Expanded overtime guarantees for millions
First over-the-counter birth control pill to hit U.S. stores in 2024
Making airlines pay up when flights are delayed or canceled
Gun violence prevention and gun safety get a boost
Renewable power is the No. 2 source of electricity in the U.S. — and climbing
Preventing discriminatory mortgage lending
A sweeping crackdown on “junk fees” and overdraft charges
Forcing Chinese companies to open their books
Preventing another Jan. 6
Building armies of drones to counter China
The nation’s farms get big bucks to go “climate-smart”
Biden scraps Trump’s paint scheme for Air Force One (not sure this is worthy)
The Biden administration helps broker a deal to save the Colorado River
Giving smaller food producers a boost
Biden recommends loosening federal restrictions on marijuana
A penalty for college programs that trap students in debt
Biden moves to bring microchip production home
Tech firms face new international restrictions on data and privacy
Preventing a cobalt crisis in Congo
Cracking down on cyberattacks
Countering China with a new alliance between Japan and South Korea
Reinvigorating cancer research to lower death rates
Making medication more accessible through telemedicine
Union-busting gets riskier
Biden inks blueprint to fix 5G chaos
Biden empowers federal agencies to monitor AI
Fixing bridges, building tunnels and expanding broadband
The U.S. is producing more oil than anytime in history
Strengthening military ties to Asian allies
A new agency to investigate cyberattacks
And I will add a few of my own:
Creating a new 15% minimum corporate tax rate
Creating the most new jobs in any 4 year period of American history.
Ending inflation without starting a recession
Reducing student loan debt
Expert handling of Putin
Ending Covid without telling people to drink bleach
Ending inflation without starting a recession is probably the most impactful on this list.
A few years ago when Covid shut down the economy and the fed printed trillions to keep the whole system from collapsing, I would have bet anything that a major recession was just around the corner.
The ‘soft landing’ was one of the most significant challenges our country/the world has ever faced.
Obviously not completely attributable to Biden, but his leadership during this time allowed us to come out of Covid stronger than we were before it started. The whole world was at risk of the dollar collapsing and it was a super close call.
No one will ever remember it. That’s what government should be like. Inflation was guaranteed, now we just need to see them start hitting companies for over charging. So step 1 is getting congress to write a bill saying over charging for a product is illegal. The question is how much is to much… So we will likely never get legislation. Maybe start with saying food cannot be resold at a cost higher than 3%. It will start bringing food costs down, and we can fix Desantis’s stupid bill and change it from Chinese and make it so no one who does not live in the U.S. can buy multiple properties and companies cannot buy properties in residential areas. Then we might see housing stabilize or drop.
We are experiencing a lot of late stage capitalism issues.
With the increasingly valid excuse of uncertainty, mega corps ‘must’ make more money now because they don’t know what kind of economic hardships they will have to be prepared to endure in the future.
That risk is built into the cost of goods, and can’t easily be quantified, so a bill capping profit margins isn’t really feasible. And let’s not forget who really crafts legislation these days.
In my state, there is a limit to the number of liquor stores one person/corporation can own. They recently increased it from one to three. This law makes a lot more sense for housing than it does for liquor stores, but unfortunately there are too many billionaires with skin in the game.
A crash in housing prices comes with its own set of problems as well, so whatever changes are necessary, they should be taken slowly so as not to cause another collapse in the housing market. Home ownership is still the primary way for the average American family to develop any meaningful wealth, good or bad as that may be.
Whatever changes need to happen, they must be gradual and sustained over a long period of time. Massive and abrupt changes create instability which will have unanticipated consequences.
We want these mega corps to be like the proverbial frog in the boiling pot. Eventually, monopolistic and racketeering like practices could be diminished while millions are lifted out of poverty. If it is to happen, it will take time.
If I were a betting man, I would say that meaningful change is unlikely. Mega corps will continue to squeeze every penny out of the people, leaving us only enough to continue buying their shit. Bernie may have been able to do it, but sadly that ship has sailed.
“The U.S. is producing more oil than anytime in history”
The point is meant for the republican readers :P
With a list like that he can’t lose. So I guess it’s okay if I vote my conscious. Let’s go Claudia De la Cruz. /s
Are they seriously trying to paint the mass production of AI powered war drones, while hinting they’d be useful in war against China, as a good thing?!
Político is written my actual morons.
Not “they”, but Paul McLeary, the Politico defence reporter. Each point on the list is essentially an opinion piece by one of their journalists.
And it’s not necessarily saying it’s a good thing: It’s a thing you might have missed. You could also question whether “the U.S. is producing more oil than anytime in history” is supposed to be a good thing.
Furthermore, as to McLeary’s point: Some - such as anyone in the region except the Chinese - might argue it’s important that the influence of China in the South China Sea is balanced out by other powerful players. It’s not about going to war with China, it’s about the continued independence of Taiwan and other fairly fragile balances in the region. It doesn’t take a moron to see that the situation is complex.
And it’s not necessarily saying it’s a good thing
Did you actually read the article? They very clearly say it would be a major win for Biden.
Tech firms and lawmakers still want more specifics on how this is all supposed to work. But if things go as planned, the success of the program would be a major win for the White House, which has been eager to display American technological and industrial might.
So, if it goes according to plan and is a success, it would be a major political victory for the White House/Biden in terms of their eagerness to “display American technological and industrial might”.
It’s something they want to do, and which if this goes as planned, they will manage to do it. Hence, in politics, a “win”. This is different from passing normative judgment as to whether or not it’s a good thing: It’s a win in the same sense destroying the Supreme Court was a “win” for the previous White House.
Pandora’s AI war drone box has pretty much been opened so might as well get ahead of the curve. More important than the utility in an actual war is the function of weapons as a deterrent to show that it’s not worth fighting a war.
Yes because you guys have been so responsible with your drone warfare in the past.
If you believe we need to have the best technology to defend ourselves, and potential rivals are already pursuing this, yes. US has always tried to stay ahead in technology and this is no different than the latest stealth fighter, or vtol, or aircraft carrier or tank or missile or satellite or submarine or secure communications or radar system or even the best airlift or inflight refueling. The first wave of drone development was a huge success, as was what we were able to send Ukraine. Why wouldn’t we apply the same strategy to a new wave of same technology, and be mostly genuine in saying this will save American and allied lives?
This might be shocking to you, but those of us outside of the states don’t exactly think of your military power as the good guys by any stretch of the imagination.
Not at all, your interests don’t always align with mine, and any use of force has downsides. But of course I’ll usually prefer that my country not be at the mercy of someone else’s use of force.
I’ll also say that humanity is flawed, violent, ruled by baser emotions and …… one of the benefits of it being the US over some other possibilities is that we’re all (especially us citizens) free, even encouraged, to speak up where we have concerns. If you have a specific conflict in mind, I’d just like to suggest such things are never simple or straightforward: try to look at the conflicting requirements and goals, as well as history of the conflict
Given that many independent voters were Republicans and conservatives love war, this is a positive. It demonstrates that Biden isn’t lax on national security and has an eye on the future when his Republican critics constantly attack him over the subject. Democrats will vote for Joe over Trump, but independents and waffling Republicans are in play.
I’m a fan, for one. Fuck China. Fuck Russia.
Respectfully - with that attitude, we’ll never be at peace.
We’ll never be at peace anyway. If we lay down our weapons, our enemies will not do the same. They’ll just conquer us.
I’ll be happy to be at peace with a country who also wants peace. Russia and China do not want peace. Their actions have overwhelmingly proven this. Rolling over to let them do whatever they want in the name of the paradox of tolerance is how we got here in the first place.
The US can suck a fat one too while we’re at it.
Not just morons, paid DNC shills.
Granted, there’s a lot of overlap, including on Politico.
Politico is owned by Axel Springer, the media house that publishes the definitive unabashed, populist arch-conservative newspaper in Germany.
They are so unabashedly right wing, that they regularly bend and break journalistic rules and get sanctioned by the German press council for their violation of standard journalism ethics.
Today, Germans say they trust Bild significantly less than other German media sources.
This newspaper is an organ of perfidity. It is wrong to read it. Anyone who contributes to this newspaper is totally socially unacceptable. It would be wrong to be friendly or even polite to any of its editors. You have to be as unfriendly to them as the law allows. They are bad people who do wrong. - Max Goldt
I’d love to see one of these articles where the list isn’t padded with non-accomplishments like painting the fucking plane, or giving Biden credit for starting preliminary inquiries into thinking about doing something like with cannabis legalization, or things that he should be ashamed of, like producing more oil than at any time in history.
In the good ol’ US of A? Good luck.
Healthcare pls
They’ve found new and exciting ways to to stuff money in insurance pockets. I may be dumb, but I don’t think subsidies are a solution at all. If the Government wanted to set prices…great. if they want to run a single payer system…sploosh. all this does is obscure from people how fucking expensive their healthcare is. I get that that satisfies the need of individual healthcare consumers (sort of…40$ vs the actual monthly rates people will be paying is kind of an “oh how cute” situation), it doesn’t make the system any more sustainable.
The strategy that California is pursuing is providing subsidies to more and more groups of people, giving government a greater say in prices over time. Eventually the goal is to have government pay for everyone’s health care so they can negotiate prices to a fair level. Sounds feasible to me.
2000 dollars isn’t free.
Sure, but the point is we’re getting there. Vote blue and we’ll get there faster.
Hahahaha, lost me here. I’ll definitely take your point about California and how they’re going about universal healthcare to heart, but if you put hope in the Democrats, you will be disappointed. Fuck…the Democratic party. They would be nothing without the anti Republican vote.
“I can’t have everything I want right now, therefore nothing of value has been done!”
I can’t have anything I want…ever. They’re still a right wing party except on cultural issues.
Any Healthcare plan that could get through the Republican House is gonna be worse than what we already have. Vote for Democrats in 2024 if you want better laws on Healthcare.
It would be cool if it even seemed like he was trying. He let Joe Manchin and Kristen Sinema block him because it was convenient for him too. It would be nice if he used his position of power to get what he wanted.
Renewable energy as #2 source of energy.
As opposed to what? Non-renewables?
Is there even a #3?
The article says:
Electricity generation from renewable energy sources — including wind, solar and hydropower — surpassed coal-fired generation in the electric power sector for the first time in 2022, making it the second-biggest source behind natural gas generation. Renewables also passed nuclear power generation for the first time in 2021 and widened that gap the next year.
So at least it’s
- Fossil Gas
- Renewables
- Coal
- Nuclear
Don’t get me wrong, I do know what they’re referring to, but to group all types of renewable (solar, hydro, wind) against a single type of non-renewable energy source is a stupid way of comparing things.
I’ve searched (not researched) a little bit and it appears that the categories that they may be referring to are petroleum products, coal, nuclear, and then renewables.
I’d love to see a bigger focus on creating better public mass transit systems instead of focusing on producing more oil for cars. Cheaper gas addresses the symptom, not the cause.
I really dislike the majority of the focus of this article on just getting more EVs. While electrification is important, it doesn’t really solve any of the current transportation issues and tries to position itself as the climate fixer. Yes, EVs are technically better for the climate, but what is even better is competent public transit. EVs transport a fraction of people that trains, trams, and busses can, which makes them much less energy efficient. Remember that electricity is still generated in lots of places using non-renewable resources, and the manufacturing of batteries also contributes a significant amount of carbon emissions. Given how big cars are and how little people they tend to transport, you start to see how extremely inefficient they are. Removing cars (more specifically, the dependence on cars) is always better than replacing them one for one.
The real focus should be on building more public transportation options to compete with cars, and petitioning local government to make changes to remove car-centric zoning laws and allow for mixed-use zoning, which is greener, cheaper to maintain, and brings in more city revenue than large roads and parking lots.
Yes, EVs are technically better for the climate
Not just “technically”. They’re massively better for the climate.
Technically, a fully electrified transportation sector that focuses on EVs is even better for the climate than a transportation sector without cars and focused just on public transit.
But the main reason is that convincing people to switch to EVs is waaaaaaaaaaaay faster, cheaper, and more doable than convincing people to rebuild our entire transportation infrastructure.
As far as I’m concerned, yes public transit is more desirable, but the climate emergency is more pressing. Once we’re fully electrified, then we can begin transitioning to mass transit options. But it’s a matter of priorities: the ongoing destruction of the climate is more important than efficient transit.
Once we’re fully electrified, then we can begin transitioning to mass transit options.
This is the biggest qualm I have. It’s not an either or. We can have more EVs and better transit too, so we can and should push for both at the same time. They both solve climate problems, and transit also gives better quality of life, in my opinion.
Additionally, I believe that the best way towards a greener world is to make the green option the easiest option for people. Buying an EV is very expensive for an individual, adding friction to the decision to purchase and alienating certain economic classes. If we were to put public funds towards good transit options instead of repairing the endless sprawl of roads, then we would see mass adoption of those transit options in favor of both ICEs and EVs, as it would be seen as viable competition to car ownership.
Ultimately, it’s about finding the right balance. That was my biggest issue with the White House statement. I agree that the climate emergency is a major concern, and EVs might be quicker to adopt (I have concerns about the accuracy of the claim though). But we can and should work in parallel. The statement put so much focus on EVs, when I really think that better mass transit options should have at least an equal focus.
But with limited funds, shouldn’t we go for the biggest bang for our buck regarding the environment?
It likely depends. From a time efficiency perspective, doing both would be best. If money is the bottleneck, then it’s probably best to find more money (tax the rich please?) or make budget adjustments so that time is the bottleneck instead (it is a climate emergency after all). I’ve heard that it is cheaper to maintain compact and mixed-use zoning areas over the classic strip mall with parking lots common across North America, and that could be enough for cities to see reorganizing the infrastructure as an investment over paying increasing maintenance costs. Of course that’s a big up front cost, but it over time it would be cheaper.
It seems like we do disagree on the exact impact both options have, which could help in deciding the priority. I don’t have any data to prove either side on this one, but if you know of any sources on that, I would love to see it.
If money is the bottleneck, then it’s probably best to find more money
Well I mean if you were the King of America, sure. But the money constraints are there because of political opposition, if we (democrats) could override that we would.
From a time efficiency perspective, doing both would be best.
I think this is where we disagree. Public transit projects are notoriously expensive and take a long time. Electrifying the existing infrastructure (roads and cars) is much easier.
I think we might be coming at this differently. In my view, the environment is the primary goal, and efficient transportation is a secondary goal. I think you’re seeing them both as equal goals.
It seems like we do disagree on the exact impact both options have
It seems like you’re talking in good faith here, so I’d be willing to find data. But before I do, I want to suggest a simple thought exercise to you: if all vehicles are electric, isn’t that essentially a 100% impact? An equivalent would be 100% electrified public transit. The former scenario involves keeping the existing systems, just swapping to electric. The latter involves redesign of a majority of our infrastructure, AND electrifying. Doesn’t it sound like the latter option will be more difficult?
I don’t mean to be an ass regarding these because a lot of them are really nice but, none of them aside from the broadband expansion and maybe the funding for election transition/process really seem to help the current day millennial or Gen Z, the closest might be his environmental policies, I feel he should start focusing on thr younger groups if he wants to keep regained support for the newer gens.
That being said I did learn quite a bit from this article because I wasn’t aware he did most of what was listed here so it is cool
I feel like these should all establish a trajectory that very well aligns with the countries younger generation:
- Over the counter birth control
- Office of gun violence prevention
- Financial fee crackdown
- Inflation reduction act
- Assistance to smaller food producers
- Consequences to colleges drowning students in debt
- Chips and sciences act
- Access to medication without in person visits, including anti depressants, gender affirming care, and opioid addiction
- worker protections for union busting
I’m not a blowhard but I think this country could be in a really great place if this kind of progressive push continues with another Biden administration that would hopefully open the gates for an even more progressive eight years with his successor. The continued snuffing out of regressive views and bolstering a growing progressive shift in this country is exciting to think about. As much as I would like faster progress, and I admittedly voted for Biden as a vote against trump last cycle, I will be voting for him again because he’s exceeded my expectations. He’s laying a foundation this countries youth can build on and run away with. It’s not perfect but neither is this country. The aperture is opening up though.
Careful…. This will upset the kids.
Ooh. Preemptive deployment of the most common centrist thought-terminating cliche.
How do you not bore yourself with this drivel?
Why would anyone be upset that Biden issued an executive order to start the process of legalizing weed? Or that renewable power is now the number 2 source of electricity in the country?
Because here on lemmy, the kids like to ignore everything good something is in favor of the one or two bad things and then elevate that to ridiculous levels.
Because “US Bad” is the fundamental thought process of a lot of lemmings
Jesus christ, Politico.
Lmao
Anything but fix real problems.
I don’t give a fuck about the paint on a fucking airplane
I’d say you didn’t read the article, but the Air Force One paint is smack in the middle of the article with 29 other things that actually do fix real problems.
I mean, whoever reads the article would also see that they did a similar piece on Trump, listing both positive and negative achievements of his presidency.
I think it’s a cool format. The media cycle tends to blow one single story out of proportions while neglecting anything else that happens, this is (imo) a good way to review some of what’s been happening the last four years.
Drones for China doesn’t fix healthcare.
Downvotes wont fix income inequality, chuds, just like Biden.
Biden can’t unilaterally fix healthcare. He would need congress to cooperate with him and he has never been able to get that. He couldn’t even pass the bills he wanted that did pass without major changes.
It amazes me what people think presidents have the power to do. They’re not absolute monarchs.
Putting mushrooms on a hamburger won’t fix housing affordability, but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea
Making medicine easier to get via telemedicine and insulin caps certainly help though.
How about border security? Oh, Republicans torched that because Big Cheeto told them to? Must be Bifen’s fault!
There’s no border crisis
