• 9 Posts
  • 1.03K Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 20th, 2023

help-circle
  • Their proposals are in the article

    The IMF, which often requires fiscal prudence among its borrowing countries, recommended a series of options to lower deficits, including reducing some longstanding tax deductions and exemptions that it said were “poorly targeted.” These include tax exemptions for the value of employer-provided healthcare plans and capital gains on the sale of a primary residence, and deductions for mortgage interest and state and local taxes - breaks that add up to about 1.4% of U.S. GDP per year.

    The U.S. should consider closing the “carried interest” provision under which investment partnership income can be taxed at lower capital gains income rather than normal income, the IMF said. It added that corporate tax rates should be raised and the corporate tax system shifted to a cash flow tax.

    The IMF also recommended raising federal excise taxes on gasoline and diesel, which have not been raised since 1993.

    On the expenditure side, the IMF recommended indexing Social Security benefits to the chained consumer price index and subjecting earnings greater than $250,000 a year to payroll taxes.

    So kind of a mix of good and bad. But raising corporate taxes was one thing. A lot more reasonable than I was expecting.






  • No, a population heat map means it’s darker over the cities. There’s more reports in Chicago than say, middle of nowhere Montana because there are more people there to report. This map is reporting the locations people are when they report it is down. And the circles get bigger and darker the more reports from that area. So if it was down everywhere, you would see the biggest circles over the biggest cities, and smaller circles in smaller cities, just like in this map. You see NYC, Boston, Chicago, San Fran have the biggest ones, and then smaller cities like Minneapolis have smaller ones.




  • You don’t need to be hospitalized to get all the antivirals. In fact, that’s the whole thing paxlovid is supposed to prevent. Anyone with risk factors can take paxlovid, and it’s very effective at preventing severe covid. It should be started as soon as possible, not waiting until someone’s already hospitalized. Even in unvaccinated people, if taken early in the course, is 90% effective at preventing severe disease.

    Remdesivir is the one that’s generally only for hospitalized patients, though even that can be used pre hospital too.

    Anyways point is, if you get covid, and have risk factors for severe covid, call your doctor or urgent care to get paxlovid to take if you can, especially if you’re unvaccinated.

    And yeah between getting diagnosed quickly, getting paxlovid I’m sure, and being immunized, Biden will very likely be fine.

    Edit: yes he started paxlovid https://www.npr.org/2024/07/17/nx-s1-5043814/biden-covid


  • Ranvier@sopuli.xyztoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldbUt BoTh SiDeS dA sAmE
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Talking about it won’t make it happen. But political action can’t happen if it’s not talked about! We’re again at this impasse where according to your view point, no one is allowed to stake out a political position unless there’s already a certainty for it to pass. How is anyone supposed to build consensus and improve support for something like that? More people from any party, whether that’s democrat republican independent or a third party, supporting your position is a good thing and makes it more likely to happen. Running on a platform and popularizing it is political action. And “republicans don’t like it” is generally the obstacle when you’re talking about democrats passing a law yeah. Because they get elected to congress too and can vote against it (or worse the president). I’m not claiming every democrat supports it, obviously that is not the case. But getting more and more people to adopt the position is how you get to the political action. Politicians staking out a position and then people voting for the ones whose position matches your own is how this whole thing works.


  • Yes, that’s true. The poll averages themselves haven’t moved much either though. And the reliance on the fundamentals forecast has me nervous, but they definitely do it for a reason. When they developed the models and looked at poll history the pattern they found was the fundamentals had a big influence on what the polls would look like closer to the election and the eventual result. Polls closer to the election are more predictive than the fundamentals. Polls farther away from the election less so. There’s at least some reason to think things have changed enough maybe the fundamentals aren’t as fundamental for this race, but I guess we won’t know until afterward.


  • Ranvier@sopuli.xyztoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldbUt BoTh SiDeS dA sAmE
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Yes and Medicare, Medicaid, the children’s health insurance program (chip), the affordable care act, all passed by Democrats. And there’s now three states with their own public option, all passed by Democrats.

    I don’t understand why you don’t want politicians talking about things you support more. I wish the public option and Medicare for all were brought up even more. Talking about it less doesn’t make it more likely to happen, even if you’re not sure if the votes will be there to do it I the next cycle. If politicians who support Medicare for all keep doing well in elections, other politicians will see that and adopt that position too Then hey maybe enough someday will finally get elected they can get it all passed together. Politicians love passing stuff, it makes them more likely to be re elected. FDR didn’t get re elected four times by doing nothing.


  • Ranvier@sopuli.xyztoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldbUt BoTh SiDeS dA sAmE
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Okay, so if the goal isn’t accomplished in 4 years, politicians are no longer able to mention it again, got it.

    And he can’t do either of these things congress would be require for both. Neither are promises.

    I don’t think Sanders and AOC would be pushing so hard for Biden to stay the candidate if they didn’t think he was the best way to get policies they approve of in action.


  • Ranvier@sopuli.xyztoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldbUt BoTh SiDeS dA sAmE
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    So according to you, politicians aren’t allowed to express their opinions on any issue or propose any policies, unless they have the ability to foretell the result of all the upcoming elections, to know exactly who will be elected and if there will be enough support from the other 535 people needed for making laws. Got it.

    So we will run on nothing and say nothing about any possible policies until we already know it has happened after the election, just to be safe. Dems will win in a landslide for sure, running on this message of we won’t say.

    And I assume you are upset with every politician who ever proposed something that then didn’t happen. Bernie, AOC, how dare you mention single payer and then don’t make it happen.

    Look, breaking a campaign promise would be if a politician is running for a position, that position has the power to do something and then they don’t do it. The president cannot make a public option out of thin air. It must be passed as a law. They have some influence for sure. But a broken campaign promise would be congress passed a public option, sent it to Biden’s desk, and then he vetoed it. That would be a broken campaign promise.


  • Exactly, I think because races have been so close lately, and the probabilities are ending up close to 50% often, people sometimes unintentionally conflate them with poll numbers. 53% to 46% would be a massive poll lead. For probabilities though in this situation it’s the same as saying they have even odds of winning. Look at those massive 95% confidence intervals, the race is in a statistical dead heat. It’s kind of remarkable how steady it has been despite all the wild events that have happened.






  • That could certainly be the case, I was trying to get at that with the second part of the comment. I’ll link the poll below directly for people where that can be seen easier. I wish we had some more people who already could poll better though. I was also hoping that Trump’s support might drop some with some of the other choices though, with some moving to the not sure category when a different democrat was proposed. Unfortunately it was looking like the “not sure” people are mostly coming from the previously Biden category, with Trump staying locked in at 40 like he is with Biden, or even higher for some of them. Michelle Obama was the only to get that to drop, and only to 39%.

    The “wouldn’t vote category” also dropped by a percent or 2 for some of them, so a few voters at least might be pulled of the sideline with a new candidate if they can manage to keep all the Biden voters. It was pretty impressive for Michelle Obama again, lowering from 8% to 4% not voting for the poll-takers in the case of Michelle Obama. She seems to pull her extra support over Biden from the current “won’t vote” and third party voters. Some of the other potentials also peeled off a percent or two from the third party voters too into the not sure category. These are the people that really need to be convinced if we’re going to beat Trump, and some of them at least seem to at least think about it when a new democrat is proposed.

    https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/only-michelle-obama-bests-trump-alternative-biden-2024