←back to thread

337 points tareqak | 3 comments | | HN request time: 1.134s | source
Show context
tomrod ◴[] No.44469345[source]
If correct, this is a good thing on a generally bad, overstuffed bill. Immediate expensing never should have been changed in the first place, and it was always weird seeing people twist themselves in knots defending it.
replies(4): >>44469474 #>>44469476 #>>44469714 #>>44471311 #
1. earth2mars ◴[] No.44469476[source]
This. TCJA removed it and OBBBA restored it. What am I missing here
replies(2): >>44469490 #>>44469519 #
2. lesuorac ◴[] No.44469490[source]
It lets you claim BBB doesn't increase the budget by as much as it'll ultimately do.

By having a bunch of random provision in BBB that generate revenue it lowers it's impact on the defect and then you can repeal them later on after passing BBB.

3. rhinoceraptor ◴[] No.44469519[source]
Classic 45-47 maneuver, first create a problem. Then solve it, often poorly and incompletely. Finally, claim victory, another 300 IQ 5D chess move in the books.