Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

Chronicles of a stable genius - all the biggliest stuff

Travelled to a bunch countries with actual dictators. Never once had my phone content checked.

Freedom of speech!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muz
Another Trump feud slowly boiling away

Samuel Clench

But another feud has been bubbling away for months: the one between Mr Trump and Jerome Powell, the man he appointed during his first term to head up the equivalent of Australia’s Reserve Bank.

The President wants the Federal Reserve to lower America’s interest rates, and has been expressing his dissatisfaction with Mr Powell for some time. The Fed Chairman’s latest remarks, which come to us from a conference in Portugal, will not help their relationship.
Mr Powell essentially said the Fed would have already cut interest rates, fulfilling Mr Trump’s wish, if not for ……… the President’s own policies.

He was explicitly asked whether rates would have been cut, absent Mr Trump’s tariffs.

“I think that’s right,” said Mr Powell.

“In effect, we went on hold when we saw the size of the tariffs, and essentially all inflation forecasts for the United States went up materially as a consequence of the tariffs.”

Mr Trump continues to insist the tariffs are not inflationary. And today he once again said “anybody would be better” as Fed Chairman than Mr Powell.



 
Football us life said:
The MAGA people think that European NATO countries are free loading off the US whilst spending more money per capita on universal healthcare services and universal welfare services. This has caused much knashing of teeth within MAGA and the GOP in general.
Click to expand...
That is also incorrect. Spending categories are defined and spending amounts are determined in advance in any government yearly budget. Defence & social services are completely separate and the increase/decrease of one does not mean more money for the other.
Defence "aid" has always aligned with long term geopolitical strategy so the MAGA cretins should realise that it's a matter of political will whether President Trump wants to give money to Ukraine on a long term basis or whether he wants to enrich his mates in the defence industry whether Ukraine and the rest of Europe ( 5% GDP ) by playing games.
 
erogenouszone said:
That is also incorrect. Spending categories are defined and spending amounts are determined in advance in any government yearly budget. Defence & social services are completely separate and the increase/decrease of one does not mean more money for the other.
Defence "aid" has always aligned with long term geopolitical strategy so the MAGA cretins should realise that it's a matter of political will whether President Trump wants to give money to Ukraine on a long term basis or whether he wants to enrich his mates in the defence industry whether Ukraine and the rest of Europe ( 5% GDP ) by playing games.
Click to expand...

This.

How many of these countries will be buying US gear given they now have to spend 2, 2 and a half times what they were spending.
 
erogenouszone said:
That is also incorrect. Spending categories are defined and spending amounts are determined in advance in any government yearly budget. Defence & social services are completely separate and the increase/decrease of one does not mean more money for the other.
Defence "aid" has always aligned with long term geopolitical strategy so the MAGA cretins should realise that it's a matter of political will whether President Trump wants to give money to Ukraine on a long term basis or whether he wants to enrich his mates in the defence industry whether Ukraine and the rest of Europe ( 5% GDP ) by playing games.
Click to expand...
Yes I know that but I don't think that quite you're getting my actual point.

At the recent Munich Security Conference VP JD Vance made several jibes at the European NATO countries for their lack of defence spending within the NATO umbrella.

Ans Vance’s speech was not an isolated incident. Prior to it US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth made it clear at NATO headquarters in Brussels that Europe should not rely on American leadership and protection any longer, stating that the US would no longer tolerate an imbalanced relationship which encourages dependency, signalling that large spending to maintain peace in Europe is no longer a priority for the US.....

So my point is that many within the MAGA movement and the GOP in general are getting a little sniffy as to why European NATO countries fiscal priorities lie more with healthcare, social care and welfare than the defence of their continent, whilst the US spends big on defence in comparison to the aforementioned social services.

This was never the point of view from the previous Democrat Party administration although I can remember Obama once scolding Europe for it's relative lack of spending on defence.
 
And just to add to that....

There is always a element of chauvinism from the radical populist right when it comes to spending money on universal healthcare and welfare services, regardless of whether it's from US or in Europe.

So it's possible that the MAGA people, right as their pet project DOGE, is going the full spaz on their fiscal priorities, are using European NATO's lean defence spending as a stick to beat it because the proportion of GDP that goes on universal healthcare and welfare services is much higher than the US on a GDP per capita basis.

Because most military analysts will probably now tell you that the main threats to European countries within NATO come from Russia, who at the minute, to put it politely, look like they couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.
 
Last edited:
America is a weird place. If you asked Australians if they thought billionaires should get tax cuts the majority would say no.

Americans are the complete opposite. They really are sold on this 'land of opportunity' thing where they'll literally vote against their own self interest in the hope that one day they could be a billionaire too.
 
Muz said:
America is a weird place. If you asked Australians if they thought billionaires should get tax cuts the majority would say no.

Americans are the complete opposite. They really are sold on this 'land of opportunity' thing where they'll literally vote against their own self interest in the hope that one day they could be a billionaire too.
Click to expand...
I know an American couple, one of which, the wife is related to my wife. Her husband is a corporate lawyer in Chicago and they are both strong Democrats.

More Hilary than Bernie mind.

We've visited them a few times over the years and they have a very good life. And they are also very socially responsible and she does a lot of charity work. Particularly for the homeless....

But by christ they are money mad too...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muz
Football us life said:
I know an American couple, one of which, the wife is related to my wife. Her husband is a corporate lawyer in Chicago and they are both strong Democrats.

More Hilary than Bernie mind.

We've visited them a few times over the years and they have a very good life. And they are also very socially responsible and she does a lot of charity work. Particularly for the homeless....

But by christ they are money mad too...
Click to expand...
A relative in the States theorises thats because Wealth is the New Worlds replacement for Aristocracy...
 
Monoethnic Social Club said:
A relative in the States theorises thats because Wealth is the New Worlds replacement for Aristocracy...
Click to expand...

Their ethos appears to be 'every man for himself'. I was reading a book on POWs in the Pacific. The were Brits, Aussies, Dutch and Americans. The one line that stood out in that book was the author was saying many times Australians and Poms banded together to look after each other but the Americans had a completely different mindset which was look out for yourself first and foremost. The Dutch also looked after each other but no one liked them.

As an aside, the Dutch, who had colonies in SE Asia were well schooled in bush medicine and while Australians were getting sick from beri-beri and tropical ulcers the Dutch weren't because of local knowledge. But because of the animosity between the various nations the Australians and poms suffered needlessly from things the Dutch could have helped them with.
 
Last edited:
Muz said:
Their ethos appears to be 'every man for himself'. I was reading a book on POWs in the Pacific. The were Brits, Aussies, Dutch and Americans. The one line that stood out in that book was the author was saying many times Australians and Poms banded together to look after each other but the Americans had a completely different mindset which was look out for yourself first and foremost. The Dutch also looked after each other but no one liked them.

As an aside, the Dutch, who had colonies in SE Asia were well schooled in bush medicine and while Australians were getting sick from beri-beri and tropical ulcers the Dutch weren't because of local knowledge. But because of the animosity between the various nations the Australians and poms suffered needlessly from things the Dutch could have helped them with.
Click to expand...
1751617012848.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top