Joe Biden 2021

[F250 28682]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

The so-called "moderates" are tanking Biden's agenda because apparently they're fucking idiots who think it's good politics to run against their own party's extremely popular policy proposals and the President who ran on them.

The Democratic party should probably be considered the conservative party considering it's run by moderates and moderates are essentially conservatives in the traditional sense. The GOP definitely does not hold to Burkean conservativism and will shift the government as far as they want with no fucks given. When the Democrats get a chance they temper policy with incrementalism despite the fact that their predecessors made massive shifts in policy. The GOP will take 4 steps forward and the Democrats will take a half a step backwards which always leaves the GOP setting the direction.

 

[wildcat09 29237]

What’s amazing this time is there isn’t even any pressure on them to moderate. There’s no town halls full of rabid freaks like with Obamacare, there’s no polls showing substantial opposition to the actual policies contained in the bill, and there’s no desire even among the moderates to try to negotiate any of this shit to get Republican votes. They don’t have any of the usual cover they typically rely on to justify pulling this bullshit, yet they’re still doing it and sure seems right now like they’ll succeed. 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

52 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

What’s amazing this time is there isn’t even any pressure on them to moderate. There’s no town halls full of rabid freaks like with Obamacare, there’s no polls showing substantial opposition to the actual policies contained in the bill, and there’s no desire even among the moderates to try to negotiate any of this shit to get Republican votes. They don’t have any of the usual cover they typically rely on to justify pulling this bullshit, yet they’re still doing it and sure seems right now like they’ll succeed. 

Because they don’t have consensus among the elected. Because the letter D next to your name means your party cuts a much broader swath of interests and people than the letter R.

[Captainant 27447]

2 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Because they don’t have consensus among the elected. Because the letter D next to your name means your party cuts a much broader swath of interests and people than the letter R.

Must be nice to have your voting bloc welded together with racism and a hate for poor people

[Brisketexan 104596]

You know….I just love when in all this mess, I can laugh. The old Joe Biden memes almost always do that. Thanks for that.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

58 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Must be nice to have your voting bloc welded together with racism and a hate for poor people

There is a reason two party systems aren’t favorable for heterogeneous populations; I know it sounds counterintuitive because of the abject corruption, but we should look to Latin America for how multiple party governments have to operate and build coalitions and consensus that are defined and boxed by project or bill or time. Seems like it would be more efficient.

Edited September 29, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[ChiTownDoc 21098]

57 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Must be nice to have your voting bloc welded together with racism and a hate for poor people

This needs to have 7 spidermans (men?) pointing at eachother.  That's the new R party.  

[washparkhorn 9935]

4 hours ago, F250 said:

The Democratic party should probably be considered the conservative party considering Theyit's run by moderates and moderates are essentially conservatives in the traditional sense

Agree.

• Conservatives, by definition, push back on any deviance from the status quo - regardless of ideology.
  • They turtle. This tactic serves the purpose of slowing down radicals. 
  • In common practice, the conservative wait-and-see approach to problems fuels populist anger at many intersections in the political world.
    • One side effect has been the retreat from democracy towards traditional Second-World status we see in much of the world. 
  • Conservatives are the "rock gardens" in poker games.

Spoiler

 

• Our economic system for the past 50 years has been neoliberalism. This is a conservative economic policy, despite the name.
  • The liberal in that word refers to Classical Liberalism, a/k/a today's economic conservative. Free market and nothing else.
    • Free Market is all they know. Anything else filed under the amorphous communism label.
• The political ideology behind our the neoliberal economic system is to privatize - everything - so there is no need for government.
  • Not kidding. 
• Having said all that mush, most voters have no idea what the word salad above means and they are informed by news silos whose mission is profit, not informing. 
  • Even though the US and much of the free world have lived under our neoliberal economic policies since the 1970's, few can define the term.
  • That's a big disconnect (and exploitable by those who see it an avenue for profit or ill-will toward U.S. interests).

Changing economic systems now is too late, but conservatives must recognize the negative externalities created by their continued intransigent stances. Moderation for moderation's sake is not a viable option in a world filled with right wing populist death cults and thugs. No more time for meetings, seminars, and brainstorming. The problems require decisiveness after forward-looking thinking. This is the economic conservative's world that we live in today.   

Like climate change, "the future is here now, but unevenly distributed at the moment."* 

* horrible butchering of a William Gibson quote.

Edited September 29, 2021 by washparkhorn

[Dbeasy 14966]

Manchin’s press release today articulates the concerns of moderates on both sides of the aisle.

A big chunk of this board enthusiastically supports the $3.5T plan. I still can’t wrap my head around the numbers.

Like many Americans I’ve only heard a high level view of this spending package, and I can’t reconcile the fact that we are over 100% of gdp in debt, running trillion plus deficits without the extra spending, and have social security and Medicare on the verge on running out of money. Stronger explanations by the proponents of this spending of how this fiscally makes sense is a reasonable expectation. 

[DalTxHornFan 3085]

9 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Manchin’s press release today articulates the concerns of moderates on both sides of the aisle.

A big chunk of this board enthusiastically supports the $3.5T plan. I still can’t wrap my head around the numbers.

Like many Americans I’ve only heard a high level view of this spending package, and I can’t reconcile the fact that we are over 100% of gdp in debt, running trillion plus deficits without the extra spending, and have social security and Medicare on the verge on running out of money. Stronger explanations by the proponents of this spending of how this fiscally makes sense is a reasonable expectation. 

Rampant inflation will make the current outstanding government debt numbers irrelevant.  That's the plan!

[hornmpa96 2598]

11 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Manchin’s press release today articulates the concerns of moderates on both sides of the aisle.

A big chunk of this board enthusiastically supports the $3.5T plan. I still can’t wrap my head around the numbers.

Like many Americans I’ve only heard a high level view of this spending package, and I can’t reconcile the fact that we are over 100% of gdp in debt, running trillion plus deficits without the extra spending, and have social security and Medicare on the verge on running out of money. Stronger explanations by the proponents of this spending of how this fiscally makes sense is a reasonable expectation. 

It’s actually paid for. Unlike the $2 trillion tax cut passed in 2017.

[Dbeasy 14966]

Just now, hornmpa96 said:

It’s actually paid for. Unlike the $2 trillion tax cut passed in 2017.

Okay but how do we get back to <3% of gdp deficits, fix social security, etc. 

[hornmpa96 2598]

7 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Okay but how do we get back to <3% of gdp deficits, fix social security, etc. 

cut the military budget?

[Willfully Horn 7913]

20 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Manchin’s press release today articulates the concerns of moderates on both sides of the aisle.

A big chunk of this board enthusiastically supports the $3.5T plan. I still can’t wrap my head around the numbers.

Like many Americans I’ve only heard a high level view of this spending package, and I can’t reconcile the fact that we are over 100% of gdp in debt, running trillion plus deficits without the extra spending, and have social security and Medicare on the verge on running out of money. Stronger explanations by the proponents of this spending of how this fiscally makes sense is a reasonable expectation. 

The last time this nation faced so much debt, as a percentage of GDP (140%?) top tax rate was 95%. Never gonna happen. 

[Js1 85104]

Yay the fake fiscal conservatives are back! 

[Willfully Horn 7913]

1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Yay the fake fiscal conservatives are back! 

Cynicism isn’t unwillingness, hermano.

[washparkhorn 9935]

Our cost to finance all that debt is small - since the demand for our debt remains robust.  The debt fear-mongers should trust the markets.

After all, our economic monetary invested trillions to prop up the financial markets early in the Pandemic (and that continues). 

We have had 50 years of austerity and resulting decay. Everyone sees it, but blame the victims of austerity rather than the creators of the policy.

The nations who buy our debt wish we would spend more money to clean up what has become of America.

We continue to let the seed corn rot. That's not healthy for our economy. 

And remember one more thing, the United States is not a household with a budget. That is the wrong perspective to view a sovereign with the world's preferred currency. Snap out of it. 

No offense intended. 

[Satoshi 129]

50 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Manchin’s press release today articulates the concerns of moderates on both sides of the aisle.

A big chunk of this board enthusiastically supports the $3.5T plan. I still can’t wrap my head around the numbers.

Like many Americans I’ve only heard a high level view of this spending package, and I can’t reconcile the fact that we are over 100% of gdp in debt, running trillion plus deficits without the extra spending, and have social security and Medicare on the verge on running out of money. Stronger explanations by the proponents of this spending of how this fiscally makes sense is a reasonable expectation. 

And that’s without saying that inflation is already currently running hot. 
 

10 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Our cost to finance all that debt is small - since the demand for our debt remains robust.  The debt fear-mongers should trust the markets.

After all, our economic monetary invested trillions to prop up the financial markets early in the Pandemic (and that continues). 

We have had 50 years of austerity and resulting decay. Everyone sees it, but blame the victims of austerity rather than the creators of the policy.

The nations who buy our debt wish we would spend more money to clean up what has become of America.

We continue to let the seed corn rot. That's not healthy for our economy. 

And remember one more thing, the United States is not a household with a budget. That is the wrong perspective to view a sovereign with the world's preferred currency. Snap out of it. 

No offense intended. 

Debt/gdp 1971-34% 

debt/gdp today-125% 

the austerity is overwhelming 

[DalTxHornFan 3085]

12 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Our cost to finance all that debt is small - since the demand for our debt remains robust.  The debt fear-mongers should trust the markets.

After all, our economic monetary invested trillions to prop up the financial markets early in the Pandemic (and that continues). 

We have had 50 years of austerity and resulting decay. Everyone sees it, but blame the victims of austerity rather than the creators of the policy.

The nations who buy our debt wish we would spend more money to clean up what has become of America.

We continue to let the seed corn rot. That's not healthy for our economy. 

And remember one more thing, the United States is not a household with a budget. That is the wrong perspective to view a sovereign with the world's preferred currency. Snap out of it. 

No offense intended. 

I loved all of the zero percent interest rate credit cards that I got when I first got out of college.  Then I started getting zero or low percent balance transfer offers.  Then I realized that the balance eventually needed to be paid off.  

Seed corn, indeed.

[Dbeasy 14966]

22 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Our cost to finance all that debt is small - since the demand for our debt remains robust.  The debt fear-mongers should trust the markets.

After all, our economic monetary invested trillions to prop up the financial markets early in the Pandemic (and that continues). 

We have had 50 years of austerity and resulting decay. Everyone sees it, but blame the victims of austerity rather than the creators of the policy.

The nations who buy our debt wish we would spend more money to clean up what has become of America.

We continue to let the seed corn rot. That's not healthy for our economy. 

And remember one more thing, the United States is not a household with a budget. That is the wrong perspective to view a sovereign with the world's preferred currency. Snap out of it. 

No offense intended. 

None of this works or makes sense if and when inflation spirals up. 

[washparkhorn 9935]

2 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

None of this works or makes sense if and when inflation spirals up. 

But that is not this day. 

After all, we pay our debts - making the U.S. a secure investment. 

If we don't pay - our investors go down with the ship with us. Almost a stalemate.

Our investors (note: direct link to Treasury data) - https://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt

[High Plains Drifter 10974]

1 hour ago, Dbeasy said:

Okay but how do we get back to <3% of gdp deficits, fix social security, etc. 

 

57 minutes ago, hornmpa96 said:

cut the military budget?

 

means test social security. Raise the retirement age.

 

 

22 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

I loved all of the zero percent interest rate credit cards that I got when I first got out of college.  Then I started getting zero or low percent balance transfer offers.  Then I realized that the balance eventually needed to be paid off.  

Seed corn, indeed.

 

The US government is not a business, a family, or a person just out of college doing the credit card debt shuffle. Such comparisons only serve to undermine any argument or point you are trying to make.

 

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by High Plains Drifter

[Brisketexan 104596]

Our cost to finance all that debt is small - since the demand for our debt remains robust.  The debt fear-mongers should trust the markets.
After all, our economic monetary invested trillions to prop up the financial markets early in the Pandemic (and that continues). 
We have had 50 years of austerity and resulting decay. Everyone sees it, but blame the victims of austerity rather than the creators of the policy.
The nations who buy our debt wish we would spend more money to clean up what has become of America.
We continue to let the seed corn rot. That's not healthy for our economy. 
And remember one more thing, the United States is not a household with a budget. That is the wrong perspective to view a sovereign with the world's preferred currency. Snap out of it. 
No offense intended. 

All of this. But it won’t matter. Read the replies to this. They don’t get it. They never will.

“Fiscal conservatives” are dehydrated fools, reconstituted only when sprinkled with the moisture of a Democratic President/Congress, then instantly desiccating the moment the GQP takes over. Lather, rinse, repeat.

[TwiceHorn 31269]

4 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

The US government is not a business, a family, or a person just out of college doing the credit card debt shuffle. Such comparisons only serve to undermine any argument or point you are trying to make.

 

Nonetheless, you can't keep spending in excess of revenues indefinitely without consequence.

Washparkhorn, the most astute liberal economist here, concedes as much in #6303.

Foreigners still want to buy our debt.  At some point that will diminish or end, and then it all comes crashing down.  Continuing to deficit spend in ever larger amounts increases the likelihood of that happening.  It's not the sole cause, other geopolitical events are more likely to make that happen, but the closer we are to a "balanced budget" when those things happen, the better off we'll be.

But he's also right about austerity.  We spend less and less on the people every year.  Unless those people happen to be in the military or work for defense.

Edited September 30, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[DalTxHornFan 3085]

3 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

The US government is not a business, a family, or a person just out of college doing the credit card debt shuffle. Such comparisons only serve to undermine any argument or point you are trying to make.

 

 

Oh, I forgot.  The laws of economics do not apply to the United States.

[DalTxHornFan 3085]

[Dbeasy 14966]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Nonetheless, you can't keep spending in excess of revenues indefinitely without consequence.

Washparkhorn, the most astute liberal economist here, concedes as much in #6303.

Foreigners still want to buy our debt.  At some point that will diminish or end, and then it all comes crashing down.  Continuing to deficit spend in ever larger amounts increases the likelihood of that happening.

And inflation can screw it up too.  Yet all these posters just ignore it all like there are no consequences, and instead hurl insults calling everyone conservatives, republicans whatever. It’s just bizarre behavior. I don’t get it. 

[High Plains Drifter 10974]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Nonetheless, you can't keep spending in excess of revenues indefinitely without consequence.

 

 

1 minute ago, DalTxHornFan said:

Oh, I forgot.  The laws of economics do not apply to the United States.

 

I don't disagree.  

 

 

 

 

[Satoshi 129]

11 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

And inflation can screw it up too.  Yet all these posters just ignore it all like there are no consequences, and instead hurl insults calling everyone conservatives, republicans whatever. It’s just bizarre behavior. I don’t get it. 

This is the CR. Standard operating procedure.

The better place for inflation and deficit discussion is the 6thSJ thread as you know. But if anything slightly political is mentioned you get referred over here for non productive discussion. Just how it works around here. 
 

I’ll add the obvious that the way this forum gets excited about unprecedented spending as if it’s consequence free should be pushing people to Bitcoin. Oh and the fact that it’s censorship resistant money as well. We have a thread on that at 6SJ as you know. 

Edited September 30, 2021 by Satoshi

[Brisketexan 104596]

I just love how invariably, 100% without fail, “oh my god the deficit” becomes an issue of serious, deep concern….when Dems are in power. But it doesn’t even merit a shoulder shrug when the Repubs are - multi trillion dollar deficit-feeding measures fly through without a hiccup. It’s fucking comically absurd. And the same monkeys dance to the fake music every time.

