Jump to content

Joe Biden 2021


tantric superman

Recommended Posts

  On 9/30/2021 at 5:14 PM, Captainant said:

Deficit of our recent history:

Reagan: 70B -> 175B

Bush: 175B -> 300B

Clinton: 300B -> 0

Bush2: 0 -> 1200B

Obama: 1200B -> 600B

Trump: 600B -> 3300B (in just 4 years!)

 

Fuck outta here with acting like you give a fuck about the national debt. Everyone you vote for makes it worse. 

Expand  

This graphic should show up on every Democratic Party election poster/graphic in the country. It’s pretty powerful

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 9/30/2021 at 10:34 PM, Dbeasy said:

So is the October debt limit deadline just political theater or is there really a chance of default with the associated consequences, which could range from nothing to kicking off initiatives from other countries to move even further off the dollar?

Expand  

Yes, yes, yes, and yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is another version.  The point being is not really whether we are looking at raw debt or debt/gdp or deficit. Those are all reasonable metrics that tell you different things. It's that we need to also include control of the house and the senate in the presentation of the data. 

 

960x0.jpg%3Ffit=scale

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 12:13 AM, Anastasis said:

Here is another version.  The point being is not really whether we are looking at raw debt or debt/gdp or deficit. Those are all reasonable metrics that tell you different things. It's that we need to also include control of the house and the senate in the presentation of the data. 

 

960x0.jpg%3Ffit=scale

Expand  

Regardless of which team you pull for, these numbers are staggering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 12:13 AM, Anastasis said:

Here is another version.  The point being is not really whether we are looking at raw debt or debt/gdp or deficit. Those are all reasonable metrics that tell you different things. It's that we need to also include control of the house and the senate in the presentation of the data. 

 

960x0.jpg%3Ffit=scale

Expand  

I can’t draw any conclusion from this other than they all suck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 9/30/2021 at 4:57 PM, Satoshi said:

The long term debt/deficit predicament of our country can be addressed in 3 possible ways. 
 

1-reform. Lol good luck with that. 
2-default. Will never happen while we are the reserve currency. 
3-inflation. Debt monetization via increasing Fed purchases of USTs. Ding ding ding. 
 

The effects of following path 3 can be debated, but I don’t see any other way to deal with the actual numbers. 

Expand  

So, growing the fuck out of the economy, and thus raking in beaucoup tax dollars, is off the table? You’re a glass half empty kind of guy, I’m guessing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 12:47 AM, DalTxHornFan said:

Please elucidate me.

Expand  

 

  On 9/30/2021 at 5:14 PM, Captainant said:

Deficit of our recent history:

Reagan: 70B -> 175B

Bush: 175B -> 300B

Clinton: 300B -> 0

Bush2: 0 -> 1200B

Obama: 1200B -> 600B

Trump: 600B -> 3300B (in just 4 years!)

 

Expand  

Look at the trajectories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 9/30/2021 at 5:49 PM, Incredulity said:

Subsidized housing has been a disaster.   Both with the mega "projects" and current Section 8 format.

Expand  

Not entirely, but parts have been…why is that? 

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/public-housing-success/406561/

  Quote

For a while, this worked. Tenants were carefully screened, and public-housing complexes, though largely segregated, were home to working-class residents of all races. But this all changed after World War II, when the federal government pushed for many people to buy their own homes by increasing the authorization for Federal Housing Authority loans, which were mostly available to white families. The job opportunities were mostly available for white workers, too. The combination meant that many working-class white families could afford to move out of the housing projects and buy their own homes. Those job (and housing) opportunities were closed off to minority residents, though, who were discriminated against in job applications and prevented from buying homes in certain areas. As the population of public-housing properties became more impoverished and blacker, white residents with jobs, even low-paying ones, hurried to move out of the projects.

“You saw a change in the racial composition, which simply added to the stigma and the pattern of administrative neglect that characterized many housing authorities,” Goetz told me.

As the 1950s began, big-city public-housing agencies like Chicago, New York, and Baltimore built high-rise units that would soon become emblematic of all the problems with public housing.

But public-housing authority budgets took a big hit as working-class residents moved out and the poor remained. They charged a set amount for rent, but this increasingly amounted to a larger and larger percentage of the incomes of the people still living in public housing, in part because the federal government was hesitant to subsidize public housing. By the late 1960s, some of the worst-performing buildings had high vacancy rates and high rents. The 1964 Civil Rights Act accelerated the exodus—as public housing was integrated, white residents left, according to “A Brief History of Public Housing,” a paper by J.A. Stoloff.

