Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Jettisawn]

Proof once again of the disingenuous poster showing their bad-faith attempts to "both sides" enormous success from Biden while Trump continually fell flat on his face.

To you specifically, Jet - has there ever been a large piece of legislation in which some intended recipients didn't "fall through the cracks"? You let us know when you find one - we'll wait.

WHere did I say both sides? If anything I said this new one was better then the previous two.


Perhaps if you didn't take everything I said and try and find something wrong with it. Instead you purposely and consistency try and find something wrong in everything I say. It could be I am arguing in bad faith, some trump supporter, or you are down right demeaning. Honestly I don't care. I know my stance, and if you want to attack me for being concerned about people so be it.

[Endus]

Governance is basically tyranny, it has to be. The only question is the extent of harm it causes vs the benefits it brings.

But that's my point.

Once you've established that "governance is tyranny", and that anarchy is even worse than governance as it allows anyone to seize power by force if they care to (not to mention making any form of justice aside from straight-up revenge and gang violence a laughable proposition), what are you left with?

If your argument isn't that there's a non-tyrannical path to be tread (and here, there isn't), then you're just arguing that "tyranny" shouldn't be considered a dirty word in the first place and that it contains no inherent negative connotations.

Which, if that's what you're doing, fine, but it's a deviation from how the term's normally used and you should be a lot more clear about it.

[Felya]

Governance is basically tyranny, it has to be. The only question is the extent of harm it causes vs the benefits it brings.

Nature is basically tyranny... the question is who decides what is harmful and what is beneficial.

- - - Updated - - -

But that's my point.

I think you are misunderstanding his point... we know that harmful things are to be minimized and beneficial extended to their full effect. That’s not a point of debate...

[Kellhound]

But that's my point.

Once you've established that "governance is tyranny", and that anarchy is even worse than governance as it allows anyone to seize power by force if they care to (not to mention making any form of justice aside from straight-up revenge and gang violence a laughable proposition), what are you left with?

If your argument isn't that there's a non-tyrannical path to be tread (and here, there isn't), then you're just arguing that "tyranny" shouldn't be considered a dirty word in the first place and that it contains no inherent negative connotations.

Which, if that's what you're doing, fine, but it's a deviation from how the term's normally used and you should be a lot more clear about it.

Anarchy is a transitionary state between government change over, it never lasts because someone always establishes power. Tyranny is a dirty word, and all governments should strive to limit is as much as possible, but they cannot avoid it.

- - - Updated - - -

Nature is basically tyranny... the question is who decides what is harmful and what is beneficial.

- - - Updated - - -



I think you are misunderstanding his point... we know that harmful things are to be minimized and beneficial extended to their full effect. That’s not a point of debate...

The people in power define what is harmful and what is beneficial as far as governance goes. What actually splits harm from benefit and which is more important is, sadly, nebulous and likely unknowable by such insignificant creatures as humans.

[Felya]

The people in power define what is harmful and what is beneficial as far as governance goes. What actually splits harm from benefit and which is more important is, sadly, nebulous and likely unknowable by such insignificant creatures as humans.

Okay... then who decides who the powerful are... to make declarations of such consequence?

[jonnysensible]

kellhound are you really still doing this 'nothing means anything' stuff. not bored of that yet?

[Felya]

Anarchy is a transitionary state between government change over, it never lasts because someone always establishes power. Tyranny is a dirty word, and all governments should strive to limit is as much as possible, but they cannot avoid it.

No, government isn’t inherently tyranny... nature is... government attempts to circumvent the tyranny of nature. If we don’t need food, there are no laws on food. If we don’t need shelter, we don’t need laws on shelter.

Edit: For example... Biden... shameless attempt to be on topic...

[Kaleredar]

kellhound are you really still doing this 'nothing means anything' stuff. not bored of that yet?

"Like, what if we're all just the dream of some sleeping butterfly, man?"

Anyway, yeah, this is wildly off topic as it has nothing to do with Biden or Harris.

[Kellhound]

Okay... then who decides who the powerful are... to make declarations of such consequence?

The winners of the last struggle for power.

- - - Updated - - -

No, government isn’t inherently tyranny... nature is... government attempts to circumvent the tyranny of nature. If we don’t need food, there are no laws on food. If we don’t need shelter, we don’t need laws on shelter.

Edit: For example... Biden... shameless attempt to be on topic...

Government exists to tell people what they can and cannot do and force the population to follow those rules. It is what the Biden administration is doing, is it not?

[Elegiac]

I am saying no form of government is inherently safe, see 1933.

If your issue is what happened between 1933 and 1945 in Germany, your problem is with nationalism and capitalism. Not government.

[PhaelixWW]

I am well aware how the tyranny of the majority works.

No, clearly it doesn't seem like you do.

Hot Take: There's no such thing. "Tyranny of the majority" is just democracy.

Don't be ridiculous, of course it's a thing. It's just not what some people make it out to be: the idea that all (or even most) majority decisions are somehow inherently tyrannical to the minority.

Does it happen? Yes. Is it rare? Yes.

Believing in either absolute is just counter-productive.

Besides which, every single person finds themselves in the majority for some issues and the minority for others.

[Felya]

Government exists to tell people what they can and cannot do and force the population to follow those rules. It is what the Biden administration is doing, is it not?

I didn’t realize Biden defined how government functions or what government is... ‘government exists to tell people what they can do’... is a completely meaningless statement. It’s like saying cars exist to drive...

- - - Updated - - -

The winners of the last struggle for power.

That doesn’t mean anything... who wins power struggles? People who are the winners? This is ridiculous... you are using a lot of words to say absolutely nothing... lol

[Kaleredar]

That doesn’t mean anything... who wins power struggles? People who are the winners? This is ridiculous... you are using a lot of words to say absolutely nothing... lol

*Pro gamer tip, just report 'em for going wildly off-topic and move on.*

[Dontrike]

I am well aware how the tyranny of the majority works.

When Democracy is called tyranny you know you've gone too far right.

The best parts of America have lower population densities, which is true the world over.

This is just adorable.

[PosPosPos]

unknowable by such insignificant creatures as humans.

Speak for yourselves, thanks. The alt-right are ignorant by choice, doesn't mean others are the same.

[Ivanstone]

Government exists to tell people what they can and cannot do and force the population to follow those rules. It is what the Biden administration is doing, is it not?

Government is composed of your fellow citizens. Its other people telling you what you can and can't do. Why do you libertarian asshats can't grasp that?

[bladeXcrasher]

To get this training back on the rails, Biden administration is tasking FEMA to assist with the huge influx of unaccompanied minors at the border. Good to see they are constantly trying to improve the processing of children down there. It's great having an adult at the wheel again.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...4ef_story.html

[Bodakane]

Tyranny by any other name is still tyranny.

I mean you're wrong.

Democracy is the literal opposite of tyranny according the dictionary.

[Breccia]

. Good to see they are constantly trying to improve the processing of children down there.

Good to see the article does not use the term "dog cages".

- - - Updated - - -

Goldman Sachs changes GDP forecast dramatically.

"We have raised our GDP forecast to reflect the latest fiscal policy news and now expect 8% growth in 2021 (Q4/Q4) and an unemployment rate of 4% at end-2021 — the lowest among consensus forecasts—that falls to 3.5% in 2022 and 3.2% in 2023

Note the change is due to "the lateest fiscal policy news". News such as "Democrats pass relief bill" I believe.

This is easily the highest prediction out there. Apparently the average prediction for 2021 is 4.7% "growth" (recovery). Based on expectation of 2020's final quarter, a growth of 4.7% would actually make 2020/2021 collectively fairly standard.

- - - Updated - - -

Sources tell Bloomberg that Biden is preparing a tax hike, specifically to pay off the COVID relief bill.

"Hey! I don't want to pay more taxes!"

Good news, you probably won't.

Targets include:
1) Pass-through businesses (we've talked about those before)
2) The corporate tax rate going from 21 to 28 percent
3) The tax rate on those earning over $400,000 going up
4) Capital gains tax rate increasing --

"Hey! I thought you said--"

4) -- for those making at least $1 million.
5) Something about "Expanding the estate tax’s reach" which...I don't know what that means.

Trump's lethal outbreak cost the US trillions. It's gotta come from somewhere.

"Okay so maybe I won't pay more directly, but raising taxes on corporations, won't that just come back to us?"

Hmm. Interesting. How much savings did you see, when the tax rate lowered?

"Uh..."

That's what I thought. Also, what was the corporate tax rate pre-tax cut for the rich?

"Oh, something under 28% I'm sure."

It was 35%. This isn't a loss, it's just less of a gain.

Because these changes only actually affect the richest Americans, I'm already looking forward to the Republican talking points about how this will, somehow, be worse for Bubba Bo Bob Bubba in Alabamer than COVID. I mean, maybe it happened, but I missed the point where LA, FL and TX created their own PPP system and invented their own vaccines. The reason things aren't much worse in the deep red south is, despite their attempts otherwise by refusing to mask up, a massive effort led by the federal government. It's going to take a truly monumental effort for the Republican Party to claim otherwise, and then push that lie onto their blue-collar workers they forced back to work.

Team Biden seems to think this tax change will get $2.1 trillion over ten years, and....well, that sounds high to me, based on these changes. But honestly, I was against the tax cut for the rich well before COVID. Taking part of it back, in exchange for business-saving loans and life-saving medicine? It's going to be hard to object to that, without self-identifying as human cancer.

[Paranoid Android]

Biden planning first major tax hike in almost 30 years: report https://t.co/EC5OIvwFi0 https://t.co/dccwLDKTX1

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1...708664844?s=19

The planned increases reportedly include: raising the corporate tax from 21 percent to 28 percent; increasing the income tax rate on people making more than $400,000; expanding the estate tax; paring back tax preferences on pass-through businesses such as limited-liability companies; and setting up a higher capital gains tax rate for individuals making at least $1 million

This will upset all our millionaires and billionaires in here who always defend tax cuts for the rich.