• spit_evil_olive_tips@beehaw.orgOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Biden took the biggest action on climate change ten times over

    oh wow, are we at the “bringing up non-sequitur talking points” point of this debate already?

    Jan 2023:

    Federal data show the Biden administration approved 6,430 permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands in its first two years, outpacing the Trump administration’s 6,172 drilling-permit approvals in its first two years.

    Feb 2023:

    The Biden administration cleared the way on Wednesday for a controversial Arctic oil project, recommending that drilling proceed in an undeveloped section of the Alaskan tundra.

    While the Bureau of Land Management, or BLM, suggested that the project move forward with a more limited footprint, the changes would still allow ConocoPhillips, the company behind the development, to extract the full volume of oil it is targeting.

    August 2024:

    In a sit-down interview with CNN on Thursday, Vice President Harris said she wouldn’t ban fracking if elected president, a reversal of her position during her first presidential run.

    The Democratic nominee attempted to explain why her position has changed from being against fracking to being in favor of it.

    like I said, climate change is a complete non-sequitur from the conversation we were having - but if you look at it beyond a surface level, it still underscores the point I was trying to make. Democrats’ opposition to climate change isn’t based on principles, it’s based on “say whatever we need to say to get elected”.

    and reduced income inequality for the first time in I have no idea how long

    sigh. sure, let’s play this game of non-sequiturs.

    from the Census’s own website:

    Using pretax money income, the Gini index decreased by 1.2% between 2021 and 2022 (from 0.494 to 0.488). This annual change was the first time the Gini index had decreased since 2007, reversing the 1.2% increase between 2020 and 2021

    which sounds great, until you scroll down…

    In contrast to the 1.2% decrease in the Gini index calculated using pretax income, the annual change in the Gini index calculated using post-tax income increased 3.2% from 2021 to 2022.

    so yeah, income inequality decreased…if you use a statistic that doesn’t matter in the real world (income before taxes). but inequality increased if you use a statistic that reflects actual people’s actual pocketbooks (post-tax income).

    and even using the misleading pre-tax figures, the supposed decrease in inequality was from high incomes decreasing slightly, while low incomes stayed the same:

    The 2022 data suggest that declines in real income at the middle and top of the income distribution drove the decrease in the Gini index.

    At the 90th percentile, 10% of households in 2022 had income above $216,000, down 5.5% from the 2021 estimate of $228,600.

    However, at the 10th percentile, 10% of households had income at or below $17,100 in 2022, not statistically different from 2021 ($16,890).

    so Biden gets a talking point about how he reduced income inequality…but for actual low-income people, nothing materially improves. again, this underscores the point I was making. Democrats don’t have “help poor people” as a principle, they just want to get votes based on a perception that they help the poor.

    if a campaign had a principled stance of improving material conditions for poor people, then it probably wouldn’t do things like have Uber’s Chief Legal Officer as a campaign advisor. but I’m just a random guy on the internet and not a Democratic campaign strategist, so what do I know.

    • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      oh wow, are we at the “bringing up non-sequitur talking points” point of this debate already?

      You claimed that “Democrats have no principles. they’ll campaign on anything they think will get them votes.” My point was that on the two biggest problems of the day, the last Democrat to be in office worked hard on it, and that’s relevant here.

      If you’re talking only about campaigning, saying that regardless of their principled performance in office, their messaging is incoherent dogshit that matches whatever they think people want to hear but doesn’t even do a good job of that, we can agree completely.

      And, actually, on most Democrats we can agree as to that they just don’t do much. I just think Biden was an exception, with Gaza as a notable return to the norm, which was tragic for everybody.

      Democrats’ opposition to climate change isn’t based on principles, it’s based on “say whatever we need to say to get elected”.

      Biden was the first US president who ever took any kind of big action on climate change. We needed to do ten times more, and we needed to do it 20 years ago, but if your metric for “opposition to climate change” is based purely on campaign statements, not on anything that people actually do, then I would request a reframing of the landscape.

      Of course, as far as “normal” Democrats, you’re completely right. Biden was an outlier. Most of them don’t seem to give a shit.

      You listed all the favorite talking points about individual things that Biden did bad on the climate. If you look at the entire picture, it looks like this:

      https://www.statista.com/chart/27935/how-the-inflation-reduction-act-will-affect-us-ghg-emissions/

      Or like this, if you consider infographics suspect:

      https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-were-the-climate-policies-in-the-ira-and-what-will-happen-to-them-after-the-2024-election/#%3A~%3Atext=All+together%2C+the+climate+provisions%2Cto+40%25+below+2005+levels.

      so Biden gets a talking point about how he reduced income inequality…but for actual low-income people, nothing materially improves. again, this underscores the point I was making. Democrats don’t have “help poor people” as a principle, they just want to get votes based on a perception that they help the poor.

      Here’s a summary of what you’re talking about:

      https://www.epi.org/publication/swa-wages-2023/

      Relevant excerpt:

      Between 2019 and 2023, hourly wage growth was strongest at the bottom of the wage distribution. The 10th-percentile real hourly wage grew 13.2% over the four-year period. To be clear, these are real (inflation-adjusted) wage changes. Overall inflation grew nearly 20%, or about 4.5% annually, between 2019 and 2023. Even with this historically fast inflation, particularly in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic recession, low-end wages grew substantially faster than price growth. Nominal wages (i.e., not inflation-adjusted) rose by roughly 34% cumulatively since 2019.

      There’s actually a specific reason why high-end wages dropped, during that time: Biden pursued deliberately inflationary policies, during the worst of the Covid recovery, to keep unemployment low. The alternative would have been to let unemployment stay high, depress wages, but make the rich people happy by keeping inflation lower than it would have been. He did the first one. Are you interested in me digging up an article on the details? They’re pretty interesting.

      2022 was the inflation year, when absolutely historic inflation slammed every country in the world, and in the US it was worse (temporarily) because of Biden’s specifically working-person-friendly policies. Again, if you’re genuinely interested in this stuff, let me know and I’ll look up an article, I just don’t want to do it if you’re not planning to engage with it. It’s not surprising to me that if you hit the pause button exactly in 2022, real wages looked the same as 2019, since 10th percentile wages were already steadily rising, but inflation was around 8% that year.

      https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/

      After that, even after Covid, wages at the 10th percentile grew very steeply. High-income earners continued to lose out a little bit, the middle of the scale stayed pretty much even, and low-income earners saw their biggest gains since LBJ. Again, if you’re interested in more than the articles I already sent, let me know, and I’ll dig up some more details.

      This is all by way of response to you saying that Democrats don’t actually do anything, more or less, they just run around making things worse and asking for money and votes. Actually, as far as most Democrats I think that’s pretty accurate (although voting for them so the Republicans don’t get into office and start killing people on purpose still seems sensible to me). But Biden was an exception.