Thank you much for the midterms

Thanks for the substantive response Blackman. I'm going to reply Hedonist Style! I'm even going to use blue print. I'll rearrange your words so I can cover one topic at a time.

I personally disagree with you. Making some semi-conductors at home is a necessity.

That was a bipartisan bill. I don't know the details. I suspect it's a pork laden POS. And some of it has the potential to turn out like the support the Obama administration provided Solyndra - money flushed down the toilet. Instead of doling money and subsidies out to special interests who are supporting the Senators and Congressmen who voted for the bill, how about fighting the Asians with their own medicine? Thailand and Vietnam would provide, say, 10 year tax free holidays to companies that set up plants like these, and then perhaps another 10 years at a 50% tax rate. Do something similar for extraction and processing of rare earth elements. There was one leader in Congress who had the smarts to promote something like this, Paul Ryan. Unfortunately, he's gone, replaced by Nancy Pelosi.


Expanding broadband internet beyond the large cities is a necessity.

Why? Because rural areas exert outsized power in the Senate? The private sector should do this.

Some action on Climate and clean energy is a necessity.


The pork laden and ridiculously named "Inflation Adjustment Act" did a poor job of this. Our federal government does a poor job of picking winners and losers. This bill does provide upper middle class Americans $7500 tax credits for buying electric vehicles, and they'll have the smug satisfaction of driving electric cars that they think will save the environment. Perhaps they're unaware that manufacturing electric vehicles (EV's) generates 70% more carbon than manufacturing internal combustion vehicles (ICV). And they'll need to drive the vehicle for 68,000 miles to leave a similar carbon footprint as an ICV, assuming they don't have to replace the batteries.

And just how much difference will the Inflation Adjustment Act make in worldwide carbon emissions over the long haul? Reduce them by maybe a percent or two? Not enough to do any good whatsoever with global warming. The USA currently accounts for 15% of global carbon emissions, and that number will go down radically with the years as developing countries account for more and more of the world's carbon emissions.

If you want to do something about carbon emissions, then the way to do it is with a reasonable, logical carbon tax, levied on whoever burns the fuel. If we're going to put an extra tax on cigarettes and alcohol, maybe a reasonable carbon tax makes sense. You're not picking winners and losers and handing out money to constituencies and special interest favored by the Congressmen who vote for the bill. The Democrats were toying with a carbon tax to get the BBB bill over the goal line, and would have passed one if not for Joe Manchin. However, it was designed solely by the environmentalists and not logical. It would have shut down U.S. exports of coal, oil and natural gas. That wouldn't have done jack to reduce carbon emissions, as countries like Russia, Australia, and Saudi Arabia would have made up the shortage. You think Europe is over a barrel right now because Putin shut off their gas, imagine where it would be without our LNG.


Minimal tax on businesses is a necessity.

Yes, I agree. That's why the Republican's lowering of the 35% federal corporate income tax rate to 21% was a great thing. We were uncompetitive at 35%. Why don't we have advanced chipmaking plants here in the USA? Well, one reason was an income tax system that was uncompetitive with the Asian's.

Taking care of soldiers is a necessity.

This is Democratic Party propaganda. They're running ads right now telling prospective voters than Republicans want to do away with Veterans benefits, along with social security and Medicare. The Republicans slowed down recent legislation benefitting a small percentage of veterans for the purpose of eliminating pork. They didn't stop it. I believe they ended up voting for it.

Giving away free money and exorbitant unemployment benefits started under Trump along with flat payments. Putting that on Biden and democrats is just untrue. And before you go claiming pork or set asides or whatever, the republicans could have passed pork free versions of any of the above legislation when they had congress but they didn’t, because they didn’t care to do so.

The COVID stimulus and unemployment benefits were bipartisan. Who prevented Pelosi and Trump from sending out $2,000 COVID checks to most American adults and children in December, 2020? Answer: Senate Republicans. When it was obvious that the American Rescue Plan was going to supercharge inflation, because we were going to shell out much more than the output gap created by COVID, when Larry Summers was shouting from the rooftops, "Don't Do It!", who voted against the bill?
Every Republican Senator and Congressman, that's who.

I don't recall any bills passed for the main purpose of doling out pork during the Trump administration. I'll admit though giving tax breaks to businesses with lots of depreciable property and lots of employees, instead of treating them equally, was not the Republicans finest moment. The infrastructure act, chip bill, and Inflation Reduction Act seem to me to be primarily designed to spread the pork around.

If you want a version of legislation that you like or encompasses your vision of how things should be, pass it. Don’t sit around and wait for the other side to do so and whine about it.

Our federal government squanders our money.
Doing nothing is a great alternative.

None of the problems democrats claim to want to address in their legislation just came into existence. They were around for decades. They were the only ones to try and address them. And they did, in their way.

What exactly did they fix? We would have been better off without the two bills they passed without Republican support.

You can dislike aspects of the legislation passed but claiming we’re better off doing nothing is silly. That’s how we end up with falling bridges terrible roads. Infrastructure was a necessity. Republicans could have done the same, but could get their heads outta their asses to do it. Trump claimed to be able to get the greatest infrastructure in the world and provided along with his congress ZERO solutions, but he did build about 30 miles of fencing that a 12 year year old with a ladder could circumvent.

I like to cite the example of my city buying buses with federal money that no one rides. Money spent on infrastructure is best raised and spent closest to the people. That means at the local and state level. We end up with things we really need, and the money is spent more efficiently. Now if the pork laden, bipartisan infrastructure bill helps with our air traffic control system and interstate highway system, I'm all for that part of the bill.


Trump had 104 weeks that he could have had the republicans create an infrastructure bill and a replacement for the ACA. [Republicans] railed against the ACA for 7 years prior to that and came up with ZERO alternative solutions.

Health care in America is a bipartisan failure. We spend almost 18% of GDP on health care! Absolutely ridiculous! This may bankrupt the country. ACA doubled down on a failed system. I give Republicans and Democrats "0" credit for doing anything about health care. Well, maybe I do give the Democrats credit for negotiating Medicare drug costs in the Inflation Reduction Act.

Nothing against your response except their indirectness to the point made. You can disagree all you want with what the democrats came up with as answers to problems a majority of people believe exist in the US. You can argue that the solutions are ineffective. In the big scheme of things only time will tell. However, if the republicans wanted to pass any alternative, they had the opportunity to do and failed. They couldn’t come up with any solutions. None nada. All your arguments against what the democrats did don’t matter because they at least were able to come up with a solution which may or may not work. The republicans ZERO solutions just prove who the new Republican Party are, failures and nobodys that just raise money by whining and crying and have no intention of actually governing.

If republicans want better solutions, maybe they should elect better house and senate candidates. Nonetheless, the likes of Jazz and HF will vote and support terrible candidates just because they claim an R rather than a D. Personally I’m good with that because we get the government we deserve rather than the one we need.

Nothing against your response except their indirectness to the point made. You can disagree all you want with what the democrats came up with as answers to problems a majority of people believe exist in the US. You can argue that the solutions are ineffective. In the big scheme of things only time will tell. However, if the republicans wanted to pass any alternative, they had the opportunity to do and failed. They couldn’t come up with any solutions. None nada. All your arguments against what the democrats did don’t matter because they at least were able to come up with a solution which may or may not work. The republicans ZERO solutions just prove who the new Republican Party are, failures and nobodys that just raise money by whining and crying and have no intention of actually governing.

If republicans want better solutions, maybe they should elect better house and senate candidates. Nonetheless, the likes of Jazz and HF will vote and support terrible candidates just because they claim an R rather than a D. Personally I’m good with that because we get the government we deserve rather than the one we need. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are "I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Originally Posted by Ronald Reagan

I'm a Libertarian who believes in a small federal government. Your necessities aren't really necessities. In my book, the Democratic Party's solutions to most of the "problems" you cited are worse than the problems.

If the people of the city of Los Angeles or the state of California want their governments to install universal broadband, or spend silly money on infrastructure, or provide massive subsidies for renewable energy, more power to them. If you want your tax dollars spent that way, you can move there.

