6 ms·

We'll see. We're only a couple months into this 'regime' - might be interesting to try a different strategy for a little while. H&W may have campaigned on this

We'll see. We're only a couple months into this 'regime' - might be interesting to try a different strategy for a little while. H&W may have campaigned on this, but there's two things critical to good advertising: offering what people want, and offering it credibly.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
> might be interesting to try a different strategy for a little while. Maybe interesting to you and others largely insulated from the downsides of "a different strategy". Others might not find it so "interesting" at all ...
- drivebyhooting 2y ago
  What would the status quo be? Continue to escalate in Ukraine? Pile on more debt? I can’t see how that wouldn’t lead to debasement and ultimately the collapse of the US hegemony. At least this way we will have TSMC and other local production capacity.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
    The current administration is doing a very fine job ... of collapsing whatever US hegemony still exists. The status quo would be, for example: * continuing to honor the social safety net constructed incrementally since 1929 * honoring contracts with overseas organizations * honoring the 200+ year old understanding that Congress controls spending, creates government departments, and establishes rules for the hiring and firing of government employees * retaining an understanding of the complex and deeply woven role of the federal government, along with the argument known as "Chestertons fence" (don't tear down a fence till you understand why it was built) * continuing to structure taxation based on (a) the marginal value of income (b) the concept that the impact of taxation should be roughly equal no matter what your income level is * resist the expansion of worldwide ideologies that lead to a decrease in personal liberty and/or is accompanied by the use of military force to acquire another nation's territory (we've never been close to perfect on this, but it's nice to have an ideal in mind rather than just dropping any attempt at a morally just world). Debt is only a problem if you subscribe to heterodox ideas about how national economies with sovereign currencies operate (or worse, imagine that national economies function like household or business economies).
    - drivebyhooting 2y ago
      So what I’m hearing is: * Keep all the existing obligations * Continue to run a deficit * Hope that we can finance these growing expenses through treasuries or debasement * all the while ignoring the hollowing out of American industrial base and expertise * also allowing a large portion of the population to become redundant, unproductive, and irrelevant in the world economy
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
        > Hope that we can finance these growing expenses through treasuries or debasement No need for "debasement", but sure. > all the while ignoring the hollowing out No, we should not be doing this. But the left has been talking about this for decades and was mocked for it. The idea that billionaires and the recipients of their largesse are how we stop "ignoring the hollowing out" just seems laughable to me. > allowing a large portion of the population to become redundant, unproductive, and irrelevant in the world economy when the left raised these objections to global trade treaties that ignored labo mobility, they were roundly ignored and ridiculed. Again, the idea that the very class of people who wanted these changes (free movement of capital, tax-free repatriation of profit, tariff-free importation of foreign produced goods, massively reduced labor costs) are the people who will oversee the reversal of their effects just seems laughable to me. These are absolutely things we should focused on, and it is true that the left-as-represented-by-the-Democratic party has not really done so (certainly not until Biden, and even then it was relatively weak sauce). But the idea that this administration is actually motivated by a desire to solve these problems and not simply reduce costs and taxes for the capital class ... again, it just seems laughable to me.
        generalizations 2y ago
        >> all the while ignoring the hollowing out of American industrial base and expertise > But the left has been talking about this for decades and was mocked for it. > These are absolutely things we should focused on, and it is true that the left-as-represented-by-the-Democratic party has not really done so (certainly not until Biden, and even then it was relatively weak sauce). So, you're right - up until this "regime change" not a lot has been done. And at least this is moving in approximately the right direction. Even if this is a rough amputation, at the very least it's likely to remove the tumor, when nothing up till now has done so.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago

> might be interesting to try a different strategy for a little while. Maybe interesting to you and others largely insulated from the downsides of "a different strategy". Others might not find it so "interesting" at all ...

drivebyhooting 2y ago
What would the status quo be? Continue to escalate in Ukraine? Pile on more debt? I can’t see how that wouldn’t lead to debasement and ultimately the collapse of the US hegemony. At least this way we will have TSMC and other local production capacity.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  The current administration is doing a very fine job ... of collapsing whatever US hegemony still exists. The status quo would be, for example: * continuing to honor the social safety net constructed incrementally since 1929 * honoring contracts with overseas organizations * honoring the 200+ year old understanding that Congress controls spending, creates government departments, and establishes rules for the hiring and firing of government employees * retaining an understanding of the complex and deeply woven role of the federal government, along with the argument known as "Chestertons fence" (don't tear down a fence till you understand why it was built) * continuing to structure taxation based on (a) the marginal value of income (b) the concept that the impact of taxation should be roughly equal no matter what your income level is * resist the expansion of worldwide ideologies that lead to a decrease in personal liberty and/or is accompanied by the use of military force to acquire another nation's territory (we've never been close to perfect on this, but it's nice to have an ideal in mind rather than just dropping any attempt at a morally just world). Debt is only a problem if you subscribe to heterodox ideas about how national economies with sovereign currencies operate (or worse, imagine that national economies function like household or business economies).
  - drivebyhooting 2y ago
    So what I’m hearing is: * Keep all the existing obligations * Continue to run a deficit * Hope that we can finance these growing expenses through treasuries or debasement * all the while ignoring the hollowing out of American industrial base and expertise * also allowing a large portion of the population to become redundant, unproductive, and irrelevant in the world economy
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
      > Hope that we can finance these growing expenses through treasuries or debasement No need for "debasement", but sure. > all the while ignoring the hollowing out No, we should not be doing this. But the left has been talking about this for decades and was mocked for it. The idea that billionaires and the recipients of their largesse are how we stop "ignoring the hollowing out" just seems laughable to me. > allowing a large portion of the population to become redundant, unproductive, and irrelevant in the world economy when the left raised these objections to global trade treaties that ignored labo mobility, they were roundly ignored and ridiculed. Again, the idea that the very class of people who wanted these changes (free movement of capital, tax-free repatriation of profit, tariff-free importation of foreign produced goods, massively reduced labor costs) are the people who will oversee the reversal of their effects just seems laughable to me. These are absolutely things we should focused on, and it is true that the left-as-represented-by-the-Democratic party has not really done so (certainly not until Biden, and even then it was relatively weak sauce). But the idea that this administration is actually motivated by a desire to solve these problems and not simply reduce costs and taxes for the capital class ... again, it just seems laughable to me.
      - generalizations 2y ago
        >> all the while ignoring the hollowing out of American industrial base and expertise > But the left has been talking about this for decades and was mocked for it. > These are absolutely things we should focused on, and it is true that the left-as-represented-by-the-Democratic party has not really done so (certainly not until Biden, and even then it was relatively weak sauce). So, you're right - up until this "regime change" not a lot has been done. And at least this is moving in approximately the right direction. Even if this is a rough amputation, at the very least it's likely to remove the tumor, when nothing up till now has done so.