Law Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Signed into law 11/15/21

[ElKarlo]

Gee, and how much of that money will actually be used for real infrastructure work like roads, bridges, dams, etc.

I’m sure some of it. I’m also sure there will be studies funded by it. I guess high end like 25% will actually go towards real infrastructure. Everything else will be pure pork

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

I wonder what “infrastructure” spending on education entails.

Throwing money at research universities is fine, but “upgrading buildings” vis a vis K-12 schools annoys me when we need three things: 1) pay teachers more 2) fire bad teachers 3) allow more flexibility in how teachers teach

Building more spacious classrooms in order to better observe social distancing doesn’t seem like an investment to me. Applying a coat of paint to the walls doesn’t improve education but it does inflate how much money is being spent.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/04/01/what’s-2-trillion-infrastructure-plan-higher-ed

https://www.edweek.org/policy-polit...lion-for-school-construction-upgrades/2021/03

Replacing lead pipes and expanding internet access seems worthwhile to me

 

[Lead]

Wrong thread

 

[Based and White Pilled]

It won't hurt it

That's about the worst attitude toward finances I've ever heard. You probably also would've gladly supported writing this stupid twat a blank check to save everyone from lead poisoning.



Edit: lmao I just saw your post above supporting spending money on replacing lead pipes. That's too good.

 

[Teppodama]

I'd rather it didn't.

That's because you have questionable judgment.

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

That's because you have questionable judgment.

lol

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

That's about the worst attitude toward finances I've ever heard. You probably also would've gladly supported writing this stupid twat a blank check to save everyone from lead poisoning.



Edit: lmao I just saw your post above supporting spending money on replacing lead pipes. That's too good.

oh.....lol

 

[cooks1]

Looks like there might be some headway on the infrastructure bill


Bipartisan group of U.S. senators says it has a deal on infrastructure framework
Reuter’s


No tax hikes and they closed the gap between their initial proposals (Dems 2.2T; GOP 550B). Could still fall through but this is the first time I’ve seen news about an agreement. Looks like it’s a group of five from each side which means it could still be shot down with a filibuster if others don’t join in.

here's hoping

 

[second sight]

shovel ready projects 2.0, funneling money from tax payers, to donors, back to politicians

 

[Lead]

Looks like there is possibly a gas tax increase associated with it which is a bit surprising as many states are looking for alternatives from that. Bernie also put out a statement that wasn’t in approval of the proposal.

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

Looks like there is possibly a gas tax increase associated with it which is a bit surprising as many states are looking for alternatives from that. Bernie also put out a statement that wasn’t in approval of the proposal.

Yeah I can't imagine the Dems trading a Corp tax increase with a gas tax increase, and I personally support the gas tax increase.

The think the options are

1. ~$2T bill with a corporate tax hike pushed through reconciliation with no GOP support

2. $1.7-$2T bill with no tax hikes at all with 1-5 GOP Senators joining the Dems... still probably through reconciliation but maybe not

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

Something to keep in mind in regards to the reconciliation process is that it can not be projected to increase the deficit by more than $1.5T over 10 years, so the corporate tax hike allows for the Dems to get more spending

 

[Lead]

Yeah I can't imagine the Dems trading a Corp tax increase with a gas tax increase, and I personally support the gas tax increase.

The think the options are

1. ~$2T bill with a corporate tax hike pushed through reconciliation with no GOP support

2. $1.7-$2T bill with no tax hikes at all with 1-5 GOP Senators joining the Dems... still probably through reconciliation but maybe not

I don’t think you’d get anyone in the GOP senate at 1.7 or corporate hikes. Obviously a lot more could with reconciliation if they have the same full support at 50 like they did with the relief bill.

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

I don’t think you’d get anyone in the GOP senate at 1.7 or corporate hikes. Obviously a lot more could with reconciliation if they have the same full support at 50 like they did with the relief bill.

Agreed, the chances of a bipartisan bill are pretty low. But I won't be shocked if any combination of Romney, Murk and Collins and up signing whatever the Dems push through.

 

[DavidsGhost]

In my opinion, the only path forward for the country at the moment is through these kind of bi partisan agreements.

It’s good for unity, and the heavier swings to one side are either unsuccessful in getting passed or they are undone later down the road.

We need to move on this.

 

[Lead]

Some more info:

Who makes up the 10 senators:
Democrats:

• Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia
• Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire
• Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona
• Sen. Jon Tester of Montana
• Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia

Republicans:

• Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana
• Sen. Susan Collins of Maine
• Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
• Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio
• Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah

What's in the deal?
While the group didn't publicly reveal specifics of the agreement, several sources tell CNN they crafted a package that includes:

• $1.2 trillion of spending over eight years
• $974 billion spent over the first five years
• The plan calls for $579 billion dollars of new spending.
• The spending will be focused on core, physical infrastructure.
• The plan will be paid for without tax hikes.
• Many of the specific details still need to be ironed out.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/10/politics/infrastructure-deal-announced-10-senators/index.html

 

[Lead]

Already was expected but Sanders opposes the deal


Sanders won't vote for bipartisan infrastructure deal
The Hill

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) says he won't support a bipartisan infrastructure spending proposal unveiled last week because he believes it doesn't do enough to address the needs of the country and shields the wealthy from tax increases.

Sanders's opposition means the proposal would need to garner at least 11 Republican votes in the 50-50 Senate if Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) puts it on the floor and the rest of the Democratic caucus votes for it.

Looking at some of the other Senators responses, I’m skeptical this has 50 votes even if Schumer puts it on the floor. GOP (like Scott) doesn’t like the gas tax increase. Dems (Like Casey) don’t like the huge drop in spending and narrowing it to just infrastructure.

 

[Lead]

McConnell hasn’t weighed in either way, only saying it has a 50/50 chance and it can’t touch the 2017 tax cuts.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

If planned parenthood isn’t getting a taste, then you won’t even have 50 democrats.

 

[Lead]

If planned parenthood isn’t getting a taste, then you won’t even have 50 democrats.

There are only 50 and Bernie said nah so it obviously isn’t expected to be a plan that tries to just skim the 50 through reconciliation. Problem is how much support it would then need from GOP senators. You would assume they have at least five since it’s a group of ten from each party.