Biden Introduces American Families Plan

[Arcangl86]

Why would there be any negotiations with the GOP?

There were negotiations with the GOP for the American Rescue Plan and several amendments cosponsored by Republicans made it into the final bill, even if every single Republican then voted against it.

 

[renniks]

Biden Details $1.8 Trillion Plan for Workers, Students and Families

He's spending money like a drunk pirate.
Does he think that there's a bottomless treasure chest?

 

[Whyayeman]

America needs measures to redistribute wealth from the absurdly rich to those in dire need. Billionaires could give away enough to make any tax measures unnecessary. They won't, of course. So take it anyway, in the form of taxes on the very wealthy. That way, the squeezed middle classes will not be penalised.

Those billions of dollars hoarded by the mega-rich do nothing for the economy; put them to use by letting the poor have something to spend! And the mega-money men would lose nothing of their way of life and feel much better.

Win win!

 

[mark46]

I liked Biden's speech. But these huge bills will increase inflation and may have other adverse consequences. This graph shows how the value of US dollars, which is reflected in buying power, has declined over the past year:

Xe: USD / CAD Currency Chart. US Dollar to Canadian Dollar Rates

Congrats to Canada. Seriously. This does NOT mean that we have high inflation in the past year. The fed has been trying to get the inflation rate UP to 2% for many years.

 

[grasping the after wind]

The majority is slim enough that some political trading would be required to get this passed.

Political Trading among the different factions of the Democratic Party is all that is needed.

 

[grasping the after wind]

America needs measures to redistribute wealth from the absurdly rich to those in dire need.

No it actually doesn't need that at all.

 

[Pommer]

No it actually doesn't need that at all.

Government is largely in place to facilitate the transfer of wealth from the very tippy-top to the bottom, otherwise all the money would eventually languish at the very tippy-top because capitalism doesn’t work but in one direction.

 

[renniks]

America needs measures to redistribute wealth from the absurdly rich to those in dire need. Billionaires could give away enough to make any tax measures unnecessary. They won't, of course. So take it anyway, in the form of taxes on the very wealthy. That way, the squeezed middle classes will not be penalised.

Those billions of dollars hoarded by the mega-rich do nothing for the economy; put them to use by letting the poor have something to spend! And the mega-money men would lose nothing of their way of life and feel much better.

Win win!

That's socialism in a net shell. Take money away from the guy who worked for it and redistribute it evenly to everyone, whether they did anything to earn it or not.

 

[renniks]

Government is largely in place to facilitate the transfer of wealth from the very tippy-top to the bottom, otherwise all the money would eventually languish at the very tippy-top because capitalism doesn’t work but in one direction.

Capitalism works fine for people like me who have worked hard to make it above the poverty level and don't give a care whether we are considered middle or lower class. The point is, with capitalism, the harder you work, the luckier you get.

 

[Whyayeman]

The point is, with capitalism, the harder you work, the luckier you get.

On that logic billionaires must work 1000 times harder than mere millionaires.

That's socialism in a net shell.

It certainly is. Bring it on!

 

[renniks]

On that logic billionaires must work 1000 times harder than mere millionaires.



It certainly is. Bring it on!

So I can give the man who has never worked for anything your money?

 

[Ana the Ist]

The Trump tax cuts were misguided and only the wealthiest got any significant benefit.

When allowable deductions are factored in, United States corporate taxes prior to Trump's misguided 2017 tax cuts were not out-of-line with other industrialized nations and did not put us at a competitive disadvantage.

What hurts businesses and corporations most is the lack of a middle class, the lack of educated and skilled workers, etc.

I sometimes think of my Guatemala mission experience. One day we took a side trip to the "tablon," a squatters village. The last thing you saw before roads, electricity, running water, heat, broadband connections, etc. disappeared was a coffee plant, and the owner's lavish home with pool, tennis courts, mansion, completely gated off....

Would you want to live there, knowing that your "neighbors" built houses out of trash bags and sheet metal and had no education for their children, utilities, water, etc. ?

We aren't there....yet....but income inequality is unacceptably high, and at some point soon businesses will lose customers and have a hard time finding skilled workers.

How shortsighted the greedy "me-firsters" are...

Part of the problem is the economy in the future.

The economy in the past required a robust middle class. You had a large group moderately educated adults getting paid to work large factory jobs.

Now we don't have those factories. We don't have an economy that needs a middle class. Rather we have jobs for the very smart and capable.....jobs for the not so smart but hardworking.....and very little else.

 

[Fantine]

You need a middle class because there is no prosperity without a broad consumer base, and even if the 1% shops till they drop it won't make a dent.

 

[Ana the Ist]

You need a middle class because there is no prosperity without a broad consumer base, and even if the 1% shops till they drop it won't make a dent.

Do you?

The consumer base is worldwide now. Even if your product only is available to the top 5% worldwide it's still hundreds of millions of people.

 

[Whyayeman]

So I can give the man who has never worked for anything your money?

I think this is a rather trite response and an indication of a misunderstanding of social spending. You have food stamps for the indigent and their children, I guess.

If you want to see what a country with strong social budgets look to Scandinavia.

All taxes tend to be redistributive; few object to taxes being spent on defence, for example. Police, fire fighting and education are paid for without demur from the public purse. The courts, and their officials similarly. Are these entities socialistic?

 

[Arcangl86]

I need to look at teh plan in more detail, but it seems odd to me that he would introduce it while Congress is still fighting over his American Jobs Plan. It makes sense to pass them one at a time, though I wonder if he might be introducing both now so he has a chance to use reconciliation. He can only do it one more time this year.

 

[renniks]

I think this is a rather trite response and an indication of a misunderstanding of social spending. You have food stamps for the indigent and their children, I guess.

If you want to see what a country with strong social budgets look to Scandinavia.

All taxes tend to be redistributive; few object to taxes being spent on defence, for example. Police, fire fighting and education are paid for without demur from the public purse. The courts, and their officials similarly. Are these entities socialistic?

Yes they are. What will happen is more and more of our income will be taxed away. Perhaps you remember our history? We came here to get away from that. To create a country where there is truly equal opportunity. We who lived through the cold war, saw where socialism / communism leads. We heard about the food lines in Russia. And the same crap is happening now in other socialistic countries

 

[Arcangl86]

Yes they are. What will happen is more and more of our income will be taxed away. Perhaps you remember our history? We came here to get away from that. To create a country where there is truly equal opportunity. We who lived through the cold war, saw where socialism / communism leads. We heard about the food lines in Russia. And the same crap is happening now in other socialistic countries

You're the one who doesn't remember our history. People came here for a variety of reasons, but the two biggest ones (for those who came voluntarily) were religious reasons and economic advancement, i.e. cheap land. Tax wasn't a concern for those folk, because only land owners got taxed anyway. And as for equality of opportunity, you had to convince the Crown or Governor to grant you land, which was limited to the relatively powerful. And if you read the Declaration of Independence, you will see that taxes were a contributory factor, but not the main one. And specifically the issue with taxes was "taxes without our consent". The colonies weren't represented in Parliament, so they had no say in taxes, which British tradition has held as being a gift to the Crown from the people. That was the issue with taxes, not that they existed but rather that they were unilaterally imposed. And the issue with the Soviet Union was the fact that it relied on a planned economy, which was implemented poorly. Planned economies are not fundamental to all forms of socialism.

 

[renniks]

Planned economies are not fundamental to all forms of socialism.

There's far more failed socialistic systems than successful ones. And those who do succeed suck away a huge portion of income from thier residents through taxes.

 

[Whyayeman]

There's far more failed socialistic systems than successful ones.

I am afraid your lack of knowledge is showing.

Many countries you might not describe as socialistic have a strong redistributive taxation policies as part of their welfare system: all the Scandinavian states; all the EU countries; all constituents of the United Kingdom; Australia; Canada; New Zealand. They happily embrace a mixture of capitalist and socialist principles so that there is no loss of liberty and a widening of prosperity in their populations. There are many more. They are 'mixed economies' and are the rule rather than the exception in advanced societies.

America has social policies too. Not enough and not much touted as socialist in nature, but long established.