Asked to comment on the reason for highlighting Mr. Ramaswamy’s religion and background, the super PAC’S chief executive, Chris Jankowski, said in a statement: “We are highlighting that his philosophy of government is a direct reflection of his life experience. When his parents moved here from India, they had an 85 percent inheritance tax. In fact, his support of the inheritance tax is connected to the argument he makes in his book against meritocracy.”
August 18, 2023
"The document’s first paragraph, addressing Mr. Ramaswamy’s past support for inheritance taxes, draws a link between that policy position and his Hindu upbringing..."
"... as the son of Indian immigrants. 'Ramaswamy — a Hindu who grew up visiting relatives in India and was very much ingrained in India’s caste system — supports this as a mechanism to preserve a meritocracy in America and ensure everyone starts on a level playing field,' the document states...."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
44 comments:
“We are highlighting that his philosophy of government is a direct reflection of his life experience."
Great - do Hillary, now that she has a yoga practice
oh noes not a man of faith running for president as a republican
Ny governor, who I believe has been great in the job, makes another unforced error.
Wouldn't it be something if candidates were to present their own (positive) view for governing the nation, instead of this useless garbage?
The irony of railing against companies being too involved with societal issues and then attempting to provide an antidote via the same process of politicizing business is rather amusing.
Vivek is simply pointing out an unpleasant truth, we have a caste system here in the US largely based on inherited wealth. I understand and support the drive to provide a better life for your children, and support passing a family home or family business down to future generations, but I agree that excessive inherited wealth is causing problems in our society.
And so it begins. NYT prose style here is the “tell” —feigning a mild interest, a genteel curiosity, in this presumptively fine fellow whose true nature and intentions will be unraveled more in sorrow than in anger.
I, for one, am looking forward to the debates. Ramaswamy will mop the floor with all of them.
The knives are now coming out for Vivek.
Watch his interview on Tucker Carlson.
My best friend is opposed to him (for now) because he's not Christian. My response was, "He's an alum of a Jesuit high school."
I like Vivek. A lot. He is an idea man. We need more idea people. Our political class is abysmally bereft of ideas of any sort, particularly new ideas. And no, I don't mean warmed up leftovers from the 60s.
I like DeSantis for his ability to focus on a problem or an issue, and go after it. He gets things done. Most of government is getting in the way of people who want to get things done. He's the opposite.
But...I like Ramaswamy because he brings good and sometimes, new ideas to the forefront. This is what I liked so much about (dare I use his name?) Newt Gingrich in his Congressional years and shortly after he left. He was an idea machine. Not all great ideas, but...many were. And most were thinking outside of the box, or the norms.
We are stale as a nation. We need a spark. And not a spark for an anarchist revolution. But a spark for a different kind of revolution. I actually see Vivek as potentially, that spark.
And, no- I don't agree 100% with him or anyone else. I love my wife more than anyone in the world, and I don't agree 100% with her on things either. In other words, none of us would or should agree with anyone 100% of the time. So, if I disagree with him on this tax, so be it. There's too much to like in other areas. And, I'd wait to hear his updated view on it.
Temujin...well said. Bravo!
It is generally a good idea that all the paper wealth is locked up in the accounts of people who will never spend even 10% of it. The dollar would disappear in a massive hyperinflationary event if we started transferring the paper wealth to the government or everyone else. My first act on any attempt to pass such a confiscatory wealth tax would be to convert all my financial assets to hard ones that I could hide because the financial assets would quickly become worthless.
And yet they still moved….
"but I agree that excessive inherited wealth is causing problems in our society."
What percent of those problems do you think can be attributed to using that wealth to buy political favors? Is it possible that a government big enough and powerful enough to grant such favors is more of a problem than inherited wealth is?
Inheritance taxes are one of those policies that seem at first to be a very good idea, but don't hold up well. First of all, providing for one's children is a very strong instinct and the urge to circumvent these taxes will be powerful. There will always be ways around such taxes, and most of these methods will be written by and for the benefit of the very wealthy. The super rich won't be bothered by this tax in any meaningful way. The vast middle of the population will find it much more difficult to escape this tax. Family farms and small businesses will be destroyed at the death of the founders. This is exactly the policy supported by Warren Buffet. Force small business owners into life insurance policies and dissolve their businesses upon their death.
Inheritance taxes seem on the face of it to promote meritocracy when, in fact, they do the opposite. They lock in the ruling class of very wealthy families, and keep everyone else in their place.
If you're opposed to the idea of inherited wealth, then you're in favor of socialism. Confiscatory estate taxes are nothing more than a wealth-redistribution scheme -- steal from the rich to give to the "poor" (or rather to the government, ostensibly on behalf of the poor). If you think the government should be in charge of deciding how much private wealth an individual can accumulate and how he should be able to spend or dispose of it, congratulations, you are a socialist.
What percent of those problems do you think can be attributed to using that wealth to buy political favors? Is it possible that a government big enough and powerful enough to grant such favors is more of a problem than inherited wealth is?
The two feed on each other. As wealth accumulates, there's increasing incentive to use the government to both advance one's own personal interests, as well as protect that accumulation. Especially once you start seeing second or third generations who inherited said wealth and have a completely different mindset than the first generation.
If we can get a South Asian President who is also against identity politics for his ethnic group and is a real populist, I'm gonna feel pretty good about that.
There are wealth taxes and there are wealth taxes. For 99% of Americans, there is no tax on what they inherit. But economics is not my strong suit, so I will have to think about what Yancey says about hyperinflation.
On the other hand, the mostly leftist or leftitarian super-wealth class in America is destroying us with the foundations they build with their wealth. And for every one conservative one, there are 100 leftist or leftitarian ones, (essentialy the same thing).
For example, all those assholes who got rich as hedge fund managers then wanted to be seen as social justice warriors while throwing themselves big galas (Epstein, Weinstein and Gwenyth Paltrow were on their board) -- called, unironically, The Robin Hood Foundation -- fund some 200 organizations in NYC that don't directly provide services to the needy: oh no, these smart guys figured out that if they put their energy into first passing the most posh "poverty safety net" in the country for NYC, then staffing 200 organizations to sign every single eligible person up for every single benefit, needed or not, they could just foist financial responsibility for the outrageous bennies laws they passed in New York onto middle-class taxpayers, as most such programs flow through payroll taxes, which have a ceiling of what, the first 115K of salary?
So the uber-rich of the Robin Hood Foundation steal from the middle-class and working-class to give wall-to-wall bennies to the unproductive poor.
I wouldn't mind slapping them with a wealth tax -- or at least just doing away with this sort of ridiculous "nonprofit" tax status, where the tax-deductible donations are used to squeeze the middle class and throw giant parties for the richest donors.
Temujin - Your comment about not agreeing with anyone, including your wife, 100% made me laugh. I always tell people the only time I'd agree with a candidate 100% would be if I were the candidate!
Mitt Romney, a hedge fund guy who wanted to become President.
Vivek Ramaswamy, a hedge fund guy who wants to become President.
Both talk a good libertarian game.
Ramaswamy and Romney, really, is the Deep State even trying anymore?
"ingrained in India's caste system"
Amazing the difficulty in separating this Hindu from his childhood, while Obama had no issues separating himself from his radical mentors and Islamic experiences as a youth, at least per the media.
And Kennedy was gonna be run by the Pope, except that he chose instead to continue screwing women who were not his wife while in office, instead.
Either childhood matters or the adult and current policy matters. Choose and quit changing the rules.
He promises to shut down the FBI and Dept of Education and lay off 90+% of Federal Reserve employees with no well-defined alternatives.
He has flipped-flopped from denouncing Trump after Jan 6 to claiming it is a politically driven DOJ takedown.
He's just another populist with no real plan. He can make people feel, but does not want them to think.
The DeSantis donors are feeling the heat from a guy they never even considered. Hence this clumsy attack on his religion.
how are Inheritance taxes any different from Gift taxes? except death/will/intestate playing role
why attack/support one and not the other?
What caste? I assume high because most Indian immigrants are (which has been cited as the reason Americans think most Indians are smart—we see the ones who were raised well, with resources to get a good education).
I have mixed feelings about the inheritance tax. It’s a good tool to reduce the concentration of wealth and I don’t see why anybody would have a right to inherit anything. On the other hand, as Rome showed, it’s dangerous to let the government profit from death.
"but I agree that excessive inherited wealth is causing problems in our society." I don't disagree with this. And hiding that wealth from the taxman via trusts and foundations has created another blight on our society. Institutions like the Soros, the Ford Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are doing positive harm to this country. On the other hand, handing even more money to the corrupt government we now have via an inheritance tax seems counter-productive as well. Maybe eliminate the trusts and foundations. After all, you can pretty much rely on the rich kids who inherit the wealth to piss it away to the benefit of high-end retailers everywhere. It's be trickle down at its finest. I watched Ramaswamy's interview with Tucker Carlson and was impressed. He might be the best choice out there.
The greater issue here is the utter stupidity of the Republican "consultants" who put their sausage making online for the world to see.
It's not his fault, other than his his decision to tie-in with the Republican campaign class, but this is terrible for DeSantis. He'll look like a "tool of the Republican establishment" if he uses any of this in the debate and even if he doesn't it will be used to hammer him as a "tool of the Republican establishment" by Ramaswamy and, outside the debate, by Trump.
Amateur hour.
I believe the reference to Religion, India, Hindu and Caste system is purely designed to create a wedge between the White MAGA Americans and - what appears to be - a viable Right leaning/conservative/Republican/GOP/Libertarian candidate.
Of course, the inheritance tax is a point of discussion, but that's not what this article is designed to do.
The left have such an ingrained hatred of the right (i.e. anything not leftist or progressive), that they really don't realize that the right really don't care about those things. They want action, and anything that squashes the governmental, and d(D)emocrats, authoritarianism is all good stuff, regardless of who makes that happen.
NYTimes should link to the specific opposition research memo that it addresses and quotes.
Prior stories addressing another opposition research memo (advising hammering Vivek) did link to the underlying memo
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/de-santis-debate-memo/6168af048af86ab9/full.pdf
Also from the NYTimes piece:
"Highlighting a minority candidate’s ethnicity or faith is historically a dog whistle in politics, a way to signify the person is somehow different from other Americans."
REALLY?
It seems to me that historically (at least in relatively recent history) many minority political candidates have been protestant Christian (African Americans) and highlighting such faith is not a great way to signify a political candidate is somehow different from other Americans.
There is a reasonable argument that highlighting protestant Christian faith has in recent history been used by candidates (minority and otherwise) to show a kinship with a wide array of (majority and other) Americans.
There may be something to highlighting differences of Catholic Latinos or Irish, but I don't see that much, although it does remind of Rock Ridge.
On both accounts, a citation from NYTimes would be welcome.
Indian politicians in the US seem to be uniquely bad (Kamala Harris, Ro Khanna, the crazy woman in Seattle). Maybe I'm just being racist. That said, I like a lot of what Vivek has to say, and I'd be ok with him as the nominee based on what I've seen so far. DeSantis is still my preferred candidate given his track record of running the executive branch in a large state.
As for the inheritance tax in India, does anyone actually pay 85%? I seriously doubt it.
""He's an alum of a Jesuit high school."
Well, that's one strike against.
I met Ramaswamy at a small confab in my small town in a midwestern state. He was on tour with a local pol who had aspirations to Governorship and they were touring an "anti-CRT in schools" information session. I attended, listened, learned, was impressed.
I had no idea who this Ramaswamy dude was and this was before he was officially on campaign. It might be that I liked him because he is familiar to me as the archetype of Indian immigrant the likes of with whom I do most of my daily work. I listened, read his anti-ESG book, agreed with most of it. He's a great example of the modern Great American Melting Pot.
At the moment I'm torn between Trump, Ramaswamy, and DeSantis. I'll be watching the debate with a keen interest. All have much to recommend them. All have little to recommend against them.
After all, you can pretty much rely on the rich kids who inherit the wealth to piss it away to the benefit of high-end retailers everywhere. It's be trickle down at its finest.
That would be harmless and helping others to make a living. Instead the Pritzger heirs and the Walton heirs and the Disney heirs are funding Black Lives Matter and other destructive "Foundations" that harm the rest of us.
"The two feed on each other. As wealth accumulates, there's increasing incentive to use the government to both advance one's own personal interests, as well as protect that accumulation."
Yes, I understand that. My question related to attempts to limit wealth accumulation vs. attempts to limit the power of government to manage society. If you manage to do the former, the latter is still an issue while if you do the latter, the former won't really matter all that much. IMO, anyway.
Why do we punish those that excel at saving money.
That's all wealth is. The save money, only buy to cover their needs, and save(invest) the rest.
I guess pro athletes or entertainers are good examples of those that spend money vs those that invest money. The spenders end up beggars. But some think other peoples money should be handed over to the spenders, and punish the savers.
and support passing a family home or family business down to future generations, but I agree that excessive inherited wealth is causing problems in our society.
Problem in what way? How? Who is the victim? The assumption that the money is better spent by the govt has a long history of being disproven.
Your have a lot of work to flesh out the claim of 'inherited wealth is a problem'
I've been paying attention to inherited wealth for more than 5 decades, my dad, 5 decades before that.
What I see, not a single dynasty in the farm sector has ever survived the 3rd generation. All that wealth get redistrbuted, without the DC mobsters sucking up the vig.
I'm 73 years old and have voted in every election, local state and national, after attaining legal voting age. Never once have I agreed 100% with any candidate I voted for. For most I probably had a 70-80% agreement. The last President I voted for was Reagan. Since then all I've done is hold my nose and vote against the Democrat, this includes Trump.
I still have to hear more from and about Vivek, but he may and I stress the may, be only the second candidate that I actually vote for. We'll see, the jury is still out.
Having said all that, I will NEVER vote for a Democrat or any "Republican" member of the uni-party. I will write in my own name first.
Wilbur said...
Ny governor, who I believe has been great in the job, makes another unforced error.
Dictator Hochul? Great job?
Along with all the other governors who violated the rights of the people during the covidiocy, including her predecessor, she should receive a fair trial before she’s led to the gallows.
The more I see the “unexplained “ sudden deaths with “no cause “ pile up, the less kindly I feel about any of them.
Karl Denninger at market-ticker.org/akcs-www?blog=market-ticker-nad has been on a tear recently expressing my feelings- because they coincide with his.
Jeff Childers at coffeeandcovid.com is one of several documenting the unusual deaths of otherwise healthy people who’ve had the shots. Those of us who haven’t are dying at the usual rate of expected things. At 68 (66 for my wife) we’re in a very small minority of people are age. By 82, when my parents who had horrible lifestyles died, I expect my wife and I will be in the vast majority of living people our age.
"Problem in what way? How? Who is the victim? The assumption that the money is better spent by the govt has a long history of being disproven."
Money is not the problem. Government power being available for sale is.
For me, this whole episode is nonsensical. Why would Ramaswamy's being steeped in "the caste system" make him more likely to approve an inheritance tax? Obviously it should do the reverse, as families handing down whatever wealth they have w/o hindrance tends to perpetuate the existing strata. If Ramaswamy wants to disrupt our equivalent of a "caste system," he's going about it the right way. If he wanted to preserve our "caste system," he would reduce whatever inheritance tax we currently have to zero.
He is the son of H1B’s. So many Trump voters will see him as part of the problem. He needs to make a definitive pull-up-the-ladder statement, that well, 40 years ago, it made sense to bring my mom and dad over, but things are way different now, and we need to take care of the people that are already here. Train kids in Harlem before you bring in coders from Hyderabad. West Virginia before the West Indies. Etc.
Otherwise, a certain part of the MAGA core will not bother to vote, and any blacks and hispanics who flirted with Trump will go back to the Dems.
H1B is a four-letter word in the inner city.
JSM
"H1B is a four-letter word in the inner city."
Is this really true? Inner city residents are seldom displaced by H1Bs. Unless by "inner city" you mean Cupertino. I'm not saying I disagree with you, just pondering what you said.
Old and slow: in the inner city, it's more illegals putting working class minorities out of work. I worked alongside a lot of skilled black and white tradesmen in Atlanta. They lost wages and careers to policies favoring illegals.
Michelle: that was indeed one of the more incoherent screeds the NYT has offered lately.
Time for the Times to cut back on the pot gummies.
Old/slow: True dat - not a lot of people running around the inner city saying “I busted my ass for a PhD in recursion theory, and that damn H1B got my job!”
It’s more used as a shothand for all the immigration programs that make it easier to hire a compiant foreigner than have to deal with the fallout of our nation’s original sin. Kind of like “wiretap” doesnt literally mean “Obama was in the back of Trump Tower putting alligator clips on my phone line.”
Mostly in the hospitality industry, you see employers twisting the law into a pretzel just so they don’t have to hire 1619 blacks.
I would also contend, though, that more inner-city residents than not understand the chain of causation from the narrowly-defined H1B program to the lack of decent public education, to the low supply of higly-skilled graduates, to the H1B program, in a never ending vicious cycle.
JSM
Post a Comment