The amount of spending and debt are legitimate issues. I haven't looked a the proposed bill that closely yet but I'm sure there is stuff that can be trimmed out. Even so spending on infrastructure is about the best thing you can do with debt. If we don't address our infrastructure problems now it will be the generations that follow who will have to deal with those issues and it will only get more expensive.
Spending certainly has the possibility of leading to inflation so Summer's isn't wrong there is that risk. Better infrastructure though can help to maintain and improve productivity which can counter inflation while that possibility exists it's not a guarantee that it will lead to inflation and could fight. What is more likely to cause inflation is a tax cut during an expansion. With the economy already growing cutting taxes isn't likely going to increase productivity but just leaving more money in the system.
Can't take Summers and his bluster seriously. Even his Clinton term is marked with several blunders that we've eventually had to deal with. Imagine millennials and younger gens staying at home into their 40s along with their boomer parents all while desperately growing their own families. It's becoming more of a frequent thing. I guess that's what transfer of wealth will come to mean. I can't blame too much on Gen X. Their demo is much smaller than boomers and millennials. They leant more rebelliously independent after being ignored in the limelight. They seem to be the first to take the mindset of being on your own. They might run large funds and corporations but they certainly aren't the primary clients... As for children. Mr. Hunt made a great point what birth rates are tied with economic environment. Japan actually had a booming population post war and didn't truly decline into pathetic despair until their market burst 30 years ago. In theory, we should have a "covid baby boom" but it's doubtful many families could afford another runt or two. So it might not be "women in the workforce" as the greatest suppressor of modern birth rates, but rather low "wage suppressing" interest rates. I saw another interesting interview that posed the Fed quandary of interest rates. We've kept interest rates low to suppress a corporate debt death spiral that covid seemingly triggered (because covid forced companies to take up low rate bonds to buy back stocks), but this comes at the expense of pension funds. Those funds are demanding 8%+ returns while our current rates are a third (generous) as much. Good luck getting there w/ a 60/40 portfolio. A bar napkin shortfall hovers around 10T in state pension funds if rates remain as low as they are. Not OK Boomer.
Can anyone post the Summers article? I remember him being a pretty big fiscal proponent under Obama so it'd be interesting to see what's change. The size of the bill? It seems like in hindsight, Obama should have done a $3-4 trillion stimulus package or at least in my opinion. In my very amateur view, we will probably see a re-inflation as some capital moves back towards the old economy/commodities while also modernizing the "old economy" (google 4th industrial revolution). However, technology tends to be deflationary and I don't see the high structural inflation on the horizon.
The COVID baby boom is looking more like a baby bust Demographic timebomb on its way. Hopefully the second massive piece of legislation will further address our aging population because somethings gotta give.
I’m interested to hear a bit more on this Gen X failure. Everything else you note sounds spot on, so lay it on me.
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp It's funny how boers didn't have that mindset in the 30s and 40s. Click "max" on the graph time scale. Notice the era that increased the middle class the most in American history. Also notice the debt to gdp ratio that led up to that increases. Spending for spending sakes is not smart. But properly investing in the people is not some future burden for future generations if it actually helps the people.
I'm not all in on Pete's policy desires during the primaries but I think he would have made a better president than Joe. You can poke fewer holes at him and he's far more witty and sharp. The right would have less "gaffs" to spam on facebook with this guy.
if Biden is serious about this infrastructure bill Pete is right where he needs to be both for messaging and for his future. infrastructure spending is popular (which is why fox is doing such a poor job messaging about roads and bridges) and if I were running in 8 years when most of the projects will have been completed it’d be a great way to stand out in the primary.
Section 304 is a go. The earlier reconciliation bill can be amended. https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/0...n-through-congress-over-republican-opposition ...with some Democrats reluctant to dismantle the filibuster, the rest of Mr. Biden’s agenda risks stalling amid Republican objections. With the Senate divided 50-50, Democrats effectively need 10 G.O.P. senators to join them to move forward on nearly any major legislation. Seeking alternative avenues, Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, had argued that the rules permitted the Senate to revisit the budget blueprint, which allowed for passage of the pandemic relief plan, and take at least one more crack at reconciliation before the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30. Because there was no precedent for doing so, Mr. Schumer asked Elizabeth MacDonough, the Senate parliamentarian, for guidance. On Monday, she blessed the gambit, according to Justin Goodman, a spokesman for Mr. Schumer. The ruling “allows Democrats additional tools to improve the lives of Americans if Republican obstruction continues,” Mr. Goodman said in a statement, adding that “some parameters still need to be worked out.”
How much does it suck for Kamala that Pete gets this infrastructure thing and she gets the insolvable border mess?
I think he needs more experience but he and Yang were my choices so there goes experience lol. And of course, gay is still a hurdle to overcome.
Of course he does, its evident in what you post continuously. Are you really gonna try that tired deflection AGAIN. Let me guess the next thing you are gonna say is that you are a moderate democrat right?
Buttigeig was my second choice in the primaries and liked a lot of his policies. That said experience and unfortunately his sexual orientation were still a factor. While obviously Trump would've used it against him but winning over more socially conservative African American voters might've been an issue too. If you were to put together a list of traits that for a candidate to beat Trump Joe Biden could check off most of those factors. Even if he is essentially a candidate by committee I will say he's done much better than I expected and although I'm not a progressives I think on many Progressive issues he has done better than expected.
It’s a shame Pete is President. Tucker Carlson would already be in court defending his position of “can we trust a gay guy to keep us safe?”
