116
Biden promised not to finance fossil fuels. So why is the US backing a huge gas project?
(www.motherjones.com)
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2024
116 points (79.6% liked)
politics
19088 readers
3653 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
He completely flipped on immigration. He left Trump era policies in place and made them worse.
He shut down the biggest union action in the last decade.
He's sending weapons to a genocidal regime.
His idea of economic problems is shrinkflation. While grocery stores and land lords have a third of the country over the barrel.
I can keep going. Should I keep going? Should I talk about the continuation of Trump's trade war with China? The protectionist legislation he championed so auto manufacturers can keep prices up and quality down?
Let's rap
Which policies?
There were 458,900 workers involved in work stoppages in 2023, notably including the motion pitcture strike which is the bulk of that huge bar up at the top of the graph. It looks to me like the rail strike involved about 1,100 workers, barely visible down at the bottom. You're talking about the rail strike, yes? You didn't say so but that's the one I'm aware of him shutting down and the talking point that y'all like to use. The rail strike wasn't the biggest union action in the last decade or in 2023; it wasn't 1% of the union action in 2023.
What it looks like to me is that he shut down the rail strike because it would have a big impact on the rest of the economy, then his labor department kept working the issue and got the workers their sick days anyway.
Your assertion is that because he shut down 0.2% of the strikes that happened in 2023, for specific reasons, and then got the workers what they were asking for anyway, he's a bad president for labor?
(Edit: Hang on, is the rail strike not in that chart? Maybe because it didn't happen or it started in 2022, it doesn't show there. I'm trying to look up now how many workers were actually involved; it was more than 1,100.)
(Edit 2: I am totally wrong -- it was 115,000 workers, in 2022 and way more sizable than what I was saying. I still stick with the point that if Biden was anti-union he would have done something about some of the 458,900 people who went on strike in 2023.)
No argument. It's fucked. There are some things he's doing better than a normal president and much much better than Trump, but yes, it's fucked. Hopefully all the noise about a break with Netanyahu starts to turn into less dead or starving Palestinians.
I ... what?
He instituted a minimum 15% corporate tax, he forgave $138 billion worth of student loans, he came out of the COVID apocalypse with the lowest unemployment in 20 years and the strongest recovery out of any first-world country by a pretty decent margin... I honestly can't even tell what you're complaining about here. You're assigning him an idea about what he thinks, and then complaining that his economics are bad because of nothing about what actually happened but because of the belief you assigned him?
Let's stick with those four initial points for a second. What immigration policies? I have a bunch to say about his immigration policies, but I want to know what Trump-era policies you're even talking about him making worse before I say too much about it.
Remain in Mexico. Refusing to honor Asylum unless people manage to get processed through a border control point. Requiring Asylees to stay in the country that's dangerous for them until we oh so graciously give them permission to flee for their lives. Considering Mexico a safe country even though it's perpetually one bad weekend away from the cartels just running the place.
The Rail workers did not get their sick days. Not the ones on the rails working themselves to death. They gave sick days to their office bound workers. The guys who actually keep the trains running are still being forced to work without sick days and under threat of being fired if they fail to show up when called, even if they're at the doctor's office. The inhumane conditions that were brought to light were not fixed. They gave stuff to support staff and called it a victory. It's the biggest union action in the last decade because of the impact it could have had and because it showed us exactly what the politicians think of the working class.
Biden has not taken serious action to reduce grocery prices or other necessities. That's great that he taxed corporations but that doesn't put food on the table. His fixation on shrinkflation can be seen in his speeches. And that's the slight improvement from his attempt to take a victory lap on an economy people are still struggling in. We aren't dumb and we aren't blind.
Which of those policies did Biden make worse and how? Both of what you listed (remain in Mexico and asylum only through a port of entry) are Trump policies. I know Trump did family separation and Biden started the task force to reunite families; did that make things worse?
Things have gotten substantially worse simply because the number of migrants has gone up, but Biden has been fighting with the Republicans to try to get more judges to clear the backlog of asylum cases, trying to get them not to drown people in the Rio Grande, things like that. Do you have some specific policy that he's actually made worse?
What is your source for what you're saying about sick days? Here is mine; the unions and the news have been saying that as of October, 91% of rail workers have sick days (and that link has a link to a PDF that's a little fact sheet about different roles and the benefits they get).
I honestly don't see anything to respond to here. It kinda sounds like a campaign ad -- "doesn't put food on the table" "we aren't dumb." If you want to talk about his economic performance in terms of the numbers instead of the fee fees you're welcome to and I'll respond to what you have to say, but otherwise I'm comfortable with what I've said so far.
I gave you three border policies not two. Then to talk about union stuff you link to the literal industry lobbying organization. Finally you pass off a Gallup Research poll as fee fees.
That's three red flags and a big old nope from me.
Stimulating discussion as always