Presidential Debate

[NeuroTypical]

As I look through Project 2025, I'm once again reminded at the massive size of our Federal Government.  In 2023, the FedGov brought in around $4.1 trillion dollars, and they spent $6.1 trillion of it.  We've allowed ourselves to be talked in to this situation for a very long time.  As far as I can tell, zero political will exists anywhere in the country to force the govt to stop spending more than it has.  Politicians will say words about it, but there hasn't been any real substantive action since before 9/11.

Each item here - a massive pile of unelected bureaucrats spending money and wielding power:

The White House - Executive Office of POTUS

Department of Defense
Department of Homeland Security
Department of State
Intelligence Community

U.S. Agency for Global Media
Corporation for Public Broadcasting
Agency for International Development

Department of Agriculture
Department of Education
Department of Energy and Related Commissions
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor and Related Agencies
Department of Transportation
Department of Veterans Affairs
Department of Commerce

Department of the Treasury
Export-Import Bank (EXIM)
Federal Reserve
Small Business Administration
Securities and Exchange Commission and Related Agencies
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Federal Communications Commission
Federal Election Commission
Federal Trade Commission

How many of these did you not know about until reading through this list for the first time?  (I had to look up EXIM.)

 

[Phoenix_person]

5 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

As I look through Project 2025, I'm once again reminded at the massive size of our Federal Government.  In 2023, the FedGov brought in around $4.1 trillion dollars, and they spent $6.1 trillion of it.  We've allowed ourselves to be talked in to this situation for a very long time.  As far as I can tell, zero political will exists anywhere in the country to force the govt to stop spending more than it has.  Politicians will say words about it, but there hasn't been any real substantive action since before 9/11.

Each item here - a massive pile of unelected bureaucrats spending money and wielding power:

The White House - Executive Office of POTUS

Department of Defense
Department of Homeland Security
Department of State
Intelligence Community

U.S. Agency for Global Media
Corporation for Public Broadcasting
Agency for International Development

Department of Agriculture
Department of Education
Department of Energy and Related Commissions
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor and Related Agencies
Department of Transportation
Department of Veterans Affairs
Department of Commerce

Department of the Treasury
Export-Import Bank (EXIM)
Federal Reserve
Small Business Administration
Securities and Exchange Commission and Related Agencies
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Federal Communications Commission
Federal Election Commission
Federal Trade Commission

How many of these did you not know about until reading through this list for the first time?  (I had to look up EXIM.)

 

More than half of the federal budget is spent on three things: Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and DoD/DHS. There's no political will in either party to make cuts to defense spending. GOP politicians talk about cutting health care and social security spending, but that would be political suicide for them. So they're stuck chipping away at things like food stamps and the industrial regulatory apparatus. Food stamps are a small drop in a very large welfare bucket, and I'd ask Boeing and the railway industry how deregulation is working out.

[Phoenix_person]

7 hours ago, Traveler said:

I would be interested in why you think Trump made money when his net worth diminished.  Even, (and especially) using the methods to determine net worth referenced by democrats in his trial in NY.

You and @Carborendum are correct, and I was wrong. Though there's some fineprint.

- Trump is still a billionaire. His current estimated net worth is $7.5B. It's difficult to say how different that number would be if he had never been president. But it's probably safe to say that the presidential salary would have been crumbs to him if he hadn't declined it (which is likely *exactly* why he declined it.

- Trump's largest source of wealth is in commercial real estate, a sector that took heavy hits during COVID. That would have caused him problems even if he was never president. So his biggest financial loss was arguably unrelated to his presidency. His second-largest investment is Truth Social, which has been plagued with funding headaches and underperforming user numbers since its conception. Truth Social probably wouldn't exist if Trump hadn't become president, so that windfall can be blamed on the Oval Office, if a tad indirectly.

 

[Traveler]

19 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

More than half of the federal budget is spent on three things: Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and DoD/DHS. There's no political will in either party to make cuts to defense spending. GOP politicians talk about cutting health care and social security spending, but that would be political suicide for them. So they're stuck chipping away at things like food stamps and the industrial regulatory apparatus. Food stamps are a small drop in a very large welfare bucket, and I'd ask Boeing and the railway industry how deregulation is working out.

I am grateful for your input and point of view.  I would like to drill down a little into a couple of things you have said – mainly because I have some experience and personal research.  In 1960 the USA conducted the most extensive census ever attempted.  Some political pundits review that census determined that if just 2% of our GDP was funneled to the poor that poverty could be eliminated in the USA.  The sound was so noble there was little opposition – and what there was, was easily overcome. 

It was mostly the democrats that pushed through reforms to establish what was called the “Great Society”.  The reforms targeted social programs for the poor and environmental concerns.  It is interesting to note that it was argued that science had determined that without reform of human pollution that the earth would become uninhabitable to humans in as little as 15 years.

It is now 50 years later.  Currently we are funneling close to 30% of the GDP into various social programs for the poor.  Sadly, poverty in the USA can be argued to be worse in 2020 than it was in 1960.  Simple math tells us either the theory of funding to end poverty is grossly flawed or that over 90% of our social funding is completely wasted (diverted into pockets of the wealthy – because the gap between the wealthy and those in poverty has increased – despite that fact that the wealthy are taxed more now than in 1960).   We can no longer assume that we can relieve poverty by increasing funding.  We have enough experience to realize such efforts are worthless failures.  We do have other options that look more promising but for whatever reason no political party on the planet are willing to even give recognition for any possibility.  For the record I believe every citizen should be taxed – especially if they are receiving government subsidies.   Otherwise, citizens will vote themselves more subsidies and create more inflationary government debt.

It is also important to note that that non-citizens entering into the USA claiming asylum can be awarded Social Security funds for support – for the rest of their life.  Under Biden we have had over 10 million asylum seekers.  I contend that this is the primary reason that Social Security is projected to run out of funds within the next 10 years.

I worked for Boeing in the 70’s and 80’s.  The testing and care given into the development of new products was far greater than any government regulations.  At that time Boeing was the #1 commercial airline producer in the world – Boeing was also a leader in military and space applications.  There are a lot of problems currently with Boeing – and I would say part (not all) reside in government regulations.   Some come from tax structures and some from corporate changes (some of which is corporate greed – but not quite in the way many would think.)

I have also worked in various industries as an expert in automation and robotics.  Sadly, the relationship between industries and government regulators has become greatly non-cooperative.  I personally believe that the primary reason for this is because of an element in government that believe corporate profits and industrial production to be a cash cow for unlimited government spending – especially on social services.

I strongly believe we can improve both life styles and opportunities for all citizens of the USA through intelligent applications of government programs – but we have become addicted to the lure of quick fixes from subsidies that inevitably result in waste and corruption.

Edited July 9, 2024 by Traveler

[LDSGator]

7 minutes ago, Traveler said:

worked for Boeing in the 70’s and 80’s.  The testing and care given into the development of new products was far greater than any government regulations.  At that time Boeing was the #1 commercial airline producer in the world – Boeing was also a leader in military and space applications.

That was the time when non-Boeing planes like the DC10 had those safety issues right?

[Traveler]

2 hours ago, LDSGator said:

That was the time when non-Boeing planes like the DC10 had those safety issues right?

It was my impression that Boing was ahead with wing design (supercritical wing) and was able to produce planes that were more stable, less drag and better lift, resulting in cheaper to fly, less maintenance and greater range.  So, it was not so much that the DC10 was unsafe as it was that the Boeing plains were faster, more stable, cheaper to operate and thus generally safer.

Of course, there are other considerations and history behind all this but until recently Boing was a head of the curve in avionic design.

When I worked for Boeing, it was the best company to work for.  Besides leading in design Boeing was considered the destination for the best engineers.  Engineers were expected to spend on average, a month per year in training.  Their compensation for top engineers is the best I have ever encountered – which means that the concept of equal pay for equal work was considered nonsense.  When I went to work for Boeing I was offered a 50% raise from my current position where I was working – within 3 months I was given another 25% raise.

 

The Traveler

[Traveler]

21 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

You and @Carborendum are correct, and I was wrong. Though there's some fineprint.

- Trump is still a billionaire. His current estimated net worth is $7.5B. It's difficult to say how different that number would be if he had never been president. But it's probably safe to say that the presidential salary would have been crumbs to him if he hadn't declined it (which is likely *exactly* why he declined it.

- Trump's largest source of wealth is in commercial real estate, a sector that took heavy hits during COVID. That would have caused him problems even if he was never president. So his biggest financial loss was arguably unrelated to his presidency. His second-largest investment is Truth Social, which has been plagued with funding headaches and underperforming user numbers since its conception. Truth Social probably wouldn't exist if Trump hadn't become president, so that windfall can be blamed on the Oval Office, if a tad indirectly.

 

The turnaround at Twitter by Musk undercut every intent of Truth Social to create an internet platform based on the principles of free speech.

As per COVID and real estate (in which I am also heavily invested) – real estate still outperformed stocks, bonds and most other investments – with some exceptions.  I am of the age where long term (in fact anything over 5 years) may not give the highest returns in my lifetime.  To succeed in real estate requires lots of attention to certain details.  I will be investing less and less in our future.

 

The Traveler

[mirkwood]

 

The debate everyone really wants to hear.

 

[Vort]

On 7/9/2024 at 2:54 PM, Traveler said:

Of course, there are other considerations and history behind all this but until recently Boing was a head of the curve in avionic design.

When I worked for Boeing, it was the best company to work for.  Besides leading in design Boeing was considered the destination for the best engineers.  Engineers were expected to spend on average, a month per year in training.  Their compensation for top engineers is the best I have ever encountered – which means that the concept of equal pay for equal work was considered nonsense.  When I went to work for Boeing I was offered a 50% raise from my current position where I was working – within 3 months I was given another 25% raise.

Boeing has been the greatest aerospace company that this world has ever known. Boeing's precipitous plunge starting in the 1990s is truly one of the great business tragedies in US history. Boeing is now a laughingstock in some areas, e.g. its unbelievable string of failures and bunglings regarding its Starliner space capsule, not to mention the criminal horror of its 737 Max fiasco.

Why corporate executives at Boeing have not gone to jail for that latter thing, well, I don't understand. Boeing executives have blood on their hands, and they're apparently walking away scot-free, at least in this life. I wonder how different it would have been for Boeing if Americans rather than Indonesians and Africans had been the victims.

[ZealoulyStriving]

19 minutes ago, Vort said:

Boeing has been the greatest aerospace company that this world has ever known. Boeing's precipitous plunge starting in the 1990s is truly one of the great business tragedies in US history. Boeing is now a laughingstock in some areas, e.g. its unbelievable string of failures and bunglings regarding its Starliner space capsule, not to mention the criminal horror of its 737 Max fiasco.

Why corporate executives at Boeing have not gone to jail for that latter thing, well, I don't understand. Boeing executives have blood on their hands, and they're apparently walking away scot-free, at least in this life. I wonder how different it would have been for Boeing if Americans rather than Indonesians and Africans had been the victims.

Because they know the secrets.

🛸👽

[Traveler]

13 hours ago, Vort said:

Boeing has been the greatest aerospace company that this world has ever known. Boeing's precipitous plunge starting in the 1990s is truly one of the great business tragedies in US history. Boeing is now a laughingstock in some areas, e.g. its unbelievable string of failures and bunglings regarding its Starliner space capsule, not to mention the criminal horror of its 737 Max fiasco.

Why corporate executives at Boeing have not gone to jail for that latter thing, well, I don't understand. Boeing executives have blood on their hands, and they're apparently walking away scot-free, at least in this life. I wonder how different it would have been for Boeing if Americans rather than Indonesians and Africans had been the victims.

Since you live in the Settle area you are currently closer to the Boeing’s going on.  Not sure but I believe that the headquarters were moved after I left and new management took over the company.  It is interesting to me that the company I left Boeing for went through a management change with the death of the founder.  The new management took that company from a 90% market share to less than a 15% market share.  All the while bragging about keeping the company profitable and taking home millions in bonuses. 

I believe that Boeing’s corruption is a very tiny tip of a colossal iceberg of corporate corruption in the USA.  I believe this trend is following in line with political corruption.  I would like to be able to say that it is all the Democrats doing but the truth is that I left the Republican party because of corruption. Though I discovered the corruption of the Democrats to be exponentially worse – political corruption cannot be escaped from by simply voting Republican – especially with the attitude of voting against the opposing party because of corruption. 

I believe that for a society to be free – the people must stand for principles of freedom and liberty.  Trusting that institutions (government, businesses {corporate or private} and organizations {even individuals) in general) is not nor has ever been a title of liberty.  History has demonstrated that even the military must be untrusted and comprised of citizens and citizen oversite to maintain freedom and liberty.  As a side note: having worked on secret projects myself – I believe that there should not be classified material except during a time of war and declared emergency (which is then unclassified at the war’s end or emergency end).  I also believe that providing any information that is helpful to anyone (foreign or domestic) that endangers citizens, to be a capitol crime of treason, punishable by death – especