The President and Congress have spent $1.9 trillion on Covid relief, some necessary and valid, some not.
Now the President is proposing $2.3 trillion for infrastructure, much of which is not infrastructure at all.
Shortly the President will propose an array of new ongoing programs for child care, pre-school, leave from jobs, even monthly checks for each child up to $300 per child, and two years free tuition at community college. All for $1.8 trillion.
And all āpaid forā by less than 1% of US taxpayers … with no consequences of course. And speaking of paid for, the latest spending proposal, while priced over a ten year period as is normal, will be paid for over fifteen years. You canāt say politicians arenāt creative accountants.
Politicians are great at enacting popular programs, that for practical purposes wonāt go away, but will increase in cost over the years. Then future politicians fail to continue adequate funding, or economic conditions canāt provide sufficient funding.
Social Security, Medicare and the Transportation trust are prime examples. The all were intended to have broad based funding, but as usual politicians havenāt the courage to raise taxes to pay for promises. so, either the programs deteriorate or federal deficits soar.
Convincing Americans that only the wealthy will pay for more and growing social programs is the biggest financial con since Bernie Madoff. Simply look to the tax and fee structures in European countries.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
Dick, you can copy the next two paragraphs and post them EVERY TIME you identify another promise where there is insufficient funding, or where they plan to tax only a small, disfavored group in order to fund a general welfare benefit or entitlement.
“… As President Ford once said, āA government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have.ā …”
“… To paraphrase Martin Niemƶller, when the next idiot politician says the tax will only apply to individuals with incomes (or wealth) above $X (just like the initial income tax only applied to 3% of the population, individuals with a 1913 income of $3,000): āFirst they came for the billionaires, and I did not speak outābecause I was not a billionaire. Then they came for the millionaires, and I did not speak outā because I was not a millionaire. Then they came for the property owners and capitalists, and I did not speak outābecause I was neither a property owner nor a capitalist. Then they came for meāand there was no one left to speak for me.ā …”
And, here’s some excerpts from a recent WSJ editorial – please pay particular attention to what Rahm Emanuel says (I put it in CAPS so you won’t miss it). I also want to point out that President Biden also suggests that this legislation is “paid for”. Reminds me of Health Reform where President Obama said it “doesn’t add one dime to the deficit”. But, see the last comment on the budget gimmicks – doesn’t add a dime but only if all the tax increases are fully realized and only if the economy continues to grow (not likely with these taxes) and only if you exclude spending after the ten year budget window period. I call this hooking Americans on the government crack pipe…
“… The progressive hits keep coming from the Biden Administration, and the latest is the $1.8 trillion American Families Plan introduced in broad strokes on Wednesday. Itās more accurate to call this the plan to make the middle class dependent on government from cradle to grave. The government will tell you sometime later, after youāre hooked to the state, how it will force you to pay for it. …
The goal is to expand the entitlement state to make Americans rely on government and the political class for everything they donāt already provide. …
The White House talking points pitch this in the smothering love of the welfare state: āmaking care affordableā; free medical and family leave; āfree educationā; two years of āuniversal pre-schoolā; āinvest in the care workforce.ā Subsidies and millions of new care givers, all licensed and unionized, will nurture you through the challenge of earning a living and raising a family. …
One question to ask is: Havenāt we tried this before? What is Head Start if not government pre-school education and child care? Werenāt school lunches and the Women, Infants and Children program supposed to prevent child hunger? Food stamps, welfare checks, child-care subsidies and a supplement to earned-income, plus public housing. Werenāt all of these programs and more from previous decades supposed to end poverty? Why did the trillions of dollars spent on those programs fail? And if they didnāt work, why do we need more? …
For the candid answer, listen to Rahm Emanuel, the Chicago Democrat who explained the political calculation this week to the Washington Post: āONCE EVERYONE’S IN, ALL THE PARENTS WANT IN. THEN IT’S NOT A POOR PERSON’S PROGRAM OR A POVERTY PROGRAM. IT’S AN EDUCATION PROGRAM … THAT TO ME IS ESSENTIAL. IT CHANGES THE CENTER OF GRAVITY ONCE IT’S FOR EVERYBODY.” …
So much for the āsafety netā to prevent poverty. This is now about mainlining benefits to middle-class families so they become addicted to governmentāand to the Democratic Party that has become the promoting agent of government. …
Democrats are enamored of this principle of āuniversalityā because it has worked to sustain the popularity of Social Security and Medicare, despite their failing finances. But those programs promise benefits in return for work across a lifetime. The Biden New Deal isnāt a deal at all. Most of its programs are free handouts on the model of the 1960s Great Society. …
The new pre-school entitlement will go to all families, as would free community college. The tax-credit expansion to $3,600 per child in the Covid bill, which Mr. Biden wants to make permanent, is on top of the other welfare subsidies. The Biden plan also makes permanent an expansion of ObamaCare subsidies for more affluent adults, eliminating the subsidy cap that was 400% of poverty. A new paid family leave entitlement will be an incentive for companies to drop leave benefits that already cover most workers. …
The White House is also less than honest about how it will pay for all this. Its short answer is that more taxes on the wealthy and more IRS audits are enough. But that doesnāt come close. The permanent child-tax credit expansion would cost $1.6 trillion over 10 years, according to our friends at Cornerstone Macro. The White House says it only costs $420 billion, but thatās because it only includes four years through 2025. The new entitlements ramp up slowly but explode in the later years, while the tax increases are immediate and wonāt raise the revenue they expect. …”
LikeLike
I totally agree with you about politicians not having the guts to fund programs that they offer and that is an ongoing problem nevertheless after many years of hearing the conservative side and seeing the deterioration of the middle class and the taxation on the the middle class it is my opinion that perhaps we need to do some damage to the 1% and the untaxed corporations by way of a minimum tax even though in the end it likely won’t pay for all the programs the one thing Biden said last night that I am convinced about is that trickle down ‘never works’. He said it and the Pope said the same thing not to long ago. Greed, despite the efforts of some to do praiseworthy things, causes the bulk of their wealth to stay with them. The Trump tax plan served the very wealthy extremely well and corporations fared very well but how much of that newly released wealth made it it to the worker? The divergence of CEO pay (320times the avg. worker) that he quoted only grows wider and so higher taxes to that class can serve as a way of assuring that a greater piece of their earnings goes to the lower economic class. Listen in the end it may not work but I have been to Europe and for the most part I think their systems work fairly well so let’s blend a bit of Biden’s ‘spread the wealth ‘ ideas and see if we can get to a better place. Creating more jobs, better educational opportunity for all children, and more health care coverage are worthy goals and in the end I think his plan deserves a shot. The expansion of infrastructure no matter if it is road, bridges, bandwidth, or even well crafted social programs can all create decent jobs which in the end have a better chance of increasing the tax base and that will serve our country better than giving the wealthy a ‘tax’ gift as Trump did. Even though a generous portion of the money that has been allocated is to clean up balance sheets of poorly run State and local governments that too has a value since in the end it takes the monkey off the backs of the taxpaying citizen. While Trump talked an America first plan other than talk he did little to keep jobs here. His tariff ideas were paid by Americans in the products they bought. Biden is insisting on ‘made in America’ Ultimately leadership matters and Biden has already proved that in his first 100 days and I think given a chance he will continue doing good for all Americans, well except maybe not for the 1% gang ?
LikeLike