“It Will Cost Nothing”

[LDAHL]

So now the administration is claiming that their $3.5 trillion spending package will cost nothing. They say this is because they will raise taxes on “the rich” and corporations that they believe should have been taxed more harshly all along, and there will be no new debt required. I suppose this might be true if you believe all our income belongs to the government, who decides how much we are worthy of keeping.

This is what happens when people don’t listen to accountants.

[catherine]

Makes sense to me.

When the gap between the rich and the poor keeps getting wider and wider, and when the effective tax rate of corporations and individuals is less than that of middle class people, it's time to recalibrate. Or we can just admit that our democracy is really an oligarchy.

[LDAHL]

Makes sense to me.

When the gap between the rich and the poor keeps getting wider and wider, and when the effective tax rate of corporations and individuals is less than that of middle class people, it's time to recalibrate. Or we can just admit that our democracy is really an oligarchy.

Hey, if you want to use the tax code to redistribute income, have at it. But don’t try to tell me that 3,500,000,000,000 = 0. That makes as much sense as Trump claiming “the wall will cost us nothing”.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Accountants aren't experts on national financing (but if I needed help with my taxes, if I had a business that needed accounting work done, I'd call an accountant and not an economist for sure). Of course one can say economists have not always given great advice either and have a point.

[LDAHL]

Accountants aren't experts on national financing (but if I needed help with my taxes, if I had a business that needed accounting work done, I'd call an accountant and not an economist for sure). Of course one can say economists have not always given great advice either and have a point.

An accountant might have been able to explain the difference between revenue and expenses.

[iris lilies]

Never have I ever said we should not listen to accountants.

[catherine]

Hey, if you want to use the tax code to redistribute income, have at it. But don’t try to tell me that 3,500,000,000,000 = 0. That makes as much sense as Trump claiming “the wall will cost us nothing”.

There are certain situations where I think the fate of one of our citizens affects us all. I have to admit I've been doing a lot of thinking about how neither party is serving us well. I represent liberal thought, but at the same time, I see the pitfalls.

In general, I think that the Federal government should provide the following to all of its citizens:
Universal healthcare
Safe, reliable infrastructure
A reasonable safety net for economic hardship
Clean air and water through whatever means necessary including tough regulation on corporations and tough penalties for non-compliance
Public education through 12th grade
Commitment to the future in terms of climate change mitigation

That's the short list.There are a lot of things I don't think belong on that list.

Frankly, I haven't researched the 3 trillion dollar package, so I don't know what it buys us, so I'll take a look and get back to you.

[iris lilies]

There are certain situations where I think the fate of one of our citizens affects us all. I have to admit I've been doing a lot of thinking about how neither party is serving us well. I represent liberal thought, but at the same time, I see the pitfalls.

In general, I think that the Federal government should provide the following to all of its citizens:
Universal healthcare
Safe, reliable infrastructure
A reasonable safety net for economic hardship
Clean air and water through whatever means necessary including tough regulation on corporations and tough penalties for non-compliance
Public education through 12th grade
Commitment to the future in terms of climate change mitigation

That's the short list.There are a lot of things I don't think belong on that list.

Frankly, I haven't researched the 3 trillion dollar package, so I don't know what it buys us, so I'll take a look and get back to you.

Do you think we have that reasonable safety net now for economic hardship?

I’m glad to see that you’ve limited that to “citizens. “You know that disqualifies significant measure of the population who are living here, right?

[ApatheticNoMore]

No I don't think we have a reasonable safety net for economic hardship. People go bankrupt due to medical bills. People die due to being unable to get medical care that wouldn't with universal medical care. People are homeless, people live in ridiculously crowded conditions (i'm not talking having 2 roommates in a 3 bedroom apartment, I mean 20 people in a house). The safety net is only available if a few very very complex conditions are met (usually only involving children).


I’m glad to see that you’ve limited that to “citizens. “You know that disqualifies significant measure of the population who are living here, right?

I think at this point pretty much everyone thinks some kind of amnesty may be the only real option there. This isn't equivalent to open borders, but of course there is that risk. It's not so easy to say what one should do with people who have been living in this country decades illegally.

