|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On March 13 2020 06:13 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2020 03:41 Introvert wrote:On March 13 2020 02:24 Artisreal wrote:On March 13 2020 02:00 Introvert wrote:On March 12 2020 22:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 12 2020 22:22 Introvert wrote:
Don't have time for all of that, but as an example, Trump has not cut CDC funding. Every spending bill he has signed has increased their budget, and not by small amounts. Yet this is still something going around. Whoever you are reading, you should stop. In 2018, the CDC funds were not replenished; right this second, he's planning on continuing CDC budget cuts for next year. Nearly every news source has been talking about this over the past 1-2 weeks. No, a particular fund was not replenished, if I recall it was mainly for Zika or something like that (memory is more foggy here). Not the whole agency. Moreover, as I said, what Congress has actually done, as opposed to the president's budget, is increase spending by, according to my memory, about 8%. Why dont we let the CDC speak here instead? FY 2018: click here for source wrote:
The fiscal year (FY) 2018 President’s Budget request for CDC and ATSDR includes a total funding level of $6,037,243,000 in discretionary budget authority and the Prevention and Public Health Fund (PPHF). This is an overall decrease of $1,222,431,000 below the FY 2017 Annualized Continuing Resolution (CR) level, which is a 17% reduction. The funding amounts and programmatic approaches described below are changes compared to the FY 2017 Annualized CR level. According to another document, the final 2018 budget was $6,824 + $801 million. FY 2019: click here for source wrote:
The fiscal year (FY) 2019 budget request for CDC and ATSDR includes a total funding level of $5,722,755,000 in discretionary budget authority and PHS Evaluation Funds. This is $1,372,185,000 below the FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (CR) level. The FY 2019 budget request maintains a number of programmatic reductions and eliminations proposed in the FY 2018 President’s Budget. According to another document, the final 2019 budget was $6,478 + $805 million. FY 2020: click here for source wrote:Total program funding request for CDC is $6.594billion. Compared to FY 2019, CDC’s budget reflects: $1.276 billion decrease in Budget Authority Apparently this concept is more difficult to understand than I thought. What is requested is not what is allocated. The president's excellent head of OMB has requested a cut to many departments. Those cuts have not and will never happen, because congress gives out the cash, not the president. I will find the CBO report later if you really need convincing, but the last spending bill substantially increases the CDC's budget. We're talking what actually happens, not what the President asks for. Am I misreading the PDF I linked twice? It contains factual numbers that aren't labeled as pres requested, which per source also linked, was way lower. I might not understand.
His argument has shifted from "Trump increased CDC funding but is being blamed by the libs for cutting it" to "Trump tried to cut CDC funding but congress stopped him so he should get credit for increasing it" .
I would not bother any further.
|
Ohio officials are estimating 100,000 people with COVID-19 in the state
Ohio officials said Thursday that more than 100,000 people in the state are believed to carry the novel coronavirus, reinforcing fears that infections are far more widespread in the United States than limited testing confirms.
“We know now, just the fact of community spread says that at least 1 percent, at the very least 1 percent of our population is carrying this virus in Ohio today,” said Amy Acton, director of the Ohio Department of Health.
www.washingtonpost.com
|
On March 13 2020 06:13 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2020 03:41 Introvert wrote:On March 13 2020 02:24 Artisreal wrote:On March 13 2020 02:00 Introvert wrote:On March 12 2020 22:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 12 2020 22:22 Introvert wrote:
Don't have time for all of that, but as an example, Trump has not cut CDC funding. Every spending bill he has signed has increased their budget, and not by small amounts. Yet this is still something going around. Whoever you are reading, you should stop. In 2018, the CDC funds were not replenished; right this second, he's planning on continuing CDC budget cuts for next year. Nearly every news source has been talking about this over the past 1-2 weeks. No, a particular fund was not replenished, if I recall it was mainly for Zika or something like that (memory is more foggy here). Not the whole agency. Moreover, as I said, what Congress has actually done, as opposed to the president's budget, is increase spending by, according to my memory, about 8%. Why dont we let the CDC speak here instead? FY 2018: click here for source wrote:
The fiscal year (FY) 2018 President’s Budget request for CDC and ATSDR includes a total funding level of $6,037,243,000 in discretionary budget authority and the Prevention and Public Health Fund (PPHF). This is an overall decrease of $1,222,431,000 below the FY 2017 Annualized Continuing Resolution (CR) level, which is a 17% reduction. The funding amounts and programmatic approaches described below are changes compared to the FY 2017 Annualized CR level. According to another document, the final 2018 budget was $6,824 + $801 million. FY 2019: click here for source wrote:
The fiscal year (FY) 2019 budget request for CDC and ATSDR includes a total funding level of $5,722,755,000 in discretionary budget authority and PHS Evaluation Funds. This is $1,372,185,000 below the FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (CR) level. The FY 2019 budget request maintains a number of programmatic reductions and eliminations proposed in the FY 2018 President’s Budget. According to another document, the final 2019 budget was $6,478 + $805 million. FY 2020: click here for source wrote:Total program funding request for CDC is $6.594billion. Compared to FY 2019, CDC’s budget reflects: $1.276 billion decrease in Budget Authority Apparently this concept is more difficult to understand than I thought. What is requested is not what is allocated. The president's excellent head of OMB has requested a cut to many departments. Those cuts have not and will never happen, because congress gives out the cash, not the president. I will find the CBO report later if you really need convincing, but the last spending bill substantially increases the CDC's budget. We're talking what actually happens, not what the President asks for. Am I misreading the PDF I linked twice? It contains factual numbers that aren't labeled as pres requested, which per source also linked, was way lower. I might not understand.
the header of those documents all say something like "CDC-Budget Request Overview" and "FY 2020 President's Budget Request"
|
|
|
On March 13 2020 07:03 Belisarius wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2020 06:13 Artisreal wrote:On March 13 2020 03:41 Introvert wrote:On March 13 2020 02:24 Artisreal wrote:On March 13 2020 02:00 Introvert wrote:On March 12 2020 22:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 12 2020 22:22 Introvert wrote:
Don't have time for all of that, but as an example, Trump has not cut CDC funding. Every spending bill he has signed has increased their budget, and not by small amounts. Yet this is still something going around. Whoever you are reading, you should stop. In 2018, the CDC funds were not replenished; right this second, he's planning on continuing CDC budget cuts for next year. Nearly every news source has been talking about this over the past 1-2 weeks. No, a particular fund was not replenished, if I recall it was mainly for Zika or something like that (memory is more foggy here). Not the whole agency. Moreover, as I said, what Congress has actually done, as opposed to the president's budget, is increase spending by, according to my memory, about 8%. Why dont we let the CDC speak here instead? FY 2018: click here for source wrote:
The fiscal year (FY) 2018 President’s Budget request for CDC and ATSDR includes a total funding level of $6,037,243,000 in discretionary budget authority and the Prevention and Public Health Fund (PPHF). This is an overall decrease of $1,222,431,000 below the FY 2017 Annualized Continuing Resolution (CR) level, which is a 17% reduction. The funding amounts and programmatic approaches described below are changes compared to the FY 2017 Annualized CR level. According to another document, the final 2018 budget was $6,824 + $801 million. FY 2019: click here for source wrote:
The fiscal year (FY) 2019 budget request for CDC and ATSDR includes a total funding level of $5,722,755,000 in discretionary budget authority and PHS Evaluation Funds. This is $1,372,185,000 below the FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (CR) level. The FY 2019 budget request maintains a number of programmatic reductions and eliminations proposed in the FY 2018 President’s Budget. According to another document, the final 2019 budget was $6,478 + $805 million. FY 2020: click here for source wrote:Total program funding request for CDC is $6.594billion. Compared to FY 2019, CDC’s budget reflects: $1.276 billion decrease in Budget Authority Apparently this concept is more difficult to understand than I thought. What is requested is not what is allocated. The president's excellent head of OMB has requested a cut to many departments. Those cuts have not and will never happen, because congress gives out the cash, not the president. I will find the CBO report later if you really need convincing, but the last spending bill substantially increases the CDC's budget. We're talking what actually happens, not what the President asks for. Am I misreading the PDF I linked twice? It contains factual numbers that aren't labeled as pres requested, which per source also linked, was way lower. I might not understand. His argument has shifted from "Trump increased CDC funding but is being blamed by the libs for cutting it" to "Trump tried to cut CDC funding but congress stopped him so he should get credit for increasing it" . I would not bother any further.
