That was then, this is now. But the reason why I said we're living in a funky time is that no blue collar workers would have ever voted for a right wing extremist like Trump back in the day. That no longer is the case. It would be very interesting to see how the organized labor will fare going forward. I think the whole dynamic will shift drastically.
Labor is much more likely to vote Trump than I think you believe. His America first doctrine and simply his anti woke rhetoric typically plays to that base. Did you see the commercial ‘Kamala is for they/them, Trump is for you?’ Prime time, all major channels. NFL Sunday, you name it. If not, take a look.
Wow!! @Pricechange, you trolled two posts to respond to my just one comment. I must've touched a nerve. LOL All right, let me respond to your comments one by one then. No this is NOT true. You do not need people to vote, to pay taxes and etc. to be fillers. This is not running a frat party, the more the merrier. When you want a strong and prosperous country, it's the better the merrier. Bigger is not always better. Taxes, colleges and universities and all the infrastructures are all supposed to be proportional to the population size of a country. If you have a smaller country without a lot of people, you would naturally be paying lower taxes because your bureaucracy and infrastructure would be smaller unless it's an inefficiently run country. Plenty of small countries in the world that do not have high immigrant populations all rank higher than United States in terms of wealth and/or well-being according to many ranks, studies and etc. And educational institutions like universities don't need to be big or costly either. In many of the small and yet well-run countries like Sweden which never had high number of immigrants until recently, universities are free and are perfectly sized for the populations' needs. And for creating consumers for goods, that's even more ridiculous. If you are producing more than your domestic population can consume, you are more than welcome to export the excess, WHY do you need to allow people to enter even illegally into your country just for them to buy your goods??!!! This is dumb!!! And besides before they can have the money to pay for your goods, you will actually have to pay them to live in your country!! So you spend more to earn less? LOL And what if they can't find jobs when they come to your country and don't have the money to consume your products? You are going to give the products to them for free??!! LOL Your idea of allowing illegal immigration just to be some kind of fillers is just as ludicrous as putting exhaust pipes on an EV!! Really?? The dumber the more third world these people are, the better? Are you calling illegal immigrants dumb?? Just good enough to be some bottom feeders to allow people to stay in the top 1%??!! Really??!! As much as I don't agree with illegal immigration, I still believe immigrants even are people, with families and children, with the same dreams, hopes, fear and anxiety just like all of us. They shouldn't be allowed to enter this country illegally but they still should be treated with respect and dignity and definitely not as some kind of bottom feeders for others to stay at the top? And to wish them to be dumb and stay dumb? LOL So this is the Democrat's illegal immigration policy? Is to let them into the country just for the votes but at the same time to keep them down and dumb forever? LOL No wonder even the Latino's didn't vote for Kamala Harris. Now I know why. LOL Ok I talked about these unnecessary "needs" in my comments above. God, your thoughts are all over the place. Quite the opposite, you use robotics to do the lower ends of jobs and always the humans to do the higher ends of jobs. The highest end of jobs aren't the technical or the skilled ones; it's the creative jobs like performance arts and living arts, you want robots to do those? You want to see two robots playing Romeo and Juliet or dance the Swan Lake? So if you are already having robots that require no breaks, no food, no shelter, no benefits, no insurance except just supply of minimum energy and occasional repair/maintenance doing the most repetitive, mundane jobs in the highest efficiency possible, then WHY would you still want illegal immigrants to come in to take over from robots? LOL Remember humans will NEVER be as efficient and fast as machines and robots. As I have stated earlier, are you planning to treat illegal immigrants like robots expecting them to work non-stop without giving them any breaks, food, shelter, benefits, insurance except with minimum substance and occasionally healthcare when they are absolutely on their last breath? America already tried that, it's called slavery and cheap labours, neither of them worked out. That's why we are trying with the robots. Get with the program. Like I said we do NOT need illegal immigrants to fill the lower end of jobs. The lower end of jobs will eventually be filled by robotics. I am already not needing to hire maids to clean my house by having two robotic vacuum cleaners. And I eliminated the need to have pool cleaners by buying a robotic pool cleaner. I am also planning to get rid of my lawn maintenance contractor eventually when I buy a robotic lawn mower once the robotic lawn mower technology is perfected a bit more. And same thing goes for my window cleaning. I am waiting for the robotic window cleaning technology to mature a bit more before I buy it to clean my windows and as it stands right now, robotic window cleaners can also clean your shower stalls and counters. They are also developing robotic toilet cleaners. Eventually all of my household cleaning and maintenance tasks can all be handled by robotics which would completely eliminate the need for human labour. So why remind me again would there be a need to import supposedly cheap labour into the country via illegal immigration in the first place if we don't need them to even fill the "lower end" of jobs? And illegal immigration won't make inflation go down either. Like I illustrated it before, immigration, legal or illegal, carries its own cost. And these cost are not going to just disappear into the thin air; they will eventually make it into the price that consumers pay. Now I hope you can why illegal immigration does not make sense and why Trump wants to get rid of them. They do not help in any bit not in the least in reducing inflation.
His cabinet picks are primarily neocons and financial engineers. I expect a Reaganesque type presidency, meaning he'll be a TV President while not knowing what his underlings are doing.
I think it depends a lot on how much the currencies will float around the tariffs to overcome or reduce the effects and second how much budget cuts will be effectively done on administration things and government spendings in the USA. If the use AI to digitalize a lot and automate processes the efficiency can be much larger than now and more budget cuts can be realized because of that. So this is a bet on the future how effective Musk, Trump and co. will do their job.
Debatable: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/12/17/trump-trade-peter-navarro-tariffs-inflation-deficit-.html Trump trade counselor Peter Navarro says planned tariffs won’t spur inflation Published Tue, Dec 17 202410:31 AM ESTUpdated 3 Hours Ago Kevin Breuninger@KevinWilliamB Share Key Points Peter Navarro, top trade advisor to President-elect Donald Trump, argued that Trump’s planned tariffs and tax cuts will not boost inflation or federal deficits. Navarro, in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” claimed that inflation during the Biden administration was caused by “fiscal irresponsibility.” Trump has proposed numerous tax cuts, including further lowering the corporate tax rate, as well as eliminating taxes on tips for service workers and on Social Security benefits for seniors. Former director of the US Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro speaks on stage with his “Wife Bonnie” on the third day of the Republican National Convention at the Fiserv Forum on July 17, 2024 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images Peter Navarro, who is set to become the top trade advisor to President-elect Donald Trump, contended Tuesday that Trump’s plans for broad tariffs and steep tax cuts will not spur inflation or raise deficits, despite warnings from some experts. Navarro said Trump’s first term in the White House proved his point. “We put on significant tariffs on China, steel, aluminum, dishwashers, solar, a lot of increased countervailing duties to stop the dumping,” Navarro said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “We had zero inflation from any of that,” he said. Trump imposed tariffs on China during his first term. President Joe Biden’s administration kept many of them in place. “So I would say that just go back and play all the interviews that were done on CNBC of people back in the first term with their hair on fire, worrying about inflation,” said Navarro. “It never happened, and it’s the same movie this time,” the 75-year-old China hawk added. Navarro, whom Trump picked earlier in December to be his senior counselor for trade and manufacturing, argued that the inflation that hung over Biden’s term was caused by “fiscal irresponsibility.” watch now VIDEO07:31 Peter Navarro: You’ll see over $1 trillion of investments from Trump’s tariff & trade policies During his recent campaign, Trump said he wanted to enact much larger and broader tariffs, plus additional targeted duties on imports from China. Since winning the election, he has issued additional tariff threats on Mexico and Canada. Trump also has suggested a laundry list of proposed tax cuts, including further lowering the corporate tax rate, as well as eliminating taxes on tips for service workers and on Social Security benefits for seniors. He has also vowed to extend tax cuts implemented during his first term, some of which are set to expire at the end of 2025. The national debt increased during Trump’s first term, even before the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. Asked how Trump hopes to keep deficits under control while pursuing new tax cuts, Navarro on Tuesday again pointed to the example of the first administration. Navarro argued that before the pandemic, the U.S. was “steadily gathering more and more strength in the economy.” “And if we had had a clean fourth year without the pandemic, I think you would have seen a much different fiscal picture at the end of the first term,” he said. Navarro claimed that economic growth in the next term will come from boosting domestic oil drilling efforts, and predicted “tremendous cost savings within the government to pull back the fiscal overhang.” “We’re keenly aware of the need to engage in fiscal responsibility and prudent Fed policies that will help the American people afford what they need,” he said.