Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
ltbewr
Posts: 16150
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Mon Dec 20, 2021 5:38 pm

The removal of the SALT deduction under Pres. Trump was supposed to be offset by the higher standard/base family deduction. Problem is if you live in a state with high local property and state income taxes like CA, MA, NY, NJ (I live in NJ), that offset was no where near enough especially for many middle and working class families who owned their own home in those and other states. That meant paying net higher Federal and possibly State income taxes. The SALT deduction should be reinstated but with a reverse progressive value as income levels go up to $200,000 for a single person and $300,000 for a family and no SALT deduction after that level of all income.
 
MohawkWeekend
Posts: 1590
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Mon Dec 20, 2021 5:51 pm

Those numbers might work if the phase out starts at say $75,000 for individuals and $125,000 for couples.

This was also a concern of Manchin that the child credit went to people making well over $100k.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 15006
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Mon Dec 20, 2021 5:59 pm

Very interesting read as Manchin has spoke about his no vote to local media.

https://nypost.com/2021/12/20/manchin-s ... SocialFlow

“It is not the president. This is staff,” the West Virginia Democrat told home-state radio host Hoppy Kercheval.

“And they drove some things, and they put some things out, that were absolutely inexcusable. They know what it is.”

Manchin continued: “I’m always willing to work and listen to try. I just got to the wit’s end and they know the real reasons what happened.”

He added that the “real reason” was the “staff-driven” process, before slamming Democrats and activist groups who tried to “beat the living crap” out of him to win his support.


Makes you wonder.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Mon Dec 20, 2021 9:24 pm

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:


Sinema will not make it to an election. Obviously, she does not understand what being primaried means, but she will shaking a cup for a living outside the AZ state capital soon enough.


Okay, will someone significantly “left” of Sinema be elected in AZ after she is dumped in a primary? She and other moderates are holding those positions because they know what they need to do to be re-elected.


Firstly, we all need to discharge overboard the fiction that conservatives have any idea what 'moderate' means. She and Manchin are nothing grander than a pair of idiots who refuse to get off the railroad tracks when they hear the whistle blowing.

But most importantly, we need to see things as they actually are. She was elected specifically not to appease an irrelevant and regressive element of society. The issue with that woman is not one of specific political position per se. It is the fact that what was on the box is not what was inside. While this is somewhat typical, she was elected for the express purpose of doing what she is now desperately trying to stand in the way of. And that is exactly how people get primaried. Like just about anyone else who matters, I will not lose sleep when the 15 minutes she traded away any usefulness she might have had fails utterly to protect her from ignominy.


Voters know what “moderate” means and they aren’t seeing in Congress or the President. The Democrats need to move back toward the center or face a blow out in 2022, maybe even 2024 if the Republicans can remove their heads from the rear ends and pick a conservative. That means dump Trump’s personality cult but not some of his salient policies.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house ... e-midterms
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 3097
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Mon Dec 20, 2021 11:57 pm

MohawkWeekend wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Sinema will not make it to an election. Obviously, she does not understand what being primaried means, but she will shaking a cup for a living outside the AZ state capital soon enough.



She holds her office until the general election not the primary. So she's in office until the end of 2024
GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Senatorial races have primaries. AZ's is usually in August. I believe you are confusing Primary with Mid-Term...



Voters know what “moderate” means and they aren’t seeing in Congress or the President. The Democrats need to move back toward the center



Firstly, an opinion piece is not a reference. And frankly, taking this long to get back on that indicates it was a pretty hard dig. Understandable, of course.

Nextly, again with the definitions... Moderate =/= Centrist. Those are two different things. They overlap occasionally, but that does not make them the same. This is another thing that arch conservatives are frequently observed having a very difficult time grasping.

As it pertains, no, Democrats most certainly do not need to move any further to the right. We have already compromised with the regressives more than anyone ever should have had to, thank you very much. If one cannot cope with having had things that easy, that is the GOP's problem, not ours.
This remains yet another thing the MAGAs are completely incapable of understanding; elections have consequences. When a party spends nearly half a decade being as abusive as possible to a country, it should come as no surprise that their wishes will eventually go ignored. As they should. Understand that Americans do not owe MAGAs anything. If you guys feel disenfranchised while we —very slowly and with a frustrating lack of urgency, no doubt— clean up MAGA's mess, I frankly do not know what to tell you. But the time to include the people who created these problems is in the past.


GalaxyFlyer wrote:
or face a blow out in 2022, maybe even 2024 if the


MAGA regressives make an awful lot of noise, but that is not the same as having a valid position. Let alone a plurality on any of these things. Americans still remain more or less appalled at things like Jan 6, the juvenile antics Texas is trying to loft, anti-vaxxerism, and the GOP's refusal to account appropriately for themselves. It really will not take much in the way of media saturation to keep the right down.
For our part, Democrats have finally gotten the message that we more or less cannot lose so long as we show up. That was a weakness in 2016. The absolute curb-stomp the GOP absorbed in 2018 and last year should have made it clear by now that we have shored that up.

As well, there are 20 Republicans but only 14 Democrats up for the Senate in 2022's election. With that amount of exposure, expecting any sort of win is somewhere between optimistic and outright Fan Fiction.

Make no mistake, we still have problems of our own —literally the topic of this thread— but that is for us to work on...

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Republicans can remove their heads from the rear ends and pick a conservative.


The GOP literally endorses people like DeSantis, Santorum, Abbot, et al. I join almost everyone I know when I shudder at the thought what sort of Hun could possibly be to the right of that ilk...



GalaxyFlyer wrote:
That means dump Trump’s personality cult but not some of his salient policies.


The personality cult was the problem, and it prevented completely an otherwise unremarkable presidency from remaining so. Not everything 45 did was wrong. That administration's stance on China, for example, has been and will remain relatively unchanged. For a lot of good reasons.
But he will not be remembered for that...

MohawkWeekend wrote:
This was also a concern of Manchin that the child credit went to people making well over $100k.


Ideally, there should not be any child credit, unless specific educational expenses can be proven. But I also know that this is hardly the time for Manchin to take his ego for a walk...

FlapOperator wrote:

If the US left was serious about climate change, they would support things like nuclear power.


This is not the only example, but things like this are why education is as important as it is. The lack of understanding behind nuclear power is particularly vexing, as it is not even a difficult science to learn. But here we are...


FlapOperator wrote:

The Founders likely didn't intend for the US to be a massive nanny state.


Why do we care about this? They come from an era that was more or less incompatible to ours.

Aaron747 wrote:

A relatable example: in a company you can realize incredible pace of execution and mission precision when all employees have bought into whatever vision is in vogue. The US is a like a company where all department are siloed, collaboration is fractured, and every manager clutches pearls and plays CYA instead of coordinating and sharing resources.


:checkmark:
 
MohawkWeekend
Posts: 1590
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 1:59 am

So exactly what did you mean with this quote?

DarkSnowyNight wrote: Sinema will not make it to an election. Obviously, she does not understand what being primaried means, but she will shaking a cup for a living outside the AZ state capital soon enough.
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 3097
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 2:29 am

MohawkWeekend wrote:
So exactly what did you mean with this quote?

DarkSnowyNight wrote: Sinema will not make it to an election. Obviously, she does not understand what being primaried means, but she will shaking a cup for a living outside the AZ state capital soon enough.



Just that she will not make it to the general election in 2024 for the Senate race. Generally, AZ holds their Senate Primaries in August; I think for 2024 this happens on the same actual election date in Nov as it is also a presidential election year.
In any case, Sinema is regarded by her own constituency with more than a lot of buyer's remorse. As I mentioned, this is not foreign to politics, but her being so loudly dishonest and willfully unfaithful to her donors has ended any chance of securing financing for a campaign, leave alone beating out other Democratic contenders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Unit ... in_Arizona
 
FGITD
Posts: 2028
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 2:47 am

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
In any case, Sinema is regarded by her own constituency with more than a lot of buyer's remorse. As I mentioned, this is not foreign to politics, but her being so loudly dishonest and willfully unfaithful to her donors has ended any chance of securing financing for a campaign, leave alone beating out other Democratic contenders.


She’s a political con job, and it should concern all sides of the spectrum. This time she pulled one over on democrats, but there’s absolutely nothing to stop it happening to republicans. All you have to do is campaign the right way, say the right things, and in you go. Then once you’re in…no accountability for then turning your back on every single thing you campaigned on. Sure you might not get re-elected, but who cares, you’ve made good money, left your mark, and off to some private gig you go.

Republicans should arguably be more worried because their base tends to be more narrowly focused on certain issues. Go to a deep red state and run the God, Guns, and Abortion campaign and people will eat it up. Then once you get in…oops turns out I’m more Democrat than I thought!
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:39 am

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
MohawkWeekend wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Sinema will not make it to an election. Obviously, she does not understand what being primaried means, but she will shaking a cup for a living outside the AZ state capital soon enough.



She holds her office until the general election not the primary. So she's in office until the end of 2024
GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Senatorial races have primaries. AZ's is usually in August. I believe you are confusing Primary with Mid-Term...



Voters know what “moderate” means and they aren’t seeing in Congress or the President. The Democrats need to move back toward the center



Firstly, an opinion piece is not a reference. And frankly, taking this long to get back on that indicates it was a pretty hard dig. Understandable, of course.

Nextly, again with the definitions... Moderate =/= Centrist. Those are two different things. They overlap occasionally, but that does not make them the same. This is another thing that arch conservatives are frequently observed having a very difficult time grasping.

As it pertains, no, Democrats most certainly do not need to move any further to the right. We have already compromised with the regressives more than anyone ever should have had to, thank you very much. If one cannot cope with having had things that easy, that is the GOP's problem, not ours.
This remains yet another thing the MAGAs are completely incapable of understanding; elections have consequences. When a party spends nearly half a decade being as abusive as possible to a country, it should come as no surprise that their wishes will eventually go ignored. As they should. Understand that Americans do not owe MAGAs anything. If you guys feel disenfranchised while we —very slowly and with a frustrating lack of urgency, no doubt— clean up MAGA's mess, I frankly do not know what to tell you. But the time to include the people who created these problems is in the past.


GalaxyFlyer wrote:
or face a blow out in 2022, maybe even 2024 if the


MAGA regressives make an awful lot of noise, but that is not the same as having a valid position. Let alone a plurality on any of these things. Americans still remain more or less appalled at things like Jan 6, the juvenile antics Texas is trying to loft, anti-vaxxerism, and the GOP's refusal to account appropriately for themselves. It really will not take much in the way of media saturation to keep the right down.
For our part, Democrats have finally gotten the message that we more or less cannot lose so long as we show up. That was a weakness in 2016. The absolute curb-stomp the GOP absorbed in 2018 and last year should have made it clear by now that we have shored that up.

As well, there are 20 Republicans but only 14 Democrats up for the Senate in 2022's election. With that amount of exposure, expecting any sort of win is somewhere between optimistic and outright Fan Fiction.

Make no mistake, we still have problems of our own —literally the topic of this thread— but that is for us to work on...

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Republicans can remove their heads from the rear ends and pick a conservative.


The GOP literally endorses people like DeSantis, Santorum, Abbot, et al. I join almost everyone I know when I shudder at the thought what sort of Hun could possibly be to the right of that ilk...



GalaxyFlyer wrote:
That means dump Trump’s personality cult but not some of his salient policies.


The personality cult was the problem, and it prevented completely an otherwise unremarkable presidency from remaining so. Not everything 45 did was wrong. That administration's stance on China, for example, has been and will remain relatively unchanged. For a lot of good reasons.
But he will not be remembered for that...

MohawkWeekend wrote:
This was also a concern of Manchin that the child credit went to people making well over $100k.


Ideally, there should not be any child credit, unless specific educational expenses can be proven. But I also know that this is hardly the time for Manchin to take his ego for a walk...

FlapOperator wrote:

If the US left was serious about climate change, they would support things like nuclear power.


This is not the only example, but things like this are why education is as important as it is. The lack of understanding behind nuclear power is particularly vexing, as it is not even a difficult science to learn. But here we are...


FlapOperator wrote:

The Founders likely didn't intend for the US to be a massive nanny state.


Why do we care about this? They come from an era that was more or less incompatible to ours.

Aaron747 wrote:

A relatable example: in a company you can realize incredible pace of execution and mission precision when all employees have bought into whatever vision is in vogue. The US is a like a company where all department are siloed, collaboration is fractured, and every manager clutches pearls and plays CYA instead of coordinating and sharing resources.


:checkmark:


You didn’t even the article’s polling data. If the progressive Left has such a winning hand, why did they finish the 2020 election with a 50/50 Senate and a 5 vote majority in the House, losing 13 seats? How is it both Biden and Harris are dropping approval ratings like a stone? The only poll that matters is election day 2022, which history shows the Democrats losing control—President approval under 45%, historically the President loses seats in the mid-term election.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:42 am

FGITD wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
In any case, Sinema is regarded by her own constituency with more than a lot of buyer's remorse. As I mentioned, this is not foreign to politics, but her being so loudly dishonest and willfully unfaithful to her donors has ended any chance of securing financing for a campaign, leave alone beating out other Democratic contenders.