I responded to someone saying Trump cut the CDC budget. That is factually untrue. Your first summary of what I said in quotes doesn't even make sense but maybe that was a typographical error. I gave no one credit or blame.
|
On March 13 2020 07:32 Artisreal wrote:
But the data doesn't.
Dude, read the parts you quoted to me also.
They all begin something like "The fiscal year (FY) 201X President’s Budget request." before listing numbers.
|
On March 13 2020 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Ohio officials are estimating 100,000 people with COVID-19 in the state Show nested quote +Ohio officials said Thursday that more than 100,000 people in the state are believed to carry the novel coronavirus, reinforcing fears that infections are far more widespread in the United States than limited testing confirms.
“We know now, just the fact of community spread says that at least 1 percent, at the very least 1 percent of our population is carrying this virus in Ohio today,” said Amy Acton, director of the Ohio Department of Health. www.washingtonpost.com
At my court in Ohio, we are assuming the worst and are going totally remote.
|
On March 13 2020 07:33 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2020 07:03 Belisarius wrote:On March 13 2020 06:13 Artisreal wrote:On March 13 2020 03:41 Introvert wrote:On March 13 2020 02:24 Artisreal wrote:On March 13 2020 02:00 Introvert wrote:On March 12 2020 22:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 12 2020 22:22 Introvert wrote:
Don't have time for all of that, but as an example, Trump has not cut CDC funding. Every spending bill he has signed has increased their budget, and not by small amounts. Yet this is still something going around. Whoever you are reading, you should stop. In 2018, the CDC funds were not replenished; right this second, he's planning on continuing CDC budget cuts for next year. Nearly every news source has been talking about this over the past 1-2 weeks. No, a particular fund was not replenished, if I recall it was mainly for Zika or something like that (memory is more foggy here). Not the whole agency. Moreover, as I said, what Congress has actually done, as opposed to the president's budget, is increase spending by, according to my memory, about 8%. Why dont we let the CDC speak here instead? FY 2018: click here for source wrote:
The fiscal year (FY) 2018 President’s Budget request for CDC and ATSDR includes a total funding level of $6,037,243,000 in discretionary budget authority and the Prevention and Public Health Fund (PPHF). This is an overall decrease of $1,222,431,000 below the FY 2017 Annualized Continuing Resolution (CR) level, which is a 17% reduction. The funding amounts and programmatic approaches described below are changes compared to the FY 2017 Annualized CR level. According to another document, the final 2018 budget was $6,824 + $801 million. FY 2019: click here for source wrote:
The fiscal year (FY) 2019 budget request for CDC and ATSDR includes a total funding level of $5,722,755,000 in discretionary budget authority and PHS Evaluation Funds. This is $1,372,185,000 below the FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (CR) level. The FY 2019 budget request maintains a number of programmatic reductions and eliminations proposed in the FY 2018 President’s Budget. According to another document, the final 2019 budget was $6,478 + $805 million. FY 2020: click here for source wrote:Total program funding request for CDC is $6.594billion. Compared to FY 2019, CDC’s budget reflects: $1.276 billion decrease in Budget Authority Apparently this concept is more difficult to understand than I thought. What is requested is not what is allocated. The president's excellent head of OMB has requested a cut to many departments. Those cuts have not and will never happen, because congress gives out the cash, not the president. I will find the CBO report later if you really need convincing, but the last spending bill substantially increases the CDC's budget. We're talking what actually happens, not what the President asks for. Am I misreading the PDF I linked twice? It contains factual numbers that aren't labeled as pres requested, which per source also linked, was way lower. I might not understand. His argument has shifted from "Trump increased CDC funding but is being blamed by the libs for cutting it" to "Trump tried to cut CDC funding but congress stopped him so he should get credit for increasing it" . I would not bother any further. I responded to someone saying Trump cut the CDC budget. That is factually untrue. Your first summary of what I said in quotes doesn't even make sense but maybe that was a typographical error. I gave no one credit or blame.
