Results 1 to 30 of 505

Thread: Biden Thread

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,483

    Default Re: Biden Thread

    ...in that Manchin is an honest fool rather than mendacious like Sinema I guess
    I don't buy that for one second. He know's exactly what he's doing which is bowing to his donors (which I pointed out in previous posts), making millions from his coal interests (any wonder why he's dead set on tanking the climate action portions of the Reconciliation Bill?), and keeping the minimum federal wage increases as low a possible (he has widespead food service interests in WVa). He's a sneaky snake, talking about fiscal responsibility (where the hell were you Joe when Trump's tax cuts added to the deficit?), while raking in millions on dirty coal:

    https://tyt.com/stories/4vZLCHuQrYE4...gVC4rAZQw5Hkno

    Manchin has a vested and longstanding interest in the coal industry as a senator from West Virginia. The state is second in the nation in coal production and coal is part of its identity. Between 2011, the year covered by his first Senate disclosure filing, and 2020, Manchin raked in a total of $5,211,154 in dividend income from Enersystems, a coal and energy resource company he founded in 1988, before entering the public sector, according to annual financial disclosures. The senator earned $491,949 in dividends last year alone, as journalist Alex Kotch reported this summer.
    Enersystems represents a staggering 71 percent of Manchin’s investment income, according to FinePrint. It accounts for 30 percent of his net worth. His stake in the company is worth as much as $5 million. Manchin, in other words, has a vested interest in creating policies to keep coal profitable.
    Earlier this year, Unearthed, Greenpeace U.K.’s investigative unit, obtained video of now-former Exxon lobbyist Keith McCoy discussing 11 senators he called crucial to Exxon’s interests, referring to Manchin in particular as “the kingmaker.” McCoy bragged about speaking with Manchin’s office on a weekly basis.
    Then there's this:

    https://thejourneyman.substack.com/p...ckballed-neera

    When Tanden decided to call out Joe Manchin’s daughter for yet another example of corporate greed, little could she have known that while Joe Manchin can rationalize confirming Bret Kavanaugh, an accused sexual predator, and Jeff Sessions, a renowned racist, her mean tweets about his daughter are where he draws the line.
    Now there were other legitimate reasons for rejecting Tanden, but that quote is difficult to call coincidence.

    And where was "King Manchin" when this happened?

    https://inthesetimes.com/article/wes...chin-democrats

    In a statement, Joe Manchin said, ​“For months, I have engaged in conversations with Viatris, Monongalia County, the Morgantown Area Partnership, and local and state leaders to find a solution that protects every single job.” (Since the plant’s 1,500 jobs are set to be eliminated in a week, any conversations he had were apparently fruitless.)
    Lots of blah-blah-blah, but no action:

    Joe Manchin, he says, gave the union members ​“two minutes of his time” several months ago, and has not done anything meaningful on their behalf.
    Ya think a $30 million 'golden parachute' for his beloved daughter had anything to do with his lack of action?

    The man spouts nothing but BS, as in this quote:

    “Wherever there is one job on the verge of being lost, I will fight to save it. Wherever there is one company looking to grow in West Virginia, I will fight to make that growth a reality.”
    Yep, how do you think the fine citzens of WVa feel about seeing their jobs headed overseas? Sorry, "The King Maker" is nothing but a corrupt, money-grubbing politician that is using his office to increase his own personal wealth at the expense of the American public.

    Sinema is a different animal...a chameleon. She got elected by running as a "progressive", but has quickly changed her tune (or maybe it was her plan all along) and is now one of the main fronts for BigPharma having accepted close to $1 million in campaign donations from pharmaceuticals.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0ljgTvvmq4

    Compare the "progressive" rhetoric in that interview with the crap she espouses today. LIAR.

    Most of Biden's agenda polls with majority support, 60%, 70%, more
    It's nearly 80% in Manchin's home state of WVa, and that polling includes nearly 60% of Republicans across the states.