[TwiceHorn 31269]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I just love how invariably, 100% without fail, “oh my god the deficit” becomes an issue of serious, deep concern….when Dems are in power. But it doesn’t even merit a shoulder shrug when the Repubs are - multi trillion dollar deficit-feeding measures fly through without a hiccup. It’s fucking comically absurd. And the same monkeys dance to the fake music every time.

I'm consistently kinda worried about it and neither party assuages that worry.  It's not the sole reason not to do worthwhile things, but it should be a consideration.

A real infrastructure bill, including "human infrastructure," is sorely needed.  I'm more cheesed about the tax cut than the cost of an infrastructure bill.

Edited September 30, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Eskimohorn 5613]

Our cost to finance all that debt is small - since the demand for our debt remains robust.  The debt fear-mongers should trust the markets.
After all, our economic monetary invested trillions to prop up the financial markets early in the Pandemic (and that continues). 
We have had 50 years of austerity and resulting decay. Everyone sees it, but blame the victims of austerity rather than the creators of the policy.
The nations who buy our debt wish we would spend more money to clean up what has become of America.
We continue to let the seed corn rot. That's not healthy for our economy. 
And remember one more thing, the United States is not a household with a budget. That is the wrong perspective to view a sovereign with the world's preferred currency. Snap out of it. 
No offense intended. 

The GOP know that defense spending and tax cuts are the primary driver of the debt. We know this. The GOP know that we know. But we make-believe that we don't know and the GOP make-believe that they believe that we don't know, but know that we know. Everybody knows.

This is borrowed from Under Siege 2, but someone is going to post the reference from Lion in Winter. Then someone will point out its actually from Under Siege 2.

[wildcat09 29237]

Republicans have been fear mongering about runaway inflation being just around the corner because of Democratic spending for literally the last hundred years. It’s beyond time for people who don’t directly benefit from austerity policies to realize that it was never a real concern and merely a justification to refuse helping regular people. 

Edited September 30, 2021 by wildcat09

[washparkhorn 9935]

1 hour ago, DalTxHornFan said:

Oh, I forgot.  The laws of economics do not apply to the United States.

I mean this with no offense, but many conservatives have not kept up with how the economy fucking works on the macrolevel.  A lot has changed in the past 10 years. The instability in that time tested theories and some theories are just plain dead. Such as: 

The Phillips Curve is dead. It is not science anymore.  But clings on like a hand from the grave. It's mainly a front for political tools now for whenever taxes might be raised on the wealthy. It has been effective for the ultra-wealthy (there are no ultra-wealthy shot-callers here.)  Look at that wealth gap. 

It's easy to catch up with the current state of play in economics.

Defeat is a bitch for many of clowns fronting for deficit fear mongering - such as Lou Dobbs, Joe Kiernan, Rick Santelli, and countless others. The Chamber of Commerce still peddles the debt mongering, but look who they speak for on the national level. Stop pretending they give a fuck about you. They don't. 

TLDR: Business news is not economic news. 

+++++++++++++++++++++

Back to Joe Biden. There is a compromise out there. The "Debt Fear-Mongers" appear when taxes may be raised on the wealthy. They trigger the middle class by pretending they will be crushed by taxes. And we end up here. Over and over again. Let's put aside their fears.
 

Spoiler

My economics are left libertarian. Many on this board are in that quadrant - regardless of political label. 

Here's the compromise. Our economy has deflationary headwinds that continue. Basic Keynesian logic says: Don't raise taxes when deflationary collapse could result.

We have over-inflated assets (financial and real estate market) that is sensitive to the disruptions we face. We have continuing Covid domestically, but, worse than that, we rely on foreign supply chains that are faltering with the virus and political turmoil, including China. They fail, we suffer economically.

I am not a Keynesian and modern economic conservatives are no friend of Keynes either. How about we compromise and do what Keynes would have done. We agree no taxes to pay for the debt created by this bill.  . . .  .

That's what Semenema is holding out for - no new taxes. Let's give her the win - that crazy Maverick that she is.

We can sell the debt because we always pay our bills in USD, which is still accepted all over the world. 

Deal?  

Edited September 30, 2021 by washparkhorn

[DalTxHornFan 3085]

7 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

I mean this with no offense, but many conservatives have not kept up with how the economy fucking works on the macrolevel.  A lot has changed in the past 10 years. The instability in that time tested theories and some theories are just plain dead. Such as: 

The Phillips Curve is dead. It is not science anymore.  But clings on like a hand from the grave. It's mainly a front for political tools now for whenever taxes might be raised on the wealthy. It has been effective for the ultra-wealthy (there are no ultra-wealthy shot-callers here.)  Look at that wealth gap. 

It's easy to catch up with the current state of play in economics.

Defeat is a bitch for many of clowns fronting for deficit fear mongering - such as Lou Dobbs, Joe Kiernan, Rick Santelli, and countless others. The Chamber of Commerce still peddles the debt mongering, but look who they speak for on the national level. Stop pretending they give a fuck about you. They don't. 

TLDR: Business news is not economic news. 

+++++++++++++++++++++

Back to Joe Biden. There is a compromise out there. The "Debt Fear-Mongers" appear when taxes may be raised on the wealthy. They trigger the middle class by pretending they will be crushed by taxes. And we end up here. Over and over again. Let's put aside their fears.
 

  Hide contents

My economics are left libertarian. Many on this board are in that quadrant - regardless of political label. 

Here's the compromise. Our economy has deflationary headwinds that continue. Basic Keynesian logic says: Don't raise taxes when deflationary collapse could result.

We have over-inflated assets (financial and real estate market) that is sensitive to the disruptions we face. We have continuing Covid domestically, but, worse than that, we rely on foreign supply chains that are faltering with the virus and political turmoil, including China. They fail, we suffer economically.

I am not a Keynesian and modern economic conservatives are no friend of Keynes either. How about we compromise and do what Keynes would have done. We agree no taxes to pay for the debt created by this bill.  . . .  .

That's what Semenema is holding out for - no new taxes. Let's give her the win - that crazy Maverick that she is.

We can sell the debt because we always pay our bills in USD, which is still accepted all over the world. 

Deal?  

[wildcat09 29237]

Republicans don’t know shit about and have never known shit about economics. They proudly abhor empiricism, think actual data has no place in economics, and think it’s all about reasoning from certain assumptions about human behavior. Of course, conservatives have a really shitty understanding of people so their reasoning is usually shit, their assumptions are even shittier, and they refuse to acknowledge any data that contradicts their assumptions or conclusions.

[washparkhorn 9935]

@DalTxHornFanI had to dumb it down for the SEC lurkers. Sorry. 

Edited September 30, 2021 by washparkhorn

[DalTxHornFan 3085]

2 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

@DalTxHornFanI had to dumb it down for the SEC lurkers. Sorry. 

Oh, I get it.  It just isn't the own that you think it is.

 

[Dbeasy 14966]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

I just love how invariably, 100% without fail, “oh my god the deficit” becomes an issue of serious, deep concern….when Dems are in power. But it doesn’t even merit a shoulder shrug when the Repubs are - multi trillion dollar deficit-feeding measures fly through without a hiccup. It’s fucking comically absurd. And the same monkeys dance to the fake music every time.

It isn’t just conservatives playing political games. There are a lot of people like myself who have been enraged for a long time about our irresponsible spending policies, especially the irresponsible tax cut.

But just because republicans have been irresponsible doesn’t mean democrats can be even more irresponsible with no criticism.  

And if the whole strategy of the Democratic Party is to believe in the extreme economist viewpoint that excessive deficit spending not only doesn’t matter but is actually a good idea, then our problems as a country, and our political divisions are going to get way worse fast. As bad as republicans have looked over the last few years with Trump, Democrats disconnecting completely from economic reality is just as bad, or worse. 

