The Democrats aren't political neophytes. They know damn well the consequences of denying the aid package and starting a partisan fight over the bill would lead to it all being delayed and the people who live paycheck to paycheck- who can't collect one- will suffer in the meantime. That's an acceptable trade-off to them, as long as they can divert the blame onto their political rivals.
So this is basically saying whoever presents their proposal first wins?? Like a 100-meter dash?? .
It's not about who wins. You are so concerned with Democrats looking better than Republicans that you can't see that yes, the timing is extremely important, because people don't have enough food now, not later. They can't pay rent now, not later. The political reality is that they can not ask for Heaven and Earth in their bill and receive it, and they know it. They are putting up a pointless fight to grandstand in order to bolster their image at the expense of the well being of people. You know it, and I know it.
I know no such thing. I know you're invested in the idea of some kind of "political realignment" wherein the Republican Party moves farther left on economic stimulus and maintains their hard-edge on social issues, and the Democratic House plan shoots that idea to shit, so you pretend it doesn't exist and/or that it is some kind of stalling tactic. And you may need food now, and you may need to pay rent now, but I also have more news for you. No matter WHICH bill gets passed, you aren't seeing it until early-April at BEST. So spare me the idea that 48 hours passing in an attempt to make it better is some kind of fire alarm situation and pretending like the check is going to be direct deposited the next morning at 6am. It isn't.
The Democrats aren't political neophytes. They know damn well the consequences of denying the aid package and starting a partisan fight over the bill would lead to it all being delayed and the people who live paycheck to paycheck- who can't collect one- will suffer in the meantime. That's an acceptable trade-off to them, as long as they can divert the blame onto their political rivals.
So this is basically saying whoever presents their proposal first wins?? Like a 100-meter dash?? .
It's not about who wins. You are so concerned with Democrats looking better than Republicans that you can't see that yes, the timing is extremely important, because people don't have enough food now, not later. They can't pay rent now, not later. The political reality is that they can not ask for Heaven and Earth in their bill and receive it, and they know it. They are putting up a pointless fight to grandstand in order to bolster their image at the expense of the well being of people. You know it, and I know it.
As an aside, I object to the Democrat bill because it demands a 15$ minimum wage to receive aid for your company, and is just a laundry list of their own pet projects that is all just bait to try to get it shot down. I mean, isn't that the Democrats own objection? It is fundamentally unserious, and doesn't give me much more anyway. The small buisness that I work for simply can't afford 15$ for everyone and will likely go out of buisness when this is said and done. Maybe there is a small business provision in there, I admittedly only read the article and not the bill despite my newfound free time.
The Democrats aren't political neophytes. They know damn well the consequences of denying the aid package and starting a partisan fight over the bill would lead to it all being delayed and the people who live paycheck to paycheck- who can't collect one- will suffer in the meantime. That's an acceptable trade-off to them, as long as they can divert the blame onto their political rivals.
So this is basically saying whoever presents their proposal first wins?? Like a 100-meter dash?? .
It's not about who wins. You are so concerned with Democrats looking better than Republicans that you can't see that yes, the timing is extremely important, because people don't have enough food now, not later. They can't pay rent now, not later. The political reality is that they can not ask for Heaven and Earth in their bill and receive it, and they know it. They are putting up a pointless fight to grandstand in order to bolster their image at the expense of the well being of people. You know it, and I know it.
I know no such thing. I know you're invested in the idea of some kind of "political realignment" wherein the Republican Party moves farther left on economic stimulus and maintains their hard-edge on social issues, and the Democratic House plan shoots that idea to shit, so you pretend it doesn't exist and/or that it is some kind of stalling tactic. And you may need food now, and you may need to pay rent now, but I also have more news for you. No matter WHICH bill gets passed, you aren't seeing it until early-April at BEST. So spare me the idea that 48 hours passing in an attempt to make it better is some kind of fire alarm situation and pretending like the check is going to be direct deposited the next morning at 6am. It isn't.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here other than "it's not so bad". Well, maybe it's not for you. But it is for a lot of people, myself not included, and not everyone has the time to wait while the Democrats find a way to make the situation all about them. There is now a possibility that nothing gets passed in the coming days, and it will be all on their head.
Let's run down what the Republican proposal would do. $1200 for each person, but ONLY if they had some tax liability in 2018. If they made too little, it's closer to $600. But it's tied to you 2018 tax return.
Democratic plan gives $1500 to everyone, up to $7500 for a family of five. Plus $600 dollars a week for the duration you are laid off for the extent of the crisis.
So let's say this goes 3 months:
GOP Plan: $1200, maybe, depending on if your job even met the taxable threshold two years ago.
Democratic Plan: $1500, not tied to taxable income, but simply having a SS number, plus $600 a week. Over 3 months, coming out to.......$8700.
$8700>$1200
But yes, they are definitely making it all about themselves by attempting to give the laid off workers you are talking about 6-7x more money, but you think they shouldn't do that, because.......well, you haven't given a reason other than "Democrats aren't allowed to make suggestions and can only sign on to the first thing Mitch McConnell shoves in their faces" site unseen. So I won't be lectured by someone claiming I don't give a shit about getting people money and that I don't think it's that bad, when I am advocating for a plan that can prop people up for an extended period of time and is the only thing CLOSE to what is being done in Europe. As others have said, the final result will likely be something inbetween. Be sure to give anything above the $1200 back to prove your point. But if you keep it, thank Nancy Pelosi for not caving the moment the Republicans said "jump".
Not that it matters much in the grand scheme of things anyway, since the President is literally getting people to basically drink bleach and the entire right-wing media apparatus is outright suggesting we just let 15% of the population over 65 drop dead.
The Democrats aren't political neophytes. They know damn well the consequences of denying the aid package and starting a partisan fight over the bill would lead to it all being delayed and the people who live paycheck to paycheck- who can't collect one- will suffer in the meantime. That's an acceptable trade-off to them, as long as they can divert the blame onto their political rivals.
So this is basically saying whoever presents their proposal first wins?? Like a 100-meter dash?? .
It's not about who wins. You are so concerned with Democrats looking better than Republicans that you can't see that yes, the timing is extremely important, because people don't have enough food now, not later. They can't pay rent now, not later. The political reality is that they can not ask for Heaven and Earth in their bill and receive it, and they know it. They are putting up a pointless fight to grandstand in order to bolster their image at the expense of the well being of people. You know it, and I know it.
As an aside, I object to the Democrat bill because it demands a 15$ minimum wage to receive aid for your company, and is just a laundry list of their own pet projects that is all just bait to try to get it shot down. I mean, isn't that the Democrats own objection? It is fundamentally unserious, and doesn't give me much more anyway. The small buisness that I work for simply can't afford 15$ for everyone and will likely go out of buisness when this is said and done. Maybe there is a small business provision in there, I admittedly only read the article and not the bill despite my newfound free time.
It's not about who wins then Republicans should make a bipartisan bill instead of a partisan bill.
They should also stop McConnell from performing silly stunts like holding show votes and wasting everyone's time.
Get mad at Republicans for putting out a non-starter.
The Democrats object so strongly to Republicans putting forth a partisan bill that they did the exact same thing with their own bill. Apply this to every other scenario in American politics. It is a meaningless objection that condemns the entirety of American politics, not solely this scenario. If it were a reason to reject a bill there would never be a bipartisan agreement ever again.
People in need could have been helped. They weren't because the Democrats said no, and decided to guarantee their own bill to fail by doing everything they objected to in the first place. Maybe something will be worked out, maybe it won't at this point, but this is the reality at the present moment.
The Democrats aren't political neophytes. They know damn well the consequences of denying the aid package and starting a partisan fight over the bill would lead to it all being delayed and the people who live paycheck to paycheck- who can't collect one- will suffer in the meantime. That's an acceptable trade-off to them, as long as they can divert the blame onto their political rivals.
So this is basically saying whoever presents their proposal first wins?? Like a 100-meter dash?? .
It's not about who wins. You are so concerned with Democrats looking better than Republicans that you can't see that yes, the timing is extremely important, because people don't have enough food now, not later. They can't pay rent now, not later. The political reality is that they can not ask for Heaven and Earth in their bill and receive it, and they know it. They are putting up a pointless fight to grandstand in order to bolster their image at the expense of the well being of people. You know it, and I know it.
As an aside, I object to the Democrat bill because it demands a 15$ minimum wage to receive aid for your company, and is just a laundry list of their own pet projects that is all just bait to try to get it shot down. I mean, isn't that the Democrats own objection? It is fundamentally unserious, and doesn't give me much more anyway. The small buisness that I work for simply can't afford 15$ for everyone and will likely go out of buisness when this is said and done. Maybe there is a small business provision in there, I admittedly only read the article and not the bill despite my newfound free time.
It's not about who wins then Republicans should make a bipartisan bill instead of a partisan bill.
They should also stop McConnell from performing silly stunts like holding show votes and wasting everyone's time.
Get mad at Republicans for putting out a non-starter.
The Democrats object so strongly to Republicans putting forth a partisan bill that they did the exact same thing with their own bill. Apply this to every other scenario in American politics. It is a meaningless objection that condemns the entirety of American politics, not solely this scenario. If it were a reason to reject a bill there would never be a bipartisan agreement ever again.
People in need could have been helped. They weren't because the Democrats said no, and decided to guarantee their own bill to fail by doing everything they objected to in the first place. Maybe something will be worked out, maybe it won't at this point, but this is the reality at the present moment.
Again, your position is "Democrats MUST agree to whatever is presented to them by Republicans" and that "Republicans have absolutely no obligation to consider any Democratic proposals whatsoever". It must be fun playing basketball with you. I assume you demand two possessions for every one your opponent gets. But you gave away why you think this when you said something or exactly to the effect of "Democrats have no leverage because not enough people voted for them". And it's really stunning, in the end, that they managed to gain control of the House with this apparently being the reality of the situation. One might even say it's a miracle.
The Democrats aren't political neophytes. They know damn well the consequences of denying the aid package and starting a partisan fight over the bill would lead to it all being delayed and the people who live paycheck to paycheck- who can't collect one- will suffer in the meantime. That's an acceptable trade-off to them, as long as they can divert the blame onto their political rivals.
So this is basically saying whoever presents their proposal first wins?? Like a 100-meter dash?? .
It's not about who wins. You are so concerned with Democrats looking better than Republicans that you can't see that yes, the timing is extremely important, because people don't have enough food now, not later. They can't pay rent now, not later. The political reality is that they can not ask for Heaven and Earth in their bill and receive it, and they know it. They are putting up a pointless fight to grandstand in order to bolster their image at the expense of the well being of people. You know it, and I know it.
As an aside, I object to the Democrat bill because it demands a 15$ minimum wage to receive aid for your company, and is just a laundry list of their own pet projects that is all just bait to try to get it shot down. I mean, isn't that the Democrats own objection? It is fundamentally unserious, and doesn't give me much more anyway. The small buisness that I work for simply can't afford 15$ for everyone and will likely go out of buisness when this is said and done. Maybe there is a small business provision in there, I admittedly only read the article and not the bill despite my newfound free time.
It's not about who wins then Republicans should make a bipartisan bill instead of a partisan bill.
They should also stop McConnell from performing silly stunts like holding show votes and wasting everyone's time.
Get mad at Republicans for putting out a non-starter.
The Democrats object so strongly to Republicans putting forth a partisan bill that they did the exact same thing with their own bill. Apply this to every other scenario in American politics. It is a meaningless objection that condemns the entirety of American politics, not solely this scenario. If it were a reason to reject a bill there would never be a bipartisan agreement ever again.
People in need could have been helped. They weren't because the Democrats said no, and decided to guarantee their own bill to fail by doing everything they objected to in the first place. Maybe something will be worked out, maybe it won't at this point, but this is the reality at the present moment.
Again, your position is "Democrats MUST agree to whatever is presented to them by Republicans" and that "Republicans have absolutely no obligation to consider any Democratic proposals whatsoever". It must be fun playing basketball with you. I assume you demand two possessions for every one your opponent gets. But you gave away why you think this when you said something or exactly to the effect of "Democrats have no leverage because not enough people voted for them". And it's really stunning, in the end, that they managed to gain control of the House with this apparently being the reality of the situation. One might even say it's a miracle.
The Republicans hold the Senate and Executive Branch of government while the Democrats hold just the House. It makes perfect sense for them to lead in this scenario, and their bill was up for a vote first in a time of emergency. That's two good reasons I can see for the Democrats to be the ones to have to come to the table.
But no, they didn't. Their bill is not an attempt by any means to act in the bipartisan manner they have suddenly found so much respect for. So I reject all arguments about bipartisanship for the nonsense that they are.
The Democrats aren't political neophytes. They know damn well the consequences of denying the aid package and starting a partisan fight over the bill would lead to it all being delayed and the people who live paycheck to paycheck- who can't collect one- will suffer in the meantime. That's an acceptable trade-off to them, as long as they can divert the blame onto their political rivals.
So this is basically saying whoever presents their proposal first wins?? Like a 100-meter dash?? .
It's not about who wins. You are so concerned with Democrats looking better than Republicans that you can't see that yes, the timing is extremely important, because people don't have enough food now, not later. They can't pay rent now, not later. The political reality is that they can not ask for Heaven and Earth in their bill and receive it, and they know it. They are putting up a pointless fight to grandstand in order to bolster their image at the expense of the well being of people. You know it, and I know it.
As an aside, I object to the Democrat bill because it demands a 15$ minimum wage to receive aid for your company, and is just a laundry list of their own pet projects that is all just bait to try to get it shot down. I mean, isn't that the Democrats own objection? It is fundamentally unserious, and doesn't give me much more anyway. The small buisness that I work for simply can't afford 15$ for everyone and will likely go out of buisness when this is said and done. Maybe there is a small business provision in there, I admittedly only read the article and not the bill despite my newfound free time.
It's not about who wins then Republicans should make a bipartisan bill instead of a partisan bill.
They should also stop McConnell from performing silly stunts like holding show votes and wasting everyone's time.
Get mad at Republicans for putting out a non-starter.
The Democrats object so strongly to Republicans putting forth a partisan bill that they did the exact same thing with their own bill. Apply this to every other scenario in American politics. It is a meaningless objection that condemns the entirety of American politics, not solely this scenario. If it were a reason to reject a bill there would never be a bipartisan agreement ever again.
People in need could have been helped. They weren't because the Democrats said no, and decided to guarantee their own bill to fail by doing everything they objected to in the first place. Maybe something will be worked out, maybe it won't at this point, but this is the reality at the present moment.
Again, your position is "Democrats MUST agree to whatever is presented to them by Republicans" and that "Republicans have absolutely no obligation to consider any Democratic proposals whatsoever". It must be fun playing basketball with you. I assume you demand two possessions for every one your opponent gets. But you gave away why you think this when you said something or exactly to the effect of "Democrats have no leverage because not enough people voted for them". And it's really stunning, in the end, that they managed to gain control of the House with this apparently being the reality of the situation. One might even say it's a miracle.
The Republicans hold the Senate and Executive Branch of government while the Democrats hold just the House. It makes perfect sense for them to lead in this scenario, and their bill was up for a vote first in a time of emergency. That's two good reasons I can see for the Democrats to be the ones to have to come to the table.
But no, they didn't. Their bill is not an attempt by any means to act in the bipartisan manner they have suddenly found so much respect for. So I reject all arguments about bipartisanship for the nonsense that they are.
This is not how the United States government works. The House of Representatives isnt obligated to abnegate its responsibility in a bicameral legislature simply because the other party holds the executive branch.
Also, the Democrats are very much "at the table". In fact, they were "At the table" negotiating to make the stimulus bill acceptable to them at the same time as McConnell was holding manipulative show votes.
- Trump impeached for interfering in our elections.
- He's a neverending faucet of lies.
- Failures to act to protect american lives
- corruption and incompetence
- every other horrible thing he's done
THIS AFTERNOON, the Food and Drug Administration granted Gilead Sciences “orphan” drug status for its antiviral drug, remdesivir. The designation allows the pharmaceutical company to profit exclusively for seven years from the product, which is one of dozens being tested as a possible treatment for Covid-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus.
Experts warn the designation, reserved for treating “rare diseases,” could block supplies of the antiviral medication from generic drug manufacturers and provide a lucrative windfall for Gilead Sciences, which maintains close ties with President Donald Trump’s task force for controlling the coronavirus crisis. Joe Grogan, who serves on the White House coronavirus task force, lobbied for Gilead from 2011 to 2017 on issues including the pricing of pharmaceuticals.
“The Orphan Drug Act is for a rare disease and this is about as an extreme opposite of a rare disease you can possibly dream up,” said James Love, the director of Knowledge Ecology International, a watchdog on pharmaceutical patent abuse.
“They’re talking about potentially half the population of the United States,” said Love, adding that “it’s absurd that this would happen in the middle of an epidemic when everything is in short supply.”
Picking up on the earlier discussion about a potential end to social distancing in the US, the director of the John Hopkins Center for Health Security wrote a long series of tweets about the problems this could cause. There's nothing new in there, but it may act as a useful aide memoire. The tweets have been compiled here.
The Democrats aren't political neophytes. They know damn well the consequences of denying the aid package and starting a partisan fight over the bill would lead to it all being delayed and the people who live paycheck to paycheck- who can't collect one- will suffer in the meantime. That's an acceptable trade-off to them, as long as they can divert the blame onto their political rivals.
So this is basically saying whoever presents their proposal first wins?? Like a 100-meter dash?? .
It's not about who wins. You are so concerned with Democrats looking better than Republicans that you can't see that yes, the timing is extremely important, because people don't have enough food now, not later. They can't pay rent now, not later. The political reality is that they can not ask for Heaven and Earth in their bill and receive it, and they know it. They are putting up a pointless fight to grandstand in order to bolster their image at the expense of the well being of people. You know it, and I know it.
As an aside, I object to the Democrat bill because it demands a 15$ minimum wage to receive aid for your company, and is just a laundry list of their own pet projects that is all just bait to try to get it shot down. I mean, isn't that the Democrats own objection? It is fundamentally unserious, and doesn't give me much more anyway. The small buisness that I work for simply can't afford 15$ for everyone and will likely go out of buisness when this is said and done. Maybe there is a small business provision in there, I admittedly only read the article and not the bill despite my newfound free time.
It's not about who wins then Republicans should make a bipartisan bill instead of a partisan bill.
They should also stop McConnell from performing silly stunts like holding show votes and wasting everyone's time.
Get mad at Republicans for putting out a non-starter.
The Democrats object so strongly to Republicans putting forth a partisan bill that they did the exact same thing with their own bill. Apply this to every other scenario in American politics. It is a meaningless objection that condemns the entirety of American politics, not solely this scenario. If it were a reason to reject a bill there would never be a bipartisan agreement ever again.
People in need could have been helped. They weren't because the Democrats said no, and decided to guarantee their own bill to fail by doing everything they objected to in the first place. Maybe something will be worked out, maybe it won't at this point, but this is the reality at the present moment.
Again, your position is "Democrats MUST agree to whatever is presented to them by Republicans" and that "Republicans have absolutely no obligation to consider any Democratic proposals whatsoever". It must be fun playing basketball with you. I assume you demand two possessions for every one your opponent gets. But you gave away why you think this when you said something or exactly to the effect of "Democrats have no leverage because not enough people voted for them". And it's really stunning, in the end, that they managed to gain control of the House with this apparently being the reality of the situation. One might even say it's a miracle.
The Republicans hold the Senate and Executive Branch of government while the Democrats hold just the House. It makes perfect sense for them to lead in this scenario, and their bill was up for a vote first in a time of emergency. That's two good reasons I can see for the Democrats to be the ones to have to come to the table.
But no, they didn't. Their bill is not an attempt by any means to act in the bipartisan manner they have suddenly found so much respect for. So I reject all arguments about bipartisanship for the nonsense that they are.
This is not how the United States government works. The House of Representatives isnt obligated to abnegate its responsibility in a bicameral legislature simply because the other party holds the executive branch.
Also, the Democrats are very much "at the table". In fact, they were "At the table" negotiating to make the stimulus bill acceptable to them at the same time as McConnell was holding manipulative show votes.
Your outrage is selective.
They were so at the table that they took their vacations while the Republicans actually didn't.
They are so at the table that they are using the Coronavirus to hold the American people hostage to get what they want... They put out a 1400 page bill that LITERALLY NO ONE HAS ANY TIME TO READ, when quick action is needed but I'm willing to put money on it's chalk full of green new deal ideology-isque nonsense.
Was the Republicans plan perfect, no but all bills have some kind of loop hole in them that we could've taken care of after the fact.
But the beauty of all of this, the stupidest move they did was block it, ignoring the fact thatboth progressives, Democrats, AND republicans watching from their homes were ok with the bill. If the bill was a success, it would've been viewed as a bipartisan success, stating that despite the fact both sides fight none stop, when time is needed they come together to help the country.
If it had failed, they actually would've had a TRUMP card to use against the Republicans for the next coming months. All they have done is increase animosity towards them and making even more people walk away.
No they want to use this to try and gain power, that's all the Dems have been doing
"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) worked to scupper the phase-three coronavirus relief package on Sunday after Majority Whip James Clyburn (D., S.C.) told caucus members last week that the bill was “a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.”
Clyburn’s comments came on a Thursday call featuring more than 200 House Democrats, during which caucus members laid out a list of provisions they wanted to be included in the Senate’s trillion-dollar package."
That doesn't sound like concern for the people, that sounds like a grab at power to me.
Pun is intended.
Also I'm now hearing people day that they don't ever want to hear Dems claim to be the party of the people again after this debacle.
Yeah, the word I'm hearing 'on the street' (ie: from everyday folks) is that this could be a big black-eye for the Democrats. Don't underestimate how much your average people literally HATE intellectuals. The more cerebral the Democrats sound, the worse it's going to be for them. I wish I were kidding...
Ah, the famous "is it perfect?? no but...." while mentioning nothing about it and WHY it isn't perfect and the equally famous "some people are saying" and "the American people" being used as an amorphous, monolithic group. Meanwhile, within the last 50 minutes, the President just suggested we all go back to work next week, which would basically cause a mini-Holocaust. The Republican Party is now basically advocating for a culling of 1-2 million people. Is refusing to actually use the Defense Production Act despite New York probably needing 25,000 more ventilators than they have by next week. Everything they have claimed they are doing they are not doing, and that includes ignoring what EVERY OTHER FUCKING COUNTRY ON EARTH is doing, which is committing to a shut-down for as long as it takes to get it under control.
Yeah, the word I'm hearing 'on the street' (ie: from everyday folks) is that this could be a big black-eye for the Democrats. Don't underestimate how much your average people literally HATE intellectuals. The more cerebral the Democrats sound, the worse it's going to be for them. I wish I were kidding...
Yeah, because we've clearly seen the past two weeks that the "average" American knows what the fuck is going on with this by their actions and indignation at being told they have to make a mild sacrifice for the greater good. If we're re-opening restaurants and businesses next week like Trump is suggesting, why do we need the checks at all?? It's been a week. Almost all unemployment claims have a week waiting period. Fine, go back to work Red America. See what happens. Then they'll change their position on this for the 5th or 6th fucking time in 20 days. I'll be in my apartment watching the world burn. This woman has it correct:
But yeah, if we need to dumb it down for them (because, honestly, the term "social distancing" might as well be a calculus problem to most of these morons), let's do so. Stay the fuck at home, and the Republicans would rather make sure the bottom line of the cruise ship industry and Trump's hotels don't suffer than let you grandparents live.
Picking up on the earlier discussion about a potential end to social distancing in the US, the director of the John Hopkins Center for Health Security wrote a long series of tweets about the problems this could cause. There's nothing new in there, but it may act as a useful aide memoire. The tweets have been compiled here.
You don't understand, @Grond0. The calculation has been made that the economy is more important than the lives of the "weak". They will be culled. Now, they aren't going to have much of an "economy" if their plan goes into action, with half the workforce out sick for two weeks and hospital systems that literally melt-down. But yeah, I guess this is what the President of the United States is going with. The fact that this is even being suggested makes negotiations over what is in the aide package seem beyond trivial in comparison. The plan the right-wing media and White House is floating is a mass death sentence.
Ah, the famous "is it perfect?? no but...." while mentioning nothing about it and WHY it isn't perfect and the equally famous "some people are saying" and "the American people" being used as an amorphous, monolithic group. Meanwhile, within the last 50 minutes, the President just suggested we all go back to work next week, which would basically cause a mini-Holocaust. The Republican Party is now basically advocating for a culling of 1-2 million people.
Wrong what he suggested is in 2 weeks we take a look back at the situation and see how it faired. Of the situation improved enough then maybe we can.
But let's go back to the "oh it's not perfect" circular reasoning you just used.
"The 1119-page bill is Christmas in March for liberal special interests. It imposes racial and gender pay equity provisions, diversity on corporate boards, increased use of minority-owned banks by federal offices, and a grab-bag of other diversity-themed requirements. "
That doesn't have ish to do with the Coronavirus...
"It increases the collective bargaining power for unions and cancels all the debt owed by the U.S. Postal Service to the U.S. Treasury. For the global"
Please I really want a logically valid and sound response on what this has to do with the Coronavirus. The debt the U.S. postall service has was not started or caused. This is suppose to be relief for the people isn't it?
"For the global warming crowd there are increased fuel emission standards and required carbon offsets for airlines, plus tax credits for alternative energy programs."
Oh that will be a big help to the starving working people who HAVE NO MONEY RIGHT NOW.
"For the kids there is a provision for student loan payment deferment, and for the education bureaucrats who overcharge them a $9.5 billion giveaway to colleges and universities."
Ok we finally have something that semi makes sense. I'd rather that money go to primary schools, but the corrupt University institutions are still businesses to. As far as student loans go, freeze effing interest and just let us pay back what we borrowed because it's the interested that never lets the effing debt go down.
"Perhaps the most troubling sections of the bill are under the rubric ‘‘American Coronavirus/COVID–19 Election Safety and Security” or ‘‘ACCESS” Act. This section would impose requirements on states for early voting, voting by mail, required mailing of absentee ballots to everyone, ballot harvesting (i.e., having third parties deliver absentee ballots), online voter registration, same-day registration and other practices which undermine confidence in the integrity of the ballot.'
This shouldn't even be a concern I. This bill, it's literally the last thing people are worried about right now.
Power grab, that's all this shit is, and the sad part is the people who are being hurt aren't the millionaires and billionaires sitting in Congress, it's the average Joe. And it isn't all Trump's fault, no matter how partison you try to make this issue.
Just like the bs power grab the DOJ trying to do to get the power to basically ish on civil our civil rights!
"The DOJ asked Congress to authorize the attorney general to ask the chief judge of any district court to pause court proceedings “whenever the district court is fully or partially closed by virtue of any natural disaster, civil disobedience, or other emergency situation.”
Although unlikely to pass the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives, the request would grant judges the broad power to suspend civil rights that apply to “any statutes or rules of procedure otherwise affecting pre-arrest, post-arrest, pre-trial, trial, and post-trial procedures in criminal and juvenile proceedings and all civil process and proceedings,” according to legislation shared with Congress."
But you want to sit there and pick apart every little thing, that helps no one this is a emergency relief bill, keyword being EMERGENCY, meaning TEMPORARY, not permenant. This helps NO ONE!
I'm not sure what bipartisan means in the context of this crisis. What I think it should mean is that both sides try to understand the position of the other and produce proposals that will be acceptable to the other side - thus avoiding the need for time spent in horse-trading. I don't think that either side is doing that.
It seems clear to me that the Republicans would have known perfectly well that setting up a $500bn slush fund in an election year would be unacceptable to the Democrats, so there's no evidence of a desire for bipartisanship there. So why include that proposal, when quick action is needed to help the country? Well I think, unfortunately, it makes good sense in a political context - either:
1) the Democrats accept the fund with all the opportunities that gives the Republicans to purchase influence, or
2) they block the bill and a well-orchestrated right-wing campaign immediately swings into action with the aim of ensuring the Democrats take the blame for everything to do with Covid-19.
Trump's default position seems to be not to try and fix problems, but find a way to blame someone else for them. He's struggled for a couple of months now with the fact that blaming a virus doesn't help him politically, but he's now starting to get to grips with it and lining up his targets - like the Chinese, like particular States and like the Democrats. Doing that won't of course help the country - quite the reverse, it will make things worse. However, Trump's main concern is whether he takes the blame for any problems. Clearly he should be blamed - you only have to look at a timeline of what he's said and done over the last couple of months to see why - but he does have a remarkable record for avoiding deserved blame ...
Edit: just to clarify that I agree with a lot of what @DragonKing says. This should be a time for quick action, rather than trying to force pet projects through on the back of an emergency. Personally it seems clear to me that in an emergency the government should be the one's taking the lead in tackling it - and therefore my focus is more on them, but that doesn't mean I'm impressed with the actions of the opposition.
Making sure we have elections shouldn't be a concern. Ok then. Country fundamentally changes by way of a global pandemic, but you don't think implementing vote by mail is an important response to the crisis. Sure. Also, see my VERY SIMPLE math in an earlier post about how much money you get from each proposal. It's right there. Trump's response yesterday to concerns about no oversight of the $500 billion slush fund. "I'll be the oversight". LMFAO. Good god in heaven.
And don't bullshit me about what Trump is suggesting. Ever. There is NO chance the situation improves within two weeks. None. I have a DOCUMENTED list written down of what the narrative has been every step of the way, and will continue to add to when it inevitably changes every 4 or 5 days from here on out. I keep my receipts, and I know how to use them. I'm not some caricature of a liberal you argue with in the comment sections of your reactionary Youtube videos. I don't play. I've been watching right-wing media for 20 years, and I correctly predicted EXACTLY what they would do 12 hours before it happened. Mocked and ridiculed for saying so and then, like magic, it goes into effect. Such is the life of anyone who has watched the American right for years.
I'm not sure what bipartisan means in the context of this crisis. What I think it should mean is that both sides try to understand the position of the other and produce proposals that will be acceptable to the other side - thus avoiding the need for time spent in horse-trading. I don't think that either side is doing that.
It seems clear to me that the Republicans would have known perfectly well that setting up a $500bn slush fund in an election year would be unacceptable to the Democrats, so there's no evidence of a desire for bipartisanship there. So why include that proposal, when quick action is needed to help the country? Well I think, unfortunately, it makes good sense in a political context - either:
1) the Democrats accept the fund with all the opportunities that gives the Republicans to purchase influence, or
2) they block the bill and a well-orchestrated right-wing campaign immediately swings into action with the aim of ensuring the Democrats take the blame for everything to do with Covid-19.
Trump's default position seems to be not to try and fix problems, but find a way to blame someone else for them. He's struggled for a couple of months now with the fact that blaming a virus doesn't help him politically, but he's now starting to get to grips with it and lining up his targets - like the Chinese, like particular States and like the Democrats. Doing that won't of course help the country - quite the reverse, it will make things worse. However, Trump's main concern is whether he takes the blame for any problems. Clearly he should be blamed - you only have to look at a timeline of what he's said and done over the last couple of months to see why - but he does have a remarkable record for avoiding deserved blame ...