She’s a political con job, and it should concern all sides of the spectrum. This time she pulled one over on democrats, but there’s absolutely nothing to stop it happening to republicans. All you have to do is campaign the right way, say the right things, and in you go. Then once you’re in…no accountability for then turning your back on every single thing you campaigned on. Sure you might not get re-elected, but who cares, you’ve made good money, left your mark, and off to some private gig you go.

Republicans should arguably be more worried because their base tends to be more narrowly focused on certain issues. Go to a deep red state and run the God, Guns, and Abortion campaign and people will eat it up. Then once you get in…oops turns out I’m more Democrat than I thought!


Sinema isn’t a con job, she joined the Blue Dog Democrat coalition as a Representative—should be blindingly obvious she’s not anything but a centrist Democrat from a red-ish state.
 
FGITD
Posts: 2028
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 4:51 am

https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying ... reconsider

Really repping his people and their industry well. A true man of the people.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12958
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 8:26 am

FlapOperator wrote:
The Founders intended the Senate precisely to be a place where legislation dies.

The Founders likely didn't intend for the US to be a massive nanny state.


So the founders of the US wanted it to remain locked in the mid-eighteen hundreds? Inflexible to react to challenges they could not have imagined? I can hardly imagine that the founders would be so inflexible and so ridiculously lack of vision for the future.

As a person from the outside, looking in, it is quite strange to see a country that is so inflexible in its legislation. The constitution is like a bible for orthodox Christians. It is the word of the founders and can't be changed (or very difficult at least) and you have some high priest (the supreme court) who interprets the meaning of the texts, written down centuries ago.
 
DLPMMM
Topic Author
Posts: 2351
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:34 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 10:14 am

Dutchy wrote:
FlapOperator wrote:
The Founders intended the Senate precisely to be a place where legislation dies.

The Founders likely didn't intend for the US to be a massive nanny state.


So the founders of the US wanted it to remain locked in the mid-eighteen hundreds? Inflexible to react to challenges they could not have imagined? I can hardly imagine that the founders would be so inflexible and so ridiculously lack of vision for the future.

As a person from the outside, looking in, it is quite strange to see a country that is so inflexible in its legislation. The constitution is like a bible for orthodox Christians. It is the word of the founders and can't be changed (or very difficult at least) and you have some high priest (the supreme court) who interprets the meaning of the texts, written down centuries ago.


The purpose of the three branch form of government with a bicameral legislature plus a free press (the fourth estate) is to insure the continuity of government and protect the political minorities from whipsawed political opinion (such as the demonization of both the far left and far right seen in the posts earlier in this and other threads).

The ship of state can turn very quickly when both ends of the spectrum agree (such as WWII), but will be much slower to turn on divisive issues.

I think it was brilliant thought on the part of the founding fathers and has served the county well over the centuries.

Politicians are a curse the population is stuck with….the constitution helps keep the population safe from the venal among them.
 
ItnStln
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:47 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:22 pm

FlapOperator wrote:
Oh, and for those scoring at home...the military received a 2.9% pay raise, while it was 5.7% (IIRC) for Social Security in an economy with something like a 6.3% core rate of inflation, at least.

With a 6.3% rate of inflation, the Military's 2.9% and Social Security's 5.7% raises look like pay cuts!
 
ItnStln
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:47 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:24 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
The rich lost their SALT deduction, so there’s that. Nothing in BBB would do anything the least meaningful for climate warming—maybe 0.0001%.

I'm against the SALT deduction anyway. It's a way for states with lower taxes to subsidize those with higher taxes at the federal level. With that said, I believe that taxation is theft and that the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution should be repealed. We were doing fine before the 16A and we'll do fine once it's repealed.
 
Reinhardt
Posts: 501
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:05 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:29 pm

FlapOperator wrote:
Newark727 wrote:
If we're going to stop the polarization and absolutism of American politics, centrism has to stand for something besides "conspicuously refusing to solve problems," and the Senate has to be something more than the place where legislation goes to die. Has Manchin got anything to offer us beside "no" votes?


The Founders intended the Senate precisely to be a place where legislation dies.

The Founders likely didn't intend for the US to be a massive nanny state.


Perhaps you shouldn't be relying so much on what people thought hundreds of years ago, and accept that times change, peoples needs change, and the countries situation changes. They were not right about a lot of things, yet it's impossible to change them because of "The Founders". They were not some visionaries.

High time the US woke up - you're being out educated, out built by China and half of the rest of the Western World. Generation education needs a complete overhaul, and infrastructure is a farce. The income gap is as bad as many other countries admittedly but at least they have some support systems. I've never seen so many middle class folks borderline homeless, or having to work multiple jobs just to survive. healthcare and mental health also needs a massive overhaul.

And still I laugh at every turn when you guys say "Far left" Dems. Nobody in an elected position in the US is far left. Give over. Most Dems are centre or right of centre. GOP are right, or some very far right. There is no socialism trying to be implemented, it's laughable to suggest otherwise. So long as you can't even have a sensible debate about the problems, and the GOP will try and block anything that will remotely make the Dems look good, you're not getting anywhere.
 
MohawkWeekend
Posts: 1590
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:45 pm

I live in middle of the rust belt. Don't know where you are living but in my 65 years I've never seen a more affluent time. Our public housing has been rebuilt. Most of the schools rebuilt or new. All my nieces and nephews in their 20's and 30's are doing better than I did at the same age. And we have a bunch of really hard working immigrants - many of them researchers and doctors at the Cleveland Clinic and our Universities That includes alot of those bright folks who the Chinese, Koreans, Syrians and Lebanese educated for us.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:51 pm

Article V has several methods to amend the US Constitution and the Founders certainly anticipated that possibility. Heck, they included a method to rewrite to whole thing. It was amended to ban alcohol, so anything is possible. Politicians and the people don’t have the attention span to build cases for doing so. The desire for Instant gratification is the problem.

True, no socialism, just an ever-expanding welfare state called, incorrectly socialism. Debt service, at record low rates, consumes 15% of Federal tax revenue, with 7% inflation, even 8% interest rates would quadruple debt service in a few years. That’s not sustainable. Today’s WSJ has an article US household durable goods spending is up 45% over 2018, while the EU’s household spending is up 3%. Too much money chasing too few goods equals inflation the government can’t fix without pain.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 6:13 pm

Here’s Schumer blowing up the BBB bill, the NY Senator is arrogant and incompetent at being majority leader.

https://twitter.com/realscubamike/statu ... 64227?s=21
 
M564038
Posts: 1079
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:16 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 8:40 pm

Good points!
The word of the founders combined with a wild west attitude where everyone must fend for themselves and their family(as shown in the gun cult) No tradition or real culture, only money and power.


Dutchy wrote:
FlapOperator wrote:
The Founders intended the Senate precisely to be a place where legislation dies.

The Founders likely didn't intend for the US to be a massive nanny state.


So the founders of the US wanted it to remain locked in the mid-eighteen hundreds? Inflexible to react to challenges they could not have imagined? I can hardly imagine that the founders would be so inflexible and so ridiculously lack of vision for the future.

As a person from the outside, looking in, it is quite strange to see a country that is so inflexible in its legislation. The constitution is like a bible for orthodox Christians. It is the word of the founders and can't be changed (or very difficult at least) and you have some high priest (the supreme court) who interprets the meaning of the texts, written down centuries ago.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 9:46 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Today’s WSJ has an article US household durable goods spending is up 45% over 2018, while the EU’s household spending is up 3%. Too much money chasing too few goods equals inflation the government can’t fix without pain.

The US military budget is four times higher than that of the EU, the unemployment rate in the US is two thirds of the EU's rate, the US S&P 500 stock index has outperformed the stoxx EU 600 index in the past year, the average income in the US is higher than that of any EU country but one. US citizens - on average - own larger homes, drive larger cars, fly more often and further and eat more meat. They have access to the highest ranked universities and some of the best health care. There are more billionaires in the US than anywhere else.

Really, the US is outperforming any other country by any metric. There's nothing that needs fixing.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12958
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 10:06 pm

mxaxai wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Today’s WSJ has an article US household durable goods spending is up 45% over 2018, while the EU’s household spending is up 3%. Too much money chasing too few goods equals inflation the government can’t fix without pain.

The US military budget is four times higher than that of the EU, the unemployment rate in the US is two thirds of the EU's rate, the US S&P 500 stock index has outperformed the stoxx EU 600 index in the past year, the average income in the US is higher than that of any EU country but one. US citizens - on average - own larger homes, drive larger cars, fly more often and further and eat more meat. They have access to the highest ranked universities and some of the best health care. There are more billionaires in the US than anywhere else.

Really, the US is outperforming any other country by any metric. There's nothing that needs fixing.


And I thought the US was outperforming the rest of the world on one aspect: the number of incarcerated people per capita.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 15006
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 10:21 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
FGITD wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
In any case, Sinema is regarded by her own constituency with more than a lot of buyer's remorse. As I mentioned, this is not foreign to politics, but her being so loudly dishonest and willfully unfaithful to her donors has ended any chance of securing financing for a campaign, leave alone beating out other Democratic contenders.


She’s a political con job, and it should concern all sides of the spectrum. This time she pulled one over on democrats, but there’s absolutely nothing to stop it happening to republicans. All you have to do is campaign the right way, say the right things, and in you go. Then once you’re in…no accountability for then turning your back on every single thing you campaigned on. Sure you might not get re-elected, but who cares, you’ve made good money, left your mark, and off to some private gig you go.

Republicans should arguably be more worried because their base tends to be more narrowly focused on certain issues. Go to a deep red state and run the God, Guns, and Abortion campaign and people will eat it up. Then once you get in…oops turns out I’m more Democrat than I thought!


Sinema isn’t a con job, she joined the Blue Dog Democrat coalition as a Representative—should be blindingly obvious she’s not anything but a centrist Democrat from a red-ish state.


Exactly, as I alluded to before whenever the far left of the Dem party suffers a loss they lash out usually with knee jerk reactions. They don’t and won’t understand how the moderate members of their party feel or think. So instead of having a good dialogue they run to the first Microphone they can find in the hallway at the capital and start the mud slinging. It’s why nothing is getting done and why nothing will get done until they stop this media driven dog and pony show.
 
M564038
Posts: 1079
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:16 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 10:25 pm

But you see,
The average isn’t really that interesting.
What about the typical person rather than the average?
How many people do you have in the lower brackets?
Crime rate? Number of incarcerated people?

Turns out even socialist hell holes like sweden, iceland and norway has more billionaires per capita than USA.

What about social mobility, you know the definition of «the american dream», start with two empty hands and make it to the top?
Wouldn’t you believe it, the USA is beaten by every socialist hellhole there is on that list.

What about average life span? The US places #40. How embarrasing!

So yes, if you are lucky enough to be in the large house, high income bracket, you can board up the windows, hang on to your guns and await a statistically early death.



mxaxai wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Today’s WSJ has an article US household durable goods spending is up 45% over 2018, while the EU’s household spending is up 3%. Too much money chasing too few goods equals inflation the government can’t fix without pain.

The US military budget is four times higher than that of the EU, the unemployment rate in the US is two thirds of the EU's rate, the US S&P 500 stock index has outperformed the stoxx EU 600 index in the past year, the average income in the US is higher than that of any EU country but one. US citizens - on average - own larger homes, drive larger cars, fly more often and further and eat more meat. They have access to the highest ranked universities and some of the best health care. There are more billionaires in the US than anywhere else.

Really, the US is outperforming any other country by any metric. There's nothing that needs fixing.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 10:56 pm

I never called the Nordic countries “socialist hell holes” something you seem to attribute to others gleefully. They’re no such thing, mostly be capitalistic countries with deep welfare states that actually pay for those services with steep taxes throughout the income distribution, mostly consumption taxes. No Congress here could possibly pass laws for those tax levels here.

The Nordic countries are much more homogenous than the US, much higher trust levels which has big knock-on effects. There’s a huge difference between governing 5 million, mostly agreeable people, than 325 million of a 100 or more ethnicities.

Americans kill themselves at much higher rates than Europeans—violent crime, drug abuse, accidents. Tragic, yes, but the average middle class person has very similar life expectancies, it’s the fringes that drive those numbers including incarceration.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17871
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:02 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
The Nordic countries are much more homogenous than the US, much higher trust levels which has big knock-on effects. There’s a huge difference between governing 5 million, mostly agreeable people, than 325 million of a 100 or more ethnicities.


Going to call this a bit of a canard, since the Nordic countries are akin to many large counties in the US. The multiethnic nature of the US is not what makes it difficult to manage - in polling, Americans generally share similar views when grouped by income/class, instead of ethnicity. The issue with managing the US, posted earlier, are value divides between regions/states, and urban/rural residents. The complex layering of jurisdictions also guarantees government effectiveness is limited in all but the most moonshot circumstances.
 
FlapOperator
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2021 4:07 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:34 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
The complex layering of jurisdictions also guarantees government effectiveness is limited in all but the most moonshot circumstances.


"Effectiveness" is a loaded and I'd argue meaningless term. Politically speaking, you're thinking of the term Subsidiarity, defined as "the principle that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed at a more local level." Interestingly, Subsidiarity is de jure part of the European Union legal canon (the de facto element is another debate.)

Subsidiarity also means that there is likely far more representation/direct participation for the majority of matters like school boards, water boards, state legislatures and county sheriffs than would be found in classic Westminster system. You take the good with the bad.

The original Westminster system is trending toward local devolution, interestingly enough.
 
FlapOperator
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2021 4:07 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:36 pm

Dutchy wrote:

And I thought the US was outperforming the rest of the world on one aspect: the number of incarcerated people per capita.


That and "providing security to Europe." We are doing well on that one, as well.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:37 pm

Norway's wealth comes mostly from abundant natural resources, gas and oil in particular. Manchin's West Virginia is similarly rich in resources, mostly coal and timber in his case. It is unsurprising that he doesn't want to see his exceptional wealth get distributed to other less well off states.
 
FlapOperator
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2021 4:07 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Tue Dec 21, 2021 11:42 pm

M564038 wrote:
Good points!
The word of the founders combined with a wild west attitude where everyone must fend for themselves and their family(as shown in the gun cult) No tradition or real culture, only money and power.


During the period from 1800 to the present, which European nations were existent from that moment onward, uninterrupted with their current existent form of government, in their current geopolitical form?

I can think of three or six, only one of which is a G-7 nation, one mid grade power and the others microstates.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:27 am

FlapOperator wrote:
M564038 wrote:
Good points!
The word of the founders combined with a wild west attitude where everyone must fend for themselves and their family(as shown in the gun cult) No tradition or real culture, only money and power.


During the period from 1800 to the present, which European nations were existent from that moment onward, uninterrupted with their current existent form of government, in their current geopolitical form?

I can think of three or six, only one of which is a G-7 nation, one mid grade power and the others microstates.



US, UK, Sweden, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Virtually every other nation either didn’t exist, was a colony or was fought over / invaded since 1900. The US and UK fought a lot of wars in the 19th century, at least two with each other.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:29 am

FlapOperator wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
The complex layering of jurisdictions also guarantees government effectiveness is limited in all but the most moonshot circumstances.


"Effectiveness" is a loaded and I'd argue meaningless term. Politically speaking, you're thinking of the term Subsidiarity, defined as "the principle that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed at a more local level." Interestingly, Subsidiarity is de jure part of the European Union legal canon (the de facto element is another debate.)

Subsidiarity also means that there is likely far more representation/direct participation for the majority of matters like school boards, water boards, state legislatures and county sheriffs than would be found in classic Westminster system. You take the good with the bad.

The original Westminster system is trending toward local devolution, interestingly enough.


That and I like my town meetings—get to see the locals, complain to the Selectmen, pay my tax bill, gripe at the Highway Surveyor.
 
FlapOperator
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2021 4:07 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 2:30 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:



US, UK, Sweden, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Virtually every other nation either didn’t exist, was a colony or was fought over / invaded since 1900. The US and UK fought a lot of wars in the 19th century, at least two with each other.


Interestingly, of the G-7, only the UK and the US have any claim. San Marino and Vatican are two microstates, Iceland is outlier of political continuity as well. Sweden can classed either way as significantly modified their government in the early 1970s, I think.

Even the countries that were fought over in Europe, Belgium as a political entity dates to 1830, Italy to 1861 (lots of units in the American Civil War adopted Italian unification uniforms early on) and modern Germany 1871 (with many of the refugees/losers of the Revolutions of 1848 having critical roles in the US Civil War.)

I can make a pretty decent argument that the continuity of the postbellum US is a result of the emigration of Forty Eighters and economic refugees secondary to these revolutions to the US.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 15257
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 2:50 pm

Looks like Manchin is still trying to wheel and deal with Biden. Apparently the Coal Unions are making some noise that is going to hurt Macnhin

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/manchin-un ... ck-better/

Manchin may have received corporate "donations" to turn away from the bill, but will it be good for him if the below issues are raised by workers in one of the largest industries in the state ?
According to the union, elements of the bill that would help coal industry workers include tax incentives to encourage clean-energy companies to build facilities in coalfields; an extension of fees paid by coal companies to workers who contract Black Lung; and financial penalties for companies that block their workforce from unionizing.

 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24480
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 3:24 pm

WA707atMSP wrote:
seb146 wrote:
ltbewr wrote:
To me the decision of Sen. Mancin in his own words and other reasons have several elements.

While many people would benefit from the BBB bill, no one wants to pay for it or continue to increase the massive national debt.

Many who would pay for it see some parts as encouraging people not getting jobs, being 'lazy', more dependence on the Federal government especially other than White European decedent persons.

For some benefits the Federal government would only pay part of them, states would have to put up some funds and/or the staffing to carry them out with its costs and no way do any of those state politicians want to raise taxes to do so.

Just too much in the bill, including dealing with immigration in ways many find unacceptable. Break up the elements of this bill bundle and vote on them in smaller groups that would likely pass like the subsidies and price regulations on diabetes drugs.


It is being paid for by those wealthiest Americans by repealing the Republican 2017 tax cut. That tax cut was not replaced with anything.

Manchin should just stop pretending he is a Democrat. He has not been for a long time. Swap him out for one of the RINOs who voted for impeachment the second time.


I agree that Manchin is a DINO.

However, the wealthy are definitely NOT paying their fair share in this bill. Reinstating the SALT deduction will probably lower the tax burden for wealthy taxpayers, at least if you live in a place like Atherton, Brentwood, or Central Park South where lots of Democratic campaign donors live.


It lowers taxes on people making less than $400,000 per year. A huge number of those living in West Virginia will now have a larger tax bill because of their Senator.

BTW, he also negotiated the bill down from $6 trillion saying "I'll vote for it if you just cut out this and that" but still didn't. He lied. The people of West Virginia should be outraged and calling him because they will not see any extra money and because he lied. He was not negotiating in good faith. This bill would probably pass if Democrats would negotiate with two Republicans who we all know would negotiate in good faith.
 
