Purple and Black
Taking Independent and Unofficial Back

The Biden-Harris Administration Thread

The House Passes The American Rescue Plan Relief Bill in Washington, DC
The House Passes The American Rescue Plan Relief Bill in Washington, DC

:clap: :clap: :clap:

 
Guest essay in the NYTimes today, 5.5.21:
Biden's Taiwan Policy Is Truly, Deeply Reckless
The argument in this essay makes me wonder why Biden is doing this.
He’s doing so by undoing a diplomatic fiction that for more than 40 years has served the United States, Taiwan and the world exceptionally well. In 1978, when the United States established diplomatic relations with Beijing, it agreed to pretend that there was only “one China.” The arrangement was absurd: Taiwan was, and is, effectively an independent country. But to Beijing, its de facto independence is the bitter fruit of imperialism — Japan stole away the island in 1895; America’s Seventh Fleet prevented the mainland from taking it back in 1950. By keeping U.S. relations with Taiwan unofficial, the “one China” fiction helped Beijing imagine that peaceful reunification remained possible. Which gave it an excuse not to invade.
Any thoughts? I'll look for other perspectives that explain what may be behind this change to our usual handling of this relationship.
 
Guest essay in the NYTimes today, 5.5.21:
Biden's Taiwan Policy Is Truly, Deeply Reckless
The argument in this essay makes me wonder why Biden is doing this.

Any thoughts? I'll look for other perspectives that explain what may be behind this change to our usual handling of this relationship.
Although I know so little about war games or strategy, Im guessing we're testing that stupid One China agreement we made in 1978. China is 3000 years old, with 18% of the world's population. World domination has always, always been their overarching goal. Taiwan is in a terrible position, no doubt. As far as Biden and the short term goes, I doubt he wants a war with China.
 
Just keeping an eye on the goings on.
From the NYTimes (5.28.21):
Biden's Fossil Fuel Moves Clash With Pledges on Climate Change
The clash between Mr. Biden’s pledges and some of his recent decisions illustrates the political, technical and legal difficulties of disentangling the country from the oil, gas and coal that have underpinned its economy for more than a century.

On Wednesday, the Biden administration defended in federal court the Willow project, a huge oil drilling operation proposed on Alaska’s North Slope that was approved by the Trump administration and is being fought by environmentalists. Weeks earlier, it backed former President Donald J. Trump’s decision to grant oil and gas leases on federal land in Wyoming. Also this month, it declined to act when it had an opportunity to stop crude oil from continuing to flow through the bitterly contested, 2,700-mile Dakota Access pipeline, which lacks a federal permit.
The three decisions suggest the jagged road that Mr. Biden is following as he tries to balance his climate agenda against practical and political pressures.

Mr. Biden “can’t afford to take a pure position on the climate” because he lacks strong majorities in Congress, said William A. Galston, a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. “That is the backdrop against which this president and the administration will be making trade-offs on every single issue.”
The decision on the Willow project was made as the Biden administration is trying to win Republican support for its infrastructure package and other policies, said Gerald Torres, a professor of law and environmental justice at Yale University. “He is going to need Murkowski’s vote for some things,” he said. “These are political calculations.”
oops... had already started a Biden & Climate Change thread. Would like this to go there, so as to have all that in one place. Easy reference when scrolling.
 
Last edited:
Jobs report was good today. We are not BACK yet but we're heading there. Oh, but some think Biden will only have until August to make good on his policies cuzzzz someone else thinks he's gonna be reinstated. INSANITY. :loser:
 
A podcast I like had a show about monopolies, tech, and anti-trust measures. Cory Doctorow was interviewed about recent executive actions taken by the Biden admin. It was really interesting. And, for them that like t----, he was mentioned as having spoken of breaking up some monopolies.

Quoting from a small part of the interview:
"For examples of some of the impacts of our present day system: GM tells the copyright office you don't own your car. Your car software belongs to GM. It can't be sold. It's only licensed. The licensing terms prohibit you fixing your own car. Doctorow says, every class of goods is in on this. It isn't just about extracting money from you for the repair, although that's a big part of it. It's also making sure that you only buy original, non-refurbished parts for domestic consumption. Another example: Apple blocks Apple parts being shipped from other parts of the world at the border as trademark violations. They put tiny, microscopic apples on parts that are never shown so that they can use trademark law to block these at the border so that refurbishers can't get access to them because they only sell parts to people that opt into their authorized service program. If you just want to be an independent iPhone repairer, you have to get your parts from somewhere else. They block their own parts as counterfeit. They can charge you extra for parts. They can decide when your device is no longer eligible to be repaired. While picking our pockets, it also affects the planet through increased trash. Similar restrictions apply to machinery from John Deere. Farmers, who traditionally have repaired their own machinery, can no longer do that. Things have software locks and it's illegal to break the software locks. Nobody's allowed to do third party service on them. You're paying for the product and you're the product.

"The thing that determines whether you're going to be the product is not whether you pay or you don't pay. It's whether the company is afraid that they'll get in trouble. They'll lose your business. They'll get hit with a lawsuit. That there'll be some government enforcement if they treat you as the product. If they have something to fear, they'll respect you. And, if they know you have no where to go and you're locked in? There's no reason they're going to treat you well.

"There is legislation that is working it's way through Congress and Joe Biden's executive order address this. For example, the 'right to repair'. The FTC sat down a couple of decades ago and decided to not use its enforcement powers any more. The first order of business for Lena Kahn was to sit down and give them back. The son of Robert Bork (the architect of modern monopoly theory) started howling. The fact that we are now living in a world with 5 publishers and 4 talent agencies and 3 record labels and 2 media companies and 1 theater chain is fine! The world doesn't need more than 1 company that makes eye glasses. The fact that Luxottica owns every eye glass brand and the largest lens maker and every high street retail store you've ever heard of... that's fine. And, if the prices have gone up a thousand percent over the last decade? It has nothing to do with Bork's theories that let one company corner the market on your right to see stuff."

Anyway. Many people didn't expect Biden to address these issues and they are surprised. Here are some links to some articles on the topic:
Biden's Antitrust Team Signals a Big Swing at Corporate Titans (NYTimes, 7.24.21)
Facebook asks recusal of FTC head in antitrust case decision (WaPo, 7.14.21)
And, there are some bills in congress, which is good, since executive orders can easily be reversed.
Opinion: Don't want the FTC to act on antitrust? Tell Congress to get moving. (WaPo, 7.11.21)
 
Last edited:
A podcast I like had a show about monopolies, tech, and anti-trust measures. Cory Doctorow was interviewed about recent executive actions taken by the Biden admin. It was really interesting. And, for them that like t----, he was mentioned as having spoken of breaking up some monopolies.

Quoting from a small part of the interview:
"For examples of some of the impacts of our present day system: GM tells the copyright office you don't own your car. Your car software belongs to GM. It can't be sold. It's only licensed. The licensing terms prohibit you fixing your own car. Doctorow says, every class of goods is in on this. It isn't just about extracting money from you for the repair, although that's a big part of it. It's also making sure that you only buy original, non-refurbished parts for domestic consumption. Another example: Apple blocks Apple parts being shipped from other parts of the world at the border as trademark violations. They put tiny, microscopic apples on parts that are never shown so that they can use trademark law to block these at the border so that refurbishers can't get access to them because they only sell parts to people that opt into their authorized service program. If you just want to be an independent iPhone repairer, you have to get your parts from somewhere else. They block their own parts as counterfeit. They can charge you extra for parts. They can decide when your device is no longer eligible to be repaired. While picking our pockets, it also affects the planet through increased trash. Similar restrictions apply to machinery from John Deere. Farmers, who traditionally have repaired their own machinery, can no longer do that. Things have software locks and it's illegal to break the software locks. Nobody's allowed to do third party service on them. You're paying for the product and you're the product.

"The thing that determines whether you're going to be the product is not whether you pay or you don't pay. It's whether the company is afraid that they'll get in trouble. They'll lose your business. They'll get hit with a lawsuit. That there'll be some government enforcement if they treat you as the product. If they have something to fear, they'll respect you. And, if they know you have no where to go and you're locked in? There's no reason they're going to treat you well.

"There is legislation that is working it's way through Congress and Joe Biden's executive order address this. For example, the 'right to repair'. The FTC sat down a couple of decades ago and decided to not use its enforcement powers any more. The first order of business for Lena Kahn was to sit down and give them back. The son of Robert Bork (the architect of modern monopoly theory) started howling. The fact that we are now living in a world with 5 publishers and 4 talent agencies and 3 record labels and 2 media companies and 1 theater chain is fine! The world doesn't need more than 1 company that makes eye glasses. The fact that Luxottica owns every eye glass brand and the largest lens maker and every high street retail store you've ever heard of... that's fine. And, if the prices have gone up a thousand percent over the last decade? It has nothing to do with Bork's theories that let one company corner the market on your right to see stuff."

Anyway. Many people didn't expect Biden to address these issues and they are surprised. Here are some links to some articles on the topic:
Biden's Antitrust Team Signals a Big Swing at Corporate Titans (NYTimes, 7.24.21)
Facebook asks recusal of FTC head in antitrust case decision (WaPo, 7.14.21)
And, there are some bills in congress, which is good, since executive orders can easily be reversed.
Opinion: Don't want the FTC to act on antitrust? Tell Congress to get moving. (WaPo, 7.11.21)

That was very interesting, thanks for posting! I saw some headlines about "right to repair" but never dug into it. Now, I know what it is. Thanks again!
 
Going to have to close this thread soon because Trump will be President again by August

Yeah but come September 1, here in Texas we're going to have permitless, unlimited open carry of firearms. So it's all good, shouldn't be anything but a state full of heavily armed yet polite gun-toters.
 
BOOM! BOOM!


Washington — The Senate passed a budget resolution early Wednesday that lays the groundwork for Democrats' massive $3.5 trillion spending package, capping a flurry of activity just hours after senators approved a separate $1 trillion infrastructure bill.

The Senate passed the resolution on a party line vote of 50-49. The measure serves as the blueprint for President Biden's social spending agenda, and will include funds to combat climate change, establish child care programs, expand Medicare and provide a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.
 
WOW!


This administration has limited time before the midterms to get as much shit done as possible. So far, I am becoming more and more impressed, but there is so much left to do.
 
Personally, I don't Joe is going to be able to make it as President for 3 more years. I don't see him speaking to the American people unless it is in a formal setting with aides nearby. He has shown poor judgement with the Afghanistan withdrawal and aftermath. Kamala H has also not been present during a time we need to hear from them. Kamala does not appear ready to take the reins if something goes on with Joe.

Neither one of them, IMO, have 1/2 the competency of Obama. Some don't want to talk about it but I believe there will be a day of reckoning.
 
BOOM! BOOM!


Washington — The Senate passed a budget resolution early Wednesday that lays the groundwork for Democrats' massive $3.5 trillion spending package, capping a flurry of activity just hours after senators approved a separate $1 trillion infrastructure bill.

The Senate passed the resolution on a party line vote of 50-49. The measure serves as the blueprint for President Biden's social spending agenda, and will include funds to combat climate change, establish child care programs, expand Medicare and provide a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

House Passes $3.5 Trillion Budget Plan for Vast Expansion of Safety Net

This is more complicated than I realized. They voted on a 'plan', not a bill. It's a necessary step on the way to passage of a bill but it's not law yet.

The vote was 220 to 212 on party lines to approve the budget plan and allow future votes on both the infrastructure bill and a voting rights measure that the House passed soon after.

While the budget plan, which passed the Senate this month, does not have the force of law, it allows Democrats to move forward with a fast-track process known as reconciliation. That would enshrine the details of the blueprint in legislation that is shielded from a filibuster, allowing it to pass over the objections of Republicans.
It is expected to include universal preschool, paid family leave, federal support for child care and elder care, an expansion of Medicare and a broad effort to tackle climate change — all paid for through tax increases on high earners and companies.
...
The same differences between moderates and progressives that nearly derailed the plan this week promise to resurface in the weeks to come, as progressives push to make the reconciliation bill as far-reaching as possible and conservative-leaning Democrats work to limit its scope.
... more sparks to fly, guaranteed...
In a joint statement, Representative Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey and eight other moderates who had conditioned their votes for the budget on a deadline for action on infrastructure boasted that their group had succeeded in making sure that the bipartisan bill would “receive stand-alone consideration, fully de-linked, and on its own merits.”

But moments after the budget plan passed, a large group of liberal Democrats signaled that they still regarded the two measures as linked, raising the prospect of another standoff next month.
...
In the evenly divided Senate, leaders need the votes of every Democrat and independent — plus Vice President Kamala Harris, who can break ties — to win passage of the reconciliation bill. In the House, the margin is only slightly more forgiving, allowing as few as three Democrats to defect if all Republicans are opposed, as expected.
...
The divisions began to flare this month, when nine centrist Democrats publicly announced that they would not advance the budget blueprint until the House passed the Senate-passed bipartisan infrastructure agreement, which omits many of the party’s highest priorities. Liberals called the compromise insufficient.

Ms. Pelosi had already said she would not move the infrastructure bill, which includes $550 billion in new funding for roads, bridges, water and climate resiliency projects, until the reconciliation bill passed.
...
In a series of phone calls and private meetings that stretched past midnight on Monday, Democratic leaders sought to persuade their colleagues to drop their insistence on passing the infrastructure bill first. They did so after securing a hard commitment, enshrined in legislation, that a vote would come on or before Sept. 27.

Ultimately, Ms. Pelosi also pledged that the House would vote only on a reconciliation package that could clear the Senate, sparing moderate lawmakers tough votes on provisions that could never become law.
...
But progressive lawmakers remain concerned that if the reconciliation bill did not go first, provisions addressing climate change, paid family leave, health care and educational opportunity could fall by the wayside, lacking enough support to be enacted into law.
The end of September, when votes on the actual bills are scheduled, should be interesting.
 

Links to Folks we Support

Back
Top