Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Biden/Harris Potential Legislative/Policy Agenda Discussions


goskins10
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Burgold said:

This isn't about Tom, but I always thought it was dumb to have the opposition rebuttal immediately following the President's speech. It should happen 24 hours later. That way, it can actually address what was said and not speak in general platitudes and assumptions. Mind you, they would still spin, lie, and twist facts, but at least it would be on topic.

 

Haha.  I just responded to someone saying this exact same thing on twitter. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, skinfan2k said:

Tim Scott is an idiot.  Token move by Republicans lol


“We want to reach across the aisle”

 

Also Republicans: “go choke on a ...” 

 

Dude pulled a “read the bill” line on legislation that actual legal scholars called complete, unabashed, bull****. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Corcaigh said:

The very wealthy typically pay a much lower tax rate than high-earning salaried workers because of the structure of capital gains taxes

 

but they pay more dollars.....  fair share is subjective....

Edited by CousinsCowgirl84
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

but they pay more dollars.....  fair share is subjective....

 

I'm not sure subjective is the right term.  People may differ on their opinion of what a fair share is, but it doesn't mean all of those opinions are necessarily valid or correct.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Burgold said:

This isn't about Tom, but I always thought it was dumb to have the opposition rebuttal immediately following the President's speech

Exactly. It’s stupid. What he said was written days ago without knowing what Biden would say

 

And the thing is why would anyone accept that? It’s not like this is some deep secret we’re exposing everyone understands he didn’t write the speech after hearing what Biden said. So - what’s the point. Who watches that and thinks “oh this is good stuff”?

 

what an incredibly dumb system that guarantees the other side won’t rebut with alternative ideas.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, clietas said:

Tim Tim literally just said he's experienced racism and discrimination from liberals then immediately follows that up with America isn't racist. What?

1- Republicans struggle with the concept that democrats are real Americans.  
2- Republicans haven’t required things be consistent, or even rational, for a while now.  

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I don't think I've ever heard a more specific, detailed Presidential speech.

 

Very policy driven without all the shoutouts. Id like to see that more often, or at least once a year. Its what the state of the union should be.

Edited by Renegade7
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is there somewhere I can go to read a critical take on his speech?

 

it’s sad to say but even the places I used to find such things have gone off the deep end with Trump. I haven’t been impressed with a conservative take by it being thoughtful, factually accurate, and geared towards a problem/solution that doesn’t include pretending the problem doesn’t exist in.... I mean... the obama years...

 

something that goes deeper than “it’s expensive” and “job creators”

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, c slag said:

Kinda re-affirmed the American people made the correct choice in the last election 


He spent the first part of his speech noting that there were two women behind him and encouraging people to get vaccinated instead of claiming victory. 
 

He ran on a “we not me” platform. And he didn’t miss.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, tshile said:

So is there somewhere I can go to read a critical take on his speech?

 

it’s sad to say but even the places I used to find such things have gone off the deep end with Trump. I haven’t been impressed with a conservative take by it being thoughtful, factually accurate, and geared towards a problem/solution that doesn’t include pretending the problem doesn’t exist in.... I mean... the obama years...

 

something that goes deeper than “it’s expensive” and “job creators”

 

Not sure that this is as conservative as you might like (it's NPR), but a little more detailed:

 

Biden's Address To Congress, Annotated

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, China said:

 

Not sure that this is as conservative as you might like (it's NPR), but a little more detailed:

 

Biden's Address To Congress, Annotated

Love npr. I read/listen to them daily. 
 

that’s a great write up and it’s better than watching it cause there’s no applause issue and you can skip the fluff 3-4 paragraphs at a time 

 

I was looking for something more critical

 

like - why we shouldn’t do this

 

kinda seems like we need to do this...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, tshile said:

Love npr. I read/listen to them daily. 
 

that’s a great write up and it’s better than watching it cause there’s no applause issue and you can skip the fluff 3-4 paragraphs at a time 

 

I was looking for something more critical

 

like - why we shouldn’t do this

 

kinda seems like we need to do this...


well, I mean, on the economic stuff do you want the United States to look like Europe economically or not.

 

It seems to me that Biden is moving us more in line with policy that is popular in Europe.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:


well, I mean, on the economic stuff do you want the United States to look like Europe economically or not.

 

It seems to me that Biden is moving us more in line with policy that is popular in Europe.

 

 

 

I think the answer is "who cares?"

 

I don't care if it makes us look more like Europe, Taiwan or the Betazed colony on Alpha Centauri.  The only questions should be: do the policies achieve a necessary objective? are they effective? and are they in line with the Constitution?  The latter is, of course, open to interpretation (see the history of slavery for details).

 

I am so ungodly tired of people constantly bringing up whether this that or the other policy originates from wherever or whoever the hell.  IT IS IRRELEVANT.  Hell...I'm a huge supporter of renewable energy and environmental conservatorship.  Wanna know where the modern field of ecology originated?  Nazi Germany.  Like national parks?  Look up "Madison Grant", who was one of the greatest champions of national parks, and shudder.

 

A policy stands on its own merits regardless of who comes up with it or where it originates.  The reason this country is failing is because too many idiots vote for people, identity and tribe rather than an actual evaluation of policy.  If an intelligent policy ever came out of Louie Gomert's mouth (unlikely since I've never heard anything intelligent come out of the mans face hole) I'd probably support it.

 

So upshot:  your question should not be about who the policy makes us look like, but whether the policy achieves an object we need, is effective based on it prior implementations in other locations and whether it generates any constitutional concerns.

 

Apologies...I'm in a mood.  Had to deal with a Fox news only viewer recently and its way to early to start drinkin... 

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are looking at only per capita earnings?  Are we happier than Europe?  What about life expectency?  What about how do we treat the worste off amongst us compared to Europe? What is life like for the median wage earner?  I don't know the honest answer to the last couple of  questions, but it comes at your per capita gdp in a slightly different way because it looks at the income distribution in a way that will better capture what most of us experience.  We have seen a lot of data in the past few years about the top 1% or even 10% and how different their life is from most of ours.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Jabbyrwock said:

I think the answer is "who cares?"

Certainly if the substance of the counter argument is basically limited to:

-job creators

-socialism

-deficit

-sex blimps

 

 

I love reading critical analysis. I’m glued to an article when I find one. I love reading compelling, alternative ideas that have their roots in facts, pragmatism, and genuine purpose. 
 

The 3rd grade reading level fear mongering with no alternative solutions to real issues? Not so much. 

 

for all the hand wringing about “socialist Europe!” those people don’t do anything to offer any other path. 
 

i could consider complaining about how the Biden administration wants to tackle these issues, but I don’t even see the point if no one is offering an alternative. 
 

Looking back on the last election cycle from the presidency down to contested races down ballot, the core of the Republican argument to the American people was:

Radical leftist socialist democrat <name> <nonsensical rant>
 

the role of republicans in the debate over fixing some serious issues is reduced to being the guy in the group where after every rant everyone else goes “ooooooook, so...” and just moves in as if nothing was said. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

image.thumb.png.3fa4d4ff103445e62a2569275638280d.png

 

 

So you cherry picked the one graph that could be interpreted as supporting your position - although you have not actually presented a position just EU bad, US good. Providing some detail of what specifically about the EU model is a problem, it might help your argument. When you compare EU to US in terms of GDP PPP (purchasing power parity, that includes standard of living), the chart is much different (BTW the chart below comes from the same article you posted from. Source listed for others)

 

Two majors things that GDP do not show - the US spends 17% of the GDP on health care costs where the EU averages around 11%. The average retirement age in the EU is around 62 where it's 67 in the US. So Ok, you spend some more in taxes. Overall quality of life is better unless of course you are in the 1% here. Then life is great. There is more but those two should be enough. 

 

Source for 1st 2 charts: https://mgmresearch.com/us-vs-eu-a-gdp-comparison/#:~:text=of the EU.-,The EU has always been behind the US on GDP,capita in 2018 is %2419%2C398.

SOurce for the last chart: https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2020/07/how-does-the-us-healthcare-system-compare-to-other-countries#:~:text=The United States Spends More on Healthcare per Person than Other Wealthy Countries&text=In 2019%2C the United States,per capita across the OECD.

 

image.png.fc762f42f71f9680e329210282416af1.png

 

 

image.png.9e7e01d8ca0467f3deda2e9e438a98af.png

 

image.png.3227c9608484fa6bc8a4ab348b47cb02.png

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...