In other words, I view the Republican Party's failure to "do something" about the majority of these "necessities" or "problems" as a plus. The more money that stays in the private sector, the engine for jobs and growth, the better off we are. And if people disagree, they should get their local and state governments to spend the money. They shouldn't have to send most of their tax dollars to an inefficient government in Washington, D.C., which will squander a significant part of what it gets.

Damn Tiny, that was impressive talkin' right there.


My favorite quote from 1bm1

All your arguments against what the democrats did don’t matter because they at least were able to come up with a solution which may or may not work.

So if Trump's idea doesn't work..... he failed.


When Biden's ideas fail.... just one of those things that happens some time.


I love it when people tell you exactly what they think not realizing what they just said.

When did I say if Trumps idea doesn’t work he fails? Find where I said that and we can discuss it. Should be easy for you to do, since you’re implying that I made that argument.

And when did I say if Biden’s idea doesn’t work he is a success? I guess you can find that too. I’ll patiently wait.

I’m 100% sure that you aren’t just stating these things without proof.

I agree with Jacuzzme. We would have been better off without the two bills that Democrats passed without support from Republicans. The American Rescue Plan supercharged inflation and increased the national debt by $1.9 trillion. And then there was the pork-laden, ridiculously-named "Inflation Reduction Act."

. Originally Posted by Tiny

Inflation was super charged because the economy was opening back up after a sustained shutdown. Both Trump and Biden's give aways are equally responsible for inflation along with DeSantis and his orphan giveaway!

The Inflation Reduction Act just passed and is not responsible for current inflation.

I'm a Libertarian who believes in a small federal government. Your necessities aren't really necessities. In my book, the Democratic Party's solutions to most of the "problems" you cited are worse than the problems.

If the people of the city of Los Angeles or the state of California want their governments to install universal broadband, or spend silly money on infrastructure, or provide massive subsidies for renewable energy, more power to them. If you want your tax dollars spent that way, you can move there.

In other words, I view the Republican Party's failure to "do something" about the majority of these "necessities" or "problems" as a plus. The more money that stays in the private sector, the engine for jobs and growth, the better off we are. And if people disagree, they should get their local and state governments to spend the money. They shouldn't have to send most of their tax dollars to an inefficient government in Washington, D.C., which will squander a significant part of what it gets. Originally Posted by Tiny

You can not claim to be a small governments guy and whine about people in California getting government installed broadband while championing government money to kids in Florida.

I told you at the time it was a slippery slope and others pet projects you would not approve would combined be a bunch of money and not a true small governments mantra

You can not claim to be a small governments guy and whine about people in California getting government installed broadband while championing government money to kids in Florida.

I told you at the time it was a slippery slope and others pet projects you would not approve would combined be a bunch of money and not a true small governments mantra Originally Posted by WTF

Help for the poorest children is a lot higher priority for me than the items on Blackman’s list. I may be a Libertarian, but, like Gary Johnson, I do believe in a social safety net to help the poorest among us, particularly the children. And the cost of the program you’re questioning was $35 million.

This is not what you believe in your heart WTF. It sounds like your concerns about inequality are all about dragging down the people at the top, not helping people at the bottom. That’s not the real WTF. Bernie Sanders has hardened your heart.

Peace and love,

Tiny

❤️

I'm a Libertarian who believes in a small federal government. Your necessities aren't really necessities. In my book, the Democratic Party's solutions to most of the "problems" you cited are worse than the problems.

If the people of the city of Los Angeles or the state of California want their governments to install universal broadband, or spend silly money on infrastructure, or provide massive subsidies for renewable energy, more power to them. If you want your tax dollars spent that way, you can move there.

In other words, I view the Republican Party's failure to "do something" about the majority of these "necessities" or "problems" as a plus. The more money that stays in the private sector, the engine for jobs and growth, the better off we are. And if people disagree, they should get their local and state governments to spend the money. They shouldn't have to send most of their tax dollars to an inefficient government in Washington, D.C., which will squander a significant part of what it gets. Originally Posted by Tiny

Generally I agree with you. I’d much rather states and local govts be responsible nearly everything. Some things should be the federal govt like social security and Medicare for instance since people move around and states shouldn’t have to track peoples money. I would have no issue with infrastructure being a state thing and the state to fund their own bridges (outside of the interstate highway system and national railways).

The fewer and smaller federal programs there are the better. Let poor states figure out how to be less poor and rich states to be more rich. This isn’t the 1800s and people can move from state to state if they believe they’ll get better opportunities. Let’s stop rich states from supporting poor states by redistribution of tax funds. However all of that is academic since that’s not the govt we have and will never return to that.

Your argument is not consistent with the practicality of how things are done and have been for over a century. So we live with the govt we have. Congress will never not pass legislation (justify their own existence) so I’ll return to my statement. If you want legislation to reflect your solution pass it. If you fail to take an action, stop crying that the other side passed a solution. Pass a better solution.

When did I say if Trumps idea doesn’t work he fails? Find where I said that and we can discuss it. Should be easy for you to do, since you’re implying that I made that argument.

However, if the republicans wanted to pass any alternative, they had the opportunity to do and failed.

And when did I say if Biden’s idea doesn’t work he is a success? I guess you can find that too. I’ll patiently wait.



I never said that. I was remarking on your comment that sometimes Biden's ideas work and sometimes they don't which you imply is acceptable to you but if a Republican idea doesn't work, you label it a failure which is different than what you applied to Republicans.


I’m 100% sure that you aren’t just stating these things without proof. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

And you were right about being 100% sure.

Help for the poorest children is a lot higher priority for me than the items on Blackman’s list. I may be a Libertarian, but, like Gary Johnson, I do believe in a social safety net to help the poorest among us, particularly the children. And the cost of the program you’re questioning was $35 million.

This is not what you believe in your heart WTF. It sounds like your concerns about inequality are all about dragging down the people at the top, not helping people at the bottom. That’s not the real WTF. Bernie Sanders has hardened your heart.

Peace and love,

Tiny

❤️ Originally Posted by Tiny

Pat Benatar

That was a bipartisan bill. I don't know the details. I suspect it's a pork laden POS. And some of it has the potential to turn out like the support the Obama administration provided Solyndra - money flushed down the toilet. Instead of doling money and subsidies out to special interests who are supporting the Senators and Congressmen who voted for the bill, how about fighting the Asians with their own medicine? Thailand and Vietnam would provide, say, 10 year tax free holidays to companies that set up plants like these, and then perhaps another 10 years at a 50% tax rate. Do something similar for extraction and processing of rare earth elements. There was one leader in Congress who had the smarts to promote something like this, Paul Ryan. Unfortunately, he's gone, replaced by Nancy Pelosi.
Originally Posted by Tiny

Solyndra had good intentions, raw materials for competitors dropped by 90% and that did them in as they couldn't compete anymore. Definitely was a speculative investment gone bad but it is way more complex than just mentioning Solyndra.

Back on the midterms, there’s an article in the New York Times today that makes a compelling case that Democrats now have the edge. There have been 4 special Congressional elections since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, and Democrats are outperforming Biden in all of them. Trump won in the four districts by an average of 7.7%, but the Republicans only averaged 3.7% better.

Add the student loan forgiveness to the mix. The timing on this was shrewd. I just spoke with someone who got a pell grant who’s over the moon that her $16,000 in debt is about to be forgiven. Biden bought quite a few votes with that move.

Generally I agree with you. I’d much rather states and local govts be responsible nearly everything. Some things should be the federal govt like social security and Medicare for instance since people move around and states shouldn’t have to track peoples money. I would have no issue with infrastructure being a state thing and the state to fund their own bridges (outside of the interstate highway system and national railways).

The fewer and smaller federal programs there are the better. Let poor states figure out how to be less poor and rich states to be more rich. This isn’t the 1800s and people can move from state to state if they believe they’ll get better opportunities. Let’s stop rich states from supporting poor states by redistribution of tax funds. However all of that is academic since that’s not the govt we have and will never return to that.

Your argument is not consistent with the practicality of how things are done and have been for over a century. So we live with the govt we have. Congress will never not pass legislation (justify their own existence) so I’ll return to my statement. If you want legislation to reflect your solution pass it. If you fail to take an action, stop crying that the other side passed a solution. Pass a better solution. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Fair enough

This whole student loan crap has been a subsidy to colleges.