[catherine]

Do you think we have that reasonable safety net now for economic hardship?

I’m glad to see that you’ve limited that to “citizens. “You know that disqualifies significant measure of the population who are living here, right?

That's a two-part question:
a) Do I think we have a reasonable safety net given our current economic-political situation (yes)
b) Do I think our aconomic/political system is the right one to ensure that the majority of our citizens can flourish and prosper. (no)

As far as the "citizen" question goes: I agree with ANM in that I believe in some kind of amnesty to keep people who have lived here and established roots to stay. I wish there were some kind of creative tool to enable the acceptance and speedy citizenship of newcomers. I don't believe in treating desperate people cruelly.

[Rogar]

Certainly a bit of wordsmithing for marketing purposes. If the issue is about who will pay, I'm not a big fan of cutting taxes on the rich while at the same time paying for government services and operations through a growing government debt, which we've have seen previously.

[ApatheticNoMore]

There are certain situations where I think the fate of one of our citizens affects us all. I have to admit I've been doing a lot of thinking about how neither party is serving us well. I represent liberal thought, but at the same time, I see the pitfalls.

The pitfalls at this point seem largely illusory. I'd like someone to point out something with all that much reality. I mean does some identity politics stuff go off the deep end? Sure, but enough about twitter or even what happens at some university as it's largely inconsequential for people's lives. It doesn't mean I approve of it.

Is something here or there subject to corruption or abuse? Sure. You need a very informed and active citizenry to hold government to account if that happens but speaking local government, that's very hard to produce in many parts of the u.s. for cultural reasons (and everyone is also busy with everything else - you need housewives or retired people almost). And political polarization doesn't help there - people that are opposed to safety nets on principle aren't going to be useful there, you need people who believe in them but don't want them corrupted by widespread fraud. That's what social democracy takes. Meanwhile liberals are so tired of fighting decades worth of attack on the minimal u.s. safety net - some of which have succeed many of which have largely failed like constant attempts to cut social security and medicare, that they hardly want to hear it. All one hears is: "I want to eliminate the safety net blah blah".

For instance there has been known theft from the unemployment system in many states including here. That is bad. But you just can't argue from that that there shouldn't be an unemployment system. It just does not follow. But that's the kind of fraud you actually can in theory crack down on, someone said they looked for a job this week and didn't, is just not.

[frugal-one]

So, by holding out and not addressing the debt ceiling..... what is the advantage? Seems like there is no choice but to raise the ceiling as was done with trump and those before him. The other alternative? ... already see the stock market is down almost 500 points...

[Alan]

The other alternative?
We could ask our government to operate within its budget like the rest of us.

[LDAHL]

Certainly a bit of wordsmithing for marketing purposes. If the issue is about who will pay, I'm not a big fan of cutting taxes on the rich while at the same time paying for government services and operations through a growing government debt, which we've have seen previously.

Yes, why should the left confine themselves to the rigid ethical standards of a late night infomercial? There has certainly been no dearth of wordsmithing and transcendence of mundane factuality connected with this orgy of expenditure. Who knew everything that creeps upon the Earth was infrastructure? That there are no expenditures, only investments? That whether it’s an expense or not depends on where you mail the bill? That spreading a few trillion around would serve to lower inflation?

[ApatheticNoMore]

We could ask our government to operate within its budget like the rest of us.

That no country does that, every country has a debt, might be a clue that it makes no sense. China? Yep. Canada? Yep. Switzerland? Yep. Germany? Yep. Denmark? Yep. Japan? Yep. So there is no "like the rest of us" model to choose in reality. Which might give one pause. Okay maybe it could work in theory, I'm able to consider theoretical models but I would both have to be persuaded it is both possible and desirable, because not a lot of examples ... Russia is one of the countries with the lowest debt.

Now, I don't doubt the U.S. had advantages in being able to issue debt that some don't. And the real question is just if the interest can be serviced.

[Alan]

So there is no "like the rest of us" model to choose in reality. Which might give one pause.
I think all 50 US States and Puerto Rico have some sort of balanced budget requirement, most of which are memorialized within their individual state constitutions and the remainder through legislative fiat. Our federal government could do the same as long as there were provisions allowing for excess expenditures during periods of national emergency.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Those are states not countries (I suppose one could make the argument for being states for EU nations, but they have debt).

[Rogar]

Yes, why should the left confine themselves to the rigid ethical standards of a late night infomercial? There has certainly been no dearth of wordsmithing and transcendence of mundane factuality connected with this orgy of expenditure. Who knew everything that creeps upon the Earth was infrastructure? That there are no expenditures, only investments? That whether it’s an expense or not depends on where you mail the bill? That spreading a few trillion around would serve to lower inflation?

I don't think the left has exclusive rights to soft selling their programs under certain false or weak promises. I can remember when 45 promised his tax cuts and trade deals would eliminate or greatly reduce the national debt by fueling the economy. But somehow the debt grew to record levels. I remember the delusion of weapons of mass destruction. It's politics as usual.

Whether the proposed budget has within it hidden bloat is probably a separate issue on it's own, but at least this time there is some sort of tax increases to balance spending. Or that's the story I'm getting. I haven't looked at specifics, but aside from infrastructure, I'd like to see some of the programs that were cut under T, like climate research, cleaner energy, EPA, education, NIH etc. restored to the levels that make us a country focused on future prosperity instead of immediate wallet gratification. Part of that needs to include focus on the debt issue, too. And someone is going to have to pay for it.

[frugal-one]

We could ask our government to operate within its budget like the rest of us.

Too late. trump raised the debt so the debt ceiling was brought up last term and it was approved. Why is it different now?

Hope it went well today for you and your family, Alan! Was thinking of you.

[Alan]

Hope it went well today for you and your family, Alan! Was thinking of you.
Thank you! It went well. The tumor and kidney were removed without complication. Now we await post-op testing and further consultation but everything's looking good at this point. She'll come home in a couple of days and we're hoping life can get back to normal soon.
I was at the hospital with her from 6:15am until they threw me out at 6pm and will be back first thing in the morning.
Thanks to everyone who wished us well, I think it may have helped. :thankyou:

[jp1]

So glad to hear that Alan! Cancer is so common that I’ve lost count of all the people I know who have had to deal with it. I’m always relieved when I hear good news like this. Wishing continued good news for you and your wife.

[ToomuchStuff]

So now the administration is claiming that their $3.5 trillion spending package will cost nothing. They say this is because they will raise taxes on “the rich” and corporations that they believe should have been taxed more harshly all along, and there will be no new debt required. I suppose this might be true if you believe all our income belongs to the government, who decides how much we are worthy of keeping.

This is what happens when people don’t listen to accountants.

Maybe they are hiring Hollywood accountants.>8)

[Jane v2.0]

Thank you! It went well. The tumor and kidney were removed without complication. Now we await post-op testing and further consultation but everything's looking good at this point. She'll come home in a couple of days and we're hoping life can get back to normal soon.
I was at the hospital with her from 6:15am until they threw me out at 6pm and will be back first thing in the morning.
Thanks to everyone who wished us well, I think it may have helped. :thankyou:

I have a friend who had a malformed kidney removed when she was in high school. She and her remaining kidney are still going strong sixty years later. I'm happy to read that everything went so well.

[happystuff]

Thank you! It went well. The tumor and kidney were removed without complication. Now we await post-op testing and further consultation but everything's looking good at this point. She'll come home in a couple of days and we're hoping life can get back to normal soon.
I was at the hospital with her from 6:15am until they threw me out at 6pm and will be back first thing in the morning.
Thanks to everyone who wished us well, I think it may have helped. :thankyou:

So glad the surgery went well. Sending more prayers for a speedy recovery!

[Teacher Terry]

Studies show that people that were prayed for did better even if they didn’t know it was happening. Alan, so glad the surgery went well.

[flowerseverywhere]

So now the administration is claiming that their $3.5 trillion spending package will cost nothing. They say this is because they will raise taxes on “the rich” and corporations that they believe should have been taxed more harshly all along, and there will be no new debt required. I suppose this might be true if you believe all our income belongs to the government, who decides how much we are worthy of keeping.

This is what happens when people don’t listen to accountants.
Haven’t you heard about the special presidential exemption from lying by using imaginary made up rules? Like Mexico will pay for the wall? Tax cuts won’t raise the deficit? I did not have sex with that woman? I am not a crook?

you cannot possibly think for one minute politicians care about the taxpayers they represent. Power and money are the number one goals.

[LDAHL]

I don't think the left has exclusive rights to soft selling their programs under certain false or weak promises. I can remember when 45 promised his tax cuts and trade deals would eliminate or greatly reduce the national debt by fueling the economy. But somehow the debt grew to record levels. I remember the delusion of weapons of mass destruction. It's politics as usual.

Whether the proposed budget has within it hidden bloat is probably a separate issue on it's own, but at least this time there is some sort of tax increases to balance spending. Or that's the story I'm getting. I haven't looked at specifics, but aside from infrastructure, I'd like to see some of the programs that were cut under T, like climate research, cleaner energy, EPA, education, NIH etc. restored to the levels that make us a country focused on future prosperity instead of immediate wallet gratification. Part of that needs to include focus on the debt issue, too. And someone is going to have to pay for it.

There are the usual squid-ink distraction moves about how Republicans run deficits too, or how deficits don’t matter. There are also the usual “we are about values, not the petty details of ways and means” posturing. They aren’t really arguments, but they sound good.

But this bill seems to take malarkey to an unprecedented level. That’s why they’re pushing to vote on it without CBO numbers.

Ultimately, our best defense against this abomination will be the Democrats’ trying to hold each other to ransom over various aspects.

[catherine]

We all know that a pet GOP tactic is "starving the beast" which usually means taking tax cuts to a low and spending to a high in order to prevent Dems from tackling social issues. In the 2000s, Bush simultaneously added a couple trillion to the deficit with his tax cuts, and added spending by engaging in wars in the Middle East.

[LDAHL]

We all know that a pet GOP tactic is "starving the beast" which usually means taking tax cuts to a low and spending to a high in order to prevent Dems from tackling social issues. In the 2000s, Bush simultaneously added a couple trillion to the deficit with his tax cuts, and added spending by engaging in wars in the Middle East.

Even if all of that is true, it detracts nothing from the mendacity surrounding this spending package.

[Rogar]

Even if all of that is true, it detracts nothing from the mendacity surrounding this spending package.

Referring to the bill as malarkey or mendacity pleads for an emotional response, but really doesn't offer any specifics for a rational discussion.

[LDAHL]

Referring to the bill as malarkey or mendacity pleads for an emotional response, but really doesn't offer any specifics for a rational discussion.

Sometimes malarkey really is just malarkey no matter how you couch it. Sometimes 3.5 trillion equals 3.5 trillion no matter how much pixie dust you sprinkle on it.

I think a good start would be a CBO score.

[jp1]

Ldahl has a point. Sometimes bills in congress are just malarkey. Like the tax scam that got passed during the previous administration.

[Rogar]

If we're just name calling, the conservatives that spent trillions in Iraq under the squid ink premise of WMD was malarkey.

[bae]

I’m curious to see if the warring parties really manage to default on the debt and crash the world economy. Should be fun times for all.

[Rogar]

I’m curious to see if the warring parties really manage to default on the debt and crash the world economy. Should be fun times for all.

It always seems like the game of chicken, waiting to see who will swerve first.

[LDAHL]

Ldahl has a point. Sometimes bills in congress are just malarkey. Like the tax scam that got passed during the previous administration.

Once again, that does not make the current nonsense any less nonsensical.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Whether the proposed budget has within it hidden bloat is probably a separate issue on it's own

that's guaranteed, the only real question is if it's more good than bad.

[frugal-one]

I’m curious to see if the warring parties really manage to default on the debt and crash the world economy. Should be fun times for all.

See that the federal employees G Fund will AGAIN be used to pay down debt somewhat. If any other company did this, they would go to jail.

[rosarugosa]

Studies show that people that were prayed for did better even if they didn’t know it was happening. Alan, so glad the surgery went well.

My understanding is quite the opposite: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16569567/

[Teacher Terry]

Rosa, that’s really interesting. The studies I read were older.

[catherine]

Rosa, that’s really interesting. The studies I read were older.

God isn't an order-taker or a suggestion box. I think intercessory prayer works because it connects us to each other and allows us to articulate our heartfelt desire for the best for the person. We were all genuinely praying for Alan and his wife with compassion and love. When I, or anyone else, needed prayers, my mother would always say "I'll shoot one up"; I think her sentiment expressed that we want the best for our friends and loved ones, but there's only so much we can control so tend to hand our care off to God for whatever outcome follows.

If there are reports of people getting better because of prayers of others, I can only believe that the efficacy of prayer in that case is due to the person knowing people are thinking and praying for them and feeling the love, which by itself is good medicine.

[Rogar]

I don't think the final word on the effectiveness of prayer on healing has been written.

Prayer and healing: A medical and scientific perspective on randomized controlled trials


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2802370/

EDIT to add, my personal thoughts are that we are all somehow connected and that our thoughts and behavior can affect non-local others, but I'm not so sure about divine intervention.

[happystuff]

EDIT to add, my personal thoughts are that we are all somehow connected and that our thoughts and behavior can affect non-local others, but I'm not so sure about divine intervention.

I agree with this. I also believe that we are all somehow connected and, as a result, can affect each other - both positively and negatively.

[catherine]

I agree with this. I also believe that we are all somehow connected and, as a result, can affect each other - both positively and negatively.

Yes, I also believe in a "collective unconscious" that we don't even see or recognize most of the time. It's kind of like the crass Reagan postulate that economic "rising tides float all boats." While I don't believe that that hasn't happened economically in our country, I do believe it's true in general when it comes to "good vibes."

[Teacher Terry]

Since I don’t believe in God there’s no order taker. I believe it’s the positive energy put out into the world that’s helpful more like the collective unconscious. When my dad had a massive stroke at 59 and I still believed I prayed for him to live. He did and it was a miserable existence. Now I pray for someone’s best and highest good by putting the energy and word into the universe.

[LDAHL]

It's kind of like the crass Reagan postulate that economic "rising tides float all boats."

I think JFK (or at least one of his speechwriters) first used that one when he was pushing some dam project.

[rosarugosa]

Rogar, that is interesting, and I agree that we don't have a definitive answer.
I personally don't believe, I don't pray, and I never tell anyone that I will pray for them. I do keep people in my thoughts and wish for good outcomes, but I don't have any belief that my wishes affect those outcomes (I consider that to be magical thinking and irrational). The best I ever expect to accomplish is to let people know I care about them and what happens to them. I think there is some value to that.

[iris lilies]

This free flowing discussion is so funny! From Congressional spending plans to effectiveness of prayer.

Hilarious!

[rosarugosa]

This free flowing discussion is so funny! From Congressional spending plans to effectiveness of prayer.

Hilarious!

I was thinking the same thing; this is a perfect example of how we digress! The only thing I don't like about it is if I go away and ponder, and then want to come back to say more on a topic, it can be a challenge to find the correct thread.

[catherine]

I was thinking the same thing; this is a perfect example of how we digress! The only thing I don't like about it is if I go away and ponder, and then want to come back to say more on a topic, it can be a challenge to find the correct thread.

That's true!

[Alan]

This free flowing discussion is so funny! From Congressional spending plans to effectiveness of prayer.

Hilarious!
I think the prayer digression was my fault as my thankfulness had to be expressed somewhere, but I'm not sorry. :moon:

[catherine]

I think the prayer digression was my fault, but I'm not sorry. :moon:

Neither am I.

[iris lilies]

I think the prayer digression was my fault as my thankfulness had to be expressed somewhere, but I'm not sorry. :moon:
No problem, these digressions are like In Real Life conversations.

[Teacher Terry]

I love the way threads get off track. It often leads to good discussions.

[happystuff]

I love the way threads get off track. It often leads to good discussions.

Definitely agree. Also agree that sometimes it's hard to go back and add an additional comment, but just means re-reading some posts/threads.