting to see how much of the current demand for shares is coming from corporate buybacks. A few years ago, it was 70%. It might be higher today.

---

I really don't think you can just re-create what worked in the past. Capital and business are much more mobile than they used to be. With its abundance of tech and entertainment business, I think California, in particular, would get ripped by corporate rates over 35%.

In the near term I think we need to tie acces to our capital markets to a wealth tax. Pay to play, if you will.

Dreaming bigger, it would be ideal to have an alliance of free nations that support each other in defense, trade, and tax policy. But truly free nations. No Saudi Arabias and Chinas. Then, possibly, we could go back to a 35+% corporate tax rate.

---

Why not? It's just policy.

Besides, why would California get "ripped" with a Federal corporate earnings tax of 35%??

The mobility of Capital and businesses increased dramatically starting in the early 1990s with GATT, then the WTO, NAFTA, and Globalism in general. But it's all policy. Theoretically, it can be undone just as easily as it was done in the first place.

Under the Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton administrations, the U.S. went from the world's leading manufacturer & creditor (under FDR's New Deal policies) to the world's leading debtor and importer. The U.S. Middle Class had $trillions of its wealth transferred from its own balance sheets to the balance sheets of large corporations & oligarchs.

It's taken decades, but it we're finally taking a look at all the policy changes of the last few decades, and realizing that they made a few people fabulously wealthy -- but they absolutely demolished the standard of living, the life expectancy, and the good will for about 90% of Americans.

What were we thinking??

All the promises of increased wealth under "Free Trade" and globalism have faded from memory. Instead of building the wealth of our own Middle Class, we've built a Middle Class in China.

So why not go back to the trade policies that served us so well since the founding of our nation -- the ones created by Alexander Hamilton: tariffs on imports. Yes, that's called "Protectionism." So if your company wants to sell products to Americans, are you going to move your factory somewhere else, exploit cheap Labor (with a much lower cost of living), and pay a significant tariff on those products when you import them into the U.S.?? No, you aren't.

It took nearly four years after the market crash of October, 1929, to replace the unsustainable, low-tax/low-wage policies of "trickle-down" Capitalism with a form of Capitalism that was sustainable, and that worked well for nearly everyone. Those policies were known as FDR's New Deal. They directly led to steady, sustainable growth for decades -- with no financial crises -- until Reagan & the Neoliberals took over in 1980, with their deregulation, monopolization, and austerity policies.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

---

California would get ripped because tech and entertainment can easily move. Much easier than moving factories. The remedies need to be different because the world is different.

TandemBear said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

The Top 5% of American earners already pay 63% of all Federal income taxes.

---

So what? As incomes of the top 5% increase, of COURSE they're going to pay more tax. Math is hard. Ironically, they're still not paying enough, as we learn the more you make, the less tax you pay. A basic flat tax would increase their taxes even more.

A $50 trillion dollar flow of wages from the bottom 90% of American paychecks to the top 1%, and you STILL think the top 5% are getting a raw deal???

If these earnings were by ditch-diggers, that percentage would be far, FAR higher.

But nope the Ferrari crowd deserves a break. It's tough being really rich, flying private, and all the other privileges & entitlements that come along with it.

---

I've found the opposite true of your bogus claims.
Whenever I've made more money, I've been taxed more.

The top rate for California income tax payers is 13.3% which includes a 1% surcharge for mental health.

California has a very progressive income tax system.
People making $66,200 face a 9.3% marginal rate.
The more you make, the more you pay.

You're terribly lost.

California State Tax: Rates, Who Pays in 2022-2023 - NerdWallet

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Love these Reagan era fossils still trotting out the same lines after 40 years of failure

---

Seems you have no problem taking and spending other people's money.

What's your opposition to making sure the taxes already being collected are properly managed... BEFORE ASKING FOR MORE?

---

As I've said. At the Federal level that's been said for 40 years. It's a failure. I've asked you multiple times to name the programs and dollar amounts you think can be saved. For 40 years, that question goes unanswered as our debt balloons. At this point, it's a joke.

---

What's the problem starting with waste fraud, and abuse?

So you'll take what's behind door #1... continuing to balloon the debt?

---

Listen, Bob Dole. We did start with waste, fraud, and abuse. 40 years ago. We've been doing it your way for 40 years. You've given us nothing but debt.

---

Dajo, for reasons unknown to me you seem intent on labeling me as a 'Reaganite' or 'Bob Dole'. I find this interesting, especially since I haven't proposed a specific tax policy.

What I've said is that we need to address the problems of waste, fraud, and abuse of existing tax dollars BEFORE asking for MORE tax dollars.

