Stupid Trade War
Plus: Puberty blockers nixed, DOGE chaos, AI race, and more...

Bad news: Over the weekend, President Donald Trump signed orders imposing tariffs on goods imported from Canada, Mexico, and China—just our top three trading partners!
Effective tomorrow at 12:01 a.m., a 25 percent import tax will apply on all goods from Canada and Mexico while a 10 percent import tax will apply on all goods from China (in addition to taxes already levied on those goods).
You are reading Reason Roundup, our daily, morning newsletter.
Want articles just like this in your inbox every morning? Subscribe to Reason Roundup. It's free and you can unsubscribe any time.
Some goods—such as Canadian crude oil, which will be taxed at a 10 percent rate, not 25 percent—are partially exempt. But setting a lower tariff for such energy products is Trump telling on himself, admitting that tariffs will in fact raise prices:
Canadian press is reporting the 25% tariff on Canada will be on "virtually all goods" starting on Tuesday.
Oil will be tariffs at 10%.
Reports says the tariffs will stay in place until Trump is satisfied Canada is doing enough to stop the flow of fentanyl. pic.twitter.com/0Tsg05N6ij
— Heather Long (@byHeatherLong) February 1, 2025
Team Trump's stated justification for the tariffs? The influx of fentanyl into America:
Spare me the sob story about how Canada is our "best friend." I love Canada and have many Canadian friends. But is the government meeting their NATO target for military spending? Are they stopping the flow of drugs into our country?
I'm sick of being taken advantage of.
— JD Vance (@JDVance) February 2, 2025
Trump says Chinese fentanyl is meandering through Canada and Mexico before entering the U.S. at our northern and southern borders. The way to get those countries to enforce their borders more strictly, Trump posits, is to hit them where it hurts. Of course, this will also mean hitting American consumers quite hard.
"We categorically reject the calumny from the White House, that the Mexican government has alliances with criminal organizations," said Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum in response. "If such an alliance exists anywhere, it's with the gun manufacturers of the United States, which sell high-powered weapons to these criminal groups."
The fentanyl justification makes little sense. Presumably, illegal drug smuggling is something border officials work to prevent; it's not clear how Trump expects this additional pressure to alter border-enforcement protocols. Other administration officials have latched onto dissatisfaction with NATO as the reason why Canada must be punished, and onto the idea that the two countries are doing too little to work with the U.S. to control illegal immigration. Since the justifications for why the tariffs have been levied are so wide-ranging, it remains unclear what exactly officials in each country ought to do to get them rolled back.
"Drugs may be an excuse since Mr. Trump has made clear he likes tariffs for their own sake," writes The Wall Street Journal's editorial board. "'We don't need the products that they have,' Mr. Trump said on Thursday. 'We have all the oil you need. We have all the trees you need, meaning the lumber.' Mr. Trump sometimes sounds as if the U.S. shouldn't import anything at all, that America can be a perfectly closed economy making everything at home. This is called autarky, and it isn't the world we live in, or one that we should want to live in, as Mr. Trump may soon find out."
"Make no mistake, this is a trade war of choice being launched unilaterally by Trump," writes Reason's Eric Boehm. "It is a foolish and self-destructive move, one that (in the case of tariffs on Canada and Mexico, at least) directly violates a trade deal Trump signed during his first term and hailed as 'the fairest, most balanced, and beneficial trade agreement we have ever signed into law. It's the best agreement we've ever made.' Tariffs are not a path to peace or prosperity, and igniting a trade war with America's three largest trade partners is sure to have negative consequences no one can foresee at the moment."
These tariffs are a really bad idea, one that Trump defenders seem to believe will just…magically work?
It'd be nice to have a bit of consistency from MAGA explainers as to wtf the plan is.
When the US dollar appreciates, it makes it easier for Americans to buy foreign stuff (the imports I thought we were discouraging?) and harder for other countries to buy *our* stuff (the… https://t.co/SKnNZnjhSe
— Derek Thompson (@DKThomp) February 3, 2025
Not every criticism of Trump's trade barriers is on target. Some people are blaming the high price of eggs on the tariffs (which haven't gone into effect yet):
Trump's economy: eggs are now TWENTY THREE DOLLARS pic.twitter.com/Zenkx4XtcP
— Max Dubler ????️???? (@maxdubler) January 31, 2025
They're missing that a) most eggs come from right here at home (we import relatively few eggs), and b) there's been a bad avian flu outbreak lately, the effects of which will be felt for a long time.
Of course, grocery prices will be majorly affected going forward: Expect prices for avocados, citrus, berries, tomatoes, and lots of other produce categories to rise, since these goods are imported from Mexico. Beef, tequila, and beer imports will likely become more expensive too. Canadian grains, meat, pork, potato, and dairy imports will become costlier for consumers here.
Cars and car parts will become more expensive. Lumber—and thus the cost to build—will also be affected.
Interestingly, some Chinese firms have been bracing for these tariffs, reminiscent of Trump's first term, and working to set up shop in places like Cambodia, per the BBC's reporting. (Markets find a way!)
But don't expect such moves to come close to fully mitigating the tariffs' effects. This will be bad for many months to come. The Tax Foundation has more on just how bad the first-term tariff impact was, and just how bad things will get this time around.
Scenes from New York: One of the leading New York City hospital systems—NYU Langone Health—has started canceling appointments for two different 12-year-olds who were scheduled to receive implants that would start dispensing puberty blocking medication, per The New York Times. This follows Trump's executive order taking aim at doctors and hospitals who assist in gender transitions for minors.
QUICK HITS
- What happens if Donald Trump seals the border? Julia Gelatt came on Just Asking Questions to talk immigration and border enforcement with us. (Subscribe to the main channel here.)
- The history of indoor air quality, and how it went from a huge problem to basically fixed, courtesy of Asimov Press.
- Department of Government Efficiency leaving chaos in its wake: "Top security officials at USAID were placed on leave Saturday after refusing to allow DOGE staffers access to systems at the foreign assistance agency, saying they lacked the required security clearances," reports Bloomberg. Elon Musk claims that the president has agreed to shut the U.S. Agency for International Development down. There have also been reports that the administration intends to consolidate USAID with the State Department.
- Effective immediately, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott reports, the Texas National Guard has been "granted the power of immigration officials to make immigration arrests."
- Good point from former JAQ guest Ethan Mollick:
The Google/OpenAI race for a research tool is going to be very interesting and very consequential.
For Google, it feels like a massive emergency and a huge opportunity. They have a unique position (search, Books, YouTube, etc.) and the models to do something big. We will see.
— Ethan Mollick (@emollick) February 3, 2025
- Also, this:
Been waiting for someone to test this and see if it really works - can multiple AI agents fact-checking each other reduce hallucinations?
The answer appears to be yes - using 3 agents with a structured review process reduced hallucination scores by ~2,800% across 310 test cases. pic.twitter.com/kU1IMNZZhC
— Ethan Mollick (@emollick) February 2, 2025
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
Over the weekend, President Donald Trump signed orders imposing tariffs on goods imported from Canada, Mexico, and China—just our top three trading partners!
I wonder if we're also theirs.
We are. These tariffs will hurt them far more than us, no matter how much jeffsarc tries to protest.
Jeffsarc ultimately sees America as the bad guy. Why they ignore and even demand other countries can impose tariffs or costs on the US but zero response against other countries.
Free trade means governments don't punish their own people for another country's tariffs.
Why? Because of one of those core economic principles you deny. It's called 'comparative advantage'.
What you want is protectionism and mercantilism. You know, what Adam Smith debunked two and a half centuries ago. But what did he know. He was a leftist, right?
Fucking partisan moron.
Fuck off and die, steaming pile of efty shit.
You need to change it up a little. And you’re not nearly mean enough to him.
We need to stop coddling Sarc.
Free trade means governments don't punish their own people for another country's tariffs.
How are you being punished, Sarckles?
Jesus fucking H Christ you're stupid.
Please explain how you’re being punished by the tariffs, Sarc.
He can't get that cheap imported Canadian rotgut as cheap anymore. What are you, a monster?
What, for not understanding how you're being punished by tariffs that don't have anything to do with you.
If any one is being punished here it would be me, which I imagine will give you the biggest boner.
Why would that give me a boner? It's not like that maple whine that you guzzle comes from red states.
No. It comes from Blue states like Maine, just the area around Portland produces from more Maple Syrup than the whole of Western Canada put together.
I thought, generally, maple trees are plentiful in the eastern portion of Canada, and rather scarce in the western half of the country. So I wouldn't expect much exportation of maple syrup from Western Canada.
(In fact, I think I learned this first from you talking about how the maple leaf isn't as representative of all of Canada, as primarily Ontario and Quebec are the only major provinces that have large numbers of maple trees.)
Yeah. The only sugar maple east of Southern Ontario would be in a Vancouver botanical garden.
Maine on the other hand is full of them.
When Canada first became a country it was just a sliver running from Windsor, to Toronto, to Montreal, to Halifax, Nova Scotia, and the whole territory had sugar maples, so the leaf made sense. But you don't find those trees anywhere in the West or in northern Ontario, Quebec or Newfoundland. All which were added to the country later.
That's why an Aspen or Spruce Tree would have made more sense for a national symbol.
You can find sugar maples however throughout Maine and Vermont, which is why I find Sarckles attempted association of me with the tree so amusing. I live 2000 miles away from the closest stand of sugar maples, while Sarc lives right in them.
My biggest problem with the Maple Leaf is that you guys named your Toronto team the "Maple Leafs" instead of the "Maple Leaves"!
But I'll forgive the stupid name for Toronto in light of the fact that Canada gave the world the great game of ice hockey.
I’m pretty sure that 45+ years of severe, extreme alcohol abuse have rendered Sarc physically incapable of getting a boner. Jus t like it has exacerbated his innate retardation.
He continues to say this retarded shit even after being given the literal definition dozens of times.
He thinks unilateral advantaged trade is free trade. He's a fucking moron.
99% of economists disagree with you. But what do they know, they're all leftists, right?
Oh yeah, you read a book about game theory. Now you know more than 250 years of accumulated economic study.
98% of statistics used in arguments are made up.
TrUmP is playing GaMe ThEorY. Fuck off jesse and socks. Your boy just went full retard. You dumbfucks will be cheering for him even after we've actually gone over the cliff, which may have already happened. Fuck off and die
Sarc sock identified. Lol.
Game theory has been used in economics for decades.
Sorry you retards think economic theory stopped in the 1800s.
But even using that version of economic theory, you still don't understand what free trade is. You're fucking idiots lol.
Everyone but you understands what free trade is, moron.
It's KAR or Sarc.
The Trumpistas have a pretty funny way of acknowledging and justifying this game theory.
"It doesn't raise prices."
"It doesn't hurt Americans."
"Unilateral free trade hurts Americans."
If you clowns acknowledged reality along with Trump's game theory, you'd have more credibility.
He'll "win", at least by press releases if not by reality, just because we're the bigger bully. But there will be no substance to the agreements which end this stupid trade war on Americans.
hear! hear!
So i guess that's a no to educating yourself.
You even created a bunch of strawman arguments in your attempted attack here lol.
Ironically the only one to use an absolute statement was you below.
Trump isn't citing game theory. But your denial that it applies to economics shows you don't actually care to have a discussion or even a base understanding of any economics.
You do you.
Sarc: fuck off
Jesse: I listed the most common defenses of Trump's tariffs. Why not try responding to them instead of just asserting they are strawmen?
Because you can't. They aren't strawmen and you can't honestly deny they are your common excuses.
we've actually gone over the cliff, which may have already happened
You know eventually, most toddlers develop the ability to walk up and down stairs and it stops seeming like every step is the equivalent of going over a cliff.
AOC has an econ degree.
And she's a one percenter.
And she's a one percenter.
"In the statistical framework I made up."
And now Sarc celebrates rent seeking behavior from corrupt members of Congress.
Do you mean she uses only 1% of her brain compared to most people who use 10% of their brains?
(Yes, I know the 10% thing has been debunked many times in the past.)
Like Sarc, she’s a retarded cunt.
Wonder if all those appealing to authority here realize there are multiple competing schools of economic thought. Probably not.
Boston University should be embarrassed, at least in the Econ department. I suppose the rest of their social science college gets all wet down there when thinking about AOC.
99% of Americans think you’re a worthless, drunken piece of shit, and a committed pinko.
He's moron, sure. But unilateral free trade benefits the importing country. If you can't recognize that, you're a moron too.
Other moronities:
Trump hates the so-called trade deficit, and so do call Trumpistas, because Trump. But Trump also loves foreign investment in America, which IS the bulk of the trade deficit. If Saudia Arabia were to actually dump $600 billion into American investments, they would raise the trade deficit by $600 billions. There is no better sign of economic illiteracy than believing in two contradictory things. War is peace. Freedom is slavery.
The fentanyl excuse is about as sorry an excuse as they come. "Look, Canada and Mexico! Our border police are too incompetent and corrupt to find the drugs coming into our country from yours. So we want your police to find them because your police are competent and not corrupt." What a load of crap.
