Politics of the Free - It’s because Democrats, stupid. - The Bear and Badger

yourfavouriteuncle

Has he stopped being all red and purple yet?

Armitage_Shankburn

So you'd think that, with control of the senate, Biden will propose a bill to send the remaining1400 dollars to citizens as covid relief, right? RIGHT?

COS ITS DEFINITELY MITCH MCCONNELL WHO DOESN'T WANT IT AND NOT THE DEMOCRATS WHO WERE BOUNCED INTO SUPPORTING IT A CONTRE-COEUR BY TRUMP

RedDave2

Wasn't the 2k the original Democrats proposal? I remember reading about it back in April (along with a mortgage/ rent cancellation plan proposed by Ilhan Omar

Diluted Dante

A bill will almost certainly be proposed by Sanders, and both the Georgia runoffs ran on it. It would be political suicide for Biden to try and stop it.

Funkstain

Hmm, thought that the Itchy McConnell problem was that he tried to attach all sorts of "extras" the bill?

Armitage_Shankburn

RedDave2 wrote:

Wasn't the 2k the original Democrats proposal? I remember reading about it back in April (along with a mortgage/ rent cancellation plan proposed by Ilhan Omar

Nope. I know that's what you read.

Armitage_Shankburn

Diluted Dante wrote:

A bill will almost certainly be proposed by Sanders, and both the Georgia runoffs ran on it. It would be political suicide for Biden to try and stop it.

He won't stop it himself, as in veto it. It will die in the senate, at democrat hands.

Roujin

I thought Biden has already been quoted last night saying that if the dems took both seats that 2000 was going out the door asap, the issue will be whatever bullshit Mitch sticks in there to spite everyone since he can't cock block the vote anymore.

Edit: Obvs Biden isn't president yet, hence the Mitch McConnell Section 230 business.

RedDave2

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

RedDave2 wrote:

Wasn't the 2k the original Democrats proposal? I remember reading about it back in April (along with a mortgage/ rent cancellation plan proposed by Ilhan Omar

Nope. I know that's what you read.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/house-dems-propose-payment-of-2k-a-month-to-americans/

Roujin

I guess the only thing is that is a proposal for an ongoing 2k per month payment to everyone in employment over the age of 16, until everything returns to normal, so basically a proposal to implement UBI for the duration of the pandemic.

Armitage_Shankburn

RedDave2 wrote:

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

RedDave2 wrote:

Wasn't the 2k the original Democrats proposal? I remember reading about it back in April (along with a mortgage/ rent cancellation plan proposed by Ilhan Omar

Nope. I know that's what you read.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/house-dems-propose-payment-of-2k-a-month-to-americans/

No, I'm talking about the recent bill, 600 dollars. Also, big fines for piracy, a shedload of money to Israel. You know, that Bill. 600 dollars becayse that's all we can get through; outmanoeuvred by Trump who calls for 2k, then they do propose 2k, knowing that the Rs will reject it

Here's Pelosi barely keeping a straight face behind a mask pretending like 600 dollars is significant and she'd have liked them to be bigger.

Peter Daou on Twitter: "BREAKING: #Pelosi says $600 is a "significant" amount for working families. #LetThemEatCake #TrillionForBillionaires https://t.co/PjcIV9W1JX" / Twitter

Funkstain

it also seems too simple? I mean there are quite a few families in the US who really don't need $2K in their laps (or $600 either for that matter), where as there are many who need quite a bit more. It's a silly bill, notwithstanding all the additional cruft it's gained

Armitage_Shankburn

You can justify a one off stimulus like that based on administrative convenience, the money going into the economy, etc etc.

They can't do a means-tested payment because then they're locked into a narrative of "these people - and you know who they are now - still need support". Which the Pelosi / Biden democrats don't want to do because they despise those people and anyone who wants to help them. They're not their constituents, they're losers who vote for them.

RedDave2

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

RedDave2 wrote:

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

RedDave2 wrote:

Wasn't the 2k the original Democrats proposal? I remember reading about it back in April (along with a mortgage/ rent cancellation plan proposed by Ilhan Omar

Nope. I know that's what you read.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/house-dems-propose-payment-of-2k-a-month-to-americans/

No, I'm talking about the recent bill, 600 dollars. Also, big fines for piracy, a shedload of money to Israel. You know, that Bill. 600 dollars becayse that's all we can get through; outmanoeuvred by Trump who calls for 2k, then they do propose 2k, knowing that the Rs will reject it

Here's Pelosi barely keeping a straight face behind a mask pretending like 600 dollars is significant and she'd have liked them to be bigger.

Peter Daou on Twitter: "BREAKING: #Pelosi says $600 is a "significant" amount for working families. #LetThemEatCake #TrillionForBillionaires https://t.co/PjcIV9W1JX" / Twitter

Did you watch the clip? She says she would like them to be bigger but they are significant. I.e. she wanted a figure bigger than the 600.

And while 2k is more than 600 obviously, where did trump pluck that number? Maybe the original 2k proposal which the Democrats proposed?

Really not sure what your point is. The recent bill is the same bill they've been working on for ages which the Democrats felt didn't go far enough.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/21/covid-relief-bill-stimulus-checks-congress-republicans-democrats

Funkstain

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

You can justify a one off stimulus like that based on administrative convenience, the money going into the economy, etc etc. They can't do a means-tested payment because then they're locked into a narrative of "these people - and you know who they are now - still need support". Which the Pelosi / Biden democrats don't want to do because they despise those people and anyone who wants to help them. They're not their constituents, they're losers who vote for them.

well, quite

Roujin

I do love that Donald is such a sore loser that he even fucking threw McConnell under the bus by coming out with the "people in the US deserve 2k" outburst after McConnell confirmed Joe Biden would be the next president.

Armitage_Shankburn

RedDave2 wrote:

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

RedDave2 wrote:

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

RedDave2 wrote:

Wasn't the 2k the original Democrats proposal? I remember reading about it back in April (along with a mortgage/ rent cancellation plan proposed by Ilhan Omar

Nope. I know that's what you read.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/house-dems-propose-payment-of-2k-a-month-to-americans/

No, I'm talking about the recent bill, 600 dollars. Also, big fines for piracy, a shedload of money to Israel. You know, that Bill. 600 dollars becayse that's all we can get through; outmanoeuvred by Trump who calls for 2k, then they do propose 2k, knowing that the Rs will reject it Here's Pelosi barely keeping a straight face behind a mask pretending like 600 dollars is significant and she'd have liked them to be bigger. Peter Daou on Twitter: "BREAKING: #Pelosi says $600 is a "significant" amount for working families. #LetThemEatCake #TrillionForBillionaires https://t.co/PjcIV9W1JX" / Twitter

Did you watch the clip? She says she would like them to be bigger but they are significant. I.e. she wanted a figure bigger than the 600. And while 2k is more than 600 obviously, where did trump pluck that number? Maybe the original 2k proposal which the Democrats proposed? Really not sure what your point is. The recent bill is the same bill they've been working on for ages which the Democrats felt didn't go far enough. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/21/covid-relief-bill-stimulus-checks-congress-republicans-democrats

It's her Bill - she's introducing it, she's in control of the policy and the figure. You can always accept an amendment revising the 2k figure down. don't be fooled, that's hot air - it's not how it works. She made damn sure it was 600 dollars and 600 dollars only because fundamentally she and her ilk do not believe that poor people should have this money. Labour crisis is an opportunity for her and for her donor base.

Armitage_Shankburn

Roujin wrote:

I do love that Donald is such a sore loser that he even fucking threw McConnell under the bus by coming out with the "people in the US deserve 2k" outburst after McConnell confirmed Joe Biden would be the next president.

This, and the fact that Trump is trying to get his left wing voters back, addresses the final point.

Diluted Dante

Funkstain wrote:

it also seems too simple? I mean there are quite a few families in the US who really don't need $2K in their laps (or $600 either for that matter), where as there are many who need quite a bit more. It's a silly bill, notwithstanding all the additional cruft it's gained

Means testing it would result in people who desperately need it potentially being evicted, or dying because they can't pay for insulin ect. At a minimum, you are paying for everyone to have shelter for a month during a pandemic. The people who are a bit better off will spend it on things like food or other necessities that they'd otherwise not be able to afford.

The hand wringing over someone who doesn't really need it getting it is dumb, because action needs to be taken right now. This should be pandemic response, not addressing long term structural inequality.

RedDave2

I cant find any specific proposal from the republicans at the start asking for 2k, only that democrat one. So as I said, that was back in April. Trump only brings that figure up at the last second in December. Up to then it was his guy who proposed the 600 at the start of December

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-12-08/mnuchin-pitches-a-new-916-billion-stimulus-package-to-pelosi?__twitter_impression=true

AOC seems to think it was more the republicans doing the dirty work as well.

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1339970407823249408?s=19

Anyway, I still don't get your point. If it's that top officials in both parties are capitalist focused , well fair enough. But your original post seemed to be that it's not mitch McConnell and rather Pelosi who is responsible for the low figure... even though McConnell is the guy who was tasked with negotiating with the dems, Mnuchin is the guy who proposes the 600 figure and the 2k idea was from 2 Democrats back in april.

What am I missing here?

Roujin

I think what Gonz was saying was that because they knew they'd have to negotiate with McConnell, the dems proposed a higher figure, knowing full well it would be negotiated down to a figure that Pelosi actually wanted, making the Dems look good even though they potentially had no intention of ever delivering a 2k stimulus cheque in the first place.

Rev

Still always getting to grips with the fact that even in their most leftist policies, the US is so centre right that most of them that run the country believe being poor is your own fault and helping the poor is just helping them to be lazy. While bailing out corporations (rich people) is sound practice in order to protect the economy (rich people).
The friends I have in the US view the Biden presidency as 'Its the best of a horrific bunch' as opposed to some kind of game changer.
I'm sure for the first couple of months Biden will be pushing a couple of crowd pleasing 'progressive policies' before the donors start stomping their feet and then it will be business as usual..
The general populace practically fight for the right to be fucked over.

RedDave2

Roujin wrote:

I think what Gonz was saying was that because they knew they'd have to negotiate with McConnell, the dems proposed a higher figure, knowing full well it would be negotiated down to a figure that Pelosi actually wanted, making the Dems look good even though they potentially had no intention of ever delivering a 2k stimulus cheque in the first place.

Thats a handy damned if they do damned if they don't isn't it? Given at the time of the negotiations beginning Trump is still the president and could well make a second term, that is a hell of a gambit. It also assumes a hell of a lot. Is there anything to back that assumption up?

And to be clear, I'm not doubting that the above isn't possible but Gonzos post was

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

So you'd think that, with control of the senate, Biden will propose a bill to send the remaining1400 dollars to citizens as covid relief, right? RIGHT?

COS ITS DEFINITELY MITCH MCCONNELL WHO DOESN'T WANT IT AND NOT THE DEMOCRATS WHO WERE BOUNCED INTO SUPPORTING IT A CONTRE-COEUR BY TRUMP

That doesn't say the dems went high because of mitch, it says they only supported it because of Trumps last second (wouldn't even say last minute it was so late in the day) switch.

Funkstain

Diluted Dante wrote:

Funkstain wrote:

it also seems too simple? I mean there are quite a few families in the US who really don't need $2K in their laps (or $600 either for that matter), where as there are many who need quite a bit more. It's a silly bill, notwithstanding all the additional cruft it's gained

Means testing it would result in people who desperately need it potentially being evicted, or dying because they can't pay for insulin ect. At a minimum, you are paying for everyone to have shelter for a month during a pandemic. The people who are a bit better off will spend it on things like food or other necessities that they'd otherwise not be able to afford. The hand wringing over someone who doesn't really need it getting it is dumb, because action needs to be taken right now. This should be pandemic response, not addressing long term structural inequality.

I get your point and understand it - but I'm not hand wringing over anything. It is clearly obvious that giving thousands of dollars to those in most need (and institutions as well) is better than giving lots of people who don't need it some lower number of dollars. It is also clearly obvious that giving everyone the money is easier and simpler and faster, and people who are desperate (now) need it now, and applying means testing at this point would be cruel.

However means testing is not that difficult - it's often been made that way to put people off. You could make it low effort and easy to do, and you could have set that system up at any time over the last almost-year of this pandemic. Sure you'd get fraud etc but it would still be better for those who really need it.

Getting something sort of right - paltry support for everyone including those most in need - should not shield people from criticism when they could have done so much better, sooner.

Diluted Dante

Sorry, I should have been clearer, the hand wringing remark was aimed at US politicians, not you.

b0r1s

Watching Sky News. Why do they give airtime to these Trump nutters?

Armitage_Shankburn

Watching Sky News. Why do they give airtime to these Trump nutters?

Watching Sky News. Why do they

Watching Sky News.

b0r1s

I know. I was watching CNN and they broke for the debate for the Arizona objection so I switched over for a bit. Back to the live debates on CNN.

Fair play to Toomey. He’s a republican twat but he follows process.

b0r1s

Capitol Hill is in lockdown due to Trump protestors. Wonder if they’ll tear gas these protectors?

Nina

This is all getting weird isn't it.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories