Biden's $2 trillion Plan for Insfrastructure and Jobs

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

I'm just going to leave this here

[surrept33 + 609]

15 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I'm just going to leave this here

Because the congressional republicans blocked Trump and the dems' bold and beautiful infrastructure plan:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/03/31/trump-democrats-coronavirus-infrastructure/

The infrastructure plan will increase corporate tax rate slightly, but still inline with OECD norms:

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/fiscal-fact/oecd-corporate-tax-rate-ff-01042021

Edited April 23, 2021 by surrept33

[-trance + 114]

Still like Powell even after she used the "no reasonable person would believe [this BS]" defence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mcb4zHBulzk

[Boat + 1,323]

21 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I'm just going to leave this here

If you were right the US wouldn’t be 30 trillion in debt. The modern version to bloated spending started with Ronald Reagan. Now days every new president is given trillions to throw at his version of what the country needs. 
Im retired and was surprised at the free money both Trump and now Biden handed out. 
Remember GW after 911? After his election those billions went to first responders and the wars. Not matter who wins expect the next round of huge spending. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

2 hours ago, Boat said:

If you were right the US wouldn’t be 30 trillion in debt. The modern version to bloated spending started with Ronald Reagan.

President spends ZERO $$$.  It is Congress 100% and since this is a representative republic and the President can't buy a roll of toilet paper without Congress say so... Why do idiots keep blaming presidents? 

1. 1977/78 Democrats in charge of BOTH houses by roughly 2/3 majority
2. 1979/80 Democrats in charge of BOTH houses by almost 2/3 majority
3. 1981/82 Democrats in charge of BOTH houses by 2/3
4. 1983/4 Dems hold house by 60%  R - Senate
5. 1985/86 Dems house by 60% R-senate
6. 1987/1988 Dems house by 60% Dems Senate....
7. 1989/1990 Dems house by 60% Dems Senate...

So, WHO in the US does the spending bill?  Oh right, House of Representatives where the DEMOCRATS had nearly a 60%-->2/3 majority for the ENTIRE 2 decades in BOTH houses.

Please do bring up Clinton..... and try claiming he "balanced" the budget and not the Republicans...   Of course the current batch of Rhino turds in power wouldn't know a balance sheet if they were used to beat them over the head...

1. 1991/92 Dems 61% in House and Senate 55% Dems...
2. 1993/1994 Dems hold BOTH houses once again by nearly 60% 
3. 1995/1996 For the first time in over 2 DECADES Republicans have both houses(barely) and first thing they do is push through the balanced budget which amazingly Clinton signed
4. 1997/1998 House Repub, Senate Democrat
5. 1999/2000 House R barely, Senate R
6. 2001/02 House R, Senate D
7. 03/04 House R, Senate R
8. 05/06 House R, Senate R
9. 07/08 House D, Senate R
10. 09/10 House D, Senate D
11. ....

 

[-trance + 114]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

 the President can't buy a roll of toilet paper without Congress say so... Why do idiots keep blaming presidents? 

 

 

HaHa

Trump had a diet coke button installed for his desk.

[Wombat + 1,028]

On 4/23/2021 at 3:35 PM, Ward Smith said:

I'm just going to leave this here

No offence to all you yanks on this site, but it's really weird how one moment you want to drain the swamp, next moment you vote for the oldest, most viscous swamp creature u got? You all have Stockholm Syndrome or something? 

PS: I thought this was what made America great:

https://youtu.be/no6-vsHgHJg

[Boat + 1,323]

On 4/5/2021 at 11:29 AM, Roch said:

Political analyst Dick Morris slams Biden so called "Infrastructure" bill.

President Joe Biden’s infrastructure proposal is meant to collectivize the nation, political strategist Dick Morris said Sunday in a harsh criticism of the bill.

Speaking on “The Cats Roundtable” radio show hosted by John Catsimatidis on WABC 770 AM, Morris, a former adviser to President Bill Clinton, said Biden’s infrastructure package is "designed to collectivize the United States, to regiment us, to unionize us, and to make us controllable and tractable as an economy.”

Stressing that “the metaphor that comes to mind is when Stalin insisted that all the farmers go to collective farms,” Morris cautioned that the main feature of the infrastructure legislation is that “you cannot get those funds unless you unionize. Davis-Bacon will control all of that spending. You have to have a union for your company to qualify. That’s going to force the entire construction industry and huge numbers of other industries into unionization.”

He also emphasized that Biden intends to make the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act part of the legislation bill, which he said would “be the greatest disaster we’ve ever had.”

Morris warned that the general public does not yet know about the PRO Act, but said that the end result would be that  “nobody can work for themselves. Everybody has to be on a corporate payroll. If you are a consultant or a contractor or a freelancer, you have to close up shop and become an employee of your client or the people you contract with.”

He said that this means that some “30 to 40 million people who make their living that way are going to have to be now on payroll,” stressing that such a law is already in effect in California and has “totally deformed the economy” of that state.

Morris said that the overall goal of Biden’s strategy on this legislative package is  “to organize our economy for more efficient government control. It sounds like in Germany where everybody basically works for a few large companies and there are only one or two large unions that represent everybody.”

"https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/1016301/1

This is why we come here. To hear some Rubublican conspiracy To bad we don’t have a rotten tomatoe rating for each one and viewer rating. You might build a better consensus and support for the best rated. 

[Boat + 1,323]

48 minutes ago, Wombat said:

No offence to all you yanks on this site, but it's really weird how one moment you want to drain the swamp, next moment you vote for the oldest, most viscous swamp creature u got? You all have Stockholm Syndrome or something? 

PS: I thought this was what made America great:

https://youtu.be/no6-vsHgHJg

Your not keeping up. Citizens United pushed by Republicans and passed by the SCOUS gave corporations rights of citizens. There is no swamp now. Just competing companies fighting for power with little accountability. So yea your swamp is what Trump tells you is swamp. The rest of the swamp is in Dem control. The SCOTUS says their all patriots and please spend on your issues. Let’s call the swamp the patriot pool now.

[Boat + 1,323]

4 hours ago, -trance said:

HaHa

Trump had a diet coke button installed for his desk.

And Coke supports Black Lives Matters. So indirectly Trump has come full circle? Lol Prob just a caffeine addict. 

[Boat + 1,323]

5 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

President spends ZERO $$$.  It is Congress 100% and since this is a representative republic and the President can't buy a roll of toilet paper without Congress say so... Why do idiots keep blaming presidents? 

1. 1977/78 Democrats in charge of BOTH houses by roughly 2/3 majority
2. 1979/80 Democrats in charge of BOTH houses by almost 2/3 majority
3. 1981/82 Democrats in charge of BOTH houses by 2/3
4. 1983/4 Dems hold house by 60%  R - Senate
5. 1985/86 Dems house by 60% R-senate
6. 1987/1988 Dems house by 60% Dems Senate....
7. 1989/1990 Dems house by 60% Dems Senate...

So, WHO in the US does the spending bill?  Oh right, House of Representatives where the DEMOCRATS had nearly a 60%-->2/3 majority for the ENTIRE 2 decades in BOTH houses.

Please do bring up Clinton..... and try claiming he "balanced" the budget and not the Republicans...   Of course the current batch of Rhino turds in power wouldn't know a balance sheet if they were used to beat them over the head...

1. 1991/92 Dems 61% in House and Senate 55% Dems...
2. 1993/1994 Dems hold BOTH houses once again by nearly 60% 
3. 1995/1996 For the first time in over 2 DECADES Republicans have both houses(barely) and first thing they do is push through the balanced budget which amazingly Clinton signed
4. 1997/1998 House Repub, Senate Democrat
5. 1999/2000 House R barely, Senate R
6. 2001/02 House R, Senate D
7. 03/04 House R, Senate R
8. 05/06 House R, Senate R
9. 07/08 House D, Senate R
10. 09/10 House D, Senate D
11. ....

 

Even the slow boat was to quick for you. The president has all the money if he can get the votes He is supplied with an entire government to push his power. An entire military for that matter. 

[SUZNV + 1,197]

On 4/22/2021 at 10:21 AM, Boat said:

So how do we explain the rise in Trumps votes. Trump energized different reasons to pick a choice for the direction of the country. While Trumps raceim was part of his popularity the idea of stopping illegal immigration was popular. His ideas against the huge trade imbalances were popular. His demands of the rest of the free world paying their fair share of the military bill was popular. All these were new directions for the Republican Party. Tax cuts and big military spending were tried and true issues for the old Republican base. Then lastly the most important thing for many Republicans is Hating anything Democrat. Trump was an outsider who excelled at trash talk and insults. He wasent afraid to open the tent to include extremeists. With the Dems willing to open their tent as far as transgender citizens drove the wedge between parties farther. Does that explain it for you? There are other issues but willingness to trash talk people of color put him on the political map.

Maybe more people was persuaded when they or their close relative have more quality jobs and  better raises, better tax cut. Maybe only retired people or anyone who is not actively seeking for jobs cannot feel that.

What's wrong with ig military spending while Trump  didn't start any war? How many tech innovation nowadays came from military spending initially? Where do you think Internet came from and it opened the door for Industry 3.0 and 4.0, worldwide.

