Angehefteter Tweet
Phil K
22.9K posts
Phil K
@Hi5_Phil
International man of little mystery. social democrat. veteran of @PES_PSE, @MartinSchulz, @sp_wien, Alumni Economics/IR @JohnsHopkins. #WienLiebe private views
Vienna, Austria / Washington DC Beigetreten Mart 2009
3.4K Folgt2K Follower
Phil K retweetet
And there it is....
Update in Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against his own I.R.S., in which he seeks taxpayer-funded damages for the prior release of his tax records
Trump legal filing says he's in "discussions" with his own I.R.S. to "avoid protracted litigation"
English
Phil K retweetet
Classic Red Vienna move: after WW1, socialists running Vienna adopted the "Breitner taxes" on luxury consumption and lifestyles (domestic servants, regattas etc), real estate speculation, landlords etc, laying the foundation for the world's best-run, most liveable city.
Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani@NYCMayor
Happy Tax Day, New York. We’re taxing the rich.
English
@txgermanbre Weather is nice, Hermanns Strandbar makes sense, then dinner & cocktails at Bruder, after that is totally dependent on your music & social tastes.
English
@BoringBiz_ Both 1 and 3 are simply wrong. You have not understood the policy.
English
People who are angry at this post all make the same mistake
“You will drive out the affluent folks”
“You are adding taxes to private property”
“You will encourage billionaires to move”
These are extremely valid claims. Yet, these are features, not bugs, for his supporters
These are the exact reasons that his voters elected him. You are reassuring them that they made the right decision.
Nothing more, nothing less
Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani@NYCMayor
Happy Tax Day, New York. We’re taxing the rich.
English
@Kick_Champ So you can take drugs and tweak on kick but god forbid you dare say the n word
English
Clavicular is enjoying his new lifestyle as a club owner, relaxing in his own private section with 2 escorts 👀
English
i hate to say it but a 1% tax on property over $5m you don’t live in is hard to argue against for the average voter
like, the solution is simply “actually live in NYC”, “what are you so broke you can’t afford 1%?”, and “well you could just leave NYC”
all are ego hits none of these property owners don’t wanna take and have a hard time refuting
love or hate him, he’s actually doing something vs most mayors and tells you in the slickest way possible
Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani@NYCMayor
Happy Tax Day, New York. We’re taxing the rich.
English
@HorveiOYVIND @MortenStostad Initiative to start a Business from the perspective of a billionaire will hardly be determined by a slightly increase in taxes, right?
What is the theory of the case?
English
@MortenStostad Its wrong to say that this tax regime is a success because you measure how few left. Other indicators say it is killing the initiative to start businesses. Other nations tried it and abandoned it. Tell me why we are so different than Sweden who abandoned this in 2007?
English
Phil K retweetet
The Norwegian example is illustrative. In the last few years, our wealth tax received massive media attention, described by media outlets as leading to an "exodus" of the wealthy.
But only ~1.7% of the ultra-wealthy actually left. Tax revenue boomed
Laura Nahmias@nahmias
At CUNY event with @nycmayor, economist Gabriel Zucman, who pioneered research on global tax havens, says the idea that increased income taxes on the wealthy leads to outmigration is largely a "myth"
English
@Yellow_Dog1959 Eben if there was a good civic argument, both EC and Senate - and thus SCOTUS - is not rebalancing. It is shifting all power toward a minorty.
English
@robertgraham @Yellow_Dog1959 In Both cases it is a chamber of the legislative. Even there it is not massive.
In the US case you have the EC Plus the Senate, where 40 Millionen Californians (many rural) have as much power as 500k small States.
It is complete power of the minorty of voters of the majority.
English
There is a good civic argument for the "electoral college".
Almost all western democracies give more weight to rural voters, for the same reason as the original compromise when ratifying the Constitution. Without some counterbalance, rural areas simply become "colonies" of urban areas, with government serving the interests of urban areas over the wishes of rural areas.
In almost all western democracies, the person leading the country is not chosen by a popular vote, but by representatives. Those representatives are in turn chosen primarily as local representatives for individual communities.
The electoral college giving more voting power to some is not a violation of democratic principles, but the norm in western liberal democracies.
James Surowiecki@JamesSurowiecki
There's no good civic argument for the electoral college. It was arguably necessary to ensure the ratification of the Constitution, but it's an anti-democratic device that gives some American citizens far more voting power than others, based purely on where they live.
English
@robertgraham What do you mean - almost all Western democracies give more weight to rural voters?
English
@TheRedNed11482 @mattyglesias That was after the election. And done by private Companies, not the government.
English
@mattyglesias It is of course true that Trump was banned from all forms of social media for a bit too, right? Accepting that there are some differences?
English
I hear the people saying "how authoritarian can Orban have been if he lost an election?" but part of the answer is "he banned the opposition leading from appearing on television."
Jay in Kyiv@JayinKyiv
Long unofficially banned from appearing on state TV, incoming Hungarian Prime Minister Peter Magyar appears on a channel to which he was previously not allowed only to announce an end of "North Korean" style Orban media monopoly.
English
@_LukeCSkywalker @HeathMayo There were more than 60 court cases.
There is zero evidence.
The claim is not outlandish, it was proofen wrong.
English
@HeathMayo "Founder: Principles First" believes that if he thinks a claim is outlandish it therefore *IS* outlandish and if you believe any claim he does not believe, you should lose your license.
Well, that's a sh*tty, short-sighted principle. Let's hope the shoe is never on your foot.
English
“Reasonable minds can disagree about the 2020 election.”
No, they can’t. If you think the 2020 election was stolen, you are not a reasonable person. If you make that claim in a court of law and advise your client to act on that fraudulent premise, you should be disbarred.
Jeff Clark@JeffClarkUS
This is a travesty. John represented the President in litigation challenging an election. That’s all. He lied about nothing. Reasonable minds can disagree about the 2020 election. He did what lawyers are supposed to do — represent disfavored individuals. And make no mistake, the elites, especially in bar apparatuses, disfavor and hate President Trump and anyone associated with him with a burning passion. No one representing Vice President Gore was disbarred for losing Bush v. Gore where the whole partial county-specific recount strategy Democrat lawyers devised there was ruled an unconstitutional violation of equal protection. Two-tiered system of justice and of bar discipline. Pray for John and his family and that John will speedily take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court and that they will grant cert and reverse this absolute nonsense.
English