    Not passing either bill and possibly defaulting on our debt will certainly end his presidency and who knows what else for the US as a superpower.
    Methinks you are getting caught up in the political rhetoric... Republicans are fully aware of what a debt default means, and so does Big Business. It ain't gonna happen in the end, but the GOP wants to milk the fear of debt default to pressure the Democrats into concessions.

    We've neglected our infrastructure for decades. What's a few more days or weeks to hammer out negotiations on the Reconciliation Bill. Progressives know full well that as distasteful as certain items in the Bi-partisan bill are, swallowing them without fighting for the $3.5 trillion package, is a serious dereliction of duty, so-to-speak. There will be an infrastructure bill passed...eventually, but surrendering to the conservatives on this issue virtually insures a completely GOP-controlled government by 2024, and then if you have any notions of living in a democracy, best find another country...
    Last edited by ReluctantSamurai; 10-03-2021 at 07:05.
    High Plains Drifter

    Member thankful for this post:



  2. #2

    Default Re: Biden Thread

    One way or another, he's going to be forced to make a public commitment. In principle, there's nothing to his personal profit, or the coal industry's prospects, that requires revenue for deficit reduction, a $1.5 trillion topline target, or vehicle and fuel tax credits for hydrogen technology (). If Manchin really will accept the tax increases listed in the memo, he ought to be counted on to vote for some form of BBB. If Sinema really won't accept any such tax increases (nor Medicare price controls), nothing of BBB will ever pass.

    We get to find out what the truth is, how exciting!
    Last edited by Montmorency; 10-03-2021 at 04:45.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



  3. #3
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,483

    Default Re: Biden Thread

    a $1.5 trillion topline target
    This is the part that infuriates progressives. Both Manchin and Sinema voted to proceed on the $3.5 trillion Reconciliation package (at least on the overall amount), in return for bringing the two bills along separately. Now the two want to pretend they never voted as such, approve the bi-partisan bill, and renegotiate the Reconciliation package. And we all know that means that package is DOA.

    We get to find out what the truth is...
    I think that's already obvious...
    High Plains Drifter

  4. #4

    Default Re: Biden Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai View Post
    I think that's already obvious...
    If the leaked memo is legit - in the sense of it being an authentic document - then the big question is why wouldn't Manchin mean what he was saying, while he was saying it not to the public but to his own Senate Majority leader alone? Now, it's possible that Manchin is going the full evil and has just being trying to maximally screw with Congress for months by misrepresenting himself to his own colleagues in private, but there's at least as good a case that this is just what Manchin believes.

    People can have different opinions than you, even if those opinions suck. You know that perfectly well from life experience.

    We'll get to find out, because if Manchin is lying about his position then he will dodge when BBB is modified for his benefit to scrap it anyway. So the puzzle will be solved in the end.


    As for Sinema, she's been running and governing as a Conservadem for almost her entire political career. Not that I read too much on her before this year, but mea culpa for buying the lazy mainstream narrative that just because she was once a Green supporter she must be secretly progressive. She told us who she was for more than a decade, we should have listened. Not exactly a good look for the (American) Greens in view of the longstanding criticism that they have no ideology other than running spoiler against Democrats.
    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog...indy-must-read

    Another article on Sinema's perils, that I think hits the nail on a general point, even if I don't agree with everything else he says.
    https://www.slowboring.com/p/sinema-menace

    That said, I think progressive thinking on money in politics is generally pretty outdated and tends to reverse cause and effect.

    In recent cycles, Democratic candidates have had no problem raising money. Indeed, Democrats have had so much money that deep longshot campaigns like Jamie Harrison in South Caroline or Amy McGrath in Kentucky end up showered with cash. Studies show that large-dollar Democratic Party donors are generally to the left of rank-and-file Democratic Party voters and small-dollar donors are even further left. As we saw in the 2020 primary, small-dollar donors love Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Big money loved Pete Buttigieg and Beto O’Rourke. The voters loved Joe Biden.

    In other words, if Sinema wanted to be a strong progressive ally, she would have plenty of cash for her reelection campaign. I don’t anticipate Mark Kelly will struggle to raise money, for example.

    Sinema isn’t blocking popular progressive ideas because she’s getting corporate money; she’s getting corporate money because she’s blocking popular progressive ideas, and businesses want their key ally to succeed and prosper.
    Sinema should be ejected from the Democratic Party, not because she's putatively driven by corruption, but because she's a narcissistic climber with a bad and dangerous worldview.

    But you can imagine a world where Sinema-ism takes over, and Democrats become an upscale suburban party that supports free trade and balanced budgets. A party that doesn’t rock the boat and taxes and spending. Where everybody reads “Lean In” and “White Fragility” and makes sure the company they work at runs DEI seminars. And, where you are constantly losing elections due to the lopsided nature of the Senate map, but even when you do govern, you’re just a kind of technocratic clean-up crew that doesn’t really try to tackle major social problems. I think you got a flash of what that kind of politics might look like in the final couple years of Bill Clinton’s administration, but then in the 21st century, Democrats broke left on economics rather than right.

    But nothing is inevitable in life, and I think there is a plausible world in which Sinema is the future. And to people who actually care about addressing things like America’s sky-high child poverty rate, the tragic persistence of medical bankruptcies, and the inadequacy of our provisions for young children and their parents, that’s a real problem.

    I am the furthest thing in the world from a DINO hunter, but I really do think that if Sinema persists in this course, it would be worth mounting a strong primary challenge to her.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



  5. #5
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,483

    Default Re: Biden Thread

    ...but there's at least as good a case that this is just what Manchin believes.
    Yep, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I've certainly been vocal about mine. I don't take seriously what any politician says anymore, privately or publicly. I look at what they actually do. You can say Manchin truly believes in what he says, and that he's just that ignorant to trust that bi-partisanship is still viable, and that he's seriously concerned about the national debt. I think his reasons for voting the way he does have been laid quite bare, and if his recent testy reply to a Bloomberg reporter is any indication, he's getting quite uncomfortable with the press looking into his finances. I think his BS (read as corruption) has never been more on display than letting 1400 high-paying jobs leave his own state for Germany, without so much as a whimper, all so his daughter can profit. He's as corrupt as they come...

    Sinema isn’t blocking popular progressive ideas because she’s getting corporate money; she’s getting corporate money because she’s blocking popular progressive ideas, and businesses want their key ally to succeed and prosper.
    Does it really matter which came first? The result is the same...a dire threat to President Biden's agenda, an agenda that has widespread popular support even among Republican voters.

    So which came first, the chicken or the egg?

    https://www.salon.com/2021/10/01/for...ighting-hikes/

    A former senior aide to "centrist" Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., worked until recently as one of the top lobbyists for JPMorgan Chase, the largest U.S. bank and a leading opponent of President Biden's proposed corporate tax increases — which Sinema also opposes.

    Sinema, a former Green Party member who campaigned on lowering drug prices and previously called for big corporations and the rich to "pay their fair share," has also balked at Democrats' plan to lower prescription drug costs and increase taxes on the wealthy and large companies, amid a massive lobbying blitz by corporations and industry groups aiming to torpedo the bill.

    JPMorgan Chase has spent more than $1.3 million on lobbying on "corporate tax issues" and other matters between the first and second quarter this year, according to its lobbying disclosures.

    Another longtime former Sinema aide, Kate Gonzales, earlier this year joined the high-end lobbying firm of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, which brags that its "political connections deliver results" and that former Capitol Hill staffers are among its principals. Gonzales is a member of the firm's Energy, Environment, and Resources Strategies Group, where she "provides insight into Democratic priorities," according to the company. "She is highly skilled at developing compelling messaging for moderate Democrats and Republicans," her bio says.

    Meanwhile, Sinema's current chief of staff, Meg Joseph, used to be a lobbyist at Clark & Weinstock, which has represented Pfizer and other top pharmaceutical companies and trade groups that oppose Biden's proposal to allow Medicare to negotiate the price of prescription drugs.
    IMHO, given that Sinema campaigned as a Green Party member, she's blocking progressive policy because she's receiving huge hand-outs from corporations, and not the other way around:

    Pharmaceutical companies and medical firms have donated more than $750,000 to Sinema during her career, including more than $466,000 since she was elected in 2018. Sinema has also received more than $920,000 from companies and industry groups leading the lobbying blitz against Biden's proposal, according to an analysis from the progressive government watchdog group Accountable.US.
    Some of the embedded links are very informative.

    At least Sinema, unlike Joe Manchin, is out in the open about all of this:

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/kyrste...dont-care-do-u
    Last edited by ReluctantSamurai; 10-04-2021 at 20:10.
    High Plains Drifter

  6. #6

    Default Re: Biden Thread

    Again on why we need to cancel federal student debt ASAP, this time with more relevance for spmetla maybe:

    It's long, so buckle up.

    Student debt is a crushing burden on millions of Americans. To help, Congress passed a law in 2007, creating the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, promising that if you're a public servant - a cop, a teacher, a soldier - and you work for 10 years, your debt will be erased.

    But maybe it should be called the unforgiveness program: 98% of those who've applied for relief were told they're ineligible. We focused on the military. According to an April report by the GAO – the government's watchdog agency - of nearly 180,000 active-duty service-members with federal student loans, only 124 individuals have managed to navigate the confusing rules of the program and get their debt wiped clean.

    We talked with a group you'd assume could figure it out: JAGs – lawyers who work for the military.


    Lesley Stahl: What was your student debt when you went into the service?

    Heather Tregle: About $90,000.

    Brandon Jones: $108,000.

    Carson Sprott: $150,000.

    Charles Olson: over $150,000.

    Charles Olson – a Marine; Carson Sprott – Air Force; and in the Army: Heather Tregle, Jonathan Hirsch and Brandon Jones. They say the rules laid out in the law seemed clear - they had to be employed in a public service job and repay typically small increments of their loans until they reached 120 payments. And whatever remained of their debt at that point would vanish: no matter how much.

    Lesley Stahl: How many of you in your own mind think that you have paid up the 120 months and that you deserve to be forgiven? [ALL RAISE HANDS] All of you.

    But all of them were told they're mistaken: they were off by years.

    Lesley Stahl: Were any of you derelict in making your payments?

    ALL: Never. No. No. Never.

    Carson Sprott: As military members, if we fail to pay our debts, we're subject to discipline under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

    Brandon Jones: And our security clearances are on the line. So all this--

    Lesley Stahl: If you don't pay, you lose your security clearance?

    Brandon Jones: You can. If you default on your loan, you can lose your security clearance.

    They all say they were walked through a bureaucratic maze that tripped them up.

    Carson Sprott: Nobody ever explained that some of your loans are coded one way. Some of them are coded the other. And some of those don't qualify.

    Major Carson Sprott was told he had 41 extra months of payments after he thought he was done. Turns out under the rules of the program only one type of federal student loan is eligible for relief. His type of loans didn't qualify. But he says that wasn't explained to him by the loan servicing companies contracted by the Department of Education to collect his money.

    Carson Sprott: Not until I'd been paying on the loans for two and a half years.

    Lesley Stahl: Aren't you angry?

    Carson Sprott: I'm a little angry. (LAUGHTER) I'm a little angry. I wrote a dozen letters over my first two years to all my lenders. And I got no response other than assurances that everything was fine.

    His loan servicer told him his only recourse was to convert to another type of loan and restart the month count from zero. And his other headache? Under the rules, he had to make small monthly repayments. But his repayments were so small – they didn't cover his interest.

    Lesley Stahl: Do you actually owe more now than you did when you started this program?

    Carson Sprott: Significantly. My initial loans of $150,000 are now at approximately $215,000.

    The way this program is set up, many borrowers don't find out there's a problem for years. Army JAG Lt. Colonel Jonathan Hirsch found out after a decade.

    Jonathan Hirsch: I got a letter that said I had zero months accumulated towards Public Service Loan Forgiveness.

    Lesley Stahl: No!

    Jonathan Hirsch: Zero. And I had been paying for ten years.

    He had the right type of loans, but the wrong type of repayment plan - so he had another decade to go!

    Jonathan Hirsch: All of my kids are going to college. And so I am taking out parent plus loans to help pay for their college--

    Lesley Stahl: Oh, no--

    Jonathan Hirsch: --at the same time that I am making payments on my loans.

    Lesley Stahl: Heather, you were in Afghanistan for a year?

    Heather Tregle: Yes.

    Lesley Stahl: So did that year count toward your 120 months?

    Heather Tregle: Half of it did.

    Army JAG Major Heather Tregle, mother of two, doesn't know why those six months didn't count. She always stayed on top of her loan, even when she was in warzones. Like when she was in Kandahar and noticed her loan servicing company suddenly hiked up her payments.

    Heather Tregle: So I spent days, because when you're in Afghanistan, you only can call for 20 minutes at a time--

    Lesley Stahl: You're calling from over there?

    Heather Tregle: Correct. So you had to use a morale line to call. And it cuts off after 20 minutes. So I would wait on hold and try to speak to them-- and get it all sorted out. And then tell them, "I am calling from Afghanistan. Can you please give me a number that I can just call you back-- that I don't have to wait on hold?" And they couldn't do that--

    Here's something else that's maddening: as long as they're in a warzone they're allowed to skip their loan payments. But what's not always explained to them – we discovered - is that that brings their monthly count to a grinding halt. In other words: serving in actual combat can set them back years in getting relief

    Seth Frotman: Think about what that means. Think about someone who is serving overseas. Think about how many of their kids' birthday parties they missed, only to be told, "None of that time counts."

    Seth Frotman heads an advocacy group called the Student Borrower Protection Center. He says borrowers should have started getting relief through the forgiveness program four years ago – a decade after it started – but over 9 out of 10 military members who have applied for debt relief have been turned down.

    Seth Frotman: Well, the first thing a 90%-plus denial rate shows you is this isn't one-off borrower's fault. This isn't just individual people who made mistakes.

    Lesley Stahl: Right.

    Seth Frotman: This is an entire system who let down our men and women in uniform.

    Lesley Stahl: We're talking not just about JAGs. We're talking about military doctors, we're talking about cyber experts.

    Seth Frotman: The Public Service Loan Forgiveness program was created because the country was desperately worried that student debt was going to stop America's best and brightest from entering critical fields like the military.

    But the rules drive them crazy - like making them chase after their commanders for their signature to verify that they're even in the military.

    Seth Frotman: This is where the system breaks down. Where service members are told "You're not eligible because we don't think you got the right officer to fill out your form." Or, "You may have found the right officer, but they forgot to date the form."

    Lesley Stahl: Oh, come on.

    Heather Tregle: They make it more difficult than it needs to be.

    Major Tregle thought she did everything right to qualify: She had the right loan, right repayment plan. She can follow the fine print, afterall, her title is chief of complex litigation for the Army's prosecutors. So after nine years of paying, she confidently started filing the necessary paperwork.

    Heather Tregle: I should have been about 12 payments away from 120 at that point. And they said that I had only paid 12 qualifying payments.

    Lesley Stahl: They're telling you that your nine years of monthly payments amounted to one year.

    Heather Tregle: Yes. So I obviously called them and said, "I don't understand. I have been in auto-payment the entire time, so you guys take my payment when it's due and the amount that is due." And the woman looked through my account and she says, "You may have an issue that we know is an issue where the auto-debit takes the payment but one penny short of what is actually due so it doesn't count."

    Lesley Stahl: Woah, woah, woah. What?

    Heather Tregle: So it's a known problem that through the auto-payment, it's not-- it doesn't take the full amount due. It takes one cent shorter than it should.


    Nobody's ever told me if that is in fact what was wrong with those payments. That was just something the servicer said on the phone that day of, "Well, this is a known problem."

    Lesley Stahl: If it's known - fix it.

    Heather Tregle: Right.

    And online, borrowers complain that paying a few pennies over the sum can get payments disqualified too.

    Heather Tregle: I submitted my case for a review. And it sat in review for three years. And in the interim, I was paying because you're like, "Okay, well, they're reviewing it. They're doing something." But it-- the review never-- three years later, it was still under review.

    It's an obstacle course. We found payments often disappear when the student loan is transferred from one servicing company to another, which happened to Marine Judge Advocate Major Charles Olson. When he applied for relief, his new servicer provided him this endless list of why he wasn't getting credit for over six years' worth of payments.

    Charles Olson: All those payments don't count for a variety of different reasons. The payment wasn't on the correct due date. The payment wasn't the correct amount. And the frustrating part is I've sent the payment information via mail, via uploading to prove to them that I've-- I've made the payments, the 120 payments.

    Lesley Stahl: On time. The right amount?

    [CHARLES NODS AFFIRMATIVE]

    He figured out that most of his records just hadn't transferred properly between servicers.

    Lesley Stahl: I can't imagine that when you saw that, you didn't run out of your house and start screaming!

    Charles Olson: If I wasn't a Marine-- yeah, I would have lost my bearing, ma'am.

    He's been arguing and appealing for over a year in vain. Army JAG Major Brandon Jones thinks repeated human errors cost him over three years of payments - his arguing and appealing has also proved futile.

    Brandon Jones: It seems like they're just trying to wear us down to the point where we either have to hire an attorney or do something else.

    Lesley Stahl: Or give it up and continue to pay--

    Brandon Jones: Or just give up. Yep.

    Carson Sprott: These are three years of my life in the service of my nation that-- as I counted on them to count for this, they don't. And the reason they don't count, in my opinion, is that I was misled.

    Seth Frotman: One of the reasons why we are in the mess we are in is because the student loan companies, who have gotten hundreds of millions of dollars to implement these programs, have cheated borrowers. They have deceived borrowers. They have chosen their bottom line over helping our men and women in uniform.

    You see this in the lawsuits that have been filed across the country. You see this in the federal regulators who have taken to task the student loan industry.

    Regulators like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which recently concluded that loan "servicers regularly provided inaccurate information", accusing them of deception.

    Carson Sprott, whose debt has grown, has left the Air Force, but he got a civilian public service job, so he's still counting months. Jonathan Hirsch, after many appeals, just got his debt wiped clean. Heather Tregle heard earlier this year that hers was too.

    Heather Tregle: It was absolutely amazing. I believe I cried. (LAUGH)

    This problem didn't start under President Biden, but Seth Frotman says he could fix it immediately.

    Seth Frotman: So there is a law that Congress passed as the War in Iraq was raging, as the War in Afghanistan was raging, which said, no member of the military should ever be denied a benefit because of bureaucratic red tape or government bureaucracy.

    Lesley Stahl: So there is an actual law that could deal with every one of the glitches the JAGs are talking about?

    Seth Frotman: Yes.

    Lesley Stahl: And the president, you believe, has the power to put that law in over the law that created this law.

    Seth Frotman: He could do it tomorrow.


    At the end of this past week, the Department of Education told us that the number of military people whose student debt has been forgiven has inched up to 350. It also said it plans to announce a major overhaul of this program as early as this week.
    ^^^How is that stuff above not outright fraud exactly?

    Of the millions of people who could be eligible for public service debt forgiveness, fifty-five hundred have seen the commitment honored over the past - since the Great Recession in other words.

    We are putting special focus here on Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF), which has recently undergone substantial changes to the application process. Over the years, PSLF has spawned much confusion and frustration. Millions of people are employed in public service, including teachers, firefighters, law enforcement, and some nonprofit workers, yet only about 5,500 borrowers have received PSLF discharges thus far, totaling $453 million.
    Taking in the bigger picture of student debt during the pandemic:

    As of March 31, 2021, the outstanding federal student loan portfolio is $1.59 trillion, representing 42.9 million unduplicated student aid recipients... As a result of special pandemic flexibilities for student loans, the number of borrowers in repayment status has fallen sharply. Only about 500,000 Direct Loan borrowers were in repayment status as of March 31, 2021, compared to 18.1 million borrowers a year ago, which was just a few days after the CARES Act was passed. Only one percent of all outstanding Direct Loan dollar balances are currently in repayment status, consisting largely of customers who have opted out of the CARES Act payment pause. More than 23 million Direct Loan borrowers with outstanding loans of about $938 billion are now in forbearance status, and more than 99% of these balances are in the special CARES Act

    So to recap:

    1. Federal student debt is now in the trillions
    2. A jubilee is within the federal government's authority (admittedly Republican judges will disagree)
    3. Student debt is currently crushing the lives of more than 10% of the country, tens of millions of people, virtually all in their 20s and 30s - the so-called future of the nation.
    4. It is an economic drag that keeps billions of dollars out of the consumer economy and out of entrepreneurial investment
    5. It literally costs the federal government money to hold this nonperforming debt that will never be repaid, adding to the national debt/deficit

    What are our options?

    A. Try to nullify at least some of the debt, even a mere (as Biden campaigned on) $10K per borrower
    B. Sorry, but comprehensive national reform of the entire education sector is not forthcoming, therefore we must permit the perfect to be the enemy of the good, indefinitely
    C. If you have the chance to make people eat as much shit as you please for the price of a few dollars, surely it's a moral hazard not to "add more weight"
    D. I believe we should execute the young

    Hmmmmm....



    Quote Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai View Post
    Yep, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I've certainly been vocal about mine. I don't take seriously what any politician says anymore, privately or publicly. I look at what they actually do.
    That's what I'm saying, that his behavior so far is most consistent with the described worldview. And it remains a striking observation that if Manchin needed money, national democrats could get him $10 million in a week compared to a million in a year from oil, gas, and mining PACs or whatever the figure is. Who paid Manchin to ask for hydrogen fuel tax breaks? Who's paying for his demand the bill contain federal abortion restrictions he's always supported (Hyde Amendment)?

    Or as Manchin recently proclaimed: "I’ve never been a liberal in any way, shape or form... and all they need to do is, we have to elect more - I guess for them to get theirs - elect more liberals.”

    Or: "I believe in my heart, that what we can do, and what needs we have right now, and what we can afford to do, without basically changing our whole society, to an entitlement mentality."

    Does it really matter which came first? The result is the same...a dire threat to President Biden's agenda, an agenda that has widespread popular support even among Republican voters.
    It matters because the implications are different between someone whose vote is rented by special interests and someone whose vote is bought by their own principle. In a certain sense you can call that corrupt as well - like, 'a politician who convinces themselves of the need to defend an unjust status quo is inherently corrupt' - but it's not going to be the traditional sense.

    I broached the story earlier of multiple House members, many of whom are in light-to-solid blue districts, abruptly changing their positions and demanding unpopular redactions from BBB following special interest lobbying and donations. We can bargain with that. If someone is just scared of inflation or taxes or whatever, or would trust their life to Republicans, or isn't a team player, there's less space for negotiation.

    At any rate, if the memo represents Manchin's current asks, it is in fact a good sign for the legislation's prospects (compared to the alternatives).

    IMHO, given that Sinema campaigned as a Green Party member, she's blocking progressive policy because she's receiving huge hand-outs from corporations, and not the other way around:
    If she's been doing this since the second Bush term, when she was AOC's age, then it's probably just who she is. Was Reagan paid off to "become" a conservative?

    To make a point, Seamus, what is the opinion of Sinema held in your circles?


    Broadening the question again, if the reconciliation bill comes to a vote, and fails, (ignoring the House) whose vote is more likely to sink the agenda between Manchin and Sinema based on what we've seen of them so far?
    Last edited by Montmorency; 10-06-2021 at 06:44.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



  7. #7
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,483

    Default Re: Biden Thread

    And it remains a striking observation that if Manchin needed money, national democrats could get him $10 million in a week compared to a million in a year from oil, gas, and mining PACs or whatever the figure is.
    Methinks you are overlooking one key difference between PAC funds and money he makes in the fossil fuel industry: the former---in the United States, a political action committee (PAC) is a 527 organization that pools campaign contributions from members and donates those funds to campaigns for or against candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation. (in theory, at least); the latter---goes directly into his personal bank account. A significant difference, no?

    Mark it on your calendar, Manchin will work to scale back the climate related portions of BBB, he will fight against raising taxes on the rich to help pay for it, and he will want to put some kind of restrictions on the portion allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices (thereby securing a significant reduction in drug costs). The first will be because of his heavy investment in coal, the second is because his second biggest donor group include some of the largest law firms in the country, and the Chamber of Commerce, and the third will be because of his daughters significant role involving Big Pharma.

    [NEWS FLASH]

    Just saw this:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-man...se-11633040698

    In comments to reporters and a newly disclosed document from the summer, Mr. Manchin called for shrinking Democrats’ education, healthcare and climate package by more than half, to $1.5 trillion. He also laid out his terms for the climate portion of Mr. Biden’s agenda, insisting on preserving fossil fuel subsidies and avoiding penalties for coal, gas and oil; that position amounts to a break with progressives on the substance of the agenda in addition to the price tag.
    In the memo, Mr. Manchin said he would support a 25% corporate tax rate, a 28% capital-gains rate and an enhancement of the Internal Revenue Service’s ability to collect taxes owed. House Democrats have proposed raising the corporate rate to 26.5% from 21% and raising the top capital-gains rate to 28.8%, drafting an additional 3% surtax for those with incomes above $5 million.
    So my point about Manchin fighting to continue fossil fuel use is correct, it seems (the rhetoric about H2 production is ridiculous, as his proposed funding is for "blue hydrogen" using natural gas, which creates more emissions than it saves). It's the typical BS a fossil fuel addict uses---"What's the hurry? Let's just keep fossil fuels in the energy mix, and slowly phase in cleaner energy". Jeezus, we're not even going to keep the temp rise below 2 degrees C, let alone 1.5...meanwhile half the world is on fire, and the other half is deluged with flooding...

    And how about this as a sad commentary about how fucked-up our government is:

    Mr. Manchin’s memo also stipulated a number of demands to help the fossil fuel industry. It said that, in his role as chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, he must have full control over crafting the central climate change provisions of the legislation — all but ensuring that those provisions will be far less ambitious and more fossil-fuel friendly than Mr. Biden had hoped.
    So someone who has a vested interest in fossil fuels is demanding to oversee all the the provisions of the climate change provisions in the BBB. Jeezus...

    I'm not into figuring out how much of a difference there is between a 25% rate and a 26.5% rate is, nor a 28% rate vs 28.8%, so someone more mathematically inclined can do the math. Suffice to say, I'm correct he'd be against tax rates, but I honestly expected a lower number from him. Yet to see where he weighs in on drug costs....

    then it's probably just who she is.
    She lied to the people who worked to get her elected, if recent events involving ASU students and others who worked on her campaign. Doesn't make any difference which came first, the money or the greed. It's the result that's important.

    Seth Frotman: One of the reasons why we are in the mess we are in is because the student loan companies, who have gotten hundreds of millions of dollars to implement these programs, have cheated borrowers. They have deceived borrowers. They have chosen their bottom line over helping our men and women in uniform.
    $70.3 billion. That's the amount of interest the federal government collects on student loans on a yearly basis:

    https://slate.com/business/2021/03/s...-payments.html

    For a size comparison, $70.3 billion is a little more than one-third what the government took in from capital gains tax receipts in 2019 ($183 billion), or a little less than double what it makes from the federal gas tax ($36 billion). It’s about 3.6 percent the size of the Biden administration’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief effort—probably not enough to take much heat off the economy if payments restart next year.
    Too simplistic to say that's the only reason, but it's hard to ignore that $70.3 billion isn't just chump change...
    Last edited by ReluctantSamurai; 10-06-2021 at 08:54.
    High Plains Drifter

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO