I can translate you you need: the legislation that he passed has nice names but in reality each bill is filled with spending for corporations and special interests (colloquially known as ‘pork barrel spending’).
For example his climate change bill has subsidies and payouts for the coal industry, his CHIPs Act had no oversight or specification about how the money should be spent etc. Biden has approved more oil and drilling contracts than even Trump.
Many Democratic voters get their information from big corporate media outlets, who have a vested interest in protecting corporate interests themselves. These voters end up recieving very little factual information to base their decisions on, and instead end up thinking Biden has “Done a lot of good” because they were given a vague feeling that he has by the corporate media.
You are clearly not well informed. Are you not American?
Presidents don’t make legislation. They don’t introduce bills and except in unusual circumstances are expected to sign them. They can’t modify them.
Secondly, your claims that there is a bill that subsidizes the coal industry is without a source. Please provide a reference to this bill as “climate change bill” is to vague for me to know which you mean.
Congress may wish to exercise its oversight authority with respect to implementation of the programs and policies in the act
and their effectiveness in addressing U.S. economic and national security concerns. Among other potential oversight issues:
the allocation of incentive funding among various types of chip manufacturing (e.g., logic chips and memory chips, mature
chips and leading-edge chips); the adequacy of funding to meet the act’s objectives; and the effectiveness of guardrails
established in the act to prevent the use of incentive funding from enabling further investments in countries of concern or
from being used for stock buybacks or dividends.
My suggestion, for future reference, is that if you are going to make claims you source them. They will be much more forceful and factual and you won’t sound like you have vague feelings about something.
The president does have the ability to block legislation, it’s why you often hear it referred to the president signing various items into law.
My suggestion, for future reference, is that if you are going to make claims you source them. They will be much more forceful and factual and you won’t sound like you have vague feelings about something.
That has very little to do with my statement. I’m very much aware of Biden’s shortcomings, I’m just not as delusional to think that Trump would be the better, let alone a good option here. And if we look at it historically he’s still, for what it’s worth, one of the better US presidents too.
The climate topic is just a mess anyway, because ultimately neither politicians, CEO’s, nor voters actually want actual climate action being taken, because of how it would affect them. It’s simply too late at this point to have sufficient climate action without major repercussions, so people rather live out their remaining comfy life and blend out what it means for younger people (who are, small minority aside, just as deluded on that topic) and future generations.
Americans and their stupid word salads…
I can translate you you need: the legislation that he passed has nice names but in reality each bill is filled with spending for corporations and special interests (colloquially known as ‘pork barrel spending’).
For example his climate change bill has subsidies and payouts for the coal industry, his CHIPs Act had no oversight or specification about how the money should be spent etc. Biden has approved more oil and drilling contracts than even Trump.
Many Democratic voters get their information from big corporate media outlets, who have a vested interest in protecting corporate interests themselves. These voters end up recieving very little factual information to base their decisions on, and instead end up thinking Biden has “Done a lot of good” because they were given a vague feeling that he has by the corporate media.
You are clearly not well informed. Are you not American?
Presidents don’t make legislation. They don’t introduce bills and except in unusual circumstances are expected to sign them. They can’t modify them.
Secondly, your claims that there is a bill that subsidizes the coal industry is without a source. Please provide a reference to this bill as “climate change bill” is to vague for me to know which you mean.
Thirdly, your claim that the CHIPs Act has no oversight is incorrect. Here’s a helpful quote from a helpful FAQ provided by the Congressional Research Service:
My suggestion, for future reference, is that if you are going to make claims you source them. They will be much more forceful and factual and you won’t sound like you have vague feelings about something.
The president does have the ability to block legislation, it’s why you often hear it referred to the president signing various items into law.
My suggestion, for future reference, is that if you are going to make claims you source them. They will be much more forceful and factual and you won’t sound like you have vague feelings about something.
What are you? 12?
Presidential vetos come at a cost and can be over-ridden by congress.
That has very little to do with my statement. I’m very much aware of Biden’s shortcomings, I’m just not as delusional to think that Trump would be the better, let alone a good option here. And if we look at it historically he’s still, for what it’s worth, one of the better US presidents too.
The climate topic is just a mess anyway, because ultimately neither politicians, CEO’s, nor voters actually want actual climate action being taken, because of how it would affect them. It’s simply too late at this point to have sufficient climate action without major repercussions, so people rather live out their remaining comfy life and blend out what it means for younger people (who are, small minority aside, just as deluded on that topic) and future generations.