Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Build Back Better "social infrastructure" bill


ElCid
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

 

If you are not poor pay for your own childcare. Having children is a choice, not some rough patch like a chronic illness. 

Then there is SALT - Yes, I really want more inflation and taxes so rich people on the coasts can have tax deductions.

I really don't remember early childhood, but I imagine I would have been angered to have to start the rigor of school at age three. Let kids be kids. No reason to teach them French at age five.

IRS - I know a businessman who was audited twice this year. Cost to him - 50K in CPA and attorney fees. Money gleaned for the treasury - zip. 

Medicare hearing benefits - I'm glad they are giving people on Medicare the benefit of a hearing. I'd hate to think they were shot without a trial. BA DOOM PAH! I'll be here all week folks. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I do not support the BBB bill in its current form.    Hard to find a brief listing, but below lists some.

I'm opposed to pre-school for three year olds, not even sure about four year olds.  Medicare coverage for hearing is too open to fraud and waste.  Maybe a 50/50 match on costs would work.  USPS just purchased whole fleets of Mercedes-Benz vans.  Too early for them to consider electrifying the fleets.   Four weeks paid family and medical leave is too broad.  What does it really mean?  Opposed to the child tax credit.  CCC sounds like a good idea.  More IRS agents is definitely a good idea.   Would need more specifics on "more aid" to HBCU's.  How much aid do they need?  Are we spending too many tax dollars on higher education already?

Not mentioned below, but I support broad band expansion efforts.  I am opposed to free community college.  Also opposed to the amount of the SALT deductions.  

I do not believe it will pass the senate unless drastically altered - and then may fail in the house.

 

  • Universal preschool to cover more than 6 million three- and four-year olds
  • An expansion of Medicare coverage to cover hearing
  • Several initiatives aimed at lowering the cost of prescription drugs, including insulin
  • Health care subsidies for low-income Americans
  • Initiatives to combat climate change, including electrification of the U.S Postal Service fleet
  • Four weeks of paid family and medical leave
  • An extension of the child tax credit through 2022 at $300 a month for each child under the age of 6 and $250 a month for each child ages 6-17
  • Creation of a Civilian Climate Corps to fight the effects of a warming planet
  • Billions to higher more IRS agents to crack down on tax cheats
  • Expanded aid for Historically Black Colleges and Universities
  • Makes another 9 million more children eligible to receive free school meals   https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/11/19/joe-bidens-build-back-better-bill-passes-house-goes-senate/6242199001/
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, LsDoorMat said:

If you are not poor pay for your own childcare. Having children is a choice, not some rough patch like a chronic illness. 

 

Medicare hearing benefits - I'm glad they are giving people on Medicare the benefit of a hearing. I'd hate to think they were shot without a trial. BA DOOM PAH! I'll be here all week folks. 

 

But....The right is against choice!  ;)  What's meant is probably, in an economy that requires the need of both parents working to live comfortably and safe,  that some measure of supplying care for those children of those parents be cared for competently, supposing the absence of family or other service that can provide it.  Example:

When my first daughter was born(in '72) we were house sitting and saving for a good down payment on a house, so my wife(the ex) had to still work.  We found, in the still existing "want ads" a lady who, for a nominal fee,  would take care of the infant until I arrived home(I went to work a few hours before my wife did).  She gave references and a few people we knew had told us they used her services and she was safe and reliable.  and only $40 a week.  But those kind of deals went by the wayside years ago, and people have been taking their kids to "daycare" centers, which cost a lot more than forty bucks.  Plus, since many generations managed to do pretty well with KINDERGARTEN as their only "pre-school", I don't see putting three year olds through all that either.   A neice of mine thought it was such a good idea that she placed my grandnephew in a "pre-school" program when he was three, and paid a high fee for the "privilege".  Result?

He dropped out of high school at 16 and is currently doing a "dime" in prison for auto theft.

Hearing?  Well, a brother in law of mine has hearing problems and routinely gets stuck with bills for $500+ for new hearing aids. But he's a GM retiree and can better afford it than seniors with a much more limited income can.  So if you think this part of the bill is too extravagant, contact your representative and ask him/her to do something about BELTONE's gouging.  ;) 

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Sepiatone said:

But....The right is against choice!  ;)  What's meant is probably, in an economy that requires the need of both parents working to live comfortably and safe,  that some measure of supplying care for those children of those parents be cared for competently, supposing the absence of family or other service that can provide it.  Example:

When my first daughter was born(in '72) we were house sitting and saving for a good down payment on a house, so my wife(the ex) had to still work.  We found, in the still existing "want ads" a lady who, for a nominal fee,  would take care of the infant until I arrived home(I went to work a few hours before my wife did).  She gave references and a few people we knew had told us they used her services and she was safe and reliable.  and only $40 a week.  But those kind of deals went by the wayside years ago, and people have been taking their kids to "daycare" centers, which cost a lot more than forty bucks.  Plus, since many generations managed to do pretty well with KINDERGARTEN as their only "pre-school", I don't see putting three year olds through all that either.   A neice of mine thought it was such a good idea that she placed my grandnephew in a "pre-school" program when he was three, and paid a high fee for the "privilege".  Result?

He dropped out of high school at 16 and is currently doing a "dime" in prison for auto theft.

Hearing?  Well, a brother in law of mine has hearing problems and routinely gets stuck with bills for $500+ for new hearing aids. But he's a GM retiree and can better afford it than seniors with a much more limited income can.  So if you think this part of the bill is too extravagant, contact your representative and ask him/her to do something about BELTONE's gouging.  ;) 

Sepiatone

I am pro-choice. I am fiscally conservative, socially liberal.  You talk about both parents needing to work. That need largely sprang up in the 1970s. There were lots of women who entered the workforce because they were now able to have careers in something outside of teaching and nursing for the first time, but it is also true that the inflation of 1965-1982 made it necessary for women to work in order to make ends meet.  Lots of those women did and still do have jobs not careers, and many of them would quit if they could afford it. 

As for affordable prescription drugs, it is most definitely a problem. As a diabetic I can attest to that. But there is usually an unintended consequence for doing things a certain way. If you restrict prices for prescription drugs, more than likely there will be some drugs that will simply no longer be made that lots of people use because big pharma will adjust their way of doing business to continue profits. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for "Would quit if they could afford it", yeah, a nephew and his wife are in that boat.  And having a special needs child makes it even more difficult.

My wife was diabetic too, so I understand that part of it all.  Through GM I was given access to a "mail-order" pharmacy which does give me really good prescription discounts, but despite my wife too being a GM retiree, insulin wasn't given the same level of discount.  IF any discount at all.

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

But....The right is against choice!  ;)  What's meant is probably, in an economy that requires the need of both parents working to live comfortably and safe,  that some measure of supplying care for those children of those parents be cared for competently, supposing the absence of family or other service that can provide it.  Example:

When my first daughter was born(in '72) we were house sitting and saving for a good down payment on a house, so my wife(the ex) had to still work.  We found, in the still existing "want ads" a lady who, for a nominal fee,  would take care of the infant until I arrived home(I went to work a few hours before my wife did).  She gave references and a few people we knew had told us they used her services and she was safe and reliable.  and only $40 a week.  But those kind of deals went by the wayside years ago, and people have been taking their kids to "daycare" centers, which cost a lot more than forty bucks.  Plus, since many generations managed to do pretty well with KINDERGARTEN as their only "pre-school", I don't see putting three year olds through all that either.   A neice of mine thought it was such a good idea that she placed my grandnephew in a "pre-school" program when he was three, and paid a high fee for the "privilege".  Result?

He dropped out of high school at 16 and is currently doing a "dime" in prison for auto theft.

Hearing?  Well, a brother in law of mine has hearing problems and routinely gets stuck with bills for $500+ for new hearing aids. But he's a GM retiree and can better afford it than seniors with a much more limited income can.  So if you think this part of the bill is too extravagant, contact your representative and ask him/her to do something about BELTONE's gouging.  ;) 

Sepiatone

The problem is (having had two sets of hearing aids) they are not the panacea everyone thinks they are.  Both of mine were fitted by a licensed audiologist and supplied by name brand companies (not one that advertises in newspapers and on TV).  Upon receipt, the audiologist adjusted to my specifications.  They made annoying sounds, didn't really help that much and were very subject to moisture damage.  Least little sweating around ears and there go the circuits.  Send 'em off for repairs and try again.  Gave up on them.  Each set cost about $3,000 and that was a few years back.

So, that is why I am not in favor of everyone on Medicare being eligible for free hearing aids.  I can just see all the marginal companies sending out bunches of ads for these aids and then the more reputable companies will do the same thing.  Doesn't work or makes noises or died - lets get Medicare to fix that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LsDoorMat said:

I am pro-choice. I am fiscally conservative, socially liberal.  You talk about both parents needing to work. That need largely sprang up in the 1970s. There were lots of women who entered the workforce because they were now able to have careers in something outside of teaching and nursing for the first time, but it is also true that the inflation of 1965-1982 made it necessary for women to work in order to make ends meet.  Lots of those women did and still do have jobs not careers, and many of them would quit if they could afford it. 

 

It actually sprang up in the late 50's and especially the 60's.  My mother worked in the 50's and the mothers of almost all of my friends worked.  The only ones who didn't work were the ones with wealthy husbands.  Not too many of those.  We were middle class and I can't recall many mothers/women who did not work in the 1960's. 

Always amused that GOPers and such are opposed to child care, mother's benefits, etc., but also opposed to abortion, birth control and quality health insurance for families.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ElCid said:

It actually sprang up in the late 50's and especially the 60's.  My mother worked in the 50's and the mothers of almost all of my friends worked.  The only ones who didn't work were the ones with wealthy husbands.  Not too many of those.  We were middle class and I can't recall many mothers/women who did not work in the 1960's. 

Always amused that GOPers and such are opposed to child care, mother's benefits, etc., but also opposed to abortion, birth control and quality health insurance for families.

I can't remember hardly any of the women in my neighborhood working in the 60s. It was the 70s when that all changed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think  social infrastructure is  a pretty simple concept, even if  the terminology  is somewhat goofy. Since the Dems will likely  be out

of  power after the next  election it's time  to put the pedal to  the metal, even if  the pedal has  been greatly reduced.  I will spend any

money I will save from not needing hearings  aids  on  filling in my collection of Metallica albums.  I remember my grandfather  had  a

hearing aid, the kind that was  about the size  of  a cigarette pack  which  fit nicely in his front shirt pocket  and a plastic wire with

an earpiece  that looked like it belonged  on  a transistor radio.   Unobtrusive they weren't.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ElCid said:

An extension of the child tax credit through 2022 at $300 a month for each child under the age of 6 and $250 a month for each child ages 6-17

As you know I'm a RINO. At first I thought the older kids don't need child care, but then I thought they'd be bugging their parents for Kyle's cosmetics or Travis Scott CD's.Which will be more expensive if they get taxed more(just a guess) It just seems we always end up in the same situation somehow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Marysara1 said:

I'm way behind  the times, but even I have switched  from vinyl records to  CDs. Vinyl  has been coming  back the last  few years,

though I doubt they'll ever be  as popular as they once were. I still have my vinyl albums, though  it's easier just to listen to albums

on YT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Vautrin said:

I'm way behind  the times, but even I have switched  from vinyl records to  CDs. Vinyl  has been coming  back the last  few years,

though I doubt they'll ever be  as popular as they once were. I still have my vinyl albums, though  it's easier just to listen to albums

on YT. 

Yeah, but unless you can play those YT clips through a decent sound system, then what's the use?  ;) 

20 hours ago, ElCid said:

The problem is (having had two sets of hearing aids) they are not the panacea everyone thinks they are.  Both of mine were fitted by a licensed audiologist and supplied by name brand companies (not one that advertises in newspapers and on TV).  Upon receipt, the audiologist adjusted to my specifications.  They made annoying sounds, didn't really help that much and were very subject to moisture damage.  Least little sweating around ears and there go the circuits.  Send 'em off for repairs and try again.  Gave up on them.  Each set cost about $3,000 and that was a few years back.

So, that is why I am not in favor of everyone on Medicare being eligible for free hearing aids.  I can just see all the marginal companies sending out bunches of ads for these aids and then the more reputable companies will do the same thing.  Doesn't work or makes noises or died - lets get Medicare to fix that.

Sure.  My brother in law boasts about having TWO hearing aids(one in each ear)  but he still can't seem to hear anything.  But it's probably not the same for everyone as I do know a few who have aids and make no complaints, seeming to hear just fine with them.  And if not free(which I don't favor either) at least price them so those who DO need them but can't afford them can be helped.

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

Yeah, but unless you can play those YT clips through a decent sound system, then what's the use?  ;) 

 

Sepiatone

Actually they sound  pretty good, even with  cheap Dell speakers. I listen to the full albums and  the only problem is that  sometimes

a  live track  is substituted for the studio one or some  songs are left out, but those are  minor problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...