4 ms·

Their stated goals are lower taxes, less regulation, less government presence. What they want bigger is private riches through industry and church. They all bel

Their stated goals are lower taxes, less regulation, less government presence. What they want bigger is private riches through industry and church. They all believe this, voter and representative. What part do you think gets built back? Maybe the FBI, when they’re sure it can be weaponized against their enemies.

FireBeyond 2y ago
> Their stated goals are lower taxes, less regulation, less government presence. And if you believe Project 2025, which I do, however the Trump campaign tried to halfheartedly distance itself from them, lower education: Project 2025 talks of how children finishing school should be looking more to "buying a house and starting a family" than college. Of course, how the average 18 year old with a high school education and single income (because homeschooling is also a very big goal of Project 2025) is meant to buy this house is left as an exercise for the (uneducated) reader. The important thing is less education and more future "Warriors for Christ" (as someone I know on my FB feed calls their children).
- _heimdall 2y ago
  I haven't read 2025 so I'm going only off what you have here. I think a strong argument could be made that an 18 year old with a strong work ethic should be able to get a job that allows them to afford a house in a reasonable timeline. I don't have any expectation that's actually what 2025 argues, but it would be a good ideal. Why shouldn't a kid out of high school willing to work hard be able to save up for a house and a family in a reasonable amount of time? Should we gate keep that behind college degrees or similar?
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    I would agree. Just as I believe minimum wage isn't "only applicable to teenagers working part time after school". But yes, P2025's goal has nothing to do with the wellbeing of said school leaver. They specifically want people to be less educated (easier to manipulate and persuade), and are all about raising as many Christian children as possible to "stack the vote".
_heimdall 2y ago
> What part do you think gets built back? I wouldn't even begin to guess. This has all moved so quickly that I've yet to find what seems to be a reliable source on what is actually changing. My point, though, was only that we've so far seen moves to reduce headcount and pause programs. That could be the first step to closing down departments entirely, but it could also be the first step to rebuilding their own version of that department.
- relaxing 2y ago
  They’ve moved quickly, but this has all been in planning for decades. Their beliefs and motivations are all out there for everyone to see. There’s nothing to suggest they want to rebuild.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    Interesting, that hasn't been my experience of the Republican party over the last few decades. I grew up over that time in a very red part of the country. In the 90s I always heard of the republican party as the party of small government and individual freedoms. Starting at least with Bush/Cheney that didn't line up. The party seemed to want a larger military budget, increased federal powers, and a stronger executive branch. Republican voters I knew largely followed that pattern. They didn't want to see departments closed or authority removed from the government. They just wanted their views written into law. Abortion is a great example, the republican party strongly pushed for regulating what individuals could or could not do, very few were arguing that abortion rights were outside the federal government's authority.
    - relaxing 2y ago
      Yes but these aren’t “spend more money on the department of X” laws or ideas. Other than military and law enforcement, which I already mentioned. Bush consolidating power under DHS and expanding wiretaps is of course Republican party values. Bush cut funding for education and pushed it to private schools. He cut antipoverty initiatives and pushed funding to church groups. Cut funding for stem cell research. And of course cut taxes for the rich. The antiabortion response is to cut funds to anything touching abortion (not, say, provide more support to mothers.) And make way for expanded power over reproductive rights at the state level.

FireBeyond 2y ago

> Their stated goals are lower taxes, less regulation, less government presence. And if you believe Project 2025, which I do, however the Trump campaign tried to halfheartedly distance itself from them, lower education: Project 2025 talks of how children finishing school should be looking more to "buying a house and starting a family" than college. Of course, how the average 18 year old with a high school education and single income (because homeschooling is also a very big goal of Project 2025) is meant to buy this house is left as an exercise for the (uneducated) reader. The important thing is less education and more future "Warriors for Christ" (as someone I know on my FB feed calls their children).

_heimdall 2y ago
I haven't read 2025 so I'm going only off what you have here. I think a strong argument could be made that an 18 year old with a strong work ethic should be able to get a job that allows them to afford a house in a reasonable timeline. I don't have any expectation that's actually what 2025 argues, but it would be a good ideal. Why shouldn't a kid out of high school willing to work hard be able to save up for a house and a family in a reasonable amount of time? Should we gate keep that behind college degrees or similar?
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  I would agree. Just as I believe minimum wage isn't "only applicable to teenagers working part time after school". But yes, P2025's goal has nothing to do with the wellbeing of said school leaver. They specifically want people to be less educated (easier to manipulate and persuade), and are all about raising as many Christian children as possible to "stack the vote".

_heimdall 2y ago

> What part do you think gets built back? I wouldn't even begin to guess. This has all moved so quickly that I've yet to find what seems to be a reliable source on what is actually changing. My point, though, was only that we've so far seen moves to reduce headcount and pause programs. That could be the first step to closing down departments entirely, but it could also be the first step to rebuilding their own version of that department.

relaxing 2y ago
They’ve moved quickly, but this has all been in planning for decades. Their beliefs and motivations are all out there for everyone to see. There’s nothing to suggest they want to rebuild.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  Interesting, that hasn't been my experience of the Republican party over the last few decades. I grew up over that time in a very red part of the country. In the 90s I always heard of the republican party as the party of small government and individual freedoms. Starting at least with Bush/Cheney that didn't line up. The party seemed to want a larger military budget, increased federal powers, and a stronger executive branch. Republican voters I knew largely followed that pattern. They didn't want to see departments closed or authority removed from the government. They just wanted their views written into law. Abortion is a great example, the republican party strongly pushed for regulating what individuals could or could not do, very few were arguing that abortion rights were outside the federal government's authority.
  - relaxing 2y ago
    Yes but these aren’t “spend more money on the department of X” laws or ideas. Other than military and law enforcement, which I already mentioned. Bush consolidating power under DHS and expanding wiretaps is of course Republican party values. Bush cut funding for education and pushed it to private schools. He cut antipoverty initiatives and pushed funding to church groups. Cut funding for stem cell research. And of course cut taxes for the rich. The antiabortion response is to cut funds to anything touching abortion (not, say, provide more support to mothers.) And make way for expanded power over reproductive rights at the state level.