You just stated that 40 years of starting with waste, fraud, and abuse hasn't worked. Why not? Why hasn't it worked?

Why should taxpayers, regardless of financial status, pay more in taxes when there is waste, fraud, and abuse of the tax dollars they've paid? When the tax dollars already collected are mismanaged, why should someone trust that more tax dollars would be used wisely?

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I've had a chance to review Biden's budget plan and I support it though it will raise my own taxes. It will help reduce income inequality and be good for the country's finances. It isn't as good as Warren's plan which would tax wealth instead of boosting high end marginal rates.

There are better ways to go about improving America's financial situation from an economic standpoint but the staunch defense put up against taxing wealth means higher taxes on income. I'd rather see lower marginal income tax rates and wealth taxes but this will do as a compromise with the staunch defenders of the tax sanctity of wealth. Until people realize taxing wealth is the way out of this mess, the affluent will continue to be soaked.

---

Why is more taxes the default response? Why shouldn't cleaning up or eliminating spending on wasteful and/or ineffective programs that don't work be the first response?

Rather than politicians constantly asking for more, why not better use of what they've already got?

---

Are you KIDDING? Look around you! Our roads are falling apart. Our schools look like crap. Bridges collapsing. "Deferred maintenance" is the norm. We underfund the IRS so they can't do their jobs. Cuts, cuts, cuts is what you want?

The private sector has proven it cannot be trusted to pay living wage jobs for the VAST MAJORITY of the population. Running everything "lean and mean" has produced almost endless desperation. I cycled 30 miles in San Jose on Tuesday past endless homeless camps. This is now the NORM. Despite being dead-center in Silicon Valley, yet homeless by the thousands. How does that make ANY sense? All thanks to the attitudes like you that we cannot trust governments to spend money well. I say we fail to trust them enough.

I live in Oakland where so much is crumbling. City jobs are hard to come by. Yet City infrastructure is falling apart. Many of our public spaces are now maintained by volunteer labor. Why? Let's PAY folks needing jobs to do this work and let everyone enjoy their weekends instead. Americans work enough hours on the clock, we shouldn't be asked to donate more hours to work - especially unpaid! We need to be spending BILLIONS a year to restore our city to what it was and could be. And this means thousands and thousands of living wage, secure jobs with full benefits and retirement (even, god forbid, PENSIONS?!!!) packages. THAT'S what gives people prosperity, not cuts, cuts, cuts.

We need FAR MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING to rebuild this country. From roads and bridges, to National and State Parks, universities, and all the rest. Oh and what about universal pre-school? Who doesn't support this? But let's pay early-education professionals living wages. Gee, what an idea. To actually properly compensate those responsible for bringing your children into the educational environment. (Right now, early education is one of the worst-paid jobs, yet we say we value children.)

If you want to go after "wasteful spending," then fire the ENTIRE private "health" insurance industry and install single-payer health care. That right there saves $1.3 TRILLION dollars every single year. Pre-tax dollars, that works out to about $6k per American and thus $24k per family of four.

If you REALLY wanted to improve efficiency in spending, you'd adopt single-payer. But nope, you'll continue your tirade on public sector spending like it's some huge problem, while leaving the true waste to continue unabated.

---

Is it your suggestion that wiser use of our tax dollars is not a good idea? Is it your suggestion that there is no mismanagement of the tax dollars already being collected?

Rather than asking for more and more tax dollars, properly manage the tax dollars already being collected. Why is this too much to ask?

---

Love these Reagan era fossils still trotting out the same lines after 40 years of failure

---

Seems you have no problem taking and spending other people's money.

What's your opposition to making sure the taxes already being collected are properly managed... BEFORE ASKING FOR MORE?

---

As I've said. At the Federal level that's been said for 40 years. It's a failure. I've asked you multiple times to name the programs and dollar amounts you think can be saved. For 40 years, that question goes unanswered as our debt balloons. At this point, it's a joke.

---

What's the problem starting with waste fraud, and abuse?

So you'll take what's behind door #1... continuing to balloon the debt?

---

Listen, Bob Dole. We did start with waste, fraud, and abuse. 40 years ago. We've been doing it your way for 40 years. You've given us nothing but debt.

---

Dajo, for reasons unknown to me you seem intent on labeling me as a 'Reaganite' or 'Bob Dole'. I find this interesting, especially since I haven't proposed a specific tax policy.

What I've said is that we need to address the problems of waste, fraud, and abuse of existing tax dollars BEFORE asking for MORE tax dollars.

You just stated that 40 years of starting with waste, fraud, and abuse hasn't worked. Why not? Why hasn't it worked?

Why should taxpayers, regardless of financial status, pay more in taxes when there is waste, fraud, and abuse of the tax dollars they've paid? When the tax dollars already collected are mismanaged, why should someone trust that more tax dollars would be used wisely?

---

Ok, Bob

Concordtom reporting from Concord here.

I was driving down Treat Blvd last night in the dark and rain. I got a significant jolt somewhere around Carondolet that made me think of you. And then it kept on rattling all the way past DLS.
Woah, when did it get like this?

Was it the rainy season?
Was it that I normally steer around in daylight?
Was it that DW was out there with a pick and shovel just to torment me?

Well, whatever it was, Ann Arbor is most assuredly still worse!

Congratulations. Your complaint is recognized. (But it's not normally so bad.)

Potholes from the rains are everywhere.

WC does an excellent job responding to them with asphalt and crack-sealing.
Concord only has a crew of 3 to handle over 700 miles of their roads, drains, and they just dont have the manpower (or budget) for a similar response.

Treat Blvd has been a "washboard" for years from Oak Grove Road to San Miguel.
I believe it is part of a repavement project that begins this July, which will also include Monument Blvd, Meadow Lane, and Market Street from Meadow to Willow Pass. - - - These are all streets that have a PCI in the 40's and 30's.

Try driving westbound on Meadow and make the (right) turn onto Market and let me know what you think of Market Street up to the intersection of Willow Pass.

It's as though you are driving down a road in Afghanistan.

DiabloWags said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

The Top 5% of American earners already pay 63% of all Federal income taxes.

---

So what? As incomes of the top 5% increase, of COURSE they're going to pay more tax. Math is hard. Ironically, they're still not paying enough, as we learn the more you make, the less tax you pay. A basic flat tax would increase their taxes even more.

A $50 trillion dollar flow of wages from the bottom 90% of American paychecks to the top 1%, and you STILL think the top 5% are getting a raw deal???

If these earnings were by ditch-diggers, that percentage would be far, FAR higher.

But nope the Ferrari crowd deserves a break. It's tough being really rich, flying private, and all the other privileges & entitlements that come along with it.

---

I've found the opposite true of your bogus claims.
Whenever I've made more money, I've been taxed more.

The top rate for California income tax payers is 13.3% which includes a 1% surcharge for mental health.

California has a very progressive income tax system.
People making $66,200 face a 9.3% marginal rate.
The more you make, the more you pay.

You're terribly lost.

California State Tax: Rates, Who Pays in 2022-2023 - NerdWallet

---

That you received your BA from UC Berkeley means both Cal and you failed to receive a true liberal arts education. "Whenever I've made more money, I've been taxed more." Wow, you JUST learned how percentages work? Congratulations!

New Deal policy created the world's largest and most prosperous middle class. A foundation of this policy was progressive taxation with very high marginal taxes. In other words, Diablo, the more you made back then, the more tax you paid and the HIGHER percentage you paid too! In other words, you were "robbed blind" (your vernacular). This is what built our beloved UC system, built the interstate highway system, National Parks, won World War II (94% top marginal rate) and so many, many others. Thanks to this policy, average Joe Americans were given the opportunity to rise from modest means, get an excellent - and oftentimes free - higher education, and enter lucrative professions. My two parents did exactly this. Thanks to New Deal policy, I was raised upper middle class.

Those days are all but over.

If I'm "terribly lost," then I guess I'm just as lost as:
David Cay Johnston
Gabriel Zucmann
Emmanual Saez
Nicholas Kristoph
Robert Reich
Anand Giridharadas
Nick Hanauer
Thomas Piketty
Paul Krugman
Joseph Stiglitz

And many, many other "terribly lost" scholars on the subject of economic opportunity.

Thanks for considering me among many of my heroes!

I think there should be a Committee of Really Rich Guys with the final authority to decide when "waste, fraud, and abuse of the tax dollars" has sufficiently been addressed to merit an increase in their taxes.

TandemBeae said:

---

And many, many other "terribly lost" scholars on the subject of economic opportunity.

Thanks for considering me among many of my heroes!

---

Im surprised you left off other Socialists like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

DiabloWags said:

---

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

bearister said:

---

Would a wealth tax in America work? Yes, argues Berkeley economist Gabriel Zucman. - Big Think

---

Why would anyone trust a French guy with your money?

Are you kidding me?

---

Great. Let's assess people by their accent, their nationality, or their skin color.
Great job!

If you want to slam zucman, do so on basis of his proposals. Use arguments.

That's just so weak, and wrong.

---

I was being sarcastic.
But it looks like it triggered you.