 

[Willfully Horn 7913]

Raise taxes. Cut defense spending. Savagely.
 

Stonekettle:

”Cut the F-35. Kill it. 

Cut all new nuclear carrier construction. 

Cut it all. No new weapons. And so on.”

 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

I just love how invariably, 100% without fail, “oh my god the deficit” becomes an issue of serious, deep concern….when Dems are in power. But it doesn’t even merit a shoulder shrug when the Repubs are - multi trillion dollar deficit-feeding measures fly through without a hiccup. It’s fucking comically absurd. And the same monkeys dance to the fake music every time.

Aside from people like Dbeasy who seem to believe in an economical value system that is consistent beyond basic party politics (though itself is political, of course), I think it can be summed up pretty generally with an old political joke. Stop me if you've heard this before, it's a classic everyone's heard:

DonkeyCigars clears his throat [ahem] and pulls out a pitch pipe and blows it, trying to strike the right chord of pastiche and humor to honor the late, great Norm MacDonald:

If you are young and generally of the male sex and find yourself to be of the fiscally conservative persuasion AND you are worried about taxes eating into your monies for your own petty and self interests...and in your youth you've begun to concern yourself with a worry about an inextinguishable deficit-- a deficit that grows and grows, never stopping, just constantly growing in exponential and pained growth, like an otherworldly creature that groans as it grows by feeding off the ever abundant foolishness that is the natural state of the flawed and wickedness of the human condition. If you find yourself in that hellscape mindset...[pause a full beat]:

This is because you have no heart.

If, on the other hand, you are an older person. Maybe someone who is well into your middle ages, gray or graying and having lived through some things. You've loved. You've lost. You've made mistakes and you have regrets. Regrets that keep you up at night sometimes and regrets which torture you. Regrets who haunt you in those ungodly hours between being awake and asleep, when all that you can discern in the ghostly dark is the thumping of both your anxious heart against your rib cage and the dampness of the sheets you soil. If you are so fortunate to live to this age [pause a beat] and you find you are economically liberal AND you find comfort with the instability of the fiscally unknown and what can only be financial theory in service of the advancement of human mercy...using money to assuage whatever pain and misery -- the only real currency in this brutish world-- to relieve the pain and misery of your fellow human beings. And in doing so, maybe helping to salve that pain and misery in your soul that could only happen if we wouldn't let people hoard stupid little papers [pause a half beat]:

Then it's because you have no money.

[Sheepish smile at telling a stupid, shaggy dog re-imagining of a pithy classic]

Edited September 30, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[hornmpa96 2598]

5 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

It isn’t just conservatives playing political games. There are a lot of people like myself who have been enraged for a long time about our irresponsible spending policies, especially the irresponsible tax cut.

But just because republicans have been irresponsible doesn’t mean democrats can be even more irresponsible with no criticism.  

And if the whole strategy of the Democratic Party is to believe in the extreme economist viewpoint that excessive deficit spending not only doesn’t matter but is actually a good idea, then our problems as a country, and our political divisions are going to get way worse fast. As bad as republicans have looked over the last few years with Trump, Democrats disconnecting completely from economic reality is just as bad, or worse. 

 

You keep focusing on the spending side but ignore the revenue side. This specific proposal is supposed to be deficit neutral. Based on your comments, you either believe the spending will be passed without the associated tax increases or the tax increases won’t actually pay for the spending. 

[Anastasis 23394]

4 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Raise taxes. Cut defense spending. Savagely.
 

Stonekettle:

”Cut the F-35. Kill it. 

Cut all new nuclear carrier construction. 

Cut it all. No new weapons. And so on.”

 

While I agree that we need deep spending cuts and military spending is first up, if we are going to continue driving this thing off the cliff fiscally (and you know we are), we are going to, eventually, really need those air craft carriers. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21060]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

While I agree that we need deep spending cuts and military spending is first up, if we are going to continue driving this thing off the cliff fiscally (and you know we are), we are going to, eventually, really need those air craft carriers. 

And if China and Russia are indeed in possession of "Carrier Killer" torpedoes that we're defenseless against, then that just leaves us w/ nukes.   

[Anastasis 23394]

3 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

And if China and Russia are indeed in possession of "Carrier Killer" torpedoes that we're defenseless against, then that just leaves us w/ nukes.   

Some random brown people better keep their head on a swivel. 

[StruggleBus 3922]

9 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

Our cost to finance all that debt is small - since the demand for our debt remains robust.  The debt fear-mongers should trust the markets.

After all, our economic monetary invested trillions to prop up the financial markets early in the Pandemic (and that continues). 

We have had 50 years of austerity and resulting decay. Everyone sees it, but blame the victims of austerity rather than the creators of the policy.

The nations who buy our debt wish we would spend more money to clean up what has become of America.

We continue to let the seed corn rot. That's not healthy for our economy. 

And remember one more thing, the United States is not a household with a budget. That is the wrong perspective to view a sovereign with the world's preferred currency. Snap out of it. 

No offense intended. 

Lol

[Dbeasy 14966]

19 minutes ago, hornmpa96 said:

You keep focusing on the spending side but ignore the revenue side. This specific proposal is supposed to be deficit neutral. Based on your comments, you either believe the spending will be passed without the associated tax increases or the tax increases won’t actually pay for the spending. 

No, as I listed above the question is not how to pay for the 3.5T. It's how to address the massive deficit spending that is already happening, PLUS the massive underfunding of social security and medicare. It is disengenious to say that everything is being paid for, while at the same time still having these huge financial holes.

An earlier poster suggested significant cuts in military spending. In my opinion, that really is a reasonable path to solving the problem. The military budget is so bloated it's unbelievable, but people are so dumb they don't realize the republicans are just shills for the military industrial complex. And I realize it's very difficult for the democrats to propose a massive spending plan and major cuts to the military. Political propaganda will kill them on it.  It's a tough situation.

[Homercles 10205]

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm consistently kinda worried about it and neither party assuages that worry.  It's not the sole reason not to do worthwhile things, but it should be a consideration.

A real infrastructure bill, including "human infrastructure," is sorely needed.  I'm more cheesed about the tax cut than the cost of an infrastructure bill.

This.  And I moderately benefited from that ‘middle class tax cut’…howling about the cost of investing in real, required, important programs that should benefit most of us seems so stupid when that ‘middle class tax cut’ has generally proven to benefit the very wealthy + massive stock buybacks from corporations.  
 

Not to mention something as utterly useless as a border wall.  What was that going to cost?

Seeks like Manchin just saw an opportunity to get his name out there and control the party due to the slimmest of senate majorities.  
 

I worry about the debt and climate changes my kids are going to inherit…and crumbling roads, bridges, etc.  
 

So yeah I’m guilty of name calling and generalities…just seems like every time I hear of a policy that makes me say ‘that makes sense’, 95% of the time it’s one group of people/politicians who oppose it.  

[GW Hayduke 1952]

I must have missed something.  Isn't the 3.5T spending bill going to be fully paid for?  Why are people even discussing debt?  Is the debt concern with this bill just a talking point to fire up the rubes, when the real concern of their puppet masters are that the wealthy will pay for the 3.5T spending bill? 

[wild_turkey 3152]

Why are most topics on this forum combined into massive meta threads?

If I want to read what people are saying about the spending plan, it seems like I should be able to come to this forum and click a thread titled “2021 Social Spending Plan”. Instead, I have to hunt around for it and eventually figure out it’s hidden in a thread titled “Joe Biden 2021” which has 6,300+ posts and a month ago was discussing Afghanistan and a month from now will be discussing Covid again. Then if the social spending plan becomes relevant again in 6 months, it’s very difficult to reference the present discussion because it’s buried 2,000 posts upstream.

This is absurd. I don’t get it.