Biden/Harris Legislative/Policy Discussions - Now with a Republican House starting 2023

[Jabbyrwock]

46 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

 

looks like the post COVID in desde in wages resulted in the government getting more payroll and income tax revenue…

 

[Larry]

45 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

In 2022 the government spent 6.3trillion

in 2021 the government spent 6.8trillion.

so .5 of the 1.2 trillion was just due to spending less. I’m guessing on COVID measures.

 

So, your point is that, before the Republicans took over, the Democrats, in "sole control" of the government, 

 

1)  Cut spending

2)  Increased revenue

3)  Slashed the federal deficit.  

 

 

[Larry]

22 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

"He started it 😭" usually isn't a good argument around here. 

 

I dunno.  It sure seems popular.  

 

Maybe a better analogy:  

 

It's always the football player who throws the second punch that gets the penalty flags.  

[CousinsCowgirl84]

27 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

So, your point is that, before the Republicans took over, the Democrats, in "sole control" of the government, 

 

1)  Cut spending

2)  Increased revenue

3)  Slashed the federal deficit.  

 

 

My point was just to give the reasons why the deficit was cut.
 

 

But also, let me know when we have a government surplus… becuase that’s what we need. Spending less on credit is still spending on credit.

Edited January 17, 2023 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Larry]

Just now, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

My point was just to give the reasons why the deficit was cut. But also, let me know when we have a government surplus… becuase that’s what we need. Spending less on credit is still spending on credit.

 

1)  The last two years of the Clinton administration.  In fact, one of the stated reasons for the GOP tax cuts when W took office, was to get rid of that surplus.  Because we all know that if the surplus continues, the Democrats will some day spend it.  

 

2)  No, it's not "what we need".  There is no such need, and history seems pretty clear that it's actually pretty good economics to run a deficit.  (Although, granted, a smaller one that we've got.)  

 

 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

30 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

1)  The last two years of the Clinton administration.  In fact, one of the stated reasons for the GOP tax cuts when W took office, was to get rid of that surplus.  Because we all know that if the surplus continues, the Democrats will some day spend it.  

im aware, part of the reason Clinton was able to enjoy a budget surplus was the .com bubble generating all kinds of capital gains and corporate taxes.

 

30 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

 

 

2)  No, it's not "what we need".  There is no such need, and history seems pretty clear that it's actually pretty good economics to run a deficit.  (Although, granted, a smaller one that we've got.)  

 

 

Well, maybe, but if the is the case why even cheer about a reduction of deficit spending at all? 

[gbear]

Chear the deficit reduction because there seems to be a sweet spot where other countries want your currency enough to allow the fed to provide softer downturns.

 

We have been fortunate to be the world's default currency to save value. Thus we can print money without destroying its perceived value allowing us to spend our way out of recessions. That is a benefit most here take for granted while the rest of the world wishes they could do that to ease their recessions. Note much of the reason the dollar is thought to be stable is because we and the world have said the u.s. economy is so strong, the dollar is a safe bet. To keep our economy humming, we make more dollars and borrow. The fed targets an inflation rate which puts some limits in how much they can just print money. So we borrow the rest, and the world becomes more invested in making sure the dollars they have retain value.

 

There is an old joke. A man borrow 100k from the bank. The bank owns him. However of he borrows 100 billion he owns the bank. When it comes to U.S. debt and the world economy, we want to make sure we set terms...so there is a value to being the side of the equation where we are closer to the billion dollar borrower...except we borrow trillions. 😀

[Cooked Crack]

 

[ClaytoAli]

21 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

 

 

They are not going to like all of these kinds of people at the White House….just as they were calming down.

[China]

BIDEN CALLS IN GHOSTBURGER TAKEOUT ORDER, LEAVES EMPLOYEE SPEECHLESS

 

rittany Spaddy has never seen “The American President,” Aaron Sorkin’s 1995 romantic comedy, but she practically lived through one of the film’s most memorable scenes, the one in which a flower shop worker collapses as the president of the United States. come in and try to order roses.

 

Spaddy was called to work at Ghostburger on Tuesday, her day off, apparently because a VIP was coming to the burger joint in DC and the place needed extra staff to handle the crowd. But the real agenda, said Ghostburger co-founder Josh Phillips, was that the owners wanted Spaddy to be there when President Biden called to place an order. The White House had made the arrangements the day before with Phillips and his wife and co-founder, Kelly.

“She won that call,” Phillips said of Spaddy, who handles virtually everything front of house at Ghostburger, one of the few feel-good stories of the pandemic.

 

None of Ghostburger’s owners told Spaddy who was calling. They just said ‘there’s an important call coming in today,'” Spaddy said. Thought it might be DC Mayor Muriel E. Bowser or some pop culture figure. He didn’t expect the president.

 

That might explain her reaction, which harkens back to a more innocent time when a sitting American president might inspire something close to awe instead of an emotional tweet meant to signal your tribe. When Biden called after 1 p.m. Tuesday, Spaddy just…well, froze.

 

“I was a bit stunned when I answered the phone, and I’m not normally like that,” she said. “Because I heard the voice and I said, ‘None! No way! No way!'”

 

Spaddy recognized the voice before the president could identify himself. She took his order. Biden requested a single Ghostburger with bacon, but no cheese and no “scary sauce.” He ordered one more Ghostburger with cheese, but no sauce. Based on a photo posted on the president’s official Twitter account, Biden claimed the bacon burger. Vice President Harris nodded at the cheeseburger. They both ordered fries.

 

 

Click on the link for the full article

[China]

Numbers Don’t Lie. Biden Kept His Promise on Improving Obamacare.

 

In a speech on Nov. 2, 2020, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden promised, “I’ll not only restore Obamacare; I’ll build on it.”

 

Two years and counting since then, how is he doing in meeting that promise?

 

KHN has teamed up with our partners at PolitiFact to monitor 100 key promises — including this one — made by Biden during the 2020 presidential campaign. The pledges touch on issues related to improving the economy, responding to calls for racial justice, and combating climate change. On health care, they range from getting covid-19 under control and improving veterans’ health care to codifying Roe v. Wade. KHN has recently done progress checks on the administration’s pledges to lower the costs of prescription drugs and to reduce the nation’s maternal mortality rate.

 

Eight days into his tenure as president, Biden signed an executive order aimed at strengthening Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. A couple of months later, he signed his first major piece of legislation, the American Rescue Plan, which included provisions expanding eligibility for subsidies and increasing premium tax credits available to help low- and moderate-income Americans purchase ACA coverage.

 

That legislation also offered financial incentives to encourage the 12 states that had declined to expand Medicaid eligibility to do so.

 

The consumer subsidies were originally set to expire this year but were extended by the Inflation Reduction Act, which Biden signed into law Aug. 16, after much debate and without any Republican votes. The expanded eligibility for subsidies was also continued by this measure.

 

In October, the Biden administration addressed another issue in the ACA, the so-called family glitch, which prevented some people with job-based insurance from qualifying for subsidies.

Those items alone prompt “an unequivocal yes,” to the question of whether Biden has met his campaign promise, said Sabrina Corlette, co-director of the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University.

 

Click on the link for the full article

[Tundra scout]

It’s all going just great under this inept administration 

 

Low-income households are being hit hardest by inflation because surging food and housing costs make up more of their spending, according to a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

 

The finding marks a reversal of the pattern that prevailed when consumer prices initially spiked in 2021 and early 2022, which showed the most severe impact on middle-income Americans.

 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/01/18/inflation-hurts-lower-income-households-food-housing-costs-rise/11074945002/

[CousinsCowgirl84]

6 minutes ago, Tundra scout said:

It’s all going just great under this inept administration 

 

Low-income households are being hit hardest by inflation because surging food and housing costs make up more of their spending, according to a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

 

The finding marks a reversal of the pattern that prevailed when consumer prices initially spiked in 2021 and early 2022, which showed the most severe impact on middle-income Americans.

 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/01/18/inflation-hurts-lower-income-households-food-housing-costs-rise/11074945002/

Is it surprising that low income wage earners would be the most hurt by increases in the price of necessities?

[tshile]

12 minutes ago, Tundra scout said:

Low-income households are being hit hardest by inflation because surging food and housing costs make up more of their spending, according to a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

 

The finding marks a reversal of the pattern that prevailed when consumer prices initially spiked in 2021 and early 2022, which showed the most severe impact on middle-income Americans.

I find it interesting people like you can identify how lower ends of the economic spectrum are hurt sometimes, but not all of the times. 
 

Like you found how they were hurt during inflation under Biden. 
 

but I never see you talking about how they are (or would be) hurt by any number of regressive GOP tax ideas. 
 

Or any of the number of things the GOP argued during Covid. 
 

You show you’re capable of understanding the general idea - but only when you want to. 

7 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Is it surprising that low income wage earners would be the most hurt by increases in the price of necessities?

Brought to you by the same people that:

 

 

want a “fair tax” with a national sales tax of 30% 

 

complain that “50% of the country doesn’t pay taxes” (cause they’re too poor to pay taxes

 

are completely unwilling to have any conversation about improving minimum wage 

 

are against programs like snap, wick, Medicaid

 

continue to propose ways to redirect public education money to private schools 

 

Deny the impacts of global warming and Covid - two things disproportionately affecting lower income people 

 

etc

[goskins10]

13 minutes ago, Tundra scout said:

It’s all going just great under this inept administration 

 

Low-income households are being hit hardest by inflation because surging food and housing costs make up more of their spending, according to a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

 

The finding marks a reversal of the pattern that prevailed when consumer prices initially spiked in 2021 and early 2022, which showed the most severe impact on middle-income Americans.

 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/01/18/inflation-hurts-lower-income-households-food-housing-costs-rise/11074945002/

 

What policies are the republicans putting forward to ease inflation for lower income families? They have the House now. They could present legislation right away. They managed to pass a bill to cut IRS funding to go after rich people and add $43B to the debt and a couple other idiotic pieces of legislation. If this is such a huge problem and they are truly concerned, where are thier solutions to inflation? 

 

 

 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

Just now, goskins10 said:

 

What policies are the republicans putting forward to ease inflation for lower income families? They have the House now. They could present legislation right away. They managed to pass a bill to cut IRS funding to go after rich people and add $43B to the debt and a couple other idiotic pieces of legislation. If this is such a huge problem and they are truly concerned, where are thier solutions to inflation? 

 

 

 

Perhaps you should allow @Tundra scout the opportunity to explain how cutting IRS funding (and thusly their ability to collect due taxes) will help reduce the pressure on low-income earners before you write them off as idiotic.

 

🤪

[GoCommiesGo]

I'm shocked that people still respond to @Tundra scout. 

 

Guy does a quick post, watches a few people make responses, but never comes back.

 

Dude is popping a post, leaning back and just snickering to himself "Got those libs, who's the alpha now!" as he watches some reactions roll in and clicks over to the Daily Wire to bathe in the essence of Ben Shapiro. 

 

You're all giving him what he wants, a reaction, he has no interest in real discussion. 

 

 

Edited January 19, 2023 by GoCommiesGo

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, GoCommiesGo said:

I'm shocked that people still respond to @Tundra scout. 

 

Guy does a quick post, watches a few people make responses, but never comes back.

 

Dude is popping a post, leaning back and just snickering to himself "Got those libs, who's the alpha now!" as he watches some reactions roll in and clicks over to the Daily Wire to bathe in the essence of Ben Shapiro. 

 

You're all giving him what he wants, a reaction, he has no interest in real discussion. 

 

 

 

 

You are of course mostly right. However, in terms of "owning the libs', I don't think that is true. I am sure to the underinformed that is gullible enough to post such silliiness they feel a sense a false fullfillment. However, people like them do not upset me in the least. It's actually helpful to show how uninformed most of the right is. Nothing but silly drivebys with ignorant bull****. No policy discussion or constructive contribution. It's more pathetic than anything else.

 

I will continue to ask for policy discussion from them when they do thier little drive-bys'. It's proof there is no intent to engage in honest discussion. 

 

 

 

[Larry]

"The Republican Agenda", for 30 years, has been "make things worse, and then yell real loud that the other guy did it".

 

And they've been successful with it. It's why they fully believe that them intentionally crashing the US economy, and yelling "he made he do it because he wouldn't cut Social Security" is a political move that will help them. 

[Cooked Crack]

 

 

[88Comrade2000]

Klain jumping a sinking ship? 

[China]

1 hour ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

Klain jumping a sinking ship? 

 

WTF are you talking about?  Most don't last 3 years, many not even 2.  In fact only 3 of the last 28 have made it at least 4 years.

 

Link

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

Klain jumping a sinking ship? 

 

More like it's past time to move on. It's a very tough job. Takes a lot out of people. Many don;t last this long. Klain has actually lasted longer. From the NY Times article posted above.

 

His resignation would mark a striking moment of turnover at the top of an administration that has been relatively stable through the first half of Mr. Biden’s term, and Mr. Klain takes pride that he has lasted longer than any other Democratic president’s first chief of staff in more than half a century. 

[Cooked Crack]

 

[China]

Biden Tells Gathering of Mayors ‘Defund the Police’ Not the Answer: ‘They Need More Funding’

 

President Joe Biden was enthusiastically applauded by a bipartisan gathering of city mayors at the White House this weekend when he said that, on matters of public safety, “the answer is not to defund the police.”

 

“They need more funding,” Biden said in the East Room when speaking to a group from the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

 

AS he was discussing funding from the federal government, Biden singled out a pair of mayors on the subject of public safety, starting with Mayor Indya Kincannon of Knoxville, Tennessee.

 

“You gave premium pay to police officers and firefighters to keep them on the job. That was a big deal!” he said.

 

He then pointed out that with money from the American Rescue Plan, Mayor John Giles of Mesa, Arizona “bought five new ambulances, hired behavioral health clinicians to help the fire department on crisis calls.”

 

“And by the way,” Biden said. “You know, when a cop turns up in a domestic violence case or someone’s standing on the edge of a bridge, they don’t need a cop. They need a psychologist with them.”

 

No applause could be heard for that line, and Biden added, “no I’m serious. We’re beginning to understand this all again.”

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

He's right on that last part, just look at the success they had implementing that in Denver, Eugene and other cities.