President Joe Biden will tout his economic agenda in remarks Wednesday as he campaigns for a second term amid low polling numbers on his job performance and the direction of the country.
The president’s plan, which the White House dubbed “Bidenomics,” aims to “move beyond” the “trickle down” economic theory that it says disproportionately benefits the wealthy and big corporations through tax cuts while reducing investment in priorities such as infrastructure and education, and failing to protect market competition.
I never wanted Joe Biden to win, but he has completely won me over. He has been an absolute class act. Americans are very fortunate to have a president who has experience with the Cold War right now. I can’t think of any major criticism, besides his age.
The economic policy has been effective, unemployment is low, inflation is under control, working class wages have risen, foreign relations are stronger, the deficit spending has been dropping, and the country feels much less hostile then it did 2-4 years ago.
I seriously was upset he won, but he’s impressed me.
I’m the same. I really wasn’t wanting him to be the Dem nominee, but he’s done so much to win me over. For a bit, I was quite unhappy with him over his resolution of the railroad worker strike since I’m pro-worker, pro-union-action. But that strike was over sick days and now I’m seeing railroads set up their employees with sick days. I don’t know what Biden’s involvement is in any of these resolutions, but it’s given me a good feeling that he’s really aware of the situations he’s approaching.
According to the IBEW, Biden’s involvement was significant.
http://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
how about that policy where no federal land can be used for wind or solar power unless even more land is leased for oil and gas extraction?
Source? I can’t find anything about this requirement.
https://grist.org/energy/inflation-reduction-act-oil-gas-leases-federal-land/
I mean, you picked a great source because that spells out why the administration made that agreement. Oil and gas doesn’t want the land. It is not profitable for them to use and they already leased more than they’ll ever need.
What you’re talking about is politics. The headline says “OIL FIRST!” And it gives the conservatives something to take home to their voters. They can go say “yea, so Biden got the IRA with climate spending, but we got oil first pick baby!!!”
Meanwhile, it’s nothing of substance and the emission reductions as a whole are far more impsctful. It makes no difference because the land leases aren’t going to oil anyway, they don’t want it. The article you link has multiple experts saying that…
I think youre misunderstanding, its not just that the bill requires land be auctioned for oil and gas, but that leasing land for renewable energy is not allowed until more land is auctioned to oil and gas first. That means energy demand will still be met with oil and gas energy, regardless of where its from.
personally I can’t see a single thing to like about biden. Literally everything he’s done is either bad or just not impactful.
He won me being the most Climate Progressive president in history. I did not expect that at all when he was nominated or elected. Is everything a win? Of course not, but he’s racked up more wins on climate than anyone else.
What has biden done for climate? I haven’t heard shit lol. AFAIK walkability is still a problem, rail is basically dead, agriculture is still animal-focused, energy is still not on sane renewables (tidal/geothermal/nuclear), production/consumption is still all time high.
The thing you got to realize is that the executive branch does not have free reign to pass whatever they want. To me, the mark of a good executive is their ability to pass legislation. The Biden administration has done a fantastic job in light of such a polarized political system in the United States. Not everybody is going to want the same things that we want. In order to get things passed, sometimes we have to make compromises.
Furthermore, the Biden administrations passing of the Inflation Reduction Act specifically invested 70+ billion into public transportation (specifically rail), and far more into renewable energy production.
Biden has been able to move the meter to the left while still working with conservatives on certain issues. If you’re looking at it from a progressive standpoint, and you might not think they’re doing as much as they can. But please keep in mind that they also have to represent moderates and conservatives of the democratic branch.
Also, walkability would be state/local issue lol.
I can think of many legislation things that’d get bipartisan support. Biden has done none of them lol. You talk about compromises, but biden has not once compromised to allow some portion of leftist economics or true traditionalist social policy. where is the compromise? I haven’t seen it.
You say biden has poured 70+ billion into rail, yet rail here has had literally no difference. In california we have 2 HSR projects that have been stuck for years now. Biden’s presidency hasn’t changed that at all. Instead we got… more roads which are the opposite of what should be done.
In terms of renewable energy, I don’t see much there either. AFAIK geothermal and tidal aren’t mentioned at all. And biden’s attempt to help renewables pushed moreso coal/oil making things worse off, rather than better.
The opposite, really. Biden has pushed plenty of progressive ideas which I am deeply opposed to. yet has not moved things left at all, but rather more towards the right.
I’d identify myself as conservative, yet biden has failed here too. Just today he’s crying about the supreme court’s decision to block the racist affirmative action policies. If he’s trying to support or compromise with conservatives, his actions here do not make sense. Similarly, Biden and the other democrats in his group have recently pushed here in california to repeal racial equality in order to discriminate against whites/asians. This is boldly progressive, and not even attempting to compromise with conservatives.
I don’t think so. If electric cars, roads/infrastructure, etc. are able to be “federal”, then surely walkability is related to that? if all federal government can do is push harmful legislation, then surely we should just abolish it entirely?
Do you think rail gets built overnight? We won’t see the effects of this funding for a decade or more. Walkability has to do with local zoning laws above all else. The federal government doesn’t have the jurisdiction to force that into law, and it would be detrimental to blanket that across everywhere in the US. Walkability needs to be focused upon in cities, which is already happening.
I think you’re quite biased here and you should really take a step back and look at the facts.
I’m looking at rail infrastructure projects in other countries and they move quite quickly; not “decades”. If you can fund road infrastructure, you can fund walkable infastructure. I don’t think I’m being unreasonable. It’s not like Biden is simply incapable of working with various state governments.
And if the federal government is unable to do anything we actually need, then why does it exist at all?
I don’t think I’d be able to have a productive discussion with you about this subject.
Can you share what you think biden has done that’s good, and why those things are good? If you think I’m being unfair, then perhaps explain why you like Biden?
I’m not an unreasonable person, I’m just not seeing any reason to like biden whatsoever, regardless of the scope of the position he has.