techno-ag said:

---

Helicopter Ben said:

---

The people crying about this and pushing these narratives are almost certainly the ones leeching on the govt largesse.

---

I've been told not to cry for Argentina.

---

Six people who don't know the words to the song starred this post.

wannaggie said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

You can't make sweeping reforms to government bloat without undergoing a painful period while people have to recondition themselves that it's up to them to earn money, provide shelter and safety and feed their families.

This is unfortunately the part where I'm not sure Trump has the appetite. He wants a legacy more than anything else. I hope like hell he can withstand the downside of what truly reforming this country will have to take. Because it'd make him or anyone truly willing to do it the greatest president in history.

---

To me this issue is at the core of one of the biggest paradoxes of American politics. America's structure was set up for long term stability by ensuring a frequent turnover and peaceful transfer of power that is flexible and responsive to the electorate.

GOOD:
Congress significantly resets every 2 years. Presidency significantly resets every 4 years. So it's harder for evil factions to permanently capture governance. (Hence the rise of the bureaucratic deep state and TLAs as the source of evil acting unilaterally outside the will of the people.)

BAD:
When serious reforms are truly needed - i.e. the bureaucratic deep state and TLAs - there is no hope for sustained momentum from Congress/POTUS because every second of their terms is now spent exclusively on strategic positioning for the next election cycle.

I have always been conflicted about term limits, because I see merit in arguments on both sides and I don't think there's a conclusive winning argument. Ultimately it always comes back to who we elect. When our servants are good we want them to stay, when they're bad we want to eject them, but the bad ones have a tendency to become entrenched so are harder to eject without some baked in limits. On the other hand, the bad ones also have an easier time defeating the good ones in an election, because elections are inherently slanted against anyone who declines to use every trick available.

In the meantime, the instant the nation as a whole starts experiencing withdrawal from the bad policies, any reform momentum stops at the next election and we recycle back.

I do not see any way that our electoral system will permit serious reform of a $7 trillion deficit-spending deep state. The tumor has infiltrated the entire economy. The founders tried to protect us from this, but their great grandchildren failed. Once government becomes enormous AND a major sector of the economy, you cannot remove the tumor without cutting out a lot of the surrounding tissue. In a nation of 350,000,000 people vying for their share of $7,000,000,000,000, there is no human surgeon who can get good margins to separate the cancerous growth from the healthy organs.

---

Any reform of this nature has to be bottom up, meaning that you have to have a plan, sell the plan to the people, and be honest with them about what it is going to take to accomplish the goals you have set out.

Part of what made Reagan able to get inflation under control and the economy going was that he was solid in his belief that what he was doing would work, he stuck to the plan, he was able to communicate his ideas to the American people with confidence, good humor and honesty. Most people didn't think Reagan was just blowing smoke but rather believed everything he was saying. It was a tremendous assistance to have Paul Volcker as head of the Fed also. And of course don't underestimate the impact of having it all happen within one presidential election cycle, so that by 1984 Reagan could run his "morning in America" ads that people could understand, believe in and support.

People will endure the pain required to fix the economy and by extension the government, but the reasons for it and the hope of what lies ahead will have to be communicated to them. Unfortunately that is simply not Trump's strong suit.

Bryan98 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Helicopter Ben said:

---

The people crying about this and pushing these narratives are almost certainly the ones leeching on the govt largesse.

---

I've been told not to cry for Argentina.

---

Six people who don't know the words to the song starred this post.

---

Brevity is the soul of wit.

Poverty keeps soaring in the US and we spend more than anyone in the world on poverty so what's the point?

Quote:

---

Trump needs 8 years for what he wants to do, he's got 4

---

And he will do it in 2.

IndividualFreedom said:

---

Quote:

---

Trump needs 8 years for what he wants to do, he's got 4

---

And he will do it in 2.

---

All while healing the sick and walking on water.

aTmAg said:

---

In this video, Milei explains it:



What happened is that before prices were strictly controlled and that price ceilings existed everywhere. Meaning that equilibrium prices were ABOVE what the controlled prices were. So for example, a hot dog should cost $1 based on supply and demand, but the government set the price at $0.75.

So when they calculated the "poverty line" they added up expected expenses at poverty level, but they used the CONTROLLED prices, not the equilibrium prices. So on paper the poverty rate was 41%. Because 59% of the people made more than that poverty level. However, as we economically literate TexAgers know, price ceilings cause shortages. So even though you could theoretically buy a hot dog at $0.75, there were not enough hot dogs. So only say the first 75% of people could get the hot dogs and the remaining 25% got none.

When Milei eliminated price controls, the price of everything shot up to their equilibrium price. That made the poverty levels shoot up to 57%. That doesn't mean that 16% more people suddenly became poor, just that the stats became honest. Poverty levels really were that high all along. Sure enough Milei's policies have made that true poverty level fall to 46% since January. 11% fewer people are below poverty line in only 11 months.

So the notion that Milei "raised poverty level" is flat out wrong. Milei LOWERED them. The "increase" is the state moving up from it's false value to it's real value.

---

Economics and statistics in action.

Democrats take note if you are smart enough to understand. That's doubtful though.

I wish I had a ton of money to pour into Argentinan assets right now. Dove hunting resorts. Vinyards. Farmland.

Muy said:

---

YouBet said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Based on his handling of covid, I have a hard time seeing Trump see this one through. However he is surrounded by better people already, so that would be his saving Grace going forward.

---

I still think this is an unfair characterization. In the beginning, it was total fog of war and no one knew what the hell was happening. In hindsight, he also had people with very bad intentions who were trying to sabotage him. He pretty much reversed course after the initial round of spend and once we started realizing what the reality was.

The Democrats were the ones that ran with the ball and decided to 1984 it.

---

Exactly. Nobody can revise history that happened just 4 years ago.

---

It is revising history to say Trump "reversed course after the initial spend". He was pushing for a 3rd round of stimulus in fall 2020 and was pushing Congress to increase their initial number.

Trump was even more guilty of the 2020 spendapalozza than Congress.

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Muy said:

---

YouBet said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Based on his handling of covid, I have a hard time seeing Trump see this one through. However he is surrounded by better people already, so that would be his saving Grace going forward.

---

I still think this is an unfair characterization. In the beginning, it was total fog of war and no one knew what the hell was happening. In hindsight, he also had people with very bad intentions who were trying to sabotage him. He pretty much reversed course after the initial round of spend and once we started realizing what the reality was.

The Democrats were the ones that ran with the ball and decided to 1984 it.

---

Exactly. Nobody can revise history that happened just 4 years ago.

---

It is revising history to say Trump "reversed course after the initial spend". He was pushing for a 3rd round of stimulus in fall 2020 and was pushing Congress to increase their initial number.

Trump was even more guilty of the 2020 spendapalozza than Congress.

---

You were against the spending to help businesses being shut down and people being out of work due to liberal shut downs in liberal cities and counties?

Dill-Ag13 said:

---

Trump needs 8 years for what he wants to do, he's got 4 1.5

---

Muy said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Muy said:

---

YouBet said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Based on his handling of covid, I have a hard time seeing Trump see this one through. However he is surrounded by better people already, so that would be his saving Grace going forward.

---

I still think this is an unfair characterization. In the beginning, it was total fog of war and no one knew what the hell was happening. In hindsight, he also had people with very bad intentions who were trying to sabotage him. He pretty much reversed course after the initial round of spend and once we started realizing what the reality was.

The Democrats were the ones that ran with the ball and decided to 1984 it.

---

Exactly. Nobody can revise history that happened just 4 years ago.

---

It is revising history to say Trump "reversed course after the initial spend". He was pushing for a 3rd round of stimulus in fall 2020 and was pushing Congress to increase their initial number.

Trump was even more guilty of the 2020 spendapalozza than Congress.

---

You were against the spending to help businesses being shut down and people being out of work due to liberal shut downs in liberal cities and counties?

---

We needed 3 stimulus checks?

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Muy said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Muy said:

---

YouBet said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Based on his handling of covid, I have a hard time seeing Trump see this one through. However he is surrounded by better people already, so that would be his saving Grace going forward.

---

I still think this is an unfair characterization. In the beginning, it was total fog of war and no one knew what the hell was happening. In hindsight, he also had people with very bad intentions who were trying to sabotage him. He pretty much reversed course after the initial round of spend and once we started realizing what the reality was.

The Democrats were the ones that ran with the ball and decided to 1984 it.

---

Exactly. Nobody can revise history that happened just 4 years ago.

---

It is revising history to say Trump "reversed course after the initial spend". He was pushing for a 3rd round of stimulus in fall 2020 and was pushing Congress to increase their initial number.

Trump was even more guilty of the 2020 spendapalozza than Congress.

---

You were against the spending to help businesses being shut down and people being out of work due to liberal shut downs in liberal cities and counties?

---

We needed 3 stimulus checks?

---

How much was needed? Please be specific and show your work.

Logos Stick said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Muy said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Muy said:

---

YouBet said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Based on his handling of covid, I have a hard time seeing Trump see this one through. However he is surrounded by better people already, so that would be his saving Grace going forward.

---

I still think this is an unfair characterization. In the beginning, it was total fog of war and no one knew what the hell was happening. In hindsight, he also had people with very bad intentions who were trying to sabotage him. He pretty much reversed course after the initial round of spend and once we started realizing what the reality was.

The Democrats were the ones that ran with the ball and decided to 1984 it.

---

Exactly. Nobody can revise history that happened just 4 years ago.

---

It is revising history to say Trump "reversed course after the initial spend". He was pushing for a 3rd round of stimulus in fall 2020 and was pushing Congress to increase their initial number.

Trump was even more guilty of the 2020 spendapalozza than Congress.

---

You were against the spending to help businesses being shut down and people being out of work due to liberal shut downs in liberal cities and counties?

---

We needed 3 stimulus checks?

---

How much was needed? Please be specific and show your work.

---

The mind of a liberal. If Trump did nothing he is an evil *******. If he does something it's over the top.

We'll get the same now re: the border, Israel support, and Ukraine.

Muy said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Muy said:

---

YouBet said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Based on his handling of covid, I have a hard time seeing Trump see this one through. However he is surrounded by better people already, so that would be his saving Grace going forward.

---

I still think this is an unfair characterization. In the beginning, it was total fog of war and no one knew what the hell was happening. In hindsight, he also had people with very bad intentions who were trying to sabotage him. He pretty much reversed course after the initial round of spend and once we started realizing what the reality was.

The Democrats were the ones that ran with the ball and decided to 1984 it.

---

Exactly. Nobody can revise history that happened just 4 years ago.

---

It is revising history to say Trump "reversed course after the initial spend". He was pushing for a 3rd round of stimulus in fall 2020 and was pushing Congress to increase their initial number.

Trump was even more guilty of the 2020 spendapalozza than Congress.

---

You were against the spending to help businesses being shut down and people being out of work due to liberal shut downs in liberal cities and counties?

---

Hell yeah. Those liberal states and cities should have to pay for their own stupid policies. Not all of us.

Holy thread hijack, Batman. Why am I not shocked it's the normal posters doing it.

Logos Stick said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Muy said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

Muy said:

---

YouBet said:

---

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Based on his handling of covid, I have a hard time seeing Trump see this one through. However he is surrounded by better people already, so that would be his saving Grace going forward.

---

I still think this is an unfair characterization. In the beginning, it was total fog of war and no one knew what the hell was happening. In hindsight, he also had people with very bad intentions who were trying to sabotage him. He pretty much reversed course after the initial round of spend and once we started realizing what the reality was.

The Democrats were the ones that ran with the ball and decided to 1984 it.

---

Exactly. Nobody can revise history that happened just 4 years ago.

---

It is revising history to say Trump "reversed course after the initial spend". He was pushing for a 3rd round of stimulus in fall 2020 and was pushing Congress to increase their initial number.

Trump was even more guilty of the 2020 spendapalozza than Congress.

---

You were against the spending to help businesses being shut down and people being out of work due to liberal shut downs in liberal cities and counties?

---

We needed 3 stimulus checks?

---

How much was needed? Please be specific and show your work.

---

Considering most businesses were reopening by fall 2020, another stimulus check in the winter was just silly. Especially considering how they were given to everyone. Not just the unemployed.

Typical libs (Muy and Logos). Love government spending and handouts.

My bad, I'll stop, carry on!

Bryan98 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Helicopter Ben said:

---

The people crying about this and pushing these narratives are almost certainly the ones leeching on the govt largesse.

---

I've been told not to cry for Argentina.

---

Six people who don't know the words to the song starred this post.

---

Weak F16 humor causes Peyronie's Disease.