117th Congress: DEMS IN DISARRAY!!!111!!

[mookie1995]

Yeah it is everything you expect from a party that has no clue what it is doing.

They have a clue

absolutely do

they think they are smarter than everyone else and reply in shock when voters …. er stupid voters that is, repudiate them at the poles.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Should have just given Manchin what he wanted and passed everything you could. This legislation is on life support at this point.

 

[rufus]

Should have just given Manchin what he wanted and passed everything you could. This legislation is on life support at this point.

Except Manchin would never tell them what he wanted. Only what he wouldn't support. Which was pretty much everything.

 

[Swansong]

It is likely tossed in to try to get some of the "lean blue but not always" voters in blue states that got fucked by the elimination as part of Trump's tax cut. Too little, too late. Even though for almost 20 years I've happily taken advantage of the mortgage interest deduction, I would support its tapered and phased elimination.

 

[unofan]

I copy this verbatim from another site although no link was provided. Is this as accurate as proclaimed?

Yes, but...

The SALT deduction cap was put in by Trump specifically and blatantly to harm people in blue states with high state and local taxes. That it also caught 1%ers in red states was collateral damage.

Yes, its outright repeal would monetarily benefit the richest people the most.

But it will also benefit plenty of upper middle class families, and probably even some true middle class households, just not to the same extent.

This is one where yeah, it's probably not the greatest fiscal policy in the world, but it's one that they can easily sell to voters, because they were the ones directly targeted in the first place.

Progressives should understand that. Sometimes you take the easy political win even if you have to hold your nose to do it.

 

[Handyman]

Progressives never understand that...it is always "All or Nothing" and damn the consequences. You know like trying to pass a "Defund the Police" amendment in the middle of a period very high crime that isn't even supported by the people it is supposedly helping.

Progressives have all the right ideas but don't have the Game Theory acumen to actually implement them.

 

[aparch]

Should have just given Manchin what he wanted and passed everything you could. This legislation is on life support at this point.

https://www.theonion.com/biden-social-spending-bill-whittled-down-to-10-billion-1847989883

 

[psych]

Yes, but...

The SALT deduction cap was put in by Trump specifically and blatantly to harm people in blue states with high state and local taxes. That it also caught 1%ers in red states was collateral damage.

Yes, its outright repeal would monetarily benefit the richest people the most.

But it will also benefit plenty of upper middle class families, and probably even some true middle class households, just not to the same extent.

This is one where yeah, it's probably not the greatest fiscal policy in the world, but it's one that they can easily sell to voters, because they were the ones directly targeted in the first place.

Progressives should understand that. Sometimes you take the easy political win even if you have to hold your nose to do it.

How is that an easy political win? It barely helps anyone other than extremely rich people. The rest of Trump/GOP’s 2017 tax cuts significantly helped middle-class families more than the SALT repeal ever will, and the SALT repeal significantly benefits high-income earners more than Trump’s tax cuts, not in absolute dollars, but % wise. The SALT repeal is a loser across the board, except for rich people, especially those in New York, New Jersey. No actual middle-class families will see more than maybe $10/year extra from SALT repeal.
Outside of not passing the bills at all, it’s the dumbest thing the party can do. So, yeah, as a progressive, if it means we need to add it in order for fucktards like Josh Gottheimer to vote yes so he can lose by 10 points next year in northern New Jersey instead of 20 points, I’m pragmatic and I understand the need. That’s the only justification.

 

[unofan]

How is that an easy political win?

Because if you're a senator from New York, or California, or Taxachussettes, or any other liberal state with above average taxes to support their above average services, you can easily sell it as "Repealing Trump's attack on you." Because it was an attack aimed at them, and they are undoing it.

The average person getting that extra $100 back on their federal taxes isn't going to complain simply because Buffett saves $100,000. They're going to see the $100 they save.

The fact that you can't see the political messaging because you're right and everyone else is wrong is why you lose. It's "defund the police" all over again only backwards, this time you have the easy slogan to sell but refuse to take it.

 

[psych]

Because if you're a senator from New York, or California, or Taxachussettes, or any other liberal state with above average taxes to support their above average services, you can easily sell it as "Repealing Trump's attack on you." Because it was an attack aimed at them, and they are undoing it.

The average person getting that extra $100 back on their federal taxes isn't going to complain simply because Buffett saves $100,000. They're going to see the $100 they save.

The fact that you can't see the political messaging because you're right and everyone else is wrong is why you lose. It's "defund the police" all over again only backwards, this time you have the easy slogan to sell but refuse to take it.

Get your facts straight before being a condescending as-hole, because that doesn’t fly with me. 98% of middle-class families won’t see a dime from the SALT repeal- I repeat- not a dime, much less the “extra $100” you magically made up. This constituency you speak of that would actually benefit from SALT repeal is so minuscule, they won’t make a difference in any election.
Besides, if those wealthy taxpayers are saving hundreds of thousands of extra dollars in taxes every year, where are those tax dollars that are saved going? Helping the government provide actual services to middle-class and lower-class constituents? I’m thinking that’s a no. It’s a lose-lose for all middle-class and working class families, and an actual loser for the 2% of middle-class families who might get that magical $100 you speak of. But, you’re right, they’ll see the $100, get pumped, and not notice that a large chunk of money from rich people’s taxes used for social services and infrastructure and public schools and other important things will no longer be there until it’s too late.
I’m sure all of the middle-class families living in those areas won’t also be convinced by Republicans that Democrats are benefiting rich people and not hardworking families like themselves by repealing the SALT cap. You don’t have to be condescending, I understand how hypocritical that sounds, coming from Republicans. But they’ll try it, and it’ll work.
For the last time, if it means the bipartisan bill and BBB bill pass Congress, thanks to votes from Gottheimer, etc., as a progressive, I’m on board with that. Whatever it takes. I’m pragmatic.

 

[psych]

It is likely tossed in to try to get some of the "lean blue but not always" voters in blue states that got fucked by the elimination as part of Trump's tax cut. Too little, too late. Even though for almost 20 years I've happily taken advantage of the mortgage interest deduction, I would support its tapered and phased elimination.

New York, New Jersey, California, Massachusetts, those people are voting blue for president and Senators 99% of the time, as you’re obviously aware. Massachusetts is what, 9-0 in the House for Democrats? New York, when it’s done gerrymandering, will have maybe 3-5 Republicans representing districts there? The people who benefit from SALT repeal the most live in states so blue, there’s no need for an “easy political win.” I understand Josh Gottheimer thinks he needs it to win re-election next year. I understand Schumer and Pelosi and others living in high-tax states want to keep their constituents happy, lest someone like Schumer face a tough primary next go ‘round. I understand it needing to be apart of the BBB to get the votes necessary to pass all of it, since it’s certainly better millionaires and billionaires get their tax cut as long as the rest of us get free preschool, etc., than the current status quo. But it’s not an easy political win for the party. It’s a slap in the face of our platform as a party. I’m sure you understand all of that too.

 

[Swansong]

I definitely understand it. It was a rare brilliant strategic move by the TA.

But in the interest of fixing something that was put in purely through bad intentions as well as maybe shoring up a few votes, it isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things.


Full disclosure - I'm not against the SALT Cap personally and I generally don't go to bat for the sake of the income of high income earners.

 

[dxmnkd316]

New York, New Jersey, California, Massachusetts, those people are voting blue for president and Senators 99% of the time, as you’re obviously aware. Massachusetts is what, 9-0 in the House for Democrats? New York, when it’s done gerrymandering, will have maybe 3-5 Republicans representing districts there? The people who benefit from SALT repeal the most live in states so blue, there’s no need for an “easy political win.” I understand Josh Gottheimer thinks he needs it to win re-election next year. I understand Schumer and Pelosi and others living in high-tax states want to keep their constituents happy, lest someone like Schumer face a tough primary next go ‘round. I understand it needing to be apart of the BBB to get the votes necessary to pass all of it, since it’s certainly better millionaires and billionaires get their tax cut as long as the rest of us get free preschool, etc., than the current status quo. But it’s not an easy political win for the party. It’s a slap in the face of our platform as a party. I’m sure you understand all of that too.

It’s not a slap in the face. It’s doing what you need to win. If it gets you two or three more house seats, that might be the difference. Is that not worth it?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

SALT Cap is fine. That's not the problem with the tax code. By a long shot. Either way the Bernie Bros are overreaching over and over again. Bernie lost. Progressives lost. Biden won. Just get what you can out of Manchin and be done with it.

Manchin is right. Southwest Virginia which voted for Youngkin 80-20 is his entire state. They're all stupid and will always vote against their best interests. You will never convince them otherwise. We have a Manchin Administration right now. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

I may be confused on salt cap. I make under 175 and still hit the cap with Minnesota taxes. Do I need tax relief? No. Should I pay less on taxes than people who make over 400k? I think so for sure. I don’t know if this would even help me

 

[unofan]

I may be confused on salt cap. I make under 175 and still hit the cap with Minnesota taxes. Do I need tax relief? No. Should I pay less on taxes than people who make over 400k? I think so for sure. I don’t know if this would even help me

If you hit the SALT cap and itemize your deductions (or would itemize but for the cap), then yes, its removal would help you. It just won't help you as much as a billionaire.

 

[Handyman]

It?s not a slap in the face. It?s doing what you need to win. If it gets you two or three more house seats, that might be the difference. Is that not worth it?

And right now that needs to be the goal. The Dems need wins if they want any chance next year and in '24. Win the easy ones and then go from there.

Its like playing the Lions...the win is never very impressive but sometimes it helps end a losing streak which can turn things around.

 

[French Rage]

If you hit the SALT cap and itemize your deductions (or would itemize but for the cap), then yes, its removal would help you. It just won't help you as much as a billionaire.

My attitude is that is double taxation, so remove it; up the bracket amounts by all means if you want; just have it make sense, which it does not with the SALT cap.

Note: removing it would massively help me given both state incomes taxes and (now that I bought a Bay Area home) property taxes. So my justification is self-serving.

 

[dxmnkd316]

If you hit the SALT cap and itemize your deductions (or would itemize but for the cap), then yes, its removal would help you. It just won't help you as much as a billionaire.

Which is why I think you're right about a minor win for raising the cap. I make less than DGF and I hit it or came close the last few years. It also promotes irresponsible taxation at the state and local levels. You want your states to be properly funded so it doesn't become a race to the bottom. If you cap it, there's less incentive for the states to tax appropriately for their infrastructure and services.

My attitude is that is double taxation, so remove it; up the bracket amounts by all means if you want; just have it make sense, which it does not with the SALT cap.

Note: removing it would massively help me given both state incomes taxes and (now that I bought a Bay Area home) property taxes. So my justification is self-serving.

Agreed. If the state taxed you at 100%, hypothetically, how do you sort that out? Obviously someone gets first dibs, probably the feds, but I don't know. Either way, you still are taxing money that doesn't exist. It's the state's or fed's. The other can't come in and claim it as well.

 

[psych]

I definitely understand it. It was a rare brilliant strategic move by the TA.

But in the interest of fixing something that was put in purely through bad intentions as well as maybe shoring up a few votes, it isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things.


Full disclosure - I'm not against the SALT Cap personally and I generally don't go to bat for the sake of the income of high income earners.

Bad intentions or not, it was good policy. I don’t think it’ll have any effect on shoring up seats. The only thing it’s knowingly, tangibly good for in this moment is securing the votes of Gottheimer, Suozzi, etc., on the twin bills in Congress, and YES- FUCKING YES- it’s worth sticking in there for that alone. SALT repeal can be worth it for THAT, and STILL be sh-tty policy at the same time. It’s a massive fucking tax giveaway to the rich, and a cursory glance of the research refutes every argument made on here, like “double taxation”, a “race to the bottom”, etc. Actual, real, middle-class families, who are represented by basically none of you on here, don’t benefit one iota. Under 3% receive anything from SALT repeal, and a family that does receives around $37.
I guess I’m a little shocked that in the 30 minutes of reading I’ve done on the topic, everything on this board in favor of repeal, or justifying as a somehow inherent “win”, can be so easily refuted. I’ll stand by my slap in the face to our party’s platform, despite the gains, and, in the case of retaining a House seat or two, potential gains.