General Question

Aster's avatar

What are Joe Biden's main plans for our future economy?

Asked by Aster (19874points) 4 weeks ago

I have watched a dozen videos of him but cannot determine what he has planned for the US. What is his platform on Social Security , taxes, social unrest and climate change?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

41 Answers

Yellowdog's avatar

All they are saying is how bad Donald Trump is. I have been watching the conventions, and nothing is said about the future economy. I know this is General, and I am just saying, I don’t think Biden has any such plans,

Aster's avatar

I dont know how you can run the country without plans. But I have not heard him speak recently.

KNOWITALL's avatar

I’ve also heard no plans, while economies like Japan also are sliding or have slid into recession. I’m curious though!

Darth_Algar's avatar

Gee, if only there was some kind of page that one could look up and access on one of those interweb computer things, that details such things. If only…

seawulf575's avatar

I said long ago that all the Dems will run on is “Hate Trump”. Look at most of the speeches from their primary. Every speaker did nothing but spew hatred of Trump. That is not a plan for the future and gives no idea of what he plans to do. @Darth_Algar Yeah, you could look at that if you want campaign promises. Go back and read it. There is zero actual plan there. It is all typical political double-speak. It reads like Bill Clinton’s speeches and debates when he first won the presidency. “My plan will do this, and My plan will do that”....but never actually saying what his plan was. So yeah, Joe says he thinks all these things are important, so lay out the plan for how you intend to meet those goals. And the one about how he wants to re-make the economy REALLY needs to be explained other than statements that sound amazingly like “it’ll be great!”.

Aster's avatar

@Darth_Algar if those are all his plans I wonder who wrote that because Biden definitely had no hand in writing it. Not sure he could even repeat it.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@seawulf575

It’s actually much more detailed than anything on the Trump campaign site. Trump’s site says absolutely nil about what his plans are for his second term (aside from vague “make America great” slogans) and are all about great Trump is.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Aster

Then why bother asking the question when you’re just going to be dismissive when presented with an actual answer?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Aster It sounds like Trumps, if that helps.

Aster's avatar

@Darth_Algar I was dismissive because I don’t consider that his platform. I am certain someone else wrote all of that. I guess “fake” will suffice.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Aster

And it wouldn’t matter if he spent an hour face-to-face with you, discussing in detail, what his plans were, you’d still say “well I’m sure someone else wrote that”. So why bother even asking the question?

stanleybmanly's avatar

I too am disappointed that he doesn’t brag constantly about being the best thing thing ever to happen in the world. He neglects to tell us that he “knows more words than anyone”, knows more about Isis and any other military matters than his country’s generals. He not only neglects to promise to cage kids at the border, he refuses to divulge any sign of manhood or initiative through bribery of a single hooker. He lacks a single indictment or criminal conviction, failed to establish a single con game disguised as a university, has yet to be distinguished for dodging the draft, cheating every bank, contractor or municipality in which he has conducted business. He has yet to produce a single lying biography of himself or amass a sizable library of volumes noted primarily as catalogs of his defects. He refuses to commit to a Presidency with his nose up Putin’s ass or to distinguish the nation’s security as services dedicated to his own destruction.

Aster's avatar

@Darth_Algar no; if Biden had a discussion with me face to face I’d say, ” well, what a nice man. He means well, poor thing.”

stanleybmanly's avatar

@Aster Of course anyone would prefer the PROVEN duplicitous asshole to the “poor” nice man.

Darth_Algar's avatar

Meanwhile, here’s Trump’s response, when asked by Sean Hannity (one of the most unabashed pro-Trump broadcasters on TV) what his priorities for a second term are -

“Well one of the things that will be really great, you know, the word experience is still good. I always say that talent is more important than experience. I’ve always said that. But the word experience is a very important word. It’s a very important meaning. I never did this before. I never slept over in Washington before. I was in Washington, I think, all of 17 times. All of a sudden I’m President of the United States. You know the story. I’m riding down Pennsylvania with our First Lady, and I say ‘this is great’. But I didn’t know many people in Washington. It wasn’t my thing. I was from Manhattan, from New York. Now I know everybody. And I have great people in this administration. You make some mistakes, like, you know, an idiot like John Bolton. All he wanted to do was drop bombs on everybody. You don’t have to drop bombs on everybody. You don’t have to kill people.”

- So there you have it. There’s Trump’s “plans” for his second term.

Aster's avatar

@stanleybmanly I will admit to having a weakness for very intelligent , verbal and charming men over nice, aging men with dementia who stutter. But yeah; he’s nice. He seems very sweet.

stanleybmanly's avatar

You don’t don’t need a platform and any plan is is useless if you:

1. Believe Frederick Douglas still lives.

2. have never (or can’t) read a book.

3. cannot pronounce (or never heard of) Yosemite.

4. know NOTHING about your country or its government

mazingerz88's avatar

Here is Tomasky’s opinion in the NYT. Catchy title IMO.

==========================

WHY RECENT REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS HAVE BEEN ECONOMIC FAILURES

Joe Biden should remind Americans that Democrats have been better stewards of the economy for decades.

========

On Thursday night, Joe Biden will address the country as the official nominee of the Democratic Party. If the voters decide on Nov. 3 to make him president, he will face a big job on a lot of fronts.

One of them is the economy: He will be the third consecutive Democratic president, going back a full three decades, who has had to clean up a mess left for him by a Republican predecessor.

Yes, that’s three Republican economic failures in a row. When will the American people figure out that we have a pattern here?

Well, for starters, when Democrats get around to telling them. For my money, that is Mr. Biden and his party’s No. 1 job between now and Election Day: Make it clear that Democrats have been better stewards of the economy — for decades, and by far.

Many people don’t believe this. The perception that Republicans are better at handling money is hard-wired.

In a new NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll, President Trump enjoyed a 10-point margin over Mr. Biden on the question of who would handle the economy better — even as 77 percent of respondents rated the economy today as “only fair” or “poor.”

But it’s true. As I’ve been arguing for some time (most recently in The Daily Beast), the country has done better for decades under Democrats, by nearly every major economic measure.

From John Kennedy through Barack Obama — 56 years during which, as it happens, we had a Democratic president for 28 years and a Republican president for 28 — we saw more than 50 million jobs created under Democrats and just 24 million jobs created under Republicans.

Even the stock market has performed better under Democratic presidents.

It’s true that just toting up numbers by the months each party had in power is imprecise. But there’s no better way to do it, and if all these numbers were reversed, Republicans would make sure Americans knew about it.

They would also make sure Americans were well aware of such an important and consistent failure from the other party. But Democrats have largely failed to punch home just how destructive Republican economic stewardship has been.

George H.W. Bush presided over a modest failure compared with the recent ones. He was in office for a recession in 1990–91. In fairness, little about that recession was his fault.

It was brought on by factors beyond his control, among them measures taken by the Federal Reserve to lower inflation and the oil price shocks in the wake of Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

The recession ended in time for the 1992 election, but the recovery was largely jobless. And on those crucial occasions when President Bush was called on to show he understood the American people’s hardships, he flubbed it.

While he signed a tax increase to raise revenue (and paid a big political price for breaking his “read my lips” promise), he did little in policy terms to get the country moving again.

Bill Clinton came in and presided over — yes, Ronald Reagan fans — the most economically successful eight years in the last half century.

The Clinton recovery started, it’s worth noting, with a budget bill in his first year that received not a single Republican vote in Congress.

And while it’s true that Mr. Clinton made moves that have come to be criticized — like following the lead of Wall Street-friendly advisers like his secretary of Treasury, Robert Rubin, and signing a Republican bill that deregulated banking — he left office having created 22 million jobs and reduced the budget deficit, as he liked to put it, from 11 zeros to simply zero. (In fact, he left a budget surplus.)

Seven years later, in 2008, George W. Bush came razor-close to overseeing a collapse of the global economy.

Much of it was his fault, or his administration’s. The most notable misstep was a lack of regulation of the banking sector.

In 2008, the economy lost around 2.5 million jobs, an average of around 215,000 a month for the entire year.

Liberals will forever debate whether Barack Obama did enough. (Should the stimulus have been larger? Should some bankers have been prosecuted?)

Still, the country went from losing 700,000 jobs a month when Mr. Obama took office to gaining, over his second term, an average of about 199,000 jobs a month.

He did this despite Republicans’ rediscovery of austerity, which they imposed through wall-to-wall obstruction, even risking the country’s credit standing by tying a debt-limit increase to spending-cut demands.

President Trump’s economy — enhanced by massive deficit spending, which somehow ceased to bother Republicans — was chugging along before the pandemic, creating around 6.6 million jobs, or about 175,000 a month (still lower than Mr. Obama’s second term average).

He made no effort to address the longstanding problem of economic inequality and arguably exacerbated it with his 2017 tax cut. And since the coronavirus crisis, according to the St. Louis Fed, the economy has lost nearly 13 million jobs, leaving Mr. Trump, for now, more than six million jobs in the red.

Obviously, the coronavirus was not Mr. Trump’s fault. He can be faulted, however, for the botched response to it and for much of the resulting economic mess.

A national lockdown from March to June, besides limiting the number of deaths, would have made that illusory “V-shaped recovery” far more likely and the economy far more resilient.

But the Trump administration didn’t do that. And experts foresee more economic duress. The Conference Board, for example, predicts a baseline contraction of gross domestic product by about 5 percent in 2020.

These Republican failures are not an unhappy coincidence. They’re a result of conservative governing practice.

Republicans no longer fundamentally believe in the workings of government, so they don’t govern well. Their contempt for government is a result of conservative economic theory.

Yet somehow, perhaps in part because liberals have sometimes borrowed or adapted some of the economic theories espoused by Republicans, Democrats rarely manage to convey this.

I know what I’ll be listening for in Mr. Biden’s acceptance speech — and in every speech that he and other Democrats give until Nov. 3.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Believe me, in the upcoming election, only a truly ignorant and hopeless bonehead will succumb to any notion of stacking Biden’s record or qualifications against those of the fool. By now there is no longer a doubt to any questions regarding which is dumber or who is more ethical, which has a better grasp on our government and the world. There is no contest, and would be no contest if Trump’s opposition were a popsicle stick.

Aster's avatar

I absolutely can’t wait for his acceptance speech and hope it isn’t 90% of his wife talking. Not that there will be such a speech. I think America is weary of the virus and may tend to blame Trump for it but at least he stays visible and sounds “with it” when he speaks. Of course even Trump makes a gaffe now and then.

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
stanleybmanly's avatar

@Aster now and then? really?

Darth_Algar's avatar

Trump sounds “with it”? El-Oh-El.

kritiper's avatar

Tune in tonight (Aug. 20, 2020) and he’ll tell you.

rockfan's avatar

Well, Biden has repeatedly had a big disdain for universal healthcare, a healthcare system that every modern country has a form of. Which means that Biden isn’t going to do anything to fix the broken healthcare system. He even said it wouldn’t help during a pandemic. Probably one of the dumbest things he’s ever uttered.

hmmmmmm's avatar

Biden: ”nothing will fundamentally change” (if i’m elected)

AlaskaTundrea's avatar

I see I’m a little late to the game thinking I’d share Biden’s website with plans and more plans, not that Aster or friends really wanted to know. Just another way to toss a subtle, albeit false, slam at Biden/Harris.

mazingerz88's avatar

For those interested here is that article from @Tropical_Willie‘s link.

======================

Joe Biden’s Health Care Plan Would Fix the Individual Health Insurance System

Robert Laszewski

======================

IF the Democrats capture the White House, keep the House and take over the Senate, no matter who they elect as President, this Biden health care outline, not Medicare for all, will likely be the plan Democrats embrace in 2021

And, with Buttigieg and Bloomberg embracing very similar health care outlines, while Warren backs off her Medicare for all proposal, that looks all the more likely.

The Biden health care proposal directly takes on the big things that haven’t worked in Obamacare.

Here are the things that are most broken in Obamacare:

The individual health insurance premiums and deductibles are, and have from the beginning of the program, been unaffordable for many but the most subsidized consumers.

That has led to dramatic anti-selection in the risk pool––particularly among those who get little or no subsidy.

That in turn has led to a cycle of ever higher and more unaffordable premiums and deductibles––it isn’t uncommon to now see unsubsidized family premiums in the $15,000 to $20,000 annual cost range with deductibles of $7,000 per person.

That has led to dramatic shrinkage in the number of those covered in recent years––particularly among the unsubsidized where the number of those covered fell by 40% during 2016 and 2017.

To counter substantial underwriting losses early in the insurance exchanges, the insurance companies dramatically increased premiums until the most highly subsidized and premium insulated consumers dominated the enrollment and the carriers had the premiums high enough that they made record profits––they are slated to rebate $800 million this year because they exceeded the law’s profit limitations.

What has worked is the Medicaid expansion where 12 million people have gained coverage in the 33 states that have expanded it––likely more states will do so shortly because public support in one traditionally Republican state after another––such as Virginia, Nebraska, Maine, Idaho, and Utah––has grown.

With that backdrop, here is what Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden is proposing.

First, he is proposing to fix what he sees as wrong with the Obamacare individual health insurance market––not proposing a single-payer Medicare for all plan and thereby not doing away with employer-based care or tinkering with Medicare as we now have it for seniors.

Biden has a comprehensive plan to make the Obamacare individual market policies more affordable.

He would:

Base policy subsidies on the more expensive “Gold” plans that have relatively low deductibles, rather then the “Silver” plans that have higher deductibles.

This would dramatically reduce the deductibles and co-pays subsidized people now face.

Make most families and individuals eligible for premium subsidies by removing the current cap limiting subsidies to only those who make less than 400% of the federal poverty level––under his plan all individual market consumers would pay no more than 8.5% of their income on health insurance premiums.

Make coverage available to the 5 million low-income consumers in states that have not expanded Medicaid by offering access to a federal premium-free option.

The Biden plan directly takes on the most problematic parts of Obamacare by making individual market coverage affordable––particularly for the middle-class who are now the ones most hurt by the existing program.

The fundamental reason the Obamacare individual market policies have seen a long succession of more and more unaffordable rate increases is because of “anti-selection”––as the prices increase more, and more healthy people find the coverage unaffordable, and as a result take the risk of dropping out, leaving the sickest participants behind, and the prices even higher.

A healthy and efficient risk pool requires about 75% of the market to participate in order to ensure there are enough healthy people paying into the pool to pay the claims of the sick.

It is likely that as much as 40% of today’s high rates are directly the result of premium loading to counter the fact that less than 40% of the eligible market ever enrolled.

That loading essentially amounted to the big Obamacare rate increases in recent years that were in excess of baseline health cost inflation.

Ultimately, as enrollment would ramp up under the Biden plan to an efficient level, the anti-selection premium-load carriers have had to apply to Obamacare in recent years, because healthy consumers fled the program, could be reversed as those same healthy consumers returned.

That is a process that would likely take a few renewal cycles as the risk pool improved and health plans were able to recognize better results.

And, I would expect Democrats would reinstate an incentive for people to carry insurance as they have done in a number of Democratic states.

Separately, premiums would continue to rise to offset annual health care inflation.

Biden also deals with a number of other health care system issues:

Medicare could negotiate directly with drug companies for lower prices in that program.

Launch prices for drugs that face no competition would have their Medicare and individual market prices tied to a process called “external reference pricing”––based on what a market basket of other nations are willing to pay thereby bringing U.S. prices more in line with what is paid in other industrialized economies.

Biden would increase the community health center budget to improve care for underserved populations.

Biden would pay for his plan by:

Eliminating the 20% flat tax on capital gains for those with incomes over $1 million and have them pay the top tax rate of 39.6% on capital gains.

Roll back the Trump tax cuts for the “very wealthy” and restore the top bracket to 39.6%.

Biden is also proposing a public option to be marketed alongside the private individual health insurance options in the insurance exchanges:

“Whether you’re covered through your employer, buying your insurance on your own, or going without coverage altogether, the Biden Plan will give you the choice to purchase a public option health insurance option like Medicare…by negotiating lower prices from hospitals and other health care providers.”

Biden goes beyond the historic definition of a public option by making it available to people beyond the individual health insurance market––even letting those participating in employer-based care to opt out of their coverage to take advantage of it.

This is the most controversial part of his plan.

Insurance companies, hospitals, doctors, and other health care providers are likely to cheer his proposed efforts to make individual market policies more attractive––and thereby enable insurers to sell more policies in a more stable market and have those private policies pay providers for more care at commercial reimbursement rates.

But effectively putting Medicare in direct competition with the insurance companies and paying providers at Medicare rates––about 50% lower than commercial rates for hospitals and 20% less on average for doctors, and much less for certain specialties––will be a much heavier political lift.

Most Democrats now regret that they didn’t include the public option when they passed Obamacare in 2010 and found themselves in bed with the insurance industry as Obamacare floundered in the face of unaffordable premiums for the middle-class.

If Democrats can’t get to Medicare for all in 2020, and as I said in an earlier post I don’t believe they can, they will surely settle for nothing less than a public option.

IF the Democrats capture the White House, keep the House and take over the Senate, no matter who they elect as President, this Biden health care outline, not Medicare for all, will likely be the plan Democrats embrace in 2021.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@Aster By the way, exactly what plans do you suppose Trump ever wrote, or even managed to repeat (since he cannot read)?

Tropical_Willie's avatar

I’ve seen no plans by the “stable genius” !

“It is what is is !” SMDH comes to mind and Covfefe also comes to mind !

The Trump is a spin doctor and not a good one but his daddy had lots of money ! !

Aster's avatar

@stanleybmanly I agree that since “he can’t read” he is incapable of writing a sentence and has never read one single book. Must have made junior high difficult not being able to read. No wonder he has been so unsuccessful in life.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Aster I wish I was so stupid and unsuccessful as to be worth billions.

(Trump is/was worth 2.1 billion as of 2020)
(Biden was worth 9 billion in 2019.)

chyna's avatar

Trump inherited much of his wealth. Other than that, we don’t really know his worth since he is withholding his tax records.
Biden earned his own money.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@KNOWITALL

[citation needed]

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Here you go. . . . @Darth_Algar . . . . . . . . . Joe Biden is worth 9 Million not Billion!

Trump is as of April now worth $2.1 billion. Which may not be good if he still owes a lot of money to the Russian Mafia

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Tropical_Willie

Right. I knew Joe had earned a few bucks since leaving office. I just found the $9 billion claim ridiculous on its face.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

And note that Trump lost 37% of his worth between March 1, 2020 and March 18, 2020. Like I said hope he is not into the Russians real heavy like he was before to build up the Trump Resorts.

Yellowdog's avatar

You could have a legitimate discussion if you didn’t go off into insane fictions every now and then and leave the path of reality.

Darth_Algar's avatar

And the Republican party have basically just said fuck it, we ain’t even bothering at this point.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther