President Trump's First 100 Days

If we don't cut spending, I don't see the tax cuts having a huge effect.

 

hell just freezing spending would be a miracle.

 

I thought in today's world that was considered a spending cut, but you're right.

 

It is in effect a spending cut, unless population and inflation flatline.

 

true

 

First, I am going to fix this stupid quote thing you guys have messed up.

Secondly, I have been hearing this since 1984 when I was a wee lad and my dad told us the world was going to come crashing down soon because of hyperinflation. But I know it is true, and you cannot just spend willy nilly forever, even if you make the money. It will come back to bite you. But it hasn't in 30 years and the average joe really sees nothing about it. Kind of like Global Warming, so it is easy to dismiss.

 

There is no doubt in my mind that it can't go on forever, and ignoring it doesn't actually put it off. Probably the opposite.

 

Well let me see where to begin this has evolved a bit since I was last here.

EO- are or are supposed to be nothing more than the President issuing directives to the administrative branch on how to execute the law as passed by congress. The problems with EO are not that they exist but that they can be abused because of lazy congresses passing overly broad and often unconstitutional laws.

Remember the line item veto? It was struck down because it ceded legislative branch duties to the executive.

Pretty much though the administrative state of today does exactly the same thing. If SCOTUS was consistent then they would strike this down as well. Congress creates overly broad law giving de facto legislative power to the unelected bureaucratic state who basically legislates via regulations. (See the REIGN act)

Now Obama, yeah I used his name, took full advantage of vague congressional law to expand the authority of the executive. He also issued EO that were not statutorily allowed. He basically said "sue me." And he was sued and lost many times but he also got some stuff by a political SCOTUS.

Trump has come in and issued EO that reversed Obamas "interpretation" of statutes and what was allowable or not. One example is that the EPA expanded the definition of navigable waters to an absurd point and in my opinion an illegal one. It was a naked power grab. I think they thumbed their noses at prior court ruling in this regard. Trump has come in and reversed that interpretation.

This like CO2 has nothing to do with clean air or water.

Now as to Garland or Gorsuch, the Senate has the role to ADVISE and consent to a nominee. When has it ever advised? Never to my knowledge. A vote has never been required. It could technically get even more into the Presidents business on nominees if it wanted to.

And to gridlock, well, thats how the founders designed it. When you dont get compromise and the place comes to a halt the founders if they were alive would be smiling. The created a limited central government and intended it to stay that way. Its not their fault that the 16th,17th amendments,the Federal Reserve and FDR screwed that up.

So know you have too much play money. You stripped the states of their representation in the congress via direct election of Senators. You have central bank whose powers come from federal statute and who is required to bankroll an out of control legislature exasperating the problem caused by the welfare state.

Nixon had a chance to fix LBJs problem but he punted by going off the gold standard and pretty much the dollar is now backed only by oil. Otherwise its a fiat currency and worthless.

As to revenue and taxes, Droski is right revenue follows gdp and rises during expansions and contracts during recessions. Clintons surplus was due to Newt Gingrich and John Kasich's budget.

 

Tenny, he types more than you

 

"Challenge accepted." - Tenny

 

were still way far away from that being a problem that anyone should worry about.

 

our debt to GDP currently is sustainable. we'd need to raise it by say 50% to really get anywhere where we need to worry about it.

 

By the time it is an imminent threat, it will be very difficult and painful to deal with.

 

well hopefully we never get there. I believe the US economy enough to think we wont.

 

i'd argue we got here because of back to back major recessions and if the economy returns to semi normal we should grow our way out of the problem (or at least plateau the problem) even if the govt continues to spend a lot of money.

 

We got here because we spend more than we take in. LOL The reason we havent flamed out like Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain is because we are the worlds reserve currency.We export our inflation to the whole world. Also unlike the PIGS we dont have anyone to us bail out if we collapse. The BRICs are slowly working to create a more multi currency reserve. This is one of the things we need to worry about. Another is the trap we are in with interest rates. A more normal rate of 5% on our debt would see an interest payment of 1T alone. That about 25% of the current budget.

Who is paying the freight? Well if it collapses or taxes hit the roof I am telling you I am not paying the freight.

I will move to ******

 

Trump got back to his roots tonight in PA, looked and sounded like the old candidate Trump. A little less talk and a lot more action though.

 

He loves to campaign. Loves to be in a room where everyone loves him. He just cannot govern.

 

Too bad he isn't a candidate anymore. When can we get a President?