From 04-MAR of this year it’s easy to see that this meme is complete bullshit. As usual, the haters have nothing but their lies to support them.
PolitiFact referred to Biden as one of Congress’ “least wealthy members” before he became vice-president under President Barack Obama and then president himself. As president, Biden’s wealth has increased from about $8 million when he took office to about $10 million.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/much-president-joe-biden-worth-160108436.html?guccounter=1
How about the cancelation of roughly $144 billion of student debt for roughly 4 million borrows.
Seems pretty good to me.
Looks like he’s just doing the shit that the US government already should have been doing based on existing programs that were actively mismanaged in the past. Promises not kept through administrative technicalities.
Not a bad thing, but a far cry from the political win it is touted as. Essentially, “we are no longer actively trying to fuck over people who applied to old debt-relief programs.” Weighing this against the predatory nature of student loan policy in the US, the unforgiving bankruptcy policies Biden directly helped put in place over a decade ago, and his failure to achieve the two student loan relief efforts he promised (or publicly campaigned on if you want to get pedantic), I’d say that the progress made is wholely insufficient.
We can simultaneously recognize that there has been an improvement while also recognizing that it has not been enough and these politicians must be held accountable for these policy failures.
These are not the markings of a promising or successful presidential campaign.
Ah yes, the ‘oh we can’t give credit for something good, it must just be lazy accident and/or incompetence’ crowd. After initially being blocked by the courts and Congress these forgiven loans are active actions where he could get around restrictions placed on him.
Still making excuses for the purposefully incompetent Democrats, huh?
Funny how the Republicans always manage to accomplish their ghoulish goals, but the Dems never seem to substantially progress any of the social benefits they promise to the people while quietly progressing all of the corporate goals they weren’t so vocal about supporting during the campaign.
You’ll notice I gave as much credit as they were due. Capable of letting Roe v Wade get overturned while having executive control, but incapable of codifying it when they had a majority in the Senate, SCOTUS and the executive branch.
They’re worse than incompetent, they’re complicit, and they’ll keep stringing people along with the threat that things will get worse if you don’t vote for them…as they participate in making things worse for everyone but their big $ donors.
Look up how filibusters work, then explain to me how, with a not even certain 51 vote majority in the Senate they codify abortion into law…
Also, please explain how the Democrats have any say whatsoever in how the supreme Court rules on Roe when the Republicans managed to stack the court with a 6/3 slant? Hint for you, the executive branch doesn’t get to tell the court what to do…
Lol, do you think history is only the last 4 years? They’ve had more than 50 years and multiple instances of having the supermajority. Has there been a 50 year filibuster?
How many times have the Democrats submitted a bill to modify RvW?
Here’s the answer: “we never really felt it was necessary.”
Keep making excuses for this abusive relationship we’ve had with the Dems. If things the majority of people actually wanted were passed, the Dems wouldn’t have anything to dangle in front of us and say, “hey, if you don’t vote for us, the other guy will take away these rights of yours that are in limbo.”
Excuses and bullshit is all they’ve had for decades. I’d say a century, but I’m trying to give them the benefit of the doubt. Got to give credit where it’s due.
https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/jun/25/control-house-and-senate-1900/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade
If you look at these two links, Roe V. Wade was decided January 22, 1973, since that time there have been two congresses where a super-majority with a filibuster proof 60+ votes in the senate and the house in 75 and 77. A Republican (Ford) was in the president’s office for one of those leaving a single time with Carter in 1977 when it would have been possible without altering the senate rules to codify the decision, assuming that the R’s would have objected as they have from the beginning. I guess you can take it up with Jimmy that it wasn’t pushed into law back when the SC had just made their stance clear a couple years prior.
The next most viable times would have been in 1993 with Clinton and and 2009 with Obama, and both of those would have needed to either amend the rules or convince some R’s to go for it. It seems you’re overestimating the power they’ve had since the matter was before the SC the first time, particularly when it had been seen as a settled matter for more than 2 decades before the earlier of those.
I’m well aware of these instances and they were included in my link. I’m saying that these are not a good justification for their inaction.
If it’s important to protect your citizens why not amend the rules? The Republicans have no issues with this tactic. The Democrats are toothless and complicit by not taking the necessary actions to properly represent their people.
Do you think their corporate sponsors accept these kinds of excuses?
The fuck kind of shit is this?
I swear, I’m going to have a block list so long because of out of place political jackasses that it will create a digital singularity and devour lemmy.
You are aware this community is hosted on the Marxist-Leninist instance that started Lemmy, right?
You are aware that your username is pretty shit and resembles that of a bot, right?
yep, but it works for me. Others don’t like it, oh well.
I swear after coming to Lemmy I’ve blocked more people than ever before on almost any other social media site I’ve been on
The amount of tankies in this collection of sites is so damn high it blows my mind. At least the neo-nazis mostly keep contained to their own instances (though I’ve blocked my fair share of them too)
I feel you.
I don’t mind the politics in and of itself. It’s the people that can’t keep it to appropriate communities, or the ones that can’t bother to at least keep the posts relevant to the community if they’re going to bring politics in.
I hate it as much when I have a similar political preference as when I don’t. Maybe even more.
Try blocking sports related stuff…I fear that’s almost worse. My block list is HUGE because of it
Yeah, it gets problematic lol
Similarly, Kamala Harris has a combined income with her husband of just a little over 6 million as recently as 29-FEB-2024.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/rich-joe-biden-kamala-harris-130058735.html
This just in: being in a high position of power in the wealthiest nation to ever exist somehow increases your net worth
Still trying to figure it out. I’ll report back when I know more! 🫡
In other breaking news, having wealth of any degree makes it easier to acquire more wealth. More at 9:00!
deleted by creator
And that is supposed to make us respect them?
