The Biden Presidency - 2020

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

wow Tim Scott, African-American SC Republican says America is not a racist country in the Republican rebuttal

someone should tell him...

[JPhillips]

This closing was well done. Not only was it written well, but it fits what Biden can deliver well.

Biden closes his #JointAddress by saying, "we've stared into the abyss of insurrection and autocracy, pandemic and pain, and we the people did not flinch ... we can do whatever we set our mind to, if we do it together. So let's begin to get together." pic.twitter.com/jo9ba4YwIB

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 29, 2021

[NobodyHere]

Gotta love media coverage of politics:

Biden's first big speech to Congress bombs on all counts


Biden’s address to Congress proves we have an adult back in the presidency


I didn't watch the speech but I wish Biden would focus more on closing the current deficit rather than announcing new trillion dollar legislation.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Gotta love media coverage of politics:

Biden's first big speech to Congress bombs on all counts


Biden’s address to Congress proves we have an adult back in the presidency


I didn't watch the speech but I wish Biden would focus more on closing the current deficit rather than announcing new trillion dollar legislation.

Frankly I wouldn’t wipe a corpse’s ass with the NY Post.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I didn't watch the speech but I wish Biden would focus more on closing the current deficit rather than announcing new trillion dollar legislation.

Fuck that.

I'm tired of when the right is in power they spend unchecked, give tax cuts to the rich, and destroy our economy then all of a sudden become the party of fiscal responsibility when they lose power. I am sick of this cycle of a dem president cleaning up the messes left by their republican predecessor.

Trump kicked this door in with spending, I say Biden says fuck it. There is always going to be some pork but at least Biden is trying to spend on meaningful things while taking that money from the people and corporations that have skated far too long, and FWIW I am above the income threshold whose taxes would go up and I am totally fine with it if it means some mom in Tulsa could afford daycare (sorry if that sounds like a flex).

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Fuck that.

I'm tired of when the right is in power they spend unchecked, give tax cuts to the rich, and destroy our economy then all of a sudden become the party of fiscal responsibility when they lose power. I am sick of this cycle of a dem president cleaning up the messes left by their republican predecessor.

Trump kicked this door in with spending, I say Biden says fuck it. There is always going to be some pork but at least Biden is trying to spend on meaningful things while taking that money from the people and corporations that have skated far too long, and FWIW I am above the income threshold whose taxes would go up and I am totally fine with it if it means some mom in Tulsa could afford daycare (sorry if that sounds like a flex).

Agreed. The Dems need to do a better job of messaging with the deficit. For my entire adult life, it seems like no one has ever called out the Republicans when they are in power for cutting taxes without balancing the budget to reduce the deficit. But the second the Democrats are in power, the deficit and spending on programs immediately becomes the worst thing in the world.

The Republicans grow the deficit by giving tax breaks to the rich and spending on the military and the Democrats grow the deficit by spending on social and domestic programs. Ideally, I'd like to see one of them make smart spending cuts and maintain tax levels (or do targeted increases) until the deficit closes, but if neither party is serious about balancing the budget, I would rather see programs that help more folks rise out of poverty and into the middle class than ones that help millionaires become billionaires.

[Ksyrup]

One of the main reasons I started voting Libertarian back in the early 2000s was my realization that the GOP wasn't for limited government/balanced budget, they just had different priorities for their spending sprees. I have never been totally comfortable with the Libertarian position because I find it to be impractical, but as shorthand for "fiscal responsibility/moderate social policies" I felt like it was the closest I could come to a political identity. Around here, though, the main Libertarian policy points are almost all about 2nd Amendment these days, so that and Trump basically forced me to consider Dems for the first time.

[ISiddiqui]

Biden actually did mention how the Trump tax cuts exploded the deficit and how they needed to be repealed on the $400k+ crowd because of that. Apparently he insisted to his speechwriters to keep that in there. It's past time to point the finger at the GOP for their explosion of the deficit.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[albionmoonlight]

Spending money on IRS enforcement will collect more revenue than it costs.

Repairing infrastructure before it breaks instead of spending money to fix it when it does will cost less over the long term.

A lot of the spending being proposed is with an eye toward long term fiscal health.

We need to start thinking longer term.

