I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

It's been years. A new board for the new Trump party.

A couple of Wonks since the last board is closed for bidness
 

1. Section 162(m). TM I have no doubt there will still be many bankers, lawyers, doctors, etc., still paid in excess of $250K. I just want their employers taxed for it. I want the rest of America making their $16,000-$40,000 to stop subsidizing the ones who don't need welfare. The additional tax revenue can be put to use rebuilding roads and schools, creating jobs that pay a living wage and restoring infrastructure.

2. GGG, You say there are ways that clever lawyers use to get around 162(m). Please to show me how they will do that when there are no exceptions to 162(m) and all increases in wealth are taxed identically? As for sourcing rules, I would deal with them thus: if income from outside the US produces cash or its equivalent that comes into the hands of a domestic individual or entity, it becomes taxable US income. Loans, investment, whatever. Once the cash crosses the border it's taxed. If it is converted to hard goods and then those are imported, deem a sale at fmv at the moment the property crosses.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Congrats NotBob. Let's talk about the Meters. A New Orleans quartet founded by Art Neville (later of the Neville Brothers), they were deeply rooted in traditional New Orleans music, but also pioneered a stripped down, riff-oriented funk groove, often instrumental, that puts them right up with James Brown, P-Funk, and later Prince, as one of the more influential funk groups of all time. You can tell this is the case in part by discovering how often they have been sampled in hip hop over the years. Because I missed the Dose yesterday, today is a Double Shot Daily Dose of the Meters, two of their earliest hits that helped define their sound. Cissy Strut:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_iC0MyIykM

And Look Ka Py Py. Both gems:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYfCTHf2ne4

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

I think the new board ought to be called "Funk Trump".

But this is Not Bob's board. We only live in it.

Re: A couple of Wonks since the last board is closed for bidness
 

162(m) relates to business deduction of salary. Just make it something other than salary, whether dividends or equity comp what have you. Lawyers who take partnership draws aren't subject to 162(m); it is a corporate provision.

So you're saying that if I keep my cash abroad it's not taxed here. WAHOOO! Not a problem. Retiring to the little Attican villa owned by an offshore trust sounds cool. In the meantime, Canada is close and very, very nice.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

One thing Trump has revealed is that an awful lot of Republicans haven't really been interested in what have been Republican elite's priorities -- free trade, immigration reform, cutting entitlements, tax cuts for the wealthy -- and care more about other things -- in particular, jobs and and halting immigration. Some of this has been clear for a while, especially re immigration reform, but Trump has had a freedom to depart from the orthodoxy across a range of issues.

Does Trump's wealth and skill working the media give him an independence that other Republican politicians won't be able to replicate, or will we see other Republican politicians echoing his positions? In the former case, he's an outlier and the GOP tries to revert to form in the next election, but in the latter case you have something more like a cleavage in the GOP.

Am assuming Trump loses in the fall, but if he wins all bets are off.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Wonk, so much for your thought that your vote won't matter. Trump has made Georgia a swing state.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...tie-in-georgia

Re: A couple of Wonks since the last board is closed for bidness
 

As for Section 162(m), I would repeal everything but Section 162(m)(1), redefine it to apply to all business entities not disregarded for FIT, and make the only limitation on it an allowance for any compensation to the extent it is exempt from employee income and deductible to the employer under IRC 401. Also, dividends, equity, options, etc. are all taxable compensation except to the extent excluded under the Code. My first step would be to remove all exclusions except for income treated as income of the sole owner of a disregarded entity or income subject to IRC 401.

If it's earned in the US, it's taxed in the US. I was talking about removing the ability to offshore earnings or inbound earnings through loans or other constructive transactions.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Hils it is, then. #NeverTrump

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Sebby, is this you? https://zeroanthropology.net/2016/05...united-states/

Re: A couple of Wonks since the last board is closed for bidness
 

I love the world of mythically idyllic tax code rewrites. I think it would be a good concept for a computer game, a sort of Oregon Trail kind of thing where if you write the right provisions you get steady economy growth distributed among the whole population and if you fuck up Donald Trump builds a tax-advantaged empire and takes all the little people's money at the casino.

We could call the game "Congress".

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

1. Awesome.
2. This is interesting to me. I wonder if there are more liberals in Georgia than one would think who would come out to vote now that their votes actually mean something.

TM

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Massive Numbers.

Georgia is 55% nonhispanic white. It's quite easy to see a candidate with a big margin among minority voters and white women easily winning there if you had strong turnout.

In general, this is why my attitude toward the various "demands" Bernie makes on behalf of his middle aged white male bernie bros and the college students who never vote is a yawn. Hillary's number one priority should be turnout among minorities in Red and Purple states, not appeasing Bernie. If she cranks it up there, we can win the house back.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

And/or if this being a truly competitive race drives minority turnout to higher levels than it has been (at least in years where Obama wasn't on the ballot).

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHS-K7OuLAc

Don't miss the comments on this. Hill-arious.

Re: A couple of Wonks since the last board is closed for bidness
 

Given we were initially talking about getting to a flat tax, this is less mythically idyllic and more what we were aiming for. And this isn't about economic distribution. It's about everybody paying tax based on what they earn. What's wrong with that?

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Labi Siffre is no Trump fan either.

https://twitter.com/labisiffre/statu...44618908143616

In 1975, he put out a sweet little funk/soul number that had two fairly distinct segments. The second section of the song, starting at about 2:08, is immediately recognizable as the sampled track for Eminem's "My Name Is" and stands on its own as a great soulful groove. Your Daily Dose:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Cp58rWCR8Y

Re: A couple of Wonks since the last board is closed for bidness
 

Nothing. But it should be about economic distribution, too.

But you don't really expect me to stick to the point, do you? Sometimes the mind wanders.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

This isn't the name Not Bob chose for the board, is it? It's just placeholder, right, bilmore? RIGHT, BILMORE?

TM

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Just a placeholder until he gives us a name.

Re: A couple of Wonks since the last board is closed for bidness
 

It's about economic distribution, but in a really meta sense. Changing the marginal utility of paying an excessive salary vis. paying more to a lower-echelon worker (you know, the folks that actually DO things) and using additional tax revenue to re-build infrastructure and create new jobs. That sort of thing.

Perhaps you might fix that hole where the rain gets in?

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Yglesias thinks Hillary should pander to the Berners to win Congress. This makes no demographic sense whatsoever. Bernie's voters are relatively unimportant in retaking Congress - the northern student vote and the educated middle class white male vote at the core of his support is already concentrated in Blue districts. Hillary's core constituencies - minorities, poor and working class voters, women - are key to winning congress.

Granted, there are some Wonks in Georgia. But there are a lot more of Hill's core constituents who we just need to get out.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Polls don't mean much right now, but in the spirit of amusing ourselves, here's another: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/0...llary-clinton/

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

File under "Cuckoo Pants."

My longest meanderings don't ramble that badly, or attempt to connect so many disparate items and theories.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

I don't think we'll know the landscape really until after the conventions. That said, I'm going to be surprised if it is the traditional landscape where it all comes down to whether a Dem can win either Ohio, Florida, or a combination of smaller purple states. I think we'll see a very different mix of states in play.

Clinton, for example, seems weak in Michigan, but might well surprise in Arkansas, Missouri, Kentucky, Arizona, and Georgia.

And widespread misogyny is her greatest problem, and one thing about misogyny is it crosses all class and racial lines.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

In the battle of the meaningless polls (that have been crappy this whole election season) my current favorite as one who is both #NeverTrump and #NeverHillary is the Dartmouth poll out of New Hampshire:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...nton-5596.html

In a direct matchup, it shows Hillary up over Trump 34 to 29. It doesn't show up on the RCP chart, but when you dig into the polling data, both Hillary and Trump are losing to "Unsure" at 36%.


http://rockefeller.dartmouth.edu/sit...016_report.pdf

These are the two best known candidates in history in terms of name recognition, and yet "Eh, whatever" gets more votes than either one of them. I don't know who will win in November, but every single American is going to end up a loser.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Well maybe it wouldn't it Hillary were not such a strident bitch. An interesting note about yesterday's Daily Dose, which I just learned yesterday: Labi Siffre, who is gay, refused to license the sample to Eminem unless he removed certain homophobic and misogynistic lyrics, which Eminem agreed to do. Here's a groovy Sly cut for today's Daily Dose. "Im Time":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Mld7eSaydI

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

high unsure numbers are common coming out of primary season, when all the supporters of the dead candidates are still unhappy at the idea of supporting the victor. As summer approaches, most of the sanders supporters will move to Hillary and most of the supporters of the various vicious dwarves on the Republican side will move to Trump, and the interesting thing will be to see how many "most" really is.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

But in the Hill v. Cruz question, "unsure" was in third, and in a matchup against Kasich, only 21% was "unsure", also in third place. I am aware that a relatively high rate of uncertainty is not unusual, it just is not usually the lead vote getter.

I will refuse to debate this further with you, but you do Hillary a disservice to blame her high unfavorables on the fact that she is a woman. But then again, I have learned my lesson that voters are clearly not as I believe them to be.... so never mind.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

I hope to hell she's pissed off enough people to have unfavorables from those who disagree with her. I'd be disappointed if she didn't.

But there is a residual sexism that is going to heavy color this race and is one of her biggest liabilities. A lot of so-called progressive Bernie Bros are really misogynist shits under it all.

My point was more to catalog what to watch, not to disagree. I suspect we agree more than disagree on some of the horserace aspects of the race. All of these things, though, will be issues of degree.

I happen to not believe a ton of former Cruz supporters and Sanders supporters who say they won't be with their nominee in November. I think especially the men among the Cruz supporters will slowly and reluctantly make their peace with the Donald, and most Sanders supporters, especially the younger voters and women, will make their peace with Hillary. But I think those who don't and who bolt, supporting a third party or the other party's candidate will still be higher (and you may well be among those in this category). I just have no idea yet how much higher.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

This election has created situations where lines have been redrawn and can make things incredibly difficult to figure out. I am unaccustomed to being on the side of Paul Ryan and Lindsey Graham and opposing the current and former Governors of Texas.

Here's an example: Paul Ryan is facing a primary challenge from Paul Nehlen. While I voted Romney/Ryan, and generally liked Paul Ryan significantly more than Mitt Romney and I find him to be less offensive than Boehner, he is also the sort against whom I would generally support a more conservative primary challenger, as I don't really see him doing much to advance conservative positions as Speaker. However, in his favor, as the highest ranking Republican, and in line for the Presidency, he has declined to endorse Trump, and called Trump out on lies characterizing his relationship. OTOH, Ryan is likely merely giving cover to other GOP House members in Not Trump districts, and personally hails from a state and district where Ted Cruz strongly outperformed Trump. Nehlen has been endorsed by some conservatives I have respected in the past. However, Nehlen has also been endorsed by Palin in her typically cartoonish fashion, pretty much solely because Ryan has refused to kiss Trump's ring.

The calculation of the enemy of my enemy is my friend has gotten very difficult. I suppose I am Team Ryan, but it feels very odd to be so.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Once upon a time, in my youth, in the first election cycle in which I voted, I dedicated myself wholeheartedly to supporting Ted Kennedy, who was pretty close to me ideologically, against Jimmy Carter, who shared some of my views on the world but to a much lesser degree.

Looking back with hindsight, that was the biggest mistake I made in politics. Carter was a man of great personal character, and that should have rendered petty disagreements over ideological niceties unimportant. And undermining him was a stupid thing to do.

But I still have some "Kennedy for President" stationary and other stuff, which can make for the fun occasional letter to some of my friends from those old political foxholes.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Nah. They're all super sincere and just don't like here on accounta how she lies all the time, is shrill, screams, is about to get indicted, and, man, can you imagine her halving the nuke codes during her "time of the month."

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

It's also Trump's biggest problem. And I'm pretty confident the the people who hate him for fanning it far outnumber the people who care about Hillary's sex.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

She's 68.

I'm not suggesting the average rabid Trump fan has Biology 101 under his belt. But he has seen commercials for hormone replacement therapy that discuss hot flashes, and heard his Aunt Betty yell at the TV, "They didn't have that when I was goin' through the change!" He knows something's keeping the old folk from birthing more youngins.

ETA: She should, however, be insulted for her fashion choices. It's too bad Johnny from Airplane is gone. E! needs a weekly bit where he could critique her endless wardrobe failures. "Where did you get that awful suit? Kim Jon Il's estate sale? And that hideous 'Mom Hair!' Is that styled after a barn owl?"

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Carter and Kennedy were similarly flawed. Recall, Jimmy "lusted after other women in his heart." Similarly, Ted drunkenly shirtcocked in front of the woman William Kennedy Smith was alleged to have raped on the night of the incident.

And neither could swim very well.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

So Ryan's challenger is now doubling down on the Palinesque Breitbart attack that Ryan refused to exclude refugees of Muslim faith from entering the US, but sends his children to a private school that screens out Muslims. Otherwise known as BREAKING NEWS: Catholic sends his kids to Catholic school!!!!

Team Ryan it is.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Check your sarcasm meter.

Yup, no misogyny here...

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Don't be a tool.

Trump gets the same. I'd do it myself, but PJ O'Rourke did it better:

"Also typical of modern Americans is Trump’s bad taste. True, he doesn’t dress the way the rest of us do—like a nine-year-old in twee T-shirt, bulbous shorts, boob shoes, and league-skunked sports team cap. And Trump doesn’t weigh 300 pounds or have multiple piercings or visible ink. He puts his own individual stamp on gaucherie. And we like it. We’re a country that cherishes being individuals as much as we cherish being gauche.

Trump’s suits have a cut and sheen as if they came from the trunk sale of a visiting Bombay tailor staying in a cheap hotel in Trump’s native Queens and taking a nip between fittings. Trump wears neckties in Outer Borough colors. And, Donald, the end of your necktie belongs up around your belt buckle, not between your knees and your nuts. Trump’s haircut makes Kim Jong Un laugh."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...s-america.html

I'm going to insult hers and Trump's appearance, demeanor, etc., as are a whole lot of people here, during this cycle. They choose to look and act the way they do and run for President. It's all fair game.

Similarly, you can choose whether to be an officious commentary policeman for potential cultural slights. Or, you can choose not to be insipid.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

I choose uninsipidity! BOOM!!! #winning #alreadywon #notanofficiouscommentarypolicemanforpotentialculturalinsights

http://15130-presscdn-0-89.pagely.ne...a-mic-drop.jpg