DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Kamala Harris

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ha...ad-taxes-admin-worked-collect-more-taxes

Copy Cat Kamala steals ideas from Trump. I guess since she's a moron she can't come up with any original ideas.

Day one??

It's day 1300

What a joke. Nobody can be stupid enough to believe this trash.

I don't know what people believe or don't believe. On the flip side of the tweet you posted ... basically on any campaign issue that Kamala raises, the same "why don't you di it now" rhetoric could be applies. I'd say that's a cheap and meaningless 'gotcha'. . . . about as meaningless as KH saying day 1 she's going to lower prices.

Interestingly odds of KH winning have shifted and she is now the marginal favorite - so I expect the attacks to increase in intensity. Also interesting that regardless of his "military" record, Walz with his attacks on Trump might be the closest thing to Trump that the Dems have. I don't particularly like it but he seems to do the attack thing fairly well.

Phheww, wow.

This administration has told us that inflation is not an issue for 3.5 years. First it didn't exist, then it was "transitory", then "look folks, prices are a little higher", then a Kamala word salad that told us why inflation was high by explaining what inflation is (sort of 🤣). But now, finally, she realizes it's a roadblock in turning her coronation into her presidency. So... "I'll fix it later"? She has such a good plan that she can do it on "day one", but eff you guys for six more months with the-thing-that-never-was. 🤣

And best yet, pointing out that comedy skit chicanery is "rhetoric". What kind of rhetoric? The cheap and meaningless kind. 👊

And what specifically is trumps plan on the economy ?

Oh yeah. Trump!

I forgot to say Trump.

He probably plans to take his seat on the throne, make all minorities live in poverty and squalor and steal the tax-free tips of sex workers to give to the Proud Boys and Taliban.

What’s Donny’s plan for the economy? Probably more of the same…

Let's talk about Trump, baby
Let's talk about how he scares me
Let's talk about all the bad things
And the bad things he may be
Let's talk about Trump
Let's talk about Trump
Let's talk about Trump
Let's talk about Trump

This race is between Kamala and don. It’s only ‘whataboutism’ because it’s only those two we can compare. You say trash about Kamala but won’t allow the counterpoint about don’s utter failures… because whataboutism. These are our only choices. We have to compare them. I’m no Kamala fan but when my only other choice is don… well I’m going to look back at his record and rightfully trash it.

We already know you hate when people actually compare both candidates to each other. You and others try to dismiss them by calling it "whatabouts". Even using the juvenile tag of TDS. People such as you have been trying to attach a negative label to things like an accurate comparison or pointing out your hypocrisy by labeling them a "whatabout". You actually use these things as a weapon to ignore, sidestep and refuse to acknowledge virtually everything he has done. People are smarter than that.

You do this when you don't have a response. To be fair, I wouldn't want to have to defend DJT either (so I don't).

Cool then.

Let's compare. Your funny little meme doesn't mention the fact that 3.6T was added for COVID relief efforts (which has nothing to do with the government expense of the pandemic itself). Seems like some quick math would make that meme a basic nothing burger.

What is the debt today, you ask??

$35,123,327,978,028.47 as of Friday.

Probably don't want to talk about that though.

I've had plenty of responses. Why don't you tell us what you think of Kamala's ability to lower prices on day one when she's helped preside over the worst inflation in 40 years with no response at all? Why not just do it now? Is that too "crazy" of a question? Or is it out of bounds because it doesn't mention Trump?

Oh yeah, my bad, #orangemanbad

I'll just say this. Oober and Portland who you were engaging in conversation already, have already come out and issued sharp criticism of Kamala Harris on this board. The same goes for Swish, who typically sides with liberals. Myself, I think she's inept. I think a lot of us have been clear that she ain't the best, but that we all see her as less bad. I don't think much at all was done effectively during this last administration to curb inflation. I think the stimmies from COVID from both administrations enabled a lot of the insanity and the fallout we have been dealing with.

See how easy that was? You and I used to have good discussions on this kind of stuff before you fell down the slippery slope.

But yes, when Trump is brought up (who is now no kidding the actual Republican candidate to be president by the way), you do exactly what oober said you do. I've seen much more of a critical eye toward Harris from the left on this board than I have seen with Trump on the right, outside of Pdawg. At no point have I seen anyone on the left claim that Harris is "larger than life." That's for sure. Maybe back in '22 you would have had the excuse to keep up the whole "Let's talk about Trump. Let's talk about Trump" schtick, which you did do then as well, but yes, now that he's legit going to be on the ballot in November, let's indeed talk about Trump.