[NobodyHere]

Wealthy would dodge 90% of Biden's capital gains tax increase, study says

Biden may want to rethink his revenue plans

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Wealthy would dodge 90% of Biden's capital gains tax increase, study says

Biden may want to rethink his revenue plans

"Wharton's Ricco said he and his fellow researchers believe that raising capital gains taxes will almost entirely be paid by wealthy Americans. He also said it is a good policy for addressing the country's growing economic inequality."


Sounds horrible.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Wealthy would dodge 90% of Biden's capital gains tax increase, study says

Biden may want to rethink his revenue plans

Yup. Sounds like it's gonna take more than increasing the rate. Gonna have to amend the laws that allow for these currently permissible loopholes.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I didn't watch the speech but I wish Biden would focus more on closing the current deficit rather than announcing new trillion dollar legislation.

I'll be with you on this a year from now, possibly even sooner, but right now I'm with Lathum. There's a mess to clean up and it's appropriate to do so by borrowing the money needed. The degree of need I disagree some with Biden on, but we're not back to the point yet where we can just return to economic normalcy and all of the considerations that would typically come with that.

Originally Posted by Thomkal

wow Tim Scott, African-American SC Republican says America is not a racist country in the Republican rebuttal

Does it really surprise anyone that he thinks this? Really??

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Does it really surprise anyone that he thinks this? Really??

Both Harris and Biden have stated after that they do not believe America is a racist nation, but they do believe we have a racist past that effects are lingering.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Does it really surprise anyone that he thinks this? Really??

He literally went on TV the next day saying people were being racist toward him. Just remarkably dumb people.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/tim-sc...eft-color-skin

[Lathum]

I heard that interview. This is the part that left me dumbfounded

"But here’s what he was really trying to do: He was trying to discredit my story. He was trying to discredit my grandfather, and my mother, and myself for one reason: because it doesn’t fit the narrative that in America, it's impossible for people who look like me to rise to this position."

He is saying that about Biden who was VP under, wait for it.....a black president.

Not to mention there are 50 republican senators, one is black, right, nothing to see here.

[PilotMan]

I can't take any of the screaming about 'cancel culture' from modern R's. The party of "we were all over cancel culture in the 80's" between music, video's, games, the right had their grubby little paws in all the "satanism".

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I can't take any of the screaming about 'cancel culture' from modern R's. The party of "we were all over cancel culture in the 80's" between music, video's, games, the right had their grubby little paws in all the "satanism".

..and Monty Python's Life of Brian!

[Brian Swartz]

That's right there on the level of 'Biden was nice to Strom Thurmond, so he's disqualified from any credibility/leadership today'. Only worse actually, because a lot of the people you're talking about from the 80s aren't even the same people anymore. Leaving aside the clear distinctions between what is referred to as cancel culture and what happened then, it's been 30-40 years. People and societies aren't trapped in time. There are a great many things that all of us do which people will think insane 40 years from now.

[Edward64]

Interesting read on Biden's plan and how it impacts the 1%. Lots of good stuff in there.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-tax-increase-rich/

[Brian Swartz]

I think it's going to be interesting to see what happens with the economy over the rest of this year or so. Retail, food service, etc. jobs at least statewide where I'm at have a fraction of the typical applicants, and many of those who are applying are phantom ones. That is, they don't really want a job, but are applying to satisfy unemployment requirements.

Something is going to crack soon one way or another. I'm wondering how much of this will be required to convince businesses to raise wages (and prices), and what the fallout from all of that will be.

[Edward64]

There are more and more articles on the fear of inflation so I believe the fear is real. But the Fed is saying a temporary/transitionary bump is expected and then it'll go back down. The saying is don't bet against the Fed so I have my chips (and hopes) the Fed is right.

To your point about cracking. I dunno. Like everything else, the economy & market will stabilize again over time (e.g. bend vs cracking). And as always, there will be winner and losers. The winners will lean towards the more wealthy, more educated, the more driven, and the more adaptable.

Bottom line, still optimistic about the US but don't like how deficit is equal/greater than

[Edward64]

Not convinced this is real yet but good job Biden. Keep up the pressure. Trump was right in being more antagonistic towards China but going at it alone was stupid. Glad you took a page out of the playbook but added allies. Hope this continues.

China Tensions Spill Over as Europe Moves Toward Biden’s Side

(Bloomberg) -- A major investment deal reached in December between the European Union and China — after seven years of painful negotiations — may end up being the high-water mark for ties that are quickly deteriorating again.

Since then, the EU’s executive branch and Germany have each formulated legislation that would make life harder for Chinese entities to invest, while joining the U.S. in swapping tit-for-tat sanctions with Beijing. Italy’s government has turned from an enthusiastic backer of President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative to blocking planned acquisitions by Chinese companies. And in France, China’s ambassador didn’t even show up when summoned in March, citing “agenda reasons.”

Taken together, the moves signal a hardening of the European stance on Beijing. And the biggest shift could be yet to come, with polls showing the German Greens party on course for a significant role in government after September’s election, raising the prospect of a more China-skeptic chill from Europe’s biggest economy.

Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang last week, and the two pledged closer cooperation on Covid-19 vaccines and fighting climate change. Yet the talk in Berlin is that optimism around the relationship is gone, and one Chinese official characterized ties with Europe as on a downward trajectory. Whether the Greens come to power in Germany or not, EU-China relations are at a critical juncture, said the official, asking not to be identified speaking about strategic matters.

The multiple signs of strain suggest Europe’s biggest players are moving closer to the views of President Joe Biden’s administration in its standoff with China.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I think it's going to be interesting to see what happens with the economy over the rest of this year or so. Retail, food service, etc. jobs at least statewide where I'm at have a fraction of the typical applicants, and many of those who are applying are phantom ones. That is, they don't really want a job, but are applying to satisfy unemployment requirements.

Something is going to crack soon one way or another. I'm wondering how much of this will be required to convince businesses to raise wages (and prices), and what the fallout from all of that will be.

Maybe offer better wages and people will be interested in the job?

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Maybe offer better wages and people will be interested in the job?

Agreed. If the success of a business is dependent on paying folks wages that are below the standard of living AND keeping them part-time so the business does not have to provide good benefits, the business should shoulder the majority of the blame for not being viable.

[thesloppy]

The suggestion that we/you know why folks are turning down jobs is fundamentally wrong in the first place.

[Lathum]

I for one am confused because I have been told the Mexicans are stealing all our jobs...

[Ghost Econ]

Pretty sure it's the saucer people and the reverse vampires.

[miked]

I saw a big sign near me (Decatur/ N Dekalb Mall) on a McDonalds talking about how they are paying "up to" $10/hr for new employees. At $400/week (assuming you work 40 hours) you could be looking at a little less than $20k per year before taxes. Not sure that is a living wage in that area, or even the south side, but not sure why that should motivate people.

As a McDonalds share holder, I fully approve their shitty wages.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

The suggestion that we/you know why folks are turning down jobs is fundamentally wrong in the first place.

When they come right out and tell you why they are turning them down, I think it's pretty clear. When you have roughly a third to a quarter of the applicants of a typical year across the board and you look and see what's different in the current environment, again it's pretty clear.

Originally Posted by Swaggs

If the success of a business is dependent on paying folks wages that are below the standard of living AND keeping them part-time so the business does not have to provide good benefits, the business should shoulder the majority of the blame for not being viable.

A lot of the jobs I'm referring to are full-time. I do agree with you that a lot of it is on the business, but even if they all raised their wages tomorrow there would still be downstream implications that would be painful. I.e., higher prices on food for poor people isn't a good thing either. It's not a 'just business' issue, it's a 'the whole environment issue'. I.e., this kind of reality is not-often-enough considered consequence of increasing unemployment. Most of the long-term, full-time employees of these businesses would make more money immediately if they were fired and went on unemployment. And in a competitive business environment, a lot of businesses are going to find it more profitable to accept running short on staff because if they increase prices and wages, more customers will go where they can buy what they need cheaper. The 'just raise wages' aspect is an important part of it, but it's only one part. The whole picture matters.

[Swaggs]

It would be interesting to see data on what percentage of fast food workers are part-time vs full-time. I tried to find some data, but came up empty. I did find this article from 2018 that gives some insight on fast food workers: Things You Don't Know About Fast Food Employees

It does say 87% of fast food employees receive no benefits and over $7-billion per year in gov't welfare goes to fast food workers (2018 numbers). So, for a lot of these franchises, they are pretty clearly propped up by government assistance.

[molson]

According to my local Facebook groups, a lot of people aren't willing to take a job where they have to wear a mask all day.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

When they come right out and tell you why they are turning them down, I think it's pretty clear.

How/why are you privy to the interview results for the retail & food service industries "statewide"? I am getting the impression you are trying to sell me personal anecdotes from two people you know as something much more.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

How/why are you privy to the interview results for the retail & food service industries "statewide"?

I'm not. Re-reading what I wrote, I can see where you'd think that's what I meant though.

The only thing I can claim statewide is that applications are down. I think the data on distinctions between this year and previous years in terms of policy changes, economic circumstances, etc. points to a pretty clear conclusion there. I.e., wages and benefits aren't what has changed. I don't have knowledge of interviews or callbacks data with anywhere near that wide of a net. I don't think that's necessary to draw reasonable conclusions in this case either.

[GrantDawg]

Molson, I can totally buy that. I can't even imagine working in a hot kitchen with a mask on all day.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[miked]

You are still paying for it downstream. As Swaggs say, a good chunk of your tax dollars are going to pay the benefits that Walmart and McDonalds won't. The Waltons collect the money on the backs of their workers, and then everyone else pays portions of their taxes for the same workers' health care and food. Point is, you pay it either way. This whole, "if we pay workers a living wage your burgers will go up" is just a strawman to keep their pockets lined.

Maybe the government should tax the Walmarts a portion of the benefits their employees receive from the government.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by miked

You are still paying for it downstream. As Swaggs say, a good chunk of your tax dollars are going to pay the benefits that Walmart and McDonalds won't. The Waltons collect the money on the backs of their workers, and then everyone else pays portions of their taxes for the same workers' health care and food. Point is, you pay it either way. This whole, "if we pay workers a living wage your burgers will go up" is just a strawman to keep their pockets lined.

Maybe the government should tax the Walmarts a portion of the benefits their employees receive from the government.

It's also false. Plenty of states and cities have high minimum wages and don't see astronomical price increases that we are told will happen.

This is all bullshit propaganda from big businesses that are upset people don't want to work in a fast food kitchen getting talked down to by customers for $8/hour. All these jobs could be filled by increasing wages. McDonalds would have no problem hiring if they were paying $20/hour.

And like you said, if people make more, they rely less on the government and tax dollars. They also have more buying power in the economy. Our current system subsidizes McDonalds and Walmart.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I'm not. Re-reading what I wrote, I can see where you'd think that's what I meant though.

The only thing I can claim statewide is that applications are down. I think the data on distinctions between this year and previous years in terms of policy changes, economic circumstances, etc. points to a pretty clear conclusion there. I.e., wages and benefits aren't what has changed. I don't have knowledge of interviews or callbacks data with anywhere near that wide of a net. I don't think that's necessary to draw reasonable conclusions in this case either.

Yeah, the conclusion is that wages and benefits are the same like you said, but you're asking people to work in a global pandemic under shittier conditions than before. So the job is now shittier but pays the same. Not rocket science why applications are down.

The unemployment argument has no basis in reality and goes against what we see everyday.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The unemployment argument has no basis in reality and goes against what we see everyday.

To the contrary, it fits quite well with what we see everyday.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It's also false. Plenty of states and cities have high minimum wages and don't see astronomical price increases that we are told will happen.

Nobody in this thread said they would be astronomical. But they do happen. At one establishment where I used to work, price increases on the order of 2-3% resulted in hundreds of lost customers per month. That's simply the competitive reality of the situation. The only way you can pull it off is if you find a way for your quality to be so much higher than the competition than customers don't care. Some businesses are in a quality market. Others are in a price market.

[Swaggs]

I was talking to someone today about this issue (applications for retail and food service jobs being down) and something that we thought of that may also be affecting it is the number of folks who would rather drive Uber/Lyft etc. or deliver for Grubhub/etc. since you can make pretty similar or better money, have complete control over your schedule, and do not have to deal with any workplace drama.

Anecdotally, a fair amount of college aged to 20-something people that I know have left their part time jobs and ended up driving due to the schedule flexibility.

I would guess that doing these types of jobs and doing online jobs or content creation are pulling some of these folks from the workforce.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Nobody in this thread said they would be astronomical. But they do happen. At one establishment where I used to work, price increases on the order of 2-3% resulted in hundreds of lost customers per month. That's simply the competitive reality of the situation. The only way you can pull it off is if you find a way for your quality to be so much higher than the competition than customers don't care. Some businesses are in a quality market. Others are in a price market.

It sounds like that establishment was poorly run. There are plenty of other ways to pull it off. Executives can take a pay cut, dividends can be cut, etc. It's odd that the only solution people like you have is to require unlimited amounts of cheap labor to stay in business.