Actually, if youre aware of Zucman's policies and assumptions, its not even worth debating his claims. You dont appear to be familiar with him, while "wifeisafurd" and I clearly are

Let us all know when you catch up and figure out how unrealistic and FLAWED Zucman's policies are, and the assumptions that those policies are based on.

---

I have always thought this radio call to be funny.
Because I know when I get caught being inappropriate my first excuse is that I was only kidding.



OR,
I was only being sarcastic:

bearister said:

---

I think there should be a Committee of Really Rich Guys with the final authority to decide when "waste, fraud, and abuse of the tax dollars" has sufficiently been addressed to merit an increase in their taxes.

---

I bet you'll be the first in line with your application to join the IRS division of auditors that spends taxpayer money flying all around the world to "audit" the art and auto collections of wealthy Americans for Elizabeth "Zucman" Warren's wealth tax.

DiabloWags said:

---

Potholes from the rains are everywhere.

WC does an excellent job responding to them with asphalt and crack-sealing.
Concord only has a crew of 3 to handle over 700 miles of their roads, drains, and they just dont have the manpower (or budget) for a similar response.

Treat Blvd has been a "washboard" for years from Oak Grove Road to San Miguel.
I believe it is part of a repavement project that begins this July, which will also include Monument Blvd, Meadow Lane, and Market Street from Meadow to Willow Pass. - - - These are all streets that have a PCI in the 40's and 30's.

Try driving westbound on Meadow and make the (right) turn onto Market and let me know what you think of Market Street up to the intersection of Willow Pass.

It's as though you are driving down a road in Afghanistan.

---

If you have a "beater car" (or are about to get your wheels realigned anyway) and want to experience an I-can't-believe-they-don't-just-fix-this road, I can highly recommend 38th street in Oakland, the block just east of Broadway. Worth going a bit out of your way, just to shake your head in amazement!

EDIT: Any car will do, just don't go over 5 mph!

Lol!
Good one!

I once went salmon fishing in Yakutat Alaska. Now THAT was an adventure.
The vehicles available were wrecks that got put on a barge and brought up there to die. The fishermen are all wet and the interiors all get trashed.

Of course, so do the suspensions.
And ain't nobody gonna show up and fix the road!

TandemBear said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

The Top 5% of American earners already pay 63% of all Federal income taxes.

---

So what? As incomes of the top 5% increase, of COURSE they're going to pay more tax. Math is hard. Ironically, they're still not paying enough, as we learn the more you make, the less tax you pay. A basic flat tax would increase their taxes even more.

A $50 trillion dollar flow of wages from the bottom 90% of American paychecks to the top 1%, and you STILL think the top 5% are getting a raw deal???

If these earnings were by ditch-diggers, that percentage would be far, FAR higher.

But nope the Ferrari crowd deserves a break. It's tough being really rich, flying private, and all the other privileges & entitlements that come along with it.

---

I've found the opposite true of your bogus claims.
Whenever I've made more money, I've been taxed more.

The top rate for California income tax payers is 13.3% which includes a 1% surcharge for mental health.

California has a very progressive income tax system.
People making $66,200 face a 9.3% marginal rate.
The more you make, the more you pay.

You're terribly lost.

California State Tax: Rates, Who Pays in 2022-2023 - NerdWallet

---

That you received your BA from UC Berkeley means both Cal and you failed to receive a true liberal arts education. "Whenever I've made more money, I've been taxed more." Wow, you JUST learned how percentages work? Congratulations!

New Deal policy created the world's largest and most prosperous middle class. A foundation of this policy was progressive taxation with very high marginal taxes. In other words, Diablo, the more you made back then, the more tax you paid and the HIGHER percentage you paid too! In other words, you were "robbed blind" (your vernacular). This is what built our beloved UC system, built the interstate highway system, National Parks, won World War II (94% top marginal rate) and so many, many others. Thanks to this policy, average Joe Americans were given the opportunity to rise from modest means, get an excellent - and oftentimes free - higher education, and enter lucrative professions. My two parents did exactly this. Thanks to New Deal policy, I was raised upper middle class.

Those days are all but over.

If I'm "terribly lost," then I guess I'm just as lost as:
David Cay Johnston
Gabriel Zucmann
Emmanual Saez
Nicholas Kristoph
Robert Reich
Anand Giridharadas
Nick Hanauer
Thomas Piketty
Paul Krugman
Joseph Stiglitz

And many, many other "terribly lost" scholars on the subject of economic opportunity.

Thanks for considering me among many of my heroes!

---

It's interesting that guys like Piketty have dinged the the New Deal, and view things like American military spending as spurring on middle class growth. You might actually want to read Capital in the 21 Century and some other stuff from your heroes, because their views seems to be different than the narrative you present.