since both extreme tribes do not like it. :-O
And since most tax payers support it.
Of course those hypocrite GOPers are crying about deficits and the national debt now after increasing it by $7.5 TRILLION while Trump was in office. And that was with no infrastructure bill.
Definitely a much better use of tax dollars than the GOP and DEMs have been doing the last few years!!!
24 comments:
The GOPers voted for Trillions in bailouts and wasteful spending last year, and now they want to say no to actually fixing our roads, rail and bridges? 😮
"How much of it really, truly is offset with credible pay-fors is I think going to be a pretty big factor for a good number of our members who might be inclined to vote for something but don't want to add it to the deficit," said Senate Republican Whip John Thune (S.D.), adding he had the "same questions."
"I want to see an updated list of the pay-fors and then get as much information from CBO and the [Joint Committee on Taxation] about that as possible," he added. "For me, making sure that we're not just putting more on the deficit and the debt is a real issue."
These are the same idiots who passed a large tax cut while increasing spending. And their supporters are the same one's who cheered them on for this act of fiscal irresponsibility.
Get off it. Too many Democrats are saying that they won't pass this $1T (with mostly sensible "investments" and reasonable-sounding "pay-fors") unless the GOP first passes their $5T socialist Christmas tree/ US bankruptcy bill, by reconciliation. The GOP should rightly reject such a Faustian bargain.
We will see what the DEMs do...
However I want to know why the fair weather conservatives are balking at it?
The GOPers should be all in on this compromise legislation, instead they are trying to pretend they are worried about deficits for some reason?
Compromise is the way to bad policy, since it is the balance between what SHOULD be and what should NOT be in legislation. I think reasonable representatives-- one would HOPE they are in the majority-- would reasonably object to 1/2 of this bill and refuse to affirm it. Had it been kept at the original $600B (~half what it is now), it might have been more-good-less-bad and less objectionable.
They SHOULD be worried about deficits, as you used to be. Some of those "pay-fors" look reasonable; others do not. It's mostly fantasyland economics, based on the idea that government should be in charge of all decisions in the economy.
So you had no problem with the GOPers driving up the deficits for 4 years.
And now you would like to block a bill that will invest in the nation's infrastructure.
Well I am going to hope that the rational people in the middle get this done.
I may be against unpaid for tax cuts, no expectation welfare, free money handouts, excessively generous pension / insurance programs, etc. But I will almost always support infrastructure and education investment.
OK, so what is "infrastructure"? Would it be "...including many of the key technologies needed to combat the climate crisis."?
And so long as you support realistic pay-fors for these "investments" that isn't bad. But I have to ask why the government alone gets to say there is a positive Return on Investment, by mere hand-waving. And how many of these "investments" could and should be made by the private sector, based on market conditions?
And do you agree that nobody should pass this $1T bill unless the additional $5T passes first?
That is why we have elected representatives... To determine what infrastructure improvements should be funded by government, and which should be addressed by the private sector.
The simple reality is that the GOPers would have lined up to sign this if Trump was President and you would have been cheering them on. It is sad when people fight good bills because they do not want to give the current President a "win".
I have not even heard about the Budget reconciliation "Human Infrastructure / Welfare" bill lately. I assume it will be a long shot with Sinema and Manchin on the fence.
Now if GOPers supported the moderate bill, then the Far Left would have no power...
If I understand you correctly, the "compromise" bill is the "moderate" bill? Not so. A compromise between staying within the budget and spending wildly is not spending half-wildly. By the same token, paying for roads and bridges that NEED repair and update, plus some airports and miscellaneous reasonable investments in "government-owned" infrastructure is also good policy, somewhere around the original $600B GOP bill. The compromise with Democrats is mostly bad ideas, driven not by the desire to solve a real problem, but by the desire to blame the GOP for objecting to crazy Dem policy. And the other $5T bill, to be passed with ZERO GOP support, is a total Dem/socialist "bankrupt America" disaster.
So are you saying that a moderate bill would be one created by GOPers? (~40% of the population)
Meaning you want the Conservative minority to rule the country?
Now please remember that you were all for Trump and the GOP cutting revenues, increasing spending, increasing deficits and increasing the national debt just a couple of years back. :-O
Same as when Reagan and the Bushes did the same thing and created our looming disaster.
Interesting news about the welfare bill
Though not surprising...
The American rallying cry...
"Cut My Taxes while Giving Me More"
How did we fall so far?
"Now please remember that you were all for...." Odd, I don't remember that at all. I tend to object to bad economic policy regardless of where it comes from. And if someone names something an "infrastructure" bill, I expect it to fund the minimum necessary for that necessary government function, and to pay for it without deficit spending. That tends to define the Republican version of bills; just the way of things.
We fell so far because Republican realities cannot match Democrat promises, and the electorate, thinking they can get something for nothing, votes these silly Democrats into office.
That is funny since you supported Trump who added $7.5 Trillion to the debt in 4 years. :-O
And that was during an economic recovery. :-O
You keep forgetting that the National Debt grows the fastest when there is a GOP President.
I supported Trump, yes. So by extension I supported every single thing he did (or Democrats forced on him), good or questionable? Wow. Sounds like guilt by association and malicious prosecution to me.
And a Democrat Congress. Let's do a simple thought experiment. Suppose that Democrats are in full control of government, state or federal (and in addition to the mass media "narrative"), and imagine the economic policies that would result. Now imagine Republicans in full control, state or federal, and consider the economic policies that would result. Which do you believe would be "wiser"?
Jerry,
You supported and support a man whose life choices and behaviors are an anathema to everything good we have been taught as Christians. Rationalizing that he did a few good things does not make this go away.
Please feel free to keep supporting a man of low character for the job of President. This is America and you are allowed to do that. I would not even hire him to work at my employer. We believe in honesty, honoring commitments, team work, etc.
History has shown the GOP cuts taxes, but does not cut entitlements. Therefore we have a HUGE NATIONAL debt.
I do not like the DEM's spending ideas, but at least they are willing to raise taxes to pay for them. Not just keep burdening future generations with their bad money management.
Ridiculous. You support a serial sex harasser and pedophile, totally corrupt, willing to violate the constitution on a whim, who supports spending us into oblivion. There is no moral, ethical, or practical equivalence here. You support a corrupt, senile old fool.
I think I need to remind you, too, of what happened when the GOP DID stand up for spending restraint, refusing to increase the debt ceiling. National Parks which were the most visible symbols of government were forcibly closed, while the Democrats and media mercilessly pounded Republicans as heartless and worse. Even though the government could have run on that reduced budget for years, with a little belt-tightening.
Jerry,
Please prove your claims against Biden.
I have proof for every claim I have levelled against Trump.
As I said, Trump had the House, Senate and Presidency for 2 years.
All they did was increase spending while cutting taxes.
Well, latest pictures of him grabbing little girls and sniffing their hair is all over, but with not a whisper of disapproval from the major media, or other Democrats. They also know he is several fries short of a Happy Meal, but keep propping him up. The investigation of Hunter has been pretty well quashed, but we still have Biden's open admission of extorting Ukraine, for his son's (and his) financial benefit. He supports another $5T of spending. QED. He just extended the eviction moratorium that he has repeatedly said he does not have the Constitutional authority to do. I'm not going to prove anything to you; you are so willfully and completely blind it is barely worth trying.
You have been listening to too much right wing media.
- sniffing hair? vs Trump's grabbing pussies?
- seems to speak as well as Trump
- Trump's investigations into the Biden's found nothing illegal (and he sure tried)
- Yes Joe Biden did work to get a corrupt Ukranian official removed, with the support of the EU
- Yes he does support the human infrastructure policy (he is a DEM)
- Regarding the eviction moratoriums
"...but with not a whisper of disapproval from the major media, or other Democrats."
Then you don't know any Democrats, not that I'm surprised.
Moose
I mean even CNN covered that silly stuff :-)
Post a Comment