Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Gorsameth]

Much easier to do if they've got an actual mandate and aren't fighting with independents in the Senate to get things passed.

4 years from now Democrats will win the presidency because Trump will fuck up the economy, Republicans will win in 8 because the Democrats can't unfuck what Trump did in 4 years

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I believe we're going to see a repeat of 2016-2020 with the difference being instead of COVID fucking everything up, it's going to be a NASTY recession.

Don't discount the possibility of COVID 2: Electric Boogaloo

[Somewhatconcerned]

Oh fucking stop it.

No one here is against getting rid of government waste. That's not what Trump and his assholes are going to do though. They are going to gut things that help the poor and middle class while spending more on shit that puts money in their own pockets.

With all due respect, we don't even know what will end up on the list and what will even end up getting cut.

[Edge-]

With all due respect, we don't even know what will end up on the list and what will even end up getting cut.

With no due respect, it's transparent bullshit and people falling for it are hilarious. It's hilariously unserious and openly includes "interest in the US debt" as if the US can just decide to stop paying that and not gut the nations credit rating and trust in the word of the US.

Y'all are just as unserious, it seems.

[Rasulis]

With no due respect, it's transparent bullshit and people falling for it are hilarious. It's hilariously unserious and openly includes "interest in the US debt" as if the US can just decide to stop paying that and not gut the nations credit rating and trust in the word of the US.

Y'all are just as unserious, it seems.

I don't remember who said this and not an exact quote.

"The fat in the US government is not like the fat around a porkchop which could be easily removed. It is marbled throughout like the fat in a high-quality wagyu steak."

[tehdang]

As much as Trump and Elon want to run the Government like one of their businesses, it's in this moment that the federal government's contrived nature and tangle of bureaucracy makes it particularly resilient. DOGE will just be a security blanket and a headpat rewarded to Elon for a job well done in his role in the election... Though I still don't know why Vivek's there. I guess to actually run it while Elon's fucked off doing anything but work.

I fully expect DOGE to be performative. Vivek's a clown. Elon has only done private business, not government administration. Just expect memes about stupid government employee position titles or government research grants.

[Huehuecoyotl]

I fully expect DOGE to be performative. Vivek's a clown. Elon has only done private business, not government administration. Just expect memes about stupid government employee position titles or government research grants.

Oh, so Trump lied to the voters about what he was going to do? And I'm guessing you are fine with that?

[DarkTZeratul]

I fully expect DOGE to be performative. Vivek's a clown. Elon has only done private business, not government administration. Just expect memes about stupid government employee position titles or government research grants.

Glad to know you understand full well that Trump is not a serious politician and is primarily doing stupid performative bullshit. That's definitely the sort of person we want to be in charge of the goddamn country.

[Edge-]

I fully expect DOGE to be performative. Vivek's a clown. Elon has only done private business, not government administration. Just expect memes about stupid government employee position titles or government research grants.

You should tell that to some of the Republican members of Congress that seem to think it will actually do a lot and are very excited for it.

I hope it's only performative, because it could do some very serious damage otherwise.

[Mafic]

If your concept of a "healthy economy" requires growth as a fundamental tenet, your position is unstable and unsustainable and will inevitably fail at some future point. Resources, including space, are not without limits, and unchecked growth merely eats away at those resources until it hits a wall, and then it collapses in on itself.

That is a very small way to look at the world. First of all that is how modern government works in most of the world. This is because you need growth in population to fund the older generations using the labor of younger generations. That is how the modern system works in most of the world. Also the idea that we do not have resources and space for a growing population is pushed by Malthusians. Malthusians argued for food and population control early in the 20th century but the reality is that we have more than enough resouurces and space on this planet. Most of the populations of the world are clustered around coast lines and waterways because the transportation of goods is the most efficient and effective through water ways and not by air or land. Outside of urban sprawl most of the world is very sparse with human development of urban cities, towns and villages. Having traveled around in Europe and the US and some parts of Canada I can safely say that we are heavily biased by living near coastlines that are heavily populated thinking we are heavily congested species on this planet when it is far from the truth.

To go with your bacteria analogy the bacteria is clustered at the very top of the test tube near the seal where some oxygen is leaking in. But that doesn't mean there isn't space in the rest of the test tube and that the oxygen doesn't reach the rest of the test tube if the seal is not tight. Also since there is a leak the bacteria is no longer limited by staying in the test tube.

[exochaft]

You should tell that to some of the Republican members of Congress that seem to think it will actually do a lot and are very excited for it.

I hope it's only performative, because it could do some very serious damage otherwise.

It's always been about political will, and both parties will try to maintain the status quo if it benefits them. That's why many Republicans were against Trump in his previous term: he actually followed through on quite a few things he said he would during the campaign, and that rubs both sides the wrong way.

When it comes to trimming down bureaucracy, it's something that has needed to be done for a long time... but the political will hasn't been there. Politicians like their status quo, which is why you'll hear that both doing nothing and doing something is bad. Having worked for the federal government, dealing both with the military side of things as well as several of the agencies/bureaus, it's a bloody mess on so many levels. Financially it's incredibly inefficient, and the various reasons and practices that waste tax money would be its own thread. There's also a lot of overlap, where jurisdiction is hampered by competing interests or simply no one knows who is in charge (so nothing gets done as it's tossed around). Furthermore, Congress likes to give away their powers and decision-making to these agencies/bureaus, which is technically illegal in many cases... but Congress doesn't care because it helps obfuscate responsibility (i.e. Congress can blame agencies/bureaus for things or play the inaction game to keep their hands clean). And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Realistically, a lot of agencies could and should be audited heavily, trimmed down, or flat out removed. Many would benefit from having their authority either consolidated or put on the state level. Local control is almost always better when it comes to matters that heavily impact people's individual lives, as it can be tailored more specifically to the peoples' needs compared to what is possible at higher (federal) levels. I think it's quite the stretch to think that just because Trump may augment/remove agencies/bureaus that what function they're supposed to do would all just disappears... makes a sexy headline if all one cares about is headlines and political pandering, but that's not reality.

As a slight yet relevant aside, I've lost count of how many times in the last decade my wife and I have had to deal with Veteran Affairs mandates coming from the federal level, wiping out state programs because they want to nationalize it while creating new metrics that kick out everyone or make it fiscally/operationally inefficient with new regulations. Veterans in my area are literally getting told as recently as three months ago that they can't have their care because the 'new and improved' federal version of the state programs and new regulations would have the VA go bankrupt if they got the care they needed... seriously had this said during a Zoom meeting with and by VA reps relaying information from the federal level of the VA. Fortunately, there's a good amount of veteran support organizations and individuals that can help veterans deal with it (and can actually lobby against actions), but it's still a losing battle in most cases as the best one can hope for is a hiatus until people forget about it. There's been tons of VA issues that have made national news but quietly never got fixed or reverted to their troubled state because people just forgot about it.

Now imagine such issues with all the other agencies/bureaus where people don't have representation (whether literal or effective) and their operations/methods are not publicized or well known.. Unfortunately it doesn't make the news that often because it's either not sexy enough or it rubs someone's narrative the wrong way. At this point, it would take a miracle for Congress to move on something without an outside impetus. There's a few avenues left to help deal with the issues, but the most likely one to occur would be to have a sitting President actually do something about it via executive orders and lobbying Congress.

[Mafic]

US manufactures high end good and provides services, tariffs affects export economies more than imports since they do not have enough domestic consumption to absorb the goods they produce. The housing crisis in the USA is due to problems with regulations, interest rates among other factors.



somewhat correct but the US makes up for its demographic issues due to imimigration.



Your understanding of economics is from monetary policy from the 1930s not 2024, you also ignore the biggest problem in the USA which is revenues due to bad taxation policies. If the USA revised the tax code to prevent things like negative tax rates and properly tax corporations and the rich the debt will be zeroed in 10 years or less. We give more in tax cuts and subsidies than the entire budget of the US government per year, that's an easier solution if getting rid of the debt is your main concern.

The Fed was established before the 1930s and the monetary policy I am citing is really the monetary theory of money which still holds up in the modern framework.

Relying on revenue to counter debt alone long term requires massive growth which means more of a growing population and more productivity. There isn't much productivity left to squeeze from the existing population and wages/salaries are not keeping up with this increased productivity. Worse, wages/salaries since post 1970's are buoyed by credit cards which is not satisfactory replacement for actual wage/salary increases.

As for the US making up for the lowered birth rate with immigration that isn't enough because you need citizens to actually be on payrolls to support government programs.

[arandomuser]

democrats " we cant raise the minimum wage because the parliamentarian says you cant in this kind of bill"
republicans " we know all of trumps picks are unpopular and unqualified were just gotta dismiss congress and ignore your advice and consent get fucked"

republicans" all democrats are degenerate communist pedos who hate america and we wil use government to supress them"
democrats " umm i think we need to really listen to the other side and take republicans concerns seriously and be less divisive"

anyone else going insane listening to the asymetrical warfare dems have to deal with especially because of the pundit class giving a double standard to trump vs dems? i think if dems really thought trump was a fascist we would be planning our own lib j6 right now and voters would like it because it projects strength they hate that the democrats are weak cowards, i think alot of people like latino men who swung would respect dems if they had a spine. i do think he is a fascist btw so im upset that dems arent, ernst thalman had the same perspective that hitler would be unpopular and he could win in the next election.. the same thing every dem prospect for 28 is saying..we all know what happened to him though.

[Bodakane]

With all due respect, we don't even know what will end up on the list and what will even end up getting cut.

Bullshit.

They've said it and listed it in Project 2025.

Maybe your problem is that you're just not that informed or pay that much attention.

[tehdang]

You should tell that to some of the Republican members of Congress that seem to think it will actually do a lot and are very excited for it.

I hope it's only performative, because it could do some very serious damage otherwise.

For all I know, their excitement is also performative.

Glad to know you understand full well that Trump is not a serious politician and is primarily doing stupid performative bullshit. That's definitely the sort of person we want to be in charge of the goddamn country.

DOGE is likely to be that way. But just recall that it's either a presidential commission or dead in Congress, and has no hiring/firing power by itself.

Oh, so Trump lied to the voters about what he was going to do? And I'm guessing you are fine with that?

It may surprise you to learn that Trump is a great bullshitter. I take the DOGE announcement just as I did Trump's announcement that Gaetz "is a deeply gifted and tenacious attorney, trained at the William & Mary College of Law, who has distinguished himself in Congress through his focus on achieving desperately needed reform at the Department of Justice."

[Mafic]

You support Trump, and you support the tariffs. You also support the guy who had the biggest budgets and deficits this country has ever seen.

Your own stance does not compute.

- - - Updated - - -

I do not support tariffs or Trump because Trump believes in zero and low interest rates which hurts the middle class the most. Tariffs are a last ditch resort and more of a posturing negotiation ploy because a tariff war ends up hurting both countries involved as an example due to the escalation. Zero and low interest rates benefit developers like Trump and corporations buying up housing the most because they can depreciate housing and still generate cash flow by borrowing the banks money without touching their own or putting down very little collateral of their own.

[Edge-]

For all I know, their excitement is also performative.

Whether it's performative or not is irrelevant. That's the image they're choosing to present, that of uninformed idiots, clapping like seals. Though I'm not so remotely confident as you that Republican lawmakers actually understand how reality works because they've pretty consistently shown a significant preference for fantasy and fiction and trouble existing in reality.

It's the same, "Secretly, everyone hates Donald and wants him gone!" that we keep seeing again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again from "anonymous lawmakers" that never amounts to more than said pearls supposedly clutched behind the scenes. Which doesn't matter when they're consistently enabling him in front of the scenes.

[Draco-Onis]

The Fed was established before the 1930s and the monetary policy I am citing is really the monetary theory of money which still holds up in the modern framework.

Relying on revenue to counter debt alone long term requires massive growth which means more of a growing population and more productivity. There isn't much productivity left to squeeze from the existing population and wages/salaries are not keeping up with this increased productivity. Worse, wages/salaries since post 1970's are buoyed by credit cards which is not satisfactory replacement for actual wage/salary increases.

As for the US making up for the lowered birth rate with immigration that isn't enough because you need citizens to actually be on payrolls to support government programs.

What are you talking about? do you not understand how the tax code works? Do you not realize the impact of trillions of dollars every year given in subsidies and tax cuts to profitable billion dollar corporations? for example AT&T had -4.1% tax rate in 2021 they made 30 billion dollars in pre-tax earnings but we the tax payer gave them 1.2 billion dollars for free.

Trump's tax cuts gave away 2-3 trillion dollars alone and that's one of many tax cuts we have given over the years. The tax code has more loophole than Swiss cheese. It would be better if you were honest and said you don't want the rich and corporations to pay their fair share.

[Mafic]

The Fed can do no such thing, and they have zero control, influence, or authority over the US budget, and consequently debts/deficits. They purely handle monetary policy.

I went back to check your posts - how do you think the Fed is monetizing US debt, even?

https://www.investopedia.com/article...nment-debt.asp

https://seekingalpha.com/article/443...-americas-debt

https://seekingalpha.com/article/435...f-federal-debt

https://www.learningmarkets.com/risk...vernment-debt/

Debt monetization is not the same thing as “printing money” but it has many of the same effects.

Debt monetization describes the process of turning U.S. Treasury debt and private corporate debt into money. Simply stated, this happens when the Fed buys Treasury and corporate debt on the open market.

https://economics.td.com/gbl-debt-monetization

https://seekingalpha.com/article/458...more-inflation



This is a good starting point. I would say there is no political party at this time willing to fix this in the US.

- - - Updated - - -

What are you talking about? do you not understand how the tax code works? Do you not realize the impact of trillions of dollars every year given in subsidies and tax cuts to profitable billion dollar corporations? for example AT&T had -4.1% tax rate in 2021 they made 30 billion dollars in pre-tax earnings but we the tax payer gave them 1.2 billion dollars for free.

Trump's tax cuts gave away 2-3 trillion dollars alone and that's one of many tax cuts we have given over the years. The tax code has more loophole than Swiss cheese. It would be better if you were honest and said you don't want the rich and corporations to pay their fair share.

Increasing taxes like tariffs are passed onto the consumer so this is why it baffles me why on one hand people complain about tariffs but are okay with massive increases of taxes on the other hand. The outcome is the same which means it is passed onto the consumer aka middle class or working poor.

[Somewhatconcerned]

I fully expect DOGE to be performative. Vivek's a clown. Elon has only done private business, not government administration. Just expect memes about stupid government employee position titles or government research grants.

I don't know, I think they are serious about it. And I think to the extent that the law allows him to, Trump will sign off on their recommendations.

Here is the first DOGE roadmap. Looks interesting. About time someone pulled back the curtains a bit!

https://x.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1859363218331718137