MohawkWeekend
Posts: 1590
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:06 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:37 pm

Why do we need to lower taxes on people making less than $400k per year? maybe $150k AGI for a couple but you are not suffering over that.
And the median income for a household in WVA is $46,711. With a std deduction of $25100, a married couple with no children would have a tax liability of $2197. I think that's pretty good. Last year with stimulus checks they were $600 to the positive.
 
apodino
Posts: 4113
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 7:09 pm

seb146 wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
seb146 wrote:

It is being paid for by those wealthiest Americans by repealing the Republican 2017 tax cut. That tax cut was not replaced with anything.

Manchin should just stop pretending he is a Democrat. He has not been for a long time. Swap him out for one of the RINOs who voted for impeachment the second time.


I agree that Manchin is a DINO.

However, the wealthy are definitely NOT paying their fair share in this bill. Reinstating the SALT deduction will probably lower the tax burden for wealthy taxpayers, at least if you live in a place like Atherton, Brentwood, or Central Park South where lots of Democratic campaign donors live.


It lowers taxes on people making less than $400,000 per year. A huge number of those living in West Virginia will now have a larger tax bill because of their Senator.

BTW, he also negotiated the bill down from $6 trillion saying "I'll vote for it if you just cut out this and that" but still didn't. He lied. The people of West Virginia should be outraged and calling him because they will not see any extra money and because he lied. He was not negotiating in good faith. This bill would probably pass if Democrats would negotiate with two Republicans who we all know would negotiate in good faith.


I think I read that over 90 percent of the benefit of a Salt Repeal would go to the wealthiest one percent, and there are democrats like Bernie and AOC who rightly point this out. The Democrats cannot criticize the GOP on one hand for giving massive tax breaks to the Wealthy, then on the other hand pass legislation that gives massive tax breaks to the wealthy. Ironically, even though most of the benefits of the Trump tax cuts went to the wealthy as we all know (Which I don't think is right either0, most of the middle class (people under $400K as you point out) got a tax break themselves under the Trump Tax Cut, and right-wing outlets are actually pointing this out. And it turns out that the Popular position among the american people is closer to where Bernie and AOC are, but they are just two people and unfortunately the lobbyists have bought off the other people who actually matter to get stuff done.


NIKV69 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
FGITD wrote:

She’s a political con job, and it should concern all sides of the spectrum. This time she pulled one over on democrats, but there’s absolutely nothing to stop it happening to republicans. All you have to do is campaign the right way, say the right things, and in you go. Then once you’re in…no accountability for then turning your back on every single thing you campaigned on. Sure you might not get re-elected, but who cares, you’ve made good money, left your mark, and off to some private gig you go.

Republicans should arguably be more worried because their base tends to be more narrowly focused on certain issues. Go to a deep red state and run the God, Guns, and Abortion campaign and people will eat it up. Then once you get in…oops turns out I’m more Democrat than I thought!


Sinema isn’t a con job, she joined the Blue Dog Democrat coalition as a Representative—should be blindingly obvious she’s not anything but a centrist Democrat from a red-ish state.


Exactly, as I alluded to before whenever the far left of the Dem party suffers a loss they lash out usually with knee jerk reactions. They don’t and won’t understand how the moderate members of their party feel or think. So instead of having a good dialogue they run to the first Microphone they can find in the hallway at the capital and start the mud slinging. It’s why nothing is getting done and why nothing will get done until they stop this media driven dog and pony show.


The Moderate wing of the Democratic Party is exactly why the Democratic Party is having so many issues right now. Biden seems like a man who has no clue what he is doing and is driving a rudderless ship; Harris has been a disaster. Pelosi is out there defending members of congress trading stock (if it were anyone else doing this, it would be considered insider trading), and Schumer is so beholden to Wall Street. If you look at Polling on the issues, and the way recent ballot initiatives have gone, you will find that most of what Bernie is proposing is actually quite popular. 15 Dollar minimum wage for example. (The last president to sign a minimum wage hike was actually George W. Bush; Obama never did it) Medicare for All polls very well. Universal Pre K, and Child Care also polls very well. Medicare negotiating the price of prescription drugs should a slam dunk as it is the easiest way to reduce the deficit without raising taxes right now, but Kyrsten Sinema got this provision killed. These are all winning issues, and if the Democratic party focused on these issues and addressing them, they would be very popular as these provisions poll well even in Red states. (Every one of these issues Polls over 50 percent in West Virginia).

The issue the democrats have is they tried to lump everything together, and thus what was in this bill ultimately got drowned out just by the price tag and this approach left it vulnerable to GOP messaging. Plus the bill got so whittled down that most of these provisions weren't even in the bill anymore, and a lot of progressive commentators were actually starting to oppose it, because what was left was nothing more than a special interest handout that really would not help the very people that were originally intended to be helped by the bill. One other thing, Manchin and Sinema were the ones that took the bullet for this because of the states they represent. I promise you there were many more democrats in the senate who wanted this result, but kept quiet to prevent from getting primaried. I would be shocked if the Delaware senators, along with a guy like Tim Kaine, Angus King or Jon Tester were also opposed this behind the scenes.

Lastly. I think the democrats need to back off of some of the culture stuff. I get that it fires up their own base, but there is a ceiling and it turns a lot more people off to them than helps, not to mention it really fuels the MAGA crowd on the other side. The police messaging has been horrible. Sending the FBI to school board meetings was a very bad look that I think helped Glenn Youngkin in Virginia. I could go on and on. None of these issues are going to get people healthcare, help put food on the table, or help families get child care so they can actually work to put food on the table.
 
johns624
Posts: 5186
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:10 pm

I find it ironic that Mitch McConnell is inviting Manchin to join the Republican Party. First, he won't because he's much more visible and powerful right where he is. The main thing is that Manchin stood up to the President, who is of the same party, while Tortoise never had the guts, balls, cajones, etc., to ever stand up to Trump when it mattered.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:12 pm

seb146 wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:
seb146 wrote:

It is being paid for by those wealthiest Americans by repealing the Republican 2017 tax cut. That tax cut was not replaced with anything.

Manchin should just stop pretending he is a Democrat. He has not been for a long time. Swap him out for one of the RINOs who voted for impeachment the second time.


I agree that Manchin is a DINO.

However, the wealthy are definitely NOT paying their fair share in this bill. Reinstating the SALT deduction will probably lower the tax burden for wealthy taxpayers, at least if you live in a place like Atherton, Brentwood, or Central Park South where lots of Democratic campaign donors live.


It lowers taxes on people making less than $400,000 per year. A huge number of those living in West Virginia will now have a larger tax bill because of their Senator.

BTW, he also negotiated the bill down from $6 trillion saying "I'll vote for it if you just cut out this and that" but still didn't. He lied. The people of West Virginia should be outraged and calling him because they will not see any extra money and because he lied. He was not negotiating in good faith. This bill would probably pass if Democrats would negotiate with two Republicans who we all know would negotiate in good faith.


WV residents are among the least to benefit from raising the SALT deduction cap. You know who benefits? The wealthiest taxpayers in Blue states, not the median taxpayers, the wealthiest who like to donate to a particular party.

https://taxfoundation.org/salt-deductio ... ap-repeal/
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 15257
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:32 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
seb146 wrote:
WA707atMSP wrote:

I agree that Manchin is a DINO.

However, the wealthy are definitely NOT paying their fair share in this bill. Reinstating the SALT deduction will probably lower the tax burden for wealthy taxpayers, at least if you live in a place like Atherton, Brentwood, or Central Park South where lots of Democratic campaign donors live.


It lowers taxes on people making less than $400,000 per year. A huge number of those living in West Virginia will now have a larger tax bill because of their Senator.

BTW, he also negotiated the bill down from $6 trillion saying "I'll vote for it if you just cut out this and that" but still didn't. He lied. The people of West Virginia should be outraged and calling him because they will not see any extra money and because he lied. He was not negotiating in good faith. This bill would probably pass if Democrats would negotiate with two Republicans who we all know would negotiate in good faith.


WV residents are among the least to benefit from raising the SALT deduction cap. You know who benefits? The wealthiest taxpayers in Blue states, not the median taxpayers, the wealthiest who like to donate to a particular party.

https://taxfoundation.org/salt-deductio ... ap-repeal/


But they are among the most likely to benefit from the Child Tax Credit and Health care benefits..

The SALT Tax was going to be balanced out with an increase on MAGI above 5 and 10 million

https://taxfoundation.org/build-back-be ... tax/#Major
Create a new surcharge on modified adjusted gross income (MAGI), defined as adjusted gross income less investment interest expense, equal to 5 percent on MAGI in excess of $10 million plus 3 percent on MAGI above $25 million.


The SALT Tax inflicts a lot of pain though in many blue collar communities in the North East where local property taxes are 2.5-4% of the home value. For Middle Income homes in the 300-500K(most middle income homes are higher ) range in that area, this results in a lot of pain for the middle class, as the state income taxes also take quite a bite.

I myself in a low property tax area come quite close to hitting the bar, the recent "value" increases will be interesting to watch when the next appraisal comes around.

the SALT tax limit needs to be raised by quite a bit, but it also needs to target more of these rich folks that use a modest vineyard far from a residence as a writeoff.
 
bhill
Posts: 1898
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 8:28 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:33 pm

Yes, but WHY did he vote no?
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 15257
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:50 pm

bhill wrote:
Yes, but WHY did he vote no?


Because he wants to keep negotiating, and look stronger in West Virginia.

https://newrepublic.com/article/164852/ ... ack-better

As a former vice chair of the West Virginia Democratic Party, I was surprised by Manchin’s move. Build Back Better showers benefits on West Virginia. The bill gives 95 percent of West Virginians a tax cut. It extends policies projected to lift 43 percent of West Virginia’s poor children out of poverty—a stunning accomplishment. Build Back Better includes vital help for coal miners with black lung. The law’s focus on expanding health care and childcare in a state where many children are raised by their grandparents because of the opioid crisis make it an absolute godsend for families. Despite what Manchin says, it is an easy vote to explain back home.


However, Politically speaking, he is close to extinct, and he needs to have some verifiable bona fides to fend off his 2024 Trump cult challenger.

Killing Build Back Better—reports since Sunday indicate that maybe it isn’t quite dead yet—doesn’t just jeopardize billions of dollars that would have flowed into West Virginia. It seriously compromises Manchin’s own political prospects. A loss of Senate control in 2022 by Democrats would make Manchin a powerless ranking member, likely for the rest of his Senate career. A failure to pass Biden’s signature bill makes that loss of control more likely.

Similarly, a party switch is not practical because even the most right-leaning Democrat in the Senate is not nearly far right enough to win a GOP primary in a Trump +39 state. The Republican nomination will go to someone like Representative Alex Mooney, a hard-right conservative who voted against certifying Trump’s loss in the election.


I expect more negotiation with some serious push for more West Virginia friendly items in the bill.
 
LCDFlight
Posts: 1644
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:34 pm

ltbewr wrote:
The removal of the SALT deduction under Pres. Trump was supposed to be offset by the higher standard/base family deduction. Problem is if you live in a state with high local property and state income taxes like CA, MA, NY, NJ (I live in NJ), that offset was no where near enough especially for many middle and working class families who owned their own home in those and other states. That meant paying net higher Federal and possibly State income taxes. The SALT deduction should be reinstated but with a reverse progressive value as income levels go up to $200,000 for a single person and $300,000 for a family and no SALT deduction after that level of all income.


I have heard the story that removing the SALT exemption resulted in people paying “higher” federal taxes in states with high local taxes. For example, Massachusetts.

As far as I can tell, this story is incorrect. Well, yes, it may be higher than people in certain states USED to pay; but it is not higher than people in OTHER states pay. It makes federal tax rates equal across the states.

With no SALT exemption, a person making $250,000 pays the same federal income tax in Florida or Massachusetts (let’s say 30%, or $75,000). But with an exemption, the Massachusetts person will pay a significantly lower federal tax rate than the person in Florida. Suddenly the Massachusetts federal payment falls to say 25% or $62,500. I don’t think it is necessarily obvious why Massachusetts should have lower federal income tax rates than Florida.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 15257
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:45 pm

LCDFlight wrote:
ltbewr wrote:
The removal of the SALT deduction under Pres. Trump was supposed to be offset by the higher standard/base family deduction. Problem is if you live in a state with high local property and state income taxes like CA, MA, NY, NJ (I live in NJ), that offset was no where near enough especially for many middle and working class families who owned their own home in those and other states. That meant paying net higher Federal and possibly State income taxes. The SALT deduction should be reinstated but with a reverse progressive value as income levels go up to $200,000 for a single person and $300,000 for a family and no SALT deduction after that level of all income.


