In this installment of their weekly Sunday Six conversation, PF Whalen and Parker Beauregard of The Blue State Conservative discuss six items from President Biden’s multi-trillion-dollar spending proposal that everyone should understand.
"*" indicates required fields
#6: It’s not “bipartisan” in the sense that Biden and Trump voters alike support it; although it is bipartisan in the sense that establishment swamp creatures of both parties endorse it.
Parker: I could not be more hopeful that Senators Sinema and Manchin finally throw off the shackles of the American Communist Party – formerly known as the DNC. While many of those who voted for them in Arizona and West Virginia are rightfully indignant that they are not getting what they voted for (even if they’re soulless fools, they still voted with expectations that their candidates would do their bidding of ruining this country), all I can say is welcome to the club.
Conservative Americans have been stuck between the proverbial rock and a hard place for decades. RINO Republicans and establishment sellouts are the norm and hardly the exception in both national and local elections. We had a combined sixteen years of Reagans and Bushes to load up the Supreme Court with actual Constitutionalists, and the best they could muster was Thomas, Scalia, and Alito. Everyone else either defected from basic constitutionality, is still a wildcard, and most might as well be Obama appointees. We have more Liz Cheneys and Adam Kinzingers than we do Rand Pauls and Ted Cruzes representing us in Capitol Hill.
It is a sad day in democracy when most of us simply vote for the lesser of two evils than limited government folks who would actually entertain eliminating the Federal Reserve, eliminating income tax, siccing the FBI on actual domestic terrorist organizations like BLM, dismantling bureaucratic hellscapes like the Ministry of Education, and reigning in Big Tech.
I hate that the designation of any part of this bill is bipartisan, and I especially hate that Republicans are going along with it. When Democrats defect, it’s for the betterment of this nation; when Republicans defect, it’s to its detriment.
#5: Over $90 billion was designated in the original bill for “Non-Profits” to serve as “incubators” as they distribute funding to “underserved” areas.
PF: At first glance, this line item sounds like just more wokeness and another method of discriminating against straight, white, Judeo-Christian men, which it certainly is. Let’s redistribute the wealth, taking tax dollars from that white guy and giving government handouts to this minority gal/guy. But it’s more than that; much more.
First, we have the amount: $90 billion. With Democrats spending money like they all just hit the Powerball, it’s easy to forget: $90 billion is a tremendous amount of cash, and an amount with which one can do a remarkable amount of “incubating.”
The other concerning element of this portion of the bill is the process. The money is to be distributed by the Small Business Administration (SBA) to the non-profit corporations, and then from the non-profits to the small businesses. This bill adds “middlemen.” Why? The SBA exists precisely to administer this type of program, so why do they need to outsource the eventual distribution of the funds? The answer: Democrats are building corruption right into their bill.
Biden and his cronies are still negotiating with this bill, and it seems likely that the final expenditure will come in at less-than $90 billion after all is said and done, but there will still be quite a bit included; no doubt. Unless the mechanics of this slice of the pie are adjusted, we’re going to have the Biden Administration handing out billions of dollars without any explicit qualifications for those funds. There are no standards or means-testing included, which means the SBA and the non-profits will have free reign.
There will be no accountability, no checks-and-balances, only tax dollars flying out the window. Donors, supporters, friends, and even family members (Hunter, perhaps?) will undoubtedly find themselves as CEOs of newly created non-profit organizations, and the circuitous “you scratch my Democratic back, and I’ll scratch yours” will continue. This part of the bill stinks to high heaven.
#4: One of the more expensive features is a $66 billion dollar allocation to freight and rail.
Parker: I am not dumb enough or naive enough to think that this project is simply going to repair railroads that all private and public entities use. If that were the case, I might actually support it; if highways need repaving for the transportation of goods, it would make sense that rail lines get maintained or improved so that the millions of tons of goods can crisscross the country.
Sadly, I don’t have to read into the earmark to understand that this wasteful earmark is for money-burning monstrosities known as high-speed rail and exorbitant Amtrak subsidies. In both cases, a fundamentally basic economic question arises: If these were good ideas, why hasn’t the private sector gone after it? (There, in one rhetorical question I solved the issue. No one is moving into the sector because it’s a losing venture; i.e., no one wants to travel by train.)
While I generally attribute leftist ideas to more sinister motives, such as promulgating CRT and transgenderism with the explicit aim of tearing down society’s fabrics, in the case of rail it has less to do with nefarious motivations and more just downright stupidity. Too many Americans actually think that railroads can be viable alternatives to planes and automobiles.
Newsflash: They cannot.
I don’t have the figures or the desire to even look up the figures, but I would imagine most urban light rails lose money. I would guess they all require government intervention to prop them up. This has to be especially true when these same urban communities choose not to enforce the countless gate jumpers and literal free riders. They likely fail, and we know with certainty that the larger systems like Amtrak and whatever high-speed rail lines exist are so underwater they make Atlantis look like a nice beach. Despite the economic realities, Americans want to model society after Europe. We are too big, too in love with freedom, and already have too many other options to travel…for now.
#3: Almost $80 billion is being earmarked to beef up the IRS for “strengthening tax enforcement activities.”
PF: This component of the Biden Boondoggle should be concerning to everyone. At the risk of being chastised by our Department of Redundancy Department, $80 billion is a remarkable amount of money to be sending anywhere, but it’s downright disturbing that it will be going to the IRS.
We’ve already seen Democrats weaponize the IRS – remember Lois Lerner? – so we know what they’re capable of. And the IRS is already extremely well-funded, with billions of taxpayer dollars already in their budget and with almost 75,000 employees in their ranks. How much more authoritarian do we need to make them? How much more powerful can the IRS get?
Democrats are, of course, spinning this section of the bill as necessary to stop tax cheats. Those fat cats with the accounts in the Cayman Islands are going to get what’s coming to them, they’ll tell us. That greedy corporation won’t know what hit them once the IRS sends in a small army to dissect their general ledger. And there’s certain to be at least some of those types of activities as a result of such spending, but it won’t stop there.
Our laws are already written in such a way that makes the IRS extraordinarily powerful. If a company goes bankrupt or if someone dies, and if that company or person owes the IRS, Uncle Sam is first in line to get paid. The IRS gets paid before any lenders and lienholders, or employees, or even the funeral home. And throwing billions of more dollars and tens of thousands more employees at an already well-armed legion of IRS agents will only make the IRS even more aggressive towards everyone.
They won’t stop at auditing CEOs and movie stars, in fact they won’t bother them at all, provided they’re woke Democrats. It’s the rest of us who need to worry.
#2: Most of this money didn’t exist the first time around, and rather than give it back to the American people they are doubling down on bankrupting the nation.
Parker: The office of Joe Manchin released some figures about where this money is coming from. Despite Joe Biden, Jen, Psaki, Nancy Pelosi, and most other Democrats suggesting that this is already paid for – because that’s how borrowing works now apparently – it is not. Printing money is not paying for something, nor is using taxes. Both are examples of using money to pay. Duh.
Another way they are paying for this bill is through a reallocation of Covid monies. For starters, these Covid dollars were unnecessarily wished into existence at various times already. Rather than give them back or make them disappear, Dems are following the basic rule that any emergency spending or addition to the government is never temporary. Once created, government expenditures are permanent.
The biggest issue for me over this bill is not the one-time price tag, but the inherent spending that it will necessitate. How many of the aims, programs, or subsidies in this bill will have to be maintained? There are so many government heroin needles being injected into peoples’ and organizations’ arms that their addiction to “free” money means they won’t be able to quit cold turkey. They will need more and more of the good stuff to get their fix.
#1: The true costs of this spending bill would be much higher than the numbers they’re giving, with the original $3.5 trillion bill projected to have ultimately had a $5 trillion price tag after all was said and done.
PF: As mentioned, the price tag on this monstrosity is a moving target. They’ve been using $3.5 trillion for several weeks now, but Biden has signaled he may be willing to lower the amount. For the purposes of this item, I’m going to stick with the $3.5 trillion cost.
It’s mind boggling to consider these amounts that they’re throwing around, and an article we ran by John Green earlier this week does a nice job trying to put it into perspective. The number ‘one trillion’ has the integer 1 followed by twelve zeros; or, to illustrate, one trillion = 1,000,000,000,000. That’s an awful lot of zeroes. So, the $3.5 trillion cost they’ve put out is difficult to comprehend to begin with. But that number is, in fact, understated. The actual cost will be $5 trillion, or perhaps even more.
Unsurprisingly, the Democrats have been lying to us. They’ve played with the numbers by minimizing the duration of the programs they’re going to fund if this thing passes. And the reality is, they’re counting on that difficulty we have with grasping these large numbers. They’re hoping we shrug our shoulders and say, “One trillion, three trillion, five trillion… whatever… why not make it a quadrillion?”
But these amounts are thoroughly disturbing.We’ve already got almost $30 trillion in national debt, and there are projections showing that number exceeding $89 trillion in eight years. It’s insanity. We’re going to destroy our economy and our currency. We often hear people say, “We’re piling this debt on the shoulders of our grandkids,” which is true. But let’s forget about the grandkids for a second. We’re destroying the country right now. In real time. And it’s not just the grandkids we have to worry about. Anyone planning on living more than about five years should be concerned, because it’s not going to take long before inflation cripples us and the whole ship sinks. We’re a house of cards right now, with a 3.5 trillion MPH windstorm heading our way.