Let's break down the cost of the $550B Biden infrastructure combo platter bill in a way most anyone can understand. 1/
The $550B almost entirely gets appropriated over 5 years, though it takes a little longer for some of the money to actually leave federal coffers. But we are talking roughly $110B a year extra for five years. What does that mean? 2/
$110B a year is about 2% of the federal budget.
Maybe think of a 49-deck cruise ship and you added another deck, maybe.
A lot of money? YES.
A big deal. YES.
Changing the arc of the budget universe? Not really. 3/
Let's break it down more. What is $110B a year to a regular person: Still a number too big to comprehend. 4/
The bipartisan infrastructure plan amounts to slightly less than $1 extra per American per day spent on roads, bridges, ports, airports, utilities, etc. over the next five years.
Now that's a little easier to understand, isn't it? 5/
Also helpful to put it in context of the bigger budget picture, which is really, really large.
We're on track to spend roughly $60T or so over the next decade with roughly $45T in revenue.
This one bill affects that larger trajectory by less than 1%. 6/
The bill also, while a bipartisan breakthrough that has eluded previous presidents, isn't a long-term fix. It's more of a 5-year patch job. Because there are no big long-term funding sources, Congress will get to do this all over again in 5 years or so. 7/
Why do some people call this a $1T package or a $1.2T package? I think @seungminkim has a good tweet on that:
The delta between $550B and $1T over five years is money that would basically happen anyway largely on autopilot, like the gas tax money that is shoveled to states via formulas for roads and so on, and assorted other transpo fees/funding.
Another problem for reporters and public Congress has an extra step it sometimes does that most people don't do: Authorizing and appropriating. They are two different things, but this bill does some of both. The appropriating is the shooting-with-real-bullets variety.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Some of the ways wealthy people shield their wealth are going untouched in the BBB bill so far: Never-realized gains, depreciation of appreciating real estate, 1031 provision that allows selling real estate without realizing gains, stepped-up basis at death, etc.
World's richest person is running a Twitter poll today on whether he should decide to realize some gains and therefore pay some taxes, or continue to not realize those gains and not pay taxes (which is perfectly legal under our system).
"Realize" is kind of a figurative term here, because billionaires can realize those gains in other ways by pledging a small portion of their wealth as collateral for low-interest loans for walking around money or for capital to start new companies.
This is a first for me in Zillow-watching: Beds in the theater room. "Impressive home theater and meditation sanctuary" per the listing. I'm guessing the crazy Escher-style room (or is it Dazzle camouflage?) leads to it. #SaturdayNightZillow
Many of you are too young to remember this but Pelosi also passed the Cap & Trade bill with GOP votes. A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.
This is back when I covered the House for Roll Call.
What happened next? Cap & trade never saw the light of day in the Senate. Talks between Lindsey Graham and John Kerry collapsed. And then, a young Joe Manchin cut an *EPIC* campaign ad…
Elizabeth Warren NOT yet sold on the SALT cap compromises that have been floated: She wants to make sure billionaires don’t benefit. Says they would be more appealing if paired w/Wyden’s Billionaire Income Tax.
One issue is billionaires can benefit from the House’s $72,500 cap…
And billionaires could even benefit if you have an income cap of about $400K floated by Sanders/Menendez. That’s because some billionaires are able to avoid having much/any adjusted gross income.