#46 President Joe Biden

11011131516322

Comments

  • static111static111 Posts: 4,889
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    static111 said:
    I think I heard on NPR that the keystone could still keep going because once lawyers take it to court in hopes of an inevitable stall of the EO the work can still go on. Of course I may have misheard.

    wss already stalled in Nebraska courts.
    So the keystone is still going and no jobs are going to be lost?
    Why would we want to Keystone?
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/general-motors-plans-to-exclusively-offer-electric-vehicles-by-2035.html
    I don’t want keystone. I’m just saying it’s disingenuous to claim that all these jobs are immediately lost to an EO if the EO is stalled in court and construction can continue.  However going electric by 2035 isn’t necessarily the answer without a huge green energy infrastructure and faster charging and more miles between charges.  Gonna drive across country and see the family, but I have to stop and charge for several hours every 200-300 miles... Additionally the manufacturing and harvesting of the natural resources for the  batteries that power them create another set of ethical and environmental problems as does the eventual and inevitable disposal.  Mass rapid transit on a national scale would be much more environmentally friendly, as would stopping factory and industrial farming practices.
    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
  • The JugglerThe Juggler Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,141
    edited January 2021
    BIDEN APPROVAL RATING TIME!

    A hair below 55%. A whopping10% higher than his predecessor and right where just about every other president has been over the last 40 years (except Obama and Bush 41 who were around 60%)

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/
    chinese-happy.jpg
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 28,602
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    static111 said:
    I think I heard on NPR that the keystone could still keep going because once lawyers take it to court in hopes of an inevitable stall of the EO the work can still go on. Of course I may have misheard.

    wss already stalled in Nebraska courts.
    So the keystone is still going and no jobs are going to be lost?
    Why would we want to Keystone?
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/general-motors-plans-to-exclusively-offer-electric-vehicles-by-2035.html
    I don’t want keystone. I’m just saying it’s disingenuous to claim that all these jobs are immediately lost to an EO if the EO is stalled in court and construction can continue.  However going electric by 2035 isn’t necessarily the answer without a huge green energy infrastructure and faster charging and more miles between charges.  Gonna drive across country and see the family, but I have to stop and charge for several hours every 200-300 miles... Additionally the manufacturing and harvesting of the natural resources for the  batteries that power them create another set of ethical and environmental problems as does the eventual and inevitable disposal.  Mass rapid transit on a national scale would be much more environmentally friendly, as would stopping factory and industrial farming practices.
    No argument.  I was just pointing out that it's a dying natural resource, so why would we invest in a pipeline, more fracking, etc. 
  • static111static111 Posts: 4,889
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    static111 said:
    I think I heard on NPR that the keystone could still keep going because once lawyers take it to court in hopes of an inevitable stall of the EO the work can still go on. Of course I may have misheard.

    wss already stalled in Nebraska courts.
    So the keystone is still going and no jobs are going to be lost?
    Why would we want to Keystone?
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/general-motors-plans-to-exclusively-offer-electric-vehicles-by-2035.html
    I don’t want keystone. I’m just saying it’s disingenuous to claim that all these jobs are immediately lost to an EO if the EO is stalled in court and construction can continue.  However going electric by 2035 isn’t necessarily the answer without a huge green energy infrastructure and faster charging and more miles between charges.  Gonna drive across country and see the family, but I have to stop and charge for several hours every 200-300 miles... Additionally the manufacturing and harvesting of the natural resources for the  batteries that power them create another set of ethical and environmental problems as does the eventual and inevitable disposal.  Mass rapid transit on a national scale would be much more environmentally friendly, as would stopping factory and industrial farming practices.
    No argument.  I was just pointing out that it's a dying natural resource, so why would we invest in a pipeline, more fracking, etc. 
    because jobs and freedom lol
    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 28,602
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    static111 said:
    I think I heard on NPR that the keystone could still keep going because once lawyers take it to court in hopes of an inevitable stall of the EO the work can still go on. Of course I may have misheard.

    wss already stalled in Nebraska courts.
    So the keystone is still going and no jobs are going to be lost?
    Why would we want to Keystone?
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/general-motors-plans-to-exclusively-offer-electric-vehicles-by-2035.html
    I don’t want keystone. I’m just saying it’s disingenuous to claim that all these jobs are immediately lost to an EO if the EO is stalled in court and construction can continue.  However going electric by 2035 isn’t necessarily the answer without a huge green energy infrastructure and faster charging and more miles between charges.  Gonna drive across country and see the family, but I have to stop and charge for several hours every 200-300 miles... Additionally the manufacturing and harvesting of the natural resources for the  batteries that power them create another set of ethical and environmental problems as does the eventual and inevitable disposal.  Mass rapid transit on a national scale would be much more environmentally friendly, as would stopping factory and industrial farming practices.
    No argument.  I was just pointing out that it's a dying natural resource, so why would we invest in a pipeline, more fracking, etc. 
    because jobs and freedom lol
    Yes, exactly.  Going back to a point I made earlier, suddenly "conservatives" are all about the gov't creating jobs for no reason.  If the gov't needs to create jobs, let's create STEM jobs, nursing, in need fields.  Retrain people.  I'm 100% supportive of that.  I'm not supportive of a bunch of jobs in a field that is dying and we should let die ASAP. 
  • static111static111 Posts: 4,889
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    static111 said:
    I think I heard on NPR that the keystone could still keep going because once lawyers take it to court in hopes of an inevitable stall of the EO the work can still go on. Of course I may have misheard.

    wss already stalled in Nebraska courts.
    So the keystone is still going and no jobs are going to be lost?
    Why would we want to Keystone?
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/general-motors-plans-to-exclusively-offer-electric-vehicles-by-2035.html
    I don’t want keystone. I’m just saying it’s disingenuous to claim that all these jobs are immediately lost to an EO if the EO is stalled in court and construction can continue.  However going electric by 2035 isn’t necessarily the answer without a huge green energy infrastructure and faster charging and more miles between charges.  Gonna drive across country and see the family, but I have to stop and charge for several hours every 200-300 miles... Additionally the manufacturing and harvesting of the natural resources for the  batteries that power them create another set of ethical and environmental problems as does the eventual and inevitable disposal.  Mass rapid transit on a national scale would be much more environmentally friendly, as would stopping factory and industrial farming practices.
    No argument.  I was just pointing out that it's a dying natural resource, so why would we invest in a pipeline, more fracking, etc. 
    because jobs and freedom lol
    Yes, exactly.  Going back to a point I made earlier, suddenly "conservatives" are all about the gov't creating jobs for no reason.  If the gov't needs to create jobs, let's create STEM jobs, nursing, in need fields.  Retrain people.  I'm 100% supportive of that.  I'm not supportive of a bunch of jobs in a field that is dying and we should let die ASAP. 
    I hear that. One of my biggest problems with retraining is making sure that people are getting retrained for jobs that will exist and pay on a similar level as to what they are accustomed. Also retraining needs to be paid for, and you can’t expect people to just not have an income while they are being retrained.  Some of these skilled laborers can make 6 figures welders, roughnecks etc and I think you’d be hard pressed to convince them that retraining them to a 30 an hour job making clean cars for a better environment is a good sell.  That’s why people are trying to keep oil and gas alive.
    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 28,602
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    static111 said:
    I think I heard on NPR that the keystone could still keep going because once lawyers take it to court in hopes of an inevitable stall of the EO the work can still go on. Of course I may have misheard.

    wss already stalled in Nebraska courts.
    So the keystone is still going and no jobs are going to be lost?
    Why would we want to Keystone?
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/general-motors-plans-to-exclusively-offer-electric-vehicles-by-2035.html
    I don’t want keystone. I’m just saying it’s disingenuous to claim that all these jobs are immediately lost to an EO if the EO is stalled in court and construction can continue.  However going electric by 2035 isn’t necessarily the answer without a huge green energy infrastructure and faster charging and more miles between charges.  Gonna drive across country and see the family, but I have to stop and charge for several hours every 200-300 miles... Additionally the manufacturing and harvesting of the natural resources for the  batteries that power them create another set of ethical and environmental problems as does the eventual and inevitable disposal.  Mass rapid transit on a national scale would be much more environmentally friendly, as would stopping factory and industrial farming practices.
    No argument.  I was just pointing out that it's a dying natural resource, so why would we invest in a pipeline, more fracking, etc. 
    because jobs and freedom lol
    Yes, exactly.  Going back to a point I made earlier, suddenly "conservatives" are all about the gov't creating jobs for no reason.  If the gov't needs to create jobs, let's create STEM jobs, nursing, in need fields.  Retrain people.  I'm 100% supportive of that.  I'm not supportive of a bunch of jobs in a field that is dying and we should let die ASAP. 
    I hear that. One of my biggest problems with retraining is making sure that people are getting retrained for jobs that will exist and pay on a similar level as to what they are accustomed. Also retraining needs to be paid for, and you can’t expect people to just not have an income while they are being retrained.  Some of these skilled laborers can make 6 figures welders, roughnecks etc and I think you’d be hard pressed to convince them that retraining them to a 30 an hour job making clean cars for a better environment is a good sell.  That’s why people are trying to keep oil and gas alive.
    Agreed on all.  I'm highly supportive of govt funded retaining.  Most people hate NAFTA. I don't.  The failure of the deal was not seeing the future and retraining 25 years ago. 
  • HobbesHobbes Pacific Northwest Posts: 6,377
    mickeyrat said:

    One of my all-time favorite GIFs:
    See the source image
  • JeBurkhardtJeBurkhardt Posts: 4,450
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    static111 said:
    I think I heard on NPR that the keystone could still keep going because once lawyers take it to court in hopes of an inevitable stall of the EO the work can still go on. Of course I may have misheard.

    wss already stalled in Nebraska courts.
    So the keystone is still going and no jobs are going to be lost?
    Why would we want to Keystone?
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/general-motors-plans-to-exclusively-offer-electric-vehicles-by-2035.html
    I don’t want keystone. I’m just saying it’s disingenuous to claim that all these jobs are immediately lost to an EO if the EO is stalled in court and construction can continue.  However going electric by 2035 isn’t necessarily the answer without a huge green energy infrastructure and faster charging and more miles between charges.  Gonna drive across country and see the family, but I have to stop and charge for several hours every 200-300 miles... Additionally the manufacturing and harvesting of the natural resources for the  batteries that power them create another set of ethical and environmental problems as does the eventual and inevitable disposal.  Mass rapid transit on a national scale would be much more environmentally friendly, as would stopping factory and industrial farming practices.
    You also have the rural reality vs more urban reality. When I am in bigger cities, you see a lot more charging stations. I live in a rural area, and the closest city that has electric charging ports is about 15 miles from me. To the best of my knowledge they have 4 charging stations. Huge infrastructure investment needed indeed.
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 35,808
    I was kind of looking forward to not hearing about the next press secretary. but here we are. Jen Psaki this, Jen Psaki that. I'm not sure why someone in such a high profile position would treat it as though she were speaking to a gossip column about a rival movie star. Lose the snark and get back to professionalism. stick to the facts and stop goading the right into social media fights and rants on fox news. 

    there's just no point. 
    Darwinspeed, all. 

    Cheers,

    HFD




  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 28,602
    I was kind of looking forward to not hearing about the next press secretary. but here we are. Jen Psaki this, Jen Psaki that. I'm not sure why someone in such a high profile position would treat it as though she were speaking to a gossip column about a rival movie star. Lose the snark and get back to professionalism. stick to the facts and stop goading the right into social media fights and rants on fox news. 

    there's just no point. 
    The only issue I have heard was the Space Force comment, which I didn't think was a big deal.  Teh reality is that when you name the members of the arm "Guardians", you're open to some snark. 
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 35,808
    mrussel1 said:
    I was kind of looking forward to not hearing about the next press secretary. but here we are. Jen Psaki this, Jen Psaki that. I'm not sure why someone in such a high profile position would treat it as though she were speaking to a gossip column about a rival movie star. Lose the snark and get back to professionalism. stick to the facts and stop goading the right into social media fights and rants on fox news. 

