4 ms·

What multi-trillion dollar social programs? What country are you talking about— I want to live there, sounds a lot better than the pittance we have in the US. U

What multi-trillion dollar social programs? What country are you talking about— I want to live there, sounds a lot better than the pittance we have in the US. Unless you think the Defense Department is a social program.

areyousure 4y ago
The reference is possibly to the Green New Deal or to Build Back Better. Both probably qualify as "multi-trillion social programs", but perhaps the former fits the description better.
- miguelazo 4y ago
  I wouldn’t call either of those social programs. They’re mostly subsidies for industry, with ancillary tax benefits for the rich and upper middle class. Also hardly “multi-trillion”. After reading the article in full, I assume they were alluding to the PPP and direct stimulus payments to taxpayers that suffered some fraud. Even the 25% fraud cited seems minor, but it certainly could have been administered a lot better. I agree that public investment in long term endeavors has been abysmal, but that trend started in the 70s with Carter. What all this is ultimately about is neoliberalism. Using the state via the Fed to further enrich the rich is the final end of that ideology, and it has been very successful at that.
  - areyousure 4y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal > social aims like job creation and reducing economic inequality > the plan could cost between $51–$93 trillion over the next decade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build_Back_Better_Plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build_Back_Better_Plan > the largest nationwide public investments in social > a variety of social policy initiatives > $1.9 trillion > $2.3 trillion (which, when combined with the American Families Plan, amounted to $4 trillion in infrastructure spending) > $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill
    - miguelazo 4y ago
      Last I checked, neither plan ever passed. Nor would they have passed in time to make a difference for the issues raised in the article.
      - areyousure 4y ago
        Your comment starting this theead was about the following quote from 'rayiner: > Democrats could advocate multi-trillion social programs https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/advocate https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/advocate
llanowarelves 4y ago
Also over $4 trillion between CARES Act and the "American Rescue Plan". Do you feel Cared about and Rescued?
- miguelazo 4y ago
  I wouldn’t call those true social programs, although the direct payments to taxpayers comes close. The programs you cite were designed to prop up the economy, and they mostly succeeded, albeit highly skewed towards big businesses. It accelerated trends already in place.
  - llanowarelves 4y ago
    Yes I was just trying to come up with trillion dollar examples of programs other than the ones already provided ("Green New Deal"), because there aren't many it could be referring to afaik.
JamesBarney 4y ago
Social security + Medicaid + Medicare is in the trillions.
- miguelazo 4y ago
  Those are not new and would be part of the long term public investment the article states has been lacking. You can’t have a productive economy when old people are indigent and have to be cared for entirely by their working age relatives. And Medicaid is a subsidy for industry that doesn’t compensate its workers sufficiently with adequate healthcare benefits.
rayiner 4y ago
Social security and Medicare are each individually trillion dollar social programs. We also just had $2.5 trillion in covid related expenditures to individuals and families and healthcare: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/03/11/us/how-covid-stimulus-money-was-spent.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/03/11/us/how-covid-.... Also, as I said, Democrats have been advocating trillions more in social spending (universal healthcare, etc.) I’m not knocking any of that. But American Democrats are probably the only center-left party in the developed world who advocates for expensive social programs while promising not to raise taxes on people making up to $400,000 a year. My point is that this is a unique outgrowth of the fed’s money printing machine.

areyousure 4y ago

The reference is possibly to the Green New Deal or to Build Back Better. Both probably qualify as "multi-trillion social programs", but perhaps the former fits the description better.

miguelazo 4y ago
I wouldn’t call either of those social programs. They’re mostly subsidies for industry, with ancillary tax benefits for the rich and upper middle class. Also hardly “multi-trillion”. After reading the article in full, I assume they were alluding to the PPP and direct stimulus payments to taxpayers that suffered some fraud. Even the 25% fraud cited seems minor, but it certainly could have been administered a lot better. I agree that public investment in long term endeavors has been abysmal, but that trend started in the 70s with Carter. What all this is ultimately about is neoliberalism. Using the state via the Fed to further enrich the rich is the final end of that ideology, and it has been very successful at that.
- areyousure 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal > social aims like job creation and reducing economic inequality > the plan could cost between $51–$93 trillion over the next decade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build_Back_Better_Plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build_Back_Better_Plan > the largest nationwide public investments in social > a variety of social policy initiatives > $1.9 trillion > $2.3 trillion (which, when combined with the American Families Plan, amounted to $4 trillion in infrastructure spending) > $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill
  - miguelazo 4y ago
    Last I checked, neither plan ever passed. Nor would they have passed in time to make a difference for the issues raised in the article.
    - areyousure 4y ago
      Your comment starting this theead was about the following quote from 'rayiner: > Democrats could advocate multi-trillion social programs https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/advocate https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/advocate

llanowarelves 4y ago

Also over $4 trillion between CARES Act and the "American Rescue Plan". Do you feel Cared about and Rescued?

miguelazo 4y ago
I wouldn’t call those true social programs, although the direct payments to taxpayers comes close. The programs you cite were designed to prop up the economy, and they mostly succeeded, albeit highly skewed towards big businesses. It accelerated trends already in place.
- llanowarelves 4y ago
  Yes I was just trying to come up with trillion dollar examples of programs other than the ones already provided ("Green New Deal"), because there aren't many it could be referring to afaik.

JamesBarney 4y ago

Social security + Medicaid + Medicare is in the trillions.

miguelazo 4y ago
Those are not new and would be part of the long term public investment the article states has been lacking. You can’t have a productive economy when old people are indigent and have to be cared for entirely by their working age relatives. And Medicaid is a subsidy for industry that doesn’t compensate its workers sufficiently with adequate healthcare benefits.

rayiner 4y ago

Social security and Medicare are each individually trillion dollar social programs. We also just had $2.5 trillion in covid related expenditures to individuals and families and healthcare: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/03/11/us/how-covid-stimulus-money-was-spent.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/03/11/us/how-covid-.... Also, as I said, Democrats have been advocating trillions more in social spending (universal healthcare, etc.) I’m not knocking any of that. But American Democrats are probably the only center-left party in the developed world who advocates for expensive social programs while promising not to raise taxes on people making up to $400,000 a year. My point is that this is a unique outgrowth of the fed’s money printing machine.