Biden 2021 - A Mediocre Middle Ground

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
2560

Shirley, you cannot be serious? I could paste 6000 articles on the border crisis, but I do not believe I need to do that if there is any honesty in the discussion. You know what is happening, I assume you are not uninformed?
Sorry Treco, for sticking my nose in.

I am not quite sure why you don’t like them, but they are the only major outlet outside of Australia that isn’t towing the government line. Yes, I am sure you can give me a link to a local station, like you for the rest of the world, I need the big picture info on everything outside of the US.

There is a big difference between choosing not to watch something and removing somebody’s ability to communicate all together. I am not sure how you can conflate the two, but you did.

1 Like
2561

What you are talking about is censorship. Not the difference between a boycott and cancel culture (which IMO are often the same thing).

2562

Oh geez, dude. Please tell me you aren’t this thick? Ignoring what somebody says is absolutely different than some unelected oligarchy policing what is and is not allowed to be said.
If I ignore, or boycott others still have the opportunity to engage with the information if they want to. If somebody is banned or removed from a platform(s) which usually happens in tandems with the other major platforms doing the same, then nobody has a chance to engage with the information, by decree. This is not even the same thing and you know it.
I assume this is some attempt at balancing the scales by deflection and projection, but most people aren’t that dumb.

1 Like
2563

My point wasn’t in regards to censorship though.

But, if you want to call censorship cancel culture, sure, I’ll bite. Didn’t the GoP pass a law saying corporations have the rights of an individual in regards to speech? Now, when someone posts something on a corporation’s website, don’t they have the right as an individual to not broadcast it? Seems pretty consistent to me.

2564

They can do what they want so long as their rules are applied consistently. If they say they only support leftwing speech to the exclusion of anything center right, no problem. But if they advertise to be open to free speech and behave inconsistently, then they are violating law by violating their own terms of service that everybody must agree to.
If the company wants to just be a left wing mouth piece, then it simply must say so.
But when you pull off actual doctors who treat covid, for not agreeing with a leftwing narrative, but leave all the posts of people wish death on unvaccinated, that Ivermectin is a horse dewormer not meant to be consumed by humans and shit like that, you are violating your own policy. Courts have many times ruled that terms of service, from any company must be clear and evenly applied.
We’ll see how the current and recently created lawsuits go, my guess is large settlements out of court will be par for the course and the violations will continue.

2565

Speaking of running backs, did you see where Derrick Henry ran for 182 (150 in the 2nd half and overtime) and 3 TDs in the Titans overtime win in Seattle?

2566

Thoughts on Biden’s proposal?

Joe Biden’s Treasury Department has announced Thursday an invasive new initiative tasking the federal government to audit virtually all financial transactions of Americans with bank accounts holding at least $600.

The Treasury document, called “General Explanations of the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2022 Revenue Proposals,” outlines how every individual bank account with over $600 will be monitored by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

“This proposal would create a comprehensive financial account information reporting regime. Financial institutions would report data on financial accounts in an information return. The annual return will report gross inflows and outflows with a breakdown for physical cash, transactions with a foreign account, and transfers to and from another account with the same owner,” the memo states.

“This requirement would apply to all business and personal accounts from financial institutions, including bank, loan, and investment accounts, with the exception of accounts below a low de minimis gross flow threshold of $600 or fair market value of $600.”

This proposal will also “apply to crypto asset exchanges and custodians.”

Patrick Hedger, vice president of policy at the Taxpayers’ Protection Alliance told the DailyMail the Treasury’s move blatantly violates the Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure.

“The IRS is first and foremost, a law enforcement agency, and the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures in pursuit of, of looking for wrongdoing and criminal actions, so I think this is going to run into severe Fourth Amendment headwinds,” Hedger said.

Hedger also said this targeting of lower income Americans amounts to the “ultimate regressive tax.”

“You’re going to push more folks into small cash transactions, you’re going to push more banking offshore … the big fish out there that do have sizable assets that are that are eligible for taxation offshore. This is the ultimate regressive tax,” Hedger said.

“You’re going to end up punishing the worst off among us … the lower income folks in this country have historically been the targets of aggressive IRS audits because they don’t have the CPAs and the lawyers to be able to fight back,” he added.

2567

Supposedly being worked into the proposal, is a provision to only monitor those reporting 400k yearly income.

Uhhh…okay.

2568

Biden doesn’t give a shit about constitutionality. He’s proven that several times.

2569

There is no hell hot enough for this husk of a man. Thoughts? Evil. The Soviet Union would have loved to have this capability. And even they might have backed off and because it’s a bit much even for them.
And this means I am going to be using cash more often for big purchases, because fuck Joe Biden and his patience.

2570

I am waiting for the hidden cameras to come out and announce that I have been punked… It’s all so absurd, it’s difficult to comprehend. And yet, unshockingly a good bit of the population has no idea what’s going on. They know nobody has the parts they need and there are always empty shelves in the store and too few are even curious as to why.
Hell, what’s the biggest crisis right now? It’s the shitshow happening at what used to be known as the U.S. border. And what does the media do? Invent stories of abusive border patrol agents on horseback cracking whips.
We haven’t gotten to that yet because we are still slack-jawed shocked that the government wants micromanage you bank transactions.
Oh they will pass this shit too. It may not be $600, but they will institute this surveillance at some level, I have no doubt.

2571

One of them have, or do.

2572

:eyes: surely no - some weird joke or something

2573

Biden’s proposal to have the IRS monitor bank accounts is an invasion of privacy that I’m not in favor of and is a huge political mistake IMHO.

There appears to be a problem that needs to be addressed though:

Biden’s proposal comes as the IRS struggles with the volume and complexity of returns.

The agency lost more than 33,378 employees between 2010 and 2020, including those auditing returns and collecting unpaid taxes.

These cuts have resulted in fewer audits for high-earning filers. The IRS audited fewer than 2 out of every 100 taxpayers earning more than $1 million in 2020, a Syracuse University report found.

While the number of millionaires have nearly doubled since 2012, tax audits have dropped by 72%, to 11,331 in 2020, from 40,965 in 2012

I had a chuckle at the title of the cnbc article as “wealthy small business owners” sounds kinda’ like jumbo shrimp to me. Still, if the reductions in IRS capacity are accurate then there’s a problem that needs to be addressed with sensible measures.

2574

Since this is our de facto bitching thread…

A 5 minute cursory glance reveals 400k/year+ households earning $1tt in 2020 and the Fortune 500 profits of ~$2.3tt for same.

Knowing enough accounting to know that there are expenses (ie depreciation, charge back losses, etc) that lower bottom line numbers, the $3.5tt spending bill (not accounting for permanent implementation nor interest costs) looks suspiciously close the old joke of IRS collection that is as follows:

  1. write name
  2. fill in total profits
  3. send in line #2 amount.

I admit not knowing the time frame for projected expenditures, but am dubious in thought as to this being paid for by rich guys and corporations only.

2575

Allegedly, the 3.5 Trillion would (theoretically) be spent over the next 10 years.

1 Like
2576

Yep, and one thing from @treco post that I noticed is that those numbers listed are not revenue, but profits. Skimming off of the profits for 10 years seems feasible to raise the 3.5tt.

2577

I think that Pres Biden could do a better job of mentioning the 10 year time frame. It might make the whole thing less scary to people.

2578

It isn’t really 10 years though, because they are using accounting tricks to say “this program will end in 5 years” and “this program will end in 3 years” then averaging the cost over 10 years. Government programs DO NOT END.

1 Like
2579

'20-'21 outlays are 31% of total GDP. Holy Crap, that kind of activity is not sustainable.
(or 6tt in deficit spending in only 2 years, if that is easier to follow)

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57339#:~:text=In%20CBO’s%20budget%20projections%20(called,the%20shortfall%20recorded%20in%202019.&text=They%20average%204.2%20percent%20of,year%20average%20of%203.3%20percent.