Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (495734)	8/1/2022 7:46:15 PM
From: koan	1 Recommendation Recommended By SuperChief Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543022

Just saying-lol. What happened: Before Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) lent his crucial vote to his party's climate, tax and healthcare package, he got a commitment from Democratic leaders to pass energy permitting legislation. And Manchin on Monday released details of that side agreement that make clear he's secured the construction of a major home-state natural gas pipeline in the process. Here's a one-page summary of the energy permitting provisions obtained by POLITICO. Notably, the document says the legislation will "require the relevant agencies to take all necessary actions to permit the construction and operation of the Mountain Valley Pipeline." Manchin, also the chair of the Energy Committee, has called for the completion of the natural gas pipeline, which would send natural gas through his home state of West Virginia to the East Coast, for years.

To: koan who wrote (495734)	8/1/2022 8:00:53 PM
From: cosmicforce	1 Recommendation Recommended By Wharf Rat Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543022

I agree with Alex What was the context - what were the givens? One given, this is Sky News Australia - Rupert Murdoch's microphone. Why are you promulgating if it is a hack job? My tin foil hat detector says you've been "made a useful idiot". If I were generous, I'd say this: In 2021 - people were hurting during COVID but the checks just were sent out nonsensically. There was no underlying theory or principle behind them other than to prevent a crash caused by the sudden shutdown. It could cause economic "water-hammer".. If the given is people didn't get a raise but got $8k (which is 5% of $160,000) - they were more than made whole. It wasn't sent to those who needed it - it was just a giant surge of cash without any consideration for need or the consequence. Was it good policy? IMHO - NO!! My two employed live-at-home kids got checks no smaller than the ones my live away daughter who had higher expenses got. It was a give-away Was it needed? I'm not sure - as given. Was it beneficial? It might have CAUSED the inflation spike (ECON 101: More $$$ chasing the same goods) It did help bring some people out of poverty but it was also abused by a lot of Trump-humping sole proprietors.