Tag Archives: political economy

Lies of Progressive-Democrats

Posted on by
Reply

Yet more of them, this time centered on jobs for American citizens.

Here’s what Moody’s Analytics said about President Joe Biden’s $2.2 trillion American Jobs Plan Spend-a-Thon to which is attached some bucks for actual infrastructure work:

The firm estimated that the US economy will add roughly 16.3 million jobs between the fourth quarter of 2020 and the fourth quarter of 2030. If Biden’s proposal were to pass, Moody’s Analytics economists estimated that the US economy would add 19 million jobs over the same time period—indicating the proposal would be responsible for about 2.7 million jobs.

Here’s what Biden’s hand-picked Transportation Secretary “Pothole” Pete Buttigieg said.

The American Jobs Plan is about a generational investment. It’s going to create 19 million jobs. And we’re talking about economic growth that’s going to go on for years and years. It’s time for America to lead the way again. And those 19 million jobs we’re about to create go way beyond some quarterly or monthly report.

Twice he lied, in quick succession.

Biden’s White House National Economic Council Director Brian Deese was completely direct in his lie:

Moody’s suggests it would create 19 million jobs[.]

And then Biden personally lied about what Moody’s actually said:

Independent analysis shows that if we pass this plan, the economy will create 19 million jobs….

It makes me wonder whether anyone in this administration is capable of discriminating truth from fiction. Or whether they can, but they don’t care; they’ll just mouth whatever they think they can get away with that will benefit them politically.

We Got What They Asked For

Posted on by
Reply

A letter writer in Sunday’s Wall Street Journal‘s Letters noted that

In the 2020 election, the US Chamber of Commerce backed 23 incumbent House Democrats, 15 of whom won. Six of the 15 won narrowly, by 3.3% or less. Without those six seats, Nancy Pelosi wouldn’t be speaker. The chamber helped hand her the gavel.
The consequences were predictable. House Democrats have passed the PRO Act, ““a labor-rights bill that would roll back many of the policies the chamber has supported for decades” (U.S. News, March 13). Without any Republican support, House Democrats passed HR1, the misnamed For the People Act, which the chamber “strongly opposes.”

The letter writer listed many of the upcoming Progressive-Democrat-run House plans, too.

He identified another organization he generously said was “duped.”

…Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden, whose leaders “feel used and betrayed” because the Covid relief package excluded the Hyde Amendment, which prevents taxpayer funding of abortions.

He concluded with

These two organizations duped themselves and sabotaged their own cause.

To which I say my heart bleeds.

It’s hard to believe that as erudite a collection of personnel as those running the US Chamber of Commerce and Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden didn’t know what they were getting when they supported those Progressive-Democrats. Of course, as responsible leaders of large organizations, they carefully vetted each of those candidates and their opponents. They knew what they were asking for.

They got it, good and hard.

And, sadly, so did the rest of us get those worthies’ choices good and hard.

Infrastructure Biden-Style

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what his latest tax-and-spend multi-trillion dollar bill that he’s masquerading as an infrastructure bill is—a misleading mess of profligacy. Here’s some of what’s in it besides actual infrastructure monies.

  • $174 billion for electric vehicles
  • $400 billion on home-based care for the elderly and disabled
  • $25 billion on child care facilities
  • $50 billion on “research infrastructure” at the National Science Foundation
  • $213 billion for home sustainability and public housing
  • $35 billion+ for climate change R&D
  • $50 billion to create a new office at the Department of Commerce to “dedicated to monitoring domestic industrial capacity and funding investments to support production of critical goods”
  • $30 billion to prepare for future pandemics
  • $45 billion so the Feds can buy “clean energy goods”
  • $14 billion “to bring together industry, academia, and government to advance technologies and capabilities critical to future competitiveness”

That’s more than $1 trillion out of Biden’s $2 trillion demand for his bill. Many of these things might actually be worthy projects—depending on pesky details—but they have no place in a real, legitimate infrastructure program.

And there’s this non sequitur that has no immediate cost, but it will reduce take-home pay of non-union members to no useful purpose and greatly limit our economy and drive up prices through greatly increased union costs:

[T]he PRO Act, which would essentially override right-to-work laws in states across the country, allowing unions to extract dues from workers who do not want to be members.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R, KY):

It’s like a Trojan horse. Its called infrastructure, but inside the Trojan horse it’s going to be more borrowed money, and massive tax increases on all the productive parts of our economy.

Indeed. Dollars—trillions of dollars—out of our economy immediately and trillions more for the foreseeable future.

Gross Misunderstanding

Posted on by
Reply

And a key distinction between what the Left and their Progressive-Democratic Party want and what Conservatives and, to an extent, the Republican Party want. President Joe Biden (D) fronts for this…position…and his Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen made it explicit last Tuesday in front of the House Financial Services Committee:

We’ve had a global race to the bottom in corporate taxation and we hope to put an end to that.

The fact—I claim—is that the race to the bottom is a National Good, not a National Bad. Our Constitution specifies only three things our Federal Government is allowed to spend money on: to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States. The general Welfare is further specified by the remaining clauses of that Article I, Section 8.

The only legitimate purpose for taxing is to raise revenue for those three narrowly specified items.

Above that low floor (or it would be low were we not living in a dangerous world with many enemies for whom the vasty oceans no longer represent serious barriers and were it not for out Government having been so profligate with spending for so many decades), the more money left in the hands of We the People in our private economy for our spending decisions, the better.

So, yes—a race to the bottom is good for our nation, the prattle of the Yellons and the Bidens and the Party notwithstanding.

One Party Reign

Posted on by
Reply

Congressman Don Beyer (D, VA), Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, has this on working with Republicans to do things (assuming “things” need doing, which isn’t always the case, especially by Government):

I would personally prefer that it [President Joe Biden’s multi-trillion dollar “infrastructure” plan] was fully paid for but I’m not going to insist on it. If we can get it half paid for, that’s a huge step forward….

Debt profusion doesn’t matter. It’s only money.

Working with Republicans on actual infrastructure? Here’s Beyer again:

[W]e’re not going to not do it because they won’t come along. … But at the end of the day, if they’re going to say no, then we will proceed with the reconciliation.

Come along. Either do things our way, quietly, or we’ll simply ignore you. That’s the Progressive-Democrat view of unity.

And it’s not just on infrastructure. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY) is pushing for robo-reconciliation. Here’s the current rule [emphasis added]:

Under the 1974 Budget Act, Congress once each fiscal year can pass via simple majority vote a budget resolution for federal revenue and outlays.

And

Mr Schumer’s office is telling the Senate parliamentarian he wants more. His claim rests on Section 304 of the Budget Act, which allows for “a concurrent resolution on the budget which revises or reaffirms the concurrent resolution on the budget for such fiscal year most recently agreed to.” In English, Mr Schumer says he should be able to pass more bills with a mere 51 votes as “revisions” to underlying budget resolutions.

No need to talk to Republicans at all on money matters. They’re obstructionist tightwads, anyway. Again, it’s only money. Especially since it’s OPM.

Progressive-Democrats aren’t interested in bipartisanship.