Yes, Jesse is a moron. Well said.
You're the moron who can't even read what you reply to. You too would have more credibility if you didn't lie so much.
Oh I know you were trying to even things out with Jesse and distance yourself from unpopular me by calling me a moron.
Well, you are a moron, and there are very good fucking reasons why you're unpopular, and no. It isn't everyone else's fault.
Sarcasmic is a moron, independent of anything about tarriffs, immigration, or anything else.
Sarc: I thought you didn't do personal crap. You don't know squat about me or my motives. You don't even know squat about yourself or your own motives.
Ideas!
Yeah, Trump's biggest flaw is his mercantilist infatuation, and his intuitive desire to "win" trade.
Canada intercepted a semi-truck full of cocaine coming from the US which came into the US at the Mexican border. It traveled the full distance without being caught.
Is that why you clowns want Canada to do the work that the US is apparently too incompetent and/or corrupt to do?
https://notthebee.com/article/canadian-police-seize-83-million-worth-of-cartel-cocaine-that-came-over-the-us-southern-border
Yeah, Trump needs to fix that too. Biden and Harris really fucked up our border patrol. It might take a little while to straighten it out.
No, they don't. They do not benefit the importing country in all cases. First if you think there is a single hard and fast rule that applies to all situations in economics, you're quite frankly an idiot.
You are also demonstrating a basic misunderstanding of hidden economic costs, such as supply chain risk.
We literally saw the issues above during covid with cost expansion from supply chains from offshore activities. Yet you ignorantly believe this is always a benefit.
There are risks booked for most corporations, there is no sole benefit. Believing so shows you don't actually understand economics to any depth.
Even in your response you ignore the costs born by the US from the actions of others. Your version of economics is economics through ignorance. Sadly just like sarc.
Your theory is pretending economics is a non complex system. And assumption used by those who never made it past econ 101. Economics is not simple.
I've given sarc links to books regarding economics trade theory including algorithmic competitions based on economics. I can give you the links if you're actually interested in them, but it is highly doubtful you are.
In every economic algorithmic simulation, the most optimal outcome is always some form of tit for tat. Always. The worst performers in every competition are those who ignore the behaviors of the other "traders" in the competition. This has been the results for decades of these economic gaming events for decades. Yet you believe the optimal outcome is always the worst performer lol.
That shows an ignorance in your belief system.
Oh look, the snide child thinks he can win an argument by saying "you're like sarc, you're like sarc, nanny nanny boo boo, you're like sarc."
Let's see if it works.
Yes, as you are the poster child for retardation amongst the commentariat. You will never not be seen as such. Nor will you ever be taken seriously, respected, liked, or held in any kind of esteem.
You are as worthless a drunken leftist scumbag here as you are to everyone physically around you in Maine. It is very unlikely anyone actually sees you any differently. Except for maybe the Sorosite pedophile, or the Sorosite morbidly obese pedophile.
That’s who you are.
As I mentioned to sarc the other day. You and him have the same ignorant belief system of an ideal economic system that has never been shown in reality. Because we've never experience a true free market where all market actors are treated the same and don't vie for advantages.
You're no different than a Keneysian claiming their system works when the multiplier is greater than 1, it never has been.
The moment you claim that bad actors can continue to be advantaged, you've already failed the free market ideal. Yet you and sarc advocate for such a system.
It is quite honestly fucking retarded.
There are always edge cases and corner cases and exceptions, and economists debate those all the time.
Blanket tariffs are bad, whether unilateral or bilateral. Blanket free trade is good, whether unilateral or bilateral. Start from there, apply the 1% exceptions, and you still get 99% good.
If Trump had targeted just the exceptions, he'd have a lot fewer arguments. He's an economic moron. Economic literacy has nothing to do with gamesmanship or the art of the deal. Stop pretending they are the same, unless you like showcasing your own economic illiteracy.
hear! hear!
The point of these tariffs is not to offset current trade agreements, even though they expire soon.
You seem to be not aware of what the issue is despite actual statements.
It is the born costs from inaction from the other countries adding to US costs. Similar to what happened with EU not meeting their funding requirements.
I will say one of my favorite things about the free trade as unilateral trade people here is calling these large trade agreements filled with quotas, tariffs, and other agreements, free trade. You guys support these large agreements then rage at tariffs outside of those agreements. Pretty amusing.
Why do you work so hard at denying tariffs are bad, then work so hard at pretending the bad effects don't matter because it's all about gamesmanship?
Why do you work so hard at denying tariffs are bad, then work so hard at pretending the bad effects don't matter because it's all about gamesmanship?
Because Jesse is either stupid or dishonest, but likely both. Additionally, he doesn't understand how tarrifs work or understand what is motivating Trump. So to the motivation. I would argue Trump is using Fentanyl as the canard to justify using emergency powers to have full power over tarrifs sans approval from congress. He knows that there is no real endpoint and no way to easily determine if and when canada, mexico and china has satisfactorily reduced the flow into the country. It could take years to analyze any effects those countries might make in impacting the flow of illegal drugs to this country. In that time, Trump is happy to tax the US citizenry through tarrifs to achieve his true motivation. The only thing Trump cares about is Insuring his legacy looks good by increasing revenue to the federal government through tarrifs so that the numbers (budget and deficit) look better and he can claim he did it by reducing taxes. On it's face it is stupid, as anybody, other than Jesse or the assholes that agree with him, know that tarrifs are taxes paid by us. The whole thing is one big fucking grift that people buy into because they are useful idiots. There is a very good chance the whole shitty mess will backfire on him.
Alberto is probably a Sarcasmic sock from the amount of hatred for “Jesse and friends”. It suffers as badly from Jesse Derangement Syndrome as Sarc does.
Sarc sock shows his pinko sympathies.
The fentanyl excuse is about as sorry an excuse as they come. "Look, Canada and Mexico! Our border police are too incompetent and corrupt to find the drugs coming into our country from yours. So we want your police to find them because your police are competent and not corrupt." What a load of crap.
Well said!
Read JesseAz's reply above. Fentanyl is a real issue as well. It shouldn't be downplayed.
Then Trump should make it a real issue.
...like we haven't been fighting the drug war for a century now...
Trump declared fentanyl a national emergency in order to activate tariff powers. That's the only reason. Not only that, but Trump should know that the war on drugs is unwinnable. So by saying he'll drop the tariffs when our neighbors win the war on drugs means he has no intention of ever dropping the tariffs.
No no. In sarcs world all costs outside of the tariff aren't actual costs.
If it's a real issue, then why not attack the real issue?
It's like threatening junkies with jail and death, pretending jail and death don't have costs, but nevertheless justifying the jail and death as honorable and good ends in themselves.
Be consistent. Be honest.
So ignore.
Why? Because of one of those core economic principles you deny
I'm so old I remember when sarc pretended he opposed people criticising others based on little voices in their head. I'm shocked to see he doesn't apply to himself the same principles he applies to those he hates.
He talks about "disadvantaged trade" which means propping up industries that are at a comparative disadvantage for the benefit of businesses, which creates opportunity cost by denying comparative advantage.
So he openly denies comparative advantage, all of the time.
Try to keep up.
Mexico already caved. Try and keep up.
See, Sarc doesn't engage in those sorts of histrionics, trolling, and name-calling. Sarc only likes to engage in well-thought-out debate of actual ideas.
Is that your excuse for raising prices by taxation? You like taxes?
I don't like taxes or inflation.
What’s the benefit in hurting them, again?
Well, the government of Mexico just blinked and ordered 10,000 troops to the border to help secure it, in exchange for Trump suspending the tariffs for a month. Seems like sometimes you have to use the stick and the carrot approach when negotiating.
That's fine, but the justifications include the stick as being good in and of itself, not just as a threat.
If any of them would admit that tariffs are not good, they'd get a lot more credibility in the rest of their arguments.
It's like pretending guns are harmless, but good for self-defense, and oh by the way, shooting everyone who comes to your front door is good just because.
I'll admit tariffs can be bad, and these Trump tariffs in particular are bad to the extend that they are NOT meant to be a negotiating tactic. That is, if Trump really wants these tariffs in place, they're pretty stupid. But if Trump is using the threat of these tariffs and the mutually assured destruction of the corresponding retaliatory tariffs Mexico and Canada would surely enact (and THOSE tariffs would be just as stupid and terrible for their citizens, right?) to get Canda and Mexico to come to the table vis helping to secure the respective borders, for example, then they might be fine--since they're not *really* meant to be in place very long if at all.
Considering he has already suspended the tariffs on Mexico for a month to verify they're going to follow through, I'm thinking it's a negotiating technique. Maybe not with China, but China's a different story, altogether. Also, did you see Panama just backed out of their agreement with China in regards to the Panama Canal, as Trump wanted them too?
And they worked. So... how "stupid" were they, really?
>I wonder if we're also theirs.
That can change.
Lol. And Mexico already caved and has agreed to send troops to protect the border.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mexico-agrees-deploy-10000-troops-us-border-exchange-tariff-pause
Makes some people below look a bit silly now.
Trudeau is next!
And Trudeau caved.
So 10,000 corrupt Mexican national guardsmen to help smuggle more into the US is the victory? No, I think Trump saw this was not going as he hoped in the press and among his followers. Anyway, we gained nothing.
Yeah, okay, that's the ticket. Whatever!
So, now you're trying to find a way not to credit Trump for getting exactly what he asked for. Fuck, that's pretty desperate there.
He's got some serious middle school "debate" skills.
Damn. I thought you one of the respectable ones. Oh well.
So why is this a 1 month delay?
If this is all Trump wanted he's even dumber than I thought. What will this accomplish? Fentanyl comes in with legitimate goods, not snuck accross the border.
It's to verify they live up to their end of the deal dipshit
If this is all Trump wanted and this is just a trial period, call me pleased. I got exactly what I wanted: No tariffs.
Speaking of dipshits though, why were so many here defending tariffs as beneficial, an offset to income tax, saving American jobs etc., then when I get what I was arguing for all along, said dipshits think they won? What about the jobs, what about the trade deficit?
So will this reduce fentanyl traffic
Very well could, better border enforcement means less likely smugglers will get through. As for people defending tariffs, there is actually a really good argument (e.g. the majority of US history) that funding the government via tariffs is far better than an income tax.
Team Trump's stated justification for the tariffs? The influx of fentanyl into America...
It looks like fentanyl is too powerful...
[dons sunglasses]
...a tool not to use to scare Americans.
Al Capone 2.0?
(•_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)
{Yeeaahhhhhhhhh!!!!!!}
Reports says the tariffs will stay in place until Trump is satisfied Canada is doing enough to stop the flow of fentanyl.
Imagine if that was the real reason.
There are some large labs in British Columbia that produce fentanyl using ingredients brought in from China. This is something Trudeau has allowed instead of cracking down on by allowing in Chinese products without scrutiny.
Canada doesn't have any laws regarding the precursors to fentanyl, why they have so many labs there.
https://bc-cb.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=2114&languageId=1&contentId=86200
https://vancouversun.com/news/crime/bc-man-arrested-alberta-super-lab-that-produced-fentanyl
We're giving it for free to our own addicts in BC who are selling the extras to entrepreneurs who ship it south.
Addicts have “extras”?
This is something Trudeau has allowed instead of cracking down on by allowing in Chinese products without scrutiny.
It's been known for a while that Trudeau is China's bottom bitch.
He is literally taking money from them. There is a paper sitting in parliament right now from the RCMP that he refuses to release stating which politicians are talking money from the Chinese Communist Party.
https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/this-is-treason-chinese-agents-are-running-canada-daniel-dorman-in-the-telegraph/
Literal treason is one of the many reasons Trudeau's polling is underground.
Half of our government and all those paid for false free trade theory are in their pocket as well.
Banana-maple republic?
There are a lot better tools if that were the real problem. Sanctions on those people and companies, international arrest warrants, it doesn't take a genius to figure out better ways. Ergo, Trump doesn't really give a shit about fentanyl except for the soundbites.
Why are the costs associated with the actions you just listed are fine, but tariffs are not?
Sanctions are even more abusive than tariffs lol.
Ironically you seem to agree with taking actions to modify behaviors as long as it isn't called a tariff.
Sanctions can be individually targeted, on foreigners. Tariffs cannot. Perhaps that's too subtle a distinction.
When are you going to admit that tariffs are internal taxes on Americans and have bad consequences for Americans.
You sound a lot like sarc more and more, maybe just this topic.
When are you going to admit that tariffs are internal taxes on Americans and have bad consequences for Americans.
When it becomes true. Show us the pricing correlation, PPI or CPI to prove your thesis. Hint. It doesn't exist.
Many of these fees are paid by inport agents who are not always citizens as ML has shown multiple times. For example a business manufactures in Canada but owns store fronts here. They subsume the tariffs. It can effect end cost, but they rarely take on the full taxes due to costing pressure of other goods on the market.
Some of the tariffs will apply downward cost pressure on the business seeking to export to the US, this is seen all the time.
Finally there is a choice of supply shift which occurs all the damn time.
You seem to not be well versed past the bumper stickers.
You are defending tariffs that Trump claims will protect domestic industry, while also claiming that they will not raise prices.
Do you know how tariffs protect domestic industry? By raising prices!
This proves that you're just a liar, because in the past you reluctantly admitted to how protective tariffs work. You know, by raising prices. If I was a loser like you I'd have kept a link so I could show SGT that you're an unserious, lying, sack-of-shit shill.
Like this?
Executive Order 14059[153][154] Imposing Sanctions on Foreign Persons Involved in the Global Illicit Drug Trade Authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to issue sanctions on persons who have engaged in activities that contributed to the international trade of illegal drugs or gained property that was from or caused those drug trading activities.
or
Proclamation 10371[158] Invocation of Emergency Authority Relating to the Regulation of the Anchorage and Movement of Russian-Affiliated Vessels to United States Ports Prohibits Russian-affiliated vessels from entering into United States ports, except those ships that transport source material, special nuclear material, and nuclear byproduct material, or provide humanitarian aid.
One of the leading New York City hospital systems—NYU Langone Health—has started canceling appointments for two different 12-year-olds who were scheduled to receive implants that would start dispensing puberty blocking medication...
I guess gender affirming care isn't all that critical after all. Fear not, people. They will find some other way to recoup that lost revenue.
It's a start. This has the potential to save thousands of kids from irreparable harm.
What is the current official position on 12 year olds being able to get full body tattoos, anyway?
Varies by state.
What happens if Donald Trump seals the border?
How long until our air runs out???
We can always raid Planet Druidia. Now excuse me while I pop a can of Perri-Air.
Had ENB gone from suck to blow? Where's my sandwich?
I prefer Yogurt.
Yogurt! Yogurt! I hate Yogurt! Even with strawberries!
Good thing it isn't blueberrys. There will not be anybody left to pick them after Trump deports all the illegals.
Maybe we’ll use the Dinks from the Moon of Vega.
You use your half the way you want, I'll use my half the way I want.
The history of indoor air quality, and how it went from a huge problem to basically fixed...
All the acid rain went up and plugged the hole in the ozone.
If indoor air quality is so great, why did I have to wear a COVID mask indoors for two straight years?
Because control reasons.
I heard it was a trial run. If government can force you to wear a mask, then MAGA government can force women to wear handmaid's tale outfits. Oh, wait, "feminists" are already doing that voluntarily.
“…. handmaid’s tale outfits.”
Can I suggest French maids outfits as an alternative?
Be very, very, very careful in what you ask for.
The mask is how they fixed it, duh.
Sick Building Syndrome was directly caused by reducing outdoor air intake in order to meet energy savings requirements from the 70s Energy Crisis. There have been better building code standards introduced and better technology put in place since then. It still remains that bringing in more ventilation air uses more energy to condition.
The addition of UV filters on the windows hasn't helped much. UV light kills viruses and bacteria.
But in the next phase of the CO2 wars, we will be required to seal buildings to prevent our personal exhaust from contaminating the atmosphere and killing the planet. How you cope with your indoor air is your problem (unless you are in a protected group, and entitled to Federal Aerobic Justice benefits).
"But in the next phase of the CO2 wars, we will be required to seal buildings to prevent our personal exhaust from contaminating the atmosphere and killing the planet."
Interesting discussion regarding climate change/fossil fuels:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dj-2to3NJk
The windows in my apt can't open. I have to resort to opening the back door on occasion. And it doesn't have a screen door so it lets all the bugs in annoyingly.
Sounds like a fire code violation. How are you supposed to get out in an emergency?
They are big bay windows. I guess they didn't want people falling out. I live on the ground floor and my backdoor leads to a porch I can escape from. The layout is copy pasted up for each floor. My "porch" is the equivalent to the upper floor's balconies. I suppose hey are meant to jump from them/ladder down to the firemen.
Yeah, no egress windows? I thought all bedrooms have to have at least one egress window?
Where Are Egress Windows Required? (R310.1)
Egress Window Locations
The code requires every basement, habitable attic, and every sleeping room to have at least one operable emergency escape and rescue opening. If a room is used as such, it must provide a means of escape.
Also note that if basements have multiple sleeping rooms, each sleeping room is individually required to provide a means of escape and rescue. These openings must open directly to the outside such as into a public way, yard, or court having a minimum 36″ width that opens to a public way.
The window also needs to be operational from the inside of the room without much effort.
Department of Government Efficiency leaving chaos in its wake...
You know who else demanded order above all else?
Emperor Palpatine?
My 3rd grade teacher?
Burgermeister Meisterburger?
The God-Emperor of Mankind?
OCD sufferers?
Generalissimo Francisco Franco?
Is he still dead?
Too bad he died well before BLM, otherwise BLM might have given him their Castro treatment.
https://medium.com/@BlackLivesMatterNetwork/lessons-from-fidel-black-lives-matter-and-the-transition-of-el-comandante-c11ee5e51fb0#.1w9bdge5o
We are feeling many things as we awaken to a world without Fidel Castro. There is an overwhelming sense of loss, complicated by fear and anxiety. Although no leader is without their flaws, we must push back against the rhetoric of the right and come to the defense of El Comandante. And there are lessons that we must revisit and heed as we pick up the mantle in changing our world, as we aspire to build a world rooted in a vision of freedom and the peace that only comes with justice. It is the lessons that we take from Fidel.
...
We are thankful that he provided a space where the traditional spiritual work of African people could flourish, regardless of his belief system.
With Fidel’s passing there is one more lesson that stands paramount: when we are rooted in collective vision when we bind ourselves together around quests for infinite freedom of the body and the soul, we will be victorious. As Fidel ascends to the realm of the ancestors, we summon his guidance, strength, and power as we recommit ourselves to the struggle for universal freedom. Fidel Vive!
Numerologists?
I'd settle for following security protocols.
These clowns are literally barging into government offices with insecure servers.
Baron Bomburst?
In 2024, over 21,000 pounds of fentanyl were seized at the U.S.-Mexico border, compared to 43 pounds at the U.S.-Canada border.
43 lbs seized vs how much got through? The "Readers Notes" imply there's not much being moved. I see it as not much getting caught.
So how much do you think got through?
All of it?
Not all of it - all but 43 lbs.
That was the decoy.
Did they put it in a container marked 'definitely not drugs'?
https://x.com/ppbeast/status/1844038388426625267
WTF? That sounds like something from “Super Troopers”.
All of how much? 200 pounds? 2 trillion pounds? Somewhere between?
And if the answer is “We don’t know,” then how are we ever going to decide we’ve successfully combatted the in-flow of fentanyl? If we aren’t finding any and then we continue to not find any, is that now declared a success?
Doesn't matter what I think. Comparing what was captured does not reflect what escaped.
That's the answer I expected.
Meaningless numbers unless they were able to stop the exact same % of the total, which is risible.
43 pounds is in excess of 10 million lethal doses.
The freak out over tariffs has been hilarious. Yet we often see more costs associated with other government activities such as regulations, just 1.8T under Biden. Yet media has their narratives. Most people wont be affected in a measurable way by these tariffs.
For example, the currency of Canada has dropped almost as much as the total for tariffs in the last year, making costs essentially a wash.
Meanwhile the media is also freaking out over DOGE and finding needless spending, an amount that will be far larger than the cost of tariffs. They already found 1B being spent on DEI.
https://x.com/DOGE/status/1885420298138247458
They found 75B missing from Ukraine funding.
https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/1886133153439576471
Ukraine spending alone is more than the estimated costs of tariffs.
Then there is the misappropriation for foreign aid and money to NGOs like USAID which has consultants and democrats freaking out as their graft is exposed, such as Bill Kristol
Hello Mr. Kristol,
For you, the deep state is preferable because you are listed as the President of Defending Democracy (EIN 831567380) which is an indirect beneficiary of USAID through Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.
You are exposed.
Hat tip to
@DannyCampsalot
https://datarepublican.com/expose/?eins=831567380
Reminder, these tariffs are to get Mexico and Canada to patrol their borders where the costs from drugs and illegals is also greater than the costs of the tariffs. All they have to do is ramp up their border controls. So frightening.
It is so bad that Musk found out government was told to never deny any payment even yo entities known to be fraudulent.
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
The
@DOGE
team discovered, among other things, that payment approval officers at Treasury were instructed always to approve payments, even to known fraudulent or terrorist groups.
They literally never denied a payment in their entire career.
Not even once.
Maybe we should reduce spending, which would offset these tariffs. Even our one true libertarian pretends to agree with this.
"Maybe we should reduce spending, which would offset these tariffs. Even our one true libertarian pretends to agree with this."
But we are so far in debt that we won't see any tax reductions. Tariffs will increase the price of goods and it remains to be seen if Trump's deregulation will be enough to offset these costs. I don't see prices for your average consumer going down anytime soon.
Except most of the goods can be produced domestically or imported from others.
As mentioned above both the peso and looney decreased by almost the percentage of the tariffs in the last year. Did you see a price decrease from this offset? Importer profit is most likely to be affected, not end price consumer. Zerohedge had a great article about this.
My other favorite thing is that for decades libertarians have pushed the idea of switching from an income tax to a consumption tax, which is what tariffs are.
Trump has also pushed this idea, yet only complaints from the libertarians despite decades of prior support.
Well, complaints from liberal-tarians.
One minor point, a tariff is subject to the political whims of the people in charge and can result in cronyism. A FAIR Tax is accross the board unbiased consumption tax that limits the powers politicians have to try and pick winners and losers.
Here's another point. We haven't actually switched, so we still have income tax, and now Trump added a consumption tax.
Every regulation is essentially a cost towards consumption. He has already started cutting regulations where he can.
Which cost is more to the consumer?
Why not cut regulations without adding a consumption tax?
Because the costs going to illegal immigrants is more than the consumption tax trying to stop those costs?
Why ignore the costs born through government spending?
This is what I don't get. Some of you reluctantly accept costs born to citizens and believe no action can ever be taken to rectify those costs.
If a temporary cost is less than current costs of the problem trying to be fixed, I'm not going to freak out.
In his first term we already saw Trump use tariffs to change costs born by the US from other countries and then remove those tariffs when the behaviors changed.
We don't have to begrudgingly say there is nothing we can do and bend over and take on costs imparted to us by foreign countries. But that seems to be a large subset of libertarians belief.
So your prefer thr current income system with carve outs for deductions and a highly progressive tax model?
No middle step allowed here?
No, I prefer the FAIR tax and FAIR tax only.
So no middle step. All or nothing. That has gotten the LP so much.
When giving power to politicans, yeah, they get nothing. FAIR Tax strips them of all their meddling in the ecomony.
A flat national sales tax is highly regressive, which would be fine if there was any widespread American sentiment for gutting government but considering there is no such sentiment it will never happen.
Or maybe it would happen, and deficit spending would effectively go up by a huge amount thus devaluing every dollar you make. The dollar is already losing half it's value every 20-30 years, accelerating that to losing half it's value every 5-10 years is very unwise.
Which is why, if you actually read the FAIR Tax Plan there is a "prebate" baked in:
Just because the poorest of the poor get a rebate doesn't make it progressive, it just makes it less regressive.
Hilariously, the bit you quoted shows that it also has preconceptions of what people 'should' be buying baked right into it.
I did not assert that the prebate makes it progressive. Only that it the FAIR Tax Plan recognizes the regressive nature of a flat consumption tax and nothing else.
Whether or not the author of the source is correct about the prebate making The FAIR Tax progressive is certainly debatable. The fact that The FAIR Tax Plan takes the regressive nature of consumption taxes into account is not.
AAaaannnnnddd... other than busybody~ism -- seeking to impose one's preferences on others -- why should there be preconceptions of that "people 'should' [emphasis mine] be buying baked right" in? That would seem counterproductive to the idea of promoting individuals' liberty.
Your quote literally opens with the idea it is progressive, so you appear to disagree with your own citation. Factually speaking, it is not progressive it merely attempts to mask the regressive nature of this style of taxation. I.E. They are lying. Nothing you've said or quoted negates that this is a regressive taxation scheme, and in fact what you have quoted states pretty explicitly that they know it is and are trying to (badly) correct for that.
The 'prebate' even states outright that this applies to 'necessity' spending up to the federal poverty line which would be defined by...the government. The people above and below stating that this would limit the governments ability to socially engineer through taxation is an outright lie. In fact it's built right into the plan itself.
Are you so naive that you can't see the corruption and carve-outs available in tariffs, especially 25%? Evading a 5% tariff is seldom worth it. Evading a 25% tariff is much more worthwhile.
Are you so naive than you don't see this is already a major part of our current taxes system.
And I have no issue with carve ours for actors who aren't creating a cost on us. They are not seeking advantage. That is literally the point. To offset the costs the US subsumed from these policies.
As ML points out many Canadian provinces are already taking action. So have no problem with the tariffs being removed where they take an active role to help reduce the costs born here. That's the entire point of this activity.
This is also what happens in all these "free trade agreements" you all seem to support because they simply have the modifier describing their agreed to import costs/limits.
Raising tariffs 25% was not a major part until they were imposed.
And you still claim the point of tariffs is gamesmanship at the same time you claim they are harmless to Americans. Your credibility is shot when you can't admit tariffs harm Americans while simultaneously claiming they are temporary and will go away as soon as the bad actors change their behavior. Why not keep them if they are so harmless?
Stop being so two-faced. Trump ain't God.
Trump ain't God.
Now you understand why some of us say he and other Trump defenders are cultists. Trump is the center of their belief system. When given a choice between reality or Him, they choose Him every time.
It’s not a switch at all when you just throw tariffs on top of existing taxes.
For you, the deep state is preferable because you are listed as the President of Defending Democracy (EIN 831567380) which is an indirect beneficiary of USAID through Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.
USAID is a front group for the CIA, so this isn't a surprise. These guys have been doing Operation Mockingbird shit and other gayops for decades--most of their functions like vaccination campaigns are explicitly for gathering intel, like where they found out Bin Laden was hiding.
Note in particular that the noise is about them getting "shut down"--look a little later, and it says they're talking about re-organizing the office under the State Department. That doesn't say "shut down" to me, that just means they're moving a lot of the billets to another office, save for maybe some of the upper managers.
What this tells me isn't necessarily about cutting off an NGO pipeline, although that's probably in play--it's because Trump and Musk know that the agency is full of glowies that would spend the next four years doing malicious compliance and misdirection to deliberately stall the administration's agenda. This is basically telling Le Resistance that they aren't going to be tolerated this time around, and if they want to play reindeer games, they'll be looking at the axe.
Why does it seem that no matter how big and treacherous I imagine the security state to be, it is probably much worse?
Because it is. Listen to and read Mike Benz over on X. He’s been spilling the beans on how bad it is for a while now.
Benz is awesome. If someone can make Rogan not interrupt & listen for 3 hours, you know it good.
https://youtu.be/rrJhQpvlkLA?si=2xhR2TVC2Sdb0aWi
Right! These tariffs are so small, so puny, that they have no effect.
No effect?!? Then why impose them?
Because they are huuuge, the hugest you've ever seen, gonna turn some heads and stop fentanyl.
I don’t like it when government makes shit more costly. I don’t see how it’s inconsistent to dislike both Biden and Trumps for this shit.
It's not. Hating taxes, period, is supposed to be a libertarian trait. Hating tariffs is a subset of hating taxes.
And hating government meddling in the economy is supposed to be another trait of libertarians. This rag barely mentions that at all, and defending Trump's meddling after decrying Biden's meddling after applauding Trump's meddling is not even close to libertarian.
Just because Trump talks a lot about meddling less doesn't mean he should be applauded for all his new meddling, even if the sum total is less than Biden.
The fucker didn't veto any spending bills his first time through. He didn't even care enough to make the Dems and RINOs take the blame for spending. He signed every spending bill. If he wants credit for shitcanning agencies, he can damned well take credit for spending he authorized.
I don't like having to pay costs created by other countries inactions on us. Yet we do.
Costs are costs.
Except tariffs. No costs to them, right? Utterly harmless to Americans.
You can stay with your bumper stickers and refuse educating yourself.
You're 0-5 in the last week lol.
Rep. Chip Roy Press Office
@RepChipRoy
What you've been paying for through USAID:
https://x.com/RepChipRoy/status/1886451484012781813
[Many images of pages listing things, but the text is not easily copied&pasted, due to the lists being images]
[Things like $5M on DEI scholarships in Burma]
Top security officials at USAID were placed on leave Saturday after refusing to allow DOGE staffers access to systems...
Who knew there could be strings attached to government largess.
Or even token obeisance to the executive?
Interlock devices for DUIs work so well, democrats in Washington now want to afd speed regulation devices for chronic speeders.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/washington-state-lawmakers-propose-requiring-speed-limiting-devices-cars-drivers-speeding-history
That has got to be one of the more fucked in the head things I’ve seen. I love how the progtards try to frame conservatives as authoritarian while they go and do the most fascist shit.
Because in the prog mind "good" fascism is not fascism but social justice. The same goes for good racism, good censorship, etc.
...the Texas National Guard has been "granted the power of immigration officials to make immigration arrests."
Hopefully not of Americans.
Aren't we all Americans?
The Google/OpenAI race for a research tool is going to be very interesting and very consequential.
Skynet is getting its PhD.
Too bad it didn't choose a productive career path.
In what? Gender studies?
George Papadopoulos
@GeorgePapa19
JUST IN: A leaked email from John Brennan verifies that the 51 intelligence agents that endorsed the Hunter Biden laptop letter did it with the specific intent of enabling Biden to mislead the American public during his election campaign.
https://x.com/GeorgePapa19/status/1885800253414158601
And this is why those fuckers all got their clearances and free access whacked. Now if any glowies leak shit to them, both parties are looking at jail time for deliberately spilling classified information.
The elimination of those clearances was basically a warning that seditious conspiracy charges will be next on the docket if they don't behave.
Someone should look into wherther or not that letter violated campaign finance laws.
I wonder if this was a violation of campaign finance laws.
...can multiple AI agents fact-checking each other reduce hallucinations?
Trippy.
Hallucinations: Down 2800%
Dishonest blameshifting deception: Unchanged
Result: Cat (97% certainty)
It's hard for me to imagine how something can be reduced 2800%. Some things take an AI to imagine.
From 1 in 1 to 1 in 2800.
You don't do percentages either. Stop making excuses for stupidity.
That is what they are trying to convey with that stat. Stop being pedantic.
pedantic
You misspelled 'correct'.
Go ahead, tell me I'm wrong.
That number is meaningless and I note that they probably put it out that way because they want to hide how many 'hallucinations' are happening in the first place.
Is this like a Star Trek episode where Kirk gets the evil computer to destroy itself by making it solve a logical contradiction?
Readers added context
In 2024, over 21,000 pounds of fentanyl were seized at the U.S.-Mexico border, compared to 43 pounds at the U.S.-Canada border.
cbsnews.com/news/mexico-fe…
npr.org/2025/02/02/nx-…
How many lethal doses is this again? Millions.
From the class of government that freaked our over 100k died with covid, they sure seem to be okay with 100k a year for fentanyl.
But, that’s (D)ifferent. They got kickbacks from Covid deaths, but also from the cartels.
Yeah, lost in all the spazzing about the tariffs against Mexico in particular is the fact that we're in a suicidal economic entanglement with a full-blown narco state, which is not strategically advantageous to us no matter how much cheap shit we get in exchance for overlooking their international criminal operations.
That commie yenta running the country is in the seat specifically because the narcos wanted her there. She's the face of the cartels. If that wasn't the case, they wouldn't have assassinated over 30 presidential candidates to ensure she got the seat. There's no reason to play nice with a narcowhore like Sheinbaum, nor with the champagne marxists running the Land of Maple Syrup after their crackdown on the trucker protests.
Why do people suddenly act like the War on (some) Drugs works? You know what happens every single time the govt attempts to focus on some drug? It usually gets more abundant and cheaper.
Like meth. We went from home made meth to 'ice.' There has been so much fed money coming into state and local law enforcement to target meth...and the meth is winning. Its still readily available and as cheap as ever.
Trump is a fucking idiot, no doubt. But this tariff stuff isn't just about basic numbers or the price of barrel of oil or a random commodity. Its about trust. Canada and Mexico and soon to be the entire E.U. can't trust the US Govt. Listen to the speeches of foreign leaders. Our word is shit when Trump himself negotiates a new NAFTA then within 2 weeks of coming back into office throws his agreement in the trash. It's a bad look. The "golden age of America" is one of isolation and paranoia of foreigners. Its not going to be a golden age for the middle or lower class. Its going to suck. And when all the 'economic voters' who voted for Trump for lower prices at the store or at the pump or cheaper healthcare get the shaft, again, the grifter in chief is likely to f his party good come midterms. Unfortunately, due to high tariff costs, lube is out of reach for the average GOP voter.
Why do people suddenly act like the War on (some) Drugs works? You know what happens every single time the govt attempts to focus on some drug? It usually gets more abundant and cheaper.
So what's the problem, I thought you shitlibs loved getting high as a fucking kite. Maybe we can finally ensure a bunch of your celebrity allies get that dirtnap from their drug fiending.
And the party in charge ALWAYS gets hit during the mid-terms, so it's not like you're being fucking Kreskin here.
What is amusing is that this particular drug exists because of the 'War on Drugs'. Ironic.
Canada and Mexico and soon to be the entire E.U. can't trust the US Govt.
We can't trust them, so it sounds like this shit is simply being reciprocated. The US does not exist to be a milch cow for the EU nor the nations on our border.
We have the global economy that primarily our capitalists contributed into building. So when our companies build a plant overseas or in Mexico because the cost of labor is cheaper, why is that Mexico's fault? That cheaper labor means more profits for the corporation, does it not? Why else do corporations act but to benefit their shareholders? Suddenly it's a major problem because Trump is economically illiterate? Amazon is wildly successful because it uses the global economy to its benefit by getting goods consumers want to them cheaply and quickly. Unless you are going to string up Bezos for being a traitor to America for sourcing his products globally and as cheaply as they can... then piss off.
Here is the same type of ignorance being shown by STG and sarc above.
Missed in all this is the growth of regulatory costs here to push work elsewhere. All under the guise of cost of labor which is a small percentage of the costs. Meanwhile welfare costs increase in the US to offset jobs moving creating even higher costs through taxation.
Just a bunch of people ignoring all the costs of their WEF aligned economic theory. Due to the policies they push.
All under the guise of cost of labor which is a small percentage of the costs.
I may be misreading this, but last I checked labor costs are one of the biggest costs for just about any organization.
You aren't wrong that American labor is being priced out of competition with foreign labor and it's an intentional thing by our own government though. It's coming from both the regulatory end and the minimum wage end, neither of which is likely to be 'fixed' any time soon in any appreciable way.
For manual jobs itnis a high cost, or in service. But many of these jobs are less so as they can be automated, so supplies and equipment drown out the overall costs. In my industry labor is generally under 10% of the all up cost.
Yours is a rarified industry then, because it's often 20-40% of overall costs.
Yours may not be the industry to use as the bellwether on labor costs.
We are nominally talking about manufacturing.
I've seen estimates put it at around 15% for most of it. Now it grows when you include the other add one like taxes (Fica, Healthcare, etc) but I consider all that regulatory costs.
Everything I've seen on labor costs actually peg manufacturing as one of the higher percentages, but then I don't work in manufacturing and I doubt it applies to ALL manufacturing firms.
MUH GLOBULL EKONOMIE
Sounds like you're more pissed off that they aren't working in the left's interests anymore. And spare us the class warfare bullshit, if you gave a shit about that you wouldn't be demanding open borders. But we all know that's about losing your revolutionary vanguard, not the economy.
Fuck off with that smokescreening.
And you are a TDS-addled steaming pile of shit, no doubt,
Not asking Canada to stop all drugs. Asking them to bear the costs and do simple things like enforce their borders. The horror. Instead of the US bearing all costs.
Why do people suddenly act like the War on (some) Drugs works? You know what happens every single time the govt attempts to focus on some drug? It usually gets more abundant and cheaper.
Well we know what happened when we decriminalized it...
Decriminalizing drugs (as opposed to legalization which largely gets rid of the black market) combined with de-facto decriminalization of (actual) crimes, like shoplifting and trespassing to robbery and vandalism, is a terrible combination. Only leftist shitholes would combine the two, and to disastrous results. It also largely causes people to conflate drug legalization with decriminalization, and associate both with serious problems that were largely the result of the soft on crime policies.
As libertarians, we should believe that we own our bodies. You, as an adult, can be smart and avoid drugs, or be stupid and indulge heavily. That's your right. It's also not the responsibility of society (taxpayers) to subsidize your bad habits, nor to foot the bill for your lifestyle.
The problems that arose (or really, worsened) in Portland, for example, had much more to do with subsidizing the addicts, allowing homeless to camp wherever they pleased, decriminalizing shoplifting and other violations of property rights, and going soft on crimes with real victims. Instead of charging a violent assailant with a felony and prosecuting, Soros DAs would not prosecute or reduce the charges to misdemeanors, often without cash bail.
How many died? Not millions.
How much water crossed the border? Probably enough to down millions. How many did die?
If the government actually cared about reducing fentanyl deaths, they stop the war on opiods. They don't. They are control freaks, moralistic prudes, and being in charge is all that matters.
DOGE staffers access to systems at the foreign assistance agency, saying they lacked the required security clearances
Why is how much money we give away to third world nations a secret that requires security clearance?
Only if you want to hide how much corruption and money laundering there is.
Back in the Before Times, even Hollywood mocked this kind of shit:
General Hummel: You will transfer one hundred million dollars from Grand Cayman Red Sea trading company to an account I designate. From these funds, one million dollars will be paid to each of the eighty-three marines' families. The rest of the funds, I will disperse at my discretion. Do I make myself clear?
Womack : Except for the Red Sea Trading Company. What is that?
General Hummel : Identify yourself.
Womack : This is FBI Director Womack, General.
General Hummel : It's a slush-fund where the Pentagon keeps proceeds from illegal arms deals...
Same year-
President Thomas Whitmore: I don't understand, where does all this come from? How do you get funding for something like this?
Julius Levinson: You don't actually think they spend $20,000 on a hammer, $30,000 on a toilet seat, do you?
Fuck, the mid-90s were such a fun time for movies. Thank god I worked in a theater during that time so I could see all of it for free.
That was when Hollywood still thought it was on the outside, speaking truth to power. Now they wallow in establishment superiority and cast the Kulaks and counter-revolutionaries as the baddies.
Perhaps Max Dubler has been buying eggs from trans-hens on Rainbow Farms. They are not quite as productive, so the prices run a little higher.
I thought it was a joke but, yeah, homo with a mustache needs to realize that he lives perpetually beyond parody on the other side of the rainbow.
Organic, free range, pasture raised. Yeah, they're going to produce a lot less eggs. You're paying for your own stupidity when you buy those eggs. You deserve to pay $23 for your virtue signaling.
Now add the factor for trans-chickens, including roosters-at-birth who overcame the prejudices of farmer-supremacy and now identify as egg-layers.
One strong, independent hen-that-don't-need-no-rooster to defend every 5-10 Roosters-that-identifies-as-an-egg-layer and the costs add up pretty quick.
Hmm. Reason published a dozen or so "abolish" articles but Liz is worried about USAID. Seems like DOGE is accomplishing a libertarian goal to me.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/musk-doge-cuts-usaid-ball-worms-no-apple-must-get-rid-whole-thing
Musk On DOGE Cuts: "USAID A Ball Of Worms, No Apple. Must Get Rid Of Whole Thing"
And sarc screams cut spending while attacking anyone who does.
Seems to be a symptom of long TDS.
Or perhaps just plain abysmal stupidity; he seems to have that in spades.
On the whole, this has been the most libertarian two weeks of a Presidency in my lifetime. Shutting down the USAID would be a massive massive win. It's wasteful, corrupt and rotten to its core. The worst of the lizard creatures feed in their dining halls.
Imagine defending USAID. Unbelievable.
It's a libertarian layup. The mere fact that they decided to play games with DOGE when they asked for access should tell most people everything they need to know. USAID is everything that's bad about 'big government.'
'The history of indoor air quality, and how it went from a huge problem to basically fixed, courtesy of Asimov Press.'
Better exhaust fans in the dining areas and restrooms at Chipotle?
It's because of those great bans on cooking with gas that indoor air quality improved. Thank the Biden admin and Democrats for your clean air. If Trump had been in office, we'd all already be dead!
The note is wrong. The 43 pounds was only the stuff stopped at just one provincial border (Manitoba) with two ports of entry. And 43 pounds of fentanyl is still a fuck of a lot and of course we're never going to reach Mexican #s, and BC is shipping the legal stuff they give to addicts at far higher numbers.
All the Premiers and Trudeau know that Trump issued two demands, stop shipping illegals and stop the Chinese fentanyl supply train.
But Trudeau won't do that because his party has been polling in the single digits for almost two years now, and believes that if the upcoming election is fought on the LP record, they're going to be wiped out and lose official party status.
He'd rather run on Trump tariffs instead, even if it means collapsing Canada's economy.
Because the feds control the border, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba are trying to escape this fate by posting sheriffs along their borders in front of the customs ports, and hoping for carve out's for hydrocarbon energy and potash.
I've been happy with pretty much everything Trump has done so far but these tariffs look like more than just a negotiating tactic at this point. He used the threat to get Columbia to take back their citizens successfully. But it's not clear to me what measurable criteria is required here. Mexican border crossings are at all time lows and I would imagine that the cartels and fentanyl smugglers are already mostly shut down. Looks like Canada needs to get on board and shut down the supply chains. In any case it's being reported that Trump is talking to Mexico and Canada today and it's likely a pause on the tariffs will be negotiated.
The measure seems to be Canada and Mexico just doing something instead of ignoring the problem.
Same type of threat he did vs NATO countries 6 years ago. He didn't set the terms, just demanded action.
Yes, he wants Canadian police to do what our incompetent corrupt border cannot do. That's a fantastic admission, which, unfortunately, too few are willing to admit. As for Mexico, their police are in the hands of the cartels. Only idiots expect anything to improve there.
Do you expect our police to make those arrests in Canada and Mexico? Does the term “international incident” mean something to you?
Yeah, bud, a border has their cops on their side and ours on our side. Why can't ours make those same arrests on our side that Trump demands their cops make on their side?
Have our border cops been defunded?
As I noted below it looks like these tariffs are a lot more about forcing action on the border and a lot less about a trade war. I wonder how Reason will react tomorrow when the tariffs fail to materialize.
It's too bad the Trumpistas defend his tariffs on the basis of being tariffs. They'd have a lot more credibility if they'd admit Trump is swinging a dangerous weapon.
They remind me of Elmer Fudds pretending some guns aren't dangerous.
Who is doing so? Here or elsewhere?
JD and Trump have been on multiple interviews saying border issues.
You seem to have created a strawman.
At this point, with all the shit they’ve done, the Liberals (and the Democrats for that matter) deserve to be completely destroyed as a party with official status. Fuck them.
Zero argument from 90% of Canadians. on that one.
So what's going on with Polievre; is he going to become PM? I admit I don't follow that situation closely.
sarc would just tell me to learn to use google, so if you want to do the same, feel free I guess.
According to polls Poilievre will be PM with a supermajority unless somehow the Trudeau Liberals launch a coup and eliminate the other parties.
The question for Trudeau and his cronies is how big an asskicking are they going to take.
In some ways Trump is a godsend for them, because they believe they can smear Poilievre as Trump and orangmanbad their way to keeping official party status in the House of Commons.
They know that they can't win, but they want to survive, and they think making Trump and tariffs the issue is their ticket.
Thanks for the input.
Fentanyl is dosed in the microgram, e.g. a thousandth of a gram for those who don't do metric well. 43 pounds is about 19.5 kG (19,500 grams for the metrically challenged). If the average dose is say 25 mcg (that's one the doses for a fentanyl patch 25mcg/hr), which is 0.025 grams, thats approximately 780,000 doses*.
*Doses vary depending on delivery route, patients size and tolerance, however, generally speaking, intravenous routes tend to be at the lower end, as the delivered dose is higher and faster than other routes. Transdermal is also fairly fast and higher absorption (absorbed fairly quickly into the capillaries). Oral tend to take the longest and have lower absorbed dosages.
Mild correction, a microgram is a ten-thousandth of a gram. A milligram is one thousandth of a gram.
1μg = 0.0001g
1mg = 0.001g
Thus, that's actually 0.0025g and 7.8 million doses.
It's a ridiculously tiny quantity and metric shitton of doses.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol
23h
The deep state is far preferable to the Trump state.
DataRepublican (small r)@DataRepublican
Hello Mr. Kristol,
For you, the deep state is preferable because you are listed as the President of Defending Democracy (EIN 831567380) which is an indirect beneficiary of USAID through Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.
You are exposed.
https://datarepublican.com/expose/?eins=831567380
These shitlibs can't help but traffic in their false dilemmas. And regardless, the deep state is not preferable at all, in any way, shape, or form.
Kristol is simply assmad that he won't be seeing these people at the DC cocktail parties for a while.
Kristol is assmad because he was stealing USAID money as the link shows.
He wasn't stealing it, they were giving it to him willingly via backdoors, like Fauci did with the NIH and Ecohealth at the Wuhan lab.
It's still theft even if you have a partner acting as inside man.
Some necessary prespective somehow omitted by good Liz. There has been a huge spike in drug overdoses in the last few years. Mostly from synthetic opioids, i.e. fentanyl. Is it Reasons contention the government doesn't have a duty to reduce these numbers. That ODs are a by product of free people making their own bad choices?
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db522.htm
If the government wanted to reduce fentanyl deaths, they wouldn't throw doctors in prison for prescribing pain pills.
It's a fine day when libertarians support government throwing doctors in jail for doing their job, and then complain when people find other sources.
Do not pretend that is the cause of OD r/t fentanyl, as most of those cases involved some other illicit drug, such as heroin or cocaine, being cut with fentanyl to increase the high. People are not using these drugs as substitutes for prescribed pain medications, they're using them recreationally or addictively. Now, we can debate the ethics of the government worrying about recreational use, but, the pain control issue is pure red herring.
A part of me says we (government) should just buy all the drugs wholesale and hand them out to anyone who wants them, as much as they want, free of charge after they sign a waiver of liability. Then let the fuckers OD. Seems that after not too long, the population of drug addicted people plummets.
Is it Reasons contention the government doesn't have a duty to reduce these numbers.
Regardless of Reason's contention, it is a fact that the government has no proper duty or authority "to reduce these numbers." The individual right to choose necessarily implies a duty to enjoy or suffer the consequences of those choices. You cannot, through government policy, mitigate the latter without necessarily violating the former.
And regardless of the talking points, the War on (Some) Drugs has nothing to do with reducing drug-related deaths and everything to do with busybodies usurping the power of Law to impose their preferences on others.
WINNING:
USAID notice instructs staffers not to go to agency headquarters Monday, after Musk said Trump agreed to shut it down - AP
These gravy trains need to be shut down and permanently closed. I wouldn’t mind seeing an attempt to recover the money from people like Bill Kristol as well.
Or the drug war puritan-mercenaries could get over themselves, and legalize recreational fentanyl use. Trump could even impose tariffs to promote domestic production.
I’m all for putting Canada and Mexico on notice for being Commie adjacent/narco states and what not. But I doubt there will be any meaningful “stopping” of fentanyl supply. 100 plus years of drug prohibition suggests otherwise. It’s kind of a spiritual crisis. Like dipshits who do mass shootings. Though, I do get get tinfoily about how the stuff winds up in *everything*.
I guess we could go about making it less appealing to live on the street or something. But that’s only one aspect of the fentanyl thing. My brother in law died at 22 from messing around with someone else’s legal prescribed patches. Shits just dangerous to play around with.
Understood. But lots of "fun" shit is dangerous.
I live in a small Rocky Mountain town with a large contingent of people who chose to live here so they can indulge pretty extreme outdoor sports. Between back-country skiing, rock climbing, peak bagging, remote trail runs, mountain biking, rafting and kayaking, and lots of other adrenaline activities, at least a handful of extremely fit people die each year.
I suppose we could outlaw all hazards. Or try to.
The FBI Reddit is openly discussing how to avoid being caught leaking.
Posting on reddit is probably a good first step.
Yeah, I don't think these retards have enough awareness to realize the security apparatus they exploited against the right for the last decade-plus can just as easily be turned around on them.
It’s almost as if they have a Sarc-like sense of self-awareness.
So, what is the opposite of self-awareness?
Awareness of others?
Good. Kash Patel goes up on capital hill and says 'there will be no political firings at the FBI' and the very next day or the same day as he is sitting there lying, the acting director of the FBI wants files on every single FBI agent involved in any J6 prosecution of which there are potentially thousands. That order is courtesy of Trump' s recent defense attorney Emil Bove (acting deputy AG). So yes, it is purely political.
If they fire 2000 FBI field agents and replace them with Trumps brownshirts...only those who have professed sufficient loyalty to the orange fuhrer.... what a shitshow that will turn out to be.
I hope the victims of the political purge do leak it all.
What about they just fire any agent that participated in J6, or marched in the Patriot Front and those who told them to do it?
Deal?
I would gladly take that deal. Its ridiculous what is happening. Because Trump invited the j6 crowds from all over the country and his supporters responded, and it was one of the largest fed investigations in recent memory, it necessarily involves agents from all over the country and in very large numbers.
Finding people who beat cops with flag poles or whatever...is them just doing their job. And if that is deemed a legitimate reason to lose your job then the person doing the firing is even sicker than I thought possible. Those are the types of people whom hung from ropes after Nuremberg for 'just following orders' since they obviously will carry out any order no matter how ridiculous. Having those people in charge is in no way, shape or fashion 'better.' The fact the order came from Trump's recent private attorney just adds a layer of stench that is hard to ignore.
I said 'participated', not "attended'.
Oh stuff it. Dems supported and encouraged Burn Loot Murder and Antifa. Two cities at least turned over areas to Burn Loot Murder and Antifa control. Arsonisrs, murderers, and looters were not prosecuted. And Capitol police opened the doors and escorted these "rioters" around the building, peacefully, for which some of the "rioters" have been awaiting trial in jail for years, and others have been sent to prison.
Clean your own vermin-infested house before whining about your neighbor not mowing his lawn every 6 days.
But that's (D)ifferent.
It's okay because Democrats did it first. No, wait.
Those are the types of people whom hung from ropes after Nuremberg
Yes, to marxists, anyone who resists their stupid political theology is a fascist.
The Party above all! Also, the Sacred Revolution.
Patel isn't currently leading the FBI dumbfuck.
Maddow tried this same shit.
Give him a break. He's just copying and pasting the talking-points.
It's like AOC claiming that Trump's buyouts caused the mid-air collision in DC. Something that a) hasn't occurred (yet) and b) ATCs are not even eligible for.
If you think Kash Patel didn't go to his nomination hearing and lie his ass off I have nothing to say to you because you don't have a functional brain.
He has promised to be Trump's retribution repeatedly. The same memo re: Jan 6 investigations also has a portion related to essentially a MAGA loyalty test. If you are not deemed sufficiently loyal to MAGA then you are fired. And if you don't think the new hires won't also be subject to a MAGA loyalty test then you are not paying attention.
Whether this is the heritage foundation playbook in action or just some stupid MAGA takeover I don't care. Its a very dark time. Political party litmus tests are not a qualification.
If they fire 2000 FBI field agents and replace them with Trumps brownshirts...only those who have professed sufficient loyalty to the orange fuhrer.... what a shitshow that will turn out to be.
It can not be worse than a lawyer for the FBI forging evidence for the purpose of undermining President Trump.
Fire the person responsible for that, no objection from me. That is unethical conduct worthy of firing. If you can explain to me how every single person who investigated ANY of the 1500+ Jan 6 defendants should be fired I would love to hear the justification for that. Just because Trump pardoned them all en masse doesn't make them saints and it doesn't make the FBI agents disloyal. They had a job they were tasked with and did it and now are being punished for it for stupid reasons...primarily Trump's narcissistic ego and bullshit politics.
Shittycityfauxttorney has the DNC so far up his ass, he's blowing them at the same time.
Its kind of funny this guy claims to oppose politicized government but only to protect politicized government.
You can't make this shit up. A purported attorney in Chicago complaining about politicized government and corruption NOT talking about Chicago politics, but the first two weeks of the new Trump administration.
The FBI Reddit is openly discussing how to avoid being caught leaking.
Depends?
Greenwald: Democratic Party officials have been so immersed in this warped mentality and cartoonish HR jargon for so long that they have completely lost the ability to perceive how bizarre and gross it sounds to people who aren't drowning in it:
Well, they've got David Hogg as Vice-Chari now, so...
BREAKING: Panama's President has ended the country's Panama Canal deal with China, immediately following a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Are you tired of winning yet?
Getting Rubio in the seat might end up being one of Trump's best picks in his entire administration. He's not only on board with the agenda, but he has an amiable but firm personality that's going to make negotiations on state-related matters a lot easier.
If Gaetz hadn't spent his time in Congress acting like a spastic and burning bridges, he'd be in the same situation right now.
Plus, he was a wishy washy big gov RINO in the senate anyway.
"If Gaetz hadn't spent his time in Congress acting like a spastic and burning bridges"
A lot of those bridges needed to be burned, and congress needs another arsonist to tackle the insider traders.
That's fine, but now his political career is effectively done. Meanwhile, Rubio is actually positioning himself pretty well to challenge Vance for the presidency, or slide into the VP candidacy, if he's inclined to do so and runs State with a firm pimp hand.
So, Gaetz had principles and Rubio doesn't?
More like Rubio knows how to play the political game and Gaetz didn't. If he wasn't from a deep red district like MTG is, he'd have never gotten office in the first place.
And Rubio got through Senate approval 99-0 in almost no time.
writes Reason's Eric Boehm. "It is a foolish and self-destructive move
One man's foolish and self-destructive is another man's strategic and reluctant.
Can someone please explain to me how the president can eliminate alphabet agencies that were created by Congress, without repealing the legislation that created them? Sure he can fire people and freeze funding, but the next Democratic administration will just undo everything.
Same thing with regulations. Sure cutting regulation is great, but unless the legislation that created the agencies that write the regulations are repealed, all of those rules will be coming back as soon as Republicans lose the White Houses.
I'd be cheering Trump for cutting government if it was permanent or serious. But it's neither. None of his changes will last without Congress.
Bread and circuses folks. That's all it is.
*House*
If you read the news on this, he's not actually eliminating it--he's simply consolidating the billets under a different agency. If it's going under State, it means he wants Rubio keeping an eye on them.
A lot of the upper managers might end up losing their jobs for running gayops, but the staffing itself isn't actually going anywhere. And because this is a front group for the CIA, it's a move to keep them off balance.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14354683/Elon-Musk-shuts-USAID-Donald-Trump-approval.html
Elon Musk shuts down USAID with Trump's approval hours after taking control of it and locks out 600 staffers overnight
Take that for example. Without Congress, all of his changes are temporary. Sure it will be a heck of a monkey wrench and take years to undo, but it will be undone.
So sorry this is happening to you, Sarckles.
This line from the article was a laugher:
The system is run by non-political career civil servants
The latter, sure. The former, not so much.
From Amu (and other sources like The Guardian):
WASHINGTON — The website for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) appeared to be offline Saturday, as the Trump administration moves to strip the agency of its independence and bring it under the control of the State Department.
That tells me the billets aren't going anywhere, he's just putting them directly under Rubio. This is a lockout measure to stay inside the glowies' decision cycle so they can't sabatoge it.
Non-political simply means they don't serve at the whim of the president. Doesn't mean the individuals are apolitical.
Non-political simply means they don't serve at the whim of the president.
No, that's just a euphemism. They're happy to serve at the whim of Democratic presidents.
Not like they would ever form The Resistance.
Whim of the president means they are can be hired and fired by the president. Doesn't describe their personal politics. You're conflating the two.
Whim of the President means the job is at-will, just like everybody else outside government.
Sarc was in here telling us the other day that the deep state are the ones who protect the laws and constitution. They are unimpeachable in his eyes.
Oh look, Jesse is lying again. Must be a day that ends in 'y'.
No, no. That's you.
Well, you did tell us the biden admin respected the constitution.
You need to stop projecting, Sarc.
Poor Sarc.
Bueller? Bueller?
USAID was subsequently established by the executive order of President John F. Kennedy, who sought to unite several existing foreign assistance organizations and programs under one agency.
Made by EO, not congress.
What's your point? The existing "organizations and programs" that were consolidated into one were created by Congress. Their funding comes from Congress. They're not gone. You think you had a gotcha, but you just showed off how ignorant and gullible you are. Enjoy the bread and circuses.
Poor sarc.
Yup, poor sarc. I think Trump's surgeon general should put sarc's quotes on booze as warning labels.
God you are dumb. USAID was created by EO and can be undone by EO sending the programs back to their former agencies. Further reading in the link you clearly did nit read, USAID is funded by congress but is operated entirely out of the executive branch:
USAID operates subject to the guidance of the president, secretary of state, and the National Security Council.[6]
Also, what happened to all your pearl clutching about Trump's EOs being undone by the next POTUS?
And it can be recreated by an EO you idiot.
Nothing that Trump is doing is permanent or serious. It's just a big show.
Unless he can get Congress on board, EVERYTHING he is doing will be undone.
So all your cheering is for nothing.
Don't get me wrong, I want to see the federal government cut. But in a permanent and serious way, which requires acts of Congress. Not by EOs that will all be rescinded by the next Democratic president.
Can someone please explain to me how the president can eliminate alphabet agencies that were created by Congress,
I explained this to you. Sorry this is happening to you.
No, you explained that that particular alphabet agency was created by an EO. And it was eliminated by an EO. And it will be recreated by an EO. The agencies that were consolidated into it were created by Congress, and can only be eliminated by Congress. Fucking fuck you don't even know what you're defending.
So you weren't asking specifically about USAID? Despite this whole thread being about USAID and nobody else talking at all about eliminating other alphabet agenices. Take the L. You are looking more unhinged that usual.
My original comment said "alphabet agencies" plural you illiterate ass.
Poor sarc.
Over 240 federal agencies have been created by EO over the last 50 years.
https://home.uchicago.edu/~whowell/papers/Agencies.pdf
Eliminating all of them wouldn't make a difference because the programs were created by Congress and the funding comes from Congress.
You're just playing a game of semantics while deliberately ignoring the point, which is that programs and funding come from Congress.
Which means busting up agencies that consolidated existing programs will not do a damn thing.
Dishonest as always.
Really, in your head 240 agencies created by EO are somehow really created by congress. Like I said, take the L and move on. Maybe you should stop skipping the links people provide you.
Really, in your head 240 agencies created by EO are somehow really created by congress.
Yes. Every single one of them could be eliminated by Congress by repealing the laws that they administer. Congress can't destroy what it didn't create.
Except, Sarc, the regulations can be removed without an act of Congress. The vast majority of them are created by the regulators within the agencies themselves. They were never approved by Congress. Even the creation of the agency itself is sometimes very nebulous in the actual legislation and created by the Executive Branch.
So better to not be cut at all rather than cut for at least four years.
Better to do it right. All he's doing is causing chaos and harm. As much as we both dislike the federal government, it still has to function or things don't get done. Government is the Great Preventer that requires that people get permission to do things. Gutting the staff at agencies that give permission just means things will take longer or not happen at all. It serves no purpose other than to be a disruption and put on a show. And in the end it will all be pointless because it will all be undone.
Unless Republicans can unite and take advantage of their majorities to cement these things into legislation, it's all for nothing.
Retard, if it’s out of commission for four years (minimum), then it’s harder to put it back together the way it was. The systems and connections fall apart.
""Better to do it right. All he's doing is causing chaos and harm""
I can't think of a way that cutting down the debt that wouldn't cause some chaos and harm as described by someone.
Debt or deficit? Can't do anything about the debt unless the budget is balanced.
And I've already explained how to do that: freeze federal spending until revenue matches expenditures.
And that’s how you cut spending, idiot. You cut the unnecessary and redundant agencies. Did that not occur to you?
""freeze federal spending until revenue matches expenditures.""
Freezing unacceptable levels of spending will not reduce. It will remain status quo of unacceptable levels. You must cut spending and a lot of it.
*sigh*
You're not that bright, are you.
When you get a mortgage the payments stay roughly the same for the entire term, while your income increases. Even if you have a dead-end job you'll get inflation raises. So while you might be house-poor when you buy the place, after a few years it's not so bad.
I'm talking about freezing the federal budget while inflation increases revenue, until the budget is balanced.
Get it now?
We need a more aggressive approach.
The only things Sarc is aggressive on would be his ex-wife and a bottle of Colt 45.
""I'm talking about freezing the federal budget while inflation increases revenue, until the budget is balanced.""
Inflation to the rescue?
Basically.
Sarc, your idiocy is truly a dazzling sight to behold.
I see, yes, you'd rather not cut at all than cut for four years.
If only your comments here were half as principled.
I see. You'd rather cut for four years than make permanent cuts. In fact, you don't want any permanent cuts at all. You just want to cheer Trump. So principled.
See, I can do it too.
Is your version of this an option? Not sure who you think is against congress abolishing these laws and agencies. But I don't see any sign of that happening.
I'm taking what I can get. If the next dem administration puts this stuff back, that's on them.
At the very least, cutting things by XO is better than not cutting them at all.
No. Trump's EO's are not really allowed to rescind or modify the XO of any Democrat predecessors, but his XOs can be undone immediately without challenge by a successor Democrat.
In this case Sarc is making a somewhat valid point. Rescinding Biden and Obama XOs is just a start. Trump needs to ride herd on Congress to get that shit undone! Oh, wait, a new Congress can just pass the same old law again! (Clearly the hope is that it's harder for Congress to revive a law and/or pass new laws than it is for Pres. to sign an XO).
WSJ:
Trump administration officials are weighing executive actions to dismantle the Education Department as part of the campaign by billionaire Elon Musk and his allies to shrink federal agencies and slash the size of the government workforce.
The officials have discussed an executive order that would shut down all functions of the agency that aren’t written explicitly into statute or move certain functions to other departments, according to people familiar with the matter. The order would call for developing a legislative proposal to abolish the department, the people said. Trump’s advisers are still debating the specifics of the order and the timing, the people said.
Puberty's not a cakewalk even for normal teens.
Why not encourage everyone to delay puberty?
Eliminating puberty is the Holy Grail in the quest for perpetual childhood, right?
Change the voting age to puberty. Drop trou, short hair inspection, done and done.
What if they get a Brazilian or manscape early?
OT, but I bet many of these anti-gender types might prefer trimming off more than hair. Think of Barbie/Ken doll crotches.
I'd say voting age is when the individual can no longer be covered by their parents insurance.
So, per Obamacare, that'd be about 26.
I'd be happy with 24, but close enough.
Nope. Voting age starts when paying some minimum income tax (and ends if tax payments fall short).
I would prefer it excluded people who are net-negative taxpayers. So if you live off the land in the middle of nowhere, but take no optional government largess, you would still be able to vote. If you are receiving food stamps, welfare, free housing, etc. you don't get to vote.
https://x.com/townhallcom/status/1886514546946228404
@PressSec
lists some of the "waste and abuse" at USAID that
@elonmusk
and DOGE have been working on eliminating:
- $1.5 million to advance DEI in Serbia's workplaces
- $70,000 for a production of a DEI musical in Ireland
- $47,000 for a transgender opera in Colombia
- $32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru
"I don't know about you, but as an American taxpayer, I don't want my dollars going towards this crap!"
What you don't realize is it's just one transgender opera-singer/comic book artist who's 1/4 Serbian, 1/4 Irish, 1/4 Columbian, and 1/4 Peruvian who's getting the $1.65 million dollar grift from USAID.
Department of Government Efficiency leaving chaos in its wake:
This is all going so much better than I expected. I'm absolutely thrilled with DOGE so far and hoping for more. As of today the usaid.gov website is down.
"...They're missing that a) most eggs come from right here at home (we import relatively few eggs), and b) there's been a bad avian flu outbreak lately, the effects of which will be felt for a long time..."
And c) Feel-good twits have pushed laws requiring more space for birds, pushing up prices.
That law is actually defensible.
OK, let's hear it.
Keeping chickens in cages for all their lives is cruel.
So it's not defensible. That's what I thought.
Chickens set out in the open for predators to eat is not cruel?
There are buildings for letting hens roam a bit while safe from predation and the elements. I’d suggest that healthier hens can walk around a bit and produce better eggs, and maybe even more eggs with fewer drugs injected into them.
No it is not.
I went through an exercise for my Chartertopia, trying to figure out what actually constitutes animal cruelty. I invite you to do the same and post your reasoning for the world to see.
=======================
The closest to any objective test is any behavior less cruel than in the wild — eaten alive, toyed with for offspring training, or starved to death from untreated injuries.
* If it is immoral for humans to enslave animals for farms, laboratories, and pets, it is equally immoral for ants to enslave aphids, or mamas to enslave prey for training their offspring, and they must be punished. But by whom?
* If it is immoral for humans to hunt, kill, and eat animals, it is equally immoral for predators to hunt, kill, and eat prey, especially to kill by eating them alive, and ranchers must be applauded for killing immoral predators.
* If inter-species predation and slavery is moral for wolves and ants, it is equally moral for humans to enslave and raise and slaughter other species.
* How far down the food chain does this extend? How do we address immoral behavior with those ants and aphids, and among our gut bacteria?
Human involvement survives this simple comparison with wild behavior.
* It is moral for humans to enslave and slaughter animals which kill each other cruelly.
* It is moral to feed ducks and geese all they want for foie gras, when the end slaughter is also moral.
* It is moral to feed cattle more and better food than they can get in the wild, to fatten them up for slaughter.
* It is moral to enslave mice in solitary confinement, whether as pets or in laboratories.
Mind you -- I want as objective a definition as possible, not some wishy-washy feel-good assertions which are impossible to even try to measure of falsify. Claiming it is cruel to keep chickens in cages is just such an assertion. If you can't provide anything better, then you haven't thought about it with the gravity you claim it deserves.
My definition is the best I could come up with. If you don't try even that hard, you aren't serious.
Further, let's assume ME is serious about his opinion. Fine; buy eggs from someone who treats chickens the way you desire.
But once you pass a law, you are requiring me and all others to pay for your totally unsupported opinion.
Fuck off and die.
And he's backing up his opinion with the government's threats of jail and death. Over chickens.
Just another statist scumbag.
I want as objective a definition as possible, not some wishy-washy feel-good assertions which are impossible to even try to measure of falsify.
Technically, his claim is false. Virtually never are the chickens allowed to die in the egg-laying cages. Typically, after 2-3 yrs. (~ half their lifespan), egg production falls off, they're removed from the cages, and processed to whatever ends the market demands.
To your own point, free-range chickens die all the time even just of their own devices, far in excess of caged birds.
Thanks. Hadn't thought of free range life actually being more dangerous, but it makes sense from what I've seen of neighbors' and friends' chickens.
There's a reason we cage the birds and it's largely due to safety and health issues. The same as farrowing crates are used so the sows don't roll over and smother their piglets (which sows are rather infamous for doing when not in a farrowing crate).
I've noticed that the roasted chickens I buy at the local grocery frequently have broken legs.
My own chickens are almost-but-not-quite free range. They are in a "chicken tractor" that gets moved daily (except for a few days per where it is frozen to the ground) in the mowed pasture. The tractor covers about 4' x 20'. Currently have 6 chickens, so each chicken is getting about 14 square feet to live in during the day (the roost box is much smaller) if they choose to space themselves out evenly, scratching in "fresh" dirt and vegetation every day free from predation by coyotes, racoons, dogs, cats, etc.
Hmm..."Free-range chickens will use their coop to lay eggs and roost at night but should ideally have about 8-10 square feet per chicken of outdoor space to forage and roam freely."
I don't think I put much credence in Ethan Mollick.
You can't reduce scores by 2,800%. I'd like to see the arithmetic for that.
Breaking, Mexico agrees to send 10,000 troops to the border. Tariffs paused for 30 days. Looks like Trump is winning this one too.
But will they actually do anything? Most likely the army will aid the drug smugglers.
The army ARE the drug smugglers
Sheinbaum has explicitly said that the Mexican government will not fight the cartels. (And here I'm accommodating the fiction that there is a difference between the Mexican government and the cartels.)
Within 90 minutes of this article
Man, it’s almost as if it’s planned obsolescence in journalisming.
Solution: let anyone who's stupid or desperate enough to take fentanyl take all they want and OD ad lib. If they commit crimes against other people, charge them with the crimes and punish them for those crimes. Let anyone who wants to make or import fentanyl into the United States do so without hindrance. If you want to ruin your life with drugs it's none of my business as long as you leave me alone.
Common sense? Individual accountability? You must be new here.
Longing for a fantasy world? Devoid of compassion? That's why libertarians are not taken seriously.
Next time Sarc tries to tell you he's a libertarian folks, spit in his eye.
Here's some of his posts from the other thread today. He's an outright fucking socialist, he argues that a large regulatory state won't run smoothly without a big enough bureaucracy and that it's somehow a bad thing to fire government employees , and if regulations need to be cut you have to wait for congress to get around to it or it doesn't count:
sarcasmic 13 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
What good are the firings? The federal payroll is something like a half a percent of the budget. So firings aren't going to save money. The laws are the same, and it's the duty of the executive to execute them. Fewer people means the things that already take years, costing us time or lives, will take longer. Things like approval for construction projects or pharmaceuticals will take even more years with fewer people to process them.
I'm all for shrinking government, and we have a government of laws, not men.
So shrinking government means getting rid of laws, not men.
sarcasmic 7 hours ago
Flag CommentMute User
Let's cut the staff of the Forest Service. Then all the national parks close.
Let's fire a bunch of people at the EPA. Now they no longer issue permits.
Let's get rid of those idiots at the FDA. Now new drugs no longer get approved.
Let's sack a bunch of employees at the Social Security Administration. Now grandma doesn't get a check.
Let's empty some offices that administer Medicare. Now grandma's surgery never gets approved.
At least she won't care about parks being closed, because she's dead.
If you really want to cut back those agencies, you need to get rid of the laws that create the jobs. Not the people who fill them.
However you're too fucking stupid to see that laws are the cause and bureaucracy is the effect. Because of you have no reasoning skills, you think cutting the bureaucracy is the fix.
It's not.
sarcasmic 22 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Shrinking government doesn't mean firing people who work in alphabet agencies. The laws that give that agencies power are still on the books. Shrinking government means repealing laws, and I've heard zero talk about that.
I think what's really going on, and Vance basically admitted it, is that they're purging the workforce to create job openings for loyalists who will execute laws Trump's way, without question.
They're not shrinking government. Not at all. That's a blatant falsehood. They're keeping all the laws, so he can weaponize the power they give, and "be your retribution" just like he promised.
And you-know-who did it first to him. So that makes it ok.
sarcasmic 10 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Regulations aren't laws. And he can't get rid of agencies without getting rid of the laws that created them. So as long as those agencies exist, those regulations are going to come back with the next Democratic administration. Everything he is doing is in vain unless the laws change. Sarckles apparently doesn't know that plenty of agencies were created by EO.
Poor sarc. It is going to be a rough 4 years. Maybe the tariffs will raise the price of booze so high he finally gets sober. Wouldn't that a be a delicious irony.
Unless the tariffs also apply to hand sanitizer, aftershave, and Liquid Plumber, that's not going to happen.
He can substitute Draino.
He can take Trump's advice and drink bleach.
He's not wrong about the firings as far as saving any kind of significant money given our current deficit. The total workforce costs about $275 billion including bennies. Fire every single one of them and there would still be a deficit of about $1.6 trillion.
We know that firing all of them and contracting everything out is not realistic. Stuff like ATC, with the airlines' hub-and-spoke system, requires a centralized organization to oversee the whole network. It's just that the FAA hasn't been run competently and let DEI bullshit interfere in the mission, just like the LA Fire Department turning away qualified white people for ethnic tokenism.
The common denominator in all of this is cultural marxism. As far as the cost, unless Trump and Musk are willing to actually tackle Medicaid, either through cuts or proposing a tax on it so that we're not going $1.75 trillion in the hole every year to pay for it, slashing the federal workforce will only work on the margins.
Fire every single one of them and there would still be a deficit of about $1.6 trillion.
The salary savings from the firings are only one small part of the money saved when disbanding an agency.
But nobody said that the firings were the only thing that should be done. Sarc is trying to create conditions that were not actually part of the discussion.
But nobody said that the firings were the only thing that should be done.
True, but as is his wont, Musk is autistically homed in on it as the primary driver.
Something tells me this is more about finding out who's intent on being part of Le Resistance, versus who's just looking to come in and do their job. That "fork in the road" email that was sent out to fedgov is part of that tell.
I suspect they're keeping tabs on people who decide not to resign but do the malicious compliance, and when October rolls around those agencies are going to be whacked of those employees.
Musl has actually been posting a lot about how the current employees are not doing their jobs, such as not denying a single payment or transfer even to known fraudulent applicants.
Forbes: "The 400 richest people in America are having a rollicking time in the roaring 2020s. In all, they are worth a record $5.4 trillion, up nearly $1 trillion from last year."
So even if we confiscated 100% of their net worth (something we can do only once, mind you, plus (*)), we fund the government for about 8 months? So why even bother?
(*) And if doing so, which is generally just confiscating all their shares in various companies, and not swimming pools full of gold coins, without impacting the value of those shares AND the government could then find someone who would buy those shares at the current (before confiscation) prices.
So what exactly will drop that Medicaid-driven deficit down? Whether confiscating every single penny from the top 0.001% will close the gap or not is irrelevant.
Geeze. I’ll have to take a look at the thread. Basically, Sarc has been gaslighting us with his identity as a libertarian for years. He’s a Democrat in libertarian (albeit very sheer and shoddy) clothing.
Plus he can’t even get the agencies right. NPS is part of the Department of the Interior, not part of the USFS, which part of USDA.
Incredibly stupid interpretation of what I said. Bravo, I'd expect no less.
Looks fairly accurate, gaslighter.
What interpretation?
I copied and pasted you, retard.
Here's some of his posts from the other thread today. He's an outright fucking socialist,
Yeah, because I want Congress to repeal the laws. Moron.
he argues that a large regulatory state won't run smoothly without a big enough bureaucracy and that it's somehow a bad thing to fire government employees
I'm arguing that when the people can't do things without approval from the government, and you cut the staff, that it harms the people who depend upon getting approval. I'm not saying that the regulatory state is good. But as long as it is there it needs to function.
and if regulations need to be cut you have to wait for congress to get around to it or it doesn't count
Congress does not write regulations, it writes laws that authorize the executive to write regulations. Cutting regulations while leaving those laws in place will have no long term effect.
I will give you credit for one thing: you're good at twisting people's words into something they obviously did not mean.
Dum dum, getting rid of those regulations means that the mechanisms keeping them in place are now gone. If someone wants to try to put them back, 1) there will be more pushback from those opposed, and 2) they may be harder to implement as they’ve been replaced by better regulations or even legislation.
Sarc knows, but he doesn't care because he only says he's a libertarian as an excuse to keep trolling here.
Sarckles apparently doesn't know that plenty of agencies were created by EO.
When an agency is "created" by an EO it is just consolidating existing agencies. Nothing is actually created. It's just moving the pieces around. Eliminating all of those agencies that were created by EO won't change a thing because all the programs will still exist.
So you're just being intellectually dishonest because you know exactly what I mean. Or you're stupid. I'm never sure which one it is.
The NSA was created by Truman via EO in 1952. It wouldn't be officially codified by the legislature until 1959. So you are wrong. Alphabet agenices can be made and funded entirely by EO as the executive branch can fund it via discretionary funding.
https://www.hsdl.org/c/timeline/national-security-agency-established/
What do all these agencies have in common? They administer laws that were created by Congress. They spend money that was allocated by Congress. They facilitate programs that were created by Congress.
Ultimately none of them would exist except for Congress. And all of them can be eliminated by Congress by repealing the laws that they execute.
None of what Trump is doing matters as long as the laws are on the books.
