Schumer, Manchin Strike Deal To Raise Taxes, Cut the Deficit, Spend Billions on Climate Change
The proposal reportedly hikes taxes by over $730 billion, with $300 billion of that money to be used for reducing the federal budget deficit.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (DāN.Y.) has reportedly brokered a deal with Sen. Joe Manchin (DāW.Va.) to pass a slimmed-down version of President Joe Biden's spending planānow to be marketed as an attempt to curb inflation.
In a statement on Wednesday evening, Manchin announced The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, a bill that the swing-vote senator says will be built around "paying down our national debt, lowering energy costs and lowering healthcare costs."
Though Manchin's statement is light on specifics about the bill, subsequent reporting byĀ PoliticoĀ and other outlets quickly fleshed out the proposal. The bill will include $370 billion in new spending on climate change initiatives and green energy projectsāa linchpin of Biden's Build Back Better plan through its many, many interactions over the past yearāand would dedicate about $300 billion of revenue toward reducing the deficit, which has been Manchin's top priority.
The bill also reportedly includes a three-year extension of the expanded Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies originally passed as a temporary measure during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as changes to how federal health insurance programs price prescription drugs. Though pitched as a way to cut costs for households, the extension of those ACA subsidies could actually worsen inflation, as Reason's Peter Suderman has explained.
The spending and deficit-reduction items will be funded with a series of proposed tax increases. Politico reports that the bill would impose a 15 percent corporate minimum tax, expand the IRS' enforcement division (a questionable means for generating revenue, it should be noted), and close a commonly used business tax break for carried interest. The tax changes would generate about $739 billion over the next decade, according toĀ The Washington Post.
"It is past time for America to begin paying down our $30 trillion national debt and get serious about the record inflation that is crushing the wages of American workers," Manchin said in his statement on the bill. He said the bill's provisions would protect "small businesses and working-class Americans while ensuring that large corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay their fair share in taxes."
At first glance, it appears like Manchin's months-long opposition to the Build Back Better plan's trillion-dollar price tag has forced Schumer (and perhaps the White House) to accept the West Virginian senator's point of view. Manchin was stressing the need for deficit reduction as a way to cool inflation back when the Biden administration was still promising that price increases were transitory, and the intervening months have proven that Manchin was right to resist dumping even more money into an overheated economy.
With inflation still surging, a plan to reduce the deficit and ease consumer costs "may be exactly what the doctor ordered," said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonprofit that advocates for lower deficits, in a statement. Though she was "encouraged" by the framework unveiled Wednesday night, MacGuineas said she was awaiting details on the specifics of the plan.
That seems wise. Earlier versions of the Build Back Better plan were loaded up with gimmicks that in some cases hid as much as half of the package's overall cost. Manchin was not shy about the fact that his opposition to Biden's proposal had a lot to do with those gimmicks, so it might be fair to assume that his support for this new deal is contingent on it being a clean bill. Even so, an inflation-combatting, deficit-reducing bill that doesn't combat inflation or reduce the deficit would be about par for the congressional course.
Politically, the announcement of this new framework kicks off the next round of questions about whether it can actually pass. After months of being in the spotlight for opposing his party's legislation, Manchin might get a nice break. Now, the focus will shift to the Senate's most left-leaning members, like Sens. Bernie Sanders (IāVt.) and Elizabeth Warren (DāMass.), who had previously championed the larger version of the bill that included huge subsidies for child care and far more money for environmental programs.
There's also the question of whether Democrats have the stomach to hike taxesāeven if not in a broad-based wayāduring a recessionary period, on the brink of a potential recession, and just months before a midterm election in which they already seem likely to lose seats.
For today, at least, Joe Manchin seems to have gotten his way.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I shit talk Nick Gillespie a fair amount, but a true point I agree with him on is the observation that the major politicians are straight up out of ideas. With everything going on, the solution was pay-outs and twiddling the tax code.
That is what happens when both teams are run by 80-year-olds for whom color television was considered a newfangled invention when they were growing up.
And who exactly are these young, dynamic thinkers with innovative new ideas? AOC? Ro Khanna? Madison Cawthorn?
It strikes me that the reason they're out of ideas is because the only ideas they're interested in considering is managing every last detail of society from a centralized authority. And that idea, itself, is a relatively newfangled invention.
I made $30k in just 5 weeks working part-time right from my apartment. When I lost my last business I got tired right away and luckily I found this job online and with that I am able to start reaping lots right through my house. Anyone can achieve this top level career and make more money on-line by:-
Reading this article:>> http://oldprofits.blogspot.com
Old farts like Rand Paul (59), Ron DeSantis (43), and Jim Jordan (58).
But Biden (79), Pelosi (82), and Schumer (71) are young and vital!
Joe Manchin really should join the Republican party. He has all the major credentials: Pretended to want to cut spending, pretended he didn't want to raise taxes, pretended that he wanted to deal with inflation and when push came to shove, he did what any good Republican would have done - stopped pretending and gave Schumer and Pelosi everything they wanted.
He could be another Romney or McCain or even a Mark Hatfield.
Hear hear!
The Republicans already have Romney.
Doublemint gum can start a new series of ads.
But McCain and Hatfield are dead. Who will replace them?
Use the same reanimation tech that they're using on Biden's corpse.
He is from an uneducated, bigoted, mostly white, economically inadequate state with a taste for old-timey superstition and street pills, so . . . natural Republican!
Yeah, people from regular reality would say he has principles. May not be perfect, but at least itās something to work with. Iāve been enjoying unprincipled, left-wing meltdowns like your post a lot lately.
Every accusation from a progressive leftist is really a confession.
LOL, they are all about assigning people an identity and finding ways to hate them. Just look at this idiot's assumptions about an entire state. Does he know that the state ledgislature is democrat controlled? Nah. Just another fool.
Both houses of the state legislature are Republican, pretty handily so (Senate 23-11, House of Delegates 78-22). Also, a Republican governor...granted he's not a conservative Republican. I'm assuming you are speaking WV.
WV is a beautiful state, and most girls donāt have penises there at least.
Are people who are poor, couldn't afford university and are of European descent, only deserving of opprobrium, Kirkland?
Also, I'm curious as to what your degree is and where you went to school. I'm guessing the University of CNN, but feel free to prove me wrong.
One of the least self-aware bigots on this site.
It's ironic how good you are at showing how disgusting your political team is.
I find it hard to believe that the Rev/Rabbi isn't parody. I assume it's the same person behind them both.
Ahh idiot. How is Bidens old worn out unit in your test
He did resist the unprincipled, malignant peer-pressure from his party quite a bit though. These creepy losers will chase you into the bathroom if they have to, and as we can see from folks like Arthur āsick fuckā Kirkland - a self-proclaimed Democrat -their rage knows no bounds, especially when they realize how impotent and irrelevant their sentiments are to normal Americans. It is not a surprise Manchin has to give the wolves some meat every once in a while.
But you are correct, Manchin should probably become a Republican. This may be good advice for every Libertarian who still thinks that their ideology is anything but an obscure, ineffective special interest luxury in times of increasing authoritarianism, where resistance is due and where there is increasing demand for people who are actually able to do things and be effective. Perpetual whiners, woke snowflakes included, should stay on the bench now more than ever.
And yes, I do strongly prefer Republican authoritarianism over Democratic authoritarianism. And I will vote accordingly if i have to, while fairy-tale dwelling, irrelevant, impotent Libertarians (who are mostly just Left-bertarians in disguise) are allowed to whine and seethe, ignored by everyone, including those who are relevant and in charge.
Biggest reason why I prefer Republican authoritarianism is that Rās have a much better record of respecting 2A rights, look at the yay/nay distributions, even including RINOs. Apart from that, they know more about guns and are more realistic about them. Which means their self-preservation instincts will work when they get a chance to take away our guns (on paper). Which means under the red strain of authoritarianism weāre more likely not getting a civil war. Maybe also not a foreign war. Just more riots and idiotic bedroom-, drug- and abortion-control.
Oh and our kids will be allowed to remain kids up to third grade. Thats another reason to prefer Republicans. Iām fed up.
The authoritarian wave is likely coming, whether you like it or not. I think very likely. This always happens when a people has become weak, shits on their defenders and warriors instead of embracing their sacrifices and discipline, and shows signs of the mollycoddled degeneration of evolutionary dead ends.
And as itās likely coming anyways, let it be red. As a new voter, I like red better to be honest.
I agree there is an authoritarian wave coming, and i would prefer it to be red for one simple reason: I think i can at least make myself useful enough to the republican authoritarians because i have some skills and they'll value me enough to let me scratch out a living.
the blue authoritarians seem to value nothing but thinking approved thoughts.
I think a blue authoritarian regime would also last significantly shorter because it would be anti-competence and anti-competition.
But the ruin and devastation they would leave would be greater.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/watch-iraqi-protesters-storm-parliament-amid-record-run-without-government
The high secured Green Zone has since the US invasion and occupation of Iraq been home to all major government branches, embassies and diplomatic missions, and international institutions. However, some local correspondents have suggested based on video to emerge of the protests that security stood down after being overwhelmed by the crowds. Police were seen milling about the building alongside protesters.
There were reportedly no Iraqi lawmakers inside parliament at the time, with the crowds occupying the building and chanting political slogans.
Caretaker Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi demanded that the demonstrators "immediately withdraw" from the Green Zone, warning that he would send additional security forces to ensure "the protection of state institutions and foreign missions, and prevent any harm to security and order."
Shoot them in the face, they deserve it!
/Jeff and Mike
https://news.antiwar.com/2022/07/26/ukraine-government-asks-us-to-provide-gas-lend-lease/
The Ukrainian government on Tuesday asked Washington to provide Kyiv with a "lend-lease" program to import natural gas from the US to ensure Ukraine has enough gas for heating this winter, Prime Minister Denis Shmyhal indicated.
The idea is for the US to provide gas to Ukraine and collect payment at a later time, similar to the World War II-era lend-lease program that was revived this year to facilitate military aid to Ukraine.
Yeah Zelenskyy is a shameless huckster. But wait til his Vogue photo shoot comes out. Sooo Dreamy.
He is fighting our 2nd most dangerous enemy, so give him a bit of slack. He is no more clownish than other European leaders.
Oh, Zelensky is far smarter than the idiots running the EU states.
Heās a fraud, but a smart one.
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/storm-indicators-show-us-consumer-tapped-out
But if we look at this data closer some alarms should go off. Why did retail only climb 1% when official inflation is at 9%? Sales should be much higher, but they are not. The 1% increase in retail in the midst of 40 year highs in price inflation is a sign of a sales implosion, not an improvement. A year ago in 2021, retail sales spiked by 7.73% in the middle of the inflation chaos. Inflation didn't go away in the past year, it only got worse, and now the increase is only 1% in 2022.
What about consumer sentiment? Well, it has plunged 37% since last year, indicating that faith in the economy is rapidly devolving and that Americans are more likely to cut their expenses in order to protect themselves from potential fiscal shocks in the months ahead.
"Rising job losses in tandem with rising prices is the last technical indicator of stagflation along with falling GDP. With GDP well in decline recession has essentially already arrived, but the Biden Administration continues to tout the high employment rate as proof that all is well in the economy. They consistently ignore all other important factors including GDP, rising prices, rising debt and loss of consumer spending power. An avalanche of job losses this year going into 2023 is so predictable it hurts, yet the White House acts as if it is oblivious.
Perhaps Joe Biden is oblivious (as his mind continues to degrade into dementia), but his economic advisers are not. They are well aware of what is about to happen and they are trying to keep the American people in the dark. Some might consider this tantamount to treason, but that's a discussion for another time. Needless to say, a considerable downturn is about to take place going into 2023 and hopefully people are preparing for the inevitable consequences."
People react long before the government. They saw the writing on the wall last year. The same thing was true of covid.
Even so, an inflation-combatting, deficit-reducing bill that doesn't combat inflation or reduce the deficit would be about par for the congressional course.
We might make a proper cynic of you yet. (How can you tell when a politician is lying? You can see his lips move.)
The bill will increase inflation (via new government spending) while making people poorer (through higher taxes). It's lose-lose.
Yes, it should be called the Recession Deepening Bill. Any chance we had of a soft landing are out the window.
https://twitter.com/AP/status/1551980710327623680?t=_fMCxX6onemzGmpvlC_Efg&s=19
By one common definition ā the economy shrinking for consecutive quarters ā the U.S. economy is on the cusp of a recession.
Yet that definition isn't the one that counts.
The economy shrinking for two consecutive quarters would meet a longstanding assumption for when a recession has begun.
But with the U.S. adding 2.7 million jobs over those same six months, economists say that wouldn't mean a recession has started.
[Link]
Itās different this time.
At least it's nice to see the AP fully drop the mask that they're anything but DNC communications/marketing
You have no interest in anything but finding something to blame Biden for.
Uhm, finding something, not like, stumbling across it HARD with every grocery bill?
Haha!! Like finding hookers in a cat house.
Biden has been president for a year and a half.
Whatever has gone wrong since he took office is his fault.
They didn't gain any jobs. They recovered some that were lost under covid. Still slightly below 2019 employment levels.
It's funny how many people think that Herbert Hoover caused a depression by "doing nothing". In actuality he did what every president (except Harding) did when faced with a recession - raised taxes and raised spending. Harding did the opposite and the recession was over in 18 months.
Between the "Green New Deal" and "Build Back Better" Biden can duplicate the Hoover - Roosevelt depression.
The 1920 recession ended because Woodrow Wilson had a stroke, was incapacitated, and his wife and staff didn't want to make it obvious, so they did nothing. The Fed did make it worse by trying to prevent natural post-war deflation, but that was mild compared to what Hoover and FDR did.
Search for "inflation 1800-present". Notice how there was no inflation to speak of until WW I, except for mild inflation during wars and deflation back to 0 after the wars.
The Fed fucked it up. They were founded in 1913 and 1919 was there first chance to do something, anything, so they did. If they had just kept their mitts off, natural post-war deflation would have restored normality and there would have been no 1920 depression.
Harding had squat to do with it.
Wilson really was one of the worst presidents ever, competing with Buchanan for that honor.
Yea, either at #1 with the other at #2 is reasonable.
Then LBJ 3rd.
And honestly the civil war was probably inevitably going to happen, so you could drop Buchanan down to 3 (or further even)
Yeah - I think history has been unfair to Buchanan. If Fremont had won in 1856, the war would have started right then and there, because if the South didn't start it, Fremont likely would have. Buchanan won and the war didn't happen until four years later.
Doesn't really seem fair to blame Buchanan for the war. More fair to blame Buchanan for four extra years of slavery, but that applies to quite a few of his predecessors, too . . .
I blame Buchanan for his ineptitude and deference to the south, which ultimately proved unsuccessful. Jefferson predicted if slavery was allowed to continue, and not addressed it would result in a Civil War. Most expected it. Buchanan tried unsuccessfully to stop it, and did little to prepare for it. Buchanan was inept, that's why I am harsh towards him. Not because he caused the civil war, nothing was likely to stop it by that point, but because his ineptitude was unforgivable. Unlike Wilson though, he was malicious. So, I conclude Buchanan was not as bad as Wilson, possibly dropping as low as 3 or 4 worst presidents (possibly five with Biden in office). I would on second thought, make my list:
1. Wilson
2. Johnson
3. FDR
4. Biden
5. Jackson (maybe the second closest to an authoritarian, after Wilson, that we've had).
6. Buchanan
7. Carter
8. T. Roosevelt
9. Hayes
10. Adams (either)
The bott five are debatable, and I reevaluated my rankings based on the previous arguments)
Obama is definitely in the top (bottom) 10. Possibly as high (low) as 5.
The whole Russiagate bullshit (the most egregious political crime in US history by orders of magnitude) was at his direction, he intentionally stoked race essentialism/divisions, and set countless other totalitarian precedents and programs in motion.
In reality, Biden is just completing the work Obama set the table for (and has some level of involvement in executing now)
Now that I'm thinking about it... I'm moving Obama up to #2. He'd be #1 if Wilson hadn't gotten so many amendments passed, and paved the way for the rise of Nazi Germany and the Bolshevik revolution.
FDR worst, both socialist policy that continues to this day, and overt racist concentration camps. Only positive was he prepared for war.
Which Johnson?
Personally, I've got LBJ ("great society") pretty near the top of the list along with FDR and Wilson for expanding government and trashing individual rights.
1. Wilson
2. Obama
3. LBJ
4. Biden
5. FDR
As far as completely and irrevocably destroying constitutional republic America, and being falsely credited with good deeds economic or otherwise, no one comes close to FDR.
But he managed to be popular while he did it.
So cutting spending and taxes had no effect? Then increasing spending and taxes should also have no effect. Yet when Hoover and Roosevelt taxed and spent we had the Great Depression which ended everywhere years before it ended here. Harding and Coolidge did the right thing, Wilson wanted to institute "war socialism" permanently.
*ctrl-f authorita 0/0*
Hawley doesn't support this one.
Just trying to figure out what qualifies as "authoritarian" behavior from out political class.
I guess this is all just misguided wonky policy decisioning.
"It's not authoritarian if the establishment/left does it"
-Reason
Just trying to figure out what qualifies as "authoritarian" behavior from out political class.
It helps if there's a Christian element.
Let me get this straight. Manchin thinks spending $450B instead of $750B is saving money, reducing inflation, reducing the national debt.
Gads, this joke is as old as coupons! "Honey, look how I saved $100 by buying this new dress on sale for $400, marked down from $500."
Retch.
$300M in "savings" bought with $430M in new spending.
"Clean bill" indeed.
Billions, not Millions.
And 125B of the "savings" assumes the IRS can extract more money from us if they just hire more agents.
Billions, not Millions.
Right - Billions. Which when you're talking hundreds of them is real money even for the Federal Government.
And 125B of the "savings" assumes the IRS can extract more money from us if they just hire more agents.
On that front, if I were a betting man my money would be on the IRS getting more money from us. But I save my betting money for in case I get audited.
Germany and the EU, in its masterful application of sanctions on Russia, may not have enough gas for the winter, and the EU countries are now beginning to want out of the roach motel they created.
The assessment that modern Western leaders have no talent for statecraft cannot be understated.
I mean, el oh el.
I remember a couple years ago people crowing about Germany's successful green energy sector. I pointed out that it was supported heavily by fossil fuels in neighboring countries. I was decried as an apostate. Oh and joy, now Biden is going to get to copy the same failed German policies that have placed them in this predicament here, while also throttling our ability to export oil and gas to them when they need it. What is it about Democrats adopting German authoritarian practices?
FDR anyone?
I pointed out that it was supported heavily by fossil fuels in neighboring countries. I was decried as an apostate.
You and Donald Trump, the craziest, crazy pants unlibertarian president in the history of the solar system.
Germans are such fucking weak losers. Soon to be cold weak losers lol
When Germans get cold or hungry, heads start to roll.
Well, to be fair: they are cold, weak, morally superior losers lmao
It's amazing- we're watching our lives be diminished and put at risk by the ruling class, as it happens, with predictable results. It's not like we don't know what's going to happen, that things are going to get worse.
And we just watch, like it's a TV show happening to others.
Conservative Germans shut down their nuclear program because of Fukushima. Are you suggesting that nuclear power is a hoax?
Conservative Germans such as the Greens? I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume you are really uninformed.
Merkel (CDU/CSU) was subject to massive pressure from pretty much every political camp in the Republic and her naive, coddled, sheepish constituents. And her party is by far not what you think is "conservative".
Their retarded green virtue signaling policy is why they will be sitting in the cold this winter. If Germans can manage to grow any residue of a spine, they will vote the progressive hippie-bitches out. But that's gonna take a while, and the sheep might be asleep again by the time the next general election comes around.
What makes you think I would defend anyone who canceled a nuclear power program in favor of methane?
Realism? You are pretty removed from reality in most other regards.
And Fukushima was old and not built according to modern safety standards, of course.
Conservative Europeans are a totally different creature than conservative Americans. Also, it was a stupid idea, whoever did it. But conservative German parties are so dissimilar to conservative American parties that bringing this up is a completely idiotic game of tribalism. Did you think you had a point?
Despite their oh so colorful partisan landscape, Germans discuss fewer opinions in politics than we do with only two parties. Their Overton Window is small, like their homes, lol.
Another reason I hate it when Europeans act superior because of their fancy multi-party-systems.
Which made no fucking sense. Fukushima was a problem because it was an outdated design, built on the coast of one of the most earthquake prone countries in the world. What does that have to do with nuclear plants in Germany?
"The assessment that modern Western leaders have no talent for statecraft cannot be understated"
It's not like THEY'RE going to go without energy or food... just the peasants.
Small businesses go broke and old people freeze to death in the dark. Big businesses thrive and there are more dead people to send ballots to. Sounds like win-win for politicians.
It's not accurate to say they're spending any money on climate change, since the spending won't affect the climate to any detectable extent.
The enormous tax hikes will come from the following:
A 15% minimum tax on corporations ($313 billion over 10 years), i.e. stealing from the productive economy
Closing the carried interest "loophole" ($14 billion over 10 years), making hedge fund managers pay income taxes on their capital gains
Funneling cash to the IRS for "enhanced enforcement) -- i.e. squeezing blood from a rock, and creating a lot of new high paying government jobs complete with pension obligations (supposedly a net gain of $124 billion to the government)
I'm betting the IRS enforcement will cost more money than it ever recovers. These types of projects almost invariably always do.
But think of the political value, i.e. punishing people on the official enemies list.
It's not accurate to say they're spending any money on climate change, since the spending won't affect the climate to any detectable extent.
When they say "climate change" they mean Climate Change, Inc.
Anyone remember some libertarian magazine hailing Joe Manchin as a champion of fiscal restraint a couple of months ago? Yeah. Good times.
If making the increase to the deficit less big than it otherwise would have been = "cutting the deficit," then doesn't that make Manchin a champion of "fiscal restraint?"
No. Because fiscal restraint isn't a concept that is neutral to the cause of deficits. Raising taxes to increase spending isn't particularly restrained, even if you are diverting part of the tax increase to your original spend.
Tallest midget is still a midget.
I wonder what Manchin got under the table. This bill will hurt him in WV.
Why would you brag about how much spending is in a bill, anyway? Why is it a big deal for you to spend a lot of taxpayer's money? Shouldn't you actually be interested in not just how much money is spent, but what it's actually aimed at accomplishing?
I mean, I'm going to focus on the price tag because I dislike government spending. But I always thought people who LIKED government spending did so because they had justifications in terms of results. They're looking at endpoints and this is the means. So what $370 billion toward green energy actually mean? Research? Buying batteries? Building wind farms?
Spending money doesn't actually solve anything by itself.
Spending money solves the problem of getting reelected.
Exactly. Green New Deal spending is basically signalling to democrat supporters that you're passing out the largess they voted you in for.
Almost all Democrats just want to stop harming the global environment.
You got to be the most naive creature I have ever encountered in the wild.
I know many Democrats, not a single one who stands to make a buck on green energy schemes.
That's because you're a prole. It's the operators like Al Gore who make out like a bandit on that shit.
-jcr
Yup, you are the best sheep a democrat could ever hope for.
DOE, USDA, EPA, and tens of thousands of those getting govt grants, almost all Donkeys.
And that's why Kerry gave up his private jet and yacht, right?
Quit telling stupid lies.
-jcr
I would agree with that. They just don't want to be the ones inconvenienced by stopping planetary harm. That's a burden that should be born by other people.
And therein lies the problem.
Another round of congratulations are in order for the Libertarian Party, which helped enable this growth in government by running a nominee against David Perdue and forcing him into a runoff. Well done!
Fuck you. If Republicans want votes, they can fucking well earn them.
-jcr
Stupid people like you is how nations end up with Hitlers
David Perdue, notably, couldn't win his runoff. So maybe the libertarian candidate isn't the problem.
Most candidates for office don't have to win twice; in Georgia, Republicans do. Democrats don't, because there is no party siphoning off votes from them.
Votes are not a property right. If the Republicans fail to earn votes, it's their own damned fault.
-jcr
Actually, in this case, the mere absence of a party siphoning off votes would have guaranteed Perdue the seat, since the plurality winner would also be the majority winner.
What Hitler needed was obedient cunts like you.
-jcr
" . . . and would dedicate about $300 billion of revenue toward reducing the deficit, which has been Manchin's top priority."
He will wind up like Reagan after granting amnesty to illegals; waiting and waiting for the democrats to keep their word.
Well, at least we now know the price of his soul.
Way to go, Manchin. Here's a little song for you, courtesy of the Bus Boys - Johnny Soul'd Out
I don't know why he did it
I don't know why he quit
Next thing you know he was acting like this...
"Shut up and suffer, peasants!"
https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1551993265473323010?t=tuHaw-auFZPdKRhKACxo9Q&s=19
You canāt be pro-insurrection and pro-cop.
You canāt be pro-insurrection and pro-democracy.
You canāt be pro-insurrection and pro-American.
[Video]
Yeah! You hear that, Adams, Franklin, Jefferson, and Washington?
Holy shit
https://www.city-journal.org/in-portland-the-sexual-revolution-starts-in-kindergarten
This canāt happen per Jeff
This is outrageous!
They get deep into this idiocy. And a later lesson talks about āCisheteronormativityā
5-yr olds are great at 9 syllable words!!
The depth of cultural ignorance of these people is staggering. They are justifying their white westerner sexual fetishes by misattributing them to other cultures. A traditional African, Chinese, Japanese etc. would be totally baffled by their ideas about gender.
Hey, Iām totally baffled by them as a gay man.
Long thread:
https://twitter.com/YossiGestetner/status/1551564301982470144?t=8S8CrdhTV8k3S6Bjl0hr9Q&s=19
Folks, ahead of the initial estimate of Q2 (April-May-June) GDP estimates being released this week, we are being propagandized that it being negative after being down in the first quarter "isn't necessarily a recession."
[Thread, links]
The "game" would appear to be "we need 2nd quarter revisions and 3rd quarter results to be able to declare a recession. Luckily for the WH, by the time we have all that it will be Election Day and many millions will have already voted."
The NBER defines a recession as "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the market, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales."
Only in the UK and other countries is it defined as two consecutive months of negative economic growth.
Two months isn't "a few months," employment is extremely high, and income is going up. It's objectively not a recession according to the US definition. Not that there is an objective definition.
But you don't give a shit about any of that, you just want something to blame on Biden.
Tony, your attempt to excuse one of the many failures of the handlers of the current Vegetable-in-Chief is as pathetic as it is obvious.
you just want something to blame on Biden
There has never been any shortage of things to blame Biden for, back before his evil brain degenerated into the mush it is today.
We're in a depression. Lying won't fix it.
-jcr
I donāt want something to blame Biden for, I would love for the country to actually work.
But the fact is that everything that has gone wrong over the past year in the economy, foreign policy, COVID, and government finances is his fault.
Deficit reduction is literally equivalent to higher taxes. Not just mathematically, literally. And that's just what this bill offers. Glad you like it?
Deficit reduction is literally equivalent to higher taxes
Of course, a lefturd like you can't even conceive of reducing the deficit by spending less.
-jcr
Spending less = MAGA Nazi Fascism, or something
Deficit reduction is only equivalent to higher taxes if spending stays the same. If spending goes up more than the additional taxes, then the deficit ain't gonna reduce...
Which is of those is going to happen Tony?
(Glad to see an intern who tripped over the power cord finally plugged in the server again)
"The proposal reportedly hikes taxes by over $730 billion, with $300 billion of that money to be used for reducing the federal budget deficit."
Leaving $430Bn to add to the debt.
They'll just inflate it away, and we'll all be billionaires! Whee!
-jcr
It's how Joe can keep his promise about $400,000. Inflate everyone up to $400K, then you can tax them too!
Schumer talking to Manchin about 'deficit reduction' probably sounded a lot like Bud Abbott explaining how 13 times 7 equals 28 to Lou Costello. Manchin of course is not that stupid. He just sold out his Country for a few more pieces of silver.
No, theyre saying Tax 700bn, spend 400bn. Leaving 300bn reduction in the 20 trillion deficit over 10 years.
And then, the stupid sumbitch tripped over it AGAIN!
Is Welsh in the house? He's stupid enough to do so, if his running of the org is anything to go by
$300 billion of that money to be used for reducing the federal budget deficit.
Lying mother fuckers.
-jcr
It's not a lump sum game they're talking about, the supposed tax increase will only net that total over ten years, that is if there are not enough loopholes built into the legislation as the behest of the big banks. And the 300 billion payback again will over ten years and eaten by the interest on the debt. It's all a shell game and the average citizen is always a losing participant.
The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022
Are you fucking kidding me? AKA the "Piss on me and tell me it's raining" act.
Does Manchin not know that the deficit will INCREASE by a trillion under current law? 300bn wont make dent in the deficit, much less the debt.
ONLY $5,615 per working citizen MORE than what they're already STEALING....
- $2,846/working-citizen to control the weather
- $2,307/working-citizen to control B.S. previous spending
And no mention of where that other $100B is going...
Then again; what is a 'fiat' (i.e. fake) $1-USD worth anyways in the monopoly funny-money the 'feds' have turned your Labor-Representation into anyways? Oh; That's right -- It's a monopoly game the 'feds' use to ENSLAVE you all into working for practically nothing in this Nazi-Addled failing nation.
There is no Constitutional authority to be pretending to be all holy gods of the weather. The trade medium setup is gold and silver. There is no Constitutional authority for the ACA.
This is NOT the USA anymore; It's been conquered by Nazi-Fans.
Then again; what is a 'fiat' (i.e. fake) $1-USD worth anyways in the monopoly funny-money the 'feds' have turned your Labor-Representation into anyways?
---
0.000042 BTC?
lol... Right š and pretty close to that on it's equivalent gold standard.
Yeah raise taxes and don't cut spending. That will work.
Government makes record revenue and record spending. Oh they lowered the deficit from last year...looking at data..after they raised it 3 million
Ukraine was never a bright shining bastion of democratic values. It is and was in fact one of the most corrupt nations in Europe.
Saying the US shouldn't get involved with money and man power isn't supporting Putin.
The fact is many in the Us government have huge investments in the Ukraine and neighboring countries. You can see this from Soros, Democrat investment vehicles, The Atlantic Council members, the Clinton's, the Bidens, etc.
The reason the US is actually pushing into the country is to protect their money for the "elite." It is not for pure values. This is why the US has given them over 20 billion dollars. It is not a war the IS should be paying for at all. The EU is the neighbors to stop encroachment. But they were too invested in Russian energy due to their shit for brains ESG and green energy programs.
You State Department simping boomers are just obsessed with killing your credibility to go all in on Ukraine.
It's silly.
Societal unrest is a key component in marxism, to undo society.
Fuck off, globalist faggot.
You have no right to demand that government put a gun to my head and steal my resources to satisfy your idiotic prejudices.
So, if a nation is corrupt, conquest by another corrupt nation is not a problem in your mind. What other nations should become part of the Russian Empire? Do you envision some kind of world-spanning empire consisting only of conquered corrupt nations as a good thing?