Wow.
Without intense preparation, without biased and complicit moderators helping her along, without being able to shift focus to an adversary, this is what Kamala Harris is. Here we have just a ten minute interview featuring soft-ball questions from a friendly Philidelphia journalist, and the result is evasiveness, gibberish and vacuous non-answers.
Some highlights:
Asked about the ephemeral “opportunity economy,” Harris says,
“For example, thinking about developing and creating an opportunity economy where it’s about investing in areas that really need a lot of work and maybe focusing on, again, the aspirations and the dreams but also just recognizing that at this moment in time some of this stuff we could take for granted years ago, we can’t take for granted anymore.”
Oh. What????
Here’s Harris filibustering the basic and easy question, “Talk about bringing down prices and making life more affordable for people. What are one or two specific things you have in mind for that?”…
Well, I’ll start with this. I grew up a middle-class kid. My mother raised my sister and me. She worked very hard. She was able to finally save up enough money to buy our first house when I was a teenager. I grew up in a community of hardworking people. You know, construction workers and nurses and teachers. I try to explain to some people who might not have had the same experience, but a lot of people will relate to this.
You know, I grew up in a neighborhood of people who were really proud of their lawn, you know, and I was raised to believe and to know that all people deserve dignity and that we as Americans have a beautiful character. You know, we have ambitions and aspirations and dreams, but not everyone necessarily has access to the resources that can help them fuel those dreams and ambitions. So, when I talk about building an opportunity economy, it is very much with the mind of investing in the ambitions and aspirations and the incredible work ethic of the American people and creating opportunity for people, for example, to start a small business.
The only competent response to that babbling is to repeat the question as if Harris had a coughing fit or something, which the interviewer did not.
Here’s another Harris gem: “My focus is very much about what we need to do over the next 10-20 years to catch up to the 21st century around, again, capacity, but also challenges.”
Right. I do a lot of public speaking, and if I ever hear myself talking like that, I will check myself into the hospital on suspicion of suffering a stroke.
This is the candidate the Democratic Party believed was so superior to all other options that she was nominated by acclamation, without having to face any opposition at all. Here I would typically add, “Democracy!” but “Idiocracy!” seems more apt.
___________
Can anyone explain this? The WordPress AI bot was apparently completely confused by Harris’s blather and told me to tag this post “Harry Potter,” “Football” “Dreams” and “Fantasy.”
Ethics Alarms 
Fact check. Kamala, wasn’t your mother a Ph.D. holder, as was your father? Middle class? Neither of my parents obtained Ph.D.s. My father didn’t graduate from high school because he was tubercular and had to spend thirteen years in a TB sanitorium beginning his junior year of high school. My mothe graduated from hight school and then spent four years in a TB sanitorium and then worked as a medical secretary. Fuck you. Middle class, my ass. What visa was it both your parents got into the country on? Go away. And now you’re married to a Jewish mega firm partner (his second marriage), but you’re aligned with Hamas?
Her anecdote is about growing up surrounded by working class people, but has no way to convey an actual working class experience.
> I try to explain to some people who might not have had the same experience, but a lot of people will relate to this.
She’s now surrounded by ruling class people who she assumes didn’t grow up surrounded by working class, but she needs to appeal to voters who did.
Ick.
With the Harry Potter tag, maybe the AI had this quote in mind: “Potter, when I want nonsense I shall hit you with a Babbling Hex”.
I’m confused! She said part of her “opportunity economy” is giving give a 50k tax deduction to start up businesses.
Did you miss that part?
Thor,
You do not understand business or taxes. First entrepreneurs pay taxes on profits not revenues and given that most start-ups fail because they never generate a profit and the ones that do survive have sufficient capitalization to survive the first five years making no profits. The only beneficiaries of such a plan would not be the middle class but upper middle class persons. This will give a tax break to the spouse of a doctor who starts a hobby business as a pass through entity which would then allow the revenues and deductions to be comingled in the family finances. Thus, a professional could shield part of his or her income earned not because of the new enterprise with this deduction.
Secondly, a 50,000 tax deduction would mean that the business earned about $180,000 in profits at a 28% tax rate. that would require a 10% net return on sales of 1.8 million. Revenues for start-ups are at best 200K and they incur losses. Therefore, the $50,000 tax deduction is smoke in a room full of mirrors.
She is not giving 50K to people to start businesses. Her idea is based on Trump’s opportunity zones that he which are similar to enterprise zones in which federal tax abatement is granted for a period of time to established businesses to locate in impoverished areas. Opportunity zones were designed to help lower middle class families with enhanced employment opportunities in larger firms that typically pay higher wages. That is how you gain leverage with tax policy.
The promise of a 50K tax deduction for starting a new enterprise is like the the ring toss games at the carnival the probability of getting the big prize is infinitesimally low unless one cheats.
For the vast majority of lower and middle income families who have maxed out their credit cards due to Bidenomics they have no money to start a business and their tax rates will increase when Harris lets the Trump tax cuts expire as she has promised.
Excellent, Chris! I was considering a similar post, but you’ve done a better, more thorough, job than my lazy self would have. Some nebulous tax cut on the far side of establishing a successful business is a pretty creaky mechanism for spuring enterprises.
The more I think about this $50,000 tax deduction as a campaign point the more unethical I believe it to be. Notwithstanding my earlier comments such a pledge could induce someone with some modest savings to start a business thinking that they will get $50K for doing so. Under federal law it is illegal to advertise an investment opportunity for a start-up to the general public except to qualified (sophisticated) investors. Qualified investors must have a net worth in excess of $1mm or $250K annual income.
Granted this tax deduction plan is not the same as inducing a direct investment into a third party’s business opportunity but the rationale for the rule is. The purpose of the rule is to prevent unsophisticated investors from being sold a bill of goods by unscrupulous persons. Even then, even the smartest got taken by a smooth talking pretty face pushing a novel biomedical product. Dangling a $50K in front of the general public creates the very real risk that a person with some modest savings tries to start a business thinking they will be rewarded with 50,000 dollars in tax savings but instead will trade a low risk investment guaranteed return for a high risk one with low probability of high returns and a high probability of total loss.
Additionally, from my experience counseling would be entrepreneurs most of them have no idea what it takes to be an entrepreneur. Virtually none come for assistance with any sort of understanding of the potential market for their product or service and upon the realization that they will have to invest time and energy – if not money – into the creation of a business or marketing plan they usually exhibit reluctance to do so.
Many say the reason most businesses fail in the first five years is lack of capital. My experience with would be entrepreneurs is not much different but the main factor in my opinion is lack of passion for their business idea which becomes an unwillingness to persist.
Spot on analysis.
Not only is presenting the policy as a credit deceptive, but even if it was a $50k no-strings infusion of cash into new businesses, then the government is playing half the role of venture investor, but no ensuring of ROI means the end result will be fraud to higher extents than seen with the PPP loans, and more inflation.
And it’s only in Campaign Promise ™ territory right now. Good luck shepherding such a bill through Congress.
Chris, that is an excellent analysis of this proposal and I think your ideas are spot on in the main. Let me add to that my experience with how an actual tax credit has worked — the solar energy tax credit.
Briefly, many of you may already be aware of this but the instance I am covering is the credit for installing a solar energy system in your home. If you do that, you can claim a tax credit of 30% of the cost of the solar energy system.
It is a real tax credit. If you spend $70000 to install solar, you will get a credit of $21000 on your federal taxes.
The problem comes in when some people — especially salesmen who sell these systems — assume that this means the government will simply cut you a check for $21000 when you file your taxes.
While that is possible, for the average taxpayer it doesn’t happen that way. The thing is that the tax credit is a non-refundable credit. That means that it will take your taxes down to zero, but no further. The Earned Income credit is refundable, which means it can actually make your income tax be a negative number (i.e. the IRS is paying you rather than you paying them).
So if you have a couple making $100k, with a kid and maybe their tax liability if $6000 (just making numbers up here). They get sold a $70000 solar system, they get a loan to pay for it, come in to get their taxes done and that $21000 tax break the salesman told them about.
They get it — and $6000 takes their current tax bill to zero. But the rest of the credit is carried forward to the next year, and they basically get $6k per year until it’s used up.
If their actual tax liability is lower it will take longer to actually get the whole tax credit. If they make a million dollars income — they probably get the whole $21k this year.
So it is not a scam, but it can definitely lead to some unhappy customers.
That is for an actual tax credit. A tax deduction, as Chris has ably explained, can be even more of a questionable benefit depending on your income.
Chris, thanks so much for sharing your expertise with us. It’s most helpful…and appreciated!!