I think a butchered version will pass, as greed, sadly again, prevails. One agonzing step forward is a step forward. I mentioned below words of Ruth Bader Ginsburg - “Real change, enduring change, happens one step at a time.” Mankind is soooo slow to evolve. Thank you, Robert, for encouraging, not giving up, on the 'baby' steps. We are finally making a turn in a better direction. And we can't stop now.
Regarding Sinema's accommodating large corporate donors, I received an email yesterday from Ryan Grim of the Intercept reporting that, in the third quarter of this year, Sinema took in $1.1 million in campaign donations, 90% of it from out of state, and much from large corporate donors. Mark Kelly, Arizona's other Democratic Senator, who fully supports the Biden agenda, raised $8.2 million in the same period. In the third quarter of 2018, when Arizonans thought Sinema would be a champion of the little guy, she raised almost $7 million. Turns out her "independence" does not even maximize campaign contributions.
We appear to be outvoted, with essentially 50 right wing Republicans and two moderate Republicans (Manchin and Sinema). But we have a Democratic President who can veto any budget and send it back. The purpose of the military is to protect our national security. Surely climate change is by far the greatest threat to our national security: sea level rise will take out most of our coastal cites, droughts and floods crash agricultural yields, hurricanes, wildfires, and heat waves threaten lives and property. China and Russia, our so-called "adversaries", could never manage that. Yet the military does not spend even one penny to protect us against climate change. We need a new set of priorities for the military. Suppose the President vetoes any 80 B defense budget that does not include at least 60 B for reducing the threat of climate change. After much haggling and negotiation, negotiate to 40 B for climate change, together with all the social justice programs that are now in the reconciliation package. Why not? If climate change is an existential crisis, as President Biden keeps repeating to the press, then why not treat it like an existential crisis?
Without addressing the climate issue, we can just ignore the rest of it. The planet will not survive if something isn’t done immediately.
The dems are hurting themselves and the country with all the infighting while the GOP are licking their lips. Sinema and Manchin should be ashamed and held accountable for the pending losses in the midterms and governors races.
You said it: the whole situation is truly “NUTS”. What frustrates me is that the Republicans have been following a deliberate plan for decades to dominate local politics (school boards), gerrymander after every census, install conservative judges following the desires of their Federalist Society, and shake voters confidence in elections!!! Democrats win power and then weakly try to push their agenda with little success (like now). They're completely crippled, out flanked. I want Biden and Democrats to GET MAD. Stop being nice. I’m worried that our country as we know it is almost over.
(Pancha Chandra): American citizens, you have important decisions to make! The most important decision is to support an ethical 46th President & disavow any allegiance to a crooked manipulator in Donald Trump who orchestrated the Capitol insurrection of January 6th. Joe Biden & Kamala Harris are determined to restore America's ethical leadership of the free world; support them to the hilt!
Citizen’s United is the major antagonist here. If we don’t reverse it, if we don’t create public funding for elections similar to the Swiss system, if we don’t eliminate the Senate and go to a multi party system, well then the government will always be easy to purchase by the wealthy. This is the problem with a federal republic type of democracy. There are only a handful of people at the top, and as we have seen with Manchin and Sinema, all the wealthy have to purchase is one or two legislators to jam the entire system. I have been politically active for fifty years, and hard as I’ve tried to do the right thing, I’ve watched our environmental situation deteriorate to the tipping point due to greed. Profits are our God, and the devil to anyone who gets in the way. Positive as I usually am, I don’t see a good outcome to this dilemma.
Professor, you're certainly correct on the numbers, but we all know that $350 billion/year won't break the bank. What's important - and not emphasized sufficiently by Congressional Democrats or even the White House - are the programs that would be covered or begun by the social infrastructure bill.
Now I read that many people are upset that funds for free community college may be cut from the bill, and that they're apparently blaming that on Biden not pushing hard enough! So his attempt to negotiate as much as he can by cutting the extent of the social infrastructure bill is now being used to attack him as a weak and ineffective President. I find that to be outrageous.
If that crew in the White House and on the Hill would just sign the physical infrastructure bill as-is and, since it's already been approved by the Senate, send it to Biden's desk for what should be Biden's use of the traditional hoopla that generally accompanies the signing by the President of any major legislation, then Biden's sinking poll numbers would start to turn around. That desperately-needed legislation would get people to work fixing roads, bridges, the electrical grid and so much more that will directly affect Americans across the country. It's long past time to show progress on something important.
Dr Reich, the people in America who elect our most influential leaders really need to hear and understand the information and perspectives that you provide, but I don't think the message is getting through -- at least not to the most important audience. One reason, I think, is that the language of macroeconomics just doesn't resonate with many people like blue-collar workers who might not be college educated. To give you a sense of their perceptions, re-read your article but replace every work that ends in "illion" with "gazillion". People have no intuitive, gut-level sense of what such mind-boggling numbers mean, and they don't see the economy from the high-level, 30,000-ft macroeconomic perspective that you provide. But read the article again with every dollar figure divided by 330 million and append with "per-capita". Or divide by 130 million and append "per-household". Now you've got their attention. I think one of the most important things that you and other progressive policy leaders can do to get your message across is to translate it from the language of macroeconomics to "Home Economics". Put it in the context of the median U.S. household income of $80,000 (plus unpaid earnings of about $50,000 that are paid to someone else as "unearned income"). How much of an average household's earnings goes to federal taxes and what is its share of national debt and annual deficit? Where does that taxed and borrowed money go, not from the perspective of the federal budget but in the context of the personal household budget? What was the median household's tax benefit from the Trump Republican tax cut and what was its share of national debt taken on to finance the cut? I think we might begin to see real political change in a progressive direction ("progress") when ordinary people have an intuitive and personal understanding of the federal budget as an extension of their household budget -- which it is in a very real sense, not just figuratively. For example, the $60,000-per household we'll be spending on the military over the next 10 years will literally be paid for, one way or another, by American workers. So my advice and request of you and other progressive policy leaders is, please, DIVIDE BY 330,000,000!
Exactly! There are zero legitimate excuses for not getting this done for the United States of America. The blatant party before people BS has go to stop.
The environment is the issue. Everything else is dependent on having a sustainable planet to live on. One big problem is that the US Constitution is 200 years old, was a quick fix to keep the colonies together under the threat of European takeover, and to raise money, and to pay the war debt. It was never meant to be a permanent and final document and does not meet the current needs. Unfortunately, at this time and in this politicized political environment, it would be extremely difficult to open it for revision.
***Joe Biden, [when talking about his excellent Mass traction Economic agenda],
often says the following:
“That's why I resolved that we have to, once again, build America from the bottom up and the middle out.
I've never seen a time in American history when the middle class did well and the wealthy didn't do very well. But I'm tired of trickle-down. Trickle-down doesn't - hasn't worked so much.”
Our infrastructure used to be the best in the world. Not hyperbole - the best in the world. Today, according to the World Economic Forum, we rank 13th in the world. Twelve other nations have superior infrastructure to us, and China has trains that go 230 miles an hour for long distances. And we got money to do that back in the administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden, and you had a Republican governor who didn't want it - didn't want any parts of it. And we used to lead the world in educational achievement. Now, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ranks America 35 out of 37 major countries when it comes to investing in early childhood education and care. Thirty-five out of thirty-seven
We cannot be competitive in the 21st century global economy if we continue to slide.
>My wife, who's a community college professor, says, "Any nation that out-educates us will
out-compete us." I'll say it again: "Any nation that out-educates us will out compete us." And that's a fact.
Putting money in the pockets of Military Companies comes before helping American Citizens! This money goes for bombing civilians and the poorest people around the world! Cut Military Spending by 90% and have peace! Quit being terrorists to the world! Spend that money on America, not for bombs and weapons that will just create more people to hate Americans for killing their people!
I think a butchered version will pass, as greed, sadly again, prevails. One agonzing step forward is a step forward. I mentioned below words of Ruth Bader Ginsburg - “Real change, enduring change, happens one step at a time.” Mankind is soooo slow to evolve. Thank you, Robert, for encouraging, not giving up, on the 'baby' steps. We are finally making a turn in a better direction. And we can't stop now.
(Pancha Chandra): Every ethical human being should heed Joe Biden's earnest desire to have a sustainable planet.
Agree.
Regarding Sinema's accommodating large corporate donors, I received an email yesterday from Ryan Grim of the Intercept reporting that, in the third quarter of this year, Sinema took in $1.1 million in campaign donations, 90% of it from out of state, and much from large corporate donors. Mark Kelly, Arizona's other Democratic Senator, who fully supports the Biden agenda, raised $8.2 million in the same period. In the third quarter of 2018, when Arizonans thought Sinema would be a champion of the little guy, she raised almost $7 million. Turns out her "independence" does not even maximize campaign contributions.
We appear to be outvoted, with essentially 50 right wing Republicans and two moderate Republicans (Manchin and Sinema). But we have a Democratic President who can veto any budget and send it back. The purpose of the military is to protect our national security. Surely climate change is by far the greatest threat to our national security: sea level rise will take out most of our coastal cites, droughts and floods crash agricultural yields, hurricanes, wildfires, and heat waves threaten lives and property. China and Russia, our so-called "adversaries", could never manage that. Yet the military does not spend even one penny to protect us against climate change. We need a new set of priorities for the military. Suppose the President vetoes any 80 B defense budget that does not include at least 60 B for reducing the threat of climate change. After much haggling and negotiation, negotiate to 40 B for climate change, together with all the social justice programs that are now in the reconciliation package. Why not? If climate change is an existential crisis, as President Biden keeps repeating to the press, then why not treat it like an existential crisis?
Without addressing the climate issue, we can just ignore the rest of it. The planet will not survive if something isn’t done immediately.
The dems are hurting themselves and the country with all the infighting while the GOP are licking their lips. Sinema and Manchin should be ashamed and held accountable for the pending losses in the midterms and governors races.
My mantra but no one believes it, "America is the richest country in the world. We can afford..."
You said it: the whole situation is truly “NUTS”. What frustrates me is that the Republicans have been following a deliberate plan for decades to dominate local politics (school boards), gerrymander after every census, install conservative judges following the desires of their Federalist Society, and shake voters confidence in elections!!! Democrats win power and then weakly try to push their agenda with little success (like now). They're completely crippled, out flanked. I want Biden and Democrats to GET MAD. Stop being nice. I’m worried that our country as we know it is almost over.
(Pancha Chandra): American citizens, you have important decisions to make! The most important decision is to support an ethical 46th President & disavow any allegiance to a crooked manipulator in Donald Trump who orchestrated the Capitol insurrection of January 6th. Joe Biden & Kamala Harris are determined to restore America's ethical leadership of the free world; support them to the hilt!
Citizen’s United is the major antagonist here. If we don’t reverse it, if we don’t create public funding for elections similar to the Swiss system, if we don’t eliminate the Senate and go to a multi party system, well then the government will always be easy to purchase by the wealthy. This is the problem with a federal republic type of democracy. There are only a handful of people at the top, and as we have seen with Manchin and Sinema, all the wealthy have to purchase is one or two legislators to jam the entire system. I have been politically active for fifty years, and hard as I’ve tried to do the right thing, I’ve watched our environmental situation deteriorate to the tipping point due to greed. Profits are our God, and the devil to anyone who gets in the way. Positive as I usually am, I don’t see a good outcome to this dilemma.
Put all the climate legislation in the Defense budget.
Professor, you're certainly correct on the numbers, but we all know that $350 billion/year won't break the bank. What's important - and not emphasized sufficiently by Congressional Democrats or even the White House - are the programs that would be covered or begun by the social infrastructure bill.
Now I read that many people are upset that funds for free community college may be cut from the bill, and that they're apparently blaming that on Biden not pushing hard enough! So his attempt to negotiate as much as he can by cutting the extent of the social infrastructure bill is now being used to attack him as a weak and ineffective President. I find that to be outrageous.