And what wrong with the popular idea of stopping illegal immigration, name one developed country who doesn't do that, using your google skill. The "illegally normal" in the US in tolerant illegal immigration and even give  them sanctuary places does not happen anywhere else, even in many developing countries, they will give a free ticket back home, It is even nothing to do with racist that any races or ethnics will be treated that way. Don't you know this basic fact? It is not even an legal US standard and even if it is, do you want to US that standard to measure the world or using the world to measure the US?  Even illegal immigrant got their dream broken, they know it is normal and nothing about racism.

Furthermore for any other developed countries, legal immigrants are based on merit, depend on what skills the countries needed to keep the countries stay competitive.  

Do you really believe there is any country in the world that allow a person can mentally choose which he/she should go to despite his physical sex? I have nice gay friends yet I  see no reason to support this.  

Are you proud that US has these 2 unique values that no where else have? 

Both sides have extremists, who do you think the people who looting and burning or making autonomous zone voted for?

It is alarming to the US voting future to have a many of US people didn't really know anything about the outside world and swallow anything politicians and mainstream fed them. They make sure US people know some paradise where education and medical is free yet they hide the fact that US is the only country doesn't actively seek and return illegal immigrants home and can accumulate up to more than 11 millions illegal immigrants and even have the sanctuary cities against the fed government for them.

Close that illegal immigrants hole first and I have no problem with amnesty. Or just remove the welfare system for anyone who have ability to work and I am okay with an open border like the old time where people could move to the US freely. No country can support increasing welfare and open border at the same time. There is nothing wrong with people who risk their life for a better life but it is very wrong to encourage people to do that. 

Edited April 26, 2021 by SUZNV

[surrept33 + 609]

3 hours ago, SUZNV said:

Maybe more people was persuaded when they or their close relative have more quality jobs and  better raises, better tax cut. Maybe only retired people or anyone who is not actively seeking for jobs cannot feel that.

What's wrong with ig military spending while Trump  didn't start any war? How many tech innovation nowadays came from military spending initially? Where do you think Internet came from and it opened the door for Industry 3.0 and 4.0, worldwide.

And what wrong with the popular idea of stopping illegal immigration, name one developed country who doesn't do that, using your google skill. The "illegally normal" in the US in tolerant illegal immigration and even give  them sanctuary places does not happen anywhere else, even in many developing countries, they will give a free ticket back home, It is even nothing to do with racist that any races or ethnics will be treated that way. Don't you know this basic fact? It is not even an legal US standard and even if it is, do you want to US that standard to measure the world or using the world to measure the US?  Even illegal immigrant got their dream broken, they know it is normal and nothing about racism.

Furthermore for any other developed countries, legal immigrants are based on merit, depend on what skills the countries needed to keep the countries stay competitive.  

Do you really believe there is any country in the world that allow a person can mentally choose which he/she should go to despite his physical sex? I have nice gay friends yet I  see no reason to support this.  

Are you proud that US has these 2 unique values that no where else have? 

Both sides have extremists, who do you think the people who looting and burning or making autonomous zone voted for?

It is alarming to the US voting future to have a many of US people didn't really know anything about the outside world and swallow anything politicians and mainstream fed them. They make sure US people know some paradise where education and medical is free yet they hide the fact that US is the only country doesn't actively seek and return illegal immigrants home and can accumulate up to more than 11 millions illegal immigrants and even have the sanctuary cities against the fed government for them.

Close that illegal immigrants hole first and I have no problem with amnesty. Or just remove the welfare system for anyone who have ability to work and I am okay with an open border like the old time where people could move to the US freely. No country can support increasing welfare and open border at the same time. There is nothing wrong with people who risk their life for a better life but it is very wrong to encourage people to do that. 

Obama was a bigger "deporter in chief" than Trump was, anyways. The difference in policy was how minors were treated, especially kids who had crossed the border alone. And the family separation policy. Oh yes, Trump used his twitterphone more.

[SUZNV + 1,197]

43 minutes ago, surrept33 said:

Obama was a bigger "deporter in chief" than Trump was, anyways. The difference in policy was how minors were treated, especially kids who had crossed the border alone. And the family separation policy. Oh yes, Trump used his twitterphone more.

I can see what these kinds of news didn't tell you:

1 Didn't count in the prevention from south Mexico border. It should be the first priority. How much reports on how minor is treated depends on how hostile media were to Trump compares to Obama or Biden now, given the same people who are doing the same jobs.  Currently how minors treated are worse because more heeded Biden calls which make the facility overflown. This is the recipe of a crisis.

Consider of the prevention from the south border, Trump did prevent lots of tragedies minor would be treated on the way to the US border and when was inside US. The opposite should be applied to Obama or Biden.

2 I doubt there was any city declared itself as sanctuary cities under Obama, how efficient can Federal ICE be without States or Cities 's cooperation?

'Half of the bread is still the bread, but half of the truth is not the truth'

 

Edited April 26, 2021 by SUZNV

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

2 hours ago, surrept33 said:

Obama was a bigger "deporter in chief" than Trump was, anyways. The difference in policy was how minors were treated, especially kids who had crossed the border alone. And the family separation policy. Oh yes, Trump used his twitterphone more.

Using statistics to lie, how Enthalpic of you. Trump didn't need to arrest and detain illegal immigrants because illegal immigration went down dramatically during his administration. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

On 4/24/2021 at 4:21 AM, Wombat said:

No offence to all you yanks on this site, but it's really weird how one moment you want to drain the swamp, next moment you vote for the oldest, most viscous swamp creature u got? You all have Stockholm Syndrome or something? 

PS: I thought this was what made America great:

https://youtu.be/no6-vsHgHJg

Xiden wasn't elected he was selected and not by voters. 

[surrept33 + 609]

27 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Using statistics to lie, how Enthalpic of you. Trump didn't need to arrest and detain illegal immigrants because illegal immigration went down dramatically during his administration. 

Was it? News to me.

https://www.cato.org/blog/president-trump-reduced-legal-immigration-he-did-not-reduce-illegal-immigration

[surrept33 + 609]

53 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Xiden wasn't elected he was selected and not by voters. 

Yes, I'm sure China really wants Biden over Comrade Chuan Jiango:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=https://m.k.sohu.com/d/453371234%3FchannelId%3D1%26page%3D1&prev=search&pto=aue

[turbguy + 1,543]

On 4/22/2021 at 9:21 AM, Boat said:

So how do we explain the rise in Trumps votes. Trump energized different reasons to pick a choice for the direction of the country. While Trumps raceim was part of his popularity the idea of stopping illegal immigration was popular. His ideas against the huge trade imbalances were popular. His demands of the rest of the free world paying their fair share of the military bill was popular. All these were new directions for the Republican Party. Tax cuts and big military spending were tried and true issues for the old Republican base. Then lastly the most important thing for many Republicans is Hating anything Democrat. Trump was an outsider who excelled at trash talk and insults. He wasent afraid to open the tent to include extremeists. With the Dems willing to open their tent as far as transgender citizens drove the wedge between parties farther. Does that explain it for you? There are other issues but willingness to trash talk people of color put him on the political map.

The reason for Donald J.Trump as #45?

Simple.

Hillary.

Edited April 26, 2021 by turbguy

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

3 hours ago, turbguy said:

The reason for Donald J.Trump as #45?

Simple.

Hillary.

Why did he fill arenas? Why did he get 11 million more votes in 2020 than when he faced Hillary in 2016? In point of fact, and I don't care if you don't like it, he got more votes than that, if by vote we're talking about a human being casting a ballot. Xiden got the most ballots, no humans involved. They're scanning for watermarks in Arizona right now. There's a good reason the Demoncrats have sent 79 attorneys to fight this audit. If they were as confident as you they needn't bother no? 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

10 hours ago, surrept33 said:

Yes, I'm sure China really wants Biden over Comrade Chuan Jiango:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=https://m.k.sohu.com/d/453371234%3FchannelId%3D1%26page%3D1&prev=search&pto=aue

You just happen to read Hanzu? Wumao much? Would explain a lot. Meanwhile the article itself is nonsense to the nth degree. 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,554]

4 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Why did he fill arenas? Why did he get 11 million more votes in 2020 than when he faced Hillary in 2016? In point of fact, and I don't care if you don't like it, he got more votes than that, if by vote we're talking about a human being casting a ballot. Xiden got the most ballots, no humans involved. They're scanning for watermarks in Arizona right now. There's a good reason the Demoncrats have sent 79 attorneys to fight this audit. If they were as confident as you they needn't bother no? 

Bang! As Is in Georgia to. Far to many assets are being deployed,  corporate America becoming evolved? In a politically charged race baiting scheme?

The stench in almost unbearable.

 

[turbguy + 1,543]

2 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Bang! As Is in Georgia to. Far to many assets are being deployed,  corporate America becoming evolved? In a politically charged race baiting scheme?

The stench in almost unbearable.

 

It's over.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

On 4/26/2021 at 9:39 PM, turbguy said:

The reason for Donald J.Trump as #45?

Simple.

Hillary.

Really?  You've just discounted 16+ Republican Presidential Candidates?

2016 Republican Party presidential candidates

Now, I won't argue with you about Hillary: Hillary was/is particularly bad.  But that certainly does not mean that Trump was not/is not particularly good.

[morissyn + 2]

IMO, President Biden's infrastructure plan is huge news for our economy. It's like a big step forward for our country's future. But if you're eager to make money faster, reading up on articles about make money fast can be really useful. It's all about finding that balance between long-term goals and short-term gains. So, while we're excited about these big changes, it's also good to explore ways to boost our finances along the way.

Edited February 18 by morissyn