The 2024 GOP Platform Promises To 'Make America Affordable Again.' So Why Are They Embracing Fiscal Insanity?
Although former President Donald Trump's deregulatory agenda would make some positive changes, it's simply not enough.

The Republican National Committee just released its 2024 platform. While calling it a platform is a stretch, the list of bullet points gives an idea of what the potential next Trump administration's goals are. Here's one issue that should be front and center: End inflation and make America affordable again.
To be sure, "make America more affordable" would be a great slogan and a great objective. It's similar to what many have called an "abundance agenda." While there is plenty to dislike in a platform that at times feels unserious and destructive, this part I like.
Abundance isn't achieved by the same old subsidies or tax breaks for special interests, price controls, or spending loads of taxpayer money on transfer payments. It's achieved by freeing up the supply side of our economy. That means freeing producers and innovators from excessive regulatory obstacles and heavy tax burdens (including tariffs) so they can provide more of what Americans need.
The Trump administration platform assures us it will move in this direction. For instance, it wants to increase America's dominance as an energy producer, which will only be achieved through a deregulation agenda. Apart from counterproductive tax incentives for first-time homeowners, it expresses a commitment to lowering housing costs through deregulation.
The platform states it will "cancel the electric vehicle mandate and cut costly and burdensome regulations" as well as "end the Socialist Green New Deal." I assume that means ending the expensive subsidies and tax breaks in the Inflation Reduction Act. Great idea, but get ready to hear all the recipients of these handouts cry that they won't be able to do what they were already doing before being given the subsidies.
A deregulation agenda would serve the Republicans' goal of boosting manufacturing much better than tariffs, which former President Donald Trump continues to love despite overwhelming evidence that they don't do what he claims. Most tariffs raise the prices of inputs used by American firms, including manufacturing, to produce outputs that serve their customers.
Something similar could be said about Republicans' swipes at immigrants. Fewer immigrants will create labor supply shortages, hurt manufacturing, and slow the economy.
Still, even with their disastrous trade and immigration agenda and the many contradictory goals espoused by this platform, implementing the deregulatory part of the agenda will make some strides at freeing the supply side and hence lowering prices. Indeed, President Joe Biden has not only maintained many of Trump's tariffs, but he's added some of its own. He's also systematically favored subsidizing the demand for certain things—nudging customers to buy what he wants them to buy—while taking actions that restrict supply. That's a recipe for affordability failure.
But as far as affordability goes, I'm less optimistic about the prospect of the next administration ending inflation. That's because Trump and other Republicans are firmly embracing fiscal irresponsibility and excessive debt. The platform contains no mention of a plan to get government debt under control. Instead, it pledges to "fight for and protect Social Security and Medicare with no cuts, including no changes to the retirement age."
Many voters love hearing this promise. But maintaining these two objectively underfinanced programs will inevitably explode the debt burden over the next 30 years. In the entire history of the United States so far, Uncle Sam has accumulated roughly $34 trillion in debt. Under the Trump plan, the government would need to borrow another $124 trillion for these programs alone.
Leaving aside the question of who will lend us all this money when foreign buyers are already scaling back purchases of U.S. Treasuries, remember that most of the inflation we've recently suffered is the product of massive Biden administration spending on top of the COVID-19 spending without any plan to pay for it. As such, announcing that the U.S. will simply go on another borrowing spree sends a poor signal, and it might even increase inflation.
This is made more important because Trump wants to make permanent the tax cuts that are set to expire after 2025, end taxes on tips, and more. If Congress and the president do this without any offsetting spending reductions, it will add at least another $4 trillion in debt over 10 years. With more inflationary fuel, we could easily see the Federal Reserve raise interest rates again, making borrowing money even more expensive than it already is.
The bottom line is that Trump's deregulatory agenda could have a shot at lowering some prices. But it will only be a game-changer if he becomes serious about fiscal responsibility. Right now, he isn't, so I wouldn't count on it.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
...
Yeah, well, you're in no position to bargain.
Biden: I will increase regulations.
Trump: I will reduce regulations.
Oliver: Most of that regulation should never have existed in the first place. I'll get rid of most of it.
Reason commenter: Well that settles it, Imma gonna go with Trump.
Me: But what about Oliver...
Reason commenter: BUT BIDEN IS WORSE! CAN'T YOU SEE THAT?
Me: Well, yeah, but what about Oliver...
Reason commenter: BUT CHASE OLIVER FLIES A PRIDE FLAG AND THAT'S TOTALLY WORSE! CAN'T YOU SEE THAT?
"Oliver: Most of that regulation should never have existed in the first place. I’ll get rid of most of it."
Except for the ones about keeping gays sacred and restricting blasphemy against the LGBTQ+ faith. Those he wnts to expand.
Yes, he wants to keep anti-gay dscrimination protections in law. That you think that this bit of libertarian apostasy justifies voting against him even though his policies are pretty close to the libertarian ideal about 80% of the time says a great deal about you.
Sorry, I do not have truck with special protections or anti-blasphemy laws. It is a deal breaker because of the terrible downstream effects. Like charging teenagers with felonies for scuffing a crosswalk painted as a Pride flag.
Totally agree.
America is not some middle eastern backward mooslim third world nation where blasphemy is treated worse than murder.
Pedo Jeffy once again conflates wokie special protections for non heterosexuals with ‘anti discrimination’. This isn’t a surprise, as Fatfuck always attempts to portray wokie authoritarianism as libertarian.
That's what worries me most. Where would it stop?
But Trump can actually get elected, and has done it before.
Keep perpetuating the duopoly.
Keep ignoring the reality.
And not in the "people like him" sense of "get elected". In the "This is a democratic republic, if you can't leverage around 30-70% of any/every given Senator or Representatives' constituency on any given issue, they will rightly tell you to fuck off on any given issue."
Justin Amash and Chase Oliver can get together and promise to burn down the entire system from the inside, douse the ashes, stir, and douse them again. That still leaves the very important question of who they're going to get to let them in?
Trump was elected, he then took a good economy his predecessor left him and then ran it into the ground. Trump passed an unneeded tax cut he did not have money to pay for and so borrowed more. HIs steel tariff policy led to Chinese soybean tariff reprisals that required Trump's administration to implement farmer welfare program increasing debt. Finally, he failed entirely to address the pandemic and mostly handed out money that would eventually lead to inflation. The economy has recovered, and a second Trump administration will just repeat the mistakes of the first.
Rubbish.
The economy has NOT recovered and in fact is near collapse.
Where are you living that you think the economy is near collapse? Can you explain why a robust stock market, good jobs reports, and inflation coming down is an economy in collapse?
Where are you living that you think the economy is near collapse? Can you explain why a robust stock market, good jobs reports, and inflation coming down is an economy in collapse?
Your gaslights are showing.
Great answer, no facts just the new catch phrase.
All of that is bullshit. The stock market is propped up with government grants. And you’re talking like prices are coming down. They’re not. They’re just increasing a little slower than the last few years. Also, the jobs reports are shit, just like you.
The stock market is a reflection of investors' confidence which is good right now. I am in my late sixties, and I can tell you that prices never come down. What your beef with the jobs report. If Trump had reports like Biden has you be singing his praises.
Labor participation, inflation, credit card debt, multiple jobs, housing market, energy prices...
Need I go on?
The stock market is robust because every payday a gazillion and a half American workers HAVE to put money in their 401k accounts, mostly in the stock market. It will always (over a reasonable time period) go up.
That good jobs report showed zero full time jobs for Americans outside of the governments. Not good.
Yes, inflation is coming down to only DOUBLE what it was under the republican administration. Coming down from SIX times what it was under the republican administration. (And showing signs of heading back up even more; probably that depends on which party controls the legislature next year)
No one has to "pay for" a tax cut. It's a reduction in theft, and not a very good one at that, since government revenues continued to rise afterward.
If you have to borrow money for a tax cut someone in the future pays for that cut.
The government is borrowing money to maintain the “spend like a drunken sailor” policies, not to payfor reduced taxes.
Everything you said is complete bullshit. Just like you.
And amazingly enough Biden and the Democrats have made Trump and Republicans governing look like paradise in comparison.
If you Trump haters didn't have the Cares Act (written, passed and final-vote cheated by House Democrats) you'd have nothing but oxymoron's just like this articles author.
Blabbing on about Tax-Cuts and Crying about Tariffs and then using the consequences of taxes to blame Trump for his Tariffs while ignoring the Tax-Cuts. Makes no sense. Sounds like a foreigner trying to dodge taxes for his widgets is the only sense that can be made of that.
With or without your vote.
Oliver is a faggot. 'nuff said
/Jesse et al
There is a difference between being gay and being politically gay, and Oliver seems to be the latter.
Yes we know. Oliver waving a Pride flag is an unforgivable sin, even if he want to tear down most government regulations unlike Trump or Biden.
He wants his faith as the country's established religion. I stand against.
Funny. Trump setup a De-Regulation committee with a 2-for-1 what was that all about do you think? Never-mind Oliver has as good of a chance as Jo Jorgensen (?who?) on winning; and his voters will probably end up handing Biden a win unless that State has Ranked-Choice.
In as much as people like you see LGBTQP+ as a reason for child grooming and mutilation, yeah. If he were a sane gay man and not a gender ideologue nobody would give a shit who he fucks.
I’ve listened to several interviews with him and didn’t get that impression at all.
Do you have any evidence to support your allegations?
“He’s a gay faggot, duh” may convince your MAGA brethren, but I need something to engage my brain, not my emotions.
but I need something to engage my brain, not my emotions.
Quite possibly the funniest thing you've ever written.
The fact that you go on the attack rather than citing any actual quotes to back up your blind hatred for that gay Libertarian guy is all anyone with a brain needs to know. Just admit it and say you hate him because he’s gay. Or are you scared to be honest? You’re a coward and a liar. You are an embarrassment to the corps.
Is this:
“He’s a gay faggot, duh” may convince your MAGA brethren, but I need something to engage my brain, not my emotions."
going on the attack or no?
Here you go for the 4th time sarc.
Oliver noted his support for federal LGBTQ anti-discrimination protections,
https://www.wabe.org/georgia-gops-top-candidates-move-harder-right-on-lgbtq-issues/
Yeah, from that drunken pile of lefty shit.
Especially after writing this:
“He’s a gay faggot, duh” may convince your MAGA brethren,
The MAGA chanters are becoming my favorite cartoons.
This after he says ” The fact that you go on the attack rather than citing any actual quotes to back up your blind hatred …..
By now, it is not "blind hatred", regardless of whether the gray box is sarc or jeffy, it is now clear-sighted hatred; they are both hated since they've earned hatred by their claims of being decent human beings instead of the slimy, steaming piles of lefty shit which they are.
Have you sought help for your emotional disturbance?
FOAD, steaming pile of lefty shit.
Have you? You’re a homeless drunk and a rageaholic suffering from multiple distinct delusions. While Sevo appears to have his shit together.
Liver failure can’t come soon enough for you.
"Have you? You’re a homeless drunk and a rageaholic suffering from multiple distinct delusions. While Sevo appears to have his shit together..."
Gracias.
Can't claim all of it, but enough to run successful company and keep some folks in victuals.
Dunno which steaming pile of shit that was, but it's doubtful that either of those assholes ever held a position you or I would call "responsible"; takes grown-up perception for that.
If it walks like a duck...
I mean I've linked to the newspaper reports where h le says he supports special protections. Multiple times.
Literally no one here has said that, except you Drunky.
Bookmarked. When have I said this sarc?
And again, solving the fiscal crisis of Social Security and MediCare is solely a problem for Republicans to do. There are innummerable articles griping about the GOP's rhetoric reassuring SS single issue voters, but damn few even discussing what the Democrats are doing about them, much less criticizing those proposals.
The democrats/ liberals are more inclined to the destruction of America and replace white voters with brown ones.
But think of the greater variety of food trucks!
Meh, those will subsequently be taxed and regulated out of existence. Or most of that market will be taken up by Amazon.
When was the last time you saw an electric food truck?
The answer will always be never.
The 2024 GOP Platform Promises To 'Make America Affordable Again.' So Why Are They Embracing Fiscal Insanity?
Do you think she means it "So why are they embracing fiscal *insanity*?" or do you think she means it "So *why* are they embracing fiscal insanity?"?
No seriously, this is Reason "What we really need is congestion pricing and a per mile road tax." Magazine, I'm going to need someone to clarify for me.
The GOP are embracing “fiscal insanity” because, if they do not, the voters will punish them for it. It may not be a brave stance, but it is inevitable in a democratic state where a large section of the public has been made dependent on largesse from the public treasury, as was warned about almost two centuries ago.
Right. I thought "Make America Affordable Again" is automatically pretty fiscally insane politically.
It's like Charles Manson, someone who thinks they're Abe Lincoln, and someone who thinks they're Napoleon all calling each other insane.
I think Napolean was actually insane himself.
Chase Oliver being in favor of anti-discrimination laws is a "deal breaker" for Mickey Rat.
Trump and the Republicans, pushing the country into trillions in debt, is NOT a deal breaker for Mickey Rat.
Who’s going to pay for all these ‘gay’ entitlement measures?
The premise of such ‘entitlement’ mentality is the very reason the country is trillions in debt.
The [WE] identify-as gang building ends up being nothing more the [WE] identify-as gang of ‘armed-robbers’ of the taxpayer.
Have you ever asked yourself why these [WE] identify-as gangs keep getting more and more common all the time?
answer: It is but a consequence of progressing [Na]tional So[zi]al[ism] where ‘democracy’ decides who([WE] gang) the ‘elitist armed-robbers’ will be and who the ‘victims’ to that armed-robbery will be. History of this ideology has a repeating record throughout history and it’s completely on track to another REPEAT here in the USA.
Maybe the USA wasn’t suppose to be about [WE] identity gangs building majority of gangsters to commit ‘gov-gun’ crimes. Maybe, just maybe it was about ensuring equal Individual Liberty and Justice for all no matter what you ‘identify’ as being.
Reason is fully behind every last bit of the welfare state except for the consequences and to them good policy is tax hikes to pay for it all, again, ignoring consequences. They may whinge here or there but when it comes down to it they're on the side of the marxist redistributionist, they just don't want there to be consequences in life.
The platform contains no mention of a plan to get government debt under control.
The US crossed the Rubicon long ago.
There is nothing that can be done here to prevent final collapse. It is pointless to try.
Hope you all got a plan.
I guess we'll just have to vote for Biden.
But reluctantly, though!
And strategically.
Well, the economy has gotten better under Biden. It is not where it should be, but I don't want to start over and have another Trump recession.
You never used the word "masterful". I'm suspicious you're not actually serious with this comment.
The fact is, and you can look it up, the last three Republican administrations have ended in recessions. Clinton, Obama, and Biden have all brought the economy back from recessions. Why would I think another Republican administration would end any better?
Careful, you're hovering around saying that Student Loan forgiveness, the inflation reduction act and tariffs worked. And sure, as long as we ignore my empty store shelves and ri-fucking-diculous levels of inflation, the economy is great.
Which party spending plans led to each one of those buddy?
Please explain how re-elected Republican-Trifectas never had a financial crisis yet one-term's can end up in economical horror right after [D]s take the stage or how FDR and his trifecta could sustain so much horror as a Great Depression for 12-F'En Years.......
Look it up: Markets go up and down all the time; but it takes a Democrat-Trifecta to drop into Great Depressions, Great Recessions, and Great Inflation.
I swear all you leftards know how to do is self-project EVERY horror your party is responsible for. Goes right along with the same mentality used to self-project any responsibility to support yourselves.
The left constantly, “Oh, Gov-God Daddy… Please come save me from having to take care of myself. It's all those other peoples fault that I can't take care of myself. They 'owe' me because I identify-as so therefore I'm oh so special....”
"Although former President Donald Trump's deregulatory agenda would make some positive changes, it's simply not enough."
Well, in that case, vote for leakin' Joe.
For many decades, Republicans have had no interest in cutting government spending. None of this is new.
D’s, OTOH…
Well, go on.
^THIS
If it's 'bad' then Republicans won't fix it.
If it's 'good' it's because Democrats did it.
Hmm... Sounds like there's an unfair biased narrative getting played around here.
Criticism of Republicans equal praise for Democrats. That makes your post praise for Democrats. Repent! Now!
FOAD, asshole.
FALAMANDER, sphincter.
Tough talk from Drunky! Hey pussy, are you finally going to nut up and come kick my ass? I’ve been waiting for almost a year and a half.
sarcasmic paraphrased,
"Criticize Republicans. Ignore Democrats unless they do something good."
"If you don't then your people have a problem!!!!"
Agreed. Democrats used to be tax and spend; Republicans spend and borrow. Problem both parties spend and borrow now.
Who wrote and unanimously passed the Cares Act?
Who was against it and what was their party affiliation?
What do you call those Tariffs you propagandists keep complaining about?
Constant, Endless, Compulsive Self-Projection.
It's all the left does.
The primary funders of the republican party are those who want upper bracket tax cuts, and to a slightly lesser extent, corporate tax cuts. So, that is almost always what the republican party will accomplish, given sufficient power.
All of the rest of it (culture wars, religious issues, immigration, etc.) are just to get enough of the hoi polloi on board so that the republicans will have sufficient power to enact upper bracket tax cuts.
This is what ties libertarians to the republican party. Their funders also have an big interest in upper bracket tax cuts.
Sure, some within the republican and libertarian parties have some interest in deficit and debt. But how many would give up the chance to cut upper bracket taxes today for some longer term debt issue. Never enough so far.
And yet, if one glances at who is funding whom it would certainly appear Democrats are the party of big corporate interests; or at least the richest of the rich.
How, then, would you label the Democrat party?
Perhaps you simply take issue with the particular corporate interests that fund each party, but there is no indication of that in your post what-so-ever. Odd.
Tax-Cuts!!!!! OMG!
Less 'armed-theft' by the government?
What a 'horror'! /s
wrong place
President Donald Trump continues to love despite overwhelming evidence that they don’t do what he claims. Most tariffs raise the prices of inputs used by American firms, including manufacturing, to produce outputs that serve their customers.
How many times are we going to go through this? Who claims tariffs will lower the price of goods?
When Donald Trump famously told the big 3 automakers that he would slap a 25% tariff on every car built if he outsourced those factories to Mexico, he didn't warn them of that action because he thought the price of American cars would go down..
I'm still waiting on Reason to realize the 50B on tariffs they scream and rage about is dwarfed by regulatory costs and even criminal reform (shoplifting is estimated to be double). Almost like costs aren't their actual concern.
Correctly identifying the issue is a start versus completely denying it which is what you get with the Biden regime. How to get to a solution will take some compromise and not your beliefs will not likely be the path taken.
Although I agree with many of your beliefs, I'm not arrogant enough to be delusional to think that my preferences will be accepted even though I believe that they are the correct approach. Everything is relative to the previous state. Is the approach better than what is current? Don't let striving for a perfect solution prevent an imperfect, but step in the right direction from occurring.
This is a common problem with Libertarians who act like a bunch of autistic nerds who prefer to argue over the perfect solution, but never actually do anything meaningful. This is why I'm a libertarian and not a Libertarian.
Rome was not built in a day and it will take longer to dismantle it than a day short of a complete collapse. While some favor a complete collapse, they are naive in their belief that what results will be better than the current mess we have. The probabilities is that a complete collapse will likely result in a worse condition with less freedoms.
While I can't vote for Trump, I would rather have him win the presidency than to have Biden win another term. I will vote for either RFK jr or Chase Oliver both of whom are deeply flawed, but still preferable to the two old guys.
I probably agree with Chase more, but he also holds some of the worst aspects of woke leftism. RJK jr is a leftist, but more old school and is reasonable on many issues.
It a difficult decision, but neither will actually win and in my state, Biden will probably win although come claim it is getting closer to being a toss up. Still I can't vote for Trump and give him a mandate.
I will probably choose RFK Jr as he is more likely to get move votes that Chase Oliver and more likely to deny Trump a mandate and help breakup the uni-party monopoly.
The problem is this: selfish, ignorant American voters and if you have selfish, ignorant voters, you're going to get selfish ignorant, corrupt politicians who get into office and screw everything up. It's not going to do any good to vote a new crop of politicians, you're going to end up with the latest in selfish ,ignorant and even more corrupt politicians.
The other problem is that voters believe everything their man says even if it's total b.s. Most voters have the I.Q. of a watermelon and only consider their own selfish interests. You can't blame them, after all they've been brainwashed into believing all the crap the government has been peddling for the last 150 years.
So this year I'm going to stay home on election day. That's right, I'm not voting. I'll be doing essentially the same thing voters are doing but when I get done masturbating, I'm gonna have a little something to show for it.
F**** Trump and Biden.
Yeah; That’s why no-one ever noticed the difference being….
– Leave me alone and let me take care of myself Republican.
versus
– ‘Go STEAL’ from identity ‘rich’ to pay for my self-proclaimed ‘poor’ identity.
BOAF SIDEZ!!! /s
Well, with Trump not talking about gun rights, and not balancing the budget, I guess we'll have to reluctantly and strategically vote for a Democrat to be named later, who will be so much better on.... wait, any articles on the Democrat Party platform yet?
wait, any articles on the Democrat Party platform yet?
One of the ones from 2015 clogged up the system and they're still waiting for the backlog of them to come through.
No need. There is a perfectly comprehensive article already posted:
https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/
"The bill has come due on the Trump Administration’s hollowing out of our public (i.e. [Na]tional So[zi]alist) institutions" pg5 5th-ph.
Apparently the DNC noticed Trump didn't grow the government.
A deregulation agenda would serve the Republicans' goal of boosting manufacturing much better than tariffs, which former President Donald Trump continues to love despite overwhelming evidence that they don't do what he claims. Most tariffs raise the prices of inputs used by American firms, including manufacturing, to produce outputs that serve their customers.
I don't think tariffs do what YOU claim.
We've lived under Trump's tariff regime before and things were more affordable --and you were complaining about tariffs then.
And you were demonstrably wrong.
I think the embrace of liberaltarianism has utterly destroyed Reason's understanding of economics --which seems to be a slightly shriller bleat of 'if the right wants it, it's bad' that we get from the entirety of those on the left.
Reason doesn't understand supply shifts. At all.
Reason was 20-Times better before they got themselves a case of TDS.
Course moving headquarters to D.C. didn't help.
Neither the Democrat or the Republican party can do what is needed to reduce the national debt. Nor can a third party. What is needed is for centrist/moderates from both major parties to regain control. You can't solve the problem by my way or the highway, it has to be I give some ground if you give some ground.
The "centrist-moderates" are largely responsible for creating the fiscal mess, trying all things to everybody, meaning a great unwillingness to say no. You do not get reform from those with wet noodles where their backbones should be.
You have it backwards, the national debt has risen as extremist in both parties have gotten their way on spending. Moderates have in the past put in place programs to reduce spending only to have them dropped when one party of the other gets total control. Consider the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985
also known as Gramm-Rudman-Hollings and how that got shot down.
Centrist means someone in between the far left and the far right.
So someone who supports abortion into the fifth trimester and wants everyone to own surface to air missiles would be centrist, because that is in between the extremes.
Hey buddy. Go look at the vote totals for most big increases to spending. Outside of ACA, most are 80+ votes. Youre dumber than even sarc.
True if you look at Rand Paul[R] and Thomas Massie[R] as 'moderates'. One of the biggest problems is the left just won't acknowledge how left the nation has gone.
Compare the US Constitution with where we are today is a good start.
Nor can a third party. What is needed is for centrist/moderates from both major parties to regain control
Yeah, because centrists/moderates agreeing to disagree didn't get us trillions in national debt.
So ending the department of education will not reduce spending or the deficit?
DoEds budget is 68B a year. Tariffs are 50B a year... looks like saving. And new tariffs are estimated at 2B.
Funny how this site only focuses on US tariffs though. No criticism of foreign markets at all.
DoEds budget is 68B a year. Tariffs are 50B a year… looks like saving. And new tariffs are estimated at 2B.
So, [double-checks Reason math] about 3 days of government spending in total on tariffs with about 3 hours of new tariffs as opposed to 4 days of government spending... assuming the DOE using student loan dollars to educate more underwater lesbian cultural basketweavers and "two weeks to flatten the curve" journalists rather than just letting them get jobs as assembly-line or fast-food workers isn't contributing to the tariffs on the back end.
That's actually a good line of sale.
Don't like Tariffs get rid of the DoEd.
If the GOP is to be successful, they have to be prudent enough to recognize the federal spending has to stop, reduce taxes even further and cut as much of the federal bureaucracy as possible.
But for some odd reason, I doubt vermin like McConnell, Ryan, Collins, Murkowski, Graham, and other fake conservatives would be willing to go along with such common sense acts.
Project 2025 raises taxes on working people. Republican voters will thank them for the increase and beg for more degradation. Pathetic bootlickers.
JJ.
Is.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
FOAD, TDS-addled steaming pile of shit.