President Joe Biden claims one of the main reasons he passed his bloated $1.9 trillion COVID-19 spending bill was to prove that the United States still has an edge over China.
According to an interview published in The New York Times on Thursday, it was the Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin’s comment to Biden that “America can’t lead. They can’t even get their arms around Covid” that pushed the Democrat president to reconsider how serious a threat China is to the United States.
“We’re kind of at a place where the rest of the world is beginning to look to China,” Biden told The New York Times. “The most devastating comment made after I was elected — it wasn’t so much about me — but it was by the Irish taoiseach” (“taoiseach” is the Irish term for prime minister).
Biden’s response, however, wasn’t to crack down on China for cheating its way to the top. Instead, the president sees the solution in spending trillions of debt-fueled taxpayer dollars to keep up with the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” and global competition presented by the communist regime.
“We’ve gotten to a point where I think our economic competence has a gigantic impact on our international influence and capacity,” Biden told David Brooks in the interview, justifying his many expensive legislative proposals since his time in the Senate.
Biden believes that unless the United States continues to pour deficit-funded government spending into research and development, China has a better shot of taking the lead. He even told Brooks “we’re eating our seed corn.”
“The risk is not trying to go big,” the president said. “If we stay small, I don’t know how we change our international status and competitive capacity.”
Biden concluded by saying that he believed education is what originally set the United States apart as the world leader and that the United States needs to add more of it now.
“I think the thing that moved us ahead of the rest of the world at the turn of the 20th century was the notion that we had universal education,” he said. “If we were sitting down today to say, ‘OK, what does public education consist of in the 21st century? Think anybody would say 12 years is enough? I don’t.”
Source: The Federalist
