CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
March 24, 2021 06:55 AM UTC
25 Comments
There is a useful reminder on personally dealing with the cascade of disasters at CPR this morning:
A Mass Shooting During A Pandemic Means More Trauma And Stress. Here’s One Psychologist’s Advice For How To Cope
I'm uncertain the generalized suggestions are going to help much … but I am nearly certain they will do more than awaiting effective social or legislative actions.
Today is National Cheesesteak Day
An altogether finer day of recognition than melba toast day.
The QAnon virus still holds great danger for our democracy
Fortunately, this heavily armed psycho, while delusional, didn't shoot anyone (this time).
Why would anyone kidnap a woman?
Democrats only eat babies.
Lawrence?
I always admired the idealism and optimism (desperation?) of English majors.
" I asked a man in prison once how he happened to be there and he said he had stolen a pair of shoes. I told him if he had stolen a railroad he would be a United States Senator." ~ Mother Jones
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/heres-how-democrats-want-to-raise-taxes-on-the-rich.html
"Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.; Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.; and eight other Democrats proposed the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act in early March.
…2% on the net worth of households and trusts ranging from $50 million to $1 billion. …3% for anything over $1 billion.
About 100,000 Americans would be subject to a wealth tax in 2023,… The policy would raise at least $3 trillion over a decade, they found."
Deficit Reduction Act
Fund American Values Act
There are a hundred ways to describe what this kind of bill would do and mean to America. Democrats chose the easiest to defeat messaging, which makes me question their sincerity. To be clear – I believe Warren and Sanders are sincere. Biden is not – and will not be – on board.
This is probably the most legally controversial method of addressing wealth inequality. I wish we'd get straight to capital gains, stock transaction fees, executive compensation reforms, and restoring higher tax rates for the upper classes and stop playing with possibly unconstitutional measures that will drain time and taxpayer dollars.
I do not believe the current administration wants to get straight to anything regarding wealth inequality.
Well whoopee shit! “would raise at least $3 trillion over a decade.” That’s chicken feed when the annual budget deficit will be $1-2 trillion PER YEAR for the foreseeable future.
“stock transaction fees” Now you’re talking, Phoenix! How about a nickel per share fee on all stock purchases and sales? Haven’t done the math. But that is likely to be much more of a winner than the typical “soak the rich” routine. And the hedge fund billionaires won’t be able to evade it.
(after being gone for 2 plus months to work on other stuff, not even lurking, I drifted back today to see what’s being said about the shooting and found this).
Maybe see ya’ll in another two months. And for Duke and kwtree, don’t get excited about this temporary return. Digging politely at the fascist, non-conservative, far right wingers on PJ Media, where I visit briefly maybe once a week, is more fun than Pols. And not all the posters on PJ are that bad. I’ve actually had some civil conversations since I reactivated my account.
I also checked out the latest wisdom from Michael Bowman. Even though we don’t directly agree on a lot, I always listen when I’m here because Michael knows his stuff and how to present it effectivly.
Hey CHB. Thanks for the kind words – miss having your contributions to the dialogue. Don’t be a stranger.
PS: Rush is celebrating one month sober today. Perhaps we should propose a balanced radio show to Clear Channel with a line-up of the full-spectrum of pollsters on this site! Otherwise I hear we’re going to be blessed by white prosperity Jesus with Dan Boiningo (sp?).
Don't hurry back. The level of stupid around here diminished considerably since you bailed.
I disagree with Michael. You add nothing valuable to the conversation.
Couldn't resist checking back one more time so I could hear the expected pious polemics emanating from the lofty and airy heights of the Sanctorum Sanctorum of western Colorado, as annunciated by the legendary Duke of Earl himself.
Michael: did you catch any of the Department of Interior's 3 1/2 hour streamed briefing today on the pause in oil & gas leasing (it was recorded)? I did the entire thing and it was highly informative, with multiple panels. Somebody does need to tell the Pipefitters Union, however, that times are changing. Later.
Gosh…you must know soooo much.
Keep trying to be relevant, CHB, you may yet get there. Oh…and when you get a chance, take a creative writing course. I am not sure two paragraphs makes a polemic. I suppose if you torture the definition…maybe.
Just sayin’
They’ll listen to you, and hopefully let go of some Q -A- nonsense. I think that you reaching out to the nutcases in your own party is a more productive use of your time than reacting to AOC or some other uppity progressive women “mouthing off”, in your quaint characterization.
So, good luck with PJ Media.
Wealth taxes sound incredibly easy … probably because few of us are that wealthy, or discuss investment choices with those who are, or have tax accountants paid for their performance at dodging taxes.
There are a number of other countries that tried to tax wealth. The Tax Foundation says "the number of current OECD members that have collected revenue from net wealth taxes has grown from eight in 1965 to a peak of 12 in 1996 to just five in 2019." Another of their essays says "only three European countries covered levy a net wealth tax, namely Norway, Spain, and Switzerland." So, why do only 5 (or 3) of the 35 countries use them?
Is there a macroeconomist in the house?
An investment banker friend of mine said it was because it's so easily evaded. You just move your assets offshore. Remember the Panama Papers?
So few countries try to have a wealth tax for multiple reasons:
a. The rich (ultra millionaires) tend to run their countries, or hire those who do.
b. It is difficult to enforce (see a.) and even if the enforcement was sincere, it is difficult.
c. Even those not currently subject to it, wish to one day be that rich.
The same can be said for the estate tax, and to a lesser degree cap gains. Assets can be relocated and retitled for planned avoidance.
Transactions are relatively easier to tax.
aka, accountants and lawyers full employment act.
Here's a secret: CPA's hope for "tax simplification" legislation because it's anything but. Whenever that type of legislation is in the works, I have to fight my way past BMW and Mercedes salesmen to get into my tax seminar.
Actually, Mitch, many
peoplehistorians would say you're full of shit.He's got that deer in the headlights look about him today.
Maybe he was thinking "[Klan] historians"?? . . .
As a descendant of slave-owners I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what he was thinking.
I’m a descendant of slave owners, too, and I know he’s full of it.
So special. Like a Cadbury egg buffet, except different.
One year ago today:
One this same day this video was hatched: