Trump 2.0

Yeah, the 0.3% drop in 1Q is most likely due to the stockpiling, but the hurt is definitely coming. Maybe a rebound next Q, and maybe avoiding recession entirely (2 consecutive Qs of negative growth), but whatever it turns out to be it will still be a far cry from the 2.5% or so that analysts had expected had Trump done absolutely nothing, and just let the Biden economy continue.

As billvon mentioned above regarding DOGE, their supposed savings of $160bn (of which <$35bn has receipts, and even those have mistakes) will actually result in a cost to tax-payer (or so says some analysis by the Partnership for Public Service) of $135bn this year. Admittedly much of this is not recurring, while some of the cuts will continue in perpetuity (e.g. payroll costs - maybe c.$3-4bn p.a.), but the $135bn figure this year also doesn't include items such as reduced tax receipts due to a reduced headcount in the IRS, with more people and businesses evading tax and not being challenged. They think this may result in lost revenue of c.$320bn over 10 years.

So whether DOGE has even saved the government any money in the long-term is questionable, and I have no doubt that the Democrats, when they get hold of any power, will launch investigations into the matter, and the entire handling of the DOGE nonsense.
 
Sarkus said:
Yeah, the 0.3% drop in 1Q is most likely due to the stockpiling, but the hurt is definitely coming. Maybe a rebound next Q, and maybe avoiding recession entirely (2 consecutive Qs of negative growth), but whatever it turns out to be it will still be a far cry from the 2.5% or so that analysts had expected had Trump done absolutely nothing, and just let the Biden economy continue.

As billvon mentioned above regarding DOGE, their supposed savings of $160bn (of which <$35bn has receipts, and even those have mistakes) will actually result in a cost to tax-payer (or so says some analysis by the Partnership for Public Service) of $135bn this year. Admittedly much of this is not recurring, while some of the cuts will continue in perpetuity (e.g. payroll costs - maybe c.$3-4bn p.a.), but the $135bn figure this year also doesn't include items such as reduced tax receipts due to a reduced headcount in the IRS, with more people and businesses evading tax and not being challenged. They think this may result in lost revenue of c.$320bn over 10 years.

So whether DOGE has even saved the government any money in the long-term is questionable, and I have no doubt that the Democrats, when they get hold of any power, will launch investigations into the matter, and the entire handling of the DOGE nonsense.
Click to expand...
Hmm, if the Democrats ever regain power I think they might be well-advised not to waste too much time on retrospective investigations. It won't serve democracy well if it becomes a game of witch-hunting and then sanctimoniously grandstanding over each other's previous terms in office. If criminality is suspected, though, then of course.

It looks as if both China and Trump are signalling that a way needs to be found to climb down. Actually I hope this takes several months to bear fruit. I think it would do the country good to see what they have done to themselves by re-electing Trump. That penny won't drop until the man in the street experiences some real discomfort.
 
exchemist said:
Hmm, if the Democrats ever regain power I think they might be well-advised not to waste too much time on retrospective investigations. It won't serve democracy well if it becomes a game of witch-hunting and then sanctimoniously grandstanding over each other's previous terms in office. If criminality is suspected, though, then of course.
Click to expand...
I'm really thinking DOGE specifically: the damage caused needs to be accounted for and highlighted, so that not so much the intent but the approach can be understood to have actually hurt the country. If they find that it really has saved money, has cut waste, inefficiency, and fraud etc, then great, let's make that known as well. But if they have lied then this needs to be shown for what it is, and the bigger the lies the more they should be torn down. This was one of Trump's key policies, and currently there is little but gaslightling about it.
Anything illegal that they've done, either DOGE or any other official, then sure, go for them. They would need to be careful not to make it look like a partisan witch-hunt, and of course be very careful that they hold themselves to the same standards.

exchemist said:
It looks as if both China and Trump are signalling that a way needs to be found to climb down. Actually I hope this takes several months to bear fruit. I think it would do the country good to see what they have done to themselves by re-electing Trump. That penny won't drop until the man in the street experiences some real discomfort.
Click to expand...
I agree, although I wouldn't usually wish such pain on the average-Joe, especially those that voted but not for Trump.
What media seems to be ignoring, though, is that the cancellation - or even reduction - of tariffs will massively impact the budget. Any monies that the American population doesn't pay in the tariff / tax will either mean further cuts to spending elsewhere, or cancellation of Trump's intended tax-cuts (or a reduction in the extension of existing cuts), or an increase in the national debt. By pushing "Tariff the world! We're going to be so rich!" as his economic plan, to turn round and effectively give that up is to trash that plan comprehensively. Yes, he'll say "we've got better trading agreements with other countries" (yet to be seen) but it is highly unlikely that that will generate all that much additional tax revenue from the increased exports. And all the jobs? Bringing back manufacturing? Pipedreams.
 
exchemist said:
Hmm, if the Democrats ever regain power I think they might be well-advised not to waste too much time on retrospective investigations. It won't serve democracy well if it becomes a game of witch-hunting and then sanctimoniously grandstanding over each other's previous terms in office. If criminality is suspected, though, then of course.
Click to expand...

Imagine that.

Why is it that the Democrats shouldn't do something because it won't serve democracy if Republicans ... what?
 
exchemist said:
Inarticulate as usual, I see. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Fine, let's try this again:

exchemist said:
Hmm, if the Democrats ever regain power I think they might be well-advised not to waste too much time on retrospective investigations. It won't serve democracy well if it becomes a game of witch-hunting and then sanctimoniously grandstanding over each other's previous terms in office.
Click to expand...

How unsurprising↑.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top