192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
nimh
 
  2  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 08:37 pm
Pretty stunning data point in relation to the Senate's proposed budget deal in combination with the Republican tax cuts bill:

Quote:
The $1.5 trillion tax cut that President Trump signed into law late last year, combined with a looming agreement to increase federal spending by hundreds of billions of dollars, would deliver a larger short-term fiscal boost than President Barack Obama and Democrats packed into their $835 billion stimulus package in the Great Recession.

The administration is also expected to soon roll out its $1.5 trillion infrastructure package, which would include $200 billion in new federal spending, offset by unspecified cuts elsewhere. [...]

The added stimulus is drawing some quiet cheers from liberal economists, who say a fiscal shot at a time of low unemployment could boost typical workers’ wages in ways unseen for two decades. But it is raising alarms among fiscal hawks.


If nothing else, this should set up an interesting tension between partisan allegiances and policy preferences. How many of the conservatives who like to describe themselves as "fiscal hawks" will nevertheless tout this deal because Trump and the Republican leadership support it? How many liberal proponents of greater government spending on healthcare, social services etc will nevertheless deride this bill because Trump will claim the credit?
nimh
 
  4  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 09:06 pm
@nimh,
The tax cut was extremely regressive of course, and deserved all the liberal scorn it got. This spending bill seems like much more of a mixed bag though, especially when looking on from a continent that's seen the ravages of way too much austerity... Paradigmatically alone, the shift in numbers here seems kind of stunning? Compare Paul Ryan, then and now:

Quote:
Republican lawmakers in 2011 brought the U.S. government to the brink of default, refused to raise the debt ceiling, demanded huge spending cuts, and insisted on a constitutional amendment to balance the budget. On Wednesday, they [...] announced a plan that would add $500 billion in new spending over two years and suspend the debt ceiling until 2019. This came several months after Republicans passed a tax law that would add more than $1 trillion to the debt over a decade. [...]

In 2011, Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), then chairman of the House Budget Committee, proposed a budget-slashing plan that would lead to a $415 billion deficit in 2019. Ryan is now speaker of the House, and the tax and spending plan he is helping advance through Congress would put the deficit at almost three times the amount he envisioned in 2011.

More than $500 billion in new spending over 2 years:

Quote:
According to outlines of the budget plan circulated by congressional aides, existing spending caps would be raised by a combined $296 billion through 2019. The agreement includes an additional $160 billion in uncapped funding for overseas military and State Department operations, and about $90 billion more would be spent on disaster aid for victims of recent hurricanes and wildfires.

Lots and lots and lots of extra defense spending, because America didn't have enough of that yet... (/sarcasm), but also:

Quote:
The budget agreement would increase what’s called discretionary spending — areas such as scientific research, education, roads and health care that are funded year to year through congressional appropriations — by 21 percent over existing budget caps. Those caps were put in place after 2011 budget talks broke down between President Barack Obama and GOP congressional leaders

And more specifically, in addition to that $90 billion in disaster relief:

Quote:
From the increase in domestic spending, Mr. Schumer said the deal includes $20 billion for infrastructure, $6 billion for the opioid crisis and mental health, $5.8 billion for child care and $4 billion for veterans hospitals and clinics. [...]

The agreement includes an additional four-year extension of funding for the Children’s Health Insurance Program, on top of the six-year extension that Congress approved last month.

The deal also lifts the debt limit until March 2019, pushing any future confrontation over that issue until after the midterm elections.

The timing's wrong. The Keynesians taught us stimulus is most needed when the economy is on the ropes, and the state can then save again when the economy is going well. But when Obama inherited an economy in the midst of a global crisis, Republicans and overly cautious Democrats stymied too much of the needed stimulus. Nevertheless the economy has grown ever since (even if that's disproportionately benefited the wealthier strata), so now is a much less logical moment for a massive stimulus. I can still see why Schumer c.s. would jump at the opportunity to secure extra funding for healthcare and infrastructure though, especially considering how happy Republicans are normally to squeeze it...
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -4  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 09:23 pm
A big-time hissy fit goin down here, eh?

Quote:
Pelosi speaks for record 8 straight hours demanding immigration vote

In her remarks, Pelosi announced that she and many fellow House Democrats would oppose the spending package unless House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., promised to allow a vote on a plan to shield from deportation hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally.

According to the House historian's office, Pelosi appeared to have set a record for the longest continuous speech in the chamber's history. The previous record, of five hours and 15 minutes, was set by Rep. Champ Clark, D-Mo., in 1909.

Her speech drew little reaction from Republicans, except for a tweet from the Republican Congressional Congressional Committee.

"Dear @NancyPelosi," it read. "Every minute you’re in front of the cameras, you make our job easier."

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., joked that he thought the speech would "make her Wikipedia page. It's her biggest accomplishment this year."


Imagine that you're a kid and that nagging, lecturing bitch is your Mama. Certainly fantasies of matricide would come to the forefront, eh?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 09:26 pm
@blatham,
I strongly prefer that no one entertains the idea of doing this.

I don’t owe anyone evidence of who I am.

Thank you.



layman
 
  -2  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 09:32 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

I strongly prefer that no one entertains the idea of doing this.

I don’t owe anyone evidence of who I am.

Thank you.
Heh, right on, Darlin.

It's kinda amusing how sure these pervs are that they KNOW sometime about you that (1) they couldn't possibly know, even if it was true, and (2) aint true to begin with.

Ambrose Bierce wrote:
"To be positive: To be mistaken at the top of one's voice. "
camlok
 
  0  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 09:37 pm
@layman,
Quote:
Ambrose Bierce wrote:
"To be positive: To be mistaken at the top of one's voice. "


How prophetic he was. He certainly nailed the description of you.
layman
 
  -4  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 09:57 pm
@camlok,
Heh, Cambo, tell me a story, willya? I'd kinda enjoy hearing again the one you told about how Bush made some paper mache airplane mock-up and took pictures of it "hitting" the pentagon while his henchmen instantly set off internally planted explosives, all to make it appear like there were really terrorists, ya know?

Oh, yeah, and can ya tell me in your most breathless tone of voice? That adds a lot of entertainment value, sho nuff.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 10:14 pm
I have received some information which leads me to the conclusion that I have likely had Lash wrong. That is, whether or not her political notions are coherent or well thought out and founded in factual data, I think it is more likely that she is expressing her actual opinions.

Thus an apology is due Lash from me and I certainly give it now. Also, I'm sorry that I set your cat on fire.
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
blatham
 
  3  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 10:27 pm
Quote:
Americans who voted for Donald Trump because they liked his rhetoric about "draining the swamp" should probably avert their eyes -- because today's news is about as swampy as it gets.

Quote:
Republican senators used their majority to advance President Donald Trump's nomination of a former coal-industry lobbyist to serve as the second-highest ranking official at the Environmental Protection Agency.

The Environment and Public Works Committee voted along party lines 11-10 on Wednesday to send the nomination of Andrew Wheeler to the full Senate for a vote.
Benen

Now that's populism!
layman
 
  -3  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 10:29 pm
@blatham,
His time in that job aint long. The EPA will be disbanded as an agency before the month is out, I figure.
layman
 
  -4  
Wed 7 Feb, 2018 10:37 pm
Racism and Feminism according to Milo:


0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Thu 8 Feb, 2018 01:22 am
@layman,
just another nail in the coffin of trump's majority, come November.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Thu 8 Feb, 2018 01:56 am
Quote:
One of US President Donald Trump's top aides has resigned amid abuse claims from his two ex-wives.

White House staff secretary Rob Porter said "these outrageous allegations are simply false" as he announced he would step down.

The accusations were first reported in the Daily Mail and include accounts of physical and emotional abuse.

The White House would not comment on a report that Mr Porter, 40, failed to receive security clearance.

His ex-wives, Colbie Holderness and Jennifer Willoughby, both recounted stories of Mr Porter's alleged misconduct.

His first spouse, Ms Holderness, said the White House aide had been verbally and physically abusive.

Ms Holderness, a US government analyst, said Mr Porter had kicked her on their 2003 honeymoon in the Canary Islands.

She also alleged he punched her in the face while they were on holiday a couple of years later in Florence, Italy.

Ms Holderness supplied a photo of herself with a black eye to the media.

Ms Willoughby, a motivational speaker, told the Daily Mail she was married to Mr Porter from 2009-13.

She wrote about her experiences in a blog post entitled Why I Stayed.

She said she filed a protective order against him in June 2010 after he allegedly punched the glass of the door at their Alexandria, Virginia, home.

Ms Willoughby told the Washington Post on Wednesday: "He has never faced repercussions that forced him to confront his issues.

"I care about him and want what's best for him, but that doesn't necessarily mean him keeping his job because he needs to face these underlying issues."

Mr Porter rejected the allegations in a statement read by the White House press secretary on Wednesday.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42983387
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Thu 8 Feb, 2018 04:59 am
@blatham,
Guaran-Goddam-teed that will continue to a level popular during the Harding regime. Trump is quite adept t doublespeak. He seems to like to accuse others of things he is quite proficient at doing himself.

His"fake news" and "lie lie lie"mantras are perfect examples .
Lash
 
  2  
Thu 8 Feb, 2018 05:45 am
@izzythepush,
I think this is the truth.

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/08/nhs-hospitals-england-worst-a-and-e-performance?__twitter_impression=true

NHS hospitals in England record worst ever A&E performance
Only 77.1% of patients were dealt with within four hours in January
———————————————
One of the more frightening issues, as American progressives fight for universal healthcare, is trusting our corrupt, completely financially wreckless government with loads of extra money —and our lives, basically.

If your country is ******* up, I have much less confidence that mine can get it right.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Thu 8 Feb, 2018 05:52 am
@Lash,
The tories are ******* up, like they always do. They pay lipservice to the NHS because to do anything else would lose votes, but they always try to do it on the cheap.


I thought you weren't reading the Guardian anymore, it's part of the 'liberal elite' that tries to stop the super rich making us all eat ****. You Republicans may love licking the rich man's arsehole, but the rest of us prefer human food.
Lash
 
  2  
Thu 8 Feb, 2018 06:08 am
@izzythepush,
Although the imagery in your (ho him) continuing personal attacks against me were quite colorful, either The Guardian’s article was correct in facts— or wrong.

The way you do it, Izzy, is refute the facts presented, if you can. Try it. Constantly relying on personal attacks against people and news sources with no factual refutation kills your credibility.

Lash
 
  2  
Thu 8 Feb, 2018 06:12 am
Maybe you like The Telegraph?

https://www.google.com/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/18/nhs-chiefs-read-riot-act-poor-ae-performance/amp/
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Thu 8 Feb, 2018 06:46 am
@Lash,
Personal attacks? That's what Republicans do, suck up to the rich man. We got the NHS back in 1946 when we still had to pay for WW2. You could have had that too, but instead you chose McCartyism.

I'm not disputing anything in the Guardian article, just mildly surprised that you'd used it immediately after trashing it on your fascism thread.

You continue to misrepresent those protesting, as some how being opposed to the NHS. That is an out and out lie, one told by Trump who wants to spread the myth that UHC doesn't work, that they only solution is over priced insurance, the only beneficiaries being big business and the super rich.

It's not just the NHS that's in crisis, it's the entire public sector, and that's down to underfunding, austerity budgets, tax cuts for the rich coupled with tax avoidance, use of loopholes and offshore banking.

This is the main story trending over here right now, chronic underfunding of local government.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-42984368

Let's get one thing straight, I've never doubted your nationality. I accept you're an American teacher somewhere in the deep South, but I've never believed your damascene conversion to progressive politics. If you were a teenager then yes, but I find it inconceivable that someone of your, (or my,) age could vote for Dubya twice and then do a complete 180 degree turn and start supporting Sanders. I'm not talking about a softening politically which I can accept, but a complete volte face.

I thought we'd reached a détente, our exchanges on TV shows have been civil enough, warm even, but that changed when you attacked the NHS. Some of those people marching in support of the NHS are my friends, and when you lied about their motives you made it personal, very personal. My father is being discharged today after receiving excellent treatment, and what you wrote was an insult to the wonderful doctors and nurses who've been treating him.

If you told any of those people marching that they didn't support the NHS you'd get short shrift. What's even worse is that you continued to misrepresent them even after being told otherwise by someone who actually lives here and is experiencing the NHS right now. You don't know what's really going on over here like I don't know what's happening over there. So for once it would be nice that instead of trotting out the party line you actually listen to someone who knows NHS staff and the protesters and knows what their motivations really are.

I would like to go back to having civil exchanges, but when you make things personal it's very difficult.

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.44 seconds on 09/19/2024 at 03:11:41