[Brian Swartz]

A different establishment that likely would give you the same answer started at the beginning of the pandemic by cutting executive salaries and offering employees free meals. This sort of simplistic 'it's always business's fault' approach makes no sense to me. There's no balance or nuance that I can discern in it.

The point isn't that you need unlimited amounts of cheap labor. It's that businesses and industries are different. There are some parts of the economy where price doesn't matter that much. There are others where, both for employees and customers, price is everything because their margins are so small. . If your answer is to cut the compensation for executives, and you can't find enough qualified management and executives in your company as it is, then one would imagine you'd have to logically fall back on your previous argument that if you can't get enough good labor it means you should *increase* wages. Or does that only apply to labor below a certain threshold/wage rate? That just gets you back to where you started.

There are a lot of badly run businesses to be sure. There is also an inherent limit to the amount of cost-cutting measures that you can effectively take without doing more harm than good. That limit is much different in various sectors of the economy. This sort of 'blame big business, they're an easy target' mantra just doesn't survive some aspects of contact with practical reality.

[dubb93]

Don't rule out the fact that some of these businesses prop themselves up with teenage labor because of the low wages they offer. I suspect that I'm probably not the only parent that would not let my child work in the public during this pandemic. We don't even have a mask mandate in my state anymore. I need the number of places my kids are going right now kept to a minimum until people figure out how to wear masks and/or take a vaccine. If my child comes down with COVID and is asymptomatic that is still 14 unpaid days off for both parents.

[JPhillips]

Tipped employment can be really shitty right now because of the limits on capacity in many states and/or the general reluctance still to eat out.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

A different establishment that likely would give you the same answer started at the beginning of the pandemic by cutting executive salaries and offering employees free meals. This sort of simplistic 'it's always business's fault' approach makes no sense to me. There's no balance or nuance that I can discern in it.

The point isn't that you need unlimited amounts of cheap labor. It's that businesses and industries are different. There are some parts of the economy where price doesn't matter that much. There are others where, both for employees and customers, price is everything because their margins are so small. . If your answer is to cut the compensation for executives, and you can't find enough qualified management and executives in your company as it is, then one would imagine you'd have to logically fall back on your previous argument that if you can't get enough good labor it means you should *increase* wages. Or does that only apply to labor below a certain threshold/wage rate? That just gets you back to where you started.

There are a lot of badly run businesses to be sure. There is also an inherent limit to the amount of cost-cutting measures that you can effectively take without doing more harm than good. That limit is much different in various sectors of the economy. This sort of 'blame big business, they're an easy target' mantra just doesn't survive some aspects of contact with practical reality.

Top executive salaries have skyrocketed over the past few decades. Shareholders are still making a mint despite a global pandemic. Pretty sure there is some fat that can be trimmed if a company is really struggling to offer an extra dollar or two an hour.

And yes, if a company can't afford to hire qualified people to turn a profit, they have failed. It's fine. Many businesses aren't cut out for it. That's the fault of their business model, not those who don't want to work a shit job for $8/hour.

What's your solution to this? Force people to work for $8/hour? Because my solution of cutting the dividend payouts to shareholders a tad and dropping ridiculous executive compensation packages seem a much better solution. And that's assuming that a bump in wages actually hurts the company financially which isn't always the case.

[thesloppy]

I really only take umbrage with the suggestion that there's a whole class of unemployed people are sitting around collecting unemployment, turning down jobs and living high-on-the-hog, doing nothing & 'wasting' those benefits and our tax dollars by extension.


Much like Swaggs point above, I imagine lots of people areusing those expanded & extended benefits to look for better opportunities outside of the minimum wage pool, and I don't consider that a wasted cost, even if it keeps plenty of folks out of the job pool for longer than the usual and/or doesn't actually result in any improvement for some/most at the end. I'm sure plenty of people are abusing the system in earnest as well, but perfect shouldn't be the enemy of good, especially in the case of US income equality.

[cuervo72]

Mitch McConnell dodges questions about Rep. Liz Cheney, 2020 election

"One-hundred percent of my focus is on stopping this new administration," McConnell said."

Not, you know, accomplishing anything or helping the country in any way. Just getting in the way of anything the administration wants to do.

Not a surprise at all, but should be repeated.

[Kodos]

He's the Obstructor in Chief. Again.

[tarcone]

My goodness, those people live in a fantasy world. Must be nice to be away from any of the hardships and stupidity regular americans face every day.

[PilotMan]

That's so 2009.