Bannon calls for "trillion-dollar" public works projects "rebuild everything"

[presence]

Mr. Bannon said in the interview that he expected Mr. Trump’s presidency would unsettle Republicans and Democrats alike with his aggressive and unconventional plans for rebuilding the country.


“I’m the guy pushing a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan,” Mr. Bannon said. “With negative interest rates throughout the world, it’s the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything.”


Predicting a change that will outshine the Reagan revolution, he added: “Ship yards, iron works, get them all jacked up. We’re just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks.”



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/us/politics/donald-trump-transition.html?_r=0


muh federal work programs!
muh state union contracts!
muh roads bitches!

[jmdrake]

Predicting a change that will outshine the Reagan revolution, he added: “Ship yards, iron works, get them all jacked up. We’re just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks.”

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

.
.
.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

[scm]

“With negative interest rates throughout the world, it’s the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything.”

just curious, what happens when rates DO go up (like they should).

[Chester Copperpot]

the only way this would be okay with me is if it were privately funded and thats highly doubtful..... trillion dollar spending is not what i wanted tbh trillion dollar cost cutting is what i wanted

[presence]

We’re just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks.


Is the kind of thing you do when selling clothing... you offer your product in 10 different colors, in limited production... see what sells best then mass produce the most popular color.

Not so much the thing you really want to do with billion dollar tax payer funded projects.

[Origanalist]

Time for another head on Mt. Rushmore?

[presence]

Time for another head on Mt. Rushmore?

https://www.change.org/p/donald-trump-put-donald-trump-s-face-on-mount-rushmore

[Origanalist]

https://www.change.org/p/donald-trump-put-donald-trump-s-face-on-mount-rushmore

Oh dear Lord. I wonder if a RPF member started it?

[scm]

billion dollar tax payer funded projects.
TRILLION with TR, billions is so 2015

[Occam's Banana]

just curious, what happens when rates DO go up (like they should).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijJiISi9P6U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijJiISi9P6U

[euphemia]

I thought this was everyone's liberty guy?

[The Gold Standard]

I thought this was everyone's liberty guy?

Hey, what says 'liberty' more than being lifted off the ground by your ankles and having every last penny shaken free from your pockets?

[juleswin]

Isn't Rand calling for something similar?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmDBI87H9gw

Cutting in military spending but again spending billions to rebuild infrastructure.

[specsaregood]

the only way this would be okay with me is if it were privately funded and thats highly doubtful..... trillion dollar spending is not what i wanted tbh trillion dollar cost cutting is what i wanted

well at the same time given the choice of spending billions building roads and bridges overseas vs. spending it here at home; I'll take the latter. So lets see if he manages to cut that overseas spending first.

Or there are the infrastructure projects Randal has been promoting by giving tax breaks for bringing money back from overseas and using those new funds on infrastructure projects.

There are ways this could be made acceptable to all but the total anarchist. (ok, maybe not ok for trillions but that's most likely just hyperbole)

[The Gold Standard]

Isn't Rand calling for something similar?

Cutting in military spending but again spending money to rebuild infrastructure.

Ron talked about bringing all of the troops home and using that money here too. I wouldn't like it, but if that's what Trump was going to do, I could live with it. Of course, that's exactly what Trump is not going to do.

[scm]

I thought this was everyone's liberty guy?
They like the word "anti" establishment or "OUTSIDER" but they never use, Liberty. They know he has NOTHING to do with Liberty. If they used that word, people would figure out what it is.

[juleswin]

Ron talked about bringing all of the troops home and using that money here too. I wouldn't like it, but if that's what Trump was going to do, I could live with it. Of course, that's exactly what Trump is not going to do.

Yes, Ron's plan is better than Rand and Rand's better than Trump's but they are in the same vein of spending money to rebuilt national infrastructure. I was mainly addressing the people outraged by his plan on spending money on public works. Yea, govt would be the one to do it cos no sane business person would spend their hard earned money fixing govt property that they have no ownership off.

[AuH20]

I thought this was everyone's liberty guy?

He is. He's preventing a permanent globalist takeover of the country. We have three choices as I see it. Follow Bannon with his bold plan, explore secession or wait until it gets so bad that the Nazi solution starts to materialize. Choice #1 is far less bloodier than the other two.

People don't realize that Nazism was the reactionary response to highly aggressive Bolshevism that was gathering momentum in the East. I hope we never even contemplate that path. But it will come if the globalists continue to push.

[randomname]

so, national socialism?

[AuH20]

so, national socialism?

Not exactly.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2016/11/04/donald_trump_s_plan_to_privatize_america_s_roads_a nd_bridges.html


Under Trump's plan—at least as it's written (more on that in a minute)—the federal government would offer tax credits to private investors interested in funding large infrastructure projects, who would put down some of their own money up front, then borrow the rest on the private bond markets. They would eventually earn their profits on the back end from usage fees, such as highway and bridge tolls (if they built a highway or bridge) or higher water rates (if they fixed up some water mains). So instead of paying for their new roads at tax time, Americans would pay for them during their daily commute. And of course, all these private developers would earn a nice return at the end of the day.

[scm]

so, national socialism?
What else were you expecting from someone that recognizes MORE with DEMONkRATS.

[AuH20]

so, national socialism?

Like I said. No.

https://www.marketplace.org/2016/11/14/elections/federal-agencies-expecting-big-cuts-under-trump

[otherone]

I thought this was everyone's liberty guy?

https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder615/500x/73292615.jpg

[undergroundrr]

We're going to be a nation of government toll roads.

[Occam's Banana]

Bailouts are bad, mmm'kay? It doesn't matter if we're talking about shipyards or subprime mortgages ...


“I’m the guy pushing a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan,” Mr. Bannon said. “With negative interest rates throughout the world, it’s the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything.”

Predicting a change that will outshine the Reagan revolution, he added: “Ship yards, iron works, get them all jacked up. We’re just going to throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks."

:rolleyes: Will these idiots never learn?
(I am giving Bannon the benefit of the doubt here by assuming ignorance on his part rather than corruption.)

Robbing Peter to pay Paul - so that Paul can pay Peter ... :rolleyes:
But what of the rest of us who are not in a position to receive Paul's (i.e., Bannon's) largesse?
I guess we're just saps to be further mulcted and drained for the benefit of ship builders and ironmongers. Amirite?

And one can already hear the rustling wings of the corrupt chiselers and other buzzards as they prepare to launch themselves to circle overhead ...

Never mind any of that, though.

Entirely apart from the "robbing Peter" and "cronyist boondoggle" angles, what happens when the spigot is turned off and all those artificially "jacked up" areas have to stand on their own?

What kind of messianic demagoguery will we be in for then? Will we be offered yet another "revolutionary" plan, announced by yet another mouthpiece of yet another "Dear Leader" (who will employ the sublime puissance of government to "save" us)?

We roundly mocked Obama for his "you didn't build that" bullshit.

When it gets right down to it, how is this any different?

[mrsat_98]

Ron talked about bringing all of the troops home and using that money here too. I wouldn't like it, but if that's what Trump was going to do, I could live with it. Of course, that's exactly what Trump is not going to do.

Trump will suck less than Clinton, deal with it.

[AuH20]

Trump will suck less than Clinton, deal with it.

There is no pure liberty solution available to us. It's gone. The people have been corrupted. It's about being as deceptive as the left at this point. Tell them one thing, gain power and then employ the reforms while they sleep. I would use infrastructure enhancements as an entire gateway to other cost cutting and government reduction avenues.

[angelatc]

just curious, what happens when rates DO go up (like they should).

He's on record as saying he wants to crash the system. But if they issue bonds....those are fixed income instruments.

[angelatc]

When it gets right down to it, how is this any different?

Maybe they'll fix it up then flip it :D

[undergroundrr]

It's about being as deceptive as the left at this point.

Which inevitably leads to becoming your enemy.


I would use infrastructure enhancements as an entire gateway to other cost cutting and government reduction avenues.

Exhibit A - pure progressive policy wonkery.

[Dr.3D]

Isn't it better to rebuild it a little at a time so when the time comes to do it again, it doesn't seem like such a big job?

[AuH20]

[QUOTE=AuH20;6365882]It's about being as deceptive as the left at this point.[QUOTE]

Which inevitably leads to becoming your enemy.



Exhibit A - pure progressive policy wonkery.

It's called pivoting, so we can get policies like this. Jobs and infrastructure will keep Trump and his camp in the White House.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/11/11/trump-to-support-nationwide-concealed-carry/

[openfire]

just curious, what happens when rates DO go up (like they should).

Either the bond bubble implodes and takes down the global financial system, or, much more likely, the Fed steps in and resumes their bond purchases to drive down yields, ie, QE4.

[undergroundrr]

Isn't it better to rebuild it a little at a time so when the time comes to do it again, it doesn't seem like such a big job?

That, and returning infrastructure responsibility to the states, while lowering federal spending and taxes so states can take care of their own.

A massive infrastructure project like this is classic corporatist redistribution.

This nation is about to go on its most massive spending spree ever. The collapse will come on trump's (aka Republicans', aka conservatives', aka libertarians') watch.

[milgram]

http://i.imgur.com/ttCTuCl.jpg

Interest rates are so low we'd be crazy not to borrow right now

[fcreature]

Ya know, I'm really tired of these purists cucks on RPF not wanting to get anything done.

Trump knows construction. Let him MAGA.

[undergroundrr]

Remember that trump has been clear on wanting to increase military spending as well.

There is no discussion of meaningful spending cuts except for a federal hiring hiatus. Which doesn't sound feasible in light of all the new spending programs.

[The Gold Standard]

Trump will suck less than Clinton, deal with it.

Triggered another one, I see. How loud would you be crying about Hillary's public works plans?

[The Gold Standard]

just curious, what happens when rates DO go up (like they should).

Default, hyperinflation, or both.

[undergroundrr]

Big government Republicans are so much better when they call themselves nationalists and stand up for white rights. Go Bannon, MWAGA!

[Spikender]

As mentioned before, this fits with Bannon's "collapsing" the system belief. I don't really see any other "benefit" to this plan.

[misterx]

Honestly, as much as I hate government spending, it's too late to get through this responsibly. I say rebuild everything and then default.

[Sola_Fide]

Hey Everyone! It's the 2016 New Deal!

Onward for liberty!


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Sola_Fide]

Big government Republicans are so much better when they call themselves nationalists and stand up for white rights. Go Bannon, MWAGA!

White power!


Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[undergroundrr]

Honestly, as much as I hate government spending, it's too late to get through this responsibly. I say rebuild everything and then default.

Thank goodness it will be spent on the military and infrastructure. Default? More likely President Warren will just raise taxes when she's in office in 2020.

Maybe we'll steal enough oil to make up the difference. If that doesn't cost more than 10 or 20,000 military casualties, it could be a wash.

[CCTelander]

Hey Everyone! It's the 2016 New Deal!

Onward for liberty!


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


More like "Screw Deal."

[misterx]

Thank goodness it will be spent on the military and infrastructure. Default? More likely President Warren will just raise taxes when she's in office in 2020.

Maybe we'll steal enough oil to make up the difference. If that doesn't cost more than 10 or 20,000 military casualties, it could be a wash.

Dems won't be back in power in 2020. You thought they would win this year. They will have a much harder road in 2020. You can only raise taxes so much, we are not taxing our way out of this. Everyone knows default is inevitable.

[Krugminator2]

Isn't Rand calling for something similar?

Cutting in military spending but again spending billions to rebuild infrastructure.

No. Some bridge between Kentucky and Ohio needs to be repaired and apparently it was a big issue in Kentucky. He had to make it look like he was doing something about it. He wasn't going to support an increased gas tax and he is against earmarks. The solution he came up with was to allow corporations with money that was earned and taxed overseas to bring it back to the US and pay 5% instead of being double taxed at the corporate rate. He then proposed using that tax revenue for the infrastructure fund which would used to pay for the new bridge.

[robert68]

799960565452079104

[devil21]

Sounds like the infamous "helicopter money".


Default, hyperinflation, or both.

Same thing, but yeah. Deflationary period now, stock markets take a big hit starting next month with rate hike, creates justification for helicopter money to reinflate, which is the last gasp for the current reserve dollar. Hyperinflate to pay off old debt with the cheap new money, then nationalize the Fed and repudiate (default) all debt held by the Fed and outstanding. End of the petro reserve dollar. Start over. Say hello to new Chinese overlords.

[AuH20]

Dems won't be back in power in 2020. You thought they would win this year. They will have a much harder road in 2020. You can only raise taxes so much, we are not taxing our way out of this. Everyone knows default is inevitable.

Dems are in deep trouble. Look at the ideas that the universal progs are floating.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/19/uk-researchers-tax-food-to-reduce-climate-change/

[Kotin]

if they are offset by cutting our expenditures overseas and we stop building infrastructure in other countries, then maybe they can do this right but I doubt they will try to avoid adding to the debt with this..

[undergroundrr]

Yeah. I haven't seen a good explanation for that 30s quote. I guess Robert A. Taft and Taft's hero Herbert Hoover were active at the time. Has he heard of Taft?

Does he have any positions other than white rights and immigration criticism? He doesn't seem to express any of the "shrink government" and "cut spending" and "get government out of our wallets" and "end the wars" kind of things that perk up fiscal conservative/libertarian ears. It's all culture war stuff.

[AuH20]

Honestly, as much as I hate government spending, it's too late to get through this responsibly. I say rebuild everything and then default.

It's more about staying in power until they can secure close to 60 senate seats. 2018 will be a pickup year with all the exposed seats. Then go hogwild with reforms. Bannon knows what he's doing.

[Sola_Fide]

It's more about staying in power until they can secure close to 60 senate seats. Then go hogwild with reforms. Bannon knows what he's doing.

AuH20,

Do you agree or disagree with a trillion dollar works project?

[AuH20]

AuH20,

Do you agree or disagree with a trillion dollar works project?

If it means a 2nd term, then yes. Absolutely. Do it. Creatively outsource it to private organizations and share the burden.

[eleganz]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought what they were thinking was incentivizing companies to invest in infrastructure via tax credits.

[Sola_Fide]

If it means a 2nd term, then yes. Absolutely. Do it. Creatively outsource it to private organizations and share the burden.

Hahahahahahahaha

wow bro

[DamianTV]

If this is all really the case, then what needs to be seen is a "Trillion Dollar Blackmail Enabler" program.

This is no different than the Fed Gov threatening to pull Federal Highway Funding for individual states unless those states change their laws to comply with the demands of the Fed Gov. Lower your Blood Alcohol Level for Drunk Driving from 0.1 to 0.08 or we will cut your Federal Highway Funding. Make Pot illegal or we will cut your Federal Funding. Pass Common Core or we will cut your Federal School Funding.

Be VERY careful how you choose to perceive this.

[AuH20]

Hahahahahahahaha

wow bro

I'm willing to take a hit on a private/public joint venture on infrastructure improvement so they can tackle the big items.

1. Reduce the corporate tax rate and offer a onetime tax holiday for corporate dollars stashed abroad
2. Audit the Pentagon
3. Phase out the import-export bank
4. pass CCW nationwide
5. diversify the budgetary support for NATO

[Sola_Fide]

I'm willing to take a hit on a private/public joint venture on infrastructure improvement so they tackle the big items.

1. Reduce the corporate tax rate and offer a onetime tax holiday for corporate dollars stashed abroad.
2. Audit the Pentagon
3. Phase out the import-export bank
4. pass CCW nationwide
5. diversify the budget support of NATO

You have gone off the rails bro. If Trump called for a single payer health care system, you'd find some way to argue that it was for liberty.

it's sad to watch actually....

[undergroundrr]

share the burden.

That is such an overtly communist sentiment. But in this case, it's corporatism funded by the taxpayers sharing the burden. Not calling you a name there, just an observation.

It just seems like a far, far way to stretch to validate this new regime.

[AuH20]

You have gone off the rails bro. If Trump called for a single payer health care system, you'd find some way to argue that it was for liberty.

it's sad to watch actually....

Single payer is an utter disaster in the UK. The NHS is the fifth largest employer in the world. There is no incentive to cut costs as middle management just grows to infinitude.

[Sola_Fide]

Single payer is an utter disaster in the UK. The NHS is the fifth largest employer in the world. There is no incentive to cut costs as middle management just grows to infinitude.

Be careful what you say. Trump and his team are just getting started. You should have never put yourself in this situation.

[CPUd]

It's more about staying in power until they can secure close to 60 senate seats. 2018 will be a pickup year with all the exposed seats. Then go hogwild with reforms. Bannon knows what he's doing.

LOL this is like bringing in guys who advocated for the draft to make sure we never have a draft.

[GunnyFreedom]

If it means a 2nd term, then yes. Absolutely. Do it. Creatively outsource it to private organizations and share the burden.

I don't believe a Republican "New Deal" is going to work out any better than HooveRoosevelt's did.

Something which a lot of people do not know, actually, is that Roosevelt's New Deal was really an expansion of Hoover's interventionist policies that created the Great Depression in the first place.

They say Hoover made the Depression by failing to intervene? Ever hear of the California Aqueduct? Or maybe, the Hoover Dam? lol


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfeHWnaK7rY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWAgt_YCNuw

WPA21 New Deal 3.0 If this happens it would make Trump the new Hoover.

Trump Dam anybody?

[Origanalist]

I'm starting to think some of the posterd here would take a stick right up their ass for. X x x and a win in 2020 because then by God these heroes are really going to tear it up.

Un freaking real.

[tod evans]

Trump Dam anybody?

How many Messicans need to go through one of the turbines to make 1KW of 'lectricity? ;)

[GunnyFreedom]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought what they were thinking was incentivizing companies to invest in infrastructure via tax credits.

Even if this were the case (which they always say it will be but it never winds up that way at the end) you still have to understand that when you rob from Peter to incentivise Paul, it's the same as spending. It's a little more palatable to the right wing to account for it like that, but because all funds are fungible on balance it amounts to the same as spending.

[GunnyFreedom]

How many Messicans need to go through one of the turbines to make 1KW of 'lectricity? ;)

Well, now we know what that "Big Beautiful Door" is all about.

[Seraphim]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought what they were thinking was incentivizing companies to invest in infrastructure via tax credits.

Yes, this infrastructure plan is not simply printing up a trillion and going on with it. It's about managing private and public money and creating incentivest to move into rebuilding America's woefully lagging infrastructure.

Combined with his plan to bring troops home en masse and shut down useless foreign bases I get the sense that spending may be very similar or go down a bit overall BUT the money spent will 100x more productive.

I'm an ancap overall so the thought of government spending doesn't make me feel all warm and fuzzy BUT turning that spending over to productive means that actually benefit Americans is exponentially better then the current state of affairs.

[AuH20]

I don't believe a Republican "New Deal" is going to work out any better than HooveRoosevelt's did.

Something which a lot of people do not know, actually, is that Roosevelt's New Deal was really an expansion of Hoover's interventionist policies that created the Great Depression in the first place.

They say Hoover made the Depression by failing to intervene? Ever hear of the California Aqueduct? Or maybe, the Hoover Dam? lol


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfeHWnaK7rY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWAgt_YCNuw

WPA21 New Deal 3.0 If this happens it would make Trump the new Hoover.

Trump Dam anybody?

Yes, I am well aware.

Let's face facts. Infrastructure = votes. The public is more responsive to physical infrastructure as opposed to abstract ideas. Infrastructure can provide an everlasting advertising narrative for a campaign.

[CCTelander]

I'm starting to think some of the posterd here would take a stick right up their ass for. X x x and a win in 2020 because then by God these heroes are really going to tear it up.

Un freaking real.


"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Origanalist again."

[Seraphim]

Even if this were the case (which they always say it will be but it never winds up that way at the end) you still have to understand that when you rob from Peter to incentivise Paul, it's the same as spending. It's a little more palatable to the right wing to account for it like that, but because all funds are fungible on balance it amounts to the same as spending.

This isn't about quantity of spending it's about quality of spending. Bombing brown people or building America.

I'd love nothing more then to see spending drop enormously, especially below the deficit threshold (AND DOWN TO NEAR 0!). BUT between deficits used to spread war and empire vs deficits used to rebuild infrastructure that is desperately in need I don't think it's even close as to which is better.

The former was happening under Clinton 100%. The latter is now a legitimate possibility.

I've heard RON PAUL on numerous occasions elude to the fact that ending empire spreading could instantly make America's social programs affordable and that although not a perfect scenario it would be exponentially better then the current state.

I'm taking that position for now. Trump's policies are not baby steps toward better policy, they are gigantic leaps toward a CONDITION that will allow true American values to be re-established - and in the process actually tackles deep needs that America current has.

[AuH20]

The main reason why our infrastructure is failing because many governors and state legislature have diverted infrastructure funds to other areas. The funds were always there.

[Seraphim]

The main reason why our infrastructure is failing because many governors and state legislature have diverted infrastructure funds to other areas.

Yes. Waiting for the Feds to do it. Meanwhile the Feds use the money to blow the world up.

Trumps plan is not about the Feds coming in and doing everything - it's about getting the private sector, States and Cities on board with his plan and helping to to get shit done that needs to get done.

[undergroundrr]

his plan to bring troops home en masse and shut down useless foreign bases

Woah woah woah. Link please. Yeah, I know he thinks we should negotiate for countries to pay to keep our bases there. That's a big difference from what you're suggesting as his position.

I definitely want to see any evidence that trump will reduce overall military spending to offset these enormous domestic programs. His stated position (https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/O-TRU-102316-Contractv02.pdf) is "eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment."

[Occam's Banana]

Even if this were the case (which they always say it will be but it never winds up that way at the end) you still have to understand that when you rob from Peter to incentivise Paul, it's the same as spending. It's a little more palatable to the right wing to account for it like that, but because all funds are fungible on balance it amounts to the same as spending.

Exactly this ^^^.

Someone has to pay for the shortfall in revenues (namely, all of us Peters who aren't on Bannon's favorites list).

It does no good to cut taxes by X if you don't cut spending by X (or better yet, X + Y).

Otherwise, "tax credits" are just camouflage for a Three-card Monte con game ...

[Seraphim]

Woah woah woah. Link please. Yeah, I know he thinks we should negotiate for countries to pay to keep our bases there. That's a big difference from what you're suggesting as his position.

I definitely want to see any evidence that trump will reduce overall military spending to offset these enormous domestic programs. His stated position (https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/O-TRU-102316-Contractv02.pdf) is "eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment."

Yes I know he wants to rebuild the military - like Reagan did. My point is that if he actually gets what he wants done the cost of foreign military intervention will drop substantially. I did NOT mean that he wanted to reduce the overall military budget (I'm inclined to think a slight reduction will occur but nothing huge).

The point was he wants to turn the way things are run upside down and dramatically increase the QUALITY of the spending that is enacted.

America's military and military capital are quite weak and need to be rebuilt. Much of the ridiculous POLICE THE WORLD spending has served to do nothing but turn America into a pariah that is making itself weaker and weaker with each passing year.

If you knew that military spending would remain the same but that aggressive foreign policy would be reversed, most troops brought home and overseas spending replaced with spending at home, would you not view this as an enormous win for America (and the world)?

That's the overall view of things I have right now. Will it play out like that? Maybe not. But for the first time in a LONG time there is legit HOPE for mass scale reversal of terrible policy.

The Liberty movement (people around here for example) will play a key role in making sure a Trump presidency does more good then harm. I really think the man listens to those around him - including your elected representatives. I truly believe he wants to hear from YOU before he listens to a lobbyist.

Take advantage. I think America's direction over the next few years can (and will) be redirected to something far, far superior to the status quo of the last 70? years.

Time will tell. I'm hopeful (for the first time in my life).

I'm hoping the Liberty movement does not waste this opportunity because who the hell knows when anything like it may come around again.

[The Gold Standard]

If this happens it would make Trump the new Hoover.

Pretty sure that's the plan. It's the reason the media pushed him through the primaries and rallied Republicans behind him in the general. The coming crash could very well make the Great Depression look like a boom time. Government approved history books will reflect on the failure of Trump and the "market economy" for generations to come, and they will celebrate the triumph of democratic socialism for saving us.

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm starting to think some of the posterd here would take a stick right up their ass for. X x x and a win in 2020 because then by God these heroes are really going to tear it up.

Un freaking real.


http://i.imgur.com/XDnN7c2.png

http://i.imgur.com/mpnsJle.png

[undergroundrr]

This "trump listens to MEEEE" crap is driving me batty.


military spending would remain the same but that aggressive foreign policy would be reversed, most troops brought home and overseas spending replaced with spending at home

Re-edit that sentence please. The boldfaced phrases are contradictory.

So is equating "eliminating the defense sequester" (trump) and "millitary (sic) spending would remain the same" (Seraphim).

[AuH20]

Dems angry that Trump's infrastructure plan includes too many private sector elements.

http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/infrastructure/306889-top-obama-aide-trumps-infrastructure-plan-is-a-trap


A former top figure in the Obama administration is warning Democrats not to back President-elect Donald Trump’s infrastructure plan, calling it a “trap” that “they will regret.”

“Backing Trump’s plan is a mistake in policy and political judgment they will regret, as did their Democratic predecessors who voted for Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts in 1981 and George W. Bush’s cuts in 2001,” Ronald Klain wrote in a Washington Post op-ed Friday.

Klain, who advised Hillary Clinton’s recent campaign, said Trump’s proposal is neither a jobs nor infrastructure plan.

“Instead, Trump’s plan provides tax breaks to private-sector investors who back profitable construction projects,” he said.

Klain emphasized that the Trump plan will “undermine core Democratic principles” and that Democrat votes for it “will not wear well in the future.” He argued that the plan does not directly fund infrastructure projects like new roads or airports.

“Because the plan subsidizes investors, not projects; because it funds tax breaks, not bridges; because there’s no requirement that the projects be otherwise unfunded, there is simply no guarantee that the plan will produce any net new hiring,” he added.

The former Obama official noted that Democrats are both looking for ways to work with the President-elect and to appeal to white working class voters who helped flip the election for Trump. But Klain maintained that the infrastructure plan would add to the deficit, while helping investors and not workers.

“But when the plan is passed and those voters see that it fattens investors’ and contractors’ pockets (but not workers’), creates few jobs, depresses wages and damages our environment, they will sour on it and turn against its backers,” he wrote.

[GunnyFreedom]

This isn't about quantity of spending it's about quality of spending. Bombing brown people or building America.

“The Great Society asks, not how much, but how good.” - Lyndon B. Johnson


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuuEFTgodc8

Johnson's Great Society was "New Deal 2.0" which is why I am calling this latest proposal "New Deal 3.0"


I'd love nothing more then to see spending drop enormously, especially below the deficit threshold (AND DOWN TO NEAR 0!). BUT between deficits used to spread war and empire vs deficits used to rebuild infrastructure that is desperately in need I don't think it's even close as to which is better.

The former was happening under Clinton 100%. The latter is now a legitimate possibility.

I've heard RON PAUL on numerous occasions elude to the fact that ending empire spreading could instantly make America's social programs affordable and that although not a perfect scenario it would be exponentially better then the current state.

Ron Paul was trying to convince people to accept less overseas and interventionist spending. That was the entire point of his argument. There is not even an attempt to make such a point here.


I'm taking that position for now. Trump's policies are not baby steps toward better policy, they are gigantic leaps toward a CONDITION that will allow true American values to be re-established - and in the process actually tackles deep needs that America current has.

The New Deal is neither baby steps, nor better policy. It did not work for Hoover. It did not work for Roosevelt. It did not work for Johnson. It did not work for Bush. It did not work for Obama. It will not work for Trump.

[CPUd]

http://i.imgur.com/XDnN7c2.png

http://i.imgur.com/mpnsJle.png

LOL thread winner

[juleswin]

This "trump listens to MEEEE" crap is driving me batty.



Re-edit that sentence please. The boldfaced phrases are contradictory.

So is equating "eliminating the defense sequester" (trump) and "millitary (sic) spending would remain the same" (Seraphim).

Maybe he is talking about building more shipyards, military bases, naval docks etc at home with the money saved from bringing troops home. The bolded parts are not necessarily contradictory.

Ofc we all know that is not going to happen, they would build all of that while not reducing enough in foreign adventurism to offset the new spending.

[Seraphim]

“The Great Society asks, not how much, but how good.” - Lyndon B. Johnson


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuuEFTgodc8

Johnson's Great Society was "New Deal 2.0" which is why I am calling this latest proposal "New Deal 3.0"



Ron Paul was trying to convince people to accept less overseas and interventionist spending. That was the entire point of his argument. There is not even an attempt to make such a point here.



The New Deal is neither baby steps, nor better policy. It did not work for Hoover. It did not work for Roosevelt. It did not work for Johnson. It did not work for Bush. It did not work for Obama. It will not work for Trump.

Did these colossal failures include private/voluntary capital to rebuild tangible infrastructure that the US needs?

[Seraphim]

Maybe he is talking about building more shipyards, military bases, naval docks etc at home with the money saved from bringing troops home. The bolded parts are not necessarily contradictory.

Ofc we all know that is not going to happen, they would build all of that while not reducing enough in foreign adventurism to offset the new spending.

Thank you. This is what I meant. Save 1$ in Syria to spend it in America on infrastructure and capital needed in America to protect America.

As you pointed out, it may not offset the spending. It probably won't. That would be a disappointment.

[Seraphim]

You have gone off the rails bro. If Trump called for a single payer health care system, you'd find some way to argue that it was for liberty.

it's sad to watch actually....

If Trump repealed ACA and replaced it with a single payer system I would be very disappointed and I would not argue it was a good thing. I don't think AuH20 would either.

[GunnyFreedom]

Did these colossal failures include private/voluntary capital to rebuild tangible infrastructure that the US needs?

You do understand that if the government does it, it's not private, right?

[Seraphim]

You do understand that if the government does it, it's not private, right?

Dude his infrastructure plan as of now is centered on luring PRIVATE CAPITAL INVESTMENT. It's a mix right now. Do I LOVE it? NO. Is it monumentally better then prior/current policy. Holy shit yes.

[CPUd]

shovel ready

[AuH20]

If Trump repealed ACA and replaced it with a single payer system I would be very disappointed and I would not argue it was a good thing. I don't think AuH20 would either.

Not only is the single payer concept wasteful, but we would be essentially stuck with it for life. Infrastructure is a one shot deal. We'd be ripping off the bandaid once.

[GunnyFreedom]

Dude his infrastructure plan as of now is centered on luring PRIVATE CAPITAL INVESTMENT. It's a mix right now. Do I LOVE it? NO. Is it monumentally better then prior/current policy. Holy shit yes.

And how does your President plan to coerce private capital into investing in this latest goobermint ponzi scheme?

[Seraphim]

And how does your President plan to coerce private capital into investing in this latest goobermint ponzi scheme?

No...it appears the infrastructure bank will simply be a place for private capital to deposit money into the bank for the purpose of deploying that capital for infrastructure.

[CCTelander]

shovel ready


Gonna take a bulldozer to put a dent in the shit that's piling up around here lately. SMGDH

[GunnyFreedom]

And how does your President plan to coerce private capital into investing in this latest goobermint ponzi scheme?


No...it appears the infrastructure bank will simply be a place for private capital to deposit money into the bank for the purpose of deploying that capital for infrastructure.

And how does your President plan to coerce private capital into investing in this latest goobermint "infrastructure bank" ponzi scheme?

[Seraphim]

And how does your President plan to coerce private capital into investing in this latest goobermint "infrastructure bank" ponzi scheme?

Huh? lol this is getting ridiculous.

If little money is parked in the bank, so be it. I'm a voluntarist. If a government initiates a project and opens the project to private investment and private money is not coerced, then the plan is exponentially better then a government spending plan that just prints/debtors it's way through the process.

[GunnyFreedom]

http://i.imgur.com/l2ihYm1.jpg

[jmdrake]

Isn't Rand calling for something similar?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmDBI87H9gw

Cutting in military spending but again spending billions to rebuild infrastructure.

Billions...versus trillion. It takes 1,000 billions to get to 1 trillion.

[GunnyFreedom]

Huh? lol this is getting ridiculous.

Yes, your magical thinking is extraordinarily ridiculous. Private businesses are just going to fork over trillions of dollars to an "Infrastructure Bank" because......

Pink unicorns?


If little money is parked in the bank, so be it.

I believe you have made your personal feelings on this ponzi scheme abundantly clear.


I'm a voluntarist.

lol!


If a government initiates a project and opens the project to private investment and private money is not coerced,

The theft of taxpayer funds to incentivize corporations to join a socialist Works Project Administration Redux is not coercion? You may need to return your Voluntaryist Card to the club secretary.


then the plan is exponentially better then a government spending plan that just prints/debtors it's way through the process.

Getting a bullet in the arm is exponentially better than getting a bullet in the chest. Nevertheless, you do not see me out shilling for getting shot in the arm.

[GunnyFreedom]

So, ITT Donald Trump's "Chief Strategist" proposes that we enact the bastard child of the New Deal and the Great Society, a plan apparently now backed (or at least unopposed) by some alleged fiscal conservatives, alleged small government conservatives, former libertarians, and former voluntaryists.

This is why we keep saying stuff like...

http://i.imgur.com/mpnsJle.png

[TheCount]

No...it appears the infrastructure bank will simply be a place for private capital to deposit money into the bank for the purpose of deploying that capital for infrastructure.


Who is going to pay the interest on that private money to give investors their return on investment?

The fact that you somehow think that this is free is hilarious to me.

[Seraphim]

Yes, your magical thinking is extraordinarily ridiculous. Private businesses are just going to fork over trillions of dollars to an "Infrastructure Bank" because......

Pink unicorns?



I believe you have made your personal feelings on this ponzi scheme abundantly clear.



lol!



The theft of taxpayer funds to incentivize corporations to join a socialist Works Project Administration Redux is not coercion? You may need to return your Voluntaryist Card to the club secretary.



Getting a bullet in the arm is exponentially better than getting a bullet in the chest. Nevertheless, you do not see me out shilling for getting shot in the arm.

No, I just think there is more private money out there that WANTS to invest in America but has been legally blocked NOT TO by Fed.GOV.

Trump has pledged specific policies and ideas that REPEAL SO MUCH OF THE SHIT PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND I HAVE BEEN RAILING ON FOR A LONG TIME (paleo/libertarian/small government/constitutionalists)

REPEAL REPEAL REPEAL has been the mantra, overall.

American companies have not been fleeing America because they don't want to be there...they have been fleeing bc FED.GOV has been chasing them away!!!

Most American companies can't wait to get back to America but they've been waiting for a President to repeal hostile laws and make America a positive business environment!!!

There are no unicorns. There are POLICIES, historical context and some basic economic reasoning that indicate that the real legal overhaul Trump has pledged turns America from the least competitive first world nation to the MOST competitive.

Do you not see or understand that his pledged tax reform and repealing of NAFTA and just about all the regulations enacted over the last few decades turns America into a desirable hub of economic activity?

Seriously man. He has pledged a 15% flat income and corporate tax rate. From there he has pledged further tax reductions from an already drastically lowered rate if you invest into American infrastructure.

The amount of money that has been chased away from America in the last 25 years has been decimating to America. The reality is most if not all of this money has been itching to get back into America should the tides of policy change.

Trump has PLEDGED a massive reversal in policy.

I'm not talking about pink unicorns. I'm talking about hundreds of billions of dollars worldwide that at the end of the day wants to be in America but has not been because FED.GOV has chased it away.

FED.GOV has literally attacked capital and forced it out of America.

Trump has PLEDGED.

Ok man got it? PLEDGED. It still needs to get done. The man hasn't even started his term. I'm not going ZOMG TRUMP IS THE SAVIOR.

But his pledged policy proposals CHANGE EVERYTHING.

Capital will begin immediately flowing back into America. Bit by bit. And steadily.

America will go from the worst tax rate in the 1st world to the best.

The economic implications of this are enormous.

Do you understand just how much PRIVATE capital will be able to be deployed throughout America as the result of his economic plan?

The answer is a lot.

And the answer is a far greater number then 1 trillion my friend.

[TheTexan]

"I’m the guy pushing a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan,” Mr. Bannon said. “With negative interest rates throughout the world, it’s the greatest opportunity to rebuild everything.”


https://media1.giphy.com/media/MVDPX3gaKFPuo/200w.gif#73

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/bc/ef/88/bcef88cdae479c98d795acf3de6878a9.jpg

http://3blmedia.com/media/images/149283445.jpg

http://i.picresize.com/images/2016/11/19/rH9aU.jpg

https://media1.giphy.com/media/10avjPZP9kwSs0/200.gif#3

[GunnyFreedom]

Who is going to pay the interest on that private money to give investors their return on investment?

The fact that you somehow think that this is free is hilarious to me.

It's gonna come from his stash.

[Seraphim]

Who is going to pay the interest on that private money to give investors their return on investment?

The fact that you somehow think that this is free is hilarious to me.

Congratulations. You argued that I said this was free and I never said any such thing. Well done. Well done.

[TheCount]

Congratulations. You argued that I said this was free and I never said any such thing. Well done. Well done.


Well, you kept acting like it's somehow not government or taxpayer money.

Would you care to explain to us what makes this strategy better for the taxpayer than selling Treasury bonds instead?

[undergroundrr]

Trump has pledged specific policies and ideas that REPEAL SO MUCH OF THE $#@! PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND I HAVE BEEN RAILING ON FOR A LONG TIME (paleo/libertarian/small government/constitutionalists)

Seriously man. He has pledged a 15% flat income and corporate tax rate. From there he has pledged further tax reductions from an already drastically lowered rate if you invest into American infrastructure.

Trump has PLEDGED a massive reversal in policy.

Trump has PLEDGED.

Ok man got it? PLEDGED. It still needs to get done. The man hasn't even started his term. I'm not going ZOMG TRUMP IS THE SAVIOR.

But his pledged policy proposals CHANGE EVERYTHING.

Okay, this is a spoof account. I get it. You got us, dude(ette?). Good one.

[Seraphim]

Who is going to pay the interest on that private money to give investors their return on investment?

The fact that you somehow think that this is free is hilarious to me.

Tax payers pay the interest. As it always has been. Is that state of affairs vanishing anytime soon? I'd like it to be so but that process will take time. Probably a lot of time. It seems overall I'm the one being realistic and pragmatic and attempting to be EFFECTIVE.

I also think that if Trump gets 8 years he will oversee a substantial amount of default issues in America, public and private. I think it's probable he will get a lot of that in a 4 year term. Lots of public debt in America is about to be defaulted and/or restructured in my view.

The man has dealt with strategic default in his life and has shown to be very savvy in defaulting when it is the intelligent thing to do, saving key assets and getting back on your feet quickly and efficiently.

[Seraphim]

Okay, this is a spoof account. I get it. You got us, dude(ette?). Good one.

No, I've just paid attention to his policies as a whole.

[GunnyFreedom]

No, I just think there is more private money out there that WANTS to invest in America but has been legally blocked NOT TO by Fed.GOV.

Trump has pledged specific policies and ideas that REPEAL SO MUCH OF THE SHIT PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND I HAVE BEEN RAILING ON FOR A LONG TIME (paleo/libertarian/small government/constitutionalists)

REPEAL REPEAL REPEAL has been the mantra, overall.

lol good luck with that. :)


American companies have not been fleeing America because they don't want to be there...they have been fleeing bc FED.GOV has been chasing them away!!!

Most American companies can't wait to get back to America but they've been waiting for a President to repeal hostile laws and make America a positive business environment!!!

There are no unicorns.

...says the guy trying to make private companies spend a trillion dollars on an "Infrastructure Bank" while pretending like this is going to happen without anyone paying for it.


There are POLICIES, historical context and some basic economic reasoning that indicate that the real legal overhaul Trump has pledged turns America from the least competitive first world nation to the MOST competitive.

Because it's gonna be GREAT! Let me tell you. MAGA! THE BEST!


Do you not see or understand that his pledged tax reform and repealing of NAFTA and just about all the regulations enacted over the last few decades turns America into a desirable hub of economic activity?

Have you learned nothing in the last 8 years about how prosperity comes from getting government out of the way, not spawning New Deal 3.0


Seriously man. He has pledged a 15% flat income and corporate tax rate. From there he has pledged further tax reductions from an already drastically lowered rate if you invest into American infrastructure.

And who is going to pay for these "drastically lowered rates?"


The amount of money that has been chased away from America in the last 25 years has been decimating to America. The reality is most if not all of this money has been itching to get back into America should the tides of policy change.

Trump has PLEDGED a massive reversal in policy.

Trump has been on both sides of every issue. Therefore what you perceive in him is a function of what you want, or expect to hear.


I'm not talking about pink unicorns. I'm talking about hundreds of billions of dollars worldwide that at the end of the day wants to be in America but has not been because FED.GOV has chased it away.

You have, during the course of this post, consistently equivocated between regulation that has chases business away, and the creation of a new "Infrastructure Bank" ponzi scheme. You have done so in an attempt to curry favor with the viewpoint that hyper-regulation has chased business overseas (something every soul here knows innately) and then by waving some kind of magic wand you argue that this means the New Deal 3.0 isn't really so bad.

This is an actual thing in logic. It is called "Magical Thinking."

Most American business has been forced overseas because of too many regulations.

I believe that Donald Trump will repeal regulations.

Therefore the Pink Unicorn Infrastructure Bank isn't really so bad.


FED.GOV has literally attacked capital and forced it out of America.

Trump has PLEDGED.

Ok man got it? PLEDGED. It still needs to get done. The man hasn't even started his term. I'm not going ZOMG TRUMP IS THE SAVIOR.

But his pledged policy proposals CHANGE EVERYTHING.

Cognitive Dissonance is a witch, man.


Capital will begin immediately flowing back into America. Bit by bit. And steadily.

America will go from the worst tax rate in the 1st world to the best.

That is such an awesome thing when you crank up spending too.


The economic implications of this are enormous.

I know right?

http://i.imgur.com/F3R9QI7.jpg


Do you understand just how much PRIVATE capital will be able to be deployed throughout America as the result of his economic plan?

Because, fairy dust.


The answer is a lot.

And the answer is a far greater number then 1 trillion my friend.

And Trumpsus, taking the five quarters and two dollars, looking up to the Federal Reserve he blessed them, and broke them, and gave to the Cabinet to set before the corporations. They all ate and were filled, and then the Cabinet went to pick up what was left, and it was a Trillion US Dollars.

[undergroundrr]

I thought it was the alt-right that had co-opted the Ron Paul Revolution. Turns out it was the FDR left. Who knew?

[TheCount]

I thought it was the alt-right that had co-opted the Ron Paul Revolution. Turns out it was the FDR left. Who knew?

Much of the alt right has always had national socialist leanings.

[GunnyFreedom]

Well, you kept acting like it's somehow not government or taxpayer money.

Would you care to explain to us what makes this strategy better for the taxpayer than selling Treasury bonds instead?

It's Trump money. He gonna get it from his stash.

[VIDEODROME]

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/23345048.jpg

[Origanalist]

Yes I know he wants to rebuild the military - like Reagan did. My point is that if he actually gets what he wants done the cost of foreign military intervention will drop substantially. I did NOT mean that he wanted to reduce the overall military budget (I'm inclined to think a slight reduction will occur but nothing huge).

The point was he wants to turn the way things are run upside down and dramatically increase the QUALITY of the spending that is enacted.

America's military and military capital are quite weak and need to be rebuilt. Much of the ridiculous POLICE THE WORLD spending has served to do nothing but turn America into a pariah that is making itself weaker and weaker with each passing year.

If you knew that military spending would remain the same but that aggressive foreign policy would be reversed, most troops brought home and overseas spending replaced with spending at home, would you not view this as an enormous win for America (and the world)?

That's the overall view of things I have right now. Will it play out like that? Maybe not. But for the first time in a LONG time there is legit HOPE for mass scale reversal of terrible policy.

The Liberty movement (people around here for example) will play a key role in making sure a Trump presidency does more good then harm. I really think the man listens to those around him - including your elected representatives. I truly believe he wants to hear from YOU before he listens to a lobbyist.

Take advantage. I think America's direction over the next few years can (and will) be redirected to something far, far superior to the status quo of the last 70? years.

Time will tell. I'm hopeful (for the first time in my life).

I'm hoping the Liberty movement does not waste this opportunity because who the hell knows when anything like it may come around again.

You have run completely off the rails. Our military is weak? In relation to who? The cost of foreign military intervention will drop substantially? Maybe, that would be great.


If you knew that military spending would remain the same but that aggressive foreign policy would be reversed, most troops brought home and overseas spending replaced with spending at home, would you not view this as an enormous win for America (and the world)?


Do you really think he's going to bring most of the troops home? I don't.


The Liberty movement (people around here for example) will play a key role in making sure a Trump presidency does more good then harm. I really think the man listens to those around him - including your elected representatives. I truly believe he wants to hear from YOU before he listens to a lobbyist.


It's a nice thought, But I think the appointments made so far suggest our input means little or nothing, he sticks with the people who stuck with him. Some here did, most didn't.


Take advantage. I think America's direction over the next few years can (and will) be redirected to something far, far superior to the status quo of the last 70? years.

I would like to think you're right but I'm just not seeing it. May I be proven wrong and look like a fool. A result I will gladly accept.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Another "small government Republican" retard.

[Origanalist]

I like her.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/MVDPX3gaKFPuo/200w.gif#73

[GunnyFreedom]

YAAAAAHHHHHOOOOOO!!!!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH01FhqMdc8

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Well, you kept acting like it's somehow not government or taxpayer money.

Would you care to explain to us what makes this strategy better for the taxpayer than selling Treasury bonds instead?


Still crying because your Democratic boyfriend Hillary lost. It's a shame you spent all this time on her stumping for Clinton, and she lost anyway.

[oyarde]

just curious, what happens when rates DO go up (like they should).

I will be rich once the inflation and or default kicks in .

[oyarde]

I thought it was the alt-right that had co-opted the Ron Paul Revolution. Turns out it was the FDR left. Who knew?

What I always expected .

[eleganz]

Even if this were the case (which they always say it will be but it never winds up that way at the end) you still have to understand that when you rob from Peter to incentivise Paul, it's the same as spending. It's a little more palatable to the right wing to account for it like that, but because all funds are fungible on balance it amounts to the same as spending.

To be honest, my goal is to pay as little tax as possible so any deductions or credits I can take advantage of is fair game. If companies were incentivized via tax credits to make investments, I wouldn't tell them not to take advantage of it, as it would be hypocritical of me to do so.

This is the issue when it comes to the libertarian ideology. If a trillion dollars was going to be borrowed anyways, should a libertarian fight for something less intrusive on the ideology and more acceptable to a larger group of people or stay pure, cross their arms, huff and puff but not do anything while the trillion dollars is printed in the end anyways?

I know we all have a different way of looking at it.

[CaptUSA]

People are really trying to defend this? :rolleyes:

What the hell? Is there nothing they can do to shake you from this trance?!

[Sola_Fide]

People are really trying to defend this? :rolleyes:

What the hell? Is there nothing they can do to shake you from this trance?!

These boards have become a wasteland.

[BV2]

Sticky Bannon?

I dont think its being defended so much as people are trying to rationalize away any dissonance that might be occuring as a result of their Cheato's doing. Reason can be a potent anesthetic, if your are properly flexible with it even forced sodomy becomes defendable.

I say it again, "Sticky Bannon" i intend it as a eupimism for some grotesque sex act.

[CCTelander]

People are really trying to defend this? :rolleyes:

What the hell? Is there nothing they can do to shake you from this trance?!


For some the answer is obviously "no." I hope that doesn't represent the majority of Trump supporters here. But my supply of optimism is running dangerously low.

[nikcers]

People are really trying to defend this? :rolleyes:

What the hell? Is there nothing they can do to shake you from this trance?!

Trump is considered an intellectual authority higher than no other. They are going to let Trump guide them blindly. This is Obama 2.0- welcome to populist America. He was right while everyone else was wrong.

[AuH20]

People are really trying to defend this? :rolleyes:

What the hell? Is there nothing they can do to shake you from this trance?!

The enemy is at the gates. Pick up a spear. Liberty on it's white steed isn't coming to save us.

[CaptUSA]

The enemy is at the gates. Pick up a spear. Liberty isn't coming to save us.

Judging from this thread and others, I'd say they're already in the forums... Too late for spears.

[GunnyFreedom]

The enemy is at the gates. Pick up a spear. Liberty on it's white steed isn't coming to save us.

"At the gates" lol-brother, you just elected him! :D

[Sola_Fide]

The enemy is at the gates. Pick up a spear. Liberty on it's white steed isn't coming to save us.

The enemy is Trump. WAKE UP.

[AuH20]

The enemy is Trump. WAKE UP.

You will understand when the Johnson Amendment falls.

[Occam's Banana]

People are really trying to defend this? :rolleyes:

What the hell? Is there nothing they can do to shake you from this trance?!

If a "strategist" for Obama (or a president-elect Clinton or Romney or McCain) had floated such an idea, it would have been universally and mercilessly savaged here.

Sometimes, all you have to do to get people to gulp down the Kool-Aid is change the flavor ...

[juleswin]

The enemy is at the gates. Pick up a spear. Liberty on it's white steed isn't coming to save us.

Lol, the enemy rode in with a trojan horse and he is now pretending to fight with u, I suggest you watch your back while holding your sword to the gate.

[jmdrake]

Is the kind of thing you do when selling clothing... you offer your product in 10 different colors, in limited production... see what sells best then mass produce the most popular color.

Not so much the thing you really want to do with billion dollar tax payer funded projects.

No kidding! It's easy to be caviler when it's someone else's money. Good grief! Trump is going to bankrupt us faster than Obama was.

[jmdrake]

If a "strategist" for Obama (or a president-elect Clinton or Romney or McCain) had floated such an idea, it would have been universally and mercilessly savaged here.

Sometimes, all you have to do to get people to gulp down the Kool-Aid is change the flavor ...

No freaking kidding! And Obama supporters are figuring this out faster than Trumpskiites. I heard on the other day say "You know...Trump is going to pass everything that Obama wanted to do but couldn't. He's going to fix Obamacare and spend a lot of money on stimulus." And the irony is the "white supremacist" everyone on the left was handwringing about is pushing all of this.

[jmdrake]

Still crying because your Democratic boyfriend Hillary lost. It's a shame you spent all this time on her stumping for Clinton, and she lost anyway.

You can't do better than that? Seriously? The time for Trump trolling is over. We got Trump trolled! Hey, I'm glad Hillary lost. (I would have been fine if Trump lost too as I can't stand either one of them). So...your guy won the election. Wonderful. NOW HOW DO WE STOP HIM FROM WRECKING THIS COUNTRY? Because at this point that's all that matters. Nothing anyone says negative about Trump can somehow cost him the election. So we can't quit pretending that he's somehow the "lesser of two evils." He's the only evil left standing.

[jmdrake]

This "trump listens to MEEEE" crap is driving me batty.

military spending would remain the same but that aggressive foreign policy would be reversed, most troops brought home and overseas spending replaced with spending at home

Re-edit that sentence please. The boldfaced phrases are contradictory.

So is equating "eliminating the defense sequester" (trump) and "millitary (sic) spending would remain the same" (Seraphim).

Ummmmm....maybe Trump plans on reversing posse comitatus? Use the military at home to tighten the noose on the American people stop terrorists and drug dealers and people who want to steal American jobs from crossing the border?

[Feeding the Abscess]

It's more about staying in power until they can secure close to 60 senate seats. 2018 will be a pickup year with all the exposed seats. Then go hogwild with reforms. Bannon knows what he's doing.

This was a poor argument when Rand shills were excusing his deviations from libertarianism on Gitmo, Iran, and other areas during his Senate campaign.

Not only was it a poor argument, it was also a false argument. There was no turn to a purist foreign policy after he was elected.

I didn't buy it when people made that argument for Rand, and I'm certainly not going to believe it when you or others use it in support of Trump.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

So...your guy won the election. Wonderful.

Umm, wut?

[jmdrake]

Umm, wut?

Unmmm...wut...nothing! TheCount was making a valid point in our current context which is Hillary isn't president and Trump is. Rather than doing something constructive, like working together to formulate a strategy against Trump's nationalists progressivism which will wreck our nation just as surely as Hillary's globalist progressivism, you want to go back to last months fight of which evil is lesser? I didn't follow TheCount enough to see if he was a closet Hillary supporter or not, but that this point, to quote Hillary "What difference does it make?" Trump's president and one of his top advisers is saying "take a trillion dollars...throw it against the wall...and see what sticks." You can't make this stuff up!

[CCTelander]

If a "strategist" for Obama (or a president-elect Clinton or Romney or McCain) had floated such an idea, it would have been universally and mercilessly savaged here.

Sometimes, all you have to do to get people to gulp down the Kool-Aid is change the flavor ...


MAGA.

Disgusting.

[CaptUSA]

If a "strategist" for Obama (or a president-elect Clinton or Romney or McCain) had floated such an idea, it would have been universally and mercilessly savaged here.

Sometimes, all you have to do to get people to gulp down the Kool-Aid is change the flavor ...

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Occam's Banana again.

This can't be bumped enough!!

[jmdrake]

It's more about staying in power until they can secure close to 60 senate seats. 2018 will be a pickup year with all the exposed seats. Then go hogwild with reforms. Bannon knows what he's doing.

:rolleyes: They're going "hogwild" right now. Good grief man, can you be any more daft? DONALD TRUMP WAS....IS...AND ALWAYS WILL BE A LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE! Seriously dude, Trump won the presidency. He won the freaking presidency. He can do whatever the hell he wants and his "grand plan" is to take 1 trillion dollars, through it against the wall (the one Mexico is going to pay for?) and see if it sticks? Oh...I'm sorry. That's not Trump's plan. It's Bannon's plan. Sheesh! Dude you been had. Just admit it. You been had. Watch this documentary so you can understand how you've been had. Trump is a modern day George Wallace. He's a progressive clothed in white populist sheep's clothing.


https://vimeo.com/116273297

So what is your plan? Go along with Trump's economic lunacy because hopefully it will help the GOP to get a filibuster proof majority? We're you the one saying the reason to support Trump was because he would be a "wrecking ball" to the GOP, win lose or draw?

[Suzanimal]

If a "strategist" for Obama (or a president-elect Clinton or Romney or McCain) had floated such an idea, it would have been universally and mercilessly savaged here.

Sometimes, all you have to do to get people to gulp down the Kool-Aid is change the flavor ...

MAGA flavor's a hell of a drug.

[Root]

Muh broken windows!

[undergroundrr]

Bannon's Goldman Sachs days are shining through. Not only trumpies, but everybody who's given their trust to the Breitbart/AJ controlled opposition project have been had. Goldman Sachs buddies Bannon's and Mnuchin's FIRST PROPOSALS in the trump administration are an FDR New Deal zombie resurrection.

The whole nation will burn. But standing high amidst the ruins, there will be $1 trillion worth of epic monuments to Goldman Sachs and the deep state, incscribed with the name of donald Ozymandias trump.

[CCTelander]

Bannon's Goldman Sachs days are shining through. Not only trumpies, but everybody who's given their trust to the Breitbart/AJ controlled opposition project have been had. Goldman Sachs buddies Bannon's and Mnuchin's FIRST PROPOSALS in the trump administration are an FDR New Deal zombie resurrection.

The whole nation will burn. But standing high amidst the ruins, there will be $1 trillion worth of epic monuments to Goldman Sachs and the deep state, incscribed with the name of donald Ozymandias trump.


Bend over America for the "Screw Deal." It's like FDR's New Deal, only deeper and harder.

[Origanalist]

Bend over America for the "Screw Deal." It's like FDR's New Deal, only deeper and harder.

Heads they win, tails we lose.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Unmmm...wut...nothing! TheCount was making a valid point... I didn't follow TheCount enough to see if he was a closet Hillary supporter or not,

Well, I have followed him. He is--without a doubt--a ZippyJuan shill and ardent Clinton supporter. He is not a "supporting member" as claimed on his avatar. His "valid points" are nothing but an attempt to disrupt and discredit this site.



...Hillary's globalist progressivism...

TheCount is about as progressive as it gets. He is some Jewish guy (as they all are on here) who hates Ron/Rand Paul for their position on Israeli aid. I would not doubt if TheCount is a member of the SPLC Center or similar.

He will, per usual, respond shortly and attempt to play it off with claims about nationalist paranoia, wacism, blah blah blah.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

....

[TheCount]

Bump

[enhanced_deficit]

Some of his tiny projects did not please MAGA:


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1282276752090431490?s=19

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1282276752090431490?s=19

I disagreed with doing this very small (tiny) section of wall, in a tricky area, by a private group which raised money by ads. It was only done to make me look bad, and perhsps it now doesn’t even work. Should have been built like rest of Wall, 500 plus miles.

But this was the major hit to infrastructure projects drive of Bannon after he had called senior WH advisors Jared Kushner and Ivanka "democrats":

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2018/01/06/04/47CC96BE00000578-0-President_Donald_Trump_repeated_his_attacks_on_aut hor_Michael_Wo-a-64_1515214310773.jpg