I have heard the story that removing the SALT exemption resulted in people paying “higher” federal taxes in states with high local taxes. For example, Massachusetts.

As far as I can tell, this story is incorrect. Well, yes, it may be higher than people in certain states USED to pay; but it is not higher than people in OTHER states pay. It makes federal tax rates equal across the states.

With no SALT exemption, a person making $250,000 pays the same federal income tax in Florida or Massachusetts (let’s say 30%, or $75,000). But with an exemption, the Massachusetts person will pay a significantly lower federal tax rate than the person in Florida. Suddenly the Massachusetts federal payment falls to say 25% or $62,500. I don’t think it is necessarily obvious why Massachusetts should have lower federal income tax rates than Florida.



Not sure where you get this comparison from. Everyone knew that SALT mostly benefited high income high tax states. It is a curve though that is marginalized by income level.
 
LCDFlight
Posts: 1644
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:42 pm

casinterest wrote:
LCDFlight wrote:
ltbewr wrote:
The removal of the SALT deduction under Pres. Trump was supposed to be offset by the higher standard/base family deduction. Problem is if you live in a state with high local property and state income taxes like CA, MA, NY, NJ (I live in NJ), that offset was no where near enough especially for many middle and working class families who owned their own home in those and other states. That meant paying net higher Federal and possibly State income taxes. The SALT deduction should be reinstated but with a reverse progressive value as income levels go up to $200,000 for a single person and $300,000 for a family and no SALT deduction after that level of all income.


I have heard the story that removing the SALT exemption resulted in people paying “higher” federal taxes in states with high local taxes. For example, Massachusetts.

As far as I can tell, this story is incorrect. Well, yes, it may be higher than people in certain states USED to pay; but it is not higher than people in OTHER states pay. It makes federal tax rates equal across the states.

With no SALT exemption, a person making $250,000 pays the same federal income tax in Florida or Massachusetts (let’s say 30%, or $75,000). But with an exemption, the Massachusetts person will pay a significantly lower federal tax rate than the person in Florida. Suddenly the Massachusetts federal payment falls to say 25% or $62,500. I don’t think it is necessarily obvious why Massachusetts should have lower federal income tax rates than Florida.



Not sure where you get this comparison from. Everyone knew that SALT mostly benefited high income high tax states. It is a curve though that is marginalized by income level.


A lot of people said removing the SALT exemption “punished high tax states.” What it did is it made them equal with low tax states, in terms of federal tax obligation. Not punished; equal. And yes, this… loophole… primarily applies to high income families.

If people don’t like paying state taxes, they should go ahead and lower their state taxes. Lay people off. Taking the IRS’s money to pay for that stuff is an understandable temptation but Should not be allowed.
 
emperortk
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Thu Dec 23, 2021 12:13 am

FlapOperator wrote:
M564038 wrote:
Good points!
The word of the founders combined with a wild west attitude where everyone must fend for themselves and their family(as shown in the gun cult) No tradition or real culture, only money and power.


During the period from 1800 to the present, which European nations were existent from that moment onward, uninterrupted with their current existent form of government, in their current geopolitical form?

I can think of three or six, only one of which is a G-7 nation, one mid grade power and the others microstates.


Yeah, it's great that the US is fumbling through the 21st century with the 18th century's finest government.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9192
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Thu Dec 23, 2021 12:22 am

Not much good to say about being invaded, colonized or borders changed by forcibly by treaty, but getting a new government might be one of the good things. We produce 22% of the global GDP with 5% of the population, have immigrants clamoring to reach our shores or airports, and are still the superpower everybody looks to in a global emergency. A lot of ruin here, but somehow after screwing up, we press on regardless.
 
johns624
Posts: 5186
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Thu Dec 23, 2021 12:42 am

emperortk wrote:
FlapOperator wrote:
M564038 wrote:
Good points!
The word of the founders combined with a wild west attitude where everyone must fend for themselves and their family(as shown in the gun cult) No tradition or real culture, only money and power.


During the period from 1800 to the present, which European nations were existent from that moment onward, uninterrupted with their current existent form of government, in their current geopolitical form?

I can think of three or six, only one of which is a G-7 nation, one mid grade power and the others microstates.


Yeah, it's great that the US is fumbling through the 21st century with the 18th century's finest government.
Yeah, we were a democracy in the 18th century while most of Europe was still run by royalty. Now, any royalty left are just figureheads and most of Europe is a democracy. I'd say that we got it right well before all you "civilized' people.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24480
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:34 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Not much good to say about being invaded, colonized or borders changed by forcibly by treaty, but getting a new government might be one of the good things. We produce 22% of the global GDP with 5% of the population, have immigrants clamoring to reach our shores or airports, and are still the superpower everybody looks to in a global emergency. A lot of ruin here, but somehow after screwing up, we press on regardless.


We are in a "global emergency" right now and other nations are just kinda going out on their own. They are not following our lead of "screw masks and vaccines and lockdowns because Biden bad!" They are not following our lead on lowering taxes on the wealthy, raising taxes on the poor, blaming the poor for not being rich, taking away basic services, funding military up the nose...

The "new government" will be a far right wing extremist dictatorship much like Russia or Hungary. Do what dear leader says or else. Such freedom. We have many Republican states working very, very hard to deny the democratic process to anyone not right wing extremist. We are no longer the shining city on the hill. It got much worse under the previous administration.
 
Newark727
Posts: 2907
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

Re: WP: Manchin will not vote for Build Back Better

Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:39 am

johns624 wrote:
Yeah, we were a democracy in the 18th century while most of Europe was still run by royalty. Now, any royalty left are just figureheads and most of Europe is a democracy. I'd say that we got it right well before all you "civilized' people.


The U.S. was much more representative than most of the governments that came before it - but much less representative than many of the governments that have come since. Some of this lack of representation was in the name of protecting minority rights, which is laudable - but some of it was done to ensure the continued political power of slaveowners, which was considerably less so. Heck, there are constitutions that the U.S. has written that have advantages over what we've got now. Japan has publicly financed campaigns - that would be great! I'd love to get out of this fever swamp of semi-legal pay-for-play that we've got going on now. Other countries don't bother with gerrymandering, the filibuster, or the debt ceiling. Other countries have a high court that doesn't threaten to light off a civil war every time a vacancy opens up.

Saying the Constitution "got it right" is a little like saying the 1903 Wright Flyer "got it right" - yes, it was a historic invention that solved problems that had vexed prior tinkerers, but it could hardly considered the end state of democratic governance.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Vintage and 27 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos