Rewarding fiscal irresponsibility...

[JohnLocke 115]

I'm not sure what covid relief has to do with rewarding blue states that were fiscally irresponsible pre-covid.   Not a good precedent.  It looks like the democrats have figured out how to get red states to pay for blue state public employee pensions. I don't get why any Texan is for this.

[Celery Man 20886]

can you tell us more about the sand and how it got in there?

[Biff Tannen 45495]

[Js1 85110]

The “blue state bailout” talking point isn’t that clever.

Edited March 13, 2021 by Js1

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

Well considering my state sends a shitload more to the feds than a lot of other states, it is only fucking right that they give it back.  @JohnLocke, your shit is tired and stale.

[David Dennison 18658]

4 minutes ago, JohnLocke said:

I'm not sure what covid relief has to do with rewarding blue states that were fiscally irresponsible pre-covid.   Not a good precedent.  It looks like the democrats have figured out how to get red states to pay for blue state public employee pensions. I don't get why any Texan is for this.

Blue states have been paying for red state fiscal irresponsibility since at least the Reagan administration.

[hookemATL 11610]

Man you a dumb motherfucker, for real. 

[Bruh Man 3160]

Here they come dusting off their tea party hats....idiots. 

[Dirk X West 772]

That thing that didn't matter from Jan 2017-Jan 2021 matters again.

[David Dennison 18658]

4 minutes ago, Dirk X West said:

That thing that didn't matter from Jan 2017-Jan 2021 matters again.

The Republicans!

 

[TwiceHorn 31280]

20 minutes ago, JohnLocke said:

he democrats have figured out how to get red states to pay for blue state public employee pensions

What does this even mean?  Show your work.

If you are going to play conservative that gives a rat's ass about fiscal responsibility, you first need to acknowledge that red states are mostly federal "takers," and that their tax cut policies during boom times (instead of servicing debt and maintaining government services) are fiscally irresponsible.

Edited March 13, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[bad_teammate 13132]

11 minutes ago, JohnLocke said:

I'm not sure what covid relief has to do with rewarding blue states that were fiscally irresponsible pre-covid.  

COVID relief isn't about rewarding fiscally irresponsible states, so I can sympathize with your confusion.

[LABEVO 928]

We now have the answer to this thread

 

[GRHorn 105]

11 minutes ago, JohnLocke said:

I'm not sure what covid relief has to do with rewarding blue states that were fiscally irresponsible pre-covid.   Not a good precedent.  It looks like the democrats have figured out how to get red states to pay for blue state public employee pensions. I don't get why any Texan is for this.

Covid relief has nothing to do with bailing out pensions, but the fiscal responsibility fight was conceded by both sides long ago. We will print money until outside forces stop us. Once you acknowledge that and prepare yourself for it, it doesn’t bother you as much. 

Might as well lie back and enjoy it. 

[hookemATL 11610]

14 minutes ago, JohnLocke said:

I'm not sure what covid relief has to do with rewarding blue states that were fiscally irresponsible pre-covid.   Not a good precedent.  It looks like the democrats have figured out how to get red states to pay for blue state public employee pensions. I don't get why any Texan is for this.

“Blep blep blep ima dumb motherfucker”

[tantric superman 4667]

16 minutes ago, JohnLocke said:

I don't get why any Texan is for this.

Or for this.

[Biff Tannen 45495]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

What does this even mean?  Show your work.

If you are going to play conservative that gives a rat's ass about fiscal responsibility, you first need to acknowledge that blue states are mostly federal "takers," and that their tax cut policies during boom times (instead of servicing debt and maintaining government services) are fiscally irresponsible.

I believe you mean red states.

[jimmyjazz 45558]

In case anybody cares, a group of people that no doubt excludes @JohnLocke, the apportionment of funds to states was tied to unemployment rates.  Average blue state unemployment is 7.61%, whereas it is 5.03% in red states.  Furthermore, the cost of living tends to be higher in blue states.

Per capita bailout amounted to $1,278 per person in blue states, and $1,017 in red states.  This is a 25% difference, not some windfall, but a simple function of higher unemployment and higher costs of living.

In short, stop being a disingenuous troll, Johnnie.

[Js1 85110]

I guess red states and republicans don’t understand that some state governments don’t actively despise their residents, as blue states have done their own unemployment supplements for COVID, stimulus programs and money to save small businesses. And they don’t get to operate at a deficit like the federal government. 

[TwiceHorn 31280]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

I believe you mean red states.

I always do that.  Dammit.

[GRHorn 105]

Just for the record, nobody on this thread sees any need to check spending in any way. Correct?

[David Dennison 18658]

Just now, GRHorn said:

Just for the record, nobody on this thread sees any need to check spending in any way. Correct?

Incorrect. We should most definitely stop spending as much money as we do on the military.

[wildcat09 29256]

If the GOP-controlled federal government last year had spent more of its own fucking resources preventing the spread of covid instead of intentionally leaving cash-strapped states to do it themselves, states wouldn't need so much financial help now.

[jimmyjazz 45558]

4 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Just for the record, nobody on this thread sees any need to check spending in any way. Correct?

I'll answer that question the moment you can prove consistent concern on your part over the 2017-2019 budget deficit.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

6 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Just for the record, nobody on this thread sees any need to check spending in any way. Correct?

[Js1 85110]

4 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Just for the record, nobody on this thread sees any need to check spending in any way. Correct?

Not when the flip side is tax cuts for the 1% so we can have less revenue and then cut government services because we “suddenly can’t afford it.”

We know your game. You don’t get to talk about checking spending when your economic policy is to cut taxes during a boom. Which is fucking stupid.  

[GRHorn 105]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Incorrect. We should most definitely stop spending as much money as we do on the military.

I figured someone would say that. But would you then prefer to use those “savings” elsewhere and maintain the same level of deficit spending?

[pyrohornIII 4809]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Incorrect. We should most definitely stop spending as much money as we do on the military.

Well now that's necessary spending, just like the billions annually in corporate welfare, or farm subsidies we have been shelling out due to Trump's dumbass trade war.   That stuff is necessary, but this spending isn't, and GR mocks us for not understanding the difference.

[GRHorn 105]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'll answer that question the moment you can prove consistent concern on your part over the 2017-2019 budget deficit.

I’ve always been concerned about the budget deficit but there’s not really an argument to have at this point. That train has sailed as Austin Powers said. 

[David Dennison 18658]

Just now, GRHorn said:

I’ve always been concerned about the budget deficit but there’s not really an argument to have at this point. That train has sailed as Austin Powers said. 

Why?

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13546]

Suddenly people who were mute when we added over a trillion per year to the deficit giving people gold toilets tax cuts and handed over a BILLION in taxpayer-backed funds to the tax-exempt Catholic Church in the first round of covid relief have opinions again on fiscal responsibility. 

[GRHorn 105]

Just now, David Dennison said:

Why?

You cannot stop the Washington establishment on either side from going ape shit on the things they want to spend money on. So why argue about it?
 

I was curious if anyone else sees any problems with it continuing unabated. 

[SydneyCarton 47884]

32 minutes ago, JohnLocke said:

I'm not sure what covid relief has to do with rewarding blue states that were fiscally irresponsible pre-covid.   Not a good precedent.  It looks like the democrats have figured out how to get red states to pay for blue state public employee pensions. I don't get why any Texan is for this.

Other posters have made all the salient points about disingenuous debt concern, adding 6 or 8 trillion under 4 years of trump, etc. So I’ll just say that you’re a worthless piece of shit. 

Edited March 13, 2021 by SydneyCarton

[David Dennison 18658]

Just now, GRHorn said:

You cannot stop the Washington establishment on either side from going ape shit on the things they want to spend money on. So why argue about it?
 

I was curious if anyone else sees any problems with it continuing unabated. 

And I'm curious as to why you've always been worried about the deficit.

[Celery Man 20886]

and you don't have to end your title with an ellipsis - we know you didn't finish your thought

[GRHorn 105]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

And I'm curious as to why you've always been worried about the deficit.

Because the currency debasement and inflation that eventually goes along with it are undesirable. 

[Sawbonz 27434]

39 minutes ago, JohnLocke said:

I'm not sure what covid relief has to do with rewarding blue states that were fiscally irresponsible pre-covid.   Not a good precedent.  It looks like the democrats have figured out how to get red states to pay for blue state public employee pensions. I don't get why any Texan is for this.

I would think you would be for letting blue states keep more of their hard earned dollars rather than sending it via the nanny state to freeloading red states 

[jimmyjazz 45558]

4 key budget deficits (Obama + 3 Trump, no covid effect included):

2017: $665B

2018: $779B (1.17X 2017)

2019: $984B (1.48X 2017)

2020: $1,083 (1.63X 2017)

 

 

[Neonmoon 38127]

Maybe if Texas wasn’t so poorly run, the federal government could stop sending it disaster relief money for poor infrastructure related disasters 

[YChang 3430]

4 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Because the currency debasement and inflation that eventually goes along with it are undesirable. 

Makes sense. Admittedly my go-to source of left of center sources for podcasts, newspaper, etc... doesn’t seem to call out inflation as being that big a concern from economist or Fed chairs for several decades now. Is this more of an irrational fear versus lack of confidence in the tools the Fed has to control rising inflation?

[David Dennison 18658]

Just now, GRHorn said:

Because the currency debasement and inflation that eventually goes along with it are undesirable. 

It's been 40 years since this was an issue.

Any day now.

 

[bolverk 29399]

Looks like Texas will need a bailout given that revenue collection in our state was among the worst last year - likely due to oil.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/01/business/covid-state-tax-revenue.html

Edited March 13, 2021 by bolverk

[TwiceHorn 31280]

I see now what OP refers to.  It is $86B to Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. to help backstop failing pension plans.

They are not public pensions.

They are, however, union pensions.

Has zero to do with state's fiscal responsibility.

[YChang 3430]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

I see now what OP refers to.  It is $86B to Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. to help backstop failing pension plans.

They are not public pensions.

They are, however, union pensions.

Has zero to do with state's fiscal responsibility.

That’s a good call out and a fair argument maybe kinda sort from the OP. Still... this is a comprehensive relief plan to help out Americans. And I’m ok with that. 

[Sawbonz 27434]

24 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Just for the record, nobody on this thread sees any need to check spending in any way. Correct?

I’m all for checking spending. There hasn’t been a republican proposal to cut spending in a meaningful way (meaning deep military cuts and reforming Medicare) in the past 20 years. So if we are going to go broke I’d rather spend the money on average citizens and not corporations and 100M- and billionaires 

[Neonmoon 38127]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

I’m all for checking spending. There hasn’t been a republican proposal to cut spending in a meaningful way (meaning deep military cuts and reforming Medicare) in the past 20 years. So if we are going to go broke I’d rather spend the money on average citizens and not corporations and 100M- and billionaires 

[TexArcher 37518]

48 minutes ago, JohnLocke said:

I'm not sure what covid relief has to do with rewarding blue states that were fiscally irresponsible pre-covid.   Not a good precedent.  It looks like the democrats have figured out how to get red states to pay for blue state public employee pensions. I don't get why any Texan is for this.

Hey texags troll: who is making sure the chickens fuck while you're screwing around on the internet?

[Celery Man 20886]

3 minutes ago, YChang said:

That’s a good call out and a fair argument maybe kinda sort from the OP. Still... this is a comprehensive relief plan to help out Americans. And I’m ok with that. 

to be a good call out and a fair argument he would have to call something out and make an argument, neither of which he did. it looks like more of a bad faith drive by

[YChang 3430]

1 minute ago, Celery Man said:

to be a good call out and a fair argument he would have to call something out and make an argument, neither of which he did. it looks like more of a bad faith drive by

What can I say... I try to be way too nice sometimes. <shrug>

[JohnLocke 115]

18 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

And I'm curious as to why you've always been worried about the deficit.

There is plenty of reason to worry about the debt.  Back in the old days of capitalism, when the government borrowed 2 trillion dollars, they had to go out on the open market and sell treasury bonds.  This tended to make interest rates rise, and acted somewhat as a brake on excessive borrowing. Now that republicans and democrats have figured out how to skip this step by having the fed buy the bonds,  I don't see any brakes on spending.  This grand experiment can't end well. But it will be much harder on the poor and middle class, who won't have appreciating assets to counter balance rising prices. Wages will struggle to keep up. So far the rich are doing great in this environment. They will likely continue to do well as they can borrow at low rates and watch their assets increase in value.  If you set up an economic plan specifically to benefit the rich, you would be hard pressed to come up with anything better.  And yeah, Trump and the Republicans were horrible on the deficit. Now the democrats are in "Hold my beer" mode. Next up 2 trillion for infrastructure, then 2 trillion for the green new deal.