583
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Wooster@startrek.website 149 points 1 year ago

He amplified his crackdown on soaring prescription drug costs, hidden fees for cable and air travel and corporate “price-gouging.” He also promised to “keep fighting to bring down costs.”

Following the links the above quote, the CNBC articles suggests we can expect progress on the first two items (prescription drug costs and hidden fees), but there's nothing I read in the linked article about dealing with price gouging other than some stern words. Maybe something is indeed in the works, but it wasn't obvious to me at the least.

Instead of taking a routine victory lap, the president doubled down on the war, pledging to do himself what the Federal Reserve’s interest rate hikes have not: Make things cheaper.

[…]

It is a marked tone shift from the president’s typical reactions to positive inflation data.

I do appreciate this narrative shift—transitioning from tone-deaf/gaslighting to acknowledging that key issues still aren't addressed.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 76 points 1 year ago

He's trying to thread the needle, and to me it's kinda working. He won't be effective on most of it, I'm sure, but I've given up hope of effective government and just like it when it makes nice sounds.

[-] Jaderick@lemmy.world 82 points 1 year ago

I feel like the biggest reason he won’t be effective is that he’s against pure obstructionists in the GOP. They have no desire to govern and somehow won the House.

[-] Wooster@startrek.website 53 points 1 year ago

That and the biggest donors, on both political sides, have everything to lose from following through on stopping price gouging.

[-] Cuttlefish1111@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

If they don’t, The golden goose will disappear forever

[-] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

have everything to lose

You mean they won't profit as much.

Nothing they lose will be so much that they have to change their lifestyles over it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh yeah, it's totally the GOP's fault. 100%. Just like the last 40 something years since Reagan. Which is why I've given up hope.

Note: I am not being sarcastic. The GOP broke our government.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

What was the reason when Biden had the House and Senate?

Manchin and Sinema?

[-] AlternatePersonMan@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

The reason inflation and price gouging continues under Biden? Inflation got better. And 40 years of deregulation and corporate mergers that never should have happened... That's pretty difficult to tackle in a 4 year term.

[-] TheFonz@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

You mean a super slim majority with two "moderate" democrats holding every vote hostage?

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Oh man that's right...

Too bad we didn't elect the guy with decades of Senate experience who.promised he'd be able to get Republican senators to vote for the Dem platform when a Dem Senate seemed impossible....

What's that?

That guy did get elected? And then as soon as he took office he did a 180 and said as president there's nothing he could do to change their mind and immediately gave up on the bulk of his campaign promises?

Huh...

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

You might remember that because of the filibuster, 41 Senators can block a bill from advancing, and despite that, quite a lot of bills got passed 51-50. Mitch McConnell could have stopped any and all of those bills if he wanted. It's probably not a coincidence that those passed and that Biden and McConnell have had a generally cordial relationship for decades.

[-] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 4 points 1 year ago

This is the same shit we heard before when Obama was president. Republicans somehow manage to pass a ton of their shitty legislation, so maybe it's just that Democrats don't really give as much of a shit about the people as they say.

[-] TheFonz@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Because not all Dem senators have the same electorate base whereas republicans (although lately we're seeing a shift away from this) tend to fall lock step in line. Sinema and Munchin come from very purple states so their seats were never secure. It's not enough to have a slight majority. Also, the Senate is being held hostage by republicans right now with ever more polarization. I don't have an answer but to just pin it on the president is asinine. We need to show up to local elections and midterms.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Tinidril@midwest.social 6 points 1 year ago

Anti-trust is the real answer, at least within the scope of what neoliberalism will embrace. Biden has never been good on anti-trust. He's made some noise on that front recently, but it doesn't seem to have slowed down consolidation of every single industry.

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Democrats know all they have to do is say the right things and people will keep voting.

Biden has no intention of doing anything meaningful on inflation.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 year ago
[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 7 points 1 year ago

He surely wouldn't but for those of who don't belong to either mainstream party your question is annoying AF. As long as we keep electing people from the same two pools of corporate backed idiots NOTHING is going to change.

[-] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

None of us like it but most of us, eventually, learn what a trap third party voting is the way the system is set up. When you're young, naive and a bit idyllic it seems like an easy choice. "I'm standing up for change!" you think to yourself. Or perhaps the old "We gotta start somewhere, let's get that 5%!" nugget.

Then you get older and the shit you used watch from the sidelines on TV actually starts to affect your lives. Health care, education, retirement and other life issues show up and that naivety falls away rapidly as you learn that A) it'll take a revolution of sorts for any meaningful change and B) our lives are too short to hope for said revolution. Do we still want that change, absolutely. However, sometimes in life, you really do need to choose between the douche and the turd sandwich.

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 6 points 1 year ago

Then you get older...

Then you get even older and realize that choosing the douche or the turd sandwich ends up with you holding a douche or a turd sandwich.

At 52 I'm done with these games. Its too important to my children, my nation, and the actual environment I live in.

[-] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 5 points 1 year ago

I don't think these people will ever get it. It's the same mentality that keeps climate change raging on, "I can't change anything on my own, so I'll just keep doing the same thing until someone else fixes it."

[-] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Fair to be fed up, but I feel that was more a concern when the two sides of the coin were very close to being the same. I'm not much behind you on age but I can still see that only one option TODAY is trying to blatantly and openly destroy most of the progress we made in your 52 years. I'd rather hold the douche and have a chance at getting out clean than hold the turd and assuredly end up covered in shit.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago

I tried to ask an honest question ... no snark intended.

And I happen to agree with electing the insane same old-same old expecting different results.

[-] JonEFive@midwest.social 5 points 1 year ago

Someone once explained representative democracy this way: Choosing a candidate is like riding a bus. None of them are going to come directly to where you are and none of them are going to drop you off at your exact destination. The best you can do is choose the one that gets you as close as possible in the shortest amount of time. Sometimes you're not even gonna get that close and you'll still have a long walk to your destination, but at least you'll be closer than where you started. Sometimes you have to take one bus then transfer to another to get to your final destination.

When the alternatives are buses that are traveling the opposite direction, your best available choice becomes very clear.

The place where this analogy falls apart is that by not taking either bus, you may actually lose ground and get further away from your destination. So I guess when the alternative is a bus that stands less than a 5% chance of arriving, you ultimately end up being shoved onto the bus that the majority of people are riding.

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

This person gets it.

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

The 'their guy sucks too' defense doesn't inspire much confidence.

[-] Stovetop@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

Better to at least support whichever candidate is less likely to destroy the country while we wait for a better one to come and save it.

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

That would be the third party candidates.

load more comments (2 replies)
this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
583 points (100.0% liked)

News

28307 readers
3353 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS