WATCH: Former President Donald Trump blames COVID for his deficit spending. But @nickgillespie delivers a live fact check—much of that spending occurred before the pandemic.pic.twitter.com/EA0064nGn5
— reason (@reason) September 28, 2024
September 29, 2024
Nick Gillespie confronts Donald Trump about the deficit. Trump absconds.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
88 comments:
I mean it’s cute and twenty years ago that would be a gotcha moment. They both suck but Trump is by far the better of the two candidates on spending. The people running Kamala would try to outdo the figure then waste it on climate pig in a poke projects, paying illegals, new wars, funding the growth deficit caused by economy choking taxation. In conclusion I’m unmoved by leftie’s question…
The deficit is not solvable. Not for Trump. Not for anyone. And as a problem its beginnings and foundation pre-date any politician elected after 1973 (Breton Woods).
If you want to blame anyone, blame Woodrow Wilson and Alan Greenspan.
I don’t remember Presidents being in charge of spending totals. Something about the House but I could be wrong…
Postscript: You may also blame G.W.Bush, the council of economic advisors, Ben Bernanke, and the entire House and Senate during 07-09 for "Too Big Too Fail". It wasn't entirely their mess, but the way they cleaned it up allowed moral hazard to enter our economy in ways we've never seen before.
It's been with us ever since.
It's true, if we are worried about the deficit, we should vote for Kamala, I am sure that all of the goodies that she is promising in her ads will actually "reduce the deficit" the same way that spending half a trillion dollars on EVs, which are only practical for the affluent who live in warm climates was called the "inflation reduction act."
The fact of a $30 trillion+ debt points to the general failure of libertarianism. Not just in the sense of being a fringe ideology, although they certainly have less influence on politics than MAGA. Put simply, libertarians are the cheerleaders of tech oligarchs, and all the actual policy direction should be examined at the top. The smarter oligarchs knew their rapid ascent couldn't be justified by "balanced budgets" so they heavily funded social spending and DEI programs. Unfortunately, pending warfare and a failing government means that won't be viable for very much longer. As an ineffective parasite on wealth, libertarian commentators are going to get hit hard.
This is why Kamala never does interviews, BTW; we have to elect her to find out what she plans to do!
Trump was not serious about the deficit. That said - the democrats are a million times worse. Democrats threw away budgeting.
Democrats DON'T BUDGET at all. Ask Nancy.
What is Chase Oliver's plan to get elected and bring down the deficit?
Does Althouse have a few clips from Trump's rambling -- incoherent Prairie du Chien rally? Trump sounded like a very old and tired night club act.
Trump inherited a robust economy (repaired from absolute GOP destruction in 2008 by Obama/Biden), a healthy employment picture, and national debt slowly coming under control --- and then he torched the nation. When Trump left the office in Jan 2021, national debt rose the highest amount in a single term ever, unemployment was near double digits, millions were dying, GDP was deeply negative, rich poor divide was astronomically high, and Trump left the nation and democracy in shambles by leading a treasonous invasion with his base.
Currently, the stock market is at record highs. Crime is plummeting following the Trump Crime Wave. Inflation just printed 2.2% and all Trump and his trolls can say is that Biden and Harris have destroyed the country. Keep destroying it then.
C'mon, folks! Nick's got to generate some attention for Moral Preener's, er, uh, I mean Reason Magazine. He needs the dough! You think hair care products and black leather jackets grow on trees?
"sounded like a very old and tired night club act."
More projection.
Trump knows to solve the debt is gonna be a very hard thing to do, no matter who is President. It is just so huge and getting larger... but one thing for sure, Democrats will make it larger and never smaller.
Oh dear facts instead of fear and doom and gloom and false information. The Lord has sent light on His day ,of course you know about facts up in here.. Help somebody today give your Maker a smile.(no charge)
Trump is a builder. It takes borrowed money. He will never be serious about the deficit until he decides it is the perfect cover for reducing bureaucracy a la Argentina. He can cut the intel agencies 20% and most of the others by more. Eliminate Education and Energy. They're part of the Executive, he should be able to do this. But if for whatever reason he can't get his way, his instincts are not for frugality; he is not Coolidge.
This really does not measure up for an Althouse Comments section entry. Everyone here knows why the deficit ballooned in the last year of Trump's presidency. COVID. What has added to the public debt far more rapidly since then have been the absurd levels of utterly wasteful deficit-financed spending by the Biden Democrats.
Yes and Losertarians with "Free Trade" with China and open borders have no solution.
Their last candidate for president ran on a platform of drug legalization.
bich presents the fantasy world of Democrats.
Yes, our stock market and several others around the globe are at record highs. But they are technically overextended and very weak. They look vulnerable to any bad news. A worldwide selloff of risk assets is certainly not farfetched!
A 20-25% haircut would put a little fear back and make budgeting choices somewhat more meaningful. A major bear market like 2000 or 2007-08 would change the landscape bigly. The wealth effect can, and does, get reversed periodically. Especially likely for one built upon the Fed's perpetual-motion machine.
I liked the shout out to free Ross Ulbricht. Trump has said he will pardon him. Bit of a local story - he’s imprisoned in the US Penitentiary in Tucson
Nick Gillespie wants the country to save money the same way he does – by wearing the same clothes every day.
Democrats think that their opinions are facts because they are too stupid to understand the difference.
This is what ChatGPT says about "abscond."
Abscond generally carries a connotation of evasion or secrecy that often hints at something illegal or wrongful. It suggests that the person is fleeing or hiding to avoid legal consequences or to escape after some questionable or illicit action. While it doesn’t always involve theft, it usually implies a motive to avoid detection or capture, which gives it a tone of illegality. For example:
"He absconded from jail."
"She absconded with the sensitive documents."
Even if the specific act isn’t spelled out as illegal, the word typically suggests that the departure is under suspicious or wrongful circumstances.
It just doesn't seem like a neutral word.
After hearing Lurch talk about the anguish of living under the US Constitution, Nick Gillespie sounds like Paul Ryan.
Trump doesn't propose cutting the deficit because the people don't want it. It would be mean. It would push granny off the cliff. Etc. etc. Until the Gillespies give us different voters, who don't want access to other people's money or load debt onto future generations, and a different Dem party, that won't call for more taxing and spending forever, deficit-cutting is a sure loser in elections. Trump is doing a lot of things to try and lose, but at least not this.
RSM and Doc K - You both nailed the right culprits. The only consolation of KH winning is that the deficit/debt issue might blow up on their watch.
Maybe we should put Trump and Harris on a stage together, ask them questions and let the whole world judge who appears to be in command and who appears a little off?
Oh wait...we did that....
That has some dangers. Remeber the 1992 vice presidential debate. Who was the worst on TV? Admiral James Stxcckdale was the worst on TV. Who was the best candidate for VP out of Senator Al Gore, VP Dan Quayle, and Retired Admiral and Standford professor James Stockdale. James Stockdale is the answer to the question.
@ PJ: Trump ranted about law abiding citizens eating dogs and cats. He is mentally unstable; a danger to our country. He rambles incoherently and cannot formulate a single sentence about policy without devolving into juvenile insults. He is terrified of another debate.
So no responsibility at all eh? You think they congress would overrride vetoes? When do they override vetoes?
That's funny, I watched a video where he didn't ignore the unprompted, informal question in a public setting, rather he gave an answer and then continued moving on. If he had ignored Gillespie and his question, then one might criticize. But calling it 'absconding' is at least as dishonest as the presumption in the question. He was gracious. He answered, and he answered Gillespie's followup. He just didn't cooperate in the ambush.
The deficit is one of the two biggest long-term issues facing this country (the Democratic criminalization of political opposition is the other), and neither party cares enough to do anything about it. The Republicans used to talk about it in their campaigns, but now they don’t even do that.
I’m not saying that all but don’t start with the override shit- If Trump vetoed the usual blasphemous CRs and Omnibus Congress would be content to shut down the government and blame Trump for killing orphans and widows. Personally I’d love to see the government cut over seven trillion from government spending over the next four years. Are the people running Kamala on board with cutting spending by over 7 trillion dollars over the next four years? I don’t see that in either agenda…
PK, that is why I worry about Trump getting a "poisoned chalice" by winning. It is now too late to fix.
The Walz-Vance debate tomorrow night will be almost as much fun.
Suppose you and your wastrel brother managed a trust together, each of you switching places as trustee in alternate years. The trustee has absolute discretion. If you manage trust assets prudently, you are only making it easier for your wastrel brother to irresponsibly dissipate the trust.
That is an oversimplified version of the dilemma created when one side cares far less about deficits than the other, and is willing to spend lots of borrowed money to buy votes.
Trump thinks crushing debt is a feature, not a bug. When it becomes unsustainable, you declare bankruptcy and some other fool is left holding the bag. If it worked for him personally, surely it will work for the entire country.
Doc K - I agree. I can't watch debates as I get too nervous. I am rooting for JD and hope the hillbilly kicks the goofballs's ass.
As you are a D/Anti Trump troll, a question to get your opinion on one item.As President, DJT ordered the killing of Qasem Soleimani. What is your opinion of that? Thanks.
bich is still trying to motivate one more assassin with lies. Watch Walz-Vance tomorrow night. Speaking of terrified.
Prole, one can understand your TDS if you read only Democrat propaganda. What are you doing here?
why do so many pretend The deficit is solvable?!
for full transparency of the game the budget should be 100% deficit and zero taxes.
eat dat cat, richie!
Reason Magazine do get a lot of mileage with the word in their name Reason Magazine
Heh… teh Wan Libertarian in Black.
as everyone knows full faith and credit of US is based on GDP + valuation of asset of the people == may be J. Engeron can provide second opinion!
A return to "Regular Order" breaking down omnibus budget bills, along with a constitutional substitute for the line-item veto, would be a start to holding POTUS accountable for deficit spending.
The meme is real Narayanan:
"If they can just print money in the amounts they do, why in the hell are we paying taxes"
Why indeed.
The Republicans used to talk about it in their campaigns,== as lip service.
Reason Magazine do get a lot of mileage with the word in their name Reason Magazine
Earnest Prole said...
Trump thinks crushing debt is a feature, not a bug. When it becomes unsustainable, you declare bankruptcy and some other fool is left holding the bag.
You misspelled Cloward-Piven.
hope hillbilly kicks the goofballs's ass. there is problem of perception > hillbilly went Ivy League and goofball went Community College?
Basically. President needs to tell the House, upfront, that they are 100% not signing any omnibus bills and they have to pass the budget by the law the House themselves passed.
doctrev said...
The fact of a $30 trillion+ debt points to the general failure of libertarianism
I think you mean libertinism in DC indulging the greed of the people.
Our best hope may be that Europe collapses first, and the wiser young Europeans come here as refugees. The worst "good" scenario is a more powerful virus that kills tens of millions of retirees quickly.
For some reason, it didn't occur to me until yesterday that China might have deliberately overreacted to early Covid in Wuhan precisely so that the West would, too, when it got here. It did more damage to ordered liberty then the racial wreckening. I'm not sure how our unraveling helps them economically, but perhaps wealth isn't their goal.
I would also put some of the blame on Dick "Reagan proved deficits don't matter" Cheney.
One side may care less than the other about deficits, but neither really cares that much, except when they're out of office and not responsible for taxing and spending.
Dick "Reagan proved deficits don't matter" Cheney.
=========
the word 'matter' does not mean same to politicians vs. citizen facing reality
how does retiree deaths help anything? except extend the pretense?
The problem is that there are no good answers for the deficit problem. The deficit has grown past the point of being able to be managed and both parties are responsible for that.
If Musk is given a Government Efficiency role, that may do some good in reducing the overspending and procurement waste. That and reduce fed taxes, limit the current budget to what the US actually collected in taxes the prior fiscal calendar. Or maybe the year before that, whichever is lower. Plus, the Federal government population needs a big layoff. Any unemployment paid out would be cheaper, and limited. Have we ever witnessed a serious govt layoff?
Oh and quit coming up with these scams (climate, DEI, etc) that “justify” spending hundreds of billions of dollars of our hard earned money. Maybe we can claw some of that back.
"Donald"
There is no poltical will to deal with deficit spending or the national debt, either in the population at large or the politicians until all other options are tried. Sorry, Libertarians, sorry Goth Fonzi, but that's the truth. So you can stop whining about it already.
Lazarus, Reagan had Democrat Congresses both of his terms. They had a deal. They would let him win The Cold War, if he didn't interfere with their spending. I blame Gingrich and Armey who had a GOP Congress for the first time in decades and ignored the problem. Clinton was clearly smarter than Gingrich but they could have done something,.
Prole, you keep outing yourself as a Democrat by restating their lies.
damikesc, that would "shut down the government" and we can't have that. Obama even blocked roads to show how bad that would be.
“Nikki Haley claimed that Trump added $8 trillion to the national debt while Ron DeSantis said that Trump added $7.8 trillion to the debt. These statements are true, depending on how you measure additions to the debt. We estimate the ten-year cost of the legislation and executive actions President Trump signed into law was about $8.4 trillion, with interest.”
https://www.crfb.org/blogs/how-much-did-president-trump-add-debt
I don’t remember Presidents being in charge of spending totals.
I don't remember them being in charge of the price of daycare, either. But the left is pushing that, too.
The Democrats have no incentive to cut the deficit as they did during the Clinton era. Every time that the supposedly fiscally disciplined Republicans have been in power in modern history they have blown the budget on tax cuts for the rich that never deliver without making the painful concordant cuts to the budget.
If the Democrats do all the hard work to bring some balance to the budget only to see the Republicans blow it all again they might as well spend for themselves and let the Republicans take responsibility themselves for once.
This is comedy, right?
I have Reason Magazine socks.
You can also get some of these socks if you donate to the Webathon that raises dough for Reason.
Anywho, Nick is often making pro-DJT comments on The Reason Roundtable podcast. IOW, he is well aware of situations where DJT is not-bad/good-ish/good.
Only a DJT fan club nut would deny that DJT is terrible re deficit spending. Unlike many that comment here, Gillespie is not a DJT fan club nut. Hence, he asked the question re DJT and deficits that Althouse highlighted in this post.
BTW, the Reason podcast worth a listen, IMHO. Matt Welch is good at moderating. He's great at moving the conversation along while getting the best from the others on the pod. Plus he's clever and funny. Also, I'm always interested to hear the Katherine Mango-Ward POV.
BTW, newer commenters here may not know the history of Althouse v Reason.
When I read this post I definitely was thinking about that fuss:
https://reason.com/2006/12/29/grande-conservative-blogress-d/
Excellent point. David Horowitz and his co-writer wrote a book back in the 90s (IIRC) that detailed how the Left was going to use this strategy to overthrow America.
I agree with you to a point, Mike K, especially about the Reagan-Tip O'Neill deal. I disagree about Gingrich. It was an ugly compromise but if we had kept the budget trajectory that resulted from the government shutdowns during Clinton's terms we likely could have balanced the budget. The Democrats were able to demagogue the Social Security "Lockbox" into being which provided a ton of money from the Boomer's last working years and the spending spree started up again.
Here's a bit more if folks want to get in the weeds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFS0SgNtxyM
Michael K. I think what Trump is going to do is ask for 10% cut in federal spending regardless. EVERYBODY is going to have to sacrifice a little now rather than a lot later. And 10% of all federal spending is a shit ton of money.
Trump can count votes, and he can count dollars. It's by no means certain, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if Trump says nothing significant about the deficit before the election and then turns around and treats debt as a dire national emergency after taking office. I also wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't. It's just that I can't see any other politicians with a possibility of competing at the presidential level who are less beholden to maintaining the status quo than him.
how does retiree deaths help anything?
The yearly deficit would disappear if the Silent Generation and the older!! half of Boomers keeled over tomorrow, because SS, Medicare, and Medicaid are its biggest autopilot drivers. Of course, Congress would pass gigantic new spending bills as soon as the Senate was refilled enough for a quorum.
Social Security is a wealth transfer program to give money to people who live a long time.
The US debt will be solved easily. One Tuesday night the President will go on TV and say,
My Fello Ams, due to circumstances created by the Republican party, it is no longer possible for the government to pay social security. Therefore all government spending will be diverted to the support of our vibrant migrants and all others must support themselves. All existing 401 K and other retirement accounts will be donated to support this effort.
All existing 401 K and other retirement accounts will be donated to support this effort.
=================
do savers have 40 trillion dollars in investments?
Thanks for posting this link, it explains some things I had observed over the years.
I agree: Reason Magazine sucks.
No. Which is why broad spending cuts are in order. There are federal agencies that can be abolished or severly cut back. A 10% cut over 10 years will do a lot reduce the debt. And yes. A 10% cut in all entitlements. Things that our constitution does not account for.
A lot of posters have noted that the horse has bolted (deficit spending) but what did we get in return? To me it was a prosperous road and an economic up-tick. But post-covid, increased spending and nothing to show for it.
Although, a ridiculous inflation reduces the 'value' of that deficit, I suppose. A trillion dollars ain't worth what it used to be.
Lazarus. There used to be something called deficit hawks. They were always Republicans. People like David Stockman and Paul Ryan. They became extinct, not because their arguments were disproven, but because austerity is far less popular than a federal check in every pocket.
If prudence is going to get you defenestrated, you adapt or retire. Republican prudence would only put the Dems in office.
Post a Comment