Roses In The Vineyard
Well-known member
- MBTI
- INFJ
I personally love the idea that we might start knowing what the government is and has been doing. There have been way too many secrets for far too long. I mean JFK was killed and we still don't know all of the details. He was literally the leader of our country and it's been hidden from us for more than a lifetime [for some people].
The secrets have become so entrenched that the idea of doing things to make us feel safe has become the very thing that makes people feel unsafe.
It does have the appearance that he's attempting to increase his value amongst the peoples opinion. By doing this he will increase confidence within the people as it pertains to his efforts. It's hard to know how much savings there will be at this point but I've heard rumblings between $1T and $5T. If it was 1T that would be approximately $3,000 for every person in the population. This would only marginally help the people for a short period of time. It could however increase support in his pursuit of corruption and that seems to be what he values most. The idea of buying support has always made me uncomfortable, this is especially true when I can't see the full scope of a persons intentions. It does however have a feeling of a Robin Hood story and I can't deny that some people (more than others) really need help. Yet, if we give $3000 to someone who has become addicted to Fentanyl then that could be a death sentence. The money itself would stimulate the economy through consumer spending and that in turn could increase jobs or possibly increase pay to a level that is back inline with prices. There's no way to know the true impact without the help of a highly complex economic model.Apparently Trump likes Musk's idea of distributing DOGE savings to American people as a stimmy check.
It's a populist move which it does nothing to address the national debt. It will pump stock market/Bitcoin though.
It does have the appearance that he's attempting to increase his value amongst the peoples opinion. By doing this he will increase confidence within the people as it pertains to his efforts. It's hard to know how much savings there will be at this point but I've heard rumblings between $1T and $5T. If it was 1T that would be approximately $3,000 for every person in the population. This would only marginally help the people for a short period of time. It could however increase support in his pursuit of corruption and that seems to be what he values most. The idea of buying support has always made me uncomfortable, this is especially true when I can't see the full scope of a persons intentions. It does however have a feeling of a Robin Hood story and I can't deny that some people (more than others) really need help. Yet, if we give $3000 to someone who has become addicted to Fentanyl then that could be a death sentence. The money itself would stimulate the economy through consumer spending and that in turn could increase jobs or possibly increase pay to a level that is back inline with prices. There's no way to know the true impact without the help of a highly complex economic model.
I'm perplexed.
I know it's an unpopular opinion but I personally like the idea of countries merging. For example, if the US, Canada, and Mexico all merged into a single country then there would be a diverse labor force, finance spread across a much larger population, and enhanced access to natural resources. This would be a big jump in the right direction for accelerating manufacturing and GDP growth. It would also push China out of Mexico and Canada and that would be a tremendous economic hit to their country. Of course, the cartels would have to be addressed immediately, and the providences would have to be convinced of their sovereignty. These are not terribly difficult things to overcome in the current economic conditions.I agree with you that many people would need a $3000 stimmy reprieve and it's definitely money much better spent than where it previously went, but at the same time it would shatter any idea that US is serious about it's national debt which would spike the interest on the future borrowing...it's a vicious circle. I think they should not do it, and I am sure that Scott Bessent is pushing strongly against this as treasury secretary.
It only makes sense if they somehow manage to accelerate productivity/GDP growth at the same time.
I know it's an unpopular opinion but I personally like the idea of countries merging. For example, if the US, Canada, and Mexico all merged into a single country then there would be a diverse labor force, finance spread across a much larger population, and enhanced access to natural resources. This would be a big jump in the right direction for accelerating manufacturing and GDP growth. It would also push China out of Mexico and Canada and that would be a tremendous economic hit to their country. Of course, the cartels would have to be addressed immediately, and the providences would have to be convinced of their sovereignty. These are not terribly difficult things to overcome in the current economic conditions.
Of course I'm speculating but there are signs of things moving in this direction.
I would relate it being similar to the EU in Europe. The obvious difference IMO would be that a merge with Canada would better fit if it were by providence rather than the entire country being a single state. People value their sovereignty and the providences in Canada carry distinct cultures (just like the states in the US and the countries in Europe). The same could be said for Mexico.Yeah, could be. I didn't really think about it that much but instinctually I agree with you. Definitely in the case of US and Canada. In Europe a bit harder due to so many different languages and national identities, although it worked quite well for the Habsburg monarchy or later Yugoslavia.