THE BEAUTIFUL BUDGET
I don't think it's very beautiful, from what I've heard about it.
No need to increase the military budget, let alone a la
apparently this thing raises taxes on everyone making less than like $700k/year and cuts taxes on everyone over, hilarious. and cuts a trilly from medicaid, slashes social security (probably), increases the deficit, more money for troops and cops (i assume), etc. let the good times roll
apparently this thing raises taxes on everyone making less than like $700k/year and cuts taxes on everyone over, hilarious. and cuts a trilly from medicaid, slashes social security (probably), increases the deficit, more money for troops and cops (i assume), etc. let the good times roll
I'll wait until a text is passed identically in both the house and the Senate, and then for CBO or equivalent neutral entities to assess who gains and who loses, because the bill is changing by the hour and there is no agreement yet
I'll wait until a text is passed identically in both the house and the Senate, and then for CBO or equivalent neutral entities to assess who gains and who loses, because the bill is changing by the hour and there is no agreement yet
Every new assessment the CBO releases is worse and worse. There is just about a 0% chance that any sort of material change is made towards the good.
Every new assessment the CBO releases is worse and worse. There is just about a 0% chance that any sort of material change is made towards the good.
A lot of the cuts have been reduced so for what you guys consider good, things are improving.
For people who care about the deficit, it's going worse and worse yes (because they are removing cuts)
A lot of the cuts have been reduced so for what you guys consider good, things are improving.
For people who care about the deficit, it's going worse and worse yes (because they are removing cuts)
NOBODY cares about the deficit.*
Republican's PRETEND to care about the deficit once in a while.
*Except maybe Rand Paul
NOBODY cares about the deficit.*
Republican's PRETEND to care about the deficit once in a while.
*Except maybe Rand Paul
*almost nobody is willing to risk re-election to tackle the deficit yes.
The right cannot increase ANY taxes, which is just dumb. For example given social security and medicare are the major culprits, payroll taxes should increase (with no increase in benefits).
The left cannot cut any welfare, which is just dumb.
Both parties can't cut defense, which maybe is reasonable, maybe is not, but still, leaves nothing on the table that can be touched.
apparently this thing raises taxes on everyone making less than like $700k/year and cuts taxes on everyone over, hilarious. and cuts a trilly from medicaid, slashes social security (probably), increases the deficit, more money for troops and cops (i assume), etc. let the good times roll
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pl9X367...
weeeeee!!!
AOC has no chance at getting the Democratic nomination, IMO. It will be a middle of the road Dem like always,
AOC is one of the rare cases on the American left of a politician with both idealism and savvy. I suspect if she seeks the nomination at some point in the future elections, it would be because there is a decent chance she could get it, and a decent chance she could win.
There is a reason the conservative eco-system has been in overdrive for the last decade to paint her as as both the devil and an idiot. They know she is a good politician.
Of course, she faces the tightrope hurdle any politician on the American left faces. Opposition from the centrists of the Democratic party when you seek power, and being abandoned by the left-wing of the party when you're in position to get it. The centrist faction want power-brokers, the left wing wants martyrs.
AOC is one of the rare cases on the American left of a politician with both idealism and savvy. I suspect if she seeks the nomination at some point in the future elections, it would be because there is a decent chance she could get it, and a decent chance she could win. There is a reason the conservative eco-system has been in overdrive for the last decade to paint her as as bo
That she is a Democrat familiarly referred to by her initials is a big plus!
FDR
JFK
LBJ
AOC
I don't think we'll ever elect a woman president. It's sad.
Not that we even have another presidential election anyway.
AOC is one of the rare cases on the American left of a politician with both idealism and savvy. I suspect if she seeks the nomination at some point in the future elections, it would be because there is a decent chance she could get it, and a decent chance she could win. There is a reason the conservative eco-system has been in overdrive for the last decade to paint her as as bo
She is a young version of Bernie so the GOP will not have to destroy her the Democrats will
It’s ****ing embarassing the level of obliviousness required to think the party of Christian nationalism and ‘family values’ will risk the wrath of the god king and the party to save *checks notes* people who gamble
healthcare, ugh, what is it good for?
State experiments with work requirements have been plagued with administrative issues, such as eligible enrollees' losing coverage over paperwork problems, and budget overruns. Georgia's work requirement, which officially launched in July 2023, has cost more than $90 million, with only $26 million of that spent on health benefits, according to the Georgia Budget & Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research organization.
Rural hospitals typically operate on thin profit margins and rely on Medicaid tax payments to sustain them. Researchers from the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research who examined the House bill concluded it would push more than 300 rural hospitals — many of them in Kentucky, Louisiana, California and Oklahoma — toward service reductions or closure.
It’s ****ing embarassing the level of obliviousness required to think the party of Christian nationalism and ‘family values’ will risk the wrath of the god king and the party to save *checks notes* people who gamble
Kinda feel like this one thing is actually more likely than other stuff to get pulled out. It’s not a high profile thing, probably got stuck in there by some special interest or god group. If it’s publicized, big casino or DFS money might make a few calls and get it struck. One call from Adelson would do it - not sure if she’d be pro or con tho?
It’s all about the donor money in the end. Texas just passed a THC ban that the Lt Gov literally went on the floor and said marijuana is the devil, and the Gov vetoed it cause $$
The Senate bill was full of things like this. Some of them made it into the final bill. Some were eliminated as a result of lobbying efforts. Some were outside the scope of a reconciliation bill in the view of the Senate Parliamentarian. In other words, they were targeted attacks on industries that were masquerading as run of the mill tax provisions (e.g., the amendment related to solar and wind that the Parliamentarian struck at the last minute).
One of the main problems with things like the gambling tax is that they don't actually increase tax revenue in the long run because they shrink the market. I don't see any way that online, high volume, high stakes (but small edge) gambling can remain viable under this tax regime, which means that the market probably will shrink too much for the provision to actually generate a long term increase in tax revenue.
FWIW, this provision probably is a boon for people who run private, high stakes, in-person poker games.
It’s ****ing embarassing the level of obliviousness required to think the party of Christian nationalism and ‘family values’ will risk the wrath of the god king and the party to save *checks notes* people who gamble
Eh. I'd be surprised if support and opposition for gambling stuff breaks perfectly along party lines. And the gambling industry has plenty of lobbyists.
FWIW, I think this is a bit of a "pigs get slaughtered" phenomenon. The gambling industry, and especially the sports gambling industry, carpet bombed the world over the last few years with advertising. The bombardment made it easy for critics to argue that the industry was bludgeoning kids with the message that the best way to enjoy sports is to bet on whether Anthony Edwards will score over 27.5 points in tonight's playoff game.
Kinda feel like this one thing is actually more likely than other stuff to get pulled out.
I very much disagree. The time to get this out of the bill was before it was passed by the Senate. House Republicans are under tremendous pressue to pass the bill as is. As you can see from Trump's reaction to the two Republicans who voted against the Senate bill, any House Republican who breaks rank will be viewed as a traitor by this president.
There is a reason the conservative eco-system has been in overdrive for the last decade to paint her as as both the devil and an idiot.
This interpretation of the conservative eco-system's motives is a bit naive imo. Like the liberal ecosystem, the conservative ecosystem often tries to cynically elevate people it believes are non-viable in general elections for higher office.
Trump didn't elevate Bernie because he personally liked Bernie or because he cared whether the DNC was treating Bernie fairly. He elevated Bernie because he thought Bernie would be easier to defeat in a general election. It's fine to think that Trump was wrong. Trump is wrong about a lot of things. But I am 100% positive that I am correct about Trump's motivations.
For whatever it is worth, I definitely agree that AOC is a savvy politician. She has a much better sense of how to market to younger voters than dinosaurs like Cuomo do. Cuomo's recent mayoral campaign was straight out of 1995.
The gambling stuff in the bill seems almost inconsequential compared to all the other bad stuff.
