Well the overton window has shifted so much I’m not sure where any party is. Republicans are the so called conservatives, who happen to love larger deficits than the democrats for economic stimulus, so I’m not sure where that puts any party on a map. I’m just going by the labels most people know them by.
Well if hes following Project 2025, which it seems based on recent comments by Elon Musk, then hes expecting other countries to remove all tariffs first. As you say, chlorinated chicken, but if you dont then you dont get to sell your healthy chickens to America, and all that money you owe thats denominated in USD becomes very hard to acquire.
Maybe the better option is to allow it but to label it with its harmful chemicals, let the free market decide, in a kind of democratic process of people determining their own marginal utility versus budget constraints. You can still buy cigarettes in the UK and Europe as well, so whats a bit of American chicken versus a lifetime of smoking?
They did say when they were exporting all the jobs to China that the stock market will do amazingly well, while skeptics were more concerned about jobs and unions. It really blurs the line between the left and the right when the left is complaining about a shrinking 401k while applauding the rich like Musk getting poorer.
Well its going to get more expensive relative as well as oil prices fall globally due to recession. But then we will hit another energy shortage and it will become cheaper, which is why France started building nuclear in the 1970s to begin with.
It seems to me nuclear takes you off the ebb and flow of global energy prices, I’d prefer spending on nuclear rather than carbon capture which seems to be the existing plan of many countries to combat climate change.
Can someone explain to me why this is worse than Europes VAT tax?
According to an International Monetary Fund (IMF) study, any nation that switches to VAT initially feels the negative impact of reduced tax revenues. In the long run, however, the study concluded that VAT adoption has in the majority of cases increased government revenue and proved effective.
It seems to be proven quite effective, and Europe still has them, so why is Trumps worse/better than a VAT?
Is US social security not the definition of a ponzi scheme, where new money pays for old money, as they obfuscate the fact its totally unfunded outside of current year debt accumulation?
Can somebody correct me where I’m wrong here, and why it is sustainable in a rising interest rate environment and aging demographics where debt is more expensive to roll over. It seems to me if you even made it optional and allowed people to opt in the entire system would collapse, as it is entirely unfunded if not for the new entrants into the system, which again appears to be a ponzi scheme.