Trump SOTU

[UNI88]

Bobqat's argument is a two-way street - and why should a pacifist have their money spent on the military, law enforcement or border protection? Bobqat and his friends can write checks for those.

Because they are necessary

If that's what you think then you should pay for them. That is Bobqat's logic at it's core.

It's mighty big of you to decide that what you support is necessary and that what you oppose isn't.

[Caribbean Hen]

Because they are necessary

If that's what you think then you should pay for them. That is Bobqat's logic at it's core.

It's mighty big of you to decide that what you support is necessary and that what you oppose isn't.

don't worry, the DoD is going to get slashed, but the national defense is still necessary unless you want to learn Chinese

[Bobcat]

Its literally in the constitution (Article 1 section 8) that federal government is basically responsible for the security of the USA.

Our security is necessary for our country, its literally the only thing the Federal government should be involved in.

Way more important than stealing our money and sending it over seas and putting a cock on a chick with a nose ring and purple hair. Our money shouldn't be used for healthcare, buy your own healthcare etc

[BDKJMU]

Hence the populist/middle class ideals I mentioned. Those apply to moderates too.

As Ganny posted, they "need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable".

So tell us, what do mean by the following and how will they be paid for:
- paid family leave
- higher wages (minimum? average?)
- labor protections
- affordable home prices and housing inventory (how do you square this with protecting our environment?)

Taxing the wealthy can't be the answer to every question about resources. Republicans are correct that the government can and should be more efficient.

Under federalism that can all fall under the states.

[BDKJMU]

Its literally in the constitution (Article 1 section 8) that federal government is basically responsible for the security of the USA.

Our security is necessary for our country, its literally the only thing the Federal government should be involved in.

Way more important than stealing our money and sending it over seas and putting a cock on a chick with a nose ring and purple hair. Our money shouldn't be used for healthcare, buy your own healthcare etc

It’s a little more than just the security of the nation (although that is numero uno, and a lot of the Enumerated Powers deal with that). Are 27 Enumerated Powers in the Constitution, mostly Article 1, Section 8. What the federal govt involves itself in today has spread far beyond those Enumerated Powers.

Also the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

[UNI88]

Its literally in the constitution (Article 1 section 8) that federal government is basically responsible for the security of the USA.

Our security is necessary for our country, its literally the only thing the Federal government should be involved in.

Way more important than stealing our money and sending it over seas and putting a cock on a chick with a nose ring and purple hair. Our money shouldn't be used for healthcare, buy your own healthcare etc

It’s a little more than just the security of the nation (although that is numero uno, and a lot of the Enumerated Powers deal with that). Are 27 Enumerated Powers in the Constitution, mostly Article 1, Section 8. What the federal govt involves itself in today has spread far beyond those Enumerated Powers.

Also the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Does Article 1 section 8 say that it's the responsibility of the federal government? Or does it say that Congress has the power to provide for the common defense?

Should we use an originalist approach (similar to what conservatives use for the 2nd Amendment) to providing for the national defense and put a time limit on military appropriations by Congress?

[kalm]

Hence the populist/middle class ideals I mentioned. Those apply to moderates too.

As Ganny posted, they "need to be clear on how all of that is affordable and obtainable".

So tell us, what do mean by the following and how will they be paid for:
- paid family leave
- higher wages (minimum? average?)
- labor protections
- affordable home prices and housing inventory (how do you square this with protecting our environment?)

Taxing the wealthy can't be the answer to every question about resources. Republicans are correct that the government can and should be more efficient.

Start with the fact that our current system has transferred wealth upwards for the past 40+ years. While spending and inefficiency are issues, recognize they always are in large organizations. This org has 330 million members, two oceans, two large borders, a large military, aging infrastructure, and 3.5 million square miles and loads of public lands and natural resources..

From the post war period through the 70’s, corporate corporate tax rates ranged in the 40-50% range and the top marginal rate ranged between 60 and 90% after certain amount of income ($11 million IIRC). Instead of growing more personal wealth that they didn’t need to survive, they avoided taxes by re-investing in their companies.

We can argue all day long about fair and economically efficient tax rates but the bottom line is we haven’t been able to replace that revenue lost with neo-liberal tax policies. Not only has the “free market” wealth not trickled down to the middle class, it hasn’t trickled down enough to avoid deficit spending either.



This all a choice. We’ve chosen to enrich the top percentiles and investor classes at the expense of national and personal debt and middle class American dream. (Remember, the American Dream was originally humble).

My prescriptives all poll well with the middle class. That’s where the numbers are. You could be correct about middle class moderates conservatives disagreeing but even they like their social security, Medicare, VA benefits, etc. family leave won’t be a stretch.

Regarding wages…they increase with labor support and if needed, via legislation like minimum wage increases. They also represent 70% of our GDP so yes, even the investor and owner classes benefit from wage growth in the long term.

Labor protections can be improved through legislation and policy as well. EG: Strengthen the NLRB rather than trying to fire members Trump disagrees with. That would be a good start.

Affordable housing involves regulations limiting foreign and investor ownership similar to what Canada does.

Again, some in the middle class may give lip service to laissez faire economics in the hope that someday they could be rich too but remember the “keep your government hands off of my Medicare” tea party signs.

That’s enough of a book. I’m sure you’ll disagree but your questions are fair and it’s a worthy discussion.

[BDKJMU]

Remember all the criticism and ridicule about the conks not being able to keep their people in line? Good times.
https://www.axios.com/2025/03/06/trump- ... ts-disrupt

[houndawg]

Sounds great on paper except that bolded part isn't going to be happening in observable reality.

So great, do nothing and continue on the road where Trump of all people is actually seen as not only viable, but preferable, for large portions of the voting population. The Democrats will of course get their turn at the steering wheel, politics, especially in our duopoly, is certainly cyclical. But we just had Biden, or whoever was really pulling the strings for him, at the wheel for the past 4 years and that wasn't really rosy either. At some point we need to try to change.

Yeah, I bet the trains run on time in Hungary.

1) we get the gubmint we deserve

2) large portions of the voting population have, do, and will always see trump as preferable and there is nothing that can change that. He could stomp a baby on live TV.

3) doing nothing is pretty much the only option the Ds have and in this situation exactly what they should do. They had no input so they don't deserve any credit.

4) I told you right here that it was GAME OVER for the United States more than a decade ago when Citizens United made it official policy that our gubmint was up for sale to the highest bidder. The highest bidder now sits in the White House and and works at destroying that gubmint while the rapist/traitor/convicted felon we "elected" plays golf and sucks Russian cock. But yeah, most of what you say looks good on paper.

[UNI88]