Trump Presidency

[Irish#1]

 

[IRISHDODGER]

View attachment 3055880
I think he stole this quote from JFK or Lincoln.

Guess all the Neil Kinnock lines have been plagiarized enough.

 

[GATTACA!]

 

[TorontoGold]

Family values!

 

[GATTACA!]

Family values!

It's like something straight out of a Death of Stalin type satire lol.

In a few decades we're going to get some amazing content based on the 2024 election.

 

[TorontoGold]

It's like something straight out of a Death of Stalin type satire lol.

In a few decades we're going to get some amazing content based on the 2024 election.

The only good thing that came out of GWB's tenure was punk revival. If Biden wins again maybe Kid Rock will expand on his original diddler Cool, Daddy cool and update it for penis inspection day.

 

[IrishLax]

I support 17.5 out of 20.

 

[TorontoGold]

Good things good bad things bad

 

[ulukinatme]

I support 17.5 out of 20.

That's about where I'm at. Which ones are your sticking points? I'm stuck a bit at 12, for one. While I support the military, we currently spend 4 times more than the next closest country, China, and 8 times more than Russia. There are countries that have a lot more personnel than we do, India in particular has more than twice our numbers. That said, I think we should continue to make sure we're making advancements and leading in technology, but I wouldn't contribute more funding at this time.

 

[GATTACA!]

That's about where I'm at. Which ones are your sticking points? I'm stuck a bit at 12, for one. While I support the military, we currently spend 4 times more than the next closest country, China, and 8 times more than Russia. There are countries that have a lot more personnel than we do, India in particular has more than twice our numbers. That said, I think we should continue to make sure we're making advancements and leading in technology, but I wouldn't contribute more funding at this time.

#2 is antithetical to #3. You can’t deport all the cheapest labor and also try to bring costs down.

I also like how #3 is just end inflation. Big “I didn’t say it I declared it” energy.

 

[RDU Irish]

#2 is antithetical to #3. You can’t deport all the cheapest labor and also try to bring costs down.

I also like how #3 is just end inflation. Big “I didn’t say it I declared it” energy.

I agree - there are some demand reduction benefits, particularly in housing, but I agree that low cost labor is a bigger variable working against the stated goal.

#13, 14 and 20 aren't far behind #3 on your point as well. Michael Scott declaring bankruptcy vibes.

 

[ab2cmiller]

#2 is antithetical to #3. You can’t deport all the cheapest labor and also try to bring costs down.

I also like how #3 is just end inflation. Big “I didn’t say it I declared it” energy.

LOL yeah. Good luck with "ending inflation". Let me know how that goes.

 

[IrishLax]

That's about where I'm at. Which ones are your sticking points? I'm stuck a bit at 12, for one. While I support the military, we currently spend 4 times more than the next closest country, China, and 8 times more than Russia. There are countries that have a lot more personnel than we do, India in particular has more than twice our numbers. That said, I think we should continue to make sure we're making advancements and leading in technology, but I wouldn't contribute more funding at this time.

You can’t do #6 without cutting spending and as we saw last term he isn’t going to cut spending. Also, tipping culture is out of control and the idea that tips shouldn’t be counted as income is ludicrous.

#2 mass deportation of criminals and agitators I support, I do not support mass deportation of migrant workers in industries like agriculture, etc. it would be horrible for the economy and directly undermine point #3. Need a more elegant and nuanced solution there, like industry specific work visas.

#14 we don’t need to protect social security we need to reform it. It WILL go bankrupt as currently constructed. Your only options are to raise taxes, raise retirement age, or reduce benefits. I don’t support having taxes raised on me to fund retirements for boomers that paid in lower amounts.

 

[IrishLax]

But #15 through #18 is all a total bullseye for me and we won’t get that from Biden. Nominate someone normal like Rubio for VP and I might actually vote for Trump we’ll see.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

I agree - there are some demand reduction benefits, particularly in housing, but I agree that low cost labor is a bigger variable working against the stated goal.

#13, 14 and 20 aren't far behind #3 on your point as well. Michael Scott declaring bankruptcy vibes.

I’m afraid #13 is just a matter of time before it’s unavoidable.

One thing that we can count on from both parties is that spending more of our tax dollars is going to increase.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

LOL! One of the few things Epstein told his brother was in regards to the 2016 POTUS election: “If the nation knew what I know about both candidates, there would be a revolt”

No way those files are being declassified. You gotta think Epstein has a video entitled “Play this if I’m dead”. LOL

 

[Irish#1]

 

[Irish#1]

#14 we don’t need to protect social security we need to reform it. It WILL go bankrupt as currently constructed. Your only options are to raise taxes, raise retirement age, or reduce benefits. I don’t support having taxes raised on me to fund retirements for boomers that paid in lower amounts.

I've been hearing this since the 70's and it's still here. Why penalize Boomers for being born during that time? They paid into SS what the government said they should.

I agree that it needs reformed. I would prefer something where your contributions go directly into an investment account solely for you, yet you can't get to it until you retire.

 

[NDVirginia19]

I think the pragmatic solution is to both raise the cap on Social Security taxable income and also raise the retirement age, but because nobody will be able to campaign on compromise, it will never happen.

 

[ab2cmiller]

I think the pragmatic solution is to both raise the cap on Social Security taxable income and also raise the retirement age, but because nobody will be able to campaign on compromise, it will never happen.

Agreed. Politicians and the American public have no appetite for even the smallest amount of pain related to the cost of fixing this issue. It won't be fixed until the year or two before the automatic cuts would kick in.

This can will get kicked down the road until at least 2030.

 

[RDU Irish]

I’m afraid #13 is just a matter of time before it’s unavoidable.

One thing that we can count on from both parties is that spending more of our tax dollars is going to increase.

I think #3, 13 and 20 are byproducts of success on the progress of the other 17 items.

SS isn't that hard to fix, bump the retirement age up 3-4 years across the board. Earliest retirement age should be 65 in tandem with Medicare eligibility and you can defer to 73 versus 62 and 70 today. Phase it in one month per year starting at those age 60 today such that 24 year olds are the oldest to "suffer" with the full 3 year shift. Allowing a portion of SS to go to 401k/IRA type account in return for lower future benefits would get raided by irresponsible people and enrich those who already have their shit together. It would take 30 years to play out so it is a great feel good, kick the can down the road policy to validate effectively higher taxes.

 

[ab2cmiller]

I've been hearing this since the 70's and it's still here. Why penalize Boomers for being born during that time? They paid into SS what the government said they should.

I agree that it needs reformed. I would prefer something where your contributions go directly into an investment account solely for you, yet you can't get to it until you retire.

The problem would then become, how do you fund the disability program?

 

[NDVirginia19]

Agreed. Politicians and the American public have no appetite for even the smallest amount of pain related to the cost of fixing this issue. It won't be fixed until the year or two before the automatic cuts would kick in.

This can will get kicked down the road until at least 2030.

Yep. And every year delay, the corrective actions will be more painful and unpalatable.

 

[RDU Irish]

The problem would then become, how do you fund the disability program?

Funny you think any of this is funded. SS and Medicare have been cash flow positive to the US Treasury for their entire existence up until now. Until the debt exploded over the last decade they combined to own some one third or more of total federal debt.

Not coincidental how once they go in the red and theoretically draw from their prior surplus we get a nasty wave on inflation.

Your point is valid though - this is not just a glorified pension system. The disability aspect is important (if not horribly abused).

 

[IrishLax]

I've been hearing this since the 70's and it's still here. Why penalize Boomers for being born during that time? They paid into SS what the government said they should.

I agree that it needs reformed. I would prefer something where your contributions go directly into an investment account solely for you, yet you can't get to it until you retire.

At the end of the day it’s $$ in $$ out. Social security still has $2.9 TRILLION in asset reserves and it’s not like it’s going bankrupt tomorrow. But it peaked in 2020 and will now be on the decline as outlays exceed revenues.

In year 2000, there was more tax being paid into social security than paid out.

In year 2010, it was neutral.

Currently, its expenditure (5.2% of GDP) is more than revenue (4.6% of GDP). It’s a pyramid scheme *unless* you make structural changes. It will only get worse, projected by the CBO to reach 6%+ by the 2030s. By ~2035ish it’ll be out of money because of the large yearly deficit.

The main things being kicked around to make it “outlay vs revenue neutral” is to reduce how much benefits are paid out, which they expect to trigger in 2034. People born in the 50s/60s will mostly all still end up getting full initial benefits (as always, the Boomers “get theirs”) and see only a moderate reduction in lifetime benefits. Gen X and beyond are looking at 25%+ reduction in benefits.

Every single employed American would have been better off taking their social security taxes and sticking them in a 401k.

 

[NDVirginia19]

Yeah, I'm 27 and I have always structured my personal savings and investment plan under the assumption that I will not receive any Social Security. Definitely a worst case scenario, but I think expecting only ~50% is a not too pessimistic expectation.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Funny you think any of this is funded. SS and Medicare have been cash flow positive to the US Treasury for their entire existence up until now. Until the debt exploded over the last decade they combined to own some one third or more of total federal debt.

Not coincidental how once they go in the red and theoretically draw from their prior surplus we get a nasty wave on inflation.

Your point is valid though - this is not just a glorified pension system. The disability aspect is important (if not horribly abused).

I've only had limited exposure to some of the approval process for SSD. I've heard from two or three people that have had some direct experience and they said even if you don't have a very good case for disability, just keep applying, it will eventually get approved.

 

[RDU Irish]

I've only had limited exposure to some of the approval process for SSD. I've heard from two or three people that have had some direct experience and they said even if you don't have a very good case for disability, just keep applying, it will eventually get approved.

It has turned into an early retirement scheme. A number of years back, Barrons ran a story illustrating one in six people age 55-65 were on SSDI. This at the same time the manual aspect of labor has dramatically reduced over the decades.

On SS surplus - in 2010 US debt was about $12T which was about double the $5.6T in 2000. So SS "owned" closer to 20% than one third I stated. I am guessing medicare surplus would fill some of that gap but I am not finding the data very quickly.

The fact remains - changing from surplus to deficit on SS and Medicare are inflationary changes of the last few years and put pressure on Treasury debt issuance demand to help drive interest rates higher for longer.

 

[GATTACA!]

It has turned into an early retirement scheme. A number of years back, Barrons ran a story illustrating one in six people age 55-65 were on SSDI. This at the same time the manual aspect of labor has dramatically reduced over the decades.

On SS surplus - in 2010 US debt was about $12T which was about double the $5.6T in 2000. So SS "owned" closer to 20% than one third I stated. I am guessing medicare surplus would fill some of that gap but I am not finding the data very quickly.

The fact remains - changing from surplus to deficit on SS and Medicare are inflationary changes of the last few years and put pressure on Treasury debt issuance demand to help drive interest rates higher for longer.

Just another thing to throw on the pile of reasons to support removing almost every government handout and replacing them all with a flat UBI.

 

[Irish#1]

The problem would then become, how do you fund the disability program?

Maybe a small portion of your contribution goes toward disability?