Printable View
The stock market was the highest ever. He handed trump a great economy that is now going down the toilet. Biden tried to help people, unlike trump who is now taking a chainsaw to our government and causing chaos and havoc. trump said he was going to be a dictator on day one. He is following through …Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
I see where there will be a vote on Congress soon to stop funding NPR and PBS. They get the majority of their funding from corporate sponsors and private donors, but what the news is saying is that it would affect coverage to some of the stations in more rural areas and there would be cutbacks. I depend on NPR as a primary source of news. Not so much so for PBS, but their hosting of Masterpiece and kids programing are popular, and the Ken Burns series and other programs are favorites. Their news features are admittedly leaning a bit to the left, but not a whole lot. I could understand where it might be on the fringe of government responsibilities to fund TV and Radio that might not be terribly different from ABC or NBC, but without the annoying ads and mostly worthless programing. In the big scheme of cutbacks it might not top the list, but an an unfortunate. Maybe it won't pass.
Trump's big post,
"REPUBLICANS MUST DEFUND AND TOTALLY DISASSOCIATE THEMSELVES FROM NPR & PBS, THE RADICAL LEFT 'MONSTERS' THAT SO BADLY HURT OUR COUNTRY!"
The major indexes were their “highest ever” in the November-February period after Biden’s lame duck status was priced in. Not that I think short term stock performance correlates all that closely with presidential policies.Quote:
Originally Posted by frugal-one
I do think presidents can affect the economy for better or worse, especially in the long term, but it’s only one set of factors out of many. If Trump actually follows through on his tariff bluster, it could be one of the most significant acts of economic self-sabotage since the New Deal.
What bedeviled the Biden people on the economic front was voters simply refusing to believe the spin that the recovery from the Covid period was due to the Administration’s masterful handling of the economy. Calling a massive spending bill the Inflation Reduction Act didn’t help their credibility much either.
Some could quibble over the Biden policies and the record stock market and prospering economy. One point of view is that Trump 1.0 ran a hot economy with tax breaks and historically low interest rates rates, and it took Biden four years to fix Trumps blunder's and the after effects of covid. It's the view I have, but there's room for pontification otherwise.
However, in Trump's case there's little room for discussion. Trump's tariffs and instability are heading us into a recession. Common expert thought is 50-60% chance. And that's not including the more remote odds of a collapse of the bond market. I've not heard talk of China dumping their US bonds, but I'll bet it's crossed their minds.
Maybe AOC will have to fix the Trump 2.0 mess: - )
1. So apparently Musk has gutted AmeriCorps, putting 75% of the employees on leave. Three of my kids were active participants of AmeriCorps. It's a great program that benefits many communities and gives young people a chance to serve in meaningful ways. This is a real shame.
2. Tonight I went to University of Vermont for a Master Gardener meeting. When we got a tour of the helpline office, the director of the program told us that one of the resources that the MGs used to be able to consult for advice and guidance, who happened to be a an agribulstural research scientist, has been let go due to DOGE cuts.
I do not understand the purpose of culling vast numbers of public servants without discerning the value they provide to the social fabric. It is making me sick.
I am also feeling ill about all this as if I can't quite wake up from a bad dream.Quote:
It is making me sick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
Anything I say as an objective observation about this whole phenomenon will seem like I’m defending it, and I’m not, but I will push forward anyway.
I can’t speak to Americorps. But for the other thing, I would imagine that and many other services like that have been taken over by the federal government. If they’re important to a state, the state needs to fund it. States will say “we can’t afford it. “
The states have been balancing their budget on the back of the federal government. Most of our 50 states have balanced budget requirements. The federal government does not. Look where that’s got us.
I am not saying that budgets shouldn't be scrutinized but the problem is they aren't being scrutinized.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
As far as AmeriCorps goes, by definition it is a Federal program. But for very little government investment it yielded a tremendous amount of social service where it's needed. For example, my daughter's first job out of college was working, through AmeriCorps, to support a NYC NGO that provides food pantries and soup kitchens to New Yorkers living in poverty. She worked full time and her AmeriCorps stipend was $2k a month. She lived in Manhattan for $2k a month! I was so proud of her but still don't know how she did it (although the seedy co-housing apartments she lived in in nasty Brooklyn neighborhoods was a clue). So it was a win-win-win-win. Win for the government--they simply supported the NGO with a small investment. Win for the NGO, they got the support they needed. Win for the idealistic college grad--getting a small amount of money to help other people. Win for the people they all helped. I guess you could say you don't like the fact that your taxpayer dollars, as a MO resident, fed poor people in NY, but I'm sure there are worthwhile programs in MO that my VT taxpayer dollars have gone to support.
But the bottom line is, I hate this slash-and-burn methodology.
We could take this discussion agency by agency and say that they all belong to the states, but in many cases in which DOGE has had their way, that just isn't reasonable or feasible.
Would it be reasonable to imagine then, that our federal taxes will decrease and our state taxes increase as they reconfigure programs?Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
Perhaps, at least your state taxes would increase. I would want any excess federal money to go to the national debt. so if there are savings, put it to good use as Dave Ramsey would say about our household budgets.Quote:
Originally Posted by KayLR
And state budgets and legislators are closer to us, we can look with better scrutiny at state programs and services.