    there's just no point. 
    The only issue I have heard was the Space Force comment, which I didn't think was a big deal.  Teh reality is that when you name the members of the arm "Guardians", you're open to some snark. 
    it all started with the "I'm going to circle back on a couple things, I know circling back is going to anger conservative twitter". that shit just isn't necessary. 

    then she made a comment about how "we're all happy trump is off twitter", yet followed it up with a comment about "this may surprise many of you, but we don't talk much about trump". 

    and i know the reality. my point is, her position is supposed to present dignity and professionalism; the voice of the president. stick to the facts and keep your bullshit off camera. 
    Darwinspeed, all. 

    Cheers,

    HFD




  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 28,602
    mrussel1 said:
    I was kind of looking forward to not hearing about the next press secretary. but here we are. Jen Psaki this, Jen Psaki that. I'm not sure why someone in such a high profile position would treat it as though she were speaking to a gossip column about a rival movie star. Lose the snark and get back to professionalism. stick to the facts and stop goading the right into social media fights and rants on fox news. 

    there's just no point. 
    The only issue I have heard was the Space Force comment, which I didn't think was a big deal.  Teh reality is that when you name the members of the arm "Guardians", you're open to some snark. 
    it all started with the "I'm going to circle back on a couple things, I know circling back is going to anger conservative twitter". that shit just isn't necessary. 

    then she made a comment about how "we're all happy trump is off twitter", yet followed it up with a comment about "this may surprise many of you, but we don't talk much about trump". 

    and i know the reality. my point is, her position is supposed to present dignity and professionalism; the voice of the president. stick to the facts and keep your bullshit off camera. 
    I don't know man.  Most of this doesn't bother me because 'conservative' media has lost all credibility and high ground.  They are persona non grata to me.  The first comment may be a bridge too far, but the second one was an answer to a question she was posed and I think it was perfectly appropriate.  I think it's self evident that Trump being off twitter is positive and it's been a gift to the Biden admin to start. 
  • mrussel1 said:
    I was kind of looking forward to not hearing about the next press secretary. but here we are. Jen Psaki this, Jen Psaki that. I'm not sure why someone in such a high profile position would treat it as though she were speaking to a gossip column about a rival movie star. Lose the snark and get back to professionalism. stick to the facts and stop goading the right into social media fights and rants on fox news. 

    there's just no point. 
    The only issue I have heard was the Space Force comment, which I didn't think was a big deal.  Teh reality is that when you name the members of the arm "Guardians", you're open to some snark. 
    it all started with the "I'm going to circle back on a couple things, I know circling back is going to anger conservative twitter". that shit just isn't necessary. 

    then she made a comment about how "we're all happy trump is off twitter", yet followed it up with a comment about "this may surprise many of you, but we don't talk much about trump". 

    and i know the reality. my point is, her position is supposed to present dignity and professionalism; the voice of the president. stick to the facts and keep your bullshit off camera. 
    Let me know when she starts posing for pictures with known white supremacists. 
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 35,808
    i think you guys are setting the bar a bit low on this. i'm not comparing her to the sludge that trump employed. i'm talking about just doing the job as it is meant to be. 
    Darwinspeed, all. 

    Cheers,

    HFD




  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom's Posts: 17,937
    I like the "Psaki bombs"....love her

    Her snark makes up about .005% of her mic time.  That's acceptable in my book.
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
  • tbergstbergs Posts: 9,195
    i think you guys are setting the bar a bit low on this. i'm not comparing her to the sludge that trump employed. i'm talking about just doing the job as it is meant to be. 
    She's doing it mostly like previous press secretaries before the Trump admin. There was always some snark, dodging of questions and back and forth, but never a barrage of lies and attack against journalists like the last 4 years. Psaki is being normal for that role.
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,072
    i think you guys are setting the bar a bit low on this. i'm not comparing her to the sludge that trump employed. i'm talking about just doing the job as it is meant to be. 
    I heard that too.  I was listening a couple of times and thought, "Man this is nice to have normal press conferences again. I do wonder when the news will start to get a little tougher on her and Biden".  Then I heard the snark.  I laughed at one but mostly thought that it would be nicer if that all went away.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • OnWis97OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 4,814
    The media is also sensitive to how "unfair" they were to the Trump Administration (the most victimized victims to ever be victimized). There's some both-sidsing of her.  All the being the victim has some impact in their favor. So while Trump's mouthpieces were throwing out low-hanging fruit that needed to be called out, effort is being made to call her out because "fairness."
    1995 Milwaukee     1998 Alpine, Alpine     2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston     2004 Boston, Boston     2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)     2011 Alpine, Alpine     
    2013 Wrigley     2014 St. Paul     2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley     2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley     2021 Asbury Park     2022 St Louis     2023 Austin, Austin
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 35,808
    edited February 2021
    tbergs said:
    i think you guys are setting the bar a bit low on this. i'm not comparing her to the sludge that trump employed. i'm talking about just doing the job as it is meant to be. 
    She's doing it mostly like previous press secretaries before the Trump admin. There was always some snark, dodging of questions and back and forth, but never a barrage of lies and attack against journalists like the last 4 years. Psaki is being normal for that role.
    there was snark lobbed at the previous admin? I'll admit I'm ignorant on this one, since before sean spicer, I have never known the name or any "newsworthy circumstance" of any press sec. 

    I get it that it can be considered somewhat loose with the press, especially with dodging of questions, I guess I just assumed the role would be a touch more dignified than that. 
    Darwinspeed, all. 

    Cheers,

    HFD




  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 28,602
    tbergs said:
    i think you guys are setting the bar a bit low on this. i'm not comparing her to the sludge that trump employed. i'm talking about just doing the job as it is meant to be. 
    She's doing it mostly like previous press secretaries before the Trump admin. There was always some snark, dodging of questions and back and forth, but never a barrage of lies and attack against journalists like the last 4 years. Psaki is being normal for that role.
    there was snark lobbed at the previous admin? I'll admit I'm ignorant on this one, since before sean spicer, I have never known the name or any "newsworthy circumstance" of any press sec. 

    I get it that it can be considered somewhat loose with the press, especially with dodging of questions, I guess I just assumed the role would be a touch more dignified than that. 
    There's always been back and forth during the pressers.  How it takes shape depends on the personality of the sec'y.  These people travel together, they talk daily, they talk on the record, off the record, so there's a degree of familiarity.  So if Psaki is a smart ass by nature, it's going to come out in these.  From what I've seen, she's fine.  You're talking about a few moments out of fair amount of conversation.  
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 28,602
    Opinions on the stimulus plan?  I think Biden has lived up (thus far) to his commitment to negotiate with the GOP.  Things are moving fast and what I read today is that he's open to dialing back the $1400 to a narrower group of people.  It's not clear whether a broader group will get a smaller check.  Either way, I think so far he's struck a good balance between negotiating, but still pushing the House forward.  
    I don't think the min wage gets through because Manchin isn't voting for it.  So if it's in the bill, and everything goes party line, it won't get through even with reconciliation.  Plus, I don't see how you justify min wage going through reconciliation.  

    https://thehill.com/homenews/house/537129-biden-commits-to-1400-checks-in-call-to-house-democrats
  • tbergstbergs Posts: 9,195
    mrussel1 said:
    Opinions on the stimulus plan?  I think Biden has lived up (thus far) to his commitment to negotiate with the GOP.  Things are moving fast and what I read today is that he's open to dialing back the $1400 to a narrower group of people.  It's not clear whether a broader group will get a smaller check.  Either way, I think so far he's struck a good balance between negotiating, but still pushing the House forward.  
    I don't think the min wage gets through because Manchin isn't voting for it.  So if it's in the bill, and everything goes party line, it won't get through even with reconciliation.  Plus, I don't see how you justify min wage going through reconciliation.  

    https://thehill.com/homenews/house/537129-biden-commits-to-1400-checks-in-call-to-house-democrats
    I'm mostly satisfied with it besides the minimum wage push. I also think if they don't do it now, it probably won't happen, but then again a blanket wage for every part of the country also doesn't seem like the most efficient plan. Similar to how I feel about the stimulus checks. I'd like it to be more focused on the under $50,000 income earners. I currently qualify again based on the income standards and certainly won't be using it or need it until Covid is over. Overall, I think Biden is being consistent and open to the Republicans proposal, even though the majority of the original plan may not change.
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • static111static111 Posts: 4,889
    With all due respect to joe I think lowering the income threshold for the checks is a bad idea, especially if you are going by 2019 or 2018 taxes still.  We are in 2021. Let’s at the least use the 2020 tax figures. Like if couples made combined let’s say 110k in 2018-2019 and then made like 70000or less In 2020 are they going to get fucked? Additionally if the bar gets so low income wise that only those living just above poverty gets a check well that makes a pretty good case for UBI for people making under a certain threshold, which I am all for.  The checks were part of what delivered the senate, don’t shit on the checks and don’t add fucking means testing to the checks, especially when people are financially ravaged, covid fatigued and pissed of in general.  It isn’t worth pleasing manchin and the republicans now just to lose votes in 2022. That’s my take at least.  And the minimum wage thing.  I don’t even know how anyone could think that people don’t deserve at least 15 for doing any kind of work. And yes I believe if you can’t pay living  wages then your business probably isn’t providing a worthwhile service.
    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 28,602
    static111 said:
    With all due respect to joe I think lowering the income threshold for the checks is a bad idea, especially if you are going by 2019 or 2018 taxes still.  We are in 2021. Let’s at the least use the 2020 tax figures. Like if couples made combined let’s say 110k in 2018-2019 and then made like 70000or less In 2020 are they going to get fucked? Additionally if the bar gets so low income wise that only those living just above poverty gets a check well that makes a pretty good case for UBI for people making under a certain threshold, which I am all for.  The checks were part of what delivered the senate, don’t shit on the checks and don’t add fucking means testing to the checks, especially when people are financially ravaged, covid fatigued and pissed of in general.  It isn’t worth pleasing manchin and the republicans now just to lose votes in 2022. That’s my take at least.  And the minimum wage thing.  I don’t even know how anyone could think that people don’t deserve at least 15 for doing any kind of work. And yes I believe if you can’t pay living  wages then your business probably isn’t providing a worthwhile service.
    First, you can't use 2020 because no one has filed.  So if you wait for 2020, that means no checks until June so that's a non starter.  Second, it's not clear whether it's 1400 or nothing, or if 1400 is the most and then it moves down from there based on income.  
    The problem with Machin right now is that if he votes against it, it doesn't matter if you move it through reconciliation or not.  You have to get one GOP vote otherwise nothing passes. 
  • static111static111 Posts: 4,889
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    With all due respect to joe I think lowering the income threshold for the checks is a bad idea, especially if you are going by 2019 or 2018 taxes still.  We are in 2021. Let’s at the least use the 2020 tax figures. Like if couples made combined let’s say 110k in 2018-2019 and then made like 70000or less In 2020 are they going to get fucked? Additionally if the bar gets so low income wise that only those living just above poverty gets a check well that makes a pretty good case for UBI for people making under a certain threshold, which I am all for.  The checks were part of what delivered the senate, don’t shit on the checks and don’t add fucking means testing to the checks, especially when people are financially ravaged, covid fatigued and pissed of in general.  It isn’t worth pleasing manchin and the republicans now just to lose votes in 2022. That’s my take at least.  And the minimum wage thing.  I don’t even know how anyone could think that people don’t deserve at least 15 for doing any kind of work. And yes I believe if you can’t pay living  wages then your business probably isn’t providing a worthwhile service.
    First, you can't use 2020 because no one has filed.  So if you wait for 2020, that means no checks until June so that's a non starter.  Second, it's not clear whether it's 1400 or nothing, or if 1400 is the most and then it moves down from there based on income.  
    The problem with Machin right now is that if he votes against it, it doesn't matter if you move it through reconciliation or not.  You have to get one GOP vote otherwise nothing passes. 
    @mrussel1i don’t want to live in a world where the Trump administration gave more direct aid to Americans than a democratic administration. Very bad optics. Because you know even if he is forced to send out less because he’s compromising with them, they will frame it that he’s ebeneezer god damned Scrooge in 2022
    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,072
    Sending checks to people that haven;t lost their jobs or any hours is just complete nonsense and lazy.  Sending the same amount of $ to someone in rural Iowa/Kansas/Wyoming as NYC is just more lazy nonsense.  
    hippiemom = goodness
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,072
    For fuck's sake the fact that trump wanted his signature on the checks previously should tell you all you need to know about the the only reason that lazy ass effort is the one they are choosing.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 28,602
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    With all due respect to joe I think lowering the income threshold for the checks is a bad idea, especially if you are going by 2019 or 2018 taxes still.  We are in 2021. Let’s at the least use the 2020 tax figures. Like if couples made combined let’s say 110k in 2018-2019 and then made like 70000or less In 2020 are they going to get fucked? Additionally if the bar gets so low income wise that only those living just above poverty gets a check well that makes a pretty good case for UBI for people making under a certain threshold, which I am all for.  The checks were part of what delivered the senate, don’t shit on the checks and don’t add fucking means testing to the checks, especially when people are financially ravaged, covid fatigued and pissed of in general.  It isn’t worth pleasing manchin and the republicans now just to lose votes in 2022. That’s my take at least.  And the minimum wage thing.  I don’t even know how anyone could think that people don’t deserve at least 15 for doing any kind of work. And yes I believe if you can’t pay living  wages then your business probably isn’t providing a worthwhile service.
    First, you can't use 2020 because no one has filed.  So if you wait for 2020, that means no checks until June so that's a non starter.  Second, it's not clear whether it's 1400 or nothing, or if 1400 is the most and then it moves down from there based on income.  
    The problem with Machin right now is that if he votes against it, it doesn't matter if you move it through reconciliation or not.  You have to get one GOP vote otherwise nothing passes. 
    @mrussel1i don’t want to live in a world where the Trump administration gave more direct aid to Americans than a democratic administration. Very bad optics. Because you know even if he is forced to send out less because he’s compromising with them, they will frame it that he’s ebeneezer god damned Scrooge in 2022
    Trump would have given 10k to every one who voted for him or in a swing state if you gave him a chance.  He's not the barometer nor are his actions.  
  • static111static111 Posts: 4,889
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    With all due respect to joe I think lowering the income threshold for the checks is a bad idea, especially if you are going by 2019 or 2018 taxes still.  We are in 2021. Let’s at the least use the 2020 tax figures. Like if couples made combined let’s say 110k in 2018-2019 and then made like 70000or less In 2020 are they going to get fucked? Additionally if the bar gets so low income wise that only those living just above poverty gets a check well that makes a pretty good case for UBI for people making under a certain threshold, which I am all for.  The checks were part of what delivered the senate, don’t shit on the checks and don’t add fucking means testing to the checks, especially when people are financially ravaged, covid fatigued and pissed of in general.  It isn’t worth pleasing manchin and the republicans now just to lose votes in 2022. That’s my take at least.  And the minimum wage thing.  I don’t even know how anyone could think that people don’t deserve at least 15 for doing any kind of work. And yes I believe if you can’t pay living  wages then your business probably isn’t providing a worthwhile service.
    First, you can't use 2020 because no one has filed.  So if you wait for 2020, that means no checks until June so that's a non starter.  Second, it's not clear whether it's 1400 or nothing, or if 1400 is the most and then it moves down from there based on income.  
    The problem with Machin right now is that if he votes against it, it doesn't matter if you move it through reconciliation or not.  You have to get one GOP vote otherwise nothing passes. 
    @mrussel1i don’t want to live in a world where the Trump administration gave more direct aid to Americans than a democratic administration. Very bad optics. Because you know even if he is forced to send out less because he’s compromising with them, they will frame it that he’s ebeneezer god damned Scrooge in 2022
    Trump would have given 10k to every one who voted for him or in a swing state if you gave him a chance.  He's not the barometer nor are his actions.  
    Agreed but that’s not what the masses will see
    Scio me nihil scire

    There are no kings inside the gates of eden
Sign In or Register to comment.