Cool. Reasonable post.

Kindly provide an answer to a couple questions then. First read my post:


Then tell me... what exactly is wrong with me asking this question?

What does the question have to do with Trump?

Why are you now the sixth poster I've responded to criticising me for not talking Trump instead of Kamala... when the question clearly has everything to do with Kamala and nothing to do with Trump? Try not to use any troll tactics that demean me for having an opinion different than others with the "slippery slope" nonsense.

Clueless libtards can't comprehend this is a thread about Cackela. But Trump! Take your L.

Trollin' trollin', trollin'. Let that Eve keep trollin'.

I'm not trolling you, and I am sorry that I offended you. I've resolved not to do that anymore, which is why I wholly - or almost wholly - don't respond to posts from those who do. I felt myself getting dragged down in the mud.

I'll put it this way, I do genuinely believe that your demeanor has changed in its trend from thoughtful and reasonable to more far right, and I do think you dodge calling out obvious flaws of the Republican candidate while taking great lengths to go after the Democratic candidate, often times rightly so. That's the slippery slope.

I imagine that you and other posters on the right - namely ones who refer to me as "as far left as they come" think I have trended down a slippery slope in the opposite direction, where I have actually not changed my policy views hardly at all. I just think one candidate to be horribly dangerous whereas I consider the other candidate to be the "same old crap" we have been dealing with for too long now.

I think, ideally, i envisage a conversation where criticism of both based on glaring weaknesses as far as the eye can see are noted. I offered to have policy discussions with you in various threads, which is something you turned down, so I am often puzzled at what we are both doing here at times (you and me). I do think we are playing into the hand of the puppet masters when we (as a society) are unjustifiably exuberant about one candidate while we ceaselessly hurl feces at another candidate.

I also don't think there is anything wrong with asking that question you asked. I may disagree with the notions behind it, but I don't have a problem with it. Fair ask.

I am venturing into speculation here because I cannot answer for the other posters you brought up, but I think that one has to talk about both candidates in any discussion. If there was a thread dedicated to Donald Trump, do you not believe a fair amount of posters on the Right would bring Kamala Harris' ineptitudes into the conversation? That is the world that we currently live in with our horrifically broken two-party system controlled by corruption on both sides. Perhaps it is just the difference in strategies that you and I employ in discussions, and I'm not saying one is better than the other, but if I were to offer a criticism about a candidate and then a poster brought up the opposite candidate, I think I would acknowledge my views on the opposing candidate in order to respond to the question and then go "now it's your turn to answer my original question." Oftentimes, recently even, when I do that, the conversation will end or the other poster will say something along the lines of "Don't you guys have anything better to do on here?" which is telling. Sometimes, it actually ends with a great discussion.

I will say, which is why I brought it up earlier, when the conversation does turn back to Kamala in those scenarios, I have seen the posters on the left in here offer far more criticism of her than the opposite.

Thus far any thread about trump they have simply chosen to avoid like the plague. I can't say I actually blame them for that but their lack of response in trump threads speaks much louder than anything.

I see voting for Kamala much like stepping in dog crap.
I see voting for don as having to lick my shoe clean.
Both suck. One is much much worse.
I’ll walk barefoot in a puppy-mill kennel before voting for don.

"This administration has told us that inflation is not an issue for 3.5 years. First it didn't exist, then it was "transitory", then "look folks, prices are a little higher","

That's a load of BS. This admin NEVER denied the existence of Inflation. NEVER. But they did try to explain why things were high.. Corporate Greed is a Component. Biden told you about Shrinkflation and Anyone that takes a moment to look can see packaging on products has gotten smaller while prices were increased. We also saw increased profits from Oil and Gas companies.

If you didn't hear him/them tell you I don't know what to say,

One never hears someone they refuse to listen to. Both Biden and Kamala have spoken about inflation and the need to get it under control repeatedly over the past and continue to to this very day. As of now it's less than half of what it was at its peak. More certainly needs to be done but a lot of progress has been made thus far. But in the world of make believe some claim it wasn't said and hasn't improved. Now you'll hear a bunch of noise to act like none of this has happened.

I agree 100%.

I'll actually try to improve my previous reply and deal with your question, as you asked it.

