Trump Elected: The True MAGA Era Begins, Now What?

[axj]

I was about to say, that automation may become a necessity due to not enough people to perform 'menial' jobs.

When there are less people, there are also less menial jobs necessary to sustain a smaller population.

However, cleaning and tiding up after yourself, physically working to organize the 3d elements in the 3d space around or in a dwelling, or even taking care of plants and animals involve actions which when performed routinely and correctly develop skills and forge personality traits.
It is clear that I have a dilemma which would require external help to resolve.

I think that it is about the freedom of choice. For example, in the ancient past the only way to get somewhere on land was by walking. Now we have more choices and can still choose walking for its health benefits, etc.

But let's get back to Trump.

 

[sToRmR1dR]

Wisconsin Supreme Court election - A "legal" battle between the Democrats and Republicans for "every inch" of America.

"The battle for Isengard has begun".

"Hands Off!" (of the criminal activities of the Democrats): Thousands of people staged protests against Trump and Musk across the US.

What a beautiful "foreplay" for starting a civil war.

 

[Jones]

As for imposing tariffs on countries we're not competing against, we probably shouldn't. But if other countries are complaining when the US's tariffs are lower than theirs, then we should.

It is probably unrealistic to fund the government exclusively with tariffs. I don't mean to make that point, as much as the point that the tariff ideology goes back.

In one of his speeches, Trump referred back to the times before the 16th amendment that introduced personal income tax when the governments sole income was through tariffs and customs duties and his take was that they had so much money that they didn't know what to do with it. The 16th amendment was ratified just before WWI and personal income tax was needed to help fund it.

Thing is, depopulation if successful will reduce the income from tariffs and customs duties as well has personal income tax. What then? The only countries that will be able to make an income off of customs duties, tariffs and income tax will those that still have a reasonable population.

 

[axj]

In one of his speeches, Trump referred back to the times before the 16th amendment that introduced personal income tax when the governments sole income was through tariffs and customs duties and his take was that they had so much money that they didn't know what to do with it.

Since these new tariffs are in effect being paid by the people in the US through higher prices, it would make sense to decrease or abolish income tax to offset that.

Thing is, depopulation if successful will reduce the income from tariffs and customs duties as well has personal income tax. What then?

Lower population means that countries have less expenses as well - unless of course much of that money is being stolen or funnelled into enriching the already rich.

 

[WhiteMountain]

Jeffery Sachs does a good job of explaining why Trumps approach is harmful. The little I've heard him speak I've found of value. The first time was his talk on how Trump dislikes Netanyahu which went viral and was appreciated by many. But a few things he said sound off the mark to me like Trump cutting taxes for the rich again, maybe for production purposes? I know he raised taxes on the wealthy in some cases in his last term and they worked furiously to get those removed. The middle class had a major decrease like I did by half. Also he says Trumps economy will harm the poorest in the US and people on Medicare will have their benefits removed. That's an old Liberal/Democratic ruse repeated endlessly in many forms. Only fraud will be cut in Medicare hopefully.

Also he's been a professor at Harvard and now long term at Columbia U which is known to be an indoctrination center for the radical left. So, some caution with him for me.

Sachs has always been on the liberal side on things, so you do have to take some of what he says knowing that. So his use of the standard Democratic rhetoric on class warfare is not surprising. But he is right about the tariffs, just as he is right about the U.S.'s mistakes regarding Russia and the Ukraine.

 

[WhiteMountain]

I appreciate the optimism. My own thinking from your response went to the fact that powerful people, as quoted here, want humans to be replaced by machines. I don't know how to stop them, and I also don't know if there's a more humane outcome as you foresee or as portrayed in one of Musk's preferred sci-fi novels. There may never be 100% unemployment, but automation is unstoppable, and according to the C's it is predicted to end our society somehow. So, my own vague prediction is the way that will happen is our existence in the matrix (or virtual reality) or else living in one of those dystopias authors seem fond of writing about.

I fully agree with that much, that this will lead to shortages in the short term for obvious reasons, because we don't produce or have what other countries provide, because we haven't trained or built the necessary facilities. Beyond that the administration may really be seeking to sell government bonds, increase the money supply, spur investment more as much as they can this way. Whether this will be successful I don't know; I still recall that economic policy is said to be very arbitrary, which I'm sure means the Fed could make things worse if that is their decision, and we can ascribe any reason to it. I still go back to a far-left idea, touted by Jill Stein and Proudhon (the true original communist), that we can really fund whatever we want (though it should be material and specific) and the private banks shouldn't be private. Issues with inflation disappear when the money is used. You are free to tell me that this is too unrealistic.

As for imposing tariffs on countries we're not competing against, we probably shouldn't. But if other countries are complaining when the US's tariffs are lower than theirs, then we should.

It is probably unrealistic to fund the government exclusively with tariffs. I don't mean to make that point, as much as the point that the tariff ideology goes back.

The problem is not the banks being private as much as the entire fractional reserve system and many of the regulations on banks that actually REQUIRE a really bad customer experience (KYI laws, antiprivacy laws, money laundering laws - all for the purpose of a 1984 Surveillance state; HSBC was caught red handed deliberately laundering money on a massive scale for terrorists/drug cartels and no one went to jail - it is all about killing privacy not money laundering).

The fractional reserve system is literally even worse than fiat money. I could make a good argument that fiat currency is done correctly is better than a gold standard if you can construct a system not controlled by the government that limits the amount of money printing. Much as bitcoin sort of tried to do (not a great system either...). But when you have a fractional reserve system, the money supply is to a large extent controlled by the willingness of banks to lend at any one moment which causes massive volatility in the system. And it leaves you vulnerable to bank runs and bank collapses. There is no such thing as a "safe" fractional reserve bank. In any other industry the practice would be considered fraud and the perpetrators would land in jail.

And both the ability of banks to expand the money supply ad infinitum and the central bank to print money ad infinitum, lets the government get bloated, live beyond its means, and leaves the society vulnerable to the collapse we are seeing now. And just printing money, which Trump wants the Fed to do obviously, is only going to make the inflation worse.

Additionally the resaon you NEED private banks is privacy. The CBDC model is literally the elimination of private banks and lumping everything on the same central PUBLIC system, where whoever controls the networks knows what is happening with no privacy to anyone. Bitcoin without any sort of anonymity. CBDC will of course add a control part as well, but putting everything in the same bank or institution without even the control aspects allows the government or whoever else has access to that system to monitor everything in real time. Private banks - the information is restricted to that bank theoretically. It used to be private banks like in Switzerland could actually offer privacy as a feature, with criminal penalties for violations. Government regulatons killed that; but those regulations should be and can be repealed. But you need private banks for any hope of privacy.

Personally, it looks to me like Trump is trying to deliberately crash the economy and try to control the crash give his administration more direct control of the economy. Then he swoops in the the CBDCs to replace the current financial system, using the infrastructure that the elite were planning anyway. He will claim that he has done it for the American people and will put everyone on universal basic income and do his best FDR inpression, and MAGA people like my mom will be cheering Trump as saviour. And maybe that is even his intent and he is being played by the people around him. But that seems to be the direction we are heading. I listened to one of Trump's former CIA contractor mouthpieces last night, Tore Maras, it it literally seemed like that was what she was promoting, and she literally said people not trusting the new system that Trump was "hijacking" from the Deep State, that would be the worst outcome. Classic pysop to make it seem the digital chains are inevitable (which she has also said before) and you have to make the best of it turning it into a maximum transparency system (including ... EVERYTHING being tracked). I am not buying that. But that sort of confirmed my worst fears about Trump because she appears to be in the know on a lot of things.

 

[Natus Videre]

"Hands Off!" (of the criminal activities of the Democrats): Thousands of people staged protests against Trump and Musk across the US.
What a beautiful "foreplay" for starting a civil war.

The American Civil War started on April 12, 1861—and a recent film Civil War was released in the US on April 12, 2024, almost exactly a year ago! April is looking explosive!

 

[axj]

a maximum transparency system (including ... EVERYTHING being tracked)

Very good point. The corruption being uncovered by DOGE transparency could be used as the main argument for a new CBDC-like system and further restrictions on cash ("maximum transparency for everyone!").

I think this is indeed the most likely way that the programmable money system (digital prison) will be 'sold' to Trump supporters. Maybe it is also how the technocrats are trying to convince Trump to do it, with "maximum transparency" and "efficiency" arguments.

 

[iamthatis]

I was about to say, that automation may become a necessity due to not enough people to perform 'menial' jobs. However, cleaning and tiding up after yourself, physically working to organize the 3d elements in the 3d space around or in a dwelling, or even taking care of plants and animals involve actions which when performed routinely and correctly develop skills and forge personality traits.
It is clear that I have a dilemma which would require external help to resolve.

Yeah, Mouravieff wrote that freed from the struggle of existence, man will degenerate. The idea of 'more leisure time leads to a better life' is a myth. Good times make weak men. Too much happiness rots the Soul. But if it's only challenge and hardship all the time,then that's the myth of the other extreme - 'arbeit macht frei' - and being worked to death. So there needs to be balance of challenge and relaxation.

Very interesting to read what Mouravieff wrote through the lens of technocracy - a new control system that will take over the bipolarity of capitalism vs. communism, with a different organization of the entire world, from production of labor (robots), to a different form of money (CBDCs), etc.:

The image of this world is transient. Everything changes. Before our eyes, these changes sap the foundations of the ancient order. Technical development marches on at an accelerated rhythm, and nobody knows how to slow or stop it. New sources of almost unlimited energy, and the automation of industrial production, modify or are just about to modify all aspects of life and of human society. Taking account of this fact, it is not too far fetched to say that in the not too distant future the struggle for existence, this great regulator of human life, will be no more than a matter of historical record. As soon as he is born, man will be provided with all he will need. What is luxury today will be given freely tomorrow.

Such a perspective can be joyful; it can also be terribly frightening. The necessity of earning his daily bread, which has occupied man until now, and has automatically restrained his ferocious instincts, will be abolished. What will he do then, free from the fatigue of his daily work? We can already constate that an increase of crime coincides with the general reduction in working hours. The yearly holidays are marked by an increased number of accidents, and by a loosening of morals. Such signs must encourage us to reflect. Can we better occupy 'freed' man by reorganizing his leisure time? Such men will soon be fed up with having four or even five Sundays a week, and with automation, one can foresee that four to six hours per day, two days a week, will be all that will be needed.


How will he be able to equilibrate his social life when this safety valve—the imperious necessity of earning one's bread—will be superseded? One cannot say. No basic concept seems to exist on this subject, and no serious proposals to solve this problem have yet been formulated by the people responsible for industrial, social and political life. Yet it is clear that the constraint exerted on man by nature, meaning by the divine Will, cannot be replaced by some human constraint such as policing. We must search for the solution of the problem on a higher plane.


Let us condense the question. One of the first consequences of the widespread application of automation in production will be the proportional weakening of the political and social power of money. Why do people today still seek to win money? Money represents an equivalent of human labour; it permits the acquisition of the fruits of this labour without any effort. If we can obtain the same results by automation with-out, or almost without, the intervention of human work, money will progressively lose its buying power. The progress of technology will guarantee an easy life, and the almost unlimited satisfaction of his material needs, to every infant as soon as he is born.

Under these conditions, we can say that humanity is undoubtedly reaching the most important turning point in its history. If money loses its purchasing power, it will inevitably loose its political and social power as well. The real power is held in the world today by a minority who possess money - capitalism - or who administer money - communism.

With automation, the rivalry between capitalism and communism will lose its meaning day by day. Deprived of its object, the great controversy of today will tomorrow be left behind without ever being solved. The question is: who will form the ruling elite of the new era? In other words, by what new force will money be replaced?

According to the C's, and also what the technocrats are drooling about, I suppose it's the '666 VISA Beast System'. Technological development seems to be an objective process, the tool become the master, and it seems like neither Trump nor any other politician has the ability to regulate it.

 

[axj]

Yeah, Mouravieff wrote that freed from the struggle of existence, man will degenerate. The idea of 'more leisure time leads to a better life' is a myth. Good times make weak men. Too much happiness rots the Soul. But if it's only challenge and hardship all the time,then that's the myth of the other extreme - 'arbeit macht frei' - and being worked to death. So there needs to be balance of challenge and relaxation.

Definitely agree that challenges are necessary, but I think that working less does not mean that there will be less challenges overall. Interpersonal relationships will still remain the main source of challenges. And it also seems that our Higher Self always brings the necessary amount of challenges into our lives.

As to "too much happiness rots the Soul", I don't think that is true. True happiness comes from building a strong conscious connection to one's soul or Higher Self. That does not "rot the soul", quite the opposite. You can also consider what life would be like in an STO world - certainly a lot more happiness there, but also various challenges.

Moravieff seems to be saying that it is a natural part of human evolution to become more or less free from the struggle of earning the daily bread. That it will be "the most important turning point in human history" and that new societal systems may become necessary.

 

[Mark]

The fractional reserve system is literally even worse than fiat money.

That's an understatement. I read the book Creature From Jekyl Island (it's about the creation of the Federal Reserve in the USA) and it explains how the system works in the USA. If I remember correctly fractional reserve means that a financial instituation must retain X percent of any money deposited, and it can lend out the remainder. Right now in the USA the reserve amount requirement is ZERO, meaning that a financial institution does not need to retain/reserve any funds deposited, they can lend all of it out.

In general it works like this: Person A deposits 100 into Institution X and if the reserve requirement is zero, then Institution X can lend that 100 to another customer at which point the money is deposited into that customer's account, then Institution X can lend that 100 out again, and so on, over and over. That creates a situation where Institution X has money lent out that does not exist, it's just "book numbers." This goes into their accounting docs as assets. They're lending what they don't really have. And even if there were a reserve required at this time greater than zero it still allows Institution X to lend funds it does not have. Maybe the reserve were 10%, it could lend out the other 90%, then that goes into another person's account at which point 90% of that deposit can be lent out, repeatedly until the amount reduces to an amount too low to lend. But that's just after one person deposits money. This problem compounds as the number of depositers increases. Meanwhile Institution X can use the "book numbers" as assets for various purposes, and at the same time the lent "money" goes into the ecomony, this can obviously cause inflation unless interest rates are high enough to curb borrowing from such institutions.

Because of this system Fed Reserve interest rates act as one of the throttles on inflation: the higher the rates the less borrowing and thus lower inflation. The Fed base interest rate is also important because in general lender's cannot lend at any interest rate lower than the base.

 

[dredger]

Hello,
I follow a little bit what Trump is doing but i have no knowledge in finance and related. But, one well known and, so far at least, respected analyst in France posted something today on X, he re-posted a comment found on "4Chan". It's a small summary text which (try to) explains why Trump is acting like he does at this moment. Maybe this was posted already, but at first glance it looks it wasn't.
So i figured out it was a good thing to repost, simply because if this french guy reposted that it's usually a good sign - at least it's FWIW.

Here's the link to the tweet

Translation of the quick comment he made :
This simple comment on 4chan is more accurate than 99% of the economic analyses of the French audiovisual landscape.

And the message, under tthe form of an image :

 

[WhiteMountain]

Hello,
I follow a little bit what Trump is doing but i have no knowledge in finance and related. But, one well known and, so far at least, respected analyst in France posted something today on X, he re-posted a comment found on "4Chan". It's a small summary text which (try to) explains why Trump is acting like he does at this moment. Maybe this was posted already, but at first glance it looks it wasn't.
So i figured out it was a good thing to repost, simply because if this french guy reposted that it's usually a good sign - at least it's FWIW.

Here's the link to the tweet

Translation of the quick comment he made :
This simple comment on 4chan is more accurate than 99% of the economic analyses of the French audiovisual landscape.

And the message, under tthe form of an image :
View attachment 107535

It does sure seem that Trump does appear to be doing this intentionally. But if he is doing this to cause a short term spike in Treasuries, that is really short sided. That might be the initial reaction, but the inflation from the tariffs will longer term push the long bond rates higher. And let's not forget about larger budget deficits as corporate and personal income goes down as the economy gets whacked. That also leads to higher long term rates. And let's not forget, these tariffs can force a lot of American small businesses to go under since they HAVE to source parts from overseas. This includes US DOMESTIC manufacturers. And they just cannot buy American at the drop of a hat. Then there are all those that are employed by these companies, many of him MAGA voters who will be regretting voting for Trump.

Finally, when someone says 94% of all stock is owned by just 8% of the population, that is not taking into account the beneficial ownership in stocks of normal people through pension funds. Pensions and retirement accounts are some of the largest holders of both stock and bond investments, and many of the defined benefit plans are already severely underfunded. Grandma might lose her retirement if either the stock market or bond market crashes (both could happen in the event of a major upward interest rate shock from long term inflation as the market values of both stocks and bonds are inversely related to effective interest rates). That is also the reason that when people say, "let's create a debt jubilee or debt holiday for the US" and just default on all those foreign nations and wealthy people who own US bonds, that would be a horrible idea as pension funds would be devastated by that. You cannot just take out trillions of value in the economy and there are no losers among normal people.

 

[hobnob]

Here's the link to the tweet

....

And the message, under tthe form of an image :
View attachment 107535

Paying off debt with debt is what it's telling me. But I don't know, the economy seems to run on optimism.

 

[susy7]