As working-class residents moved out, those left behind were required to pay an increasing share of the rents. In time, some residents were paying more than half of their income for rent to live in public housing, Goetz said. A highly-publicized rent strike in St. Louis in 1969 drew attention to this and Congress passed the Brooke Amendment, which limited the rents that public-housing authorities could charge to a certain percentage of a residents’ income. Though it was well-intended, Goetz said, the Brooke Amendment made it nearly impossible for many public-housing authorities to collect enough money to keep their properties in good condition. Going into the 1970s, public-housing authorities were becoming poorly-run, barely-financed departments, with most of their properties located in urban areas that were marked by declines related to white flight. And then they had to face urban decline, crime, and the gangs that rose up in the 1970s and 1980s with diminishing funding from both HUD and the local municipalities that didn’t want to spend money on deteriorating properties for the poor.

Expand  

It’s almost as if once the whites moved out, everyone did everything in their power to defund and sabotage them. 
 

Same old story. Defund everything and claim government can’t do anything right 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 1:11 AM, Neonmoon said:

Not entirely, but parts have been…why is that? 

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/public-housing-success/406561/

It’s almost as if once the whites moved out, everyone did everything in their power to defund and sabotage them. 
 

Same old story. Defund everything and claim government can’t do anything right 

Expand  

How much funding does Austin need to fix the homeless problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 1:32 AM, Incredulity said:

“Public housing is a failed policy, and in many ways an immoral policy,” Rick White, the spokesman for the Atlanta Housing Authority, said in 2008.

Expand  

Well you're physically incapable of understanding how structural racism built into the American housing market post WWII could turn an originally useful program into an immoral program that keeps people trapped in poverty rather than giving them a starting point. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Public housing gets a bad rap, but Maddie Garrett has no complaints. She’s lived on the same few blocks on Austin’s east side for 50 years, moving between one of the nation’s oldest public-housing complexes, Rosewood Courts, and a senior housing development called Salina Apartments. When her family grew, the housing authority helped her move to a bigger apartment; when her kids moved away, she moved back to a smaller one. When her husband became disabled, the housing authority put them in a unit that could accommodate his disabilities.
 


I question whether 50 years in public housing should be held up as an example of an achievement for the government.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 1:32 AM, Incredulity said:

“Public housing is a failed policy, and in many ways an immoral policy,” Rick White, the spokesman for the Atlanta Housing Authority, said in 2008.

Expand  

 

  On 10/1/2021 at 1:47 AM, Incredulity said:

Public housing gets a bad rap, but Maddie Garrett has no complaints. She’s lived on the same few blocks on Austin’s east side for 50 years, moving between one of the nation’s oldest public-housing complexes, Rosewood Courts, and a senior housing development called Salina Apartments. When her family grew, the housing authority helped her move to a bigger apartment; when her kids moved away, she moved back to a smaller one. When her husband became disabled, the housing authority put them in a unit that could accommodate his disabilities.
 


I question whether 50 years in public housing should be held up as an example of an achievement for the government.

Expand  

If you're going to continue to liberally post quotes from the same article six-year-old article, you might as well post the whole thing. Right? I mean...what could your motivation be to just throw out these out-of-context statements without any context? You do want to have an honest discussion in which everyone can take full measure of the problem, correct?

I just can't understand why you wouldn't at least provide a source link. Here, let me help you:

The Power of Public Housing
“The story of American public housing is one of quiet successes drowned out by loud failures,” writes the historian Ed Goetz.

Public housing gets a bad rap, but Maddie Garrett has no complaints. She’s lived on the same few blocks on Austin’s east side for 50 years, moving between one of the nation’s oldest public-housing complexes, Rosewood Courts, and a senior housing development called Salina Apartments. When her family grew, the housing authority helped her move to a bigger apartment; when her kids moved away, she moved back to a smaller one. When her husband became disabled, the housing authority put them in a unit that could accommodate his disabilities.

“It’s comfortable; it’s safe; I haven’t had any problems,” she told me, in the shady courtyard of her apartment building.

It can be hard to remember, among the multiple stories of neglect and crime in the nation’s public-housing complexes, and amid the efforts to dismantle the buildings over the last few decades, that for millions of Americans over the past century, public housing has worked well. Today there are 1.2 million Americans living in housing managed by some 3,300 public-housing authorities, many of which have received scores of 98 or higher out of 100 in HUD’s public-housing assessment system.

“The story of American public housing is one of quiet successes drowned out by loud failures,” writes Ed Goetz, a professor at the University of Minnesota, in his book New Deal Ruins: Race, Economic Justice and Public Housing Policy.

Those failures have been in the news of late, what with the HBO series Show Me A Hero reminding viewers just how bad public housing in Yonkers was in the late 1980s, New York City’s Housing Authority publicly struggling to pay the bills, and the head of a Florida public housing authority being arrested for stealing federal funds.

But as Maddie Garrett’s experience shows, and as Goetz details in his book, public housing had—and still has—a lot of potential. It’s just that seemingly no one—not politicians, not Congress, not home builders—wants it to succeed.

* * *

  Reveal hidden contents
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 2:21 AM, bolverk said:

If you're going to continue to liberally post quotes from the same article six-year-old article, you might as well post the whole thing. Right? I mean...what could your motivation be to just throw out theseout-of-context statements without any context?

Expand  

Neonmoon posted the whole article and quoted from it in 6405, you fucking idiot.

Edited by Incredulity
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 9/30/2021 at 3:43 PM, DonkeyCigars said:

But also, the flip side, is we have all lived long enough to see failed and massively wasteful and inefficient welfare/entitlement programs multiple times. 

The most succesful socialist/welfare/entitlement program, as is often mentioned, is the military and the defense program.

Expand  

It's fine to point out that military/defense spending is "socialist."  It is.

It should also be pointed out that that bit of socialism is set forth right there in the Constitution.

  Quote

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Expand  

So the "Constitution loving, sOcIaLIsm hating" GOP can take a flying fuck through a rolling donut.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now that we're not only looking at the party of the Executive but also that of the House and Senate, would our resident non-Trumpy conservitarians care to weigh in on how much impact the Executive has on the annual budget?  You know. for completeness' sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 2:44 AM, TwiceHorn said:

It's fine to point out that military/defense spending is "socialist."  It is.

It should also be pointed out that that bit of socialism is set forth right there in the Constitution.

So the "Constitution loving, sOcIaLIsm hating" GOP can take a flying fuck through a rolling donut.

Expand  

They can take a flying fuck at the moon

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 2:44 AM, TwiceHorn said:

It's fine to point out that military/defense spending is "socialist."  It is.

It should also be pointed out that that bit of socialism is set forth right there in the Constitution.

So the "Constitution loving, sOcIaLIsm hating" GOP can take a flying fuck through a rolling donut.

Expand  

I agree it's fine to point it out and that is what it is, which is why I pointed it out and called it that.

In my opinion, the defense industry generally and our standing military specifically is the best application of socialism because it represents a true win/win. You subsidize a set of people or a population that otherwise would likely not be as efficient or valuable in the private markets and they either serve a valuable purpose as is (defending the country for the rest of us and/or fighting in war) or they get free enablement and education and discipline and work ethic so that when they are released to the private markets, they are efficient and valuable.

It's actually quite fantastic if you think about it and it's a pretty crucial piece of keeping us whole as a country (and protecting the wealth of everyone from the uber wealthy to the middle class).

This is also why I think it's a pretty creative and good idea to use military service as a path for legal immigration. I think it's that important; especially in 2021 with the geopolitical chess board looking the way it looks.

Edited by DonkeyCigars
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 1:47 AM, Incredulity said:

I question whether 50 years in public housing should be held up as an example of an achievement for the government.

Expand  

Ah yes, a woman living happily with a family and a disabled husband accommodated... truly a source of shame.

She doesn't even have an upstairs gameroom. Where is her beautiful lawn? How does a human live without a rusting grill in a rarely-used back yard?

When I look at the American housing landscape, two empty nesters in a 3800sqft suburban 4/4 is what I consider an achievement in efficiency of resources and capital.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 1:07 PM, bad_teammate said:

At the end of the day, we can rest assured that Joe Biden did literally everything he could for the people who are going to be left out of this spending bill. And by literally everything I mean basically nothing.

Expand  

You've been MIA for the last couple weeks on this stuff (I get it, football season), so I was expecting a little bit more pent-up smoke from you.

I guess you are a bit beaten down already and have settled into accepting the realities of a Biden/centrist regime, a year into it?

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 10/1/2021 at 12:47 PM, Satoshi said:

I’m surprised you felt this way. You’re usually pretty blunt about the politics/numbers. Don’t have the numbers. 
 

 

Expand  

Ah yes, if Democrats were just nicer, everyone would have Covid vaccinations and $3.5T spending bills. Why won't they account for everyone's feelings?!

Edited by aggie08
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...