The Democratic Party needs to use this argument as their major talking point when selling these plans. People can understand that if they don't fix their roof now, it will cost them a fortune later to fix the damage. We need simple concepts for people to grab onto.
Today's republican party is the new confederacy. The anti-federalists never wanted a democracy, they only want power. This country, the richest in the whole history of this planet, cannot be taken down by any foreign power, it can only be taken down from within, and that is exactly what the republican party is trying to do. This is the new civil war, and the Democrats are not up to the challenge. After the citizens united decision, the rich now own "our" government and everything goes to them, including the republican party and even some democrats too. We have already lost "our" democracy. I'm glad I'll die soon so that I won't have to witness the death of the United States of America.
The public is being brainwashed, and has been for decades, by the hidden/unannounced Republican mantra: Make as much money as you can regardless of the way(s) you can get away with. The Dems. not so secret one though too timidly, at least up to now, put forth by J.B. and the surge of women activists, is to promote the overall well-being of all who live here. The Rep. ultimate weapon is to hurl the charge of "socialism" at us. Do not be tempted to defend it. Just say, "I have no idea what you're talking about." That's throwing the issue back in their lap and forcing them to explain what they mean. Then they will try 'capitalism" as the reason. Answer: No, it was the physical and mental labor of millions of workers/laborers.
Another world is possible because another world is affordable. Get rid of unnecessary corporate subsidies, cut defense spending for equipment and planes and bases and other military expenditures that make zero sense given today's geopolitical realities, and properly fund the IRS to gather up all the taxes the wealthy and corporations are hiding....then the money we need to fund a decent society will seem like a drop in the bucket.
The Biden administration should draft an Environmental Impact Assessment of the Build Back Better plan that includes an evaluation of the "do nothing alternative." That would provide those of us interested in facts and believe in science a tool to push back against the charge that it is too costly. I am becoming a 'fatalist' that the Republican's won't wake up until it's too late.
My first thought is, "It’s like thinking about putting money in the meter. You can take a chance, but doing nothing may result of getting a ticket that costs 10x more."
The second is; the first scene of the premier in ‘The Network’. When Jeff Daniels is asked repeatedly, “what does he think of American greatness?”
He finally answers that he doesn't think we're so great and rattles off a litany of examples such as education, health care, life expectancy etc. where the U.S. is not #1 and not even in the top 10 compared to industrialized nations in each category!!
We spend over $750 Billion on defense. More than the next 16 countries combined!
To defend what?? Our quality of life should be just as important, if not more.
Aren’t the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over? Why aren’t we reducing $100+ Billion off of that?
Very powerful comment. This should be repeated loudly and often. And of course, the news media never ask how defense bills will be paid for. The news media also don't probe or question the claim that tax cuts will be paid for by "growth," when the evidence clearly shows otherwise. A commenter a few days ago mentioned that a bill for aid to Israel sailed through Congress with no CBO score needed. Showering Israelis with our taxpayer money is a given, while addressing critical problems and improving Americans' lives must be questioned to death.
Other than Bernie Sanders, I have not heard our political leaders addressing this in a manner that resonates, even by Build Back Better's most ardent supporters. That has allowed the news media and conservatives to portray its provisions as luxuries that we might possibly consider sometime in the future when the sun, the moon, and the stars are in perfect alignment...
We typically employ myopic math in public policy as well as our daily lives. It's worse than you describe. Long-term costs are left out of the discussion, and so are long-term benefits. Our decisions have life-cycles whose full costs and benefits that usually remain unidentified and uncounted. Industries "externalize" as many costs as they can to keep their products competitively priced. Special interests understate the true costs of the policies they advocate to make them more politically appealing. The public health and environmental impacts of fossil fuels are prominent examples. They are enormous, but they are not reflected in the prices we pay for oil, natural gas, and coal. Kids with asthma, damaged ecosystems, and the victims of climate disasters pay them. Because our decisions have such widespread and long-term consequences today, we need a new math that counts all life-cycle costs and benefits as completely as possible. We'd have far fewer unintentional and underhanded adverse consequences.
100% agree with everything you said. It's baffling that we don't take into consideration the cost of doing nothing into the analysis and how we present the information to readers and citizens. In school, we are taught to think critically yet the way the news is delivered in this country is so shallow without proper analysis and critical thinking. It's mind-boggling and maybe also says something about our education system. The only nuance to all this that I want to add and what bothers me is that we also don't get told where the money is going precisely and how we will measure results. I am happy the money is going towards good causes but a small part of me is always concerned about corruption, especially when we're talking about billions of dollars. That said, I am happy to see us move in the direction of helping people. Canada has universal healthcare that is not attached to one's employer. That gives citizens a lot more freedom in general to speak out about things, to seek other employment, etc. There's a huge freedom there that is lost in the US when each person is so dependent on their employer for healthcare. I can also vouch for the fact that the healthcare system in Canada is GREAT regardless of how the conservative media may spin it.
What amazes me is that the 1%ers appear to believe that the dire consequences of business as usual will not affect them. No matter how many millions you have, you're breathing the same air, drinking the same water, eating the same food. A collapse of the world economy, more severe weather events, etc. are non-discriminatory, and there's no place to flee to when thinks really tank. Where will their profits go when nobody can afford their products? How will they staff their factories and offices when millions are ill, schools are closed, and transportation is unaffordable? It should be patently obvious that investing in the greater good, is an investment in their own futures, and an insurance policy against very dire consequences. So, why are we headed for the cliff with the rich flooring the gas pedal?
Thank you so much for this opportunity to express my opinion. I feel we "all" have so much to say and hope someone is listening. Great therapy!
Just thinking ..in the future" maybe if possible you can have a petition on certain "issues" like the "right to vote " or whatever. Since your site here is growing someone reading the petition just might pay attention!
The cost of doing nothing far outweighs the benefit of doing something when it comes to the problem of climate change. Factory farming is a major contributor to climate change. Rainforests are being plowed down daily to make room for the grain used to feed the cattle that we birth for our consumption. The amount of grain we feed this cattle is enough to feed the world. The creation of cattle for meat consumption is unsustainable and cruel. The dairy industry is also cruel where female cows are artificially inseminated, their babies are taken away at birth, these babies are starved to make better veal if male, and if female are put in the same cycle of abuse as the mothers. They are exploited for their milk and their udders are swollen until they can no longer produce milk and are then killed for meat after a very short life. Meat consumption at the rate that it is being produced is unsustainable. The rainforests are the lungs of the Earth. We need to find ways to eliminate fossil fuels and innovate to make clean energy resources like other countries. We need to go to solar energy, and electric energy in cars. We need those big windmills and solar panels we see on commercials. This would bring many American jobs to the working class in our society. If we can work on eliminating factory farming of our cows and chickens and eat less carnivorously, we would eliminate our gigantic carbon footprint on planet Earth and lower greenhouse emissions, which would have a great impact on lessening climate change. I won't preach about becoming vegan, but it is the most sensible, pragmatic, and ethical
choice to help eliminate carbon emissions, cruelty to animals, and provide a healthy lifestyle in which things like diabetes and heart disease are eliminated, something that big Pharma and doctors don't want to see happen. I don't want to make this a debate about veganism, please. This is what I see as a solution and I am doing my small part to help in our fight against climate change for the future of my nephews and step-grandchildren. This is what I know about action and inaction when it comes to the future of our planet.
This all makes perfect sense to anyone capable of thinking logically. The challenge is to convince two particular Senate Democrats who, apparently, are incapable of this way of thinking and/or have ulterior motives.
It seems that someone is listening to you. The Washington Post's climate newsletter "The Climate 202" today has this headline: "As Democrats await CBO score, experts argue it may not account for climate change" According to the newsletter, members of Congress, including so-called centrists, are recognizing the costs of climate change, and legislation has been introduced to require the CBO to consider the costs of climate change in its scoring. A small step, but a step in the right direction.
The cheapest way to grow crops is use artificial fertilizer. Works great for a short time and leaves the land bare of nutrients. Then you move to new land and kill it as well. Eventually all you have is worthless land that is dead, can't grow anything.
The expensive way is the right way and is organic. It improves the land over time. But it takes time and effort. It is not cheap, but it works well. And it can last for a long time.
When making salt they refine it to sodium chloride, they take all the other chemicals out. Those trace chemicals are part of our make up. Sure sodium chloride is part of us but so many other chemicals make up the human body. We need those trace elements to live.
Rice is a staple of human nutrition in its natural form. But we stripe away the nutrients to make it more palatable. White rice is essentially starch which converts to sugar in the mouth. We need the other parts of rice for our nutrition.
In other words we take the sweet and easy and leave the nutrients. It is a diet that will ultimately kill us. But we don't seem to care because it is sweet and easy and costs less for now. Who cares about tomorrow.
Today, our biased media present stories and opinion rather than factually reporting the news. I flip back and forth between the Washington Post and Fox News to read about a particular issue. If you don’t do this I highly recommend it because then you will see why we need to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in journalism. Some media, like Fox News, has become so polarized that even when they report on a topic they often omit pertinent information. These omissions have a very dramatic impact on the readers perception of what is truth and fact. Additionally, allowing a media company to own both print news and on air programming did not used to be allowed. Limiting media to one form of media would help to reduce the amount of sway they have in promoting their biased propaganda.
Social media only enhances the problem with media and individuals amplifying the MIS-information. This is what we need to get a handle on! Correct the erroneous reporting and simply report the truth.
The Democratic Party needs to use this argument as their major talking point when selling these plans. People can understand that if they don't fix their roof now, it will cost them a fortune later to fix the damage. We need simple concepts for people to grab onto.
Today's republican party is the new confederacy. The anti-federalists never wanted a democracy, they only want power. This country, the richest in the whole history of this planet, cannot be taken down by any foreign power, it can only be taken down from within, and that is exactly what the republican party is trying to do. This is the new civil war, and the Democrats are not up to the challenge. After the citizens united decision, the rich now own "our" government and everything goes to them, including the republican party and even some democrats too. We have already lost "our" democracy. I'm glad I'll die soon so that I won't have to witness the death of the United States of America.
The public is being brainwashed, and has been for decades, by the hidden/unannounced Republican mantra: Make as much money as you can regardless of the way(s) you can get away with. The Dems. not so secret one though too timidly, at least up to now, put forth by J.B. and the surge of women activists, is to promote the overall well-being of all who live here. The Rep. ultimate weapon is to hurl the charge of "socialism" at us. Do not be tempted to defend it. Just say, "I have no idea what you're talking about." That's throwing the issue back in their lap and forcing them to explain what they mean. Then they will try 'capitalism" as the reason. Answer: No, it was the physical and mental labor of millions of workers/laborers.
Another world is possible because another world is affordable. Get rid of unnecessary corporate subsidies, cut defense spending for equipment and planes and bases and other military expenditures that make zero sense given today's geopolitical realities, and properly fund the IRS to gather up all the taxes the wealthy and corporations are hiding....then the money we need to fund a decent society will seem like a drop in the bucket.
The Biden administration should draft an Environmental Impact Assessment of the Build Back Better plan that includes an evaluation of the "do nothing alternative." That would provide those of us interested in facts and believe in science a tool to push back against the charge that it is too costly. I am becoming a 'fatalist' that the Republican's won't wake up until it's too late.
My first thought is, "It’s like thinking about putting money in the meter. You can take a chance, but doing nothing may result of getting a ticket that costs 10x more."
The second is; the first scene of the premier in ‘The Network’. When Jeff Daniels is asked repeatedly, “what does he think of American greatness?”
He finally answers that he doesn't think we're so great and rattles off a litany of examples such as education, health care, life expectancy etc. where the U.S. is not #1 and not even in the top 10 compared to industrialized nations in each category!!
We spend over $750 Billion on defense. More than the next 16 countries combined!
To defend what?? Our quality of life should be just as important, if not more.
Aren’t the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over? Why aren’t we reducing $100+ Billion off of that?
Very powerful comment. This should be repeated loudly and often. And of course, the news media never ask how defense bills will be paid for. The news media also don't probe or question the claim that tax cuts will be paid for by "growth," when the evidence clearly shows otherwise. A commenter a few days ago mentioned that a bill for aid to Israel sailed through Congress with no CBO score needed. Showering Israelis with our taxpayer money is a given, while addressing critical problems and improving Americans' lives must be questioned to death.
Other than Bernie Sanders, I have not heard our political leaders addressing this in a manner that resonates, even by Build Back Better's most ardent supporters. That has allowed the news media and conservatives to portray its provisions as luxuries that we might possibly consider sometime in the future when the sun, the moon, and the stars are in perfect alignment...
We typically employ myopic math in public policy as well as our daily lives. It's worse than you describe. Long-term costs are left out of the discussion, and so are long-term benefits. Our decisions have life-cycles whose full costs and benefits that usually remain unidentified and uncounted. Industries "externalize" as many costs as they can to keep their products competitively priced. Special interests understate the true costs of the policies they advocate to make them more politically appealing. The public health and environmental impacts of fossil fuels are prominent examples. They are enormous, but they are not reflected in the prices we pay for oil, natural gas, and coal. Kids with asthma, damaged ecosystems, and the victims of climate disasters pay them. Because our decisions have such widespread and long-term consequences today, we need a new math that counts all life-cycle costs and benefits as completely as possible. We'd have far fewer unintentional and underhanded adverse consequences.
100% agree with everything you said. It's baffling that we don't take into consideration the cost of doing nothing into the analysis and how we present the information to readers and citizens. In school, we are taught to think critically yet the way the news is delivered in this country is so shallow without proper analysis and critical thinking. It's mind-boggling and maybe also says something about our education system. The only nuance to all this that I want to add and what bothers me is that we also don't get told where the money is going precisely and how we will measure results. I am happy the money is going towards good causes but a small part of me is always concerned about corruption, especially when we're talking about billions of dollars. That said, I am happy to see us move in the direction of helping people. Canada has universal healthcare that is not attached to one's employer. That gives citizens a lot more freedom in general to speak out about things, to seek other employment, etc. There's a huge freedom there that is lost in the US when each person is so dependent on their employer for healthcare. I can also vouch for the fact that the healthcare system in Canada is GREAT regardless of how the conservative media may spin it.
What amazes me is that the 1%ers appear to believe that the dire consequences of business as usual will not affect them. No matter how many millions you have, you're breathing the same air, drinking the same water, eating the same food. A collapse of the world economy, more severe weather events, etc. are non-discriminatory, and there's no place to flee to when thinks really tank. Where will their profits go when nobody can afford their products? How will they staff their factories and offices when millions are ill, schools are closed, and transportation is unaffordable? It should be patently obvious that investing in the greater good, is an investment in their own futures, and an insurance policy against very dire consequences. So, why are we headed for the cliff with the rich flooring the gas pedal?
Thank you so much for this opportunity to express my opinion. I feel we "all" have so much to say and hope someone is listening. Great therapy!
Just thinking ..in the future" maybe if possible you can have a petition on certain "issues" like the "right to vote " or whatever. Since your site here is growing someone reading the petition just might pay attention!
Great Job Mr Reich..!
The cost of doing nothing far outweighs the benefit of doing something when it comes to the problem of climate change. Factory farming is a major contributor to climate change. Rainforests are being plowed down daily to make room for the grain used to feed the cattle that we birth for our consumption. The amount of grain we feed this cattle is enough to feed the world. The creation of cattle for meat consumption is unsustainable and cruel. The dairy industry is also cruel where female cows are artificially inseminated, their babies are taken away at birth, these babies are starved to make better veal if male, and if female are put in the same cycle of abuse as the mothers. They are exploited for their milk and their udders are swollen until they can no longer produce milk and are then killed for meat after a very short life. Meat consumption at the rate that it is being produced is unsustainable. The rainforests are the lungs of the Earth. We need to find ways to eliminate fossil fuels and innovate to make clean energy resources like other countries. We need to go to solar energy, and electric energy in cars. We need those big windmills and solar panels we see on commercials. This would bring many American jobs to the working class in our society. If we can work on eliminating factory farming of our cows and chickens and eat less carnivorously, we would eliminate our gigantic carbon footprint on planet Earth and lower greenhouse emissions, which would have a great impact on lessening climate change. I won't preach about becoming vegan, but it is the most sensible, pragmatic, and ethical
choice to help eliminate carbon emissions, cruelty to animals, and provide a healthy lifestyle in which things like diabetes and heart disease are eliminated, something that big Pharma and doctors don't want to see happen. I don't want to make this a debate about veganism, please. This is what I see as a solution and I am doing my small part to help in our fight against climate change for the future of my nephews and step-grandchildren. This is what I know about action and inaction when it comes to the future of our planet.
This all makes perfect sense to anyone capable of thinking logically. The challenge is to convince two particular Senate Democrats who, apparently, are incapable of this way of thinking and/or have ulterior motives.
It seems that someone is listening to you. The Washington Post's climate newsletter "The Climate 202" today has this headline: "As Democrats await CBO score, experts argue it may not account for climate change" According to the newsletter, members of Congress, including so-called centrists, are recognizing the costs of climate change, and legislation has been introduced to require the CBO to consider the costs of climate change in its scoring. A small step, but a step in the right direction.
The cheapest way to grow crops is use artificial fertilizer. Works great for a short time and leaves the land bare of nutrients. Then you move to new land and kill it as well. Eventually all you have is worthless land that is dead, can't grow anything.
The expensive way is the right way and is organic. It improves the land over time. But it takes time and effort. It is not cheap, but it works well. And it can last for a long time.
When making salt they refine it to sodium chloride, they take all the other chemicals out. Those trace chemicals are part of our make up. Sure sodium chloride is part of us but so many other chemicals make up the human body. We need those trace elements to live.
Rice is a staple of human nutrition in its natural form. But we stripe away the nutrients to make it more palatable. White rice is essentially starch which converts to sugar in the mouth. We need the other parts of rice for our nutrition.
In other words we take the sweet and easy and leave the nutrients. It is a diet that will ultimately kill us. But we don't seem to care because it is sweet and easy and costs less for now. Who cares about tomorrow.
The “MIS-information Age”…
Today, our biased media present stories and opinion rather than factually reporting the news. I flip back and forth between the Washington Post and Fox News to read about a particular issue. If you don’t do this I highly recommend it because then you will see why we need to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in journalism. Some media, like Fox News, has become so polarized that even when they report on a topic they often omit pertinent information. These omissions have a very dramatic impact on the readers perception of what is truth and fact. Additionally, allowing a media company to own both print news and on air programming did not used to be allowed. Limiting media to one form of media would help to reduce the amount of sway they have in promoting their biased propaganda.
Social media only enhances the problem with media and individuals amplifying the MIS-information. This is what we need to get a handle on! Correct the erroneous reporting and simply report the truth.