Poor sarc, he is being pwned in real time:
USAID Absorbed Into State Department Under Rubio After DOGE Crusade
Cope and seeth little buddy.
How stupid are you? Nothing was really eliminated if it was absorbed into another agency. That's just moving pieces around. The laws are still on the books.
Why is that so impossible to understand?
Eliminating a department and making another pick up it's slack isn't just moving pieces around, you shitty Democratic party shill.
Poor sarc.
As long as the laws that the department administers is on the books, the only thing that changed is the office where the people go to work.
Do you guys know anything at all about civics? The legislature writes the laws, and the executive executes them. Executive agencies are created to execute these laws. Folding one agency into another doesn't change anything because those laws are still going to be executed. Real change requires the legislature.
Again, why are you guys unable to admit that?
Is it because you'd have to admit that Trump is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic? I think that's it. When given a choice between Trump or reality, you choose Trump. Just like Jesse and his defense of tariffs.
And what law does USAID administer that was passed by Congress, dipstick?
He knows there's none. He's just shit at lying.
To borrow from Sevo…
You
Are
Full
Of
Shit
*Sarc lies that agencies can't be created by EO when they can and they have been*
Then:
"So you're just being intellectually dishonest because you know exactly what I mean."
Amazing
He likes moving the goal posts. He is never wrong. Just ask him.
Nope. Goalposts have remained in place.
Goalposts are Congress eliminating the laws that give the executive the power to create agencies and write regulations.
You're just saying I'm wrong because the executive creates alphabet agencies too, while dismissing the fact that all of it depends on Congress.
Ad hominem for the win!
How do you still not know the meaning of ad hominen?
No, for the ten millionth time, that's not what ad hominem means.
Ad hominem would be someone saying, 'Well, you're sarasmic, therefore you are wrong' rather than addressing anything you said - facts presented, points argued, etc.
Pointing out that what you said was not entirely true, lacks context, or even disagreeing with the factual basis of your statement (correctly OR incorrectly), is in fact addressing the argument rather than the person making it.
You're claimed one part of my argument is wrong, therefore I am wrong. Dismissing the rest of my argument because me the person is wrong, not because the argument is wrong, is indeed an ad hominem.
And you still can't admit that Congress writes laws while the executive enforces them. Therefore changing which department enforces what doesn't really change a thing. Basic civics. You deny basic civics because Trump. Fucking retarded.
That is not the correct use of "ad hominem". Get your money back, sarc.
In this case, the person is wrong because the argument is flawed. That’s not an ad hominem, idiot.
'Well, you're sarasmic, therefore you are wrong'
This may just be a tautology at this point.
They could probably teach that as a universal law in physics.
Damn, you’re retarded. Were I to brush away your entire argument due to the fact that I believe you to be a total retard without addressing the points, that’s an ad hominem. If your points were addressed and found severely lacking, that’s not an ad hominem.
Ummm, the Forest Service doesn't run the national parks, in fact the park service is Department of Interior and Forest Service is Department of Agriculture. His commie ass isn't even correct in his ranting.
So I got some details wrong.
My point is that Trump is rearranging the chairs on the Titanic right now. The chairs being the agencies that administer laws passed by Congress, and I think you can figure out what the Titanic is in that metaphor.
All of these changes he's making are meaningless unless the laws change.
Is that wrong?
He is doing what he can, which you're crying about. He has limited power by the Constitution, he is doing what he can with the power he has. But you're bitching about that. And that isn't what you originally cried about anyhow, so stop gaslighting. No one buys it. They can read your own words. So stop fucking lying. Stop pretending like you weren't crying about Trump cutting what he can. Because everyone can plainly see that's exactly what your drunk ass was doing.
If what he's doing will achieve nothing, then why all your hyperventilating about it?
So I got some details wrong.
You usually get a lot of details wrong, Sarc.
Overtaken by events 2.0
The great stock market crash of 2025 caused by tariffs is over before noon.
Planting the seeds of blame-shifting?
Tariffs caused the crash not the $36,000,000,000,000 of debt. /s
"We categorically reject the calumny from the White House, that the Mexican government has alliances with criminal organizations,"
Except for the fact that they do, even if those 'alliances' are at the point of a gun, and not the governments guns but rather the guns of the cartels.
A host of decapitated government officials tells you the one's that still have heads are probably playing ball in one way or another.
He's not wrong about Bush and Obama arming the cartels, but we arm the Mexican government too so that amounts to a whataboutism.
the Mexican government has alliances with criminal organizations
The cartels and the Mexican "government" are the same organization.
Fuck you, cut spending.
*A few moments later*
Oh, shit, we didn't think you'd actually cut spending! Stop! Wait. You... you know who else cut spending? Only fascists cut spending! Hitler cut spending on the Jews, you know...
I know you're joking but I am going to be a bit pedantic. The cost to run the Holocaust probably cost Nazi Germany far more money than the Germans ever spent on the Jews up until that point.
And it probably cost Germany the war. All that money could've been put towards better weapons, training, and supplies.
""It’d be nice to have a bit of consistency from MAGA explainers as to wtf the plan is. ""
This is funny coming from someone who probably voted for Harris.
Now they care about a plan?
Of course, grocery prices will be majorly affected going forward: Expect prices for avocados, citrus, berries, tomatoes, and lots of other produce categories to rise, since these goods are imported from Mexico. Beef, tequila, and beer imports will likely become more expensive too. Canadian grains, meat, pork, potato, and dairy imports will become costlier for consumers here.
If only the small island nation of America had some arable land...
If only the small island nation of America had ZERO-Tax on its production chain.
If only the small island nation of America had some arable land...
And if it weren't for The Jones Act, we would be able to import them from the fertile fields and ranch lands of Guam, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico.
Hank Johnson says to just be sure to import from all parts of Guam equally, so that it doesn't get lopsided and tip over.
An odd point for them to make when America is one of the biggest food exporters on the planet.
The funny thing is, is that we export far more dairy products to Canada than we import. As for beef, that's a really interesting thing. A lot of the beef imported from Canada and Mexico is brought in as calves to fill feedlots in certain areas (e.g. feedlots in the PNW import a lot of Canadian calves for a variety of reasons, partially because Oregon and Washington have driven a lot of their ranchers out of business with their stupid regulations and a lot of Southern Idaho beef is marketed in neighboring states that aren't in the PNW, e.g. Nevada, Utah, Montana and Wyoming). But states like Montana and North Dakota ship a lot of cattle to Canadian feed lots. So, it's actually a wash. Some areas may have a shortage and some areas may have a surplus, but the supply of beef nationally is not going to change much (in fact, we ship enough calves to Canada and Mexico that we will actually have a surplus of calves if we don't ship to them). 95% of our leafy greens in the winter are actually grown in Southern Arizona. Again, we end up shipping more South of the border than they ship in North of the border.
Fentanyl is a stupid excuse.
[Na]tional So[zi]alist[s] building a bankrupt Nazi-Empire and the consequence thereof isn't.
How Trump should've explained them was, "Your ?free? ponies were NOT ?free? after all."
So I just read where tariffs on Mexico have been withdrawn in exchange for their posting 10,000 troops on the border.
Knowing that the tariffs are going to hurt Canada even more, I wonder what they will throw in?
Getting sense that this article isn’t going to age well…
To take off a famous cartoon
How the economy will fare:
1. Trump has imposed tariffs
2. Then a miracle will happen
3. Then the US will be great again.
And hordes of the economically illiterate are all praising the genius of Step 2.
Have the tariffs been imposed? Or were they dropped once we got the response we wanted from the country targeted?
Looks like Mexico and Panama have capitulated. Things just keep on getting worse for Diet Shrikes narratives.
And it won't be long before Canada capitulates as well.
Don't hold your breathe. Trump didn't take into account the fact that Trudeau is actually trying to destroy the Canadian economy and has been doing so for almost ten years.
Trudeau is going to try and fight the upcoming election on Trump and tariffs, than on his horrible record, so he's going to milk them for as long as possible.
Didn't he resign? Did he use the sarc definition of resign?
He said that he 'intends to resign'. Sometime in March or later.
So he's planning on getting out before his chickens come home to roost.
Sounds about right. No doubt they plan on blaming whomever happens to be holding power with the inevitable results of their administration become obvious to even the densest voter.
Please, Canuks correct me if needed.
He took advantage of a 'loophole' to dissolve the legislature, if he agreed to resign X time later.
It kept him from being tossed as a result of a 'no confidence' vote, but allowed him to remain 'in office' until that deadline arrives, in which case the Canuks ought to toss the scumbag in the Detroit River.
^ Attempt at humor by a TDS-addled slimy pile of shit.
LOL: Meta removes tampons from Men's rooms, douchebags still readily available.
Reminder, when you think you hate the media enough, you're wrong.
Also reminder: Projection. Virtually everything the left denounces is simply an admission of things they are currently doing but that they don't want the other side to do.
https://pjnewsletter.com/nbc-news-exit-media
Now, one of the most visible faces of liberal bias in journalism is making his way to the door. After years of pushing debunked narratives and demonstrating clear anti-conservative bias, Chuck Todd is leaving NBC News after nearly 20 years with the network.
“There’s never a perfect time to leave a place that’s been a professional home for so long,” Todd wrote in a memo to NBC colleagues, before without any self-awareness adding: “We can’t tolerate propagandists.”
The irony of Todd’s statement about “propagandists” would be amusing if it weren’t so revealing. This is, after all, the same Chuck Todd who spent years promoting the now-thoroughly debunked Russia collusion hoax, repeatedly attacked conservative voices, and helped suppress negative stories about Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline.
You can never hate the mainstream media enough.
Define mainstream. Is it that they have some modicum of journalistic integrity? Fair enough that it’s not enough of a modicum.
But anyone who’s read a book in their lives would know that seeking out media that confirms what you already believe is a recipe for brain rot.
Ah, you're back. And just as dumb as you were before you left.
"...But anyone who’s read a book in their lives would know that seeking out media that confirms what you already believe is a recipe for brain rot..."
That explains your comments.
Well that sure didn't take long, it looks like Mexico (not surprisingly) is already caving to Trump's demands to provide more border security, which is why those tariffs are on hold for a month pending verification of Mexico's compliance.
Mark my words, it won't be too much longer before Canada cries uncle as well.
That's impossible - the commenters here who said that Trump was just pushing tariffs for bargaining power were all told they were dead wrong, and that this president and his administration are just completely ignorant of basic economics.
If your only source of information is MSNBC, you're likely to be wrong more often than not.
You know, also, it's really kind of interesting how poorly all these other countries understand economics and how tariffs are a tax that will be born solely by Americans and capitulate to demands. Like the scene from Blazing Saddles where Sheriff Bart takes himself hostage.
Mexico is posturing. They will not take any action against the crime cartels.
If they turn back even a third of those trying to sneak into the country, that's a win. That's a third less illegal aliens sneaking into the country. And it sends a message, that your chances of getting into the USA have dramatically decreased. Add in the increase in enforcement on our side of the border, and it goes a very long way towards securing the border (be even better if Mexico deployed a large percentage of those troops to their own southern border, as that would cut the flow from Central and South America.
Additionally, every border cross the Mexican Army stops, is one less our border patrol and military need to spend time and energy detaining, which means they have more time and energy to spend looking for the drug smugglers the Mexican Army isn't going after.
The point is, they're not going to stop any. Each of those "migrants" pays thousands to the cartels for access to the border. The "government" of Mexico is not going to cost their partners in the cartels that much money.
That's why it's only a one month delay, to verify they are honoring the deal, if not the tariffs go into effect. Keep reaching.
Who should keep reaching for what?
If you can't figure that out, I can't help you.
When I took linguistics in college, we were taught that people want to be understood. The internet has taught us that is not always the case.
Your claim here:
"The point is, they're not going to stop any."
Suggests you claim knowledge you haven't, so you can be ignored.
When Canada goes (and Trudeau is smashed in the process) and Mexico is already complying will REASON admit to being stone wrong. Naaaah. MOre and more you post articles that are just totally out of touch. Trudeau you expect to be a hard ass --- are you out of your mind, that wimpy sissy limpwrister.
What is the choice, Reason ??
In India's Economic Times (so you can see how foreigners view Kamala)
Ridiculous? Kamala Harris wore a $62000 necklace while on tour to the southern border to check immigrants
Trump shits in gilded toilets. What’s it to you?
Lots of posts. Libertarians for government price fixing, I’m guessing.
Gee, TDS-addled steaming pile of lefty shit makes an appearance.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
You should have stayed away. You're just as sophomoric and jejune as always.
Canada just caved too.
Again, it's really kind of interesting how poorly all these other countries understand economics and how tariffs are a tax that will be born solely by Americans and capitulate to demands. Like the scene from Blazing Saddles where Sheriff Bart takes himself hostage. Maybe they do it out of pity of us being ruled by a tyrant.
To wit, Lawdy no Brer Bear! Don't athrows me into tha briar patch!
Several have misrepresented Catholic Church teaching on immigration.
Catechism of the Catholic Church 2241
The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.
Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants' duties toward their country of adoption. =-======> Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.