It seems like a weird thing to get hung up on though. If you were just someone who thinks facts are important and even minor falsehoods should be corrected promptly and publicly, why is this the one to focus on? There’s a lot of COVID falsehoods going around atm, including some weird ones from the president himself.
On the specific issue at hand: presumably Congressional allocations aren’t the “actual” budget either, though. I don’t know much about federal agency budgetary practices, but presumably the executive requests a budget, Congress allocates money, and then the agencies actually spend it. The first number would be requested, the second allocated, and the third actual.
So did the CDC actually spend the money? I haven’t seen the numbers, and wouldn’t know where to look. But if they were told to cut costs by the WH, then “Trump cut the CDC budget” would seem pretty accurate.
|
The snopes article on the CDC Budget cuts:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-cut-cdc-budget/
*Trump's 2021 budget proposal includes cuts to CDC activities related to chronic disease. Congress hasn't approved the budget.
*Biggest cut is to international HIV/AIDS program, but there's an increase for global health security.
*This is not the first time that Trump's team has proposed cuts, but have been overruled by congress in the past.
*erosion of a CDC grant program for state and local public health emergency preparedness, but set in motion before Trump.
*2018, Trump fired key officials connected to US pandemic response and they were not replaced.
*2018 80% reduction in the CDC's program that worked in various countries to fight epidemics. A result of the depletion of previously allotted funding.
*“Countries where the CDC is planning to scale back include some of the world’s hot spots for emerging infectious disease, such as China, Pakistan, Haiti, Rwanda and Congo,” the Washington Post reported in 2018.
So, Trump has proposed multiple cuts to the CDC, only to be rebuked by congress. He did fire a bunch of officials at the CDC without replacing them and the country did not allocate new money for emerging infectious disease in China when the old money ran out as expected.
Sounds like Trump proposed all the wrong solutions. Congress held him partially in check, but didn't fully do what they needed to do to prevent what happened. Yeah, when you get to the facts, Trump looks fucking terrible in all of this. When you add on his ridiculous lies in Tweets and press conferences, it is an utter failure as president.
|
|
|
Follow up: My company, which doesn't qualify as essential has decided to stay open and will be having a manager meeting during my shift. I have elected to call out for at least tomorrow until I know the results of said meeting as there is 0 legal protections for me currently and just being there puts my two 65+yo parents that I live with at further risk.
Those conditions at a time like this does not make my starvation wage job reasonable.
|
That's shitty man, sorry to hear you have to make choices like that.
|
That travel ban looks like it might be a good thing, help to keep the rest of the world out of the petri dish that is the United States.
|
On March 13 2020 09:11 Zambrah wrote:
That travel ban looks like it might be a good thing, help to keep the rest of the world out of the petri dish that is the United States.
I was thinking similar.
At first i somehow felt somewhat offended, but after looking closer at how the US handles this pandemic (or the shocking, jaw dropping lack of handling), i started to be happy again.
Then i remembered that i now live in the US' poodle buddy, the UK, and now i'm concerned again.
I absolutely can't grasp why people aren't taking to the streets (well probably not the greatest idea currently, granted) and demanding actual action. Four days ago, the US tested a whopping 4500 people altogether, nationwide - of which around 10% tested positive. That's a ridiculous number. Both because it's so laughably small in people tested, and because it's so shockingly obvious that there's a lot of cases out there.
If that doesn't show the blatant inability of your administration, i don't know who's worse: trump, trying his usual spin of "hoax", then "foreign invasion" - or people actually arguing that this isn't the absolutely most retarded way possible to respond to something that is fucking obviously the worst threat to our health in our lifetime/generation. To the point where the UK Prime Minister prepares his people with the sentence "more families, uh, many more families are going to lose loved ones before their time".
I can't stand the dumb memes of "flu kills that many people, corona only killed that many" - which is basically the US in a nutshell. I just can't fathom the idiocy of it.
|
On March 13 2020 09:34 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2020 09:11 Zambrah wrote:
That travel ban looks like it might be a good thing, help to keep the rest of the world out of the petri dish that is the United States. I was thinking similar. At first i somehow felt somewhat offended, but after looking closer at how the US handles this pandemic (or the shocking, jaw dropping lack of handling), i started to be happy again. Then i remembered that i now live in the US' poodle buddy, the UK, and now i'm concerned again. I absolutely can't grasp why people aren't taking to the streets (well probably not the greatest idea currently, granted) and demanding actual action. Four days ago, the US tested a whopping 4500 people altogether, nationwide - of which around 10% tested positive. That's a ridiculous number. Both because it's so laughably small in people tested, and because it's so shockingly obvious that there's a lot of cases out there. If that doesn't show the blatant inability of your administration, i don't know who's worse: trump, trying his usual spin of "hoax", then "foreign invasion" - or people actually arguing that this isn't the absolutely most retarded way possible to respond to something that is fucking obviously the worst threat to our health in our lifetime/generation. To the point where the UK Prime Minister prepares his people with the sentence "more families, uh, many more families are going to lose loved ones before their time". I can't stand the dumb memes of "flu kills that many people, corona only killed that many" - which is basically the US in a nutshell. I just can't fathom the idiocy of it.
Well the USA will have Flu numbers as well at the end of the year. If flu is gigantic in comparison to previous years, you'll have a good idea of how serious it actually was.
|
I'm actually quite worried about the rhetoric by Trump and the Republicans to blame this on China. Not saying that the CCP is the good guys, but worried about the rising Sinophobia in the USA.
I certainly have my thoughts on the CCP and those wet markets, but Asians in the USA aren't to blame, yet I fear that they will increasingly become the scapegoat. After all, if a third of the country worships Trump, they will find another target to blame to deflect criticism off of their leader
|
How funny would it be if this gets so bad Trump resigns/gets removed, then Biden decides he doesn't want to be president anymore because the main goal of beating Trump isn't there. and Bernie or someone else ends up becoming president.
|
On March 13 2020 09:11 Zambrah wrote:
That travel ban looks like it might be a good thing, help to keep the rest of the world out of the petri dish that is the United States.
I don't quite understand the logic though, since he's still allowing us to leave and come back, right?. If he's not allowing outsiders to come in, but he's still letting insiders go out and come back in, can't the virus still spread between the US and other countries?
|
On March 13 2020 10:08 HelpMeGetBetter wrote:
How funny would it be if this gets so bad Trump resigns/gets removed, then Biden decides he doesn't want to be president anymore because the main goal of beating Trump isn't there. and Bernie or someone else ends up becoming president.
I think Biden legitimately wants to become president and I don't think Trump or Senate Republicans will ever remove Trump, especially since even with covid-19 being mismanaged, he'll still have a decent chance of winning the next election.
|
On March 13 2020 10:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2020 09:11 Zambrah wrote:
That travel ban looks like it might be a good thing, help to keep the rest of the world out of the petri dish that is the United States. I don't quite understand the logic though, since he's still allowing us to leave and come back, right?. If he's not allowing outsiders to come in, but he's still letting insiders go out and come back in, can't the virus still spread between the US and other countries?
Its not really logical, just a snide comment, lol.
The best it might do is provoke people to spitefully choose not to visit the US which is probably in their best interest, really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
