It’s a giant give away to someone, at least. I’m sure that will reveal itself in time.
An government of billionaires, by billionaires, for billionaires.
The attacks on the poor probably resonate with those who believe that the poor have no value, ignoring the fact that poor people (with government funds of course) support all kinds of local businesses with these funds daily. So it’s not just an attack on the poor, but on the businesses they patronize as well. When you take away spending power from the lowest classes, it puts additional power on the rungs above. This is what conservatives, with their micro-economic perspective, typically fail to understand.
More to the point, he simply does not give a fuck. Nobody in that administration could care any less about the consequences of this or any other policy. They are there to enrich themselves, and the billionaires who donated their money to congress will use them to destroy government as we know it. And they’ve made a lot of progress in that regard, and they will probably continue to do so until such time that the people in this country get tired of being kicked in the skull - and more importantly, collectively realize whose boots are stomping on them.
This is all just another chapter of right wing aggression against people who happen to be poor. There isn’t a month that goes by without someone in our Facebook feeds sharing a post that says we all need to follow the example of 3 states that force welfare recipients for drugs. Never mind that it very likely costs more to do the testing than what is saved by eliminating drug users from the rolls, who this hurts will be the children of those who would be cut off. It’s always “I don’t want MY money to go to any of THEM”, with never a thought of a kid who will go without food because mommy smoked a joint. If you are willing to tolerate supporting one cheat in order to support 100 needy families, you’re a normal human being. If you’re willing to starve 100 needy families in order to eliminate one cheat, you’re a Republican.
Trump’s new infrastructure plan shifts spending to the states and prioritises private investment over public investment. That means new toll roads that are privately owned, and public roads with more potholes!
I haven’t read enough about the infrastructure plan, but I’m guessing it’s a system in which the federal government decides who gets contracts to build, maintain, and manage specific projects. Beyond obviously bilking the public and forcing them to pay more for things we need to use, this would give the Donald and his successors power to lean on companies. He could pick and choose “winners”…who would probably be forced to support and pay tribute to republican campaigns. This is how kleptocracies work.
What (stupid) people don’t seem to realize is that when private companies take over public works, the private companies are in business TO MAKE A PROFIT. Therefore, they have to make the project cost less than they take in. Common sense.
Yep, absolutely 1000% true. They pay more for (usually) less in return - take our health system as an example, and for-profit “education” as another. I know the usual suspects are waiting to chime in about how private contractors are already involved in public infrastructure projects - true enough. But there’s an established system of public oversight. What’s missing from these articles is that this public system of oversight that serves public interests is being gutted on a daily basis. The GOP’s idea of infrastructure is allowing private companies to essentially have absolute control over territory that they can call their own, and they determine who has access and how much we have to pay to gain admittance past the front entrance.
And going back to the previous post, this is also a system that is going to be manipulated to maintain political power of those who are in power. As an example, in Vladimir Putin’s Russia, it’s Putin who decides which contracts go to whom. Piss him off, and you don’t get a contract - your competitor does. Don’t pay Ghengis Khan, er, Vladimir Putin enough in territorial tributes, er, I mean taxes - sorry - then you don’t get new contracts. He can run individual businesses (like Amazon) out of existence in favor of Walmart. A little harder to do with a billionaire like Jeff Bezos, but Putin’s solution to that problem is to bring them in front of a judge on trumped-up (no pun intended) corruption and tax evasion charges. We saw Trump tip his hand a little bit with the dust up with Boeing right after his inauguration a year ago, and people probably have long since forgotten it, but we need to bookmark that moment, because we’ll inevitably come back to that chapter if his administration is allowed to continue long enough.
“Shrink the deficit”? Are you fucking kidding me? Who gives a rat’s ass about shrinking the deficit?
The article cites a specific family:
Children.
Seniors.
Disabled.
WORKING adults with low-paying jobs.
Yeah, let’s make it even harder for them. Because that can never happen to us. It only happens to undeserving people. They must have done something wrong, otherwise why would they be having such a hard time. Except the kids…their mistake was being born into either a poor family or a family where the main breadwinner was going to lose his/her job. Dumb kids! Serves them right!
Unless it’s a for-profit scam like Trump University. In that case, watch as they turn on the spigots for federal aid and bilk returning war veterans out of their education benefits. Now that’s what I call making America great again.
I’ve heard the argument that the truly poor don’t vote, but the working class do. So I don’t know if Trump’s followers will be affected by SNAP reductions. Some will, but as you said they’ll invent a lie so they can blame Obama and the democrats. It’ll probably be something like ‘the democrats let illegal aliens use SNAP, now the program is bankrupt. That is why I lost my benefits’.
It is tiresome being an American. The level of stupidity and amorality in pursuit of bigotry is so despairing
I have to admit, I’m in favor of this, "cuts crop insurance subsidies for farmers. " the fact that SNAP is also a subsidy for the ag industry, it seems there are going to be many family farms going bankrupt in short order.
On the one hand, I do actually like the idea of keeping that industry around, as it is nice knowing that a substantial portion of our arable land is being used by american citizens to produce for other americans. OTOH, they are the ones that typically have the most hate for their fellow american, and vote for people who will hurt americans, while smarmily telling people that live in the city that they hold “us” hostage because they happen to be living on land that food can be grown on.
Well, if they can’t afford to live there anymore, because to be quite honest, the family farm has not been viable without govt support since the great depression, oh well. Large corporations will buy up their land from the bank after they’ve gone bankrupt, and grow food more efficiently and cost effectively, while not costing tax dollars for subsidies. Win for economics, win for food supply, win for the people, the only losers are the farmers that voted for the govt that removed their supports.
There is a subset of American morons that believes the worst result of Trump’s electoral college victory is the number of anti-Trump message board threads.
On the other hand, Trump (as disgusting and vile as the big orange cheetoh is) never tried to scam a message board about getting air-conditioning only for it later to come out that the problem was his bunnies might get a little warm.
So…really, the only difference between you and Trump is that you’re a less successful scammer.
If you had paid attention to my post, you would have seen that your rejoinder is without any merit.
The “farmers” are just the people living on the land. We don’t need them living on the land in order to get food to grow there.
They don’t have some special magical skill that cannot be replicated by other people or even automation.
We are supporting them so that they can hold onto their old ways, and that’s fine. Except they have voted in a govt that is going to strip them of their land and their livelihood, and I think that the result will actually come out better.
I would not have voted for a candidate that wanted to destroy the family farm, even though I have feeling that they are less efficient than a corporate farm, but they did.