Do you mean in these forums or in the news? I have not heard anyone say it's only a supply chain issue. I have heard most saying it's the main reason. Other big reasons are the surge in consumer demand and labor issues (including long-term changes that we don't know yet - what is the new norm for labor now that everyone has a break from traditional work). If you really want to blame 1 thing - we went from closing down the economy to opening it up, worldwide. That's a one-time shock that is causing all kinds of issues including inflation here and elsewhere. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-f...s-current-inflation-tell-us-about-the-future/
But Trump and the Fed spent trillions too? Inflation was rising was last year. Why would we listen to anyone who has a hand in West Virginia's bottom feeding status?
Gas prices are having fun with numbers. Using YOY it was a big increase but looking back further you can see oil prices peaking 2014 than going to almost a 10 year low in 2016 then rising prices throughout Trump's 4 years culminating with an 80s style bust. It was just last summer that oil futures went negative.
funny you should mention that . . . I didn't remember this, I had to look this up Kavanaugh protesters arrested at Capitol, after thousands march on Supreme Court excerpt: Thousands of liberal protesters, fired up by Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, marched up Capitol Hill on Thursday to protest Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court and put pressure on the handful of undecided senators who will determine whether Kavanaugh gets confirmed in the coming days. By Thursday afternoon, Capitol Police began arresting hundreds of protesters inside the Hart Senate Office Building who raised their fists and loudly started chanting “Kavanaugh has got to go.” Arrests were made after protesters began sitting down in the building's atrium, refusing to cooperate with law enforcement. In all, some 302 protesters were arrested and charged with unlawfully demonstrating in Senate office buildings Thursday, police said.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-re...osi-manchin-11639344374?mod=opinion_lead_pos1 The Real Cost of Biden’s Spending Plan CBO comes clean on the price tag if the programs are made permanent. By The Editorial Board Dec. 12, 2021 5:34 pm ET President Biden’s tax and entitlement plan received what should be a pair of knockout punches late last week. The report of surging inflation has been well covered. But the media have largely ignored the second blow—the real cost of the plan if honestly scored. Allow us to complete the record. We’ve been telling you for months that the plan’s advertised cost of $1.75 trillion over 10 years includes multiple budget gimmicks that disguise the real cost. The Penn Wharton Budget Model has scored the 10-year cost at about $4.6 trillion, but the White House keeps claiming against all evidence that the cost is “zero.” Now comes the Congressional Budget Office to report that the claim of zero cost is a Big Con. CBO, a political outfit beholden to Congress, can’t be so blunt. It is constrained by budget conventions imposed by Congress. But even under those conventions, CBO has said the bill would add $200 billion to the deficit over 10 years. Enter Sens. Lindsey Graham and John Cornyn, who asked CBO director Phillip Swagel to add up the cost of the bill that recently passed the House if all of its programs were made permanent. This is a more honest accounting because Democrats admit both that they want to make the spending permanent and that they’ve adjusted programs to make them fit under the Senate budget rules so they can pass with a mere 51 votes (including Vice President Kamala Harris ). Mr. Swagel’s response, sent on Friday, is a torpedo speeding toward the hull of Build Back Better. The dishonesty in the $1.75 trillion spending total is astonishing even by Congressional standards. Take the child allowance, which Democrats say will cost only $185 billion because it ends after one year. No one believes they won’t extend it next year, and the year after that, ad infinitum. CBO says the real cost over 10 years is $1.597 trillion. Democrats also peg their earned-income tax credit expansion at a cost of $13 billion because it too ends after one year. CBO says the real cost is $135 billion over 10 years. An honest accounting of those two programs alone consumes $1.732 trillion, or nearly all of the $1.75 trillion that Sen. Joe Manchin has said is the most total new spending he’ll support over 10 years. But there’s so much more. Democrats phase out the child-care and pre-K entitlements after 2027 with a total cost of $381 billion. CBO says the real cost over 10 years is $752 billion if made permanent. They also underestimate the cost of expanded healthcare subsidies at $74 billion by phasing them out in 2025 or 2026. CBO says the real cost is $220 billion. And don’t forget the spending after 10 years once the subsidies for all of these new programs become embedded in American behavior. This is the main purpose of making these programs into entitlements—to make people more dependent on government from cradle to grave. One of the bill’s biggest tricks is its restoration of the state and local tax deduction to $80,000 up from $10,000. Democrats pretend that this will raise $15 billion over 10 years because the current $10,000 limit is set to expire after 2025. CBO says the real cost of this Democratic tax deduction for the rich without that gimmick would be $245 billion. We could go on, and we recommend people look at Mr. Swagel’s letter on the CBO’s website. The 18 programs that Mr. Swagel itemizes in a table with his letter contribute $3.477 trillion over 10 years to the total cost of the House bill—compared with the $889 billion that Democrats claim those same programs cost under their gimmicky rules. Overall, Mr. Swagel says in his letter, CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation project that the House bill would increase the deficit by $3 trillion over 10 years without the budget gimmicks and phony phase-outs. Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer reacted furiously to this news, falling back on their claims that the Build Back Better Act is “fully paid for.” Mrs. Pelosi says CBO has scored Mr. Graham’s “imaginary bill.” But her bill is the real fiscal fantasy and “fully paid for” is the lie of the year. All of this gives Mr. Manchin, and other Democrats hiding behind his skepticism, ample ammunition to call the whole thing off. If this bill passes, they’ll own all of the deficits, debt and inflation that result. Appeared in the December 13, 2021, print edition as 'The Real Cost of Biden’s Plan.'
This is a weird claim. If the bill wasn't the bill it is, and if they pass other future bills, then the cost of this bill goes up? That's nonsense. It's gimmicky for sure - but it's not inflationary as claimed. For the cost to go to $4T+, Congress would have to pass many future bills to extend all those programs. That means Manchin would have to agree to that, or if the GOP takes either chamber of Congress next year, they have full veto power over that. The current bill costs what it costs. This is no different than the GOP passing temporary tax cuts and putting the onus on future Congresses to continue them or kill them.
This. For many years I have wrestled with this issue. It is a ticking time bomb and the remedies at times seemed as bad as the issue..... further, what about future student loans? However, at this point the reality is that they need to just excuse it and get it over with.
Cancelling student loans without addressing the underlying issues would be an economic disaster. You basically create an economic donut hole where everyone who's paid off loans is at a huge life disadvantage, everyone who has max loans gets a huge boost, and everyone who's starting school now has all the loans again. It puts an 18 year old today at a massive disadvantage in life to the 22 year old who suddenly gets free college, meaning they have money to spend on housing (which drives up prices) or further graduate educatio , etc. Meanwhile, the 18 year old still is going to have their $100,000 in loans and now has higher housing prices and would have to take on even more debt to match the education of their 4-years-old peers, meaning worse job prospects, etc. You have to fix the system so people don't have to take out such big loans - once that's done, then get creative with ways to do reduce existing debts but put a "cost" to it. For example, 1 year of working in the public sector or other community-serving roles gets $X off your student debt. Or eliminate interest payments and extend timelines to reduce the burden and let inflation lower the cost.
Wow, lol. Republican Senators asked the CBO to grade a non-existence bill and the WSJ wrote an oped attacking the real bill. This is classic today's Republicans' behaviors. They can’t work with the truth and have to make up something to beat it up. This isn't so different from the crazies that said covid kill 100% and because it doesn't, it's fake.
"Enter Sens. Lindsey Graham and John Cornyn, who asked CBO director Phillip Swagel to add up the cost of the bill that recently passed the House if all of its programs were made permanent. This is a more honest accounting because Democrats admit both that they want to make the spending permanent and that they’ve adjusted programs to make them fit under the Senate budget rules so they can pass with a mere 51 votes (including Vice President Kamala Harris )."
Yes, I had that in the quote. None of that discount that Republicans Senator asked the CBO to grade on a non-existing bill and the WSJ editors use that to attack the real bill.
