←back to thread

OBBB signed: Reinstates immediate expensing for U.S.-based R&D

(www.kbkg.com)
342 points tareqak | 1 comments | 05 Jul 25 00:24 UTC | HN request time: 0.207s | source
Show context
tomrod ◴[05 Jul 25 01:12 UTC] 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 #
xp84 ◴[05 Jul 25 01:41 UTC] No.44469474[source]▶
It’s an overstuffed bill because nobody will compromise on anything so the only way to pass a bill that has anything even remotely controversial to either party is one reconciliation bill a year.
replies(3): >>44469494 #>>44469916 #>>44469965 #
dragonwriter ◴[05 Jul 25 01:48 UTC] No.44469494[source]▶
> It’s an overstuffed bill because nobody will compromise on anything so the only way to pass a bill that has anything even remotely controversial to either party is one reconciliation bill a year.

No, and lots of controversial bills have passed other than as reconciliation bills, and especially so during trifectas where they "controversial" within the minority party but broadly supported by the majority; reconciliation is necessary to pass something that strains unity in the majority party and is uniformly opposed by (not "controversial to") the minority party, perhaps.

replies(2): >>44469550 #>>44469712 #
cheriot ◴[05 Jul 25 02:03 UTC] No.44469550[source]▶
In the last 10 years, have there been more than a handful of bills that got 60 votes in the senate?

I wouldn't like what the current congress would do without the filibuster, but at this point a paralyzed system might be worse.

replies(4): >>44469613 #>>44469632 #>>44469664 #>>44470156 #
apsec112 ◴[05 Jul 25 02:15 UTC] No.44469613[source]▶
"Despite Democrats holding thin majorities in both chambers during a period of intense political polarization, the 117th Congress (2021-2023) oversaw the passage of numerous significant bills, including the Inflation Reduction Act, American Rescue Plan Act, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Postal Service Reform Act, Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, CHIPS and Science Act, Honoring Our PACT Act, Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act, and Respect for Marriage Act."

All of these except the first two were bipartisan and got 60 Senate votes (or more)

replies(2): >>44469638 #>>44469803 #
9283409232[dead post] ◴[05 Jul 25 02:20 UTC] No.44469638[source]▶
[flagged]
tomrod[dead post] ◴[05 Jul 25 02:59 UTC] No.44469807[source]▶
[flagged]
1. bmacho ◴[05 Jul 25 05:59 UTC] No.44470396[source]▶
Threads being over is a good thing, isn't it? Truth's been discovered, all parties agree, no more time spent on going in circles, can move on to do other, meaningful things, etc. Unless you are facebook, and you optimize on endless churn, stealing time and showing ads.

I haven't seen the original comment, but the wiki article is moronic. None of the listed example seems even bad to me, claiming that they are the devil is ridiculous. Maybe even a false flag.

The only one that actually has anything to do with "terminating cliche" is "Let's agree to disagree.". But that's just the common phrase you say after you've decided to opt out of an argument. It is not (and can't be) the cause of it, it is the consequence of it.* And it is by no means any bad, or should one avoid it.

* : something something people being able to easily leave an argument makes them do it more. But it would need a lot of stretch to argue that the possibility to go away from arguments is a net negative for humanity

edit: can we agree that the random shit you linked is 100% unrelated to the argument at hand, therefore/and definitely should not be used?

edit2: yeah, it assumes the truthness of some ridiculously nonsensical concepts, and uses them in a meta meta way, that is 2-3 steps away from the topic at hand. Much-much more annoying than anything listed. "This is the hill you want to die on, huh? Naah.. How about.." *points downwards* "..there is this hill there 14000 miles away (actually there is only ocean), how about we move this fight there?" Yeah no thx.