“Past performance is not an indicator of future performance”

Readability

"Past performance is not an indicator of future performance"

Just a thought, since democ­rats keep talk­ing about new spend­ing as an “invest­ment” does that mean they should have to run that warn­ing when­ever they talk about spending?

I think so.

Speak­ing of things that deserve a big warn­ing label:

So, like Stim­u­lus I, which was ini­tially intended to put infra­struc­ture spend­ing first, but evolved into a multi-​purpose slush fund that put infra­struc­ture last, the “infra­struc­ture bank” envi­sioned by pro­gres­sives on Capi­tol Hill would be “look­ing at a broader base” to finance “green energy” and “other large-​scale works” based on “social ben­e­fits” deter­mined by a panel appointed by the president.

What could go wrong?

Just a thought, since democrats keep talking about new spending as an “investment” does that mean they should have to run that warning whenever they talk about spending?

I think so.

Speaking of things that deserve a big warning label:

So, like Stimulus I, which was initially intended to put infrastructure spending first, but evolved into a multi-purpose slush fund that put infrastructure last, the “infrastructure bank” envisioned by progressives on Capitol Hill would be “looking at a broader base” to finance “green energy” and “other large-scale works” based on “social benefits” determined by a panel appointed by the president.

What could go wrong?