And he is upset that Biden succeeded.
He definitely was our most petty President.
Bi-partisan Infrastructure Summary
Bi-partisan Infrastructure Bill Details
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Raising social involvement, self awareness and self improvement topics, because our communities are the sum of our personal beliefs, behaviors, action or inaction. Only "we" can improve our family, work place, school, city, country, etc.
Search This Blog
Useful Links
YOU CAN HELP NOW !!!
Tell friends, relatives, co-workers, neighbors, politicians, etc to google give2attain or send them this address now !!!http://give2attain.blogspot.com/ Then I promise to keep posting unique and/or helpful thoughts, and hosting open polite dialogue. Thank You !!!
Trying for Balance
G2A Email and Rules
email: give2get@live.com
G2A will only discuss things that are general public knowledge. (ie no privileged info)
G2A will only link to public / posted documents. (ie school and other websites)
G2A will not post based on singular specific personal conversations or information without permission from the information provider.
G2a will only post after observing common themes, issues, discussions, etc. (ie it is out there and people are talking about it)
G2A will moderate any comments that apply derogatory labels. Be it to G2A, another commenter, group of people, etc.
G2A will moderate any comment that includes offensive language. (ie swearing)
G2A will only discuss things that are general public knowledge. (ie no privileged info)
G2A will only link to public / posted documents. (ie school and other websites)
G2A will not post based on singular specific personal conversations or information without permission from the information provider.
G2a will only post after observing common themes, issues, discussions, etc. (ie it is out there and people are talking about it)
G2A will moderate any comments that apply derogatory labels. Be it to G2A, another commenter, group of people, etc.
G2A will moderate any comment that includes offensive language. (ie swearing)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2021
(173)
-
▼
November
(15)
- COVID Holiday
- Responsibility to Vote
- Happy Thanksgiving
- Law and Order?
- A Kid, A Gun and Murder
- Unvaccinated Driving MN COVID
- Biden and Progressives
- Wyoming GOP Boots Liz
- Obstructionism is ???
- Trump Failed at Infrastructure
- Fear and Obsession
- 750,000 and growing
- Stupid Wokeness Cost DEMs BIG
- SALT Deduction Unacceptable
- Why Smart People Can Be SO STUPID
-
▼
November
(15)
About Me
- John
- I am married and we have 3 adult daughters and a dog. We live in Plymouth MN. My interests are learning, communicating, home improvement projects, motorcycling, boating, and other outside activities. Thank you for reading my blog and have a great day !!!
40 comments:
That was a curious thing about Trump. What he was known for, at least in a positive way, was building things, often in difficult political environments. He built Trump Tower, as iconic as any condo building in America. He built Atlantic City. He created untold numbers of jobs in the United States and throughout. Why not employ those skills, that made him a billionaire all Americans? And in doing that, couldn't he move beyond party and unify America? Why didn't any of that happen? Even aged, ancient, and a little bit dotty Joe Biden could get an infrastructure bill through Congress. Why couldn't Donald Trump?
--Hiram
Notice the first sentence of your cite? ".... a political win for President Biden." What is more important, politics or actual realizable benefit to the country? It does appear that, aside from the billions dedicated to phony-baloney "climate change," it is a good enough bill that many Republicans voted for it.
"And in doing that, couldn't he move beyond party and unify America?" You are talking about Trump, who faced in intractable "resistance" in Congress? He went around them sometimes, with EOs, for which he was roundly criticized. Biden, OTOH, seems to have unified the country pretty well, AGAINST himself and the "progressive agenda" he is pushing.
"intractable "resistance" in Congress"
And you think Biden has it any better?
He was elected by a 7+ Million voter majority and folks like yourself still question his legitimacy.
Joe Biden is the president of the United States. Isn't it his job to deliver wins for the American people? Isn't his job to get infrastructure bills passed? Wasn't that Donald Trump's job as well? Which president succeeded and which president failed?
--Hiram
The thing about Republicans is not that they fail, it's also that they fail at trying. As many times as they tried to repeal Obamaca are, they never once passed an alternative. There policy was "repeal and replace" and they could never begin to do either.
Infrastructure. This above all things was what Trump was elected to do something about. Trump knew how to get things done. Trump could build tall buildings in Manhattan that no one thought was impossible. Trump could turn the faded resort Atlantic City into wa wealthy community rivalling and even surpassing Las Vegas. Trump was the fantastically successful businessman and what fantastically successful businessmen are good at doing is building things in hostile political environments and against all odds. But once elected, nothing happened. I think it's important to understand why nothing happened. To not do what Republicans everywhere are begging us to do, to "Get past it". Why did Joe Biden get a long way toward finishing a job Donald Trump didn't even begin to get started?
--Hiram
"Infrastructure. This above all things was what Trump was elected to do something about." Hiram, you may have hit upon it. If Democrats resisted Trump so strongly on "infrastructure" then why are they now claiming that it is the most important thing in the world? Is it remotely possible that the "infrastructure" Trump wanted was obstructed by Democrats, and the "infrastructure" now pushed by mostly Democrats, are entirely different things? Don't ask people "what they want," because you will get uninformed and self-serving, politically correct answers. Remember, we don't even know what is IN the "reconciliation bill" yet, and the "bipartisan infrastructure bill is a compromise, some good, some bad, but including another 1/4 trillion dollars of deficit spending. Didn't we elect these bozos to solve problems, not make them? Is there really a crying need for electric car charging stations? Where will all that electricity come from?
For the first two years of his term, Donald Trump had larger Congressional majorities than Joe Biden has today. GOP had 241 seats in the House versus 222 for Dems today; in the Senate, Trump had 52 GOP senators in year 1; 51 in year 2 versus 50 plus the tiebreaker for Dems today.
Democrats never resisted Trump on infrastructure. They never had that opportunity. Trump never got his act together enough to propose any.
In any event, infrastructure is more of a bipartisan issue. Biden got substantial Republican support in the House for his bill. With a little work, Trump could have gotten a lot of support from Democrats on an infrastructure bill. It's something we really like. The problem is an ideological one for Republicans. They don't like infrastructure because it's evidence that government works, and they are committed to the government not working. In failing to deliver infrastructure, Trump's problems were with his own party, not the Democrats.
Trump campaigned on a promise that he alone could do things. If that claim meant anything at all, it meant that he would put politics aside, and find ways of working with members of both parties to get things done. Why that doesn't happen is because it's hard, and involves often a high political cost. At no time did Trump ever signal a willingness to even try to deal with those issues. He simply lacked the interest.
==Hiram
Sean,
Correct... And all he did with it was pass unpaid for tax cuts that drove up the deficit / debt.
Did he pass a new "better healthcare plan"... NO!!!!
Did he cut spending and reduce deficits... NO!!!
Did he pass a Transportation Bill... NO!!!
Did he improve entitlements... NO!!!
He was such a sack of hot air...
Trump made a number of promises, but that's because he was willing to promise anybody anything if he felt that would improve his chances for election. It's how he was successful in eating our lunch on a number of issues. He promised infrastructure, but he never for a moment gave thought on how exactly that promise would happen. He never wanted to make the painful choices necessary. He never made any choice that would intentionally cause him pain.
--Hiram
Remember this promise...
I will eliminate the debt in 8 years.
And then he goes on to be one of the biggest debt increasers in our history.
Or all the times he promised that COVID was nothing...
And now 750,000+ citizens are dead.
And yet some fools still trust him?
As for infrastructure, why isn't an infrastructure bill an annual thing, like defense, instead of a once a decade or once a generation type thing?
It's weird.
Moose
There was a time when massive public works projects were popular. The reason why people have electricity in rural areas is because the federal government brought it there. But those projects happened at a time when our politics was less polarized, and less divided on a regional basis. They happened at a time when the south sent only Democrats, albeit only racist Democrats to the senate. Those and other factors made it possible to get giant works projects through. But our politics has changed enormously since then. The southern contingent in the senate became virtually all Republican, and Republicans themselves became committed to the idea that the federal government can't work. The result was no new projects and no money for the projects that we have and which need to be maintained.
The idea of Trump was to bust up that entrenched polarization. Trump was a builder. He was a businessmen and a creator of wealth like Steve Jobs or Bill Gates. He would make America prosperous again. He would make America rich just like he made himself rich. But that didn't happen, and I think it's important to ask ourselves why it didn't happen, didn't even begin to happen really. Was it all Bob Mueller's fault? Was it the fault of the Democrats? Did we never give him the chance he needed, and arguably deserved?
--Hiram
Moose,
I think that they are usually multiple year plans which makes sense given the size and complexity of the projects.
More regarding annual spending history
Republicans aren't staffed in ways that create legislation. No young Republican hotshot gets ahead in their careers by specializing in health care policies. Mitch McConnell, despite his reputation as a senate tactician, has never managed complex legislation through the Congress. That just isn't something Republicans do. When Republicans are actually called to manage a crisis they fail in ways that demonstrate cluelessness. They simply don't know what to do.
--Hiram
Hiram,
On the other hand, if they believe many things should be in the private sector or a personal responsibility, then reducing the amount of policy / paperwork would be their goal.
Only the DEMs / Progressives think that ever more government intrusion in our society is a sign of success.
Democrats believe not getting bankrupted by health care costs is a sign of success. Health care policy is very intrusive. It's a question of who is doing the intrusion. When's the last time a CEO of a health insurance company knocked on your door and asked for your support? Do you even know who the CEO of your health care provider is? Has he, or she, bothered to share his, or her phone number with you?
--Hiram
"Democrats believe not getting bankrupted by health care costs is a sign of success."
Instead of bankrupting some citizens, they seem interested in bankrupting the country and/or rationing care.
I am not sure if that is success or failure.
Please remember that healthcare in the USA existed long before 1960, medicare, medicaid, etc.
Of course, the expensive tests, medical devices and really cool pharmaceuticals did not.
"they seem interested in bankrupting the country and/or rationing care"
HEALTH CARE IS ALREADY RATIONED
I guess I disagree...
Ration
1a: to supply with or put on rations
2a: to distribute as rations —often used with out
b: to distribute equitably
c: to use sparingly
Or do you think that steak is "rationed" because it is expensive?
By all accounts, we do not have the capability to provide every American they healthcare they need on demand. Therefore, the system is rationed. How do we ration health care? Primarily based on ability to pay. Other nations ration health care differently. For instance Canada, as it is often noted, makes folks wait for some non-critical procedures.
"we do not have the capability to provide every American they healthcare they need on demand"
Source please...
I mean COVID has definitely tested our capacity... But...
How do we go about developing that capability? How do we do what other, poorer, countries do?
--Hiram
The bigger question is should we do what "poorer" less successful countries do?
They provide universal health care. America is the exception in this.
--Hiram
I am not against Universal Healthcare, however doing it because "they" did is certainly not proof that it is a good idea.
On what basis would you not provide healthcare. Ability to pay? Other health conditions? Social merit?
--Hiram
Ability to pay has worked for a very long time in our country.
Then letting charities decide who to help.
"Ability to pay has worked for a very long time in our country."
Worked for who, exactly? Because in the aggregate, it hasn't worked out that great for us a country. We spend more and get less.
Who gets less?
My family and I have never needed to wait or been denied a procedure / test.
The 30 million or so uninsured in this country. And just look at our performance on the various health-related metrics. Dismal for a country of our wealth.
Maybe those folks should improve their education and get jobs that help pay for health insurance.
With our free education, Obamacare and the Medicaid systems, it is amazing that the there are so many without health insurance. Thankfully they can go to the ER.
Maybe they just do not want to pay for their own healthcare?
Ability to pay has worked for a very long time in our country.
Has it? How do the infant mortality statistics look?
--Hiram
Don't look at infant mortality or any other metric. The USA is still different than others. For example, other countries do not start measuring infant mortality until after, I believe, 6 months, while we try to save every preemie. And they don't have the huge "crack baby" problems we do. Or the gang violence, or...
Universal healthcare always comes down to rationing of some sort. I've spent enough time in Canada to notice the jars on restaurant counters to "send Johnny to the USA" for health care he cannot get in Canada. People die before they can be treated.
Jerry,
The USA's metrics are terrible and the costs are excessive.
Not sure why would want to deny this simple reality.
We spend a lot of money on marketing, profits, end of life and we do not take good care of our health.
And rationing is not necessarily a bad thing. Medical professionals practice triage when resources are tight to ensure lives are saved.
In the USA the people with the money and health insurance get wonderful care and use the resources for many important and unimportant purposes. And the others suffer and die.
And this is why our performance is so poor.
Once again, you take statistics that indicate a problem, blame it, somehow, on Republicans, and never actually look for the CAUSE of the problem. Simply ending fee-for-service care, as required by Medicare (and therefore extends through most other insurance), would cut costs in half and improve quality of care. And giving to those who can afford better care is like every other good or service, in that making it available to those folks eventually leads to those costs coming down for everybody. But of course that doesn't fit your narrative....
Please share another country where this works.
Where /what/ works? If you are talking about a country where there is NOT government-run healthcare, there are few, I'm sure. If you are talking about a country where fee-for-service is eliminated in favor of prepaid care, you can look right here, pre-Obamacare. I had it, so did many others; it was great. Literally half the cost, and the quality of care improved.
Post a Comment