Trump

[Brookie1973]

I can understand which is why I felt that there was not a strong chance of it being viewed.

Basically he says cuts to anything out of the top5/6 areas of spend are like a drop in the ocean from a $ perspective

Yes, but to my earlier point, imagine the outcry if they started cutting social security, Medicare and health, which are all in the top categories. The left already have a collective fit when they propose cutting gender reassignment surgeries for iguanas in Guatemala, imagine if they started cutting the social security benefits of all the protestors who clearly don’t have real jobs to go to.

 

[h27272727]

Sorry mate, I simply refuse to watch anything ABC. It is straight propaganda. One look at this guys video screenshots tells me all I need to know. It is a tragedy of modern life that all State news services have long since dropped any pretext of being impartial. That may be ok if they spoke for the majority, but if they weren’t tax payer funded they would be shut down in next to no time.

What do you prefer? Fox News?
Just to preface: I’ve only read a few of your posts so may be jumping the gun here. If that’s the case then this is more of a broad rant.

I haven’t had an account here for some years, but stumbled on this thread and am pretty surprised to see a fair few posters repeating the same spiel of MAGA folk over in the states. Remember, that bunch (quantitatively) are composed of the least educated portion of their (generally) ignorant population. 20% of the population are illiterate and education varies state by state; you can imagine the quality of education in the south

Your more recent post references “the left” as if they’re some singular entity. The current administration uses the same strategy where they try lump people into groups and generate fear. “These evil aliens will…”, “the left plan to …”, “those liberals…(insert vague reference to transgender, money, immigration, jobs)”.

Besides, the left in the US is basically centre. Both parties have succumbed to corporate $. Yet what’s dangerous is that the Trump administration is filled with incompetent, shameless suck ups with zero care for people with different views or nationalities. Just yesterday I saw a video of an Afghani man that defected to help the US war effort over there being whisked away by masked ICE personnel.

Alluding to a seperate post of yours, remember that the only reason a truly democratic country cares to make money is to provide care for their people. Be it hospitals, Medicaid (in US) or whatever else. If money doesn’t go into helping people, we know where else it goes… straight into the pockets of the 1%. USaid is another topic. Part of it is to help people, the other part is to establish soft power. Trump is completely oblivious to the fact that since WW2 the US has strategically invested in other countries to further establish their foothold as the richest country in the world. The effects of their recent move back to early 1900’s isolationism will have horrible economic consequences for them long term.

The whole Doge scam is another topic that I don’t even want to get into because it’s been such a **** up. Many MAGA got a rude shock when they got fired by AI, despite previously being excited it would only happen to people they don’t like.

Slowly but surely, Trump’s support base is being divided on topics they don’t quite understand (tariffs, foreign relations) and now the possibility for middle-eastern war 2.0. With the increasing prevalence of masked authorities such as ICE becoming more prevalent, it’s clear there’s only a matter of time before the noise grows. Trump’s sycophant’s are slowly but surely following the 1930’s Nazi guidebook. But they are too blatantly corrupt and incompetent to succeed at establishing Fascism (whether they even understand that’s what their goal is). Shockingly, this whole ordeal has shown that memories are short, and if a charismatic AND clever leader emerged the states could very easily descend. They are a country that has history with hating progress of the people (look no further than the black rights movement)

I understand this has been a bit of a whirlwind. But to finish back at the start, it doesn’t really matter if ABC is or isn’t propaganda. The choice to only view news from a select few outlets - ironically - puts you at far greater risk of propaganda.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Trump’s sycophant’s are slowly but surely following the 1930’s Nazi guidebook. But they are too blatantly corrupt and incompetent to succeed at establishing Fascism

True. Trump would never declare some national emergency such as invasion of Mexicans or the budget deficit or Kristi Noem running out of Botox, and use said 'emergency' as a reason to delay (cancel) elections. Which the (his) Supreme Court will no doubt shortly declare is within his power.
Could never happen

 

[lsz]

Yes, but to my earlier point, imagine the outcry if they started cutting social security, Medicare and health, which are all in the top categories. The left already have a collective fit when they propose cutting gender reassignment surgeries for iguanas in Guatemala, imagine if they started cutting the social security benefits of all the protestors who clearly don’t have real jobs to go to.

So do we agree that without real structural change (including the military) there is really no benefit in cutting smaller programs many of which have real benefits?

 

[Brookie1973]

So do we agree that without real structural change (including the military) there is really no benefit in cutting smaller programs many of which have real benefits?

I agree with Moodys that spending needs to be cut.

 

[Brookie1973]

What do you prefer? Fox News?
Just to preface: I’ve only read a few of your posts so may be jumping the gun here. If that’s the case then this is more of a broad rant.

I haven’t had an account here for some years, but stumbled on this thread and am pretty surprised to see a fair few posters repeating the same spiel of MAGA folk over in the states. Remember, that bunch (quantitatively) are composed of the least educated portion of their (generally) ignorant population. 20% of the population are illiterate and education varies state by state; you can imagine the quality of education in the south

Your more recent post references “the left” as if they’re some singular entity. The current administration uses the same strategy where they try lump people into groups and generate fear. “These evil aliens will…”, “the left plan to …”, “those liberals…(insert vague reference to transgender, money, immigration, jobs)”.

Besides, the left in the US is basically centre. Both parties have succumbed to corporate $. Yet what’s dangerous is that the Trump administration is filled with incompetent, shameless suck ups with zero care for people with different views or nationalities. Just yesterday I saw a video of an Afghani man that defected to help the US war effort over there being whisked away by masked ICE personnel.

Alluding to a seperate post of yours, remember that the only reason a truly democratic country cares to make money is to provide care for their people. Be it hospitals, Medicaid (in US) or whatever else. If money doesn’t go into helping people, we know where else it goes… straight into the pockets of the 1%. USaid is another topic. Part of it is to help people, the other part is to establish soft power. Trump is completely oblivious to the fact that since WW2 the US has strategically invested in other countries to further establish their foothold as the richest country in the world. The effects of their recent move back to early 1900’s isolationism will have horrible economic consequences for them long term.

The whole Doge scam is another topic that I don’t even want to get into because it’s been such a **** up. Many MAGA got a rude shock when they got fired by AI, despite previously being excited it would only happen to people they don’t like.

Slowly but surely, Trump’s support base is being divided on topics they don’t quite understand (tariffs, foreign relations) and now the possibility for middle-eastern war 2.0. With the increasing prevalence of masked authorities such as ICE becoming more prevalent, it’s clear there’s only a matter of time before the noise grows. Trump’s sycophant’s are slowly but surely following the 1930’s Nazi guidebook. But they are too blatantly corrupt and incompetent to succeed at establishing Fascism (whether they even understand that’s what their goal is). Shockingly, this whole ordeal has shown that memories are short, and if a charismatic AND clever leader emerged the states could very easily descend. They are a country that has history with hating progress of the people (look no further than the black rights movement)

I understand this has been a bit of a whirlwind. But to finish back at the start, it doesn’t really matter if ABC is or isn’t propaganda. The choice to only view news from a select few outlets - ironically - puts you at far greater risk of propaganda.

You’re entitled to your opinion. I disagree with most of what you have written, but I am reasonable enough to accept that other people have a different political/world view than I, and that doesn’t mean they are uneducated and/or ill informed.

 

[Brookie1973]

True. Trump would never declare some national emergency such as invasion of Mexicans or the budget deficit or Kristi Noem running out of Botox, and use said 'emergency' as a reason to delay (cancel) elections. Which the (his) Supreme Court will no doubt shortly declare is within his power.
Could never happen

Is that what passes as reasonable political commentary on the ABC these days?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Is that what passes as reasonable political commentary on the ABC these days?

No I thought of it all by myself. i'm surprised I haven't seen commentators referring to the possibility tho, to me it seems a fairly obvious option for Trump to try. Who do you think would try to stop him? The Attorney General? His top cabinet advisors? They've all sworn their allegiance to him ,have they not?

 

[Brookie1973]

No I thought of it all by myself. i'm surprised I haven't seen commentators referring to the possibility tho, to me it seems a fairly obvious option for Trump to try. Who do you think would try to stop him? The Attorney General? His top cabinet advisors? They've all sworn their allegiance to him ,have they not?

I’m trying to work out if you are actually serious or not.

 

[h27272727]

You’re entitled to your opinion. I disagree with most of what you have written, but I am reasonable enough to accept that other people have a different political/world view than I, and that doesn’t mean they are uneducated and/or ill informed

You've touched on a good point. The strongest feature of democracy is the difference of ideas (i.e. criticism/opinion). Although there's a line.

People only bother to start protesting when the people in power begin suppressing this. It started way back when with criticism being branded fake news. More recently it's directly opposing courts, removing the right for abortion, censoring 'woke' books and increasing the prevalence and power of masked authorities (ICE).

W.R.T the comments on MAGA (in general) being ill-informed I do think it is typically unfair and too simple to generalise a group all as 'uneducated' (hence me bringing up the use of 'the left' earlier). However, MAGA's support base is quantitatively less-educated, less literate and more religious. Given the past few months, if someone still supports him I will give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they do so sincerely (i.e. due to his policies, not purely driven by racial/other motives). In that case that tells me they likely accepted the narratives that deficit=bad, Canada=Fentanyl, tariffs=free_money_generation_glitch, doge=professionals cutting 'waste', immigrants=rapists & terrorists, etc.. all in spite of basic economics or evidence suggesting otherwise.

Anyways, that's all from me for now;
PS. as an aside, I stopped posting after we brought in Seibold... forgive me if I seem a bit grumpy

 

[Brookie1973]

You've touched on a good point. The strongest feature of democracy is the difference of ideas (i.e. criticism/opinion). Although there's a line.

People only bother to start protesting when the people in power begin suppressing this. It started way back when with criticism being branded fake news. More recently it's directly opposing courts, removing the right for abortion, censoring 'woke' books and increasing the prevalence and power of masked authorities (ICE).

W.R.T the comments on MAGA (in general) being ill-informed I do think it is typically unfair and too simple to generalise a group all as 'uneducated' (hence me bringing up the use of 'the left' earlier). However, MAGA's support base is quantitatively less-educated, less literate and more religious. Given the past few months, if someone still supports him I will give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they do so sincerely (i.e. due to his policies, not purely driven by racial/other motives). In that case that tells me they likely accepted the narratives that deficit=bad, Canada=Fentanyl, tariffs=free_money_generation_glitch, doge=professionals cutting 'waste', immigrants=rapists & terrorists, etc.. all in spite of basic economics or evidence suggesting otherwise.

Anyways, that's all from me for now;
PS. as an aside, I stopped posting after we brought in Seibold... forgive me if I seem a bit grumpy

All good, happy to have a debate on ideas and actions that avoids name calling etc.

I do think it’s a simplistic injustice to brand the “MAGA” base as you have, which I know is how it is portrayed on CNN and the like. We are talking about a majority of the US population after all, not some fringe group of wackos. It is this type of condescension from the other side which actually drives people the other way. I have also made the point elsewhere that being “well educated” these days may not be as reflective of intelligence as it once was, given it seems to produce indoctrinated group think rather than critical thinking skills.

On immigrants, it is more accurate to talk of “illegal immigrants” which is the focus on ICE activities. Trump is simply doing what all Presidents have done up until Biden (including Obama) which is enforce border laws. If you disagree with strong borders, that is another debate.

On tariffs, not sure what free money generation refers to, but my understanding is that Trump is attempting to correct decades long trade imbalances which have effectively destroyed much of the American manufacturing sector. That seems like a reasonable objective for an American President. On a related note, I see that US blue collar wages have recently increased by their largest amount in over 60 years.

On DOGE and cost cutting, again Trump is trying to address a long term problem which threatens to bring the whole system down - out of control debt. Total US debt is now $36 trillion, up 30% since 2019, and reflects the interest bill on decades long budget deficits driven by over spending. With credit ratings agencies looking to downgrade credit ratings, the situation will only get worse and there will have to be a reckoning at some point. However, the political situation in the US is such that there is unlikely to be bipartisan support for the meaningful cuts in expenditure that are required. The opposition to the relatively minor DOGE cuts is a case in point.

On Seibold, that sounds like something we can and do agree on 😀

I look forward to chatting more if you are so inclined. This type of debate tends to get a bit heated on here (somewhat understandably) so it’s refreshing to just toss ideas back and forth without rancour.

Cheers

 

[h27272727]

All good, happy to have a debate on ideas and actions that avoids name calling etc.

