I don't see how it is in the gop's interest to say no to any infrastructure deal, and that appears to be where they are headed.

[Leo123]

Human beings are not 'infrastructure.' Marxist/Democrats always play fast and loose with the definitions of words in order to control thinking.

 

[Leo123]

Maybe Democrats shouldn't have tried to sneak in the clause granting amnesty to illegals.

Yes, since when are humans "infrastructure?"

 

[danielpalos]

Human beings are not 'infrastructure.' Marxist/Democrats always play fast and loose with the definitions of words in order to control thinking.

Human Capital is a capital concept. Human infrastructure to support that human capital is also a concept.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

"Slipping in"?....Easly 2/3 of that sham is moonbat wish list items.

Precisely!

 

[Leo123]

Human Capital is a capital concept. Human infrastructure to support that human capital is also a concept.

Infrastructure is not a 'concept' and humans are not 'capital.' You have been led astray.

 

[sartre play]

BOTH sides took out most of the things we need, and left us with each sides political pandering wants. as usual grid lock wins.

 

[Oddball]

BOTH sides took out most of the things we need, and left us with each sides political pandering wants. as usual grid lock wins.

Gridlock is vastly underrated.

 

[Richard-H]

Infrastructure is not a 'concept' and humans are not 'capital.' You have been led astray.

People are a resource in any economy. Probably the most valuable of all resources, if well managed.

 

[DudleySmith]

Meh, that Big Giant Infrastructure bill has less than 6% spednig on infrastructure; the rest is merely subsidies for corporate cronies, fake front companies, and a lot of jobs for criminal illegal aliens.

 

[Oddball]

People are a resource in any economy. Probably the most valuable of all resources, if well managed.

.... if well managed.

 

[Concerned American]

Click on your link and the first paragraph states: "unless they see the text of the legislation and the two parties can agree on how to pay for the plan."

Frankly, that doesn't seem unreasonable at all of a request by the GOP. It seems rather odd to me that the Dems wouldn't agree to you know, share the text of what they expect the GOP to vote for.

Sounds like more "You have to pass it in order to find out what's in it" to me.

 

[Leo123]

People are a resource in any economy. Probably the most valuable of all resources, if well managed.

That does not describe infrastructure which are the structures (buildings, roads, bridges) that humans use to contribute their unique resources to the economy. Biden and the gang want give away programs for humans to be in this infrastructure bill by simply re-labeling humans which is totally wrong headed.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Republicans signal trouble ahead of Wednesday test vote on infrastructure

Find a poison pill in whatever deal they come up with. And even now Republicans in Ill are looking to improve the El with funding.

I lean towards not liking "human infrstructure" and building health care sites, but we really are talking about fixing broken interstate bridges and traditional infrastructure. The only way the dems can win is if people really think the gop is against most everything and don't want to make life better, or help the economy. I won't say Portman is a lying sack of shit, but even if he has good intentions, this seems another case Republicans not being able to deliver a pizza, as they were on a debt deal back in Obama's second term.

I doubt there is a single GOP who wouldn't be GLAD to pass an ACTUAL infrastructure bill.
Too bad that is not what the Democrats are trying to pass.
If you take an infrastructure bill, and attach $millions and $millions and $millions of pork to liberal cities, and throw in all kinds of liberal policies that have zero to do with infrastructure - it is not really fair to say the GOP are against infrastructure now is it?

When the GOP do the same thing, I am sure you don't like it. So why don't you apply the same opinion when your side does it?

 

[22lcidw]

Republicans signal trouble ahead of Wednesday test vote on infrastructure

Find a poison pill in whatever deal they come up with. And even now Republicans in Ill are looking to improve the El with funding.

I lean towards not liking "human infrstructure" and building health care sites, but we really are talking about fixing broken interstate bridges and traditional infrastructure. The only way the dems can win is if people really think the gop is against most everything and don't want to make life better, or help the economy. I won't say Portman is a lying sack of shit, but even if he has good intentions, this seems another case Republicans not being able to deliver a pizza, as they were on a debt deal back in Obama's second term.

This could have been done in 2017. Trump was obstructed. Progs sitting on their hands with some Repubs giving him a hard time. The hat so bad for him that the people in the nation came in second place. Or should I say third place. The swamp is the power.

 

[danielpalos]

Infrastructure is not a 'concept' and humans are not 'capital.' You have been led astray.

All right-wingers have is appeals to ignorance not Any "gospel Truth".

Human Capital Definition: Types, Examples, and Relationship to the Economy

Human capital is an intangible asset or quality not listed on a company's balance sheet. It can be classified as the economic value of a worker's experience and skills.

www.investopedia.com

What Is the Natural Unemployment Rate?

The natural unemployment rate is measured by the number of people unemployed due to the structure of the labor force, such as those who lack the skills to gain employment or those moving from job to job.

www.investopedia.com

 

[JustAGuy1]

It WAS a clean bill until the gop took out the agreed upon pay for with IRS enforcement. THAT'S THE POINT FOF FUICKS SAKE. jesus, try reading an OP

Um....it says no such thing.

 

[Leo123]

All right-wingers have is appeals to ignorance not Any "gospel Truth".

Human Capital Definition: Types, Examples, and Relationship to the Economy

Human capital is an intangible asset or quality not listed on a company's balance sheet. It can be classified as the economic value of a worker's experience and skills.

www.investopedia.com

What Is the Natural Unemployment Rate?

The natural unemployment rate is measured by the number of people unemployed due to the structure of the labor force, such as those who lack the skills to gain employment or those moving from job to job.

www.investopedia.com

Human capital used to be referred to as slaves. It has now morphed into a 'concept' and it has nothing to do with actual infrastructure. BTW this is interesting:

"As for human capital as a concept, though? It’s mostly a specious synonym for “labor.” As the Marxist economists Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis concluded pithily in a 1975 critique of the then novel term, human capital doesn’t mean much on its own terms, but it does make “a good ideology for the defense of the status quo.”

The problem with ‘human capital’

Once synonymous with slavery, the ideology of ‘human capital’ turns the toil we do for our bosses into something we do for our future selves.

www.opendemocracy.net

 

[danielpalos]

Your special pleading is typical of the right-wing.

Here is the rest of the story:

And yet “human capital” was once controversial, precisely because the term connoted the opposite of “dignity.” When the University of Chicago economist Theodore Schultz began developing his theory of human capital, it was haunted by the phrase’s evocation of slavery. In his 1961 article “Investment in Human Capital,” Schultz began by gingerly addressing the concept’s potentially “offensive” sound. “Our values and beliefs inhibit us from looking upon human beings as capital goods, except in slavery, and this we abhor,” he wrote. Any resemblance to human exploitation was purely coincidental, then, since human capital, far from reducing mankind to material, actually offered us the means of freedom.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Read the bill, without looking it's heavy on govt. expansion, govt. control of YOU, high taxes & disfunction, and loading the pockets of players.

FACT, I don't even have to read it.

 

[Leo123]

Your special pleading is typical of the right-wing.

Here is the rest of the story:

And yet “human capital” was once controversial, precisely because the term connoted the opposite of “dignity.” When the University of Chicago economist Theodore Schultz began developing his theory of human capital, it was haunted by the phrase’s evocation of slavery. In his 1961 article “Investment in Human Capital,” Schultz began by gingerly addressing the concept’s potentially “offensive” sound. “Our values and beliefs inhibit us from looking upon human beings as capital goods, except in slavery, and this we abhor,” he wrote. Any resemblance to human exploitation was purely coincidental, then, since human capital, far from reducing mankind to material, actually offered us the means of freedom.

Yeah, I read that. It is a good history of how word meanings can get changed. All it takes is for someone with a high sounding title to re-define a word or phrase. My point stands though, human 'capital' even as defined by Schultz (which is still questionable) is not infrastructure. Perhaps by labeling humans as 'capital' the door is opened to call them 'infrastructure' and deflect billions of infrastructure tax dollars away from building roads and bridges, etc. to political pork fat giveaway programs that would never see the light of day otherwise.