Quote:
Originally Posted by Coughdrop addict [/quote
Democrats won because they are producing results. Covid aid that prevented millions from being financially wiped out during a period they could not work,
I didn’t know Trump was a democrat?
https://thehill.com/policy/finance/3...id-19-economy/
Quote:
As coronavirus cases started to creep into the United States, President Trump signed the first COVID-19 package, the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act.
The measure doled out $2.5 billion in aid to local governments and international communities and offered funds to assist research for a vaccine.
Also:
Quote:
On March 27, Trump signed a $2 trillion COVID-19 relief bill, the CARES Act, which gave each adult in the U.S. a one-time payment of $1,200 and added another $500 for every child.
Money was also provided to different business sectors, and small businesses were granted billions of dollars in loans and grants to counter the blow of the pandemic.
We also have to remember that racist Trump wanted flight restrictions from China, but fortunately the “producing results” democrats didn’t like that:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dem...ina-travel-ban
Quote:
Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden led the way, quickly attacking what he called Trump's "record of hysteria, xenophobia and fear-mongering" after the travel restrictions were announced, and arguing that Trump "is the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health emergency." Biden, on Wednesday, didn't criticize the travel ban in any way, and instead accused Trump of "downplaying" the virus early on in remarks to Fox News.
I blame Trump, Biden, Pelosi and the Democrats (of course Pravda as well) for this miserable failure of a lock down.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/johns...cts-on-society
https://www.heritage.org/public-heal...countries-show
https://nypost.com/2022/04/11/ny-han...ng-best-study/
There are studies that disagree with the two links above, but finding which is right? Sweden turned out much better than predicted, especially if you compare what was said in 2020 to what is now known in 2022. Overall I think this is a reasonable article:
https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...pact-over-time
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coughdrop addict [/quote
billions of dollars in investment in high growth industries like solar, wind, electric vehicles and electronic chip manufacturing,
I like the idea of renewable energy, as long as it’s done right! The “full speed ahead” California and Biden type policy is foolish. California telling people not to plug in their electric vehicles (yes I know about the heat wave, but it’s indicative of the problem) yet in 13 yrs they will ban gas powered vehicles:
https://nypost.com/2022/09/01/califo...mid-heat-wave/
If they could get the infrastructure built and ready in 13 yrs, great, good on them. But do you really believe that will happen? That’s the problem with this “green” plan, it’s not tenable now:
https://gop-waysandmeans.house.gov/b...ing-consumers/
Quote:
President Biden’s disastrous Green New Deal policies are stoking a trade war with key U.S. allies and will only result in skyrocketing energy costs, slowing economic growth, and a decrease in investment for American businesses.
American families are already suffering in President Biden’s cruel economy, but the Biden Administration’s taxpayer-funded Green New Deal subsidies are liable to make them worse as they damage relations with key trading partners by essentially shutting American allies out of U.S. energy markets.
https://nypost.com/2021/01/27/biden-...onmental-plan/
Quote:
“Pie-in-the-sky government mandates and directives that restrict our mining, oil, and gas industries adversely impact our energy security and independence,” she said.
“At a time when millions are struggling due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the last thing Americans need is big government destroying jobs, while costing the economy billions of dollars.”
Furthermore there is this problem:
https://www.deseret.com/utah/2021/1/...ah-china-solar
Quote:
But how green is green?
Although countries are feverishly looking to install wind and solar farms to wean themselves off carbon-based, or so-called “dirty” energy, few countries, operators and the industry itself have yet to fully tackle the long-term consequences of how to dispose of these systems, which have their own environmental hazards like toxic metals, oil, fiberglass and other material.
Quote:
Wind power also is taking off as a clean energy resource, but the EPA notes that windmills are the least energy producing and most physically difficult renewable energy waste stream to address.
The sheer size of the windmills and the difficulty of disposing of them at recycling stations led the agency to conclude that each new wind farm is a “towering promise of future wreckage.”
Quote:
The value of the materials recycled from lithium ion batteries is only about a third of the cost of the recycling operation — and the expense of extracting old lithium is about five times the cost of mining for lithium, according to the Institute for Energy Research.
There is some innovation playing out, however, with Japan’s Nissan repurposing batteries to power streetlights. In the United States, General Motors is backing up its data center in Michigan with used Chevy Volt batteries.
The EPA notes, however, that these sort of “adaptive reuses” still only delay the time for final disposal of the batteries and the need to deal with materials in the batteries that can cause fires or leach hazardous chemicals.
https://group.met.com/en/media/energ...newable-energy
Quote:
We can read a lot of renewable resources articles about green energy and its benefits – but there are significant cons, too.
The transition from fossil fuels will not be easy, because renewable energy has its limitations, like storage problems or high upfront costs. It is still in its infancy.
We are aware of the benefits of generating electricity with green energy, and hopefully the world will be prepared to use only renewable energy when the fossil fuels run out – but until then, we still need to rely on them.
This is the point, put money toward research for better renewable energies and infrastructure to support these advances. Don’t ram the “green deal” down our throat and crush us with the price tag and lack of energy. Be intelligent about the transition!
Now about those do-nothing Republicans:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rep...ergy-costs-low
Quote:
"Our energy solutions are climate solutions. America can and must lead the world in reducing emissions without trading our security to the Chinese Communist Party and sacrificing our energy reliability and affordability to OPEC+," she continued. "Republicans on Energy and Commerce will continue to lead on real, workable solutions to make energy cleaner, reduce emissions, prioritize energy security, and keep energy costs low."
Quote:
For example, the Washington Republican would likely investigate Biden's so-called war on fossil fuel energy, policies that may have contributed to higher gas prices, and both the nation's reliance on Chinese supply chains and foreign energy sources.
Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans would also pursue bipartisan solutions on nuclear and hydropower energy expansion as well as boosting energy infrastructure cybersecurity.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...nergy-security
Quote:
"Passing these ten policies will provide a clear contrast with Biden on energy between two competing visions: one rooted in allowing market participants to produce the cleanest, most reliable, and most affordable energy on the planet, versus another, Biden-backed vision that favors mandates, command-and-control regulations, and dictates from bureaucrats designed to stamp out fossil fuels and prioritize cronies in the green energy industry—all the while scoffing at regular people who have to suffer the consequences."
Do this smart do it right!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coughdrop addict [/quote
student loan relief for the millions who are facing a lifetime of serfdom that even bankruptcy cannot eliminate
Yes I should have to pay the price for the decision of those who went to university or other forms of higher education. I was the only one who paid for my higher education and somehow survived, as did my siblings, my friends and well everyone I personally know. Yet now those who go get a higher education are going to be serfs? If that’s the case shouldn’t the universities and other institutions lower the cost? Or perhaps the people pursuing higher education should weigh the costs and....gasp.... have personal accountability...gasp...(yes this horrifying thought required 2 gasps).
https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releas...er-next-decade
Quote:
Student Debt Relief is designed to help borrowers and families most in need as they prepare to resume student loan payments in January 2023. Nearly 90 percent of relief dollars will go to those earning less than $75,000 per year. And, no borrower or household in the top 5% of earners will benefit from this action.
This means that my children and most of my siblings and friends children will be ineligible for this program as we make over the 75k listed. If we lived in other areas we would be under the 75k. Where I live milk is around $5 a gallon, in allot of other states it’s under $2 a gallon. I and others get paid more because the cost of living is more, therefore I’m excluded from the program because of that. My children will have to rely on student loans to get higher education or like me and many others work while going to school.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/02/stud...rch-finds.html
Quote:
That could result in an average burden of $2,500 per taxpayer, according to calculations from the National Taxpayers Union, a fiscally conservative advocacy group.
Nice I’m only losing $2,500 dollars out of my pocket so someone else doesn’t become a “serf”.
Quote:
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates Biden’s broad debt cancellation will cost between $330 billion and $390 billion. The overall plan will cost between $440 billion and $600 billion over the next 10 years, according to the nonpartisan organization, with a central estimate of approximately $500 billion.
So is this the only group getting the debt relief from the back of the tax payers or is it going to be an ongoing tax payer burden? After all, I like the idea of paying $2,500 out of my pocket to someone who has the potential to make 10x or more than I do, what a great idea! Here are much better solutions then putting the burden on the back of the tax payers:
https://ivn.us/2017/06/05/5-solution...nt-loan-crisis
Quote:
1. Income vs. Debt Ratio
2. Payment Withholding
3. Stop the Subsidies
4. College Choice
5. Educate the Debtor
https://www.thecollegefix.com/bullet...rtel-is-op-ed/
Quote:
[T]he issue of student-loan forgiveness is a distraction from the real problem in higher education. Tuition rates have risen faster than inflation for decades. What no one wants to confront, even as we proceed to forgive as much as $1 trillion in student loan debt, is what has created the whole situation: the stranglehold that the higher-education cartel has on colleges and universities.
The last person to look at this seriously was William Bennett, back when he was Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of Education. A study he commissioned found that tuition rates rose each year by about as much as Congress boosted federal educational assistance to college students. It was never established whether this was an example of coincidence or correlation. Media coverage ever since has tended to focus instead on suggesting that too many young people, especially the poor and minorities, can’t afford to go to college.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiem...h=642ae56637dd
Quote:
Therefore, Dynarski argues, fixing the student debt crisis should mean focusing on lowering borrowers' monthly payments and extending the time they have to repay the debt. There are existing income-driven repayment plans available through the government, like Pay As You Earn (PAYE), but Dynarski believes they need to be improved if we want any meaningful change to the student debt situation.
Cut your expenses, boost your net worth and secure your financial future in a day.
"For those patching together several part-time jobs, hours and earnings can bounce around weekly. In PAYE, and all the other income-based repayment programs, every change to earnings requires a new application to adjust the loan payment," she says. "Those who most need a helping hand are probably least able to navigate this bureaucracy."
Some policy proposals circulating around Washington would have loan servicers automatically kick a borrower into an income-driven repayment plan if they fall behind on payments. Others are seeking to make income-based repayment universal, as it is in countries like England and Australia.
"A policy that eliminated debt would also do away with default," Dynarski says. "But an end to student borrowing is not on the horizon."
https://graduateway.com/student-loan...n-we-solve-it/
Quote:
argues that colleges are exploiting individuals who take out an abundance of loans to pay for school. Carlson explains this by acknowledging some students drop out of college and perhaps, unknowingly, not be able to get a job afterwards, and have no way of repayment. He notes that colleges raise their tuition prices because they know there is and unlimited amount of money that students can take out in loans, leaving them with no choice but to do exactly that. He provides a possible solution to this problem; colleges co-sign on loans with the students, using the analogy of partnerships in business, where both parties succeed and share the same risks, stating that colleges are getting all the benefits with no risk.
As shown above the typical put the burden on the backs of the tax payers only causes more problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coughdrop addict [/quote
billions in infrastructure investment setting up the nation for future efficiencies and great construction jobs,
The Republicans would also if given a bill that allowed such a thing without billions of dollars going to wasteful spending.
https://www.cruz.senate.gov/newsroom...kless-spending
Quote:
"Too many Republicans just enabled Democrats' efforts to claim bipartisanship, spend over a trillion dollars, and then ram through their $3.5 trillion liberal wish list of crushing taxes and radical spending. The $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill that passed today contained only about $100 billion for roads and bridges. As I've said before, if the Democrats wanted to pass a bill just to fix and expand our roads and bridges, they could have done it with near-unanimous support.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infras...t_and_Jobs_Act
Quote:
In mid-April 2021, Republican lawmakers offered a $568 billion counterproposal to the American Jobs Plan.[11] On May 9, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said it should cost no more than $800 billion.[12] On May 21, the administration reduced the price tag to $1.7 trillion, which was quickly rejected by Republicans.
Republicans are for infrastructure, they are against wasteful spending.
Quote:
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., proclaimed on Twitter last week that "climate action is infrastructure," arguing in a Washington Post op-ed that "a true infrastructure plan" will deliver "climate justice" and should include key elements of the Green New Deal.
And Rep. Marilyn Strickland, D-Wash., said three days ago that "affordable housing is infrastructure" as she announced a new piece of legislation that would "make smart, effective, and green housing infrastructure investments" around the country.
Their colleagues in state politics are going further. Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, the second most senior state Democrat in Wisconsin, said "police accountability is infrastructure" on Thursday as he calls for policing reform.
https://thefederalist.com/2021/06/29...-bill-will-do/
Quote:
Meanwhile, Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters last month that Biden’s bill is "like a Trojan horse… it’s called infrastructure, but inside the Trojan horse it’s going to be more borrowed money and massive tax increases on all the productive parts of our economy."
Quote:
1. It Fuels Inflation
2. It Overdrafts America’s Bank Account
3. It Creates a New Green New Deal
4. It Funds Communists with Taxpayer Dollars
5. It Claims Art Is Infrastructure
6. It Bans States from Building New Roads
7. It Forces Rural Americans to Pay in But Doesn’t Do Much for Them
8. It Funnels Money to Pelosi’s ‘Train to Nowhere’ and Other Useless Projects
9. It Ensures Tax Dollars Are Wasted on Red Tape
10. It Adds More Bureaucracy to a Notoriously Slow System
Democrats and wasteful spending are synonymous, and Republicans are further behind in wastefulness but still do it.[/quote]
https://americansforprosperity.org/i...nding-history/
Quote:
This isn’t the first time in recent history that spending bills disguised as infrastructure bills have been criticized in this way.
In 1998, President Clinton and Congress worked together on a $217 billion transportation bill.
Who can forget President George W. Bush’s 2005 bill that included funding for the infamous Bridge to Nowhere.
President Obama’s 2009 “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” had an $831 billion price tag.
The Trump Administration proposed or endorsed several costly infrastructure plans between 2015-2020.
If President Biden’s recent proposal gives you déjà vu, you’re not alone. His promises sound familiar to us, too.
Again the Republicans can waste money, but the Democrats are better at it. Did you see that the Democrat Trump administration also endorsed infrastructure plans?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coughdrop addict [/quote
and affordable healthcare.
For who? Not me, nor anyone that I know, it cost me and all that I know more money.
https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10....150625.048781/
Quote:
An Impossible Mandate
Unworkable Subsidies
Perverse Incentives For Insurers
Other Perverse Incentives For Buyers
Lack Of Access To Care
Impossible Burden For The Elderly And The Disabled
https://www.findlaw.com/healthcare/p...bamacare-.html
https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...h=593918a84d99
Quote:
Trump Reforms Have Helped
In the aftermath of Congress’s failure to provide Americans relief from the ACA, President Trump took actions to expand coverage options and improve the individual insurance market. The Trump Administration shored up the exchanges with a market stabilization rule that limited peoples’ ability to wait until they were sick to buy policies and approved state waivers for state reinsurance programs that lowered premiums and provided better access to care for those with chronic and expensive medical conditions. (For a full discussion of President Trump’s health policy actions to address problems with the ACA, see a September 2019 Galen Institute piece, Health Reform Progress Beyond Repeal and Replace.)
The Trump Administration increased coverage options through both expanded Association Health Plans (AHP) and short-term, limited-duration plans—opening up more affordable alternatives to middle-income families and small businesses and their workers.[1] The White House Council of Economic Advisers found that the expanded coverage options combined with the elimination of the ACA’s individual mandate penalty are a major win for the American people—with around $45 billion of net economic benefit from more affordable choices and lower taxes.
The Trump Administration’s most profound regulatory actions to improve the American health care system are its health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) and price transparency rules. Through the HRA rule, employers can now offer workers tax-free payments that workers can use to purchase individual market coverage that works best for them. This rule enhances worker choice and control over their coverage and is expected to significantly improve the individual insurance market—by adding 8 million people to the market. This rule is projected to boost individual market by four times more than the ACA did, with no new federal spending since employer contributions, not taxpayer subsidies, fund this coverage.
The Trump Administration has also pursued bold price transparency rules so that American patients and employers have access to prices before they purchase health care services. These rules will help patients be better shoppers of care and will help employers get better deals for their employee health plan.
Well the Democrat Trump is at it again being a “producing results” Democrat. I really thought he was a Republican?(yes that’s sarcasm). I will have to get to the rest of this later.