Edit: just to clarify that I agree with a lot of what @DragonKing says. This should be a time for quick action, rather than trying to force pet projects through on the back of an emergency. Personally it seems clear to me that in an emergency the government should be the one's taking the lead in tackling it - and therefore my focus is more on them, but that doesn't mean I'm impressed with the actions of the opposition.
This is the crux of the issue. Everyone who is expressing selective outrage at Democrats for not passing the bill and putting forward their own are missing the fact that the GOP are using precisely the same tactic as Democrats. Their lack of objection is either ignorance of this fact, or ideological in that they think the GOP should get what it wants but Democrats shouldn’t.
That’s not how government works, and it’s not how compromise works.
Consider this: A stimulus bill could be passed TODAY if everything but the money to the citizens was removed. That it isn’t shows a willful intent to benefit from the situation by both parties.
As a last thought - one of the more obnoxious parts of this whole episode is: A deal is ALMOST CERTAINLY about to be passed. The idea that this is some nefarious plot by Democrats to hurt people is unfounded.
They’re negotiating. If they had passed it yesterday vs today would make almost 0 discernible difference. If instead, the Bill is made better for those who need it, that’s universally a good thing.
I'm not sure what bipartisan means in the context of this crisis. What I think it should mean is that both sides try to understand the position of the other and produce proposals that will be acceptable to the other side - thus avoiding the need for time spent in horse-trading. I don't think that either side is doing that.
It seems clear to me that the Republicans would have known perfectly well that setting up a $500bn slush fund in an election year would be unacceptable to the Democrats, so there's no evidence of a desire for bipartisanship there. So why include that proposal, when quick action is needed to help the country? Well I think, unfortunately, it makes good sense in a political context - either:
1) the Democrats accept the fund with all the opportunities that gives the Republicans to purchase influence, or
2) they block the bill and a well-orchestrated right-wing campaign immediately swings into action with the aim of ensuring the Democrats take the blame for everything to do with Covid-19.
Trump's default position seems to be not to try and fix problems, but find a way to blame someone else for them. He's struggled for a couple of months now with the fact that blaming a virus doesn't help him politically, but he's now starting to get to grips with it and lining up his targets - like the Chinese, like particular States and like the Democrats. Doing that won't of course help the country - quite the reverse, it will make things worse. However, Trump's main concern is whether he takes the blame for any problems. Clearly he should be blamed - you only have to look at a timeline of what he's said and done over the last couple of months to see why - but he does have a remarkable record for avoiding deserved blame ...
Edit: just to clarify that I agree with a lot of what @DragonKing says. This should be a time for quick action, rather than trying to force pet projects through on the back of an emergency. Personally it seems clear to me that in an emergency the government should be the one's taking the lead in tackling it - and therefore my focus is more on them, but that doesn't mean I'm impressed with the actions of the opposition.
This is the crux of the issue. Everyone who is expressing selective outrage at Democrats for not passing the bill and putting forward their own are missing the fact that the GOP are using precisely the same tactic as Democrats. Their lack of objection is either ignorance of this fact, or ideological in that they think the GOP should get what it wants but Democrats shouldn’t.
That’s not how government works, and it’s not how compromise works.
Consider this: A stimulus bill could be passed TODAY if everything but the money to the citizens was removed. That it isn’t shows a willful intent to benefit from the situation by both parties.
Yeah, except one of the bills gives people more money and makes sure we can vote safely in November, and the other's main feature is a corporate slush fund. This is nothing more than more "anything Democrats do, even if elected, is illegitimate, and everything Republicans do is the default Overton Window". And yeah, of course not everything in each bill is going to get through. And no, of course the 24 hours makes absolutely no difference. But if it does, to anyone concerned about it, if it's proven that the one-day delay in fact does hold up the money by that amount of time, I will personally Zelle them a $100.00 to cover for that 24 hours. But since by all accounts this money is going out in April (at least that was the estimate the entire time before this went through), it's doubtful that can ever be substantiated. The CNN article shows that McConnell knew full-well he was in ongoing negotiations with Democrats, and it was nothing but a cynical ploy to even hold the votes. Say one thing for Republicans, they know how to play the game better. What they aren't better at doing is actually keeping people alive.
Edit: assuming this is true, Democrats seem to have negotiated up to FULL salary in unemployment for up to 4 months. I won't hold my breath for any apologies:
Ah, the famous "is it perfect?? no but...." while mentioning nothing about it and WHY it isn't perfect and the equally famous "some people are saying" and "the American people" being used as an amorphous, monolithic group. Meanwhile, within the last 50 minutes, the President just suggested we all go back to work next week, which would basically cause a mini-Holocaust. The Republican Party is now basically advocating for a culling of 1-2 million people. Is refusing to actually use the Defense Production Act despite New York probably needing 25,000 more ventilators than they have by next week. Everything they have claimed they are not doing, and that includes ignoring what EVERY OTHER FUCKING COUNTRY ON EARTH is doing, which is committing to a shut-down for as long as it takes to get it under control.
This is what I don't get. You all go back to work, you all get sick. The economy crashes anyway.
You don't go back to work. Everyone stays healthy. Quarantine over, you're all itching to catch up on your consumerism habits.
He is definitely take his cue from the Stock Markets who, since the 80s have always believed short term gain is far superior to long term success - the exact opposite on how a company should be run.
~
About the three points and how "they don't relate" to the coronavirus:
1. Unprecedented collective bargaining powers for unions - 'unprecedented' is an unique word here, don't you think? Something that has never been done before. Well the response to coronavirus is something that really has never been done before and if this is going to happen again, should it be up to the government to foot the bill for a person's sick leave to prevent the spread? Should multibillion companies who skimp on benefits be taken to task to make sure the economy they run on stays healthy? This really does sound like it is related to the coronavirus.
2. Increased fuel emissions for airlines - See, this one is a nice one. Airlines are directly affected by the coronavirus and international governments crack down on travel. Instead of just giving them a lump sum, where this industry won't trickle down to those who are actually effected, the workers, the government is reducing fuel emissions standards to make fuel cheaper for these industries to save money. So ya, it relates.
3. Expansion of Solar and Wind tax credits - This is a unique one, which may actually not relate to the coronavirus, however, it is a way that gives companies money without just doling it out to them like the republicans are doing. I'd probably have to research what is exactly is being expanded, but it sounds like it is just a clever way to give companies more money without lumping it into one payment. So once again, kinda relates, but not as much as the first two.
"Perhaps the most troubling sections of the bill are under the rubric ‘‘American Coronavirus/COVID–19 Election Safety and Security” or ‘‘ACCESS” Act. This section would impose requirements on states for early voting, voting by mail, required mailing of absentee ballots to everyone, ballot harvesting (i.e., having third parties deliver absentee ballots), online voter registration, same-day registration and other practices which undermine confidence in the integrity of the ballot.'
This is also hilarious that people think things like same-day registration undermines the integrity of the ballot of a democracy. Not having same-day registration and culling of voter rolls 12 months before an election, have a greater impact on the integrity of elections than having a person with valid ID register the day of the vote because some county clerk spelt their middle name wrong when entering it into a database.
A lot of voters vote early and by mail and have absentee ballots. If, if this stretches into November, then yes a plan needs to be in place where it does not look like the government is restricting access for people to exercise there right. Imagine a lock down in November where you can't have more than 50, 25, 10 people gathered in the same place? How is that going to look about voter suppression. I personally wouldn't put it past some governors to actually enact something like this.
So to me, what's actually troubling, are people pushing back against such measures.
Meanwhile, within the last 50 minutes, the President just suggested we all go back to work next week, which would basically cause a mini-Holocaust. The Republican Party is now basically advocating for a culling of 1-2 million people.
Are you willing to back up this claim? Let's say a "go back to business as usual" policy begins next week--what time frame do you think it will take to reach that 1 million case mark? Just over a full month, by the end of April? Perhaps the end of May?
Suggest a time frame, let's agree to the terms, then...
if you are correct I will delete my profile from the board...
but if you are not correct then you will delete your profile from the board.
Neither of us will actually be harmed or lose anything real with this wager.
Of course, it that policy does not go into effect then we will never know.
*************
If Congress is willing to pass some sloppy, hastily-thrown-together project like a college student the night before a research project is due, then Democrats should not be trying to sneak all sorts of non-virus-related amendments onto it. They are the ones at fault for nothing being passed yet.
I do have to say that some of the crap they're spewing on CNN is getting pretty boring. Yes, they may have to re-use masks but the masks are for protecting patients, not the workers. You're not going to get infected by your own mask, even if you wear it all day. They're your own germs!
Edit: Also, wearing a mask without goggles (or at least glasses with side-shields) is close to useless.
Meanwhile, within the last 50 minutes, the President just suggested we all go back to work next week, which would basically cause a mini-Holocaust. The Republican Party is now basically advocating for a culling of 1-2 million people.
Are you willing to back up this claim? Let's say a "go back to business as usual" policy begins next week--what time frame do you think it will take to reach that 1 million case mark? Just over a full month, by the end of April? Perhaps the end of May?
Suggest a time frame, let's agree to the terms, then...
if you are correct I will delete my profile from the board...
but if you are not correct then you will delete your profile from the board.
Neither of us will actually be harmed or lose anything real with this wager.
Of course, it that policy does not go into effect then we will never know.
*************
If Congress is willing to pass some sloppy, hastily-thrown-together project like a college student the night before a research project is due, then Democrats should not be trying to sneak all sorts of non-virus-related amendments onto it. They are the ones at fault for nothing being passed yet.
It won't go into place because individual governors aren't going to purposefully kill their own citizens. Trump is doing this #1 because the cult of capitalism wants to hear it and #2 it allows him to blame the governors for continuing lockdowns. The real danger here is the MESSAGE it sends to millions of people already inclined to think this is a joke.
As for the number of cases, I don't know what makes you think the virus is going to just dissipate at the end of April.
We aren't doing even half as many preventive social distancing measures as Europe on a national scale, and we are somehow magically expecting different results. I have no idea why that isn't explained by a belief in American exceptionalism, which is basically blind religiosity.
Meanwhile, within the last 50 minutes, the President just suggested we all go back to work next week, which would basically cause a mini-Holocaust. The Republican Party is now basically advocating for a culling of 1-2 million people.
Are you willing to back up this claim? Let's say a "go back to business as usual" policy begins next week--what time frame do you think it will take to reach that 1 million case mark? Just over a full month, by the end of April? Perhaps the end of May?
Suggest a time frame, let's agree to the terms, then...
if you are correct I will delete my profile from the board...
but if you are not correct then you will delete your profile from the board.
Neither of us will actually be harmed or lose anything real with this wager.
Of course, it that policy does not go into effect then we will never know.
*************
If Congress is willing to pass some sloppy, hastily-thrown-together project like a college student the night before a research project is due, then Democrats should not be trying to sneak all sorts of non-virus-related amendments onto it. They are the ones at fault for nothing being passed yet.
doesn't the one million mark depend on govern actions as well?
And if 1 million is too extreme for you, what is the number of deaths is suitable to get the economy back up and running? How many lives are worth a 1% per increase in the DOW or NASDAQ?
I am also guessing America will have it easy when choosing which lives to save when it comes to limited supplies like ventilators. Instead of having an age cut off like Italy had to use, they'll just do a finance one. Supply and Demand. Sorry, you're lack of insurance doesn't cover the $15,000 daily rental fee for the equipment so you don't get one. Perfectly reasonable... and hey, the more people catch this thing, the more companies profit off of it.
Meanwhile, within the last 50 minutes, the President just suggested we all go back to work next week, which would basically cause a mini-Holocaust. The Republican Party is now basically advocating for a culling of 1-2 million people.
Are you willing to back up this claim? Let's say a "go back to business as usual" policy begins next week--what time frame do you think it will take to reach that 1 million case mark? Just over a full month, by the end of April? Perhaps the end of May?
Suggest a time frame, let's agree to the terms, then...
if you are correct I will delete my profile from the board...
but if you are not correct then you will delete your profile from the board.
Neither of us will actually be harmed or lose anything real with this wager.
Of course, it that policy does not go into effect then we will never know.
*************
If Congress is willing to pass some sloppy, hastily-thrown-together project like a college student the night before a research project is due, then Democrats should not be trying to sneak all sorts of non-virus-related amendments onto it. They are the ones at fault for nothing being passed yet.
doesn't the one million mark depend on govern actions as well?
And if 1 million is too extreme for you, what is the number of deaths is suitable to get the economy back up and running? How many lives are worth a 1% per increase in the DOW or NASDAQ?
I am also guessing America will have it easy when choosing which lives to save when it comes to limited supplies like ventilators. Instead of having an age cut off like Italy had to use, they'll just do a finance one. Supply and Demand. Sorry, you're lack of insurance doesn't cover the $15,000 daily rental fee for the equipment so you don't get one. Perfectly reasonable... and hey, the more people catch this thing, the more companies profit off of it.
That's a bit unfair. Some companies may make a profit off this, but I guarantee you far more will be taking it on the chin! I guess we can just stay locked in our houses until we're all working for Amazon, delivering to each other.
Now I'm wondering, would that be sustainable? I guess somebody would have to make the products so probably not...
Comments
I know no such thing. I know you're invested in the idea of some kind of "political realignment" wherein the Republican Party moves farther left on economic stimulus and maintains their hard-edge on social issues, and the Democratic House plan shoots that idea to shit, so you pretend it doesn't exist and/or that it is some kind of stalling tactic. And you may need food now, and you may need to pay rent now, but I also have more news for you. No matter WHICH bill gets passed, you aren't seeing it until early-April at BEST. So spare me the idea that 48 hours passing in an attempt to make it better is some kind of fire alarm situation and pretending like the check is going to be direct deposited the next morning at 6am. It isn't.
It's not about who wins then Republicans should make a bipartisan bill instead of a partisan bill.
They should also stop McConnell from performing silly stunts like holding show votes and wasting everyone's time.
Get mad at Republicans for putting out a non-starter.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here other than "it's not so bad". Well, maybe it's not for you. But it is for a lot of people, myself not included, and not everyone has the time to wait while the Democrats find a way to make the situation all about them. There is now a possibility that nothing gets passed in the coming days, and it will be all on their head.
Democratic plan gives $1500 to everyone, up to $7500 for a family of five. Plus $600 dollars a week for the duration you are laid off for the extent of the crisis.
So let's say this goes 3 months:
GOP Plan: $1200, maybe, depending on if your job even met the taxable threshold two years ago.
Democratic Plan: $1500, not tied to taxable income, but simply having a SS number, plus $600 a week. Over 3 months, coming out to.......$8700.
$8700>$1200
But yes, they are definitely making it all about themselves by attempting to give the laid off workers you are talking about 6-7x more money, but you think they shouldn't do that, because.......well, you haven't given a reason other than "Democrats aren't allowed to make suggestions and can only sign on to the first thing Mitch McConnell shoves in their faces" site unseen. So I won't be lectured by someone claiming I don't give a shit about getting people money and that I don't think it's that bad, when I am advocating for a plan that can prop people up for an extended period of time and is the only thing CLOSE to what is being done in Europe. As others have said, the final result will likely be something inbetween. Be sure to give anything above the $1200 back to prove your point. But if you keep it, thank Nancy Pelosi for not caving the moment the Republicans said "jump".
Not that it matters much in the grand scheme of things anyway, since the President is literally getting people to basically drink bleach and the entire right-wing media apparatus is outright suggesting we just let 15% of the population over 65 drop dead.
The Democrats object so strongly to Republicans putting forth a partisan bill that they did the exact same thing with their own bill. Apply this to every other scenario in American politics. It is a meaningless objection that condemns the entirety of American politics, not solely this scenario. If it were a reason to reject a bill there would never be a bipartisan agreement ever again.
People in need could have been helped. They weren't because the Democrats said no, and decided to guarantee their own bill to fail by doing everything they objected to in the first place. Maybe something will be worked out, maybe it won't at this point, but this is the reality at the present moment.
Again, your position is "Democrats MUST agree to whatever is presented to them by Republicans" and that "Republicans have absolutely no obligation to consider any Democratic proposals whatsoever". It must be fun playing basketball with you. I assume you demand two possessions for every one your opponent gets. But you gave away why you think this when you said something or exactly to the effect of "Democrats have no leverage because not enough people voted for them". And it's really stunning, in the end, that they managed to gain control of the House with this apparently being the reality of the situation. One might even say it's a miracle.
The Republicans hold the Senate and Executive Branch of government while the Democrats hold just the House. It makes perfect sense for them to lead in this scenario, and their bill was up for a vote first in a time of emergency. That's two good reasons I can see for the Democrats to be the ones to have to come to the table.
But no, they didn't. Their bill is not an attempt by any means to act in the bipartisan manner they have suddenly found so much respect for. So I reject all arguments about bipartisanship for the nonsense that they are.
This is not how the United States government works. The House of Representatives isnt obligated to abnegate its responsibility in a bicameral legislature simply because the other party holds the executive branch.
Also, the Democrats are very much "at the table". In fact, they were "At the table" negotiating to make the stimulus bill acceptable to them at the same time as McConnell was holding manipulative show votes.
Your outrage is selective.
Hmm.. Right wing parrot must have missed:
- Trump impeached for interfering in our elections.
- He's a neverending faucet of lies.
- Failures to act to protect american lives
- corruption and incompetence
- every other horrible thing he's done
it must be nice to have the memory of a mayfly.
https://theintercept.com/2020/03/23/gilead-sciences-coronavirus-treatment-orphan-drug-status/
They are so at the table that they are using the Coronavirus to hold the American people hostage to get what they want... They put out a 1400 page bill that LITERALLY NO ONE HAS ANY TIME TO READ, when quick action is needed but I'm willing to put money on it's chalk full of green new deal ideology-isque nonsense.
Was the Republicans plan perfect, no but all bills have some kind of loop hole in them that we could've taken care of after the fact.
But the beauty of all of this, the stupidest move they did was block it, ignoring the fact thatboth progressives, Democrats, AND republicans watching from their homes were ok with the bill. If the bill was a success, it would've been viewed as a bipartisan success, stating that despite the fact both sides fight none stop, when time is needed they come together to help the country.
If it had failed, they actually would've had a TRUMP card to use against the Republicans for the next coming months. All they have done is increase animosity towards them and making even more people walk away.
No they want to use this to try and gain power, that's all the Dems have been doing
"Dem Rep. Told Colleagues Coronavirus Bill Is ‘Tremendous Opportunity to Restructure Things to Fit Our Vision’"
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/dem-rep-told-colleagues-coronavirus-bill-is-tremendous-opportunity-to-restructure-things-to-fit-our-vision/
"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) worked to scupper the phase-three coronavirus relief package on Sunday after Majority Whip James Clyburn (D., S.C.) told caucus members last week that the bill was “a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.”
Clyburn’s comments came on a Thursday call featuring more than 200 House Democrats, during which caucus members laid out a list of provisions they wanted to be included in the Senate’s trillion-dollar package."
That doesn't sound like concern for the people, that sounds like a grab at power to me.
Pun is intended.
Also I'm now hearing people day that they don't ever want to hear Dems claim to be the party of the people again after this debacle.
Yeah, because we've clearly seen the past two weeks that the "average" American knows what the fuck is going on with this by their actions and indignation at being told they have to make a mild sacrifice for the greater good. If we're re-opening restaurants and businesses next week like Trump is suggesting, why do we need the checks at all?? It's been a week. Almost all unemployment claims have a week waiting period. Fine, go back to work Red America. See what happens. Then they'll change their position on this for the 5th or 6th fucking time in 20 days. I'll be in my apartment watching the world burn. This woman has it correct:
But yeah, if we need to dumb it down for them (because, honestly, the term "social distancing" might as well be a calculus problem to most of these morons), let's do so. Stay the fuck at home, and the Republicans would rather make sure the bottom line of the cruise ship industry and Trump's hotels don't suffer than let you grandparents live.
Repeat after me until it sinks in. Death cult:
You don't understand, @Grond0. The calculation has been made that the economy is more important than the lives of the "weak". They will be culled. Now, they aren't going to have much of an "economy" if their plan goes into action, with half the workforce out sick for two weeks and hospital systems that literally melt-down. But yeah, I guess this is what the President of the United States is going with. The fact that this is even being suggested makes negotiations over what is in the aide package seem beyond trivial in comparison. The plan the right-wing media and White House is floating is a mass death sentence.
But let's go back to the "oh it's not perfect" circular reasoning you just used.
How about we just take a look at how perfect that 1400 page novel is.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/03/23/nancy-pelosi-has-packed-coronavirus-stimulus-liberal-wish-list-column/2903577001/
"The 1119-page bill is Christmas in March for liberal special interests. It imposes racial and gender pay equity provisions, diversity on corporate boards, increased use of minority-owned banks by federal offices, and a grab-bag of other diversity-themed requirements. "
That doesn't have ish to do with the Coronavirus...
"It increases the collective bargaining power for unions and cancels all the debt owed by the U.S. Postal Service to the U.S. Treasury. For the global"
Please I really want a logically valid and sound response on what this has to do with the Coronavirus. The debt the U.S. postall service has was not started or caused. This is suppose to be relief for the people isn't it?
"For the global warming crowd there are increased fuel emission standards and required carbon offsets for airlines, plus tax credits for alternative energy programs."
Oh that will be a big help to the starving working people who HAVE NO MONEY RIGHT NOW.
"For the kids there is a provision for student loan payment deferment, and for the education bureaucrats who overcharge them a $9.5 billion giveaway to colleges and universities."
Ok we finally have something that semi makes sense. I'd rather that money go to primary schools, but the corrupt University institutions are still businesses to. As far as student loans go, freeze effing interest and just let us pay back what we borrowed because it's the interested that never lets the effing debt go down.
"Perhaps the most troubling sections of the bill are under the rubric ‘‘American Coronavirus/COVID–19 Election Safety and Security” or ‘‘ACCESS” Act. This section would impose requirements on states for early voting, voting by mail, required mailing of absentee ballots to everyone, ballot harvesting (i.e., having third parties deliver absentee ballots), online voter registration, same-day registration and other practices which undermine confidence in the integrity of the ballot.'
This shouldn't even be a concern I. This bill, it's literally the last thing people are worried about right now.
Power grab, that's all this shit is, and the sad part is the people who are being hurt aren't the millionaires and billionaires sitting in Congress, it's the average Joe. And it isn't all Trump's fault, no matter how partison you try to make this issue.
Just like the bs power grab the DOJ trying to do to get the power to basically ish on civil our civil rights!
"The DOJ asked Congress to authorize the attorney general to ask the chief judge of any district court to pause court proceedings “whenever the district court is fully or partially closed by virtue of any natural disaster, civil disobedience, or other emergency situation.”
Although unlikely to pass the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives, the request would grant judges the broad power to suspend civil rights that apply to “any statutes or rules of procedure otherwise affecting pre-arrest, post-arrest, pre-trial, trial, and post-trial procedures in criminal and juvenile proceedings and all civil process and proceedings,” according to legislation shared with Congress."
Just like I push back against this bs I'll push against the bs Dems are doing right now.
https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/03/doj-proposes-judges-be-able-to-detain-people-indefinitely-and-suspend-court-rules-during-coronavirus-pandemic/
But you want to sit there and pick apart every little thing, that helps no one this is a emergency relief bill, keyword being EMERGENCY, meaning TEMPORARY, not permenant. This helps NO ONE!
It seems clear to me that the Republicans would have known perfectly well that setting up a $500bn slush fund in an election year would be unacceptable to the Democrats, so there's no evidence of a desire for bipartisanship there. So why include that proposal, when quick action is needed to help the country? Well I think, unfortunately, it makes good sense in a political context - either:
1) the Democrats accept the fund with all the opportunities that gives the Republicans to purchase influence, or
2) they block the bill and a well-orchestrated right-wing campaign immediately swings into action with the aim of ensuring the Democrats take the blame for everything to do with Covid-19.
Trump's default position seems to be not to try and fix problems, but find a way to blame someone else for them. He's struggled for a couple of months now with the fact that blaming a virus doesn't help him politically, but he's now starting to get to grips with it and lining up his targets - like the Chinese, like particular States and like the Democrats. Doing that won't of course help the country - quite the reverse, it will make things worse. However, Trump's main concern is whether he takes the blame for any problems. Clearly he should be blamed - you only have to look at a timeline of what he's said and done over the last couple of months to see why - but he does have a remarkable record for avoiding deserved blame ...
Edit: just to clarify that I agree with a lot of what @DragonKing says. This should be a time for quick action, rather than trying to force pet projects through on the back of an emergency. Personally it seems clear to me that in an emergency the government should be the one's taking the lead in tackling it - and therefore my focus is more on them, but that doesn't mean I'm impressed with the actions of the opposition.
And don't bullshit me about what Trump is suggesting. Ever. There is NO chance the situation improves within two weeks. None. I have a DOCUMENTED list written down of what the narrative has been every step of the way, and will continue to add to when it inevitably changes every 4 or 5 days from here on out. I keep my receipts, and I know how to use them. I'm not some caricature of a liberal you argue with in the comment sections of your reactionary Youtube videos. I don't play. I've been watching right-wing media for 20 years, and I correctly predicted EXACTLY what they would do 12 hours before it happened. Mocked and ridiculed for saying so and then, like magic, it goes into effect. Such is the life of anyone who has watched the American right for years.
This is the crux of the issue. Everyone who is expressing selective outrage at Democrats for not passing the bill and putting forward their own are missing the fact that the GOP are using precisely the same tactic as Democrats. Their lack of objection is either ignorance of this fact, or ideological in that they think the GOP should get what it wants but Democrats shouldn’t.
That’s not how government works, and it’s not how compromise works.
Consider this: A stimulus bill could be passed TODAY if everything but the money to the citizens was removed. That it isn’t shows a willful intent to benefit from the situation by both parties.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/24/politics/congress-vote-coronavirus-economic-stimulus/index.html
They’re negotiating. If they had passed it yesterday vs today would make almost 0 discernible difference. If instead, the Bill is made better for those who need it, that’s universally a good thing.
Yeah, except one of the bills gives people more money and makes sure we can vote safely in November, and the other's main feature is a corporate slush fund. This is nothing more than more "anything Democrats do, even if elected, is illegitimate, and everything Republicans do is the default Overton Window". And yeah, of course not everything in each bill is going to get through. And no, of course the 24 hours makes absolutely no difference. But if it does, to anyone concerned about it, if it's proven that the one-day delay in fact does hold up the money by that amount of time, I will personally Zelle them a $100.00 to cover for that 24 hours. But since by all accounts this money is going out in April (at least that was the estimate the entire time before this went through), it's doubtful that can ever be substantiated. The CNN article shows that McConnell knew full-well he was in ongoing negotiations with Democrats, and it was nothing but a cynical ploy to even hold the votes. Say one thing for Republicans, they know how to play the game better. What they aren't better at doing is actually keeping people alive.
Edit: assuming this is true, Democrats seem to have negotiated up to FULL salary in unemployment for up to 4 months. I won't hold my breath for any apologies:
Was it worth a 24-hour delay?? Bueller?? Bueller??
This is what I don't get. You all go back to work, you all get sick. The economy crashes anyway.
You don't go back to work. Everyone stays healthy. Quarantine over, you're all itching to catch up on your consumerism habits.
He is definitely take his cue from the Stock Markets who, since the 80s have always believed short term gain is far superior to long term success - the exact opposite on how a company should be run.
~
About the three points and how "they don't relate" to the coronavirus:
1. Unprecedented collective bargaining powers for unions - 'unprecedented' is an unique word here, don't you think? Something that has never been done before. Well the response to coronavirus is something that really has never been done before and if this is going to happen again, should it be up to the government to foot the bill for a person's sick leave to prevent the spread? Should multibillion companies who skimp on benefits be taken to task to make sure the economy they run on stays healthy? This really does sound like it is related to the coronavirus.
2. Increased fuel emissions for airlines - See, this one is a nice one. Airlines are directly affected by the coronavirus and international governments crack down on travel. Instead of just giving them a lump sum, where this industry won't trickle down to those who are actually effected, the workers, the government is reducing fuel emissions standards to make fuel cheaper for these industries to save money. So ya, it relates.
3. Expansion of Solar and Wind tax credits - This is a unique one, which may actually not relate to the coronavirus, however, it is a way that gives companies money without just doling it out to them like the republicans are doing. I'd probably have to research what is exactly is being expanded, but it sounds like it is just a clever way to give companies more money without lumping it into one payment. So once again, kinda relates, but not as much as the first two.
This is also hilarious that people think things like same-day registration undermines the integrity of the ballot of a democracy. Not having same-day registration and culling of voter rolls 12 months before an election, have a greater impact on the integrity of elections than having a person with valid ID register the day of the vote because some county clerk spelt their middle name wrong when entering it into a database.
A lot of voters vote early and by mail and have absentee ballots. If, if this stretches into November, then yes a plan needs to be in place where it does not look like the government is restricting access for people to exercise there right. Imagine a lock down in November where you can't have more than 50, 25, 10 people gathered in the same place? How is that going to look about voter suppression. I personally wouldn't put it past some governors to actually enact something like this.
So to me, what's actually troubling, are people pushing back against such measures.
Are you willing to back up this claim? Let's say a "go back to business as usual" policy begins next week--what time frame do you think it will take to reach that 1 million case mark? Just over a full month, by the end of April? Perhaps the end of May?
Suggest a time frame, let's agree to the terms, then...
if you are correct I will delete my profile from the board...
but if you are not correct then you will delete your profile from the board.
Neither of us will actually be harmed or lose anything real with this wager.
Of course, it that policy does not go into effect then we will never know.
*************
If Congress is willing to pass some sloppy, hastily-thrown-together project like a college student the night before a research project is due, then Democrats should not be trying to sneak all sorts of non-virus-related amendments onto it. They are the ones at fault for nothing being passed yet.
Edit: Also, wearing a mask without goggles (or at least glasses with side-shields) is close to useless.
It won't go into place because individual governors aren't going to purposefully kill their own citizens. Trump is doing this #1 because the cult of capitalism wants to hear it and #2 it allows him to blame the governors for continuing lockdowns. The real danger here is the MESSAGE it sends to millions of people already inclined to think this is a joke.
As for the number of cases, I don't know what makes you think the virus is going to just dissipate at the end of April.
We aren't doing even half as many preventive social distancing measures as Europe on a national scale, and we are somehow magically expecting different results. I have no idea why that isn't explained by a belief in American exceptionalism, which is basically blind religiosity.
doesn't the one million mark depend on govern actions as well?
And if 1 million is too extreme for you, what is the number of deaths is suitable to get the economy back up and running? How many lives are worth a 1% per increase in the DOW or NASDAQ?
I am also guessing America will have it easy when choosing which lives to save when it comes to limited supplies like ventilators. Instead of having an age cut off like Italy had to use, they'll just do a finance one. Supply and Demand. Sorry, you're lack of insurance doesn't cover the $15,000 daily rental fee for the equipment so you don't get one. Perfectly reasonable... and hey, the more people catch this thing, the more companies profit off of it.
That's a bit unfair. Some companies may make a profit off this, but I guarantee you far more will be taking it on the chin! I guess we can just stay locked in our houses until we're all working for Amazon, delivering to each other.
Now I'm wondering, would that be sustainable? I guess somebody would have to make the products so probably not...