Fresh Start Political Thread

[mooby]

Originally Posted by sdskinsfan2001

I don't disagree with you. I think my above post reflects that. If I wasn't clear enough that they are full of shit on spending, REPUBLICANS ARE FULL OF SHIT ON SPENDING!

I wasn't just discussing this transportation bill specifically, moreso of spending in general in at minimum, my adult life (I'm 38). Although this bill reads more like a green new deal with some infrastructure money added in so it will get votes, and if you don't agree with the bill, you hate America's roads.

I'm all for spending money on freeways, roads, and bridges. Internet too. As Sunny pointed out, this bill spends more on boosting the electric vehicle market than it does on roads. Maybe fix the roads 1st before worrying about what is driving on them.

Give me a 2 trillion bill like this:

1.25 trillion to repair and rebuild bridges, highways and roads;
.25 trillion to expand high-speed broadband across the entire country;
.25 trillion to expand and improve power lines and spur a shift to clean energy; and
.25 trillion to reconnect urban neighborhoods cut off, bulldozed and blighted by highways planned and built with little to no regard for the people who lived along their routes.

And I'd be way more supportive.

Really I think you can cut it down to 1.5 trillion or less by pro-rating each of above accordingly.

I wouldn't disagree with you on your budget for the bill. The only problem I have is how much gov't money has been given to telecom providers to expand internet access in the last 30 years, but we never enforced it so they swindled the gov't and the taxpayers by not building it up to where it should be today. But that's a discussion for another day. Overall I agree with the majority of your post.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by mooby

I wouldn't disagree with you on your budget for the bill. The only problem I have is how much gov't money has been given to telecom providers to expand internet access in the last 30 years, but we never enforced it so they swindled the gov't and the taxpayers by not building it up to where it should be today. But that's a discussion for another day. Overall I agree with the majority of your post.

Government oversight in general is piss-fucking-poor all around in ensuring that tax money is spent properly on what it was designed for. It's absolutely pathetic. But it's not their money, so they don't care. Not to include any kickbacks they get from those companies.

Cheers.

That's my political posting for the day. Unless I have beer later tonight if work sucks lol.

[Chico23231]

The smartest money the government would ever spend would bring in outside 3rd party auditor and go through one area at a time. And then prioritize lean strategy with outside consultation

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by nonniey

If the proposal was 3t then your post would say spent 3T on tax cuts, if it was 10T then your post would say 10t on tax cuts. Your playing games here with the facts - It was 1.5t in tax cuts. Oh and tax cuts aren't spending and never have been. Tax cuts are going to be off set with increased revenue receipts, spending isn't. As is usually the case the 2017 tax cuts exceeded CBO projections on tax receipts (ie the actual cost was lower than projected thru 2019) and underperformed Republican projections on them. Oh and when if comes to CBO projections on spending effects the actual costs usually exceed their projections (Their assessment of Obamacare being a perfect example of this).

Spending is the issue that never seems to be addressed. BTW Trump was just as bad as a Dem when it came to spending (Guess because in my book he really is a Dem at heart). Spending has it's place but spending like the Greeks recently did doesn't and will lead to disaster.

It was 1.9 , or 2 so no, im not playing games with the facts but ill let you and SD get back to your little thing you got going on.

[SunnySide]

On paper it was 1.5T bc it had to be for reconciliation, but if the personal tax cut was made permanent it would be 2T.

The more I read about reconciliation, the more I dont think the Dems can pass a 2T reconciliaton bill for 2021.

1. Congress already used their once a year reconciliation bill for Covid relief. Opinion - Rs made them have to do it bc Rs played politics re covid relief when Ds didnt during tranvestite trumps term.

2. Doesnt it have to be limited to 1.5T? The covid bill was 1.9T passed under reconciliation so I really dont know, seems like a cap is sometimes applied. If so, they could pass a bipartisan bill then use a D only reconciliation bill to cover what they wanted that was left out.

--------------------

We will have a transportation bill. Most likely less than 1.5T.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by punch it in

It was 1.9 , or 2 so no, im not playing games with the facts but ill let you and SD get back to your little thing you got going on.

THANKS PUNCH!!!

Apparently this is me and Nonniey because I responded to his comment once.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Also, there wasn't an income minimum you had to have to get the tax cut. So saying rich people got 2 trillion in tax cuts is not accurate. Wasn't like the tax cut only applied to people making 1 million plus per year.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...t-for-the-rich

https://taxfoundation.org/trump-tax-...act-data-2019/

You wanna argue that the bill should have have been more favorable to non-rich people fine, I'm all for cutting taxes. Chop away. But to pretend like every dollar went to Scrooge McDuck is not accurate.

[punch it in]

I do not think my premise that a 1.9 (or as i so dramatically put it for effect ) 2 trillion dollar tax cut that GREATLY FAVORS THE RICH, and for the first time in American history, the 400 wealthiest people paid a lower tax rate than any other group (they actually own scrooge mcduck) is kosher to the right, but a 2 trillion dollar infrastructure plan that helps all Americans is a problem is anything other than pretty god damn accurate to be honest.

[nonniey]

Good read and I think he hits the nail right on the head.

"What Happened To You?
The radicalization of the American elite against liberalism

By Andrew Sullivan

........In the successor ideology, there is no escape, no refuge, from the ongoing nightmare of oppression and violence — and you are either fighting this and “on the right side of history,” or you are against it and abetting evil. There is no neutrality. No space for skepticism. No room for debate. No space even for staying silent. (Silence, remember, is violence — perhaps the most profoundly anti-liberal slogan ever invented.)

And that tells you about the will to power behind it. Liberalism leaves you alone. The successor ideology will never let go of you. Liberalism is only concerned with your actions. The successor ideology is concerned with your mind, your psyche, and the deepest recesses of your soul. Liberalism will let you do your job, and let you keep your politics private. S.I. will force you into a struggle session as a condition for employment......"

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by sdskinsfan2001

THANKS PUNCH!!!

Apparently this is me and Nonniey because I responded to his comment once.

Lol

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by nonniey

Good read and I think he hits the nail right on the head.

"What Happened To You?
The radicalization of the American elite against liberalism

By Andrew Sullivan

........In the successor ideology, there is no escape, no refuge, from the ongoing nightmare of oppression and violence — and you are either fighting this and “on the right side of history,” or you are against it and abetting evil. There is no neutrality. No space for skepticism. No room for debate. No space even for staying silent. (Silence, remember, is violence — perhaps the most profoundly anti-liberal slogan ever invented.)

And that tells you about the will to power behind it. Liberalism leaves you alone. The successor ideology will never let go of you. Liberalism is only concerned with your actions. The successor ideology is concerned with your mind, your psyche, and the deepest recesses of your soul. Liberalism will let you do your job, and let you keep your politics private. S.I. will force you into a struggle session as a condition for employment......"

The CRT debate is just the latest squall in a tempest brewing and building for five years or so. And, yes, some of the liberal critiques of a Fox News hyped campaign are well taken. Is this a wedge issue for the GOP? Of course it is. Are they using the term “critical race theory” as a cynical, marketing boogeyman? Of course they are. Are some dog whistles involved? A few. Are crude bans on public servants’ speech dangerous? Absolutely. Do many of the alarmists know who Derrick Bell was? Of course not.


I have exactly the same principles and support most of the same policies I did under BarackObama. In fact, I’ve moved left on economic and foreign policy since then. It’s Democrats who have taken a sudden, giant swerve away from their recent past.

https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/...ned-to-you-e5f

^^ this is his main point ... centrist elite liberals are being forced to the far left
-------------

First, Ive noticed writers now (when they have a POV to get to), tend to list the cons early on and quickly summarily dismiss them .. so as to seem balanced or comprehensive or fair in what they are about to say next. Its fine. Very Tucker Carlson esque.

Second, I disagree with his main premise that you cant be liberal anymore and are being forced to be the super woke liberal under this "successor ideology".
He writes well above my IQ and perhaps I am not "elite" and he is .. so I cant say whether the "elites" have been radicalized. Im not "elite" compared to him. Perhaps what he writes is true of what he sees in his small cape cod uber rich seaside town. I live in a townhouse in Columbia Md.

But I disagree with his broad brush premise that you cant just be a Obama level liberal and now are forced to be the super woke "successor ideology".

I think Im a centrist obama type democrat. I want immigration laws to be enforced. I do think Jeremiah Wright is a race baiting idiot who skewed his vision of America, ignoring the progress weve made.

I dont think black inequality in society is solely bc of "white supremacy". I think black communities have equal parts as the root of the problem and solution.

How can he say he hasnt changed .. but then say I am being forced to go from obama liberal to a super woke liberal? Im the same liberal I was 10-15 years ago.

Lastly, his conclusion as a warning that allowing "tribalism" from both sides to define us all will be the end of us .. is a drum that has been beaten by many writers, many times. He seems to think he is the first one ringing that warning bell.

interesting read ... miss its mark though. I feel like he was writing to confirm some bias held by a centrist to far right Republican, and that was his target audience vs a centrist liberal like me ... even though his article was trying to define the current state of affairs of the centrist liberal.

---

please post more articles that you come across, interesting read

[Chico23231]

Man hearing libs running cover for another communist failed state in Cuba is something else today. There is zero defense of the Marxist authoritarian Cuban government. Yet ex Obama bros openly on social media suddenly supporting protesters being clubbed in the street or the using false narratives of “this is cause of the embargo” which is propaganda of the Cuban government.

This is how it always works:

[Giantone]

This should piss off the trump cult.


https://news.yahoo.com/reichstag-mom...122105759.html


USA TODAY
'Reichstag moment': Joint Chiefs chairman feared Trump was laying groundwork for coup

WASHINGTON – The highest-ranking U.S. officer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, and other top military leaders made informal plans to stop a coup by former President Donald Trump and his allies in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election, according to excerpts from a new book

"I Alone Can Fix It," written by Washington Post reporters Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker, describes how Milley and others feared Trump might take unconstitutional actions should he lose. CNN first reported on this excerpt.

The top brass was so disturbed by Trump's rhetoric casting doubt on the legitimacy of the election before it was held that the leaders discussed contingency plans for how to thwart any illegal power grabs by the president, including how and when to resign in protest over his actions.

"They may try, but they're not going to f****** succeed," Milley told his officers, according to Leonnig and Rucker. "You can't do this without the military. You can't do this without the CIA and the FBI. We're the guys with the guns."

Milley's spokesman, Army Col. Dave Butler, declined Thursday to comment on the excerpts.

[MTK]

As time goes on we're only going to find out more about the Trump WH and what a complete and total shit show it was

How It Went Down: Authors Go Deep Into Doomed 2020 Trump White House

[mooby]

Originally Posted by MTK

As time goes on we're only going to find out more about the Trump WH and what a complete and total shit show it was

How It Went Down: Authors Go Deep Into Doomed 2020 Trump White House

"If George Washington came back from the dead and he chose Abraham Lincoln as his vice president," Trump told them, "I think it would have been very hard for them to beat me."

Off his goddamn rocker.