I went to work for a CBS outlet in the late 80's. On my first day at work, the technical director told me that if I was smart, I would just walk out the front door and not look back. I laughed and asked "Why?". He told me that 5 years earlier he wouldn't have said that but since the early 80's the programming department no longer ran the station. It was the sales department and they were determined to make the news department: "Pay their own way". They wanted to be able to turn a profit with news. It corrupted the operation. No story was too sensational.
The chopped up episodes with piece meal releases is really getting old. Will you please just release one, FULL video for the paying members. Many people have complained about this issue and yet it continues to happen. Maybe this is some thing to show your getting more views on your videos or something of that sort, but you don't need to play games. Just put out the solid product you have IN FULL and the views will be there. This chopped up shit is something Rolling Stone would do...
This podcast slams the mainstream media, and lauding the Substack movement, then proceeds to fall prey to the same mode of giving friends a free pass.
I respect Taibbi since even when I disagree with him, I found he had at least listed the obvious counterarguments -- of course while liberally smearing them with his trademark snide comments (part of the fun). But this discussion was trivial, no pushback or depth anywhere.
- The SALT tax repeal drive right now has little to do with concern for the overall tax rate paid by wealthy - that ship has sailed. It is driven by the split of the take between the Federal Govt and the States, and the ability of states to hold on to their wealthy taxpayers. With the SALT in place NY, NJ etc are now severely limited in their ability to increase their own current and future taxes, or increase the fraction it gets to control of each top end tax payer's bill. SALT has supercharged inter-state, and state/Fed tax competition, which will affect everyone at every level in the Blue states, since taxes at the top end are in fact highly progressive -- with a concentration cost to that model. It is not just direct income : what has the SALT cost NY city in lost income just from the few NY financial funds that have already moved to FLA? NJ almost had a financial coronary when just one fund (Appaloosa) left a few years ago. This is not all bad -- the SALT re-balanced the State/Fed balance and state competition is one of the historical pressure bleed valves of this country. Just dismissing the Blue State reps as hacks and praising the NY Times for "scooping" Sirota and for once showing profound insight is like cheering on the King of Pointland for digging through his belly-button lint to discover the navel beneath.
- There is an extensive economic literature on why cap gains should be taxed less than wage income. It is NOT the same as income. Just saying it is does not make it so. Sirota looks like an ideologically blinded idiot (and not even a useful one) -- I can only hope he was just outright disingenuous, which one can at least respect as being thought out. What about deferred vs immediate consumption? Inflation exposure? Investing meaning risk of loss of future consumption? The good reasons not to repeatedly tax a dollar at corporate levels, via inflation, cap-gains at death, estate tax, and often inheritance tax? And the knock on effects coming from these hikes such as the seventies conglomerates coming back, good cos going private and crud pushed to the public? Seventies never happened, eh?
- How about just the basic questions - who should pay what and how much? When all the Scandinavians go for lower cap gains and consumption taxes why not go for that model? What is the optimal revenue maximizing rate? Is it a good idea to get close to it?
Matt, on Substack you are in control. But you are also quality control. Which means you don't get to have friends if you want to not be another bubble. Podcasts of friends with friends was fine as a comfort blankie in pandemic but it is a model that will die too. This was just below par. Minimal content submerged in a self-congratulatory love fest worthy of the NY Times reporting floor. Frankly, had more of a whiff of South Park, with you smelling each other's f*rts over Zoom.
Ok. The NYT, one of the pillars of legacy media, get the story right. The independent journalism thing is working, right. But you tried to make it sound like you scooped them, but just didn't get your stuff out the door. Come on, folks, you can't have ot both ways!
Consider another perspective on SALT. I live in San Diego in a 2200 sq ft 3 br home. It cost slightly above the average for detached homes, $850k. My property tax alone is just under $10k per year. That means i get no deduction at all for the state income tax which is the highest in the country. This is a huge amount of money for me and im not alone, simply not fair compared to other states and i am not rich. You said it was done as punishment for living in a blue state, obviously tacitly admitting its unfair. This hurts regular middle class home owners NOT just rich people. So figure out an equitable solution and STOP suggesting this isnt hurting regular working people.
I wonder, why wouldn't you lobby your state government to lower their state tax instead of lobbying the federal government to let you deduct your state taxes?
That's a good one. You clearly have never had any dealings with the Franchise Tax Board. At least at the federal level there's some hope.
Besides, you used to always be able to deduct state and local taxes. It's absurd that you now cannot, especially when you make retirement plans that assumed they would be deductible.
I have no problem with addressing the grotesque wealth inequality through fair progressive taxation, unfortunately this salt change is decidedly NOT fair. it was implemented specifically to screw residents of blue states with high property and state/local taxes. The idea that it only affects the wealthy is nonsensical.
I canx my subscription because you were posting the full video a few days after the first one which didn't make sense because I was paying.
I fuckin hate this too. I think it has to do with them benefiting from the increase in traffic. I’m not canceling my subscription though
I like Sirota's passion on this topic. And Daily Poster does important work, Appreciate the post.
I went to work for a CBS outlet in the late 80's. On my first day at work, the technical director told me that if I was smart, I would just walk out the front door and not look back. I laughed and asked "Why?". He told me that 5 years earlier he wouldn't have said that but since the early 80's the programming department no longer ran the station. It was the sales department and they were determined to make the news department: "Pay their own way". They wanted to be able to turn a profit with news. It corrupted the operation. No story was too sensational.
The chopped up episodes with piece meal releases is really getting old. Will you please just release one, FULL video for the paying members. Many people have complained about this issue and yet it continues to happen. Maybe this is some thing to show your getting more views on your videos or something of that sort, but you don't need to play games. Just put out the solid product you have IN FULL and the views will be there. This chopped up shit is something Rolling Stone would do...
"Is Biden the next FDR?"
What, in terms of dying in office?
This podcast slams the mainstream media, and lauding the Substack movement, then proceeds to fall prey to the same mode of giving friends a free pass.
I respect Taibbi since even when I disagree with him, I found he had at least listed the obvious counterarguments -- of course while liberally smearing them with his trademark snide comments (part of the fun). But this discussion was trivial, no pushback or depth anywhere.
- The SALT tax repeal drive right now has little to do with concern for the overall tax rate paid by wealthy - that ship has sailed. It is driven by the split of the take between the Federal Govt and the States, and the ability of states to hold on to their wealthy taxpayers. With the SALT in place NY, NJ etc are now severely limited in their ability to increase their own current and future taxes, or increase the fraction it gets to control of each top end tax payer's bill. SALT has supercharged inter-state, and state/Fed tax competition, which will affect everyone at every level in the Blue states, since taxes at the top end are in fact highly progressive -- with a concentration cost to that model. It is not just direct income : what has the SALT cost NY city in lost income just from the few NY financial funds that have already moved to FLA? NJ almost had a financial coronary when just one fund (Appaloosa) left a few years ago. This is not all bad -- the SALT re-balanced the State/Fed balance and state competition is one of the historical pressure bleed valves of this country. Just dismissing the Blue State reps as hacks and praising the NY Times for "scooping" Sirota and for once showing profound insight is like cheering on the King of Pointland for digging through his belly-button lint to discover the navel beneath.
- There is an extensive economic literature on why cap gains should be taxed less than wage income. It is NOT the same as income. Just saying it is does not make it so. Sirota looks like an ideologically blinded idiot (and not even a useful one) -- I can only hope he was just outright disingenuous, which one can at least respect as being thought out. What about deferred vs immediate consumption? Inflation exposure? Investing meaning risk of loss of future consumption? The good reasons not to repeatedly tax a dollar at corporate levels, via inflation, cap-gains at death, estate tax, and often inheritance tax? And the knock on effects coming from these hikes such as the seventies conglomerates coming back, good cos going private and crud pushed to the public? Seventies never happened, eh?
- How about just the basic questions - who should pay what and how much? When all the Scandinavians go for lower cap gains and consumption taxes why not go for that model? What is the optimal revenue maximizing rate? Is it a good idea to get close to it?
Matt, on Substack you are in control. But you are also quality control. Which means you don't get to have friends if you want to not be another bubble. Podcasts of friends with friends was fine as a comfort blankie in pandemic but it is a model that will die too. This was just below par. Minimal content submerged in a self-congratulatory love fest worthy of the NY Times reporting floor. Frankly, had more of a whiff of South Park, with you smelling each other's f*rts over Zoom.
Ok. The NYT, one of the pillars of legacy media, get the story right. The independent journalism thing is working, right. But you tried to make it sound like you scooped them, but just didn't get your stuff out the door. Come on, folks, you can't have ot both ways!
Consider another perspective on SALT. I live in San Diego in a 2200 sq ft 3 br home. It cost slightly above the average for detached homes, $850k. My property tax alone is just under $10k per year. That means i get no deduction at all for the state income tax which is the highest in the country. This is a huge amount of money for me and im not alone, simply not fair compared to other states and i am not rich. You said it was done as punishment for living in a blue state, obviously tacitly admitting its unfair. This hurts regular middle class home owners NOT just rich people. So figure out an equitable solution and STOP suggesting this isnt hurting regular working people.
I wonder, why wouldn't you lobby your state government to lower their state tax instead of lobbying the federal government to let you deduct your state taxes?
That's a good one. You clearly have never had any dealings with the Franchise Tax Board. At least at the federal level there's some hope.
Besides, you used to always be able to deduct state and local taxes. It's absurd that you now cannot, especially when you make retirement plans that assumed they would be deductible.
I have no problem with addressing the grotesque wealth inequality through fair progressive taxation, unfortunately this salt change is decidedly NOT fair. it was implemented specifically to screw residents of blue states with high property and state/local taxes. The idea that it only affects the wealthy is nonsensical.