747
Fox hosts forced to grudgingly admit economy booming under Biden
(www.msnbc.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2024
747 points (94.5% liked)
politics
19089 readers
865 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Well yeah all those stats look great but the problem is that inflated housing just undoes them.
China is coincidentally also facing their economic issues from their massively inflated housing market with Evergrande (again?) collapsing
For sure, completely agree it needs addressed. But like most things, the origin of this housing crisis largely falls on Republicans. Here's what I'd do if I were Democratic strategists going into this year. Pivots. Lots of pivots.
If Republicans push back on Gun Control talk, you go, "okay, if you don't want to solve that and deflect, then let's solve root problems like societal stress, education, single-payer healthcare, and guaranteed access to a therapist at any age
If republicans push back on the boRDeR cRiSis, (a) point out the net-positive economic impact these hard workers fleeing crime & poverty have while (b) pivoting to the domestic terrorist threat from right-wing extremists home-grown here in the US that are the #1 threat per the DOJ.
Combined with the border crisis and affordable housing, Democrats need to go, "Why focus on the small fish at the border and not the foreign investors from China, Japan, Russia, Saudi Arabia who've bought up large swaths of land, stifling the American dream? Hell even the King of Jordan owns 2 Beach-front Malibu properties. Look at all the real estate investors and AirBNB jacking up the prices.
Most of the housing crisis needs to be solved at the local level. Zone for density, support social housing (where the city builds the houses rather than developers), design walkable neighborhoods, and support public transportation.
The federal government can play with interest rates, regulate banks, and provide funding for cities to do the above. It certainly affects things, but it's highly abstracted from the actual work of getting more people into affordable housing.
I agree zoning is a big one.
There are some top-down factors that need to be addressed in my view; chief among them is cracking down on rental properties, and foreign investors/ownership.
Another facet to this is the deterioration of small and rural communities across the country. We have a massive amount of land and yet the population density in certain hot-spots is off the charts. In this respect, I think we need an investment in bridging the rural-city divide. That means promoting work-from home jobs with federal tax incentives, high-speed rail infrastructure akin to the Interstate system that helps link the rural communities to the cities, and high-speed internet for all akin to the investments FDR made for rural communities in bringing electricity to the masses (The REA).
The ultimate effect of this will be de-congest cities where stress is high, bring people closer to nature, and tap into unused land and foster smaller more tightly-knit communities that aren't so disconnected from the world.
Democrats aren't going to fix shit lol they're just going to bail out the banks again after the economy collapses like Obama did in 2008.
And then pepper spray the protestors on Wall Street
... That was a University police officer on UC Davis campus in California and literally had zero to do with Democrats' direction, lmao. Wtf you smoking this early?
And don't care — One side is objectively orders-of-magnitude worse. Progress or damage-control, it makes little difference to me.
Them protesting against the direction of Obama bailing out the big banks?
Seems kinda relevant.
One side is objectively worse but you don't have to spread the fairy tale that Democrats are going to ever fix anything. They are just slightly less worse.
There's also NYPD cops pepperspraying the protestors if you like that one more but the picture doesn't look as funny:
New York City settles Occupy Wall Street pepper spray lawsuit for $50,001
I'm certain the lives of these people would've totally improved if the banks and economy completely collapsed, right? As with most things, the direction and anger of these Occupy protests — which I was a part of — had a long list of grievances including "banks got bailed out, we got sold out." But universally all these problems are squarely of Republican origin; and their solutions are almost all squarely obstructed by Republicans.
After all these years, do people forget that Democrats and Obama only had a filibuster-proof control of Congress for literally only months early in his first term? These protests came after the disastrous 2010 midterm election when many of these Occupy Wall Street protesters stayed home and let the Tea Party (pre-MAGA if you're unfamiliar) take control of Congress with the Freedom Caucus and other bullshit. So that sure did wonders for all the bankers, didn't it?
I'll say they're considerably-less worse. Obama sympathized with Occupy Wall street. I wonder what Trump would've done... Send in FBI vans like he did in Portland?
Bank bailouts got signed in by Bush though...wtf?
Both of them bailed out the banks. This is a both sides thing.
President-elect Barack Obama has teamed up with President George W. Bush for what could be the last major action of this presidency.
Also Obama was the guy dictatoring against Occupy Wall Street.