Guys, it’s an infrastructure, energy, and jobs plan. There’s also some housing in there. Agonizing about the exact proportion of infrastructure spending and what counts is not productive.
Fwiw, I blame Biden’s eye-rolly claim that home health care is infrastructure too for this debate as much as the GOP’s bizarre insistence that broadband and water systems don’t count
But, like, staring at each bullet point of this plan and muttering ‘is this an infrastructure?’ is not productive

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Jordan Weissmann 🗽

Jordan Weissmann 🗽 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JHWeissmann

5 Apr
This is a former Trump OMB guy who has been claiming that only 5%-7% of the Biden bill is for 'real infrastructure.'

His definition excludes the electric grid, sewers and water systems, trains, school + hospital buildings, broadband and public housing.

He's not even quoting the article correctly. Glenn Kessler just says the Biden plan is 27% transportation spending.
'teH eLeCtRiC GrIdZ iSn'T iNfrAsTrUcTuRe' - @RussVought45
Read 4 tweets
5 Apr
So, lots of talk about how ‘Bidenomics’ are shaping up—see this piece @Noahpinion, Krugman is tweeting. I’ll probably write up my own take this week, but for now, two quick points.…
1) I don’t know if signals the final death of Reaganism, but it is a complete rejection of the Reaganite GOP philosophy. Noah gets into this.

Supply-side was was about deregulation, breaking unions, and low-taxes on capital and top earners to encourage business investment... a tight money regime meant to fight inflation.

Biden would really reverse a lot of that: The new bill is pro union (the care work section might as well be called ‘the SEIU membership acquisition act), pro-industrial policy, and funds itself specifically by taxing capital.
Read 7 tweets
4 Apr
Jesus Etc. just popped up on a playlist, leading me to realize YHT is almost 20, making me wonder: Do the Zoomers get/remotely care about Wilco? Or are they one of those bands that’s gonna have to skip a generation?
Guys, I’m really not interested in what other ancients think about Wilco. This is exclusively about the youths.
That said, it’s fine if Zoomers don’t like Wilco now. Gives them some music to discover when they get their first serious taste of life-altering disappointment/hit their early midlife crisis.
Read 4 tweets
29 Mar
I wrote a bunch of words about the overheating debate.…
OK, I should be a bit more enthusiastic.

The inflation debate that obsessed economists this month was really sprawling and confusing. This piece pulls it together and explores the theoretical differences between the sides in a way I think is accessible.…
One subtle thing about this whole debate: It's not just about whether we might experience some inflation. Summers' position, echoed by Mankiw, is that we really can't trust the Fed to deal with inflation without grinding the economy into a recession.
Read 4 tweets
29 Mar
An aide to Chuck Schumer just blasted out some HOT PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE NEWS.

Democrats think they can pass extra reconciliation bills using section 304 of the Congressional Budget Act, which allows Congress to "revise" each of its budget resolutions at least once.
What this means is that they could, in theory, pass more than 2 additional reconciliation before the midterms, which would create more flexibility.

I wrote about this idea offhandedly back in January.…
Key caveat: Schumer's aide says he's preparing to do this, but hasn't made any final decisions. He has argued it to the parliamentarian, but it's unclear yet whether she agrees.
Read 4 tweets
27 Mar
Been thinking a bit more about whether we can say the Biden administration really marks the beginning of a new era. I think there's one clear way it does at this point:

This is the first time in 40 years, full-employment really is the north star for both the Fed and the WH.
In the 1990s, Clinton essentially lucked into the tech boom. His actual policies involved deficit reduction and changing the safety net to reward low-income workers. Greenspan managed to execute a good mid-cycle cut and recognized productivity growth meant you could let...
...the economy roar without worrying too much, but he was still the opportunistic disinflation guy at heart.

Bush was Bush, and Bernanke was a crisis fighter who embraced unconventional policy, but was still attached the post-Volcker paradigm in a lot of ways.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!