If that crew in the White House and on the Hill would just sign the physical infrastructure bill as-is and, since it's already been approved by the Senate, send it to Biden's desk for what should be Biden's use of the traditional hoopla that generally accompanies the signing by the President of any major legislation, then Biden's sinking poll numbers would start to turn around. That desperately-needed legislation would get people to work fixing roads, bridges, the electrical grid and so much more that will directly affect Americans across the country. It's long past time to show progress on something important.
Dr Reich, the people in America who elect our most influential leaders really need to hear and understand the information and perspectives that you provide, but I don't think the message is getting through -- at least not to the most important audience. One reason, I think, is that the language of macroeconomics just doesn't resonate with many people like blue-collar workers who might not be college educated. To give you a sense of their perceptions, re-read your article but replace every work that ends in "illion" with "gazillion". People have no intuitive, gut-level sense of what such mind-boggling numbers mean, and they don't see the economy from the high-level, 30,000-ft macroeconomic perspective that you provide. But read the article again with every dollar figure divided by 330 million and append with "per-capita". Or divide by 130 million and append "per-household". Now you've got their attention. I think one of the most important things that you and other progressive policy leaders can do to get your message across is to translate it from the language of macroeconomics to "Home Economics". Put it in the context of the median U.S. household income of $80,000 (plus unpaid earnings of about $50,000 that are paid to someone else as "unearned income"). How much of an average household's earnings goes to federal taxes and what is its share of national debt and annual deficit? Where does that taxed and borrowed money go, not from the perspective of the federal budget but in the context of the personal household budget? What was the median household's tax benefit from the Trump Republican tax cut and what was its share of national debt taken on to finance the cut? I think we might begin to see real political change in a progressive direction ("progress") when ordinary people have an intuitive and personal understanding of the federal budget as an extension of their household budget -- which it is in a very real sense, not just figuratively. For example, the $60,000-per household we'll be spending on the military over the next 10 years will literally be paid for, one way or another, by American workers. So my advice and request of you and other progressive policy leaders is, please, DIVIDE BY 330,000,000!
Exactly! There are zero legitimate excuses for not getting this done for the United States of America. The blatant party before people BS has go to stop.
The environment is the issue. Everything else is dependent on having a sustainable planet to live on. One big problem is that the US Constitution is 200 years old, was a quick fix to keep the colonies together under the threat of European takeover, and to raise money, and to pay the war debt. It was never meant to be a permanent and final document and does not meet the current needs. Unfortunately, at this time and in this politicized political environment, it would be extremely difficult to open it for revision.
***Joe Biden, [when talking about his excellent Mass traction Economic agenda],
often says the following:
“That's why I resolved that we have to, once again, build America from the bottom up and the middle out.
I've never seen a time in American history when the middle class did well and the wealthy didn't do very well. But I'm tired of trickle-down. Trickle-down doesn't - hasn't worked so much.”
Our infrastructure used to be the best in the world. Not hyperbole - the best in the world. Today, according to the World Economic Forum, we rank 13th in the world. Twelve other nations have superior infrastructure to us, and China has trains that go 230 miles an hour for long distances. And we got money to do that back in the administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden, and you had a Republican governor who didn't want it - didn't want any parts of it. And we used to lead the world in educational achievement. Now, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ranks America 35 out of 37 major countries when it comes to investing in early childhood education and care. Thirty-five out of thirty-seven
We cannot be competitive in the 21st century global economy if we continue to slide.
>My wife, who's a community college professor, says, "Any nation that out-educates us will
out-compete us." I'll say it again: "Any nation that out-educates us will out compete us." And that's a fact.
Putting money in the pockets of Military Companies comes before helping American Citizens! This money goes for bombing civilians and the poorest people around the world! Cut Military Spending by 90% and have peace! Quit being terrorists to the world! Spend that money on America, not for bombs and weapons that will just create more people to hate Americans for killing their people!