[BostonCard]

The administration seems intent on cutting off its nose.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy...ronavirus/

One person involved in the talks said Senate Republicans were seeking to allocate $25 billion for states to conduct testing and contact tracing, but that certain administration officials want to zero out the testing and tracing money entirely. Some White House officials believe they have already approved billions of dollars in assistance for testing and that some of that money remains unspent.

Fair point about the money not being spent, but I am sure the administration could come up with creative uses for the money, like paying for FTE’s to do the contact tracing.  The only thing I can think of when I read the article is “abdication of responsibility”.

BC

[BostonCard]

The administration seems intent on cutting off its nose.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy...ronavirus/

One person involved in the talks said Senate Republicans were seeking to allocate $25 billion for states to conduct testing and contact tracing, but that certain administration officials want to zero out the testing and tracing money entirely. Some White House officials believe they have already approved billions of dollars in assistance for testing and that some of that money remains unspent.

Fair point about the money not being spent, but I am sure the administration could come up with creative uses for the money, like paying for FTE’s to do the contact tracing.  The only thing I can think of when I read the article is “abdication of responsibility”.

BC

[fullmetal]

I feel the unspoken follow-up to that quote goes something like: 

Some White House officials believe they have already approved billions of dollars in assistance for testing and that some of that money remains unspent.

But others do not, and no one knows for certain because no one is keeping track in this procession of clowns.

Amateur hour.

[fullmetal]

I feel the unspoken follow-up to that quote goes something like: 

Some White House officials believe they have already approved billions of dollars in assistance for testing and that some of that money remains unspent.

But others do not, and no one knows for certain because no one is keeping track in this procession of clowns.

Amateur hour.

[Snorlax94]

It’s inexplicable, right? Why cut money for testing and tracing? Why try to force in-person schooling even when it is unsafe to do do?

I have been trying to understand why does Trump do the things he does? Many of them defy rational explanation.

And the best explanation I can think of is that Trump has 4 basic, core drives:
1) The desire for revenge and to harm anyone he thinks has ever wronged him (including anyone who has ever criticised him or even recused themselves)
2) A desire to always appear right, to never admit he was wrong about anything, ever, to never appear “weak” or like a “loser”
3) His desire to be successful as a president/businessman
4) A desire to be worshipped, to stand before large crowds of people screaming his name in adulation

People keep thinking he will do the right thing in terms of pandemic response because of drive #3 (to be a successful president), but during a pandemic, the primacy of his drives #1 (revenge) and #2 (to never be wrong, to never “appear weak”) dominate, superceding his own rational interests.

Incidentally, I think this is why a core of his supporters will follow him no matter what he does — because they share his drive #1 — to harm and take revenge on perceived enemies (on immigrants, on elites, on coastal dwellers, on African Americans), no matter what is happening to America in the process.

Why cut testing and tracing funds? To never appear wrong and never admit failure.

Why force schools to re-open when it is terribly unsafe to do so? I honestly think he has longstanding anger toward public schools, educators, unions, and teachers unions and wants public school teachers to suffer.

Why undermine public efforts for universal mask wearing? Because he is never wrong.

Why was there that bizarre elimination of tax deductions for football stadium seats even though it would disproportionately harm red states? The only explanation I can think of is he has some personal vendetta against college sports. Maybe related to his failed involvement in football leagues in the past. Maybe he courted nfl ownership and was rejected. Maybe college football jocks teased him when he was young.

This is the only unifying explanation I can think of for the crazy, inexplicable actions.

Even if you disagree with the specifics — why would Trump cut funds for testing and tracing? Why would he undermine efforts for universal mask wearing? There is only one possible explanation: that he has more basic, primal drives than his own rational self-interest.

[Snorlax94]

It’s inexplicable, right? Why cut money for testing and tracing? Why try to force in-person schooling even when it is unsafe to do do?

I have been trying to understand why does Trump do the things he does? Many of them defy rational explanation.

And the best explanation I can think of is that Trump has 4 basic, core drives:
1) The desire for revenge and to harm anyone he thinks has ever wronged him (including anyone who has ever criticised him or even recused themselves)
2) A desire to always appear right, to never admit he was wrong about anything, ever, to never appear “weak” or like a “loser”
3) His desire to be successful as a president/businessman
4) A desire to be worshipped, to stand before large crowds of people screaming his name in adulation

People keep thinking he will do the right thing in terms of pandemic response because of drive #3 (to be a successful president), but during a pandemic, the primacy of his drives #1 (revenge) and #2 (to never be wrong, to never “appear weak”) dominate, superceding his own rational interests.

Incidentally, I think this is why a core of his supporters will follow him no matter what he does — because they share his drive #1 — to harm and take revenge on perceived enemies (on immigrants, on elites, on coastal dwellers, on African Americans), no matter what is happening to America in the process.

Why cut testing and tracing funds? To never appear wrong and never admit failure.

Why force schools to re-open when it is terribly unsafe to do so? I honestly think he has longstanding anger toward public schools, educators, unions, and teachers unions and wants public school teachers to suffer.

Why undermine public efforts for universal mask wearing? Because he is never wrong.

Why was there that bizarre elimination of tax deductions for football stadium seats even though it would disproportionately harm red states? The only explanation I can think of is he has some personal vendetta against college sports. Maybe related to his failed involvement in football leagues in the past. Maybe he courted nfl ownership and was rejected. Maybe college football jocks teased him when he was young.

This is the only unifying explanation I can think of for the crazy, inexplicable actions.

Even if you disagree with the specifics — why would Trump cut funds for testing and tracing? Why would he undermine efforts for universal mask wearing? There is only one possible explanation: that he has more basic, primal drives than his own rational self-interest.

[BostonCard]

That last example (elimination of the tax deduction for football seats) was actually *gulp* good policy. If a donation is mandatory to get something of value in return, then it is not a donation, it is a payment, and thus shouldn’t be a tax deduction.

I have no idea why the administration came to the decision, but they deserve credit for good policy when they do it.

BC

[BostonCard]

That last example (elimination of the tax deduction for football seats) was actually *gulp* good policy. If a donation is mandatory to get something of value in return, then it is not a donation, it is a payment, and thus shouldn’t be a tax deduction.

I have no idea why the administration came to the decision, but they deserve credit for good policy when they do it.

BC

[oregontim]

I have no idea why the administration came to the decision, but they deserve credit for good policy when they do it.



BC

Even if they do it completely by accident. I suppose.

[oregontim]

I have no idea why the administration came to the decision, but they deserve credit for good policy when they do it.



BC

Even if they do it completely by accident. I suppose.

[Snorlax94]

That last example (elimination of the tax deduction for football seats) was actually *gulp* good policy. If a donation is mandatory to get something of value in return, then it is not a donation, it is a payment, and thus shouldn’t be a tax deduction.

I have no idea why the administration came to the decision, but they deserve credit for good policy when they do it.

BC

I had a follow-up point on this issue when it came up years ago but the topic died down.

But there’s an enormous inconsistency in terms of when “donations in anticipation of gifts received” are taxed and not taxed. If you support a non-profit like a museum or an aquarium, you may get access to a special “members only” line that saves you an hour every visit, and the “donation” to access that line wasn’t targeted in the tax bill. Theatres, like the ACT Theatre in SF, have a very long wait to get access to good seats, but if you make a large donation, you magically rise up in priority. You still pay face value for the tickets, so the “side door” deal to better seats was still a tax dedictible donation. I don’t know how familiar people are with attending gala fund raisers, but, for one, if you pay $250, $55 is in anticipation for the nice meal, and $195 was a tax-deductible donation. But if you pay $1,000 a seat, still, only $55 was for the meal for $945 was fully tax deductible, even though coincidentally you are now seated front and center and are hobnobbing with politicians — you are essentialy at the 50 yard line.

Donations for better seats is how pretty much all seats are allocated by non-profits. It’s how you decide who gets center orchestra, who gets to be close to the celebrities and politicians, who gets the better view, who gets the VIP entrance. It was incredibly arbitrary and still quite puzzling to pluck college football seats out of all the possible tax-deductible loopholes to target at 3 AM without scrutiny or debate. I cannot fathom of all the loopholes to close, a bunch of politicians  late at night would “accidentally” stick this is as well as remarkably large tax-cuts for “businesses with very few employees but very large real estate depreciation expenses” that sound an awful lot like hotel owners and special tax cuts for parnerships “so long as they are not lawyers or accountants” that sounds an awful lot like real estate develpers, while coincidentally explicitly excluding industries that often vote Democrat.

I can assure you there are plenty of other, larger and more worthy, and more liberal-elitiest-coastal-Democratic loopholes that a Republican president, House and Senate could have sprung on the public. It was not “accidental good policy.” It was planned, the question is why.

[Snorlax94]

That last example (elimination of the tax deduction for football seats) was actually *gulp* good policy. If a donation is mandatory to get something of value in return, then it is not a donation, it is a payment, and thus shouldn’t be a tax deduction.

I have no idea why the administration came to the decision, but they deserve credit for good policy when they do it.

BC

I had a follow-up point on this issue when it came up years ago but the topic died down.

But there’s an enormous inconsistency in terms of when “donations in anticipation of gifts received” are taxed and not taxed. If you support a non-profit like a museum or an aquarium, you may get access to a special “members only” line that saves you an hour every visit, and the “donation” to access that line wasn’t targeted in the tax bill. Theatres, like the ACT Theatre in SF, have a very long wait to get access to good seats, but if you make a large donation, you magically rise up in priority. You still pay face value for the tickets, so the “side door” deal to better seats was still a tax dedictible donation. I don’t know how familiar people are with attending gala fund raisers, but, for one, if you pay $250, $55 is in anticipation for the nice meal, and $195 was a tax-deductible donation. But if you pay $1,000 a seat, still, only $55 was for the meal for $945 was fully tax deductible, even though coincidentally you are now seated front and center and are hobnobbing with politicians — you are essentialy at the 50 yard line.

Donations for better seats is how pretty much all seats are allocated by non-profits. It’s how you decide who gets center orchestra, who gets to be close to the celebrities and politicians, who gets the better view, who gets the VIP entrance. It was incredibly arbitrary and still quite puzzling to pluck college football seats out of all the possible tax-deductible loopholes to target at 3 AM without scrutiny or debate. I cannot fathom of all the loopholes to close, a bunch of politicians  late at night would “accidentally” stick this is as well as remarkably large tax-cuts for “businesses with very few employees but very large real estate depreciation expenses” that sound an awful lot like hotel owners and special tax cuts for parnerships “so long as they are not lawyers or accountants” that sounds an awful lot like real estate develpers, while coincidentally explicitly excluding industries that often vote Democrat.

I can assure you there are plenty of other, larger and more worthy, and more liberal-elitiest-coastal-Democratic loopholes that a Republican president, House and Senate could have sprung on the public. It was not “accidental good policy.” It was planned, the question is why.