Citizen Free Press, the conservative news aggregator that grabbed the niche from The Drudge Report after the latter went Trump Deranged, is constantly highlighting the National Debt’s explosion. This is legitimate news. Here is an item that appeared today:
“10 years ago today Trump promised to eliminate the national debt.Instead it has doubled to $39 trillion.“
Meanwhile, over the weekend, the Nation Debt was suddenly important to the Axis again, as those who were horrified over the minuscule number of casualties in the Operation Epic Fury were desperately looking for some way to criticize the amazing rescue of the downed pilot in Iran. All of a sudden, the Left was grousing about Trump spending all that money to rescue a single soldier (The Axis has no integrity at all. I hope that’s clear by now) and citing the National Debt.
Ethics Alarms 
I recall how the Axis, when Republicans proposed reducing the rate of spending growth, accused them of wanting to starve children.
Years ago, Gingrich had a great statement along those lines. This is a paraphrase:
“If we had five hundred dollars budgeted to buy a microwave and found one that did everything we needed for three hundred, Democrats would give a press conference lamenting how Republicans slashed two hundred dollars from the microwave budget.”
I’ll never forget what a pastor said many years ago while delivering a sermon about money: “When your outgo exceeds your income, your upkeep will be your downfall.”
No words were ever more appropriate for deficit spending at the national level than those.
You make a good point about DOGE – the monies it has saved, even if it’s in the billions of dollars, is still just a pittance when weighed against the overall debt. And we really haven’t even delved into the massive black hole that is the unfunded mandates, which are well beyond $100 trillion.
We obviously can’t afford all of this stuff forever, so riding this bomb – as if imitating Slim Pickens in Dr. Strangelove – all the way to detonation doesn’t seem like a good idea. It’s a shame no one in Washington wants to divest themselves of the power that the spending gives them.
sigh…
Sorry to monopolize, but one additional thing. It should also be clear by now that the Axis is really big on people getting killed as part of moving their agenda forward. Whether it’s Good or Pretti resisting ICE or soldiers and airmen in the Middle East, death has become a real “means to an end” for the Left. The Marxist ideal of creating martyrs is not just theoretical to them.
You could almost sense this weekend the frustration the Left felt with that rescue. They complained about the money…sure…but it’s almost as though they preferred the pilot be killed or (maybe even better) captured so they could complain about the cost, in U.S blood, of our endeavors in Iran. Imagine their bitter disappointment when all they got to lament was the cost in dollars rather than talking about how Trump was killing soldiers.
Joel,
I would caveat what you said by pointing to the general principle of “by any means available” that the Axis operates under. If it is a stick with which they can beat the Right, and Trump especially, they will use it. I wouldn’t say that they are big on getting people killed, specifically, but as long as they believe they’d get mileage out of people dying, they will salivate at any prospect of a new martyr. The lament over the rescued airman NOT dying is definitely over the lost opportunity to use an American casualty as an attack at Trump. Even the complaint over the National Debt is transparently about using whatever stick is available to beat Trump. After all, these are the people who believe the Keynesian economic theories of increased deficit spending in order to stimulate the economy. But they know that the Right wants to reduce the National Debt, and so they can go on the attack for every dollar Trump spends because of how it adds to the National Debt.
As far as I can tell, the only “ethical” principle the Left operates under is will to power. I feel the Right isn’t too far behind going down that path, too, but the Left has (to my observation) jettisoned all other considerations.
As far as I can tell, the only “ethical” principle the Left operates under is will to power. I feel the Right isn’t too far behind going down that path, too, but the Left has (to my observation) jettisoned all other considerations.
According to Newton’s Third Law of Motion action is reaction. If the Left operates under its will to power, the right has to follow suit to prevent that. Somehow I start to believe that the term United States of America is becoming an oxymoron, as the people of this country are deeply and fundamentally divided about everything. I do think that the Democrat Party and the Axis media are rooting in favor of Iran to spite Trump, and to bolster the Democrat Party’s power.
That may be true, though “rooting” is a bit strong. And unlikely.
On Easter morning, one imagines it is the most (“”) sacred day for even a post-christian nation, our narcissistic Julius Cesar promised to commit war crimes against civilian populations (the people we are supposedly defending) and murder (accurate use of the word) tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands; then used the f-bomb to make an emphatic point (about the stupidity of the Iranians) and topped it off by saying “Praise be to Allah”.
Please, lay out for me — for our nation and for the world — how exactly we should “support” Donald Trump or his administration in all of this?
Ugh. Waging war is not a war crime. One’s opponents in a war always can surrender, thus ending the war, the danger, the risk to their population, especially in a case like this, where the enemy has no adverse designs on the nation or its residents. Fact: the world will be a better, safer place with a defanged Iran, and Iran has been escaping the consequences of its own murderous nature for about 40 years too long. The current action can on;y be justified ethically by utilitarian principles, but war is always evaluated that way, like capital punishment. There are no ethical and rational arguments against this one, only emotional and absolutist ones.
There are no ethical and rational arguments against this one, only emotional and absolutist ones.
In this case — I say this with full, expressed respect — you seem to me quite wrong. And unless I am mistaken (I hope I am) it will soon be clear how wrong and destructive this adventure turns out to be.
How do you respond to the dozens and multiple dozens of “non-Axis” analysts who state, emphatically, insistingly and continuously that this war, under these conditions, is extremely unlikely to be resolved favorably in our nation’s favor? Are they all under a spell?
Waging war is not a war crime.
Yet I gather that you do admit “war crime” as a genuine category? Or is it that “no quarter” will be given and no restraint observed?
How do you respond to the dozens and multiple dozens of “non-Axis” analysts who state, emphatically, insistingly and continuously that this war, under these conditions, is extremely unlikely to be resolved favorably in our nation’s favor? Are they all under a spell?
Bias makes you stupid. Ade
Waging war is not a war crime.
Yet I gather that you do admit “war crime” as a genuine category? Or is it that “no quarter” will be given and no restraint observed?
How do you respond to the dozens and multiple dozens of “non-Axis” analysts who state, emphatically, insistingly and continuously that this war, under these conditions, is extremely unlikely to be resolved favorably in our nation’s favor? Are they all under a spell?
Bias makes them stupid, that’s all. That and Trump Derangement. They want the US to lose and be embarrassed so they can regain power. It is an irrational position.
Waging war is not a war crime. Yet I gather that you do admit “war crime” as a genuine category? Or is it that “no quarter” will be given and no restraint observed?
Torturing and murdering prisoners, setting out to kill civilians when there is no possible benefit to the war objectives? Genuine genocide? Sure. Iran’s randomly attacking no combatant countries as a form of extortion is a war crime. Trying to win a war by making the enemy’s population insist on surrender is not. Neither is refusing let the human shield tactic dissuade an attack.
Bias makes them stupid, that’s all.
That is an absurd, prejudiced statement. You are saying in effect: “Anyone who has a contrary opinion to my opinion is suffering ‘bias’.” But it is possible that you operate from more acute bias than they. Therefore, it is possible by your own construction that bias is making you less intelligent and circumspect than you could be.
Attacking civilian infrastructure with the defined purpose of harming and killing civilians has been defined as criminal. And the downside, for our country, is that if we do such to them, they are justified to do the same to us.
Those who rationally oppose the tactics and strategy of this operation quite simply point out that what is being done will not work. And this (according to numerous) was known and predicted.
Apparently, it is one more example of a badly thought out escapade that does not advance the nation, does not help it rebuild and recover, but drives it deeper into decline.
If this is so it undermines your argument completely. You also fail to understand and take into account that world opinion does not support this mode of achieving US ends.
No, I am saying that when one maintains an opinion that is objectively absurd and that in another context YOU would think is absurd, than it is clear that said opinion is based on what you wish were true rather than what is true. Nobody neutral and credible has “pointed out” that the operation “will not work.” It has already worked. The analogy with the Monty Python’s Black Knight is apt. The only aspect of the mission that “hasn’t worked” is that weak and indoctrinated media sources and reflex anti-war (bias), anti-Israel (bias) anti-Trump (bias), anti-military action even when it is critical and necessary (bias), anti-US (bias) in the nation are doing their best to undermine it.
Let me elaborate briefly, because I can see the “No True Scotsman” claim coming from a mile away. The US has wiped out layer after layer of the nation’s leadership. It has eliminated most of the nation’s nuclear capabilities, and is about to cripple its infrastructure. The only claims otherwise issue from Iran’s version of “Baghdad Bob” and the social media Fifth Column in the US. Meanwhile, the predicted “terror cell” retaliations haven’t occurred, and the number of US casualties are closer to what occurs in war game operations accidents than in actual combat. Iran’s capability of seeding terrorism in the region has been hugely reduced, and Israel, the only democracy in the region, has been bolstered and supported, as it must be. Since the UN is corrupted and feckless, the US is the default Guardian of the Universe, and reminding Russia, China et all of that is vital, especially after the Biden Era’s “Don’t.” style of fearful diplomacy.
I responded waaaaay down at the bottom. No space left here!
The people in Iran accept being collateral damage as their main desire is to be liberated from the rule of the Islamic death cult. Patrick Henry would understand “Give me freedom or give me death!”
The people in Iran accept being collateral damage as their main desire is to be liberated from the rule of the Islamic death cult. Patrick Henry would understand “Give me freedom or give me death!”
One person is saying that (if I understand your X image). There is much debate within diaspora Irani community however.
None of that is my main point. I do not see this war adventure as advancing America’s position or interests if, as many responsible people are saying, it will more likely than not work against the reconstruction of America. And a misadventure will likely ruin Republican chances at mid-term. Recent decisions made by Trump et al are working against him. It is called “Snatching defeat from the mouth of victory”.
But: we will all of very soon see. My sense? Seventy-five percent likelihood of failure. Twenty-five percent of merely neutral outcome.
The left and the Iranians were salivating over the prospect of humiliating that weapons officer if he was captured alive o dragging his corpse through the streets of Iran from the back of a Toyota pickup like they did the guys who were killed trying to extricate the embassy employees forty-seven years ago. They both thought it would end the war, Republican control of congress, and any Republican’s chance to win the White House in 2028. It would be a tri-fecta for that alliance made in hell.
I’ve read that almost all countries have a national debt. I have yet to understand who holds these markers (ref: Guys and Dolls).
In my Brooklyn neighborhood, if you owed the bookie and did not clear the “marker” as “politely “requested by the loan sharks representatives, there were consequneces. Your “line of credit” was also impeded.
Perhaps, its time to put “brooklynese economics” into practice!
The former Serial Sexual Predator In Chief got out just under the gun: The ticking Time Bomb of the far-reaching ripple effects of the Lefty vote-generation scheme (the Community Reinvestment Act) leading to the Mortgage Meltdown, and the Clintons deregulating Wall Street (CFMA, FSMA, Riegle-Neal, etc.) are subjects Lefty’d prefer weren’t discussed.
PWS
As a simple layperson when it comes to debt and finances and national spending, it seems obvious to me that there are a few examples out in the world of budgeting, spending, and moving to the future that we can actually look at and say “what the hell are we doing?”
First of all, I just posted elsewhere on a different post about not knowing what Donald Trump is doing from time to time. I see the move, I say “what?” and I take a beat to let it all play out. With DOGE it was obvious that it was all just a pittance and that we spend entirely too much on 1) Fraud and 2) Defense spending. When it comes to defense spending, a lot of that is driven by us picking up the slack for the rest of the world. If you think about it, we protect the world, we don’t have the money to pay for that, so instead of the rest of the world picking up the slack and taking out loans, we take out loans from them and put ourselves into debt, and pay them interest for the privilege of providing them a service.
Ugh.
But let’s look at Saudi Arabia and UAE because I think they’re the most prolific / intelligent on the matter. They have budget surplus and they don’t invest that money in 1.5% treasury bonds. They have a sovereign wealth fund and they’re investing in companies, business, industry, trade and doing what every household in America should have: a dividend portfolio.
Elizabeth Warren wants to complain about Jeff Bezos’s wealth and wants to have him pay a $7B wealth tax because she can’t find $7B in her $7 Trillion budget. But his wealth is actually just partial ownership of a company he created. To pay that tax, he’d sell $7B of his $200B position and crash the company stock price generating a lot of paper losses across the board for a lot of other investors.
The problem with our country is that it is addicted to spending and debt. Let’s create some sort of protected fund where taxes can be paid as shares and those holdings can’t be sold off, but only liquidated by a company merging or going private. The dividends of such holdings will be the only value given to the coffers of the U.S. and should first finance meeting the obligations generated by other debt buying programs (Social Security). Eventually, SS should be used to increase government holdings of company shares.
Ultimately, the fund will have to be managed and positions considered. Liquidations of one stock position should be mandated to other stock positions, not returned as money to the government and Social Security funds should eventually be invested in the Sovereign Fund rather than in low return T-Bills. When our companies succeed, our country should succeed. This is how you get your wealth tax and companies who consistently pay dividends to investors and increase their value through buybacks will ultimately be rewarding the US Government.
I know it’s probably “heresy” to the conservative side of the house…but I think if we take a serious consideration of the idea, it’s something that could work.
In other news, Saudi Arabia will be funding $22B for Skydance/Paramount’s $110B acquisition of Warner Bros. They will not have any control or influence to operations….but they’ll get that dividend check all the same.
A number of loose remarks here:
I think this problem is unsolvable in any democracy with a one person – one vote rule. In the past only the taxpaying classes had the franchise. We are of course not going back to that situation. But that means that this problem is not solvable due to lack of political will; only a financial debt crisis like that in Greece and Cyprus a decade ago may change that. In the meantime, as the title of one of Aaron Clarey’s books, enjoy he decline!
This is off topic but on the rescue of the weapons officer, it’s terrifying how close the operation came to being a total catastrophe. As in the disastrous attempt to rescue the embassy employees forty-seven years ago, the primary aircraft were rendered inoperable by the elements. There were really two rescue operations over the weekend: they rescued the weapons officer and then four hours later, they had to rescue the entire two hundred plus rescuers! Jesus, what a fuck-up! The C-130s got stuck in the sand?!!! There was no lighter option available to get the helicopters in? Embraer transports? Ospreys for the troops? Don’t they work? If there was a possibility the C-130s would get stuck, why weren’t the ATRs on site rather than four hours away? Jeeze, there could have been over two hundred guys surrounded and slaughtered like at the Alamo.
Curiously, some reports say the C-130s had mechanical problems. Trump said wet sand. Hmm.
Couple of points. First the driver of our debt is non-discretionary spending. The increases in debt under Trump and specifically attributable to him in his first term was Covid funding to attack the problem of insufficient capacity to deal with the strain. That spending came out of discretionary spending . Yes, his across the board tax cuts accelerated debt growth but before Covid the cuts actually yielded higher revenues.
Obamacare subsidies are increasing demand driving costs up by placing greater pressures on existing limited resources.
The fact that Americans by and large choose to eat in an unhealthy manner which is reinforced by SNAP exacerbates the situation.
Medicare costs are underfunded and coupled with many more now eligible for Medicaid the government is on the hook for increasing expenditures.
Blaming politicians for not cutting expenditures is unfair given that the electorate tells them not to so all blame should fall on the electorate. We can blame politicians who promulgate laws that create new spending programs as candy for the electorate.
It should be noted that Clinton’s success was largely a result of what Economic theory postulates as long wave technological cycles which occur every 70 years or so (Kondraetieff long waves). Moreover, the welfare rolls were slashed because Gringrich’s Contract with America forced the inclusion of work requirements which were later discarded under another administration ( I believe it was Obama or Biden but it could have been Bush)
Update: after checking it was Obama by EO that eliminated the “workfare” requirement of the welfare reform act of 1996.
Ah the tea party movement… I think this was the last effort towards fiscal responsibility. I’m not sure we have anyone elected that is a fiscal hawk like in the past. I suppose it’s hard to get elected on reform when the government gives out so many subsidies and is the largest employer in many parts of the country. Of course, most personal budgets are also a shambles so perhaps it’s becoming a lost skill set.
Let me elaborate briefly, because I can see the “No True Scotsman” claim coming from a mile away. The US has wiped out layer after layer of the nation’s leadership. It has eliminated most of the nation’s nuclear capabilities, and is about to cripple its infrastructure. The only claims otherwise issue from Iran’s version of “Baghdad Bob” and the social media Fifth Column in the US. Meanwhile, the predicted “terror cell” retaliations haven’t occurred, and the number of US casualties are closer to what occurs in war game operations accidents than in actual combat. Iran’s capability of seeding terrorism in the region has been hugely reduced, and Israel, the only democracy in the region, has been bolstered and supported, as it must be.
I understand, and those who are critical of this adventure also understand, that all the tactical achievements you describe have been achieved. Their argument is that strategic accomplishments are less likely to be achievable. That is their view, and it is considerable (one can consider it I mean). You can win all battles … and still lose a war. Fact.
Since the UN is corrupted and feckless, the US is the default Guardian of the Universe, and reminding Russia, China et all of that is vital, especially after the Biden Era’s “Don’t.” style of fearful diplomacy.
Absurd, outmoded idea. Jingoist, arrogant, and puffed up. Also: likely false now, in this present era. This is not the 1950s. Yet your ideological and geopolitical picture is more similar to the former model than to today’s reality. If what I observe as being true is true, you are in for a shock.
While I am largely sure your politics are outdated, I sincerely hope things do not turn out badly as many predict.
The war is already won; that’s what you’re missing. This isn’t Vietnam, with some amorphous “domino theory” to justify. The US isn’t going to install a new regime, or try to convert the country to Christianity. It’s eliminating a nuclear threat to our allies and the region, and punishing a nation that has killed many Americans and never been held to account, all while showing what the US military is capable of when it has resolve and isn’t run by cowards and weenies. If Iran’s oppressed people rise up and create a democracy in the chaos, great, but that’s their problem: we’ve given them a chance. It has nothing to do with “politics.” This is why we have a military and make having dominant military power a priority. It is a universal principle, borne out by the history of civilization.
The war is already won; that’s what you’re missing.
Incorrect assessment. First, don’t argue with me as if my mere opinion holds weight. What I have said is that many with strong standing have pointed out that tactical wins do not add up to strategic wins.
all while showing what the US military is capable of when it has resolve and isn’t run by cowards and weenies
It is also debated that this sort of adventure will turn out as it is intended to. My view? You are entranced by a romantic view of history and geo-politics that very well might not be able to work in this present. And it is precisely that — is it *attitude*? — that has many people quite worried. Such recklessness could well indicate not bravery and upstandingness, but sheer foolishness.
But anyway, there is going to be some great TeeVee tonight at 8:00 PM when the Iranian civilization is destroyed (for the good of Iraq of course). It’s going to be good!
This is why we have a military and make having dominant military power a priority. It is a universal principle, borne out by the history of civilization.
There are many different lessons borne out by ‘the history of civilization. And one of them touches on late empires when they get to a point where Cesar-like rulership gains power and makes consequential political choices. That are divided internally. Which are teetering on bankruptcy. That do not have the leadership that can carefully think things through and act strategically. That make blundering mistakes.
This is just as possible, indeed even more likely, than your romantic hope.
However, I have continually said: I hope that, somehow, this is pulled off without damaging the Nation’s interests.
Sorry: the good of Iran.
What I have said is that many with strong standing have pointed out that tactical wins do not add up to strategic wins.
Pure appeal to authority, and authority relying on fake tales and imagined intelligence they don’t have access to and relying on confirmation bias not to be laughed out of the room.
No, in no sense is my observation that well-prepared political theorists, with standing, is appeal to authority in my argument. That is a falsely premised claim. It is wise and balanced to consider a wide range of opinions and to be willing to listen and consider.
Your opinions as well.
My view? The pressure-cooker of American psychological life is approaching a dangerous point.
I think there will be explosions. Again, read Cg Jung’s Wotan. It traces a time when a nation went crazy …
Anyway, I made some calls. I got the Straight opened for a few weeks. Let’s everyone chill down … 🌸
So Caesar didn’t commit war crimes, didn’t obliterate the Iranian civilization, and didn’t allow our military to bomb a foreign country back to the Jazz Age…tonight.
Who would have guessed that outcome from a dictator-esque tyrant?