# Elizabeth Warren 2020 **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 17, 2019, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800 "2019-08-17T17:03:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2019, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/101 "2019-08-21T14:26:36Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > šŸ˜• > Thereā€™s no wealth tax at present and thereā€™s no reason any new tax couldnā€™t be targeted at people who have millions or more in assets. I think the point is that there is currently a kind of wealth tax, which is property taxes. Property is one of the very few assets we tax as such. iamthewalrus(:3= is saying it seems unfair that the only effective wealth tax we have is highly regressive, so it makes sense to have the kind of wealth tax being proposed which starts at very high amounts of wealth. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2019, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/102 "2019-08-21T15:04:49Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > I did when I wrote, ā€œAll he has to attack her is an offensive nickname, which I think will really start to grate on votersā€, which is to say that I agree with you. Guess I missed that, sorry. :o ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2019, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/103 "2019-08-21T15:06:59Z")
Well, aiui Warrenā€™s proposal starts with people having assets of $50M being taxed at 2% and people over a billion bumped up to 3%. Not much of a worry for the middle class. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2019, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/104 "2019-08-21T15:16:24Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Well, aiui Warrenā€™s proposal starts with people having assets of $50M being taxed at 2% and people over a billion bumped up to 3%. Not much of a worry for the middle class. Yes, which is why iamthewalrus(:3= supports it as a rebalancing of the current situation. The question is why does it seem like you are arguing with someone who agrees with you. šŸ˜• ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2019, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/105 "2019-08-21T15:36:59Z")
I guess I didnā€™t understand his point. And I really didnā€™t think of property tax as a wealth tax as itā€™s so specific and in my jurisdiction, purely a municipal thing. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2019, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/106 "2019-08-21T16:43:10Z")
Yes my point was that property tax is a de facto wealth tax for the vast majority of people in the lower 99 percentiles. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2019, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/107 "2019-08-21T17:47:30Z")
> [@Akaj](#): > > I find it refreshing, even if itā€™s nothing more than non-binding blather from a group with their finger to the wind. I saw this story on another website and wondered the same thing. As you quoted, > [@](#): > > Investing in employees, delivering value to customers, dealing ethically with suppliers and supporting outside communities are now at the forefront of American business goals. Iā€™m reminded of how Henry Ford increased pay and reduced weekly work hours and Ford improved as a result, and the attendant business community was surprised, perhaps shocked by this outcome. While it may be counter-intuitive that corporations no longer acting _purely_ to increase stockholder value may actually be good for the company overall, we need a similar ā€œFordianā€ mindset today to take hold, in order to save capitalism from itself. ---
**Author:** ![Akaj](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/akaj/32/145_2.png) [@Akaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Akaj)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2019, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/108 "2019-08-21T20:17:04Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Iā€™m reminded of how Henry Ford increased pay and reduced weekly work hours and Ford improved as a result, and the attendant business community was surprised, perhaps shocked by this outcome. While it may be counter-intuitive that corporations no longer acting _purely_ to increase stockholder value may actually be good for the company overall, we need a similar ā€œFordianā€ mindset today to take hold, in order to save capitalism from itself. The dogma of ā€œincreasing shareholder valueā€ has led to any number of activities ā€“ mergers, spin-offs, LBOs and offshoring, to name a few off the top of my head ā€“ that have no other motivation whatsoever. They donā€™t improve the companyā€™s offerings, they donā€™t open new markets, they donā€™t create jobs. All they do is make shareholders wealthier. (Iā€™m not saying that these activities \*never \*have other benefits, but I spent 16 years working with Wall Street and I saw too many maneuvers that were little more than glorified arbitrage plays.) The end result of nearly 40 years of ā€œincreasing shareholder value?ā€ A 26X rise in the DJIA, and flat real incomes for most Americans. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2019, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/109 "2019-08-22T02:04:41Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > Guess I missed that, sorry. :o As I had said, weā€™re of a similar mind on the Pocahontas name-calling. Itā€™s a self inflicted wound for Trump. With regard to the economic stuff that Warren is discussing: I first became aware of her when she was a Harvard professor who was appearing on the Daily Show to discuss with Jon Stewart her advocacy for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. She often talks about the fact that she has, quite literally, studied what causes people to go broke. Her pedigree comes from the world of research and education. I see Warren as somebody who isnā€™t governed so much by ideology as by a quest for good and practical solutions to the challenges in society. Except, perhaps, for her consistent advocacy for the middle class/working poor of this country, she isnā€™t looking to serve some particular faction or impart some pre-planned result. And, of course, she canā€™t govern by fiat. The effect, then, of a Warren administration is that she steers the American conversation toward the welfare of the ā€œaverage Americanā€ while the she leads the debate on how best to improve that situation. The bully pulpit used for maximum benefit, as it were. That is vastly more important than the specifics of any particular plan or proposal, which would need to survive congressional review, anyway. When I couple that with my perception that sheā€™s more pragmatic and less dogmatic than Sanders (who also consistently advocates for the average American) she has my vote locked up. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2019, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/110 "2019-08-22T21:39:38Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > ā€¦When I couple that with my perception that sheā€™s more pragmatic and less dogmatic than Sanders (who also consistently advocates for the average American) she has my vote locked up. Great analysis, Moriarty. I agree entirely. The thing about Warren that I find appealing is that she comes across as genuinely fascinated by the intricate complex machinery of the economy, and genuinely interested in seeing it work efficiently and productively for the maximum number of Americans. Iā€™m not even sure what historical precedent there might be for that sort of person running for President. (Carter has a similar freedom from self-focus and self-aggrandizement. But he wasnā€™t as interested in the workings of the economy, I donā€™t think.) At any rate, Iā€™d like to see her get the chance to do some good. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2019, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/111 "2019-08-22T22:35:24Z")
Hereā€™s why Iā€™m starting to think [Warren may actually win this thing](https://www.gq.com/story/the-summer-of-elizabeth-warren): > [@](#): > > That she elicited such empathy in that room in Elkhart was a special feat. It was a relatively conservative corner of a conservative state, and the audience was palpably cool to her when Warren took the stage. Several voters I spoke to before the event werenā€™t sure what to expect, and one man told me that, though he was curious about the Massachusetts senator, he was sure the country would not elect a woman. > > Warren said she could sense that the audience wasnā€™t with her when she started. ā€œWell, itā€™s not like I walked in and said, okay, diagnosis: Hereā€™s the problem,ā€ she explained. ā€œItā€™s in the room. And even as Iā€™m being introduced, I can see facesā€”Iā€™m kind of standing off to the sideā€”and as soon as I got on stage, I thought, the people standing here want to know me better, they want to know who I am and why Iā€™m here. So letā€™s slow down a little bit, letā€™s talk a little more, but we got there.ā€ By the end of her speech, most of the able-bodied people in the room were up on their feet, their fists and cheers churning the air. > > Her trick isnā€™t to just read the energy in the room, itā€™s to feel the people there. And like all of her plans and strategies, she leaves nothing to chance, ensuring that the faces in her audiences are lit, that the crowds are never obscured to her by the curtain of darkness one sees from a bright stage. ā€œItā€™s very important to me to be able to see faces when Iā€™m doing a town hall,ā€ Warren said. ā€œI donā€™t want to be in a theater where Iā€™m on stage and the audience is in the dark. This is not a performance, this is a chance to engage, for all of us in the room to think about whatā€™s happening to our country, to our lives, and I need to see faces when Iā€™m talking through that.ā€ It takes one hell of a politician to be able to do that. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2019, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/112 "2019-08-22T23:34:26Z")
OK, so she can work a crowd when sheā€™s in the same room and can see their faces. Thatā€™s a very valuable skill to haveā€¦ but how much is it worth in a Presidential race, where 99.99% of the people youā€™ll need to engage will be over television, when you canā€™t possibly see their faces? Sure, thereā€™s going to be some multiplier effect, from those folks she met personally going home and telling their friends and families how great Warren isā€¦ but that multiplier isnā€™t going to be a factor of ten thousand. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2019, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/113 "2019-08-23T00:39:16Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Hereā€™s why Iā€™m starting to think [Warren may actually win this thing](https://www.gq.com/story/the-summer-of-elizabeth-warren): > It takes one hell of a politician to be able to do that. Itā€™ll take more than a glowing GQ article to convince me sheā€™s suddenly a good campaigner. But sheā€™s moving her numbers, so I hope itā€™s true. ---
**Author:** ![pool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pool/32/4152_2.png) [@pool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pool)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2019, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/114 "2019-08-23T01:59:37Z")
Hell Im not sure if itā€™s good or bad in the long run, or if itā€™s just self-serving, or selfish, or heck maybe itā€™s even a good idea. But at this point if ANY candidate promises to erase my student loan debt, Iā€™ll vote for that person, I suspect there are many millions more like me. Iā€™m going to vote my own self interest above anything else. The giant companies that lobby, spend millions, pay no income tax are all about their own self interest and profits, Iā€™m going to do the same. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2019, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/115 "2019-08-23T11:20:15Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Itā€™ll take more than a glowing GQ article to convince me sheā€™s suddenly a good campaigner. But sheā€™s moving her numbers, so I hope itā€™s true. I doubt she could have moved her numbers the way she has while being a mediocre campaigner. > [@Chronos](#): > > OK, so she can work a crowd when sheā€™s in the same room and can see their faces. Thatā€™s a very valuable skill to haveā€¦ but how much is it worth in a Presidential race, where 99.99% of the people youā€™ll need to engage will be over television, when you canā€™t possibly see their faces? Sure, thereā€™s going to be some multiplier effect, from those folks she met personally going home and telling their friends and families how great Warren isā€¦ but that multiplier isnā€™t going to be a factor of ten thousand. A couple of things. First, we donā€™t have a single national election - weā€™ve got 51 state elections for President in our screwy system, and maybe a dozen of those will be close enough to matter. Warrenā€™s already spoken to thousands of voters in Michigan, for instance, and the general election is still over 14 months away. Second, by the time we get to the fall of 2020, she will have spoken to many thousands of voters in each of those states directly, more than enough that she and her team will have a pretty good sense of whatā€™s likely to work to reach them via television. Third, sheā€™s regularly going to places where Dems donā€™t do too well, and talking with and listening to the people who live there. Sheā€™s not keeping herself in anything like a safe bubble, and there are few better ways for a politician to strengthen her message and widen its appeal. And if she can win them over, thatā€™s icing on the cake. ---
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2019, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/116 "2019-08-26T01:57:17Z")
And a 30% tax on firearms. Iā€™ve read it was designed to curb gun owners behavior. Seriously, would this change a terrorists behavior? Canā€™t you just see all of the wrong people reconsidering the firearms of their choice, downgrading and or and limiting their kills due to the 50% tax on ammo? Iā€™m sure they are thinking, god damn, this tax is really killing us, maybe just use dynamite, or go with some good ole fashioned ammonion nitrate fertilizer. Iā€™d really like to get behind a Democrat, mainly because of the two parties, they are known best for the environment and planet earth, and they are not so damn hostile to the media. That and other things are far more important to me than my guns. Although I have a few guns and rifles, Iā€™m not fanatical about 'em, and all for stricter gun laws if they can show to really make a difference. Iā€™m not worried about Democrats taking my firearms away from me. But I would like to see it not so easy to get firearms, and give some hotheads a chance to chill out instead of going off like a bottle rocket. Example: Attended another gun show in Mesquite, TX this Saturday. Found a Remington 700 series I liked with scope. Man said, since itā€™s an estate sale, there would be no sales tax to collect on it since he is not a dealer, and also no paperwork to fill out. Just pay him cash, and out the door I can go with it. All of this is legal too, at least in the state of TX, and a few other states, I believe. Iā€™ve got a lot of studying to do still on all of their positions though, does anyone know where they stand on being tough on China? This really isnā€™t a partisan issue for many, I donā€™t think, even the Democrat Sherrod Brown was wanting to get tough on them over a decade ago, IIRC. CNN is doing quite a few positive things on what Trump is doing here, which is quite rare. Personally, I think a Democrat should expound on this, by aligning more with our allies to do similar things against China, or what is left of them. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2019, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/117 "2019-08-26T03:55:08Z")
> [@Razncain](#): > > And a 30% tax on firearms. Iā€™ve read it was designed to curb gun owners behavior. Seriously, would this change a terrorists behavior? Canā€™t you just see all of the wrong people reconsidering the firearms of their choice, downgrading and or and limiting their kills due to the 50% tax on ammo?.. Yeah, thatā€™s _really_ stupid. It will mean less well trained police, and the gangbanger thugs who do drivebys only need a few rounds anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Boycott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boycott/32/6741_2.png) [@Boycott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boycott)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2019, 10:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/118 "2019-08-26T10:07:46Z")
> [@](#): > > Warren, asked how she can stand up to Trump: ā€œI know how to fight and I know how to win. Nobodyā€™s getting behind me on a debate stage and doing a handsy thing.ā€ Horrible answer. Youā€™re not winning people over in the democratic primary by having a dig at Hillary Clinton. Moreover she already got embarrassed by Trump goading her into that DNA test. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2019, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/119 "2019-08-26T14:58:43Z")
> [@Razncain](#): > > And a 30% tax on firearms. Iā€™ve read it was designed to curb gun owners behavior. Seriously, would this change a terrorists behavior? Americaā€™s 40,000 gun deaths per year are not about terrorists or even mass shootings. In fact, all that death isnā€™t really about the ā€œwrongā€ people buying guns. It is about their sheer number and availability of guns (and a certain American paranoid culture that leads to guns being kept in really unsafe circumstances). If I want to kill myself, or kill the guy who assaulted my cousin, I can get my hands on a gun legally or illegally as easily as a college freshman can get beer. Weā€™re not about to ban hand guns, much less confiscate them. Even if it were politically possible, it would be unconstitutional. Pretty much the only meaningful, rational policy that leaves is efforts to reduce the overall supply of and demand for guns. Taxes seem like a good tool to me. If it means someone buys two handguns instead of three, thatā€™s a clear win. If the concern is that people will practice at the range less, that seems like a problem we can avoid. Just heavily license and regulate ranges and have them provide ammo that is exempt from the tax. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2019, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800/120 "2019-08-26T15:15:43Z")
> [@Boycott](#): > > Horrible answer. Youā€™re not winning people over in the democratic primary by having a dig at Hillary Clinton. Moreover she already got embarrassed by Trump goading her into that DNA test. Yup. She has to show she can handle attacks and do so well. That sort of response is not reassuring that she has those skills. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-2020/838800.md?page=7)