I do not think this administration has told us that inflation is not an issue for 3.5 years. Whether or not we think it was a great stride, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 inherently implies that the administration did think that inflation was an issue at the midpoint of their tenure. I don't think Kamala has much of a solution, personally. I think the biggest problem is the consumer still wanting to spend, and that at least seems to be coming to a halt, hopefully. I do think both administrations spurred the irrational consumer exuberance by issuing stimulus checks to people who didn't need them, myself included, in multiple rounds. I also think interest rates being artificially low for such a long time, in addition to the fact COVID was not as economically harmful as it was forecasted, spurrd inflation. Lastly, I also think there was the ever-present greed. You and I actually had a good conversation on that front.

All that being said, do I think Kamala has a distinct platform or any expertise ambition on curbing inflation? Nope. BUT, with that in mind, I think, okay, this seems to be her achilles heel. This is one issue that, whether or not she caused it, it happened on her watch. Let me see if the other candidate is offering a pointed criticism of her policy, while also offering a better plan (this is where the "what about Trump" is initiated)?

This is what I see, and this is on Hannity, mind you:




I know the account that quoted it was slanted, but that's an honest conversation between Hannity and Trump. I mean, WTH was that???

So then, I think, okay, that was outdated. Trump has had time to take down Kamala on an issue where she remains vulnerable, right? Well, here's this:




I mean, that right there was a great Joe Biden impression, honestly.

I think the bottom line, kind of like what Portland and I were discussing, is this: Harris is not great. Does she have a solution for inflation? It sure doesn't seem like it. Is this an issue where it looks like the opposing candidate could attack her, easily? Of course. Digging further, does this look like an issue where the opposing candidate offers a better alternative on the issue? Nope. In my mind, the opposing candidate both has to show that he is better on the issues while also overcoming his sordid past showing that he's a threat to the country. IMHO, he is doing neither. So yeah, she sucks, but he's worse. Should we be happy with her ineptitude? Hell no. Should we substitute hers for his? In my mind, also hell no.

That's a whatabout. Wah.

See? It's annoying.


As for your question... yes, Kamala is dumb. I find the whole economy debate going on right now kinda dumb. No president has the ability to affect the economy within their term. When it comes to our economy, they are largely along for the ride... ESPECIALLY when you're talking about the last few terms. Biden was trying stimmy his way out of the end of the worst parts of COVID, and even though folks were telling him that it was too much, he kept giving away essentially free money which exasperated the inflation problem... the inflation problem that came out of the previous president's term.

j/c

New poll shows Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump in three key swing states

WASHINGTON - A new poll released Saturday shows Vice President Kamala Harris leading former President Donald Trump in three key swing states.

The New York Times/Siena College poll, conducted between Aug. 5 and Aug. 9, found that if the election were held today, 50% of voters among the likely electorate in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania each said they’d choose Harris while 46% of the electorate in each state said they’d choose Trump if the two candidates were in a head to head matchup.

The new findings come after a booming start to Harris’ campaign since President Joe Biden dropped out of the race last month, with the vice president raising over $300 million and her crowd sizes at rallies topping 10,000 people.

She also embarked on a mult-state battleground blitz Tuesday with her new running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, starting in Pennsylvania. The two held events in Wisconsin, Michigan and Arizona this week.

The surveys, conducted among 1,973 registered voters, has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points for the likely electorate.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...is-leads-trump-swing-states/74748703007/

It's still early and a lot can change between now and election day. But this is certainly a surprising development.

Hey, I'm not trying to do anything other than tell you how I feel about it. You're free not to agree.

Politics is full of political BS.... And this is just one example. I'm sure there's lots of other examples in every state and on the left and the right. Politicians double talk and BS probably should be a bigger deal, but honestly both sides do it so much you become numb to some of it.

That's dumb. For a long time, when I was in high school and college, I worked in a tipping job. I don't understand the premise behind either one of them wanting to eliminate tipping from taxes. Tipflation is already bad enough and that policy would exacerbate it that much more. I think it's just a cheap ploy by both of them to pan to people that have tipping jobs. In my mind, it's an accretion to wealth constituting income. Plain and simple. It should be taxed. This stupid policy would make it worse for the consumer. And yeah, I think it's dumb that she passed that and I guess I was unaware that she echoed that sentiment. But if true, it's stupid.

I love it when politicians get called out on this stuff. It was the same thing when Biden was going for the nomination and said he was going to fix our broken justice system. Turns out he was an excited supporter of 'Tough on Crime'.

The thing is, tips have been taxable since 1982. Kamala had nothing to do with making tips taxable. What you posted is misleading at best..............

Are Tips Taxable? How to Report Tips in the United States

In other words, tips are considered income and therefore are taxed as such. Taxing tips began back in 1982 after Congress enacted the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) as a means of generating revenue through a series of tax increases, spending cuts, and other measures.

https://www.touchbistro.com/blog/are-tips-taxable/

Nothing about this is accurate or true.....

Yes tips have been taxable since 82. However Harris cast the deciding vote to increase the amount of IRS agents who were tasked to go after people and their tips. We heard the bill was to go after Billionaires but there was more to the story.

So you heard it was to ONLY go after billionaires? It doesn't change that the headline of "Create the problem and then campaign on fixing it" is 100% false. I had no idea that collecting taxable income was such a bad thing. Then only to have people mischaracterize it as something it's not.

Billionaires have very long and complicated tax returns which take a lot of time and manpower to investigate. Not so much with tips. I understand when a dog gets hold of a bone it's hard to let go. But a nothing burger contains no bones. I suppose the IRS shouldn't go after anyone but billionaires taxes because doing anything otherwise is considered nefarious.

Are you aware that, like, if you have a garage sale and you make over $600, you have to report that income?

Are you aware that, according to your own link, the IRS will determine what your tips were if you're in a 'tippable" job?

It's all good, bro.

I'm re-reading this and I want to be clear (it's hard without being face-to-face with a Guinness)... I was trying (failing, I think) to point out that the "I'll fix it day one" is the perfect example of cheap, meaningless rhetoric, rather than bust your balls for the phrase. Cheers.

Where did you see that they were going after people not paying taxes on tips? I googled the issue and just came up with this about high wealth individuals:

https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-to...-wealth-groups-corporations-partnerships

Edit ~ Regardless of everything that's been said, the no tax on tips is going to heavily exacerbate the problem. I had a AAA guy who changed out my battery show me a screen that offered a tip. I get people asking me for tips when they haven't done anything. If this actually made it through legislation, the doctor's office will probably start asking for gratuity.

COMMENTARY Taxes
So-Called Inflation Reduction Act’s Bait-and-Switch: IRS to Crack Down on Waitresses’ Underreported Tips
Feb 22, 2023 5 min read
COMMENTARY BY
Preston Brashers
Research Fellow, Tax Policy

Preston is a Research Fellow for tax policy in The Heritage Foundation’s Grover M. Hermann Center for the Federal Budget.

Tipped employees aren’t the only non-millionaires that the IRS has in its sights.
Willie B. Thomas / Getty Images
KEY TAKEAWAYS

The IRS secured $80 billion of new funding under false—or at least misleading—pretenses.

A campaign arguing for doubling the size of the IRS to crack down on waitresses, gig workers, and small businesses would have been a public relations nightmare.

Voluntary compliance is the key to tax collections, and public trust is a necessary part of achieving it. The IRS has deeply damaged public trust.

Copied
It’s tax season, and the IRS has a new $80 billion slush fund at its disposal, thanks to the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act, which was signed into law in August.

The White House and Treasury officials told us this infusion of cash was necessary to enable the IRS to go after rich tax evaders and corporations.

It may come as a surprise, then, that the IRS is proposing to direct new scrutiny at underreported tips by waitresses, barbers, and bartenders.

Tipped employees are currently required to pay both federal income taxes and payroll taxes on the tips they receive. Workers report tips to their employers, who pay the 15.3% payroll tax to the IRS on the employee’s behalf and adjust employee wage withholding to account for the taxes workers owe on tips.

To ensure compliance, many employers participate in tip-reporting programs with the IRS.

But now the IRS is attempting to replace existing programs with a more far-reaching and invasive program that would, for example, require employers to use point-of-sale systems to record all sales subject to tipping. Employers in the program would then be required to use these electronically recorded transactions to create detailed annual employee tipping reports for the IRS.

To stay compliant with the program, employers would be required to report tips exceeding a minimum threshold that includes all electronic tips charged, plus an estimate of tips paid in cash, calculated based on the amount of sales that were subject to cash tips.

The issue here isn’t the fairness or unfairness of the IRS cracking down on underreported tips. As the feds keep blowing out the spending, everyone must bear the burden of the taxes they legally owe.

The reason the new scrutiny on tips is troubling is because it shows that the IRS secured $80 billion of new funding under false—or at least misleading—pretenses.

Proponents repeatedly told us that the massive boost in IRS enforcement funding was meant to crack down on rich taxpayers and corporations. Small businesses and Americans making less than $400,000 were led to believe they had nothing to worry about, as the new funding wouldn’t be used against them.

The White House claimed the IRS funding would “crack down on wealthy people and large corporations that cheat on their taxes.”

Recently retired IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig said, “The bottom line is this: These resources are absolutely not about increasing audit scrutiny on small businesses or middle-income Americans.”

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen even claimed that households making under $400,000 “will actually see a lower likelihood of audit.”

And yet, here we are talking about waiters’ and waitresses’ tips.

The IRS’ increased scrutiny on tipped workers isn’t a mistake. It’s an attempt to shore up what the agency sees as a significant weakness in its enforcement. The IRS has estimated that 10% of the underreported individual income-tax gap is from tips, even though tipping income accounts for a fraction of a percent of U.S. income.

Tipped employees aren’t the only non-millionaires that the IRS has in its sights.

IRS reports suggest that self-employed Americans and non-corporate small businesses account for about eight times as much underreported income taxes as corporations with at least $10 million in assets.

A study that the Treasury Department cited in 2021 found that “compliance rates at the top of the income distribution are significantly higher than at other points.”

But a campaign arguing for doubling the size of the IRS to crack down on waitresses, gig workers, and small businesses would have been a public relations nightmare. So, instead they sold us on the fantasy that the government could dramatically increase spending, but 98% of Americans wouldn’t be asked to pay another dime.

So, how can the IRS square its past claims with its current actions?

It points to the fine print.

The proposed tip-reporting changes illustrate a few ways the IRS can make middle-class and small businesses pay more in taxes without technically increasing audit rates on people making less than $400,000.

If the IRS thinks that waitresses are underreporting their tips, the agency doesn’t have to audit the waitresses, it can instead pressure the restaurants into doing its dirty work for it.

If the restaurant doesn’t give the IRS detailed reports that show what it wants to see, then the agency can subject the business to a compliance review.

The IRS defines a compliance review as “a review or other inspection of a Service Industry Employer’s books, records and filed federal tax and information returns [related to its participation in the tip-reporting program].”

Now, that may sound a bit like an audit to you, but the IRS has its bases covered. In the same definition, the IRS stipulates that compliance reviews are not audits or examinations.

The IRS can use the power to define what does and doesn’t count as an audit to help prevent audit rates on middle-income Americans and small businesses from rising.

Even if compliance reviews were counted as audits, many would be performed on restaurants and businesses with more than $400,000 of income per year, meaning the IRS wouldn’t count those as audits of “small businesses.”

The IRS and the White House know this arbitrary $400,000 cutoff is a very narrow definition of small business. The IRS itself classifies businesses as small businesses if they have less than $10 million of assets.

Despite the rhetoric, the IRS always intended to leave the door open to going after everyone from local shop owners to delivery guys to roofing companies to waitresses.

Voluntary compliance is the key to tax collections, and public trust is a necessary part of achieving it. The IRS has deeply damaged public trust by participating in a bait-and-switch.

It is incumbent on the incoming IRS commissioner to restore that trust by being straight with the American people, and Congress must hold the IRS to that standard.

This piece originally appeared in The Daily Signal

https://www.heritage.org/taxes/comm...ait-and-switch-irs-crack-down-waitresses


Also here

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-irs-plans-crack-down-waiters-tips.amp

Also here
https://reason.com/2023/02/10/irs-announces-plans-to-raid-the-tip-jar/

Edit. I heard about this from my dad. I had to look up sources.

I typed out a long response but it disappeared.

My quick response.

I don’t know if this is a good thing or not. What you said is possible. I do think removing taxes on these workers would help lower income people. I also think that this might slow the rate of increase of the percentages of tips. Like I said I’m unsure if this is a good idea or not.

Taxes always a big deal....NEVER fair JMHO....billionaires-like Trump pay little in many cases- money protects money, average Joe fudges on his/her taxes, billions of dollars in sales at garage sales, flea markets, barbers at homes, on and on.....lots of unreported income. The Republican "fat cats" Trump always say they are support the economy=trickle down system is best.....right, you trust TRUMP after all his personal BS- he's taking care of number ONE- ask the chief financial officer in PRISON for Trump in NY.....Trump's given him a golden parachute to be corrupt.....TRUMP's a peach of a guy.....CRIMINAL ex-President. UNFIT.