Biden/Harris Presidency Discussion Thread

Deleted User wrote: »

Except we know some of the policies which he's bringing in. Bringing back DACA, asylum seekers won't be staying in Mexico while asylum is being considered. Also making a point of reuniting the children who were separated from their parents. So already a drastic improvement.
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-virus-outbreak-immigration-2c47c4e0f429476e991a1aff67cbb90b

When Biden does wrong, I imagine most will criticise him for the record. But at the moment, you're just looking for reasons to be outraged.

Yeah, I'm not sure what the apparent issue is.

The options regarding immigration/asylum in broad are:
- The Trump route of stopping as many as possible, not allowing them in the country at all - creating tent cities on the border which are riddled with crime
- The Obama route of letting people in and going through the process in the US as humanely as possible and deporting anyone that doesn't meet the relevant criteria
- A open door and welcome mat for anyone that arrives at the border

There is absolutely no public support for option 3 and the Obama policy was far better for all involved than what Trump has been doing. Seeing raw numbers of deportations as a 'bad' thing points to a lack of understanding of the situation.

I find the political conversation around immigration tiring in it's deceitfulness. Large chunks of the economy are dependent on the cheap labor, yet there's this insistence on denying that reality in the law. I have sympathy for the concept that laws ought to be enforced and not willfully ignored for political reasons, but when you have a situation as untenable as currently exists, something has to give.

Nothing new though, just another facet of an economy built on gross exploitation of workers.

Speaking to an audience of more than 300 institutional investors who control trillions of euro in funds, Mr Donohoe said a Biden administration would drive forward the OECD reform agenda on corporate tax, which would bring “challenges” for Ireland.
https://amp.independent.ie/business/irish/irish-corporate-tax-take-could-be-negatively-affected-by-a-biden-presidency-39777128.html?__twitter_impression=true

landofthetree wrote: »

Speaking to an audience of more than 300 institutional investors who control trillions of euro in funds, Mr Donohoe said a Biden administration would drive forward the OECD reform agenda on corporate tax, which would bring “challenges” for Ireland.
https://amp.independent.ie/business/irish/irish-corporate-tax-take-could-be-negatively-affected-by-a-biden-presidency-39777128.html?__twitter_impression=true

He doesn't need the oecd it's the US system that needs reform. I already said it before this is low hanging fruit for any US government i.e reduce the trade deficit etc. Surprisingly I think biden knows this when I see someone like Brad Setser on the transition team. If he were to get a full time job in the admin then Ireland is serious trouble.

Ireland keeps been thrown around in name in relation to tax avoidance. The biggest players in the global market for Tax Avoidance and facilitation of same is infact the US itself and the UK. No other country what so ever comes even remotely close. Ireland benefits of course from its tax makeup but companies also are given access to the EU market with english speaking and an ease of business. Irishness itself is very globally open outside of just a fiscal sense.

But thats for another thread

Brian? wrote: »

I wouldn’t worry about it. Every president in living memory is going to fix corporate taxes in other countries in the name of fairness. It hasn’t happened yet. It wouldn’t be a wise idea to start a trade war with the EU.

and the last couple of fixes resulted in MNs paying more corp tax here (and we done fook all to enable this!)

Just thumbing nonchalantly through an old Frederick Forsyth thriller (hey, it's lockdown) and I was reminded how, at the end of the Cold War, we were all encouraged to laugh at the decrepit geriatric Soviet Leadership.

Look at those senile old geezers, we were told. Yesterday's men. Clinging to power and utterly paranoid about the next generation! What a shambles!!!

Turned out, they might have been right as when they put the relatively youthful Mikhail Gorbachev (54) in power, the old Soviet Union crumbled within a decade, but leave that to one side for the time being.

Thing is, these guys weren't terribly old by the standards of today's superpower.

Leonid Brezhnev stayed at the helm for 18 years but was only 75 when he died. He was replaced by young Yuri Andropov who was 68 but only lasted a year before he popped his clogs, to be replaced by the feeble Konstantin Chernenko who was 72 and also only lasted a year before shuffling off this mortal coil.

The satirical puppet show Spittin Image had a field day, as I remember, poking fun at all these old guys on the reviewing stand at the Red Square Military Parades. "He's not dead, no really he isn't,OK he is!" etc etc

By contrast Joe Biden has just turned 78 and he hasn't even come to power yet! He is the oldest US president to take office having beaten the previous record set by......Donald Trump four years ago. And if they hadn't selected Biden, the Democrats might have gone for some other old fogey like Bernie Sanders (79) or Elizabeth Warren (71).

Apart from premiers we also had to laugh at the age of the Soviet Cabinets. Andrei Gromyko, long time foreign minister, was 76 when he stepped down. So was Defence Minister Dmitri Ustinov, when he died.

How do they compare with Biden's putative cabinet?
So far he has proposed Antony Blinken (58) as Secretary of State;
John Kerry, who will be 77 before he takes office with responsibility for managing climate change;
Alejandro Mayorkas (61)as head of Homeland Security;
Linda Thomas-Greenfield (68) as UN Ambassador;
and Jake Sullivan (43) National Security Adviser.

So if you also include Kamala Harris, who is in her 50s, the Cabinet so far consists of two septuagenarians, another person who would be past retirement age here and only one under the age of 50!

I know there are many more places to be filled but it really seems like the "boomer" generation is clinging on to the levers of power with grim determination.
I am all for making the most of what De Valera called "the wisdom of serene old age" but in today's world you really need some perspective from the younger generation. By which I mean people in their 30s and 40s.

Is America becoming a country of old fuddy duddies?

Snickers Man wrote: »

Just thumbing nonchalantly through an old Frederick Forsyth thriller (hey, it's lockdown) and I was reminded how, at the end of the Cold War, we were all encouraged to laugh at the decrepit geriatric Soviet Leadership.

Look at those senile old geezers, we were told. Yesterday's men. Clinging to power and utterly paranoid about the next generation! What a shambles!!!

Turned out, they might have been right as when they put the relatively youthful Mikhail Gorbachev (54) in power, the old Soviet Union crumbled within a decade, but leave that to one side for the time being.

Thing is, these guys weren't terribly old by the standards of today's superpower.

Leonid Brezhnev stayed at the helm for 18 years but was only 75 when he died. He was replaced by young Yuri Andropov who was 68 but only lasted a year before he popped his clogs, to be replaced by the feeble Konstantin Chernenko who was 72 and also only lasted a year before shuffling off this mortal coil.

The satirical puppet show Spittin Image had a field day, as I remember, poking fun at all these old guys on the reviewing stand at the Red Square Military Parades. "He's not dead, no really he isn't,OK he is!" etc etc

By contrast Joe Biden has just turned 78 and he hasn't even come to power yet! He is the oldest US president to take office having beaten the previous record set by......Donald Trump four years ago. And if they hadn't selected Biden, the Democrats might have gone for some other old fogey like Bernie Sanders (79) or Elizabeth Warren (71).

Apart from premiers we also had to laugh at the age of the Soviet Cabinets. Andrei Gromyko, long time foreign minister, was 76 when he stepped down. So was Defence Minister Dmitri Ustinov, when he died.

How do they compare with Biden's putative cabinet?
So far he has proposed Antony Blinken (58) as Secretary of State;
John Kerry, who will be 77 before he takes office with responsibility for managing climate change;
Alejandro Mayorkas (61)as head of Homeland Security;
Linda Thomas-Greenfield (68) as UN Ambassador;
and Jake Sullivan (43) National Security Adviser.

So if you also include Kamala Harris, who is in her 50s, the Cabinet so far consists of two septuagenarians, another person who would be past retirement age here and only one under the age of 50!

I know there are many more places to be filled but it really seems like the "boomer" generation is clinging on to the levers of power with grim determination.
I am all for making the most of what De Valera called "the wisdom of serene old age" but in today's world you really need some perspective from the younger generation. By which I mean people in their 30s and 40s.

Is America becoming a country of old fuddy duddies?

Regarding the cabinet, how many CEOs are there of of the biggest, complex businesses are under 50 (who didn't start the company themselves)? They just don't get those roles as they aren't experienced enough and it is much easier to gain that experience in the private sector by switching companies.

Most of these departments are absolutely enormous, for example Homeland Security has around 6 times the employees that Facebook has. Add to that the additional political and regulatory complexity and you can't throw in people without enough experience and expect them to be successful.

As pointed out already, Trump dropped in several young and/or inexperienced people in jobs and they were absolute failures. We can only be thankful for this as imagine the damage the could have caused if they knew what they were doing.

Good that Biden is going to start getting the PDB so at least one person will read it.

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Silly thing perhaps, but serious respect that a foreign leader would use Taoiseach off the cuff.

A silly thing to stop brexit?