Biden infrastructure/tax increase megathread

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Thank you Mr. Bezos!
https://twitter.com/msnbc/status/1379555275049463816?s=21

It’s not like Amazon would be paying it anyways

[Lief 🗽]

Seems like the inevitable compromise will be raising the cap to $50k or something and calling it a day.

[Matty]

Good. I never did get why so many dems are so obsessed with restoring it.

It is a clear benefit for the wealthy.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Manchin didn't want to give 3oo more in Unemployment benefits, this is probably his negotiating tool so that when the stimulus comes back up again, the money should be given more to people without Unemployment than to people that are on Unemployment.

The Unemployment rate is going down, there isn't anymore need for 300 more per week

As for the Corporate tax cut, 25 is better than 20, Biden should take it

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Good. I never did get why so many dems are so obsessed with restoring it.

It is a clear benefit for the wealthy.

Trump Derangement Syndrome. Same with schools.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Thank you Mr. Bezos!
https://twitter.com/msnbc/status/1379555275049463816?s=21

It’s not like Amazon would be paying it anyways

Ding ding ding!

[Ferguson97]

GOP is truly awful at messaging lmao

https://twitter.com/MarshaBlackburn/status/1379883470491680775

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-softens-tax-proposal-aimed-at-profitable-companies-that-pay-little-11617809422
Biden Softens Tax Plan Aimed at Profitable Companies That Pay Little
Treasury Department plan sets $2 billion threshold for minimum tax, up from $100 million level pitched during campaign

President Biden’s proposed 15% minimum tax on profitable corporations would affect far fewer companies than the version he campaigned on, according to details the Treasury Department released Wednesday.

The tax—aimed at companies that report large profits to investors but low tax payments—would apply only to companies with income exceeding $2 billion, up from the $100 million threshold used during the campaign. The Biden plan would now also let companies subject to the tax get the benefit for tax credits for research, renewable energy and low-income housing—in a recognition that the campaign-trail version could have undercut the president’s preference to encourage companies to invest in those areas.

The result is that just 180 companies would even meet the income threshold and just 45 would pay the tax, according to administration estimates that assume the rest of the administration’s plan gets implemented. Nearly 1,100 U.S.-listed companies would meet the $100 million threshold, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence. Many of them would still face sharply higher tax bills from the rest of the Biden agenda, which raises rates on domestic and foreign income.

The 15% minimum tax “is a targeted approach to ensure that the most aggressive tax avoiders are forced to bear meaningful tax liabilities,” the Treasury Department said in a new report.

Good!

The administration’s overall plan includes raising the corporate tax rate to 28% from 21%, changing several key features of the 2017 tax law and rallying the world for minimum tax rates on corporate income. The Biden administration’s weaker version of the 15% minimum tax on financial-statement income suggests that this particular idea—a frequent applause line in political speeches but fraught with technical difficulties—is taking a back seat as policy is being written.

Meh.

The administration also wants to impose a 21% minimum tax on U.S. companies’ foreign income and get other countries to do the same. To prod other nations to adopt such taxes, the new plan includes tough limits on deductions for foreign-headquartered companies from countries that don’t adopt them.

Finance ministers from the Group of 20 leading economies, meeting virtually on Wednesday, said they hope to agree on a minimum tax rate for corporate profits by the middle of this year as part of a wider overhaul of the way international businesses are taxed.

That's the best part!

The report https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/MadeInAmericaTaxPlan_Report.pdf

[Red Velvet]

I know you people hate him, rightfully so, but I will forever be thankful to Trump for ending the love for Reaganomics and minimum government enthusiasts neverending race to how much nonexistent government should be. I regard him in a significantly higher position than Bush.

From Democrats in the Obama era competing on who could be the most right-wing for the sake of compromise 10 years ago to Trump, a Republican president, pushing all these people way to the left after saying stuff like $600 checks being insufficient lmao

I approve the Keynesian shift! But it needs to be even more. So far Biden has been above average of what I expected. Already showing signs he will be significantly better than Obama at least. Naturally it isn’t something that Biden always wanted, the current context with COVID, political polarization, high economic anxiety and all that is something that pushes people to those positions, kinda like the context of post-1929 and pre-WW2 pushed FDR to be the leader he was.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

I know you people hate him, rightfully so, but I will forever be thankful to Trump for ending the love for Reaganomics and minimum government enthusiasts neverending race to how much nonexistent government should be. I regard him in a significantly higher position than Bush.

From Democrats in the Obama era competing on who could be the most right-wing for the sake of compromise 10 years ago to Trump, a Republican president, pushing all these people way to the left after saying stuff like $600 checks being insufficient lmao

I approve the Keynesian shift! But it needs to be even more. So far Biden has been above average of what I expected. Already showing signs he will be significantly better than Obama at least. Naturally it isn’t something that Biden always wanted, the current context with COVID, political polarization, high economic anxiety and all that is something that pushes people to those positions, kinda like the context of post-1929 and pre-WW2 pushed FDR to be the leader he was.

The most ironical part about Trump is that he'd likely to be even more Economically Populist, if not Dems & "free" media started this ridiculous Russia Hoax, basically making Trump a hostage of Cocaine Mitch. Boy, I wanted to see Trump, the Unchained so badly. SAD!

[Beet]

I know you people hate him, rightfully so, but I will forever be thankful to Trump for ending the love for Reaganomics and minimum government enthusiasts neverending race to how much nonexistent government should be. I regard him in a significantly higher position than Bush.

From Democrats in the Obama era competing on who could be the most right-wing for the sake of compromise 10 years ago to Trump, a Republican president, pushing all these people way to the left after saying stuff like $600 checks being insufficient lmao

I approve the Keynesian shift! But it needs to be even more. So far Biden has been above average of what I expected. Already showing signs he will be significantly better than Obama at least. Naturally it isn’t something that Biden always wanted, the current context with COVID, political polarization, high economic anxiety and all that is something that pushes people to those positions, kinda like the context of post-1929 and pre-WW2 pushed FDR to be the leader he was.

Trump didn't end it. The US left was already moving that way before. Going all the way back to 2011 when OWS started. Biden is actually a disappointment compared to what you saw during the primaries in 2019-2020.

Also you're really underrating how economically populist Bush was. Remember he passed Medicare Part D which is a permanent expansion of Medicare unlike Trump's stimulus which was temporary. And the CARES Act being temporary as well. Bush expanded government more than both of them.

[Frodo]

The International Monetary Fund, which critics have long viewed as neoliberalism encapsulated in a single organization, has come out in favor of Biden's higher taxes on corporations and the wealthy to fund the infrastructure investment package before Congress:

IMF backs new taxes on corporations and the wealthy, furthering organization's historic shift

For those of us who remember the 1999 anti-globalization protests in Seattle, this is noteworthy.  

[MillennialModerate]

I’ve looked at this lab further and it’s really a major major disappointment.

A true major infrastructure bill would not only garner overwhelming support but would put more tangible evidence of this administration and congress getting things done

The bill needs to focus on simply: a faster safer power grid, rural broadband, nationwide 5G, new water lines, some highway improvements, new sage & symbolic bridges, improved airports and as much as $450B in rail expansion.

The plan out there comes woefully short of the mark

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I’ve looked at this lab further and it’s really a major major disappointment.

A true major infrastructure bill would not only garner overwhelming support but would put more tangible evidence of this administration and congress getting things done

The bill needs to focus on simply: a faster safer power grid, rural broadband, nationwide 5G, new water lines, some highway improvements, new sage & symbolic bridges, improved airports and as much as $450B in rail expansion.

The plan out there comes woefully short of the mark

Rail?  The freight rail system is largely fine and does not need government subsidy. Passenger rail is largely a pipedream. HSR suffers from the problem that in most places where there is sufficient density to make it potentially operationally viable once built, the construction costs are staggering.

[Sir Mohamed]

GOPers are making a fool of themselves by opposing it. They claim to support new infrastructure, but neither want deficit spending (which they didn't care for under Trump) nor a modest tax increase & close loopholes. Yet another proof this isn't a serious political force but just an obscure Trump cult that more cares about promoting crap conspiracies Fox "News" Sunday shows than actually delivering for the American people, including their own voters.

[Badger]

I know you people hate him, rightfully so, but I will forever be thankful to Trump for ending the love for Reaganomics and minimum government enthusiasts neverending race to how much nonexistent government should be. I regard him in a significantly higher position than Bush.

From Democrats in the Obama era competing on who could be the most right-wing for the sake of compromise 10 years ago to Trump, a Republican president, pushing all these people way to the left after saying stuff like $600 checks being insufficient lmao

I approve the Keynesian shift! But it needs to be even more. So far Biden has been above average of what I expected. Already showing signs he will be significantly better than Obama at least. Naturally it isn’t something that Biden always wanted, the current context with COVID, political polarization, high economic anxiety and all that is something that pushes people to those positions, kinda like the context of post-1929 and pre-WW2 pushed FDR to be the leader he was.

Considering Trump's one so-called legislative achievement was to pass yet another tax cut for the wealthy and corporations, Plus his administration aggressively used every mechanism Within the executive powers authority to dilute and weak and enforcement of environmental, safety, Etc regulations, I'm not sure if or how he weakened reaganism.

At best, he didn't make it a Cornerstone of his presidency by parroting populist themes about will still protect you by making Obamacare better, we'll keep all those nasty Imports and immigrants from coming into the country, and otherwise running and governing on a cult of personality basis. But at least in practice, he was a Foursquare reaganite.

[MillennialModerate]

I’ve looked at this lab further and it’s really a major major disappointment.

A true major infrastructure bill would not only garner overwhelming support but would put more tangible evidence of this administration and congress getting things done

The bill needs to focus on simply: a faster safer power grid, rural broadband, nationwide 5G, new water lines, some highway improvements, new sage & symbolic bridges, improved airports and as much as $450B in rail expansion.

The plan out there comes woefully short of the mark

Rail?  The freight rail system is largely fine and does not need government subsidy. Passenger rail is largely a pipedream. HSR suffers from the problem that in most places where there is sufficient density to make it potentially operationally viable once built, the construction costs are staggering.

The construction costs are staggering but that’s a problem with contractors ripping the government off. So because of that we are supposed to just say “Nah won’t work”? This is the United States - at one point and time we were the DO’ers who got things done. But now investment that is needed is a pipe dream?

The whole reason air travel took over rail travel for domestic trips was because it wasn’t just faster but was light years faster. And for long haul flights that’s still the case. But for short distances flights HSR has technology now to compare to flying - especially when you factor in travel to an airport, check in, security and the whole process. Not to mention the price difference.

High Speed Rail creates many construction jobs in the short term and in the long term improves connectivity between cities and economies - and spurs a ton of growth in smaller secondary cities.

There are 3 or 4 corridors in the US that would be absolute cash cows if built. And it is possible if we got our act together as a nation (that goes for our power grid, broadband, water, bridges, hospitals and schools as well). China has built a MASSIVE HSR network in 12 years. TWELVE YEARS. By massive I mean massive. Lines that travel up to 250mph.

WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID....

When I was talking about rail I was focusing centrally on local mass transit. Take Los Angeles for instance. The reason why driving is still the preferred commuting method over rail (like it is in NY) is because their network is half ass. Too many grade crossings, lines that don’t connect well - on and on.
The current Sepulveda pass which is in the planning stages is a perfect example of why investment is needed. That project would literally turn a corridor that has such stifling traffic it’s amongst the worst in the WORLD and easily the worst in North America. If that line is built properly in an instant you’ll have a single line with more riders in a day than every other ENTIRE network in the US other than NY. That’s hundreds of thousands of riders PER DAY and hundreds of thousands of cars off the route with the worst traffic on the continent. Currently the proposed cost of the project is beyond what the local transportation taxing measure will pay for, so because of that LA METRO is working with two private companies for a public private partnership. One is a tradition heavy rail subway that would be done right. But the other potential PPP proposes doing a monorail - a technology out of date, out of sync with the rest of LA’s system. In its mono rail proposal most of the stations are planned to be BESIDE the freeway - people want to take rail mass transit because it brings them directly to their destination not to be taken to a parking lot next to the free way! and worst of all it’s plans don’t even include a stop at the cooridors biggest ridership driver (UCLA). So what’s my point? If this Biden infrastructure bill allotted $8 Billion to this project (the gap between the $5B set aside for it & the $13b estimated cost) you could have a project that would do wonders for the entire Los Angeles region.

There are also two other projects in LA that would bring in ENORMOUS ridership and likely turn the preferred method of commuting to rail - one which has a $4B funding gap (Crenshaw North) and the other which is ENTIRELY not funded (Vermont Ave Red Line extension, cost $10B). $22B that would change that region FOREVER.

Then you New York City. The flagship city of this nation who has a large and extensive rail network but one that is in hideous shape. You have cities like London, Paris and virtually all major Asian cities with huge networks where every station is at minimum modern and clean. The city needs an estimated 8 billion to modernize every single station on the network. There are also areas of expansion that are badly needed. The Second Avenue Subway or lack of it has created log jams on the rail networks, in the cab network and on the roads. It’s a project proposed for 3 quarters of a century before a portion of it (3 stations) were completed in 2017. The project should be completed. There’s the proposed Utica Avenue Subway which is needed because there is a large swath of Southeast Brooklyn with no mass transit (this isn’t Boise, this is BROOKLYN). Then there’s the fact that NYC’s second airport has no rail connection to it... imagine how much that would change traveling. There’s the outter borough proposal that would take enormous strain off of the system. States Island has needed a rail connection for a century. Then there’s the needed improvements for connection to NJ.

Austin is the fastest growing city in the US. It just recently passed a measure to build a rail network. But from the looks of it - it’ll need more funding. Dallas has a light rail network but it’s central line that runs through downtown is at grade and isn’t grade separated - a proposal to put that line under ground and build a second downtown subway would likely make use of DART significantly more popular due to its added efficiency. Boston is one of the most mass transit dependent cities in the nation and  has a few projects that would have major impact: the North South Rail link that would connect its Northern commuter rail lines and its Southern Commuter Rail lines - allowing for a state wide network of passenger  electric rail and potentially open up potential for a subway traveling through the greenway and potentially into the under served seaport - there is the Blue extension which would give direct airport access to close to the entire North Shore and would take away congestion on Route 1A.

I could go on and on and on and on. Rail might seem like a pipe dream to those not living in transit dependent cities but it can do wonders for a region if executed properly and with all this money being thrown around - to tell me these badly needed projects can’t be paid for is a joke.

The issue of construction costs is something the government needs to crack down on. Or simply attach provisions for cost overruns into projects.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

GOPers are making a fool of themselves by opposing it. They claim to support new infrastructure, but neither want deficit spending (which they didn't care for under Trump) nor a modest tax increase & close loopholes. Yet another proof this isn't a serious political force but just an obscure Trump cult that more cares about promoting crap conspiracies Fox "News" Sunday shows than actually delivering for the American people, including their own voters.

The Randian wing of the Republican party, which dominates the Republican caucus hates infrastructure spending. Paul Ryan and Cocaine Mitch shot down Trump's infrastructure plans.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Rs say that if Biden scales it back they would definitely vote for it


But, where are the Green Jobs, the infrastructure plan is a redux of Obama 2014 Speed Rail plan that was shelved


1T is enough to spend, we still got other priorities in Appropriations bills and Stimulus to shelve out, we are not out of Covid

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I’ve looked at this lab further and it’s really a major major disappointment.

A true major infrastructure bill would not only garner overwhelming support but would put more tangible evidence of this administration and congress getting things done

The bill needs to focus on simply: a faster safer power grid, rural broadband, nationwide 5G, new water lines, some highway improvements, new sage & symbolic bridges, improved airports and as much as $450B in rail expansion.

The plan out there comes woefully short of the mark

Rail?  The freight rail system is largely fine and does not need government subsidy. Passenger rail is largely a pipedream. HSR suffers from the problem that in most places where there is sufficient density to make it potentially operationally viable once built, the construction costs are staggering.

The construction costs are staggering but that’s a problem with contractors ripping the government off. So because of that we are supposed to just say “Nah won’t work”? This is the United States - at one point and time we were the DO’ers who got things done. But now investment that is needed is a pipe dream?

The whole reason air travel took over rail travel for domestic trips was because it wasn’t just faster but was light years faster. And for long haul flights that’s still the case. But for short distances flights HSR has technology now to compare to flying - especially when you factor in travel to an airport, check in, security and the whole process. Not to mention the price difference.

High Speed Rail creates many construction jobs in the short term and in the long term improves connectivity between cities and economies - and spurs a ton of growth in smaller secondary cities.

There are 3 or 4 corridors in the US that would be absolute cash cows if built. And it is possible if we got our act together as a nation (that goes for our power grid, broadband, water, bridges, hospitals and schools as well). China has built a MASSIVE HSR network in 12 years. TWELVE YEARS. By massive I mean massive. Lines that travel up to 250mph.

WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID....

When I was talking about rail I was focusing centrally on local mass transit. Take Los Angeles for instance. The reason why driving is still the preferred commuting method over rail (like it is in NY) is because their network is half ass. Too many grade crossings, lines that don’t connect well - on and on.
The current Sepulveda pass which is in the planning stages is a perfect example of why investment is needed. That project would literally turn a corridor that has such stifling traffic it’s amongst the worst in the WORLD and easily the worst in North America. If that line is built properly in an instant you’ll have a single line with more riders in a day than every other ENTIRE network in the US other than NY. That’s hundreds of thousands of riders PER DAY and hundreds of thousands of cars off the route with the worst traffic on the continent. Currently the proposed cost of the project is beyond what the local transportation taxing measure will pay for, so because of that LA METRO is working with two private companies for a public private partnership. One is a tradition heavy rail subway that would be done right. But the other potential PPP proposes doing a monorail - a technology out of date, out of sync with the rest of LA’s system. In its mono rail proposal most of the stations are planned to be BESIDE the freeway - people want to take rail mass transit because it brings them directly to their destination not to be taken to a parking lot next to the free way! and worst of all it’s plans don’t even include a stop at the cooridors biggest ridership driver (UCLA). So what’s my point? If this Biden infrastructure bill allotted $8 Billion to this project (the gap between the $5B set aside for it & the $13b estimated cost) you could have a project that would do wonders for the entire Los Angeles region.

There are also two other projects in LA that would bring in ENORMOUS ridership and likely turn the preferred method of commuting to rail - one which has a $4B funding gap (Crenshaw North) and the other which is ENTIRELY not funded (Vermont Ave Red Line extension, cost $10B). $22B that would change that region FOREVER.

Then you New York City. The flagship city of this nation who has a large and extensive rail network but one that is in hideous shape. You have cities like London, Paris and virtually all major Asian cities with huge networks where every station is at minimum modern and clean. The city needs an estimated 8 billion to modernize every single station on the network. There are also areas of expansion that are badly needed. The Second Avenue Subway or lack of it has created log jams on the rail networks, in the cab network and on the roads. It’s a project proposed for 3 quarters of a century before a portion of it (3 stations) were completed in 2017. The project should be completed. There’s the proposed Utica Avenue Subway which is needed because there is a large swath of Southeast Brooklyn with no mass transit (this isn’t Boise, this is BROOKLYN). Then there’s the fact that NYC’s second airport has no rail connection to it... imagine how much that would change traveling. There’s the outter borough proposal that would take enormous strain off of the system. States Island has needed a rail connection for a century. Then there’s the needed improvements for connection to NJ.

Austin is the fastest growing city in the US. It just recently passed a measure to build a rail network. But from the looks of it - it’ll need more funding. Dallas has a light rail network but it’s central line that runs through downtown is at grade and isn’t grade separated - a proposal to put that line under ground and build a second downtown subway would likely make use of DART significantly more popular due to its added efficiency. Boston is one of the most mass transit dependent cities in the nation and  has a few projects that would have major impact: the North South Rail link that would connect its Northern commuter rail lines and its Southern Commuter Rail lines - allowing for a state wide network of passenger  electric rail and potentially open up potential for a subway traveling through the greenway and potentially into the under served seaport - there is the Blue extension which would give direct airport access to close to the entire North Shore and would take away congestion on Route 1A.

I could go on and on and on and on. Rail might seem like a pipe dream to those not living in transit dependent cities but it can do wonders for a region if executed properly and with all this money being thrown around - to tell me these badly needed projects can’t be paid for is a joke.

The issue of construction costs is something the government needs to crack down on. Or simply attach provisions for cost overruns into projects.

The main cost problem isn't construction costs, but land acquisition costs in built up areas. It wasn't just racism that caused many of our urban freeways built in the 50s and 60s to plow through minority communities, but also the fact that they were often the lowest cost routes that could be acquired.

[brucejoel99]

Every NY House Dem except AOC & Rice is drawing a hard line in the sand on repealing the SALT cap.

[President Johnson]

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1382025804788424704

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

Every NY House Dem except AOC & Rice is drawing a hard line in the sand on repealing the SALT cap.

Good for AOC and Rice, and I'm extremely disappointed, albeit not super surprised, with all of the Democrats who want to die on this hill. The defense that Suozzi gives for gutting the cap is basically that Trump instituted it for the wrong reasons, which is almost certainly true but does not at all speak to the actual merits or demerits of the policy.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

I’ve looked at this lab further and it’s really a major major disappointment.

A true major infrastructure bill would not only garner overwhelming support but would put more tangible evidence of this administration and congress getting things done

The bill needs to focus on simply: a faster safer power grid, rural broadband, nationwide 5G, new water lines, some highway improvements, new sage & symbolic bridges, improved airports and as much as $450B in rail expansion.

The plan out there comes woefully short of the mark

Did you miss the part where zero congressional Republicans voted for a COVID relief package that was massively popular among the general public and even had majority support from their Republican constituents?

[Ferguson97]

Every NY House Dem except AOC & Rice is drawing a hard line in the sand on repealing the SALT cap.

Credit where credit is due. AOC is correct here. Removing the SALT cap would be a gift to the upper-middle class.