I really hope all of this goes through. The country really needs this. Not just in terms of the jobs and opportunities this will bring for many but also the infrastructure upgrade this country has been needing for a long time.
There are parts of China more modern than whatever you see in the business districts of NY or SF. It's also a big win for private industry or the wealthy as they are the larger beneficiaries of infrastructural upgrades. Better roads and ports means a more efficient supply chain. Higher access to broadband internet means a quicker adoption to things like blockchain/AR/IoT. The only reason we haven't done it is because of politics of spite. No party wanted to give the other a "third rail" win that put jobs on the ground at a time when blue collar workers are leaving labor out of despair. Later on ideologues like McConnell didn't want to support spending because he knew it would mostly benefit densely populated areas like blue states. The ROI for rural areas is far less for the quarter billion pittance put in yearly on national upgrades. Trump understood this but gave half a trillion away to his corporate buddies first, so even if there are boondoggles in this bill, it's all unproductive noise and distractions. I think people are ****ing tired of paralysis as things of real value are slowly inflated away from the hands of the middle lower classes. That's a problem pseudo libertarian rags like Reason can't seem to solve yet has endless tons of bellyaching as a replacement
Biden is stealing from Trump's MAGA messaging. Let's go back to 1960 level of domestic investment. Let's go back to Eisenhower's usage of taxes to rebuild the country, grow the economy and American's income. Tax cut doesn't pay for itself, but tax increases to invest in infrastructure and jobs will. And the very popular portion - Made in American Tax Plan. "Alongside the American Jobs Plan, the President is proposing to fix the corporate tax code so that it incentivizes job creation and investment here in the United States, stops unfair and wasteful profit shifting to tax havens, and ensures that large corporations are paying their fair share." Rollback some of Trump's 2017 tax cuts. Set corp tax rate to 28% from today's 21% (was 35%). 15% min tax on corp "book income" remove loopholes that encourage offshoring jobs eliminate all fossil fuels subsidies Of course, Republican politicians are going to say no and this can only pass through reconciliation. Like his Covid's package, Biden plan here is popular, not as much, but still by at least a 2-to-1 margin and even with human Republican. And as we know, Trump knew how popular infrastructure was and tried infrastructure weeks forever, but as often, big donors speak and he retreats back to doing nothing. Not going to be easy to get this through. 0 support from Republicans in Congress while the progressive wing wants a much bigger package. As often said, if you have both extremes not liking it, you probably strike a good middle and so for Biden seem to be trying to win that middle from the public, from both parties. FACT SHEET: The American Jobs Plan | The White House Highlights Of Biden's $2 Trillion Infrastructure Plan : NPR POLITICO Playbook: Fault lines form on Biden’s massive infrastructure plan - POLITICO
"Biden’s Big Bet: Tackling Climate Change Will Create Jobs, Not Kill Them": https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/31/climate/biden-climate-jobs.html excerpt: And in Pennsylvania, which put Mr. Biden over the top in November, and then hosted his speech on Wednesday, some union workers don’t see how skills honed over decades in fossil fuel industries would translate in a clean-energy future. “They keep saying, ‘We’re going to transition you into solar jobs.’ That’s not how it works,” said Shawn Steffee, a leader of the Boilermakers Local 154 in Pittsburgh. “We build power plants, petrochemical plants and maintain steel mills.” He asked, “Would you ask Tom Brady to play middle linebacker just because he’s a football player?” more at the link
the turtle back to the "block anything and everything"... so they can cry about not being consulted and that Biden broke hsi promise about being bipartisan... McConnell rules out GOP support for Biden spending plan Senate Democrats are already signaling they may set up the infrastructure bill to pass along party lines. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/01/mcconnell-gop-supoort-biden-spending-478829 And suddenly, debt and deficit become republican concerns...
"Majority of economists say benefits of reaching net zero by 2050 outweigh costs, survey finds": https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/net-zero-emissions-economists-b1824080.html excerpt: The majority of economists say that the benefits of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 would outweigh the costs, a new survey suggests. Two-thirds of economists who answered the survey said that it was “likely” or “extremely likely” that the expected benefits of government targets for reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 would outweigh the expected costs. By comparison, 12 per cent said that it was “unlikely” or “extremely unlikely” that the benefits would outweigh the costs, 18 per cent said it was “still not clear” and 4 per cent said they had “no opinion”. In addition, 74 per cent of economists surveyed said they strongly agreed that “immediate and drastic action is necessary” to tackle the climate crisis. The findings suggest the majority of economists agree that the costs associated with unabated climate change would exceed those of ambitious climate action, said Derek Sylvan, strategy director the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law, which conducted the survey.
I really like this reply. It might say a bit about how you digest news content that goes against your belief system. If 34% is a lot of economists Then what's 66%? This is about net-zero by 2050 specifically as well. Then you have this But naturally, the 26% of others, those are probably the really smart scientist, who are pragmatic and individual thinkers.
"Net Zero" creates public value but destroys net private value. It can turn a billion dollar pile of dirt into a near worthless (hundred million) untapped pile of dirt. The social good of solar/wind panels seems one-off business wise since you're not necessarily locked into buying more fuel. Sure the air is cleaner and your bills go down, but you're not supporting the entire O&G supply chain that employs hundreds of thousands people to get that power from Saudi dirt and into your plug. It also minimizes our current trillions+ infrastructure focused upon centralized power plants. Frankly, I don't know why we'd want to keep a near century old power grid alive when emerging markets have better options. There will be blood as transitioning and disruption always happens...but we are actually further off in seeing dividends on investment that initially started with Obama's "Solyndra funds". Companies like Tesla and solar providers benefitted from that low rate lending. The Game is wrecked right now. Everyone in business knows that government "winners and losers" goes way beyond market forces for the past 20+ years. Cheney wet his dirty little beak with O&G subsidies while industry majors passed those profits back into dividends and corporate bonuses. So the whole charge that "innovation is more efficient with private enterprise driven by real demand" has mostly been compromised by both sides whenever they're in power. I can be partial for the bellyaching against the principle of governments tipping towards ESG. Honestly, we can imagine twice the benefits of vague future spending, but it'll realistically be half the benefits. But we are way overdue for a social correction that the aging boomer majority tipped the scales towards their favor. There will definitely be consequences to this though as nothing is ever free.
you realize that "majorities" can be wrong and that minority views can be correct? You also realize that one of the reasons economists like to make these kinds of projections thirty years out is that by the time 2050 rolls around, most of them will be retired and no one will be around to criticize their 2021 predictions for being so off.
You don't ever seem to apply this logic when spamming links that support your belief system lol. I give this response a 1.3 out of 10. I appreciate that you try to give a reason to disavow a consensus of experts, but you fail to realize that the same reasoning applies both ways. Most scientist and doctors who backed cigarettes being safe got paid and are dead now, yada yada rable rable.
