This is where the Democrats start to lose my trust.

[AU9377 5,024]

There is a bi partisan $1.5 trillion deal ready to be signed if passed by the House.  Instead of passing this, the left wing of the Democratic party wants to play $3.5 trillion or nothing.  Perhaps they need to be shown what nothing looks like.  Spending like this is no better than the Republicans spending money on wars and tanks.  It is all insanity.

[homersapien 11,426]

25 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

There is a bi partisan $1.5 trillion deal ready to be signed if passed by the House.  Instead of passing this, the left wing of the Democratic party wants to play $3.5 trillion or nothing.  Perhaps they need to be shown what nothing looks like.  Spending like this is no better than the Republicans spending money on wars and tanks.  It is all insanity.

I don't think you can realistically compare the social spending bill to what we spend on the military industrial complex.  Such legislation is much better seen as an investment in our people and economy as opposed to funding the MIC.

I don't know that I would support everything in the reconciliation bill, but there are significant objectives - like child care and global warming that we need to address.  (The latter issue is one we must address.)

Edited September 30, 2021 by homersapien

[AU9377 5,024]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I don't think you can realistically compare the social spending bill to what we spend on the military industrial complex.  Such legislation is much better seen as an investment in our people and economy as opposed to funding the MIC.

I don't know that I would support everything in the reconciliation bill, but there are significant objectives - like child care and global warming that we need to address.  (The latter issue is one we must address.)

I get it, but we can't afford either at this point without seriously endangering our future economic stability.  $1.5 trillion is the investment.  Insisting on 3.5, 4 or 5 trillion only makes the progressives look like the spending happy liberals that Republicans accuse them of being.  That is a recipe to lose the House, Senate and in 3 years the White House.  At that point, what have they achieved? Nothing but losing another seat or two on the court.  Keep in mind, some of them of the very same progressives that thought not voting for Hillary would end well.  That has now cost them the Supreme Court and what will be a serious blow to abortion choice.

 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

You still trust the democrats?!?! LMAO

[homersapien 11,426]

12 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I get it, but we can't afford either at this point without seriously endangering our future economic stability.  $1.5 trillion is the investment.  Insisting on 3.5, 4 or 5 trillion only makes the progressives look like the spending happy liberals that Republicans accuse them of being.  That is a recipe to lose the House, Senate and in 3 years the White House.  At that point, what have they achieved? Nothing but losing another seat or two on the court.  Keep in mind, some of them of the very same progressives that thought not voting for Hillary would end well.  That has now cost them the Supreme Court and what will be a serious blow to abortion choice.

 

They said the same things about the "New Deal".  That certainly didn't hurt the Democrats. 

Again, I haven't studied the bill enough to know what should/could be left out, but having said that, the amount of investment required worries me a lot less than not making the investment in the first place.

 

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,426]

9 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

You still trust the democrats?!?! LMAO

What are the Republican proposals on child care (a huge economic issue) and global warming (an existential climate threat for which we are running out of time)?

Edited September 30, 2021 by homersapien

[wdefromtx 3,159]

6 minutes ago, homersapien said:

What are the Republican proposals on child care (a huge economic issue) and global warming (an existential climate threat)?

What does that have with him just now starting to lose trust with democrats? 

[homersapien 11,426]

4 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

What does that have with him just now starting to lose trust with democrats? 

I responded to your post, not his.  (You implied trusting Democrats was less rational than trusting Republicans.)  Of course the topic subject is supporting Biden's two legislative proposals.

Perhaps you meant something else?

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by homersapien

[AU9377 5,024]

14 minutes ago, homersapien said:

They said the same things about the "New Deal".  That certainly didn't hurt the Democrats. 

Again, I haven't studied the bill enough to know what should/could be left out, but having said that, the amount of investment required worries me a lot less than not making the investment in the first place.

 

 

The New Deal was in response to the Great Depression.  We aren't in that position right now.

[AU9377 5,024]

17 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

You still trust the democrats?!?! LMAO

You trust grown men that spread absolute lies meant to make people not trust our elections?  Seriously? 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I responded to your post, not his.  (You implied trusting Democrats was less rational than trusting Republicans.)

Perhaps you meant something else?

 

I did not imply anything of the sort. You automatically let your personal bias (as usual) interfere with what you assume others are saying. Why is that?

[homersapien 11,426]

Just now, AU9377 said:

The New Deal was in response to the Great Depression.  We aren't in that position right now.

Well, it's not exactly the same, but I would argue the election of Trump is illustrative - along with things like wealth distribution and the spending on healthcare and the military - amount to much the same crisis.  We are falling behind the rest of the developed world.

Then, of course, there is global warming.

[wdefromtx 3,159]

1 minute ago, AU9377 said:

You trust grown men that spread absolute lies meant to make people not trust our elections?  Seriously? 

Where did I say I trusted those people? Please show me..............

[homersapien 11,426]

1 minute ago, wdefromtx said:

I did not imply anything of the sort. You automatically let your personal bias (as usual) interfere with what you assume others are saying. Why is that?

Sorry, you completely lost me now.

What did you mean if not comparing the hilarity (LMAO) of trusting Democrats (over Republicans)?

 

[homersapien 11,426]

6 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Where did I say I trusted those people? Please show me..............

Apparently your post is the problem here. 

Perhaps you should "please show" everyone what you really meant.

[wdefromtx 3,159]

Just now, homersapien said:

Sorry, you completely lost me now.

What did you mean if not comparing the hilarity (LMAO) of trusting Democrats (over Republicans)?

 

Ummmmm, trusting any politician. Neither are worth their weight in s**t. If you think one can really trust one party more than the other, well there's no helping you because blind party allegiance has too big a grip on you. If any politician is moving their lips they are lying..........

[SLAG-91 1,483]

7 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Ummmmm, trusting any politician. Neither are worth their weight in s**t. If you think one can really trust one party more than the other, well there's no helping you because blind party allegiance has too big a grip on you. If any politician is moving their lips they are lying..........

...and they go through lots of razorblades when shaving both faces.

Legislation needs to be crafted more narrowly...get some money toward fixing roads, bridges, etc. first, for example...and JUST that. Hell, every state has highways...money for EVERYBODY!

Mileage tax on vehicles? GTFOH with that, pols.

[wdefromtx 3,159]

12 minutes ago, SLAG-91 said:

...and they go through lots of razorblades when shaving both faces.

Legislation needs to be crafted more narrowly...get some money toward fixing roads, bridges, etc. first, for example...and JUST that. Hell, every state has highways...money for EVERYBODY!

Mileage tax on vehicles? GTFOH with that, pols.

Technically don't we already pay this? AKA the gas tax per gallon? Seems like a way to double dip...........

Edited September 30, 2021 by wdefromtx

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 350]

49 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

You trust grown men that spread absolute lies meant to make people not trust our elections?  Seriously? 

I know I don't trust a grown woman who did.

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 350]

Or a grown man who is still doing it.

[SLAG-91 1,483]

25 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Technically don't we already pay this? AKA the gas tax per gallon? Seems like a way to double dip...........

I'd say yes, you're correct...and I think double-dipping was/is the plan all along.

[homersapien 11,426]

17 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

Ummmmm, trusting any politician. Neither are worth their weight in s**t. If you think one can really trust one party more than the other, well there's no helping you because blind party allegiance has too big a grip on you. If any politician is moving their lips they are lying..........

Hmmmmmmmmm, your post neither stated - or implied - that.

And I guess there's "no helping me" for recognizing (correctly) that we have a binary choice for choosing who runs the country.

 

[homersapien 11,426]

17 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

Technically don't we already pay this? AKA the gas tax per gallon? Seems like a way to double dip...........

I think they are looking ahead to electric vehicles.

[homersapien 11,426]

17 hours ago, Shoney'sPonyBoy said:

I know I don't trust a grown woman who did.

That's a stretch.  I can't imagine Hillery or Joe denying the legal outcome of an election for months and months (and still continuing).

[CoffeeTiger 5,160]

As they say, I'm not part of an organized political party; I'm a Democrat.