I do think it’s a simplistic injustice to brand the “MAGA” base as you have, which I know is how it is portrayed on CNN and the like. We are talking about a majority of the US population after all, not some fringe group of wackos. It is this type of condescension from the other side which actually drives people the other way. I have also made the point elsewhere that being “well educated” these days may not be as reflective of intelligence as it once was, given it seems to produce indoctrinated group think rather than critical thinking skills.

On immigrants, it is more accurate to talk of “illegal immigrants” which is the focus on ICE activities. Trump is simply doing what all Presidents have done up until Biden (including Obama) which is enforce border laws. If you disagree with strong borders, that is another debate.

On tariffs, not sure what free money generation refers to, but my understanding is that Trump is attempting to correct decade long trade imbalances which have effectively destroyed much of the American manufacturing sector. That seems like a reasonable objective for an American President. On a related note, I see that US blue collar wages have recently increased by their largest amount in over 60 years.

On DOGE and cost cutting, again Trump is trying to address a long term problem which threatens to bring the whole system down - out of control debt. Total US debt is now $36 trillion, up 30% since 2019, and reflects the interest bill on decades long budget deficits driven by over spending. With credit ratings looking to downgrade credit ratings, the situation will only get worse and there will have to be a reckoning at some point. However, the political situation in the US is such that there is unlikely to be bipartisan support for the meaningful cuts in expenditure that are required. The opposition to the relatively minor DOGE cuts is a case in point.

On Seibold, that sounds like something we can and do agree on 😀

I look forward to chatting more if you are so inclined. This type of debate tends to get a bit heated on here (somewhat understandably) so it’s refreshing to just toss ideas back and forth without rancour.

Cheers

Nice, glad we agree on Manly 🙂
I think I’ve seen too many hateful comment sections that I jumped into this head first. It is refreshing to just chat about different perspectives

Well typically I am not a very political person; Australia is at a stage where both parties are fairly stable and stick pretty close to centre. My belief is that this is largely due to our system of mandatory voting; whereby popular parties try appeal to the popular ideas (i.e. average person's).

In America, however, the political parties are tasked with captivating a subset of the population. Hence the people with more passionate views (left or right) are more inclined to vote than those sitting in the middle. For example, Trump won the popular vote with 49.8% (Kamala 48.3%), yet only 65.3% of the eligible voting population actually voted. Multiply those together and Trump becomes president with the support of 32.5% of the eligible voting population.

I've always been interested by history, hence why this has peaked my interest so much despite generally not having strong political views. I think this whole anti-intellectual movement is the main red flag. It is the turning point that paved the way for so many dictatorships (Nazi book burning, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge shutting down schools, universities and moving urban communities to farmland). The idea is that these groups only succeeded once they were able to discredit people who studied years to understand their fields.

I come at this from the perspective of having studied mechanical engineering, whereas most of my friends are tradies. I can engineer stuff safer and more complex than they could, sure. But on the same note I would look like a sore thumb if all of a sudden I had to do their trade without spending the years going to TAFE and learning it as they did. For the online MAGA community and US government press conferences I get the sense they feel experts (eg. economists, engineers, doctors) are 'waste', but without being experts themselves how could they have the insight to determine that?

Why is someone an expert while others aren’t? To me an ‘expert’ is just someone that has been wrong many times along the way while learning about a specific field. Typically by that point they become well aware that they are never always right. Yet when they are wrong, it is at least based on prior knowledge and understanding. I do think Politicians fall in a grey area, where their competence/conscience cannot always be trusted.

It can be simultaneously true that a) im not better than my tradie friends, yet b) cars/planes/control systems should not be designed by them. So when it comes to things such as DOGE; saving is a totally fine (and expected) premise, but efficiency implies a robust, well-conceived method. Governments do spend a lot, yet there are also studies suggesting this is important for strong economies / cash flow. US accrues debt like money grows on trees, absolutely. Yet, despite DOGE initially claiming they were going to cut $2 trillion, as of early march it was determined to be closer to $8billion. But summarising it in a single metric is not really feasible because it’s a time-dependant thing. For example, with cutting library funding they alleviate some short term cost, but if I’m not mistaken that industry generates $7 for every $1 they spend (in the US) so what’s the effect in six months time? Governments traditionally need to invest to stimulate their economy

That’s not to mention the instances where they were caught out recording things multiple times, or claiming to have cut contracts that were already set to expire.

W.R.T to the government systems, any senior data engineer would tell us that these would take a long, long time to fully understand. They are designed as they are to safeguard corruption and replacing extensive data systems is no job for AI.

In the end, US does have serious problems (wealthy vs poor, health system, debt, gun violence). For being the richest country in the world, they should not be so disjointed. I think median income is $200k compared to $500k mean (high due to the wealthier people driving it up). I understand people looking toward more authoritarian style leaders with big promises.

 

[Brookie1973]

Nice, glad we agree on Manly 🙂
I think I’ve seen too many hateful comment sections that I jumped into this head first. It is refreshing to just chat about different perspectives

Well typically I am not a very political person; Australia is at a stage where both parties are fairly stable and stick pretty close to centre. My belief is that this is largely due to our system of mandatory voting; whereby popular parties try appeal to the popular ideas (i.e. average person's).

In America, however, the political parties are tasked with captivating a subset of the population. Hence the people with more passionate views (left or right) are more inclined to vote than those sitting in the middle. For example, Trump won the popular vote with 49.8% (Kamala 48.3%), yet only 65.3% of the eligible voting population actually voted. Multiply those together and Trump becomes president with the support of 32.5% of the eligible voting population.

I've always been interested by history, hence why this has peaked my interest so much despite generally not having strong political views. I think this whole anti-intellectual movement is the main red flag. It is the turning point that paved the way for so many dictatorships (Nazi book burning, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge shutting down schools, universities and moving urban communities to farmland). The idea is that these groups only succeeded once they were able to discredit people who studied years to understand their fields.

I come at this from the perspective of having studied mechanical engineering, whereas most of my friends are tradies. I can engineer stuff safer and more complex than they could, sure. But on the same note I would look like a sore thumb if all of a sudden I had to do their trade without spending the years going to TAFE and learning it as they did. For the online MAGA community and US government press conferences I get the sense they feel experts (eg. economists, engineers, doctors) are 'waste', but without being experts themselves how could they have the insight to determine that?

Why is someone an expert while others aren’t? To me an ‘expert’ is just someone that has been wrong many times along the way while learning about a specific field. Typically by that point they become well aware that they are never always right. Yet when they are wrong, it is at least based on prior knowledge and understanding. I do think Politicians fall in a grey area, where their competence/conscience cannot always be trusted.

It can be simultaneously true that a) im not better than my tradie friends, yet b) cars/planes/control systems should not be designed by them. So when it comes to things such as DOGE; saving is a totally fine (and expected) premise, but efficiency implies a robust, well-conceived method. Governments do spend a lot, yet there are also studies suggesting this is important for strong economies / cash flow. US accrues debt like money grows on trees, absolutely. Yet, despite DOGE initially claiming they were going to cut $2 trillion, as of early march it was determined to be closer to $8billion. But summarising it in a single metric is not really feasible because it’s a time-dependant thing. For example, with cutting library funding they alleviate some short term cost, but if I’m not mistaken that industry generates $7 for every $1 they spend (in the US) so what’s the effect in six months time? Governments traditionally need to invest to stimulate their economy

That’s not to mention the instances where they were caught out recording things multiple times, or claiming to have cut contracts that were already set to expire.

W.R.T to the government systems, any senior data engineer would tell us that these would take a long, long time to fully understand. They are designed as they are to safeguard corruption and replacing extensive data systems is no job for AI.

In the end, US does have serious problems (wealthy vs poor, health system, debt, gun violence). For being the richest country in the world, they should not be so disjointed. I think median income is $200k compared to $500k mean (high due to the wealthier people driving it up). I understand people looking toward more authoritarian style leaders with big promises.

Thanks for that. Good food for thought. I would say I’m not sure it’s really “anti-intellectuals” as much as it is “anti-establishment/anti-elite”. I think a large part of Trumps appeal is from people who believe they have been let down and talked down to by an establishment who believe in their own intellectual and moral superiority. Some would say that Trumps election proves that the democratic process is in fact working, with the voice of the majority (of eligible voters) heard over that of an elitist establishment.

On the question of cost cutting, the only thing I would say is that there never appears to be an appetite to cut budgets from those left of centre when in power. Whilst the efforts of DOGE etc may not be perfect, at least they have recognised the problem and have taken steps to try and avert it.

 

[h27272727]

Yup. They’re very justified in feeling that way. The richest country on earth yet in many places it borders on third world. wealth divide, corporate $ in politics, police, gun issues... For mine once this all boils over they really need a person who will bite the bullet and do away with all the political donations, insider stock trading etc and focus on the people again. Yet there’s only so many democrats and republicans pushing for that (surprise surprise).

My main point of confusion with those voting trump in order to do away with the elite is that now it’s more or less in the hands of the super-elite. eg. trump, musk (??), bezos, rumours of some tech leaders pulling some strings. People like Linda McMahon,RFK, the FBI guy and Hegseth would likely have their resumes tossed in the bin (and perhaps burned) if they’d applied for their roles at previous points in time.

Nonetheless, I’m very curious how it all pans out anyways. My prediction is that MAGA and the average republican will struggle to stay on the same page long term as more divisive issues come to the forefront. Or perhaps the ship will steady and this will all just be a blur. Developments in Iran will be an interesting watch

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Some would say that Trumps election proves that the democratic process is in fact working,

It proves that money can buy elections in the US (which is not new, nor is it limited to the US)

Whilst the efforts of DOGE etc may not be perfect, at least they have recognised the problem and have taken steps to try and avert it.

As h27 (I won't try to spell your name, sorry) pointed out the Doge savings have amounted to a few billion. We know you are deeply concerned about America's debt so it's odd you haven't mentioned trumps's Big Beautiful bill which includes tax cuts that are projected to add 4.6 trillion to the deficit. Most of which will benefit the mega-rich.

My prediction is that MAGA and the average republican will struggle to stay on the same page long term as more divisive issues come to the forefront.

The working class MAGA faithful have been sucked in by con-man Trump's appeal to culture wars to think he is on their side. I agree that, as cost of living bites, more will start to question this but meanwhile Trump is hobbling all the institutions that supposedly safeguard democracy, such as Congress, the courts, education system, independant media, even the right to protest without the national guard being deployed.
I agree with Brookie that many MAGA voters have (correctly) lost faith in the establishment and the 'elites' but by the time they realise that, contrary to what Trump tells them, their troubles are actually not all the fault of immigrants, fake news media, and 'the woke radical left' it will be much harder to do anything about it, not easier.

 

[Brookie1973]

Yup. They’re very justified in feeling that way. The richest country on earth yet in many places it borders on third world. wealth divide, corporate $ in politics, police, gun issues... For mine once this all boils over they really need a person who will bite the bullet and do away with all the political donations, insider stock trading etc and focus on the people again. Yet there’s only so many democrats and republicans pushing for that (surprise surprise).

My main point of confusion with those voting trump in order to do away with the elite is that now it’s more or less in the hands of the super-elite. eg. trump, musk (??), bezos, rumours of some tech leaders pulling some strings. People like Linda McMahon,RFK, the FBI guy and Hegseth would likely have their resumes tossed in the bin (and perhaps burned) if they’d applied for their roles at previous points in time.

Nonetheless, I’m very curious how it all pans out anyways. My prediction is that MAGA and the average republican will struggle to stay on the same page long term as more divisive issues come to the forefront. Or perhaps the ship will steady and this will all just be a blur. Developments in Iran will be an interesting

Thanks for that.

I’d suggest that the wealth divide is in large part driven by the decades long destruction of the working class in American. My take is that Trump is the first President in modern history to take the issue seriously, hence the necessarily dramatic actions he is taking on tariffs. Other Presidents have avoided the structural reforms necessary, preferring to pander to the votes of the disenfranchised through government handouts. Hence the current spending/deficit/debt problem.

As to a super elite, the same accusation could just as equally (and probably more so) be thrown at recent democratic presidencies (see Gates, Zuckerberg, Soros, et al). My take on the FBI and the military is that they are being returned to their core competencies, after years of politicisation.

 

[Brookie1973]

It proves that money can buy elections in the US (which is not new, nor is it limited to the US)

As h27 (I won't try to spell your name, sorry) pointed out the Doge savings have amounted to a few billion. We know you are deeply concerned about America's debt so it's odd you haven't mentioned trumps's Big Beautiful bill which includes tax cuts that are projected to add 4.6 trillion to the deficit. Most of which will benefit the mega-rich.


The working class MAGA faithful have been sucked in by con-man Trump's appeal to culture wars to think he is on their side. I agree that, as cost of living bites, more will start to question this but meanwhile Trump is hobbling all the institutions that supposedly safeguard democracy, such as Congress, the courts, education system, independant media, even the right to protest without the national guard being deployed.
I agree with Brookie that many MAGA voters have (correctly) lost faith in the establishment and the 'elites' but by the time they realise that, contrary to what Trump tells them, their troubles are actually not all the fault of immigrants, fake news media, and 'the woke radical left' it will be much harder to do anything about it, not easier.

Fortunately, money couldn’t buy an election for Kamala, no matter how much she wasted on celebrity endorsements and the like. Was it $1billion? And when you say “mega rich” do you include the Biden family in that?

On debt, the combined 4 year budget deficits under Biden/Harris totalled $7.65 trillion, approx 50% higher than the previous Trump administration, and making them by far the biggest deficit spenders in modern history. In that time, they also wasted $1 trillion on improper payments, making them the biggest wasters in history (Government Accountability Office).

As to the “Big Beautiful Bill” the tax cuts were an election commitment. I’d say any President delivering on an election promise is a sign of a strong democracy in action. Could/should the bill do more to wind back on the deficit spending and waste of the previous 4 years? Probably. But my take is that Trump recognises the political reality than any meaningful and necessary cuts will no doubt lead to more full scale coordinated rioting in the streets.

The rest sounds more like CNN/MSNBC rhetoric so I won’t bother commenting.

 

[lsz]

Thanks for that.

I’d suggest that the wealth divide is in large part driven by the decades long destruction of the working class in American. My take is that Trump is the first President in modern history to take the issue seriously, hence the necessarily dramatic actions he is taking on tariffs. Other Presidents have avoided the structural reforms necessary, preferring to pander to the votes of the disenfranchised through government handouts. Hence the current spending/deficit/debt problem.

As to a super elite, the same accusation could just as equally (and probably more so) be thrown at recent democratic presidencies (see Gates, Zuckerberg, Soros, et al). My take on the FBI and the military is that they are being returned to their core competencies, after years of politicisation.

I’m not so sure about the idea that Trump really looked after the working class especially when you consider the upcoming tax cuts many of which benefited the wealthy more than everyday workers.

I think Trump was effective rhetorically when it came to speaking to the working class he tapped into frustration and identity politics well. But when it comes to actual policy, I think some of Biden’s efforts haven’t received as much attention as they deserve.

For example, the Inflation Reduction Act (yeah, unfortunate acronym…) included major investments in clean energy, aimed at replacing lost industrial jobs and creating 1.5 million new roles over the next decade. Plus, Biden’s administration made real progress on lowering prescription drug costs including policies Trump has tried to take credit for, even though they only got across the line under Biden.

 

[Brookie1973]

I’m not so sure about the idea that Trump really looked after the working class especially when you consider the upcoming tax cuts many of which benefited the wealthy more than everyday workers.

I think Trump was effective rhetorically when it came to speaking to the working class he tapped into frustration and identity politics well. But when it comes to actual policy, I think some of Biden’s efforts haven’t received as much attention as they deserve.

For example, the Inflation Reduction Act (yeah, unfortunate acronym…) included major investments in clean energy, aimed at replacing lost industrial jobs and creating 1.5 million new roles over the next decade. Plus, Biden’s administration made real progress on lowering prescription drug costs including policies Trump has tried to take credit for, even though they only got across the line under Biden.

Thanks for that. I would say I’m not sure the objective of the Clean Energy Act was to help the working class. I do believe that is what the tariff changes were all about, and they were actual policy, not rhetoric. As I have said elsewhere, blue collar wages recently recorded their largest increase in over 60 years.

 

[h27272727]

Thanks for that.

I’d suggest that the wealth divide is in large part driven by the decades long destruction of the working class in American. My take is that Trump is the first President in modern history to take the issue seriously, hence the necessarily dramatic actions he is taking on tariffs. Other Presidents have avoided the structural reforms necessary, preferring to pander to the votes of the disenfranchised through government handouts. Hence the current spending/deficit/debt problem.

As to a super elite, the same accusation could just as equally (and probably more so) be thrown at recent democratic presidencies (see Gates, Zuckerberg, Soros, et al). My take on the FBI and the military is that they are being returned to their core competencies, after years of politicisation.

Yeah, for a long while there's been a very thin line between a political sponsor versus a political influence.

I've kind of walked around tariffs / economic policy so far because i know that will get one last big rant out of me. So may as well just get it out of the way. Perhaps you have some countering examples/ideas but my current stance on this (up to this point) is fairly established. FBI is probably my other sticking point too so hopefully I don't come across too pigheaded here. As a preface: My perspective is probably exaggerated in the current context as I tend to extrapolate things out and reality always finds a different path.

So... as for structural reforms, economic systems are quite complex. Trump's rhetoric generates some fear, he offers the solutions... But who is analysing? who is advising? Do people believe Trump has some supernatural / supreme knowledge here? He lacks understanding of the fundamentals of economics. It surely cannot be him, yet at one stage there he was more or less tweeting out tariffs on the toilet (later they advanced to using AI to generate a chart). I again question the expertise of people he's hired. It's at the stage where no one in his administration can answer simple yes/no questions when being criticised (lots on Youtube for this) and no one seems aware of what's happening outside of Trump and the top advisers. Beyond his words, I will give it that he has actually been making changes. However, the actions themselves lack reasoning and I doubt much objective professional input is involved. One of the economists Peter Nevaro wrote an isolationist trade theory based on Tariffs under a pseudonym, then referenced that work in later papers. He is Trump's main advisor and at the time of getting caught, he said:

"It's a pen name…for opinion and purely entertainment value, not as a source of fact,"​

​

Again it all points back to a small group of people running the country the way they want, thinking no one knows better.

On waste / tariffs / manufacturing, etc.
For mine, capitalism naturally abides by conservation laws. Although not particularly a fan of generalised notion of 'waste', i'll imagine a small amount of waste in a company. The company have to apply a force to hold it up ($). When waste gets heavy, they either release it, or are dragged down with it. Adapt or perish, as they say. Governments are different, although their role is more to do with investing/funding the economy. Government spending alone is not inherently bad.

With globalisation, developed countries shifted to service-based economies because of the idea of cutting waste... With global trade, they access resources from countries with naturally high supply and typically low labour fees. Supply vs demand and geographic constraints then dictates when importing is more feasible versus when it isn't.

Neglecting that these factories cannot be produced overnight, few companies will risk investing huge $ in reshoring all manufacturing when this is unlikely to be pushed long-term. Even a few months in Trump himself has been forced to slowly walk back his tariffs, delays others, exempt companies/products that were creating immediate issues.

Even then, this overlooks that Americans (and Australians, Brits, Germans, etc.) do not have a worker base prepared or willing to work in factories. In reality, this may not be a huge issue in itself, as modern day manufacturing looks very, very different to yesteryears. Plenty will be driven by control systems and automation. Together this all seems to contradict the idea of restoring an industrial working class, so what's left? The outcome is more or less increased cost for consumers, while still being subjected to the same geographic constraints (resources impossible to produce/harvest in the US) as before.

The trajectory is typically rural subsistence (third world) -> agricultural society -> industrial society (transition) -> service economy (developed). I agree a bit of A and a bit of B, C .... is good here. So increasing manufacturing alone is good; but in 2025 it's not the miracle it's being presented as.

On FBI

I don't have much knowledge about the FBI before or after to really add anything. Kash Patel's appointment though is another red flag for mine. He has not got any experience / expertise in law enforcement and much like some previous examples seems to be a bit of a sycophant for Trump. Although not enough on its own, Patel's appointment tends to indicate a shift away from political independence of the FBI (at least publicly) in favour of loyalty. I did an initial search and a few telling quotes/extracts from the first website:

• There’s a “growing sense among the ranks that there’s a leadership void, and that the highest echelons of the bureau are more concerned about currying favor with the president, retribution and leaks than the actual work,” Stacey Young
• For decades, the FBI chief has received an 8:30 a.m. daily “director’s brief” with the most important information gathered from thousands of agents and analysts. Patel reportedly had trouble making the morning briefing, so it was dropped from five days a week to two. “Even that has been a struggle”. Two current FBI officials said Patel sometimes seems uninterested in the materials, forcing them to try to create briefs that will hold his attention.

ok final big rant over, that covers most of my thoughts on it all now I think. My posts from here on out should be back to a normal length (I must've been trying to catch up on the 18 or so pages i came late to)