Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Stoneworker

Members
  • Content Count

    466
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

274 Excellent

About Stoneworker

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Denver Broncos

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is a weak attempt to link Reagan's support of a path to citizenship to your own bizarre open border philosophy...while simultaneously denouncing conservatives in the PSF as being hypocritical to their own heritage. Please stop trying to ride Reagan's coattails. Reagan generally welcomed immigrants, believed they are the foundation of this country's success and that those who were already here deserved citizenship. That's awesome. But once "undocumenteds" already here were granted amnesty, Reagan supported secure borders (i.e. 0% tolerance for illegal crossings) and a though
  2. You're 100% correct that Reagan had the correct views on immigration. “But the simple truth is that we’ve lost control of our own borders, and no nation can do that and survive.” “The ongoing migration of persons to the United States in violation of our laws is a serious national problem detrimental to the interests of the United States.” https://quotefancy.com/quote/903360/Ronald-Reagan-But-the-simple-truth-is-that-we-ve-lost-control-of-our-own-borders-and-no https://www.azquotes.com/quote/541039#:~:text=persons to...-,The ongoing migration of persons to the United States
  3. Yes. But federal funds could be used similarly. My central point is that there is a good chunk of the $2.3 trillion public capital that can be replaced with private capital. The feds could then use taxpayer money much more efficiently to offer various credit enhancements, sweeten deals for social equity purposes, etc. Given the state of the country's finances, it's a much better way to leverage Fed funds.
  4. It's a good article. That deal was in 2006 and there has been a lot of improvements since then on both the private and public side. IMO these are primary takeaways: * Many experts seem to think that the state of Indiana will almost entirely be shielded from the fallout of this bankruptcy... * Investors are increasingly impatient with record-low returns on conventional bonds, and are turning to infrastructure as an asset class that promises stable, inflation-protected returns over the long run. * Meanwhile, governments are eager to fix decaying infrastructure — but without rai
  5. And therefore the investors who are suffering financially as a result of poor investment underwriting...not the taxpayers.
  6. Agreed. Perhaps the best way to garner bipartisan support is financing with public-private partnerships. Instead of such heavy reliance on tax hikes, there is literally trillions upon trillions in private money (e.g. pension funds, insurance cos.) globally available to invest in long-term infrastructure projects. Indiana Toll Road and San Juan Airport are role models. Then Biden can use the tax hikes to pay down the debt...but the government as large-scale capital allocator asset owner has always been a losing proposition.
  7. My favorite is how something as lame as whataboutism is used whenever a position can't be defended. Taxes being raised...$5-6 trillion being spent. Tax and Spend. Case closed.
  8. Then reverse the tax cuts to get back to even. Don't layer $6 trillion in new spending on top.
  9. And if it was a Dems-only package it would have been larger. Guaranteed.
  10. Both 2020 Covid spending packages were bi-partisan. The $6 trillion in new spending is all Democrats. Your logic is bizarre, at best.
  11. $3-4 trillion in two upcoming economic proposals. The Yellen/Powell printing press still on fire from the $1.9 trillion Covid package. Tax hikes on both corporations and individuals. And Democrats wonder why they get called the party of "tax and spend"...
  12. Well then please read the linked article...you may be a bit confused as to what the proposal is...the mileage tax would be used as a revenue source to subsidize interest on municipal infrastructure projects...not a general federal tax that goes to fund the military or pay down the national debt.
  13. Not needed? Huh? Republicans and Democrats agree that the U.S. is in dire need of a major infrastructure overhaul, and at the very least, that Congress should authorize significant repairs to roads and bridges. The country’s overall infrastructure needs over the next 10 years total nearly $6 trillion, according to a report published earlier in March by the American Society of Civil Engineers. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/26/build-america-bonds-may-be-key-to-financing-bidens-infrastructure-plans.html
  14. Just keep issuing stimulus/UBI/whatever-you-want-to-call-them checks to people under $50K. It's what the Dems are going to do anyway.
×
×
  • Create New...