• Trump on coming debt crisis: "I won’t be here" when it blows up
    39 replies, posted
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-on-coming-debt-crisis-i-wont-be-here-when-it-blows-up Since the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump’s aides and advisers have tried to convince him of the importance of tackling the national debt. Sources close to the president say he has repeatedly shrugged it off, implying that he doesn’t have to worry about the money owed to America’s creditors—currently about $21 trillion—because he won’t be around to shoulder the blame when it becomes even more untenable. The friction came to a head in early 2017 when senior officials offered Trump charts and graphics laying out the numbers and showing a “hockey stick” spike in the national debt in the not-too-distant future. In response, Trump noted that the data suggested the debt would reach a critical mass only after his possible second term in office. Yeah, but I won’t be here,” the president bluntly said, according to a source who was in the room when Trump made this comment during discussions on the debt. The episode illustrates the extent of the president’s ambivalence toward tackling an issue that has previously animated the Republican Party from the days of Ronald Reagan to the presidency of Barack Obama. Those close to Trump say that one reason the issue of debt reduction has never been an animating one for him is because he is convinced that it can be solved through means other than tax hikes or sharp spending reductions. Stephen Moore, a conservative economist at the Heritage Foundation and an economic adviser to Trump’s 2016 campaign, recalled making visual presentations to Trump in mid-2016 that showed him the severity of the debt problem. But Moore told The Daily Beast that he personally assured candidate Trump that it could be dealt with by focusing on economic growth.
This shit fucking pisses me off because this feels like the textbook conservative gameplan except he's stupid enough to say it openly. Bitch and moan about debt, then blow it out of the water when you're in power so the succeeding government has to deal with the fallout.
That's the hidden benefit of Trump: He is too stupid to nuance everything behind innuendo and concealed gameplans the way most Republicans do; he's got no filter and will blurt out straight truths because he shoots first and asks questions never. He's exposing the Republican agenda by enacting it without any sense of misdirection or disguise, unlike more experienced and competent politicians in the party. Unfortunately it's still happening, just in public.
No president intends on tackling the national debt. There would have to be deep entitlement reform and other major cuts that would piss too many people off.
This is the general attitude of most old people. "Lol, our grandchildren will have to pay it back after we voted for another round of tax cuts for ourselves. Why do we care?".
Or seriously get on to tackling the hundreds of billions of DoD and other administratorial waste every year.
that clearly wasn't the point of his reasoning. It was literally. "If everything goes to shit, its not might fault. Its everyone's fault or the next's guy's fault". Aka he's a fucking Narcissist.
The problem is they've been doing this since forever yet the American people seem unable to remember who fucked them in the ass and vote for them again in 8 years. Happened with Clinton and with Obama, will happen with whatever Democrat president comes next. Republicans cause problems. Democrats fail to fix said problems(With a little help of Republicans getting in their way in the House/Senate). Republicans blame Democrats for failing. Republicans get elected on the promise they will actually fix the problems. Repeat.
Well, with his short-sighted views on Climate Change, this isn't at all surprising to me. That's pretty ridiculous. Also, Bill Clinton left government with a surplus, so your statement is quite inaccurate.
The Bill Clinton "surplus" is so misleading I wish people would stop bringing it up. The national debt never went down when Bill Clinton was in office, and wasn't on track to start going down when he left.
I wasn't suggesting that surplus or deficits necessarily decrease national debt, but it's certainly a more responsible way to run the economy than the massive Trump deficit.
Not really a surprise, Trumps answer to debt is to file bankruptcy and make it someone else's problem
Okay? I'm stating a fact that no president, be it now or in the future, is serious about tackling the national debt. It would be a political death sentence. The debt is too fucking big for one and the cuts required would have to be immense. There are too many external and internal forces that would prevent this. For example do you think hundreds of thousands of government employees are going to be willing to lose their jobs over something that doesn't directly affect them? They will fight tooth & nail and so will the labor unions.
As much as I believe he would say that, I've tried looking for other articles to corroborate it but they're all highly left-leaning sources that source this Daily Beast (which is already a biased source) article sourcing an anonymous White House source.
Daily Beast is legit and has covered some important things in the past. Espcially in the leakiest administration of all time.
I have generic conservative baby boomers in my family that literally think we should pay zero taxes. They're fucking idiots.
Healthcare is the biggest single issue to entitlement spending and that's because of a lot of factors handicapping medicare and medicaid costs like the inability to negotiate prices. https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/horowitz-entitlements-0102-1.png?w=1150
"It's not MY fault if I'm not president at the time" says man who doesn't understand consequences.
I wonder how many people will blame Obama
What a pointless and stupid post. There's a difference between blowing the debt out of the water and at least trying to keep it in check.
Fiat currency doing what fiat currency does. Bonds being issued should only be tangible with the amount of bullion in reserve. Lets not forget that Nixon took us off the gold standard to finance the vietnam war. I suggest you invest heavily in silver because that's going to be the only thing of value when overprinting blows up in America's face. It's worth mentioning that the last country to come off the gold standard was Switzerland in the 90's and they went off it because the currency exchange rate made it hard for foreigners to do business. There's actually something called a NEGATIVE federal funds rate- the central bank paying banks to take loans. The negative federal funds rate when Switzerland went off the gold standard was their solution to an overvalued currency.
How much money did you foolishly put into silver
Avatar fits
The federal funds rate is at 2.25%. If another recession happens, the federal reserve will likely [b]not[/b] have much room to lower the interest rate businesses pay for loans. This will cause what is known as a "liquidity crunch." In Japan a liquidity crunch has historically been the cause of what they call "The Lost Decade." I think platinum is hitting a historic low. Precious metals are a great way to insulate yourself against money printing as inflation is known to chiefly effect raw materials. Research into precious metal applications will further your investment. Silver is known to have the highest conductivity of any precious metal, but isn't used for its conductivity as its the softest metal on the periodic table. I particularly subscribe to the Georgist school of libertarian thought which is what the likes of Chomsky would call "libertarian socialism." I think the [i]tragedy of the commons[/i] is going to be the next big financial hit, as it was with the dustbowl in the 1920's. I went to college.
Okay so way too much is the answer
You know what guy it would have been better if you weren't here at all and instead you were staying back in your shitty tower or whatever.
nice, me too.
In the late 1910's The Haber Process for adding nitrogen to fertilizer was discovered. Ten years later the biggest financial meltdown in history happened. One thing they will teach you in macro-econ101 is that too high GDP growth can be a bad indicator for a developed country. It's a theory that the bigger the boom, the bigger the bust. Search some of the stuff I'm throwing around and learn for yourself, maybe take macroecon101. The people who ascribe to this theory say that 3% a year is healthy GDP growth. If you get a good professor, they'll tell you that there's all sorts of theories out there. Take a econ101 class, you'll find that economics and finance can be kind of a magical and mystical thing. I'm being constructive here. They gave me an A.
So do you want me to follow the example of millions of other suckers who "buy silver" where all they get is a piece of paper that says "yup they's got silva", or do you want me to go rummaging around old mine dumps/salvage electrical contacts? Because I'm fully capable of both, and you're still full of shit.
Convincing a clerk to accept a silver receipt from a reputable depository would be illegal. In 2008 Shelter Systems Warehouse owned by Liberty Services was raided. The idea was that NORFED or (deep breath) "The National Organization for Repeal of the Federal Reserve and Internal Revenue Service" would create coins with written denominations along with their own pieces of paper: 20 dollars an ounce. The paper incorporated state of the art technology and the coins were struck by Sunshine Mint; a mint with excellent coin dies. The idea was to sell them to Currency Officer for a discount who would sell them to employees for a discount who would circulate them. Since silver would be 8 dollars an ounce, the employees would basically make 2 dollars by circulating a note. "This is a receipt for ten (10) dollars given for one (1) once of pure silver." When the price moved to 14 dollars an ounce, the notes were moved to a 20 dollar silver base and the 10 dollar base notes appreciated in value. It was kind of a scam, but it kind of wasn't. Some of the legitimate holders of an interest in (x) amount of silver got their currency burned in a furnace. So yeah. That's a precedent of legitimate silver currency being illegal. I am literally Ron Paul at a computer btw and John McAfee, my cybersecurity advisor says that the only reason why they haven't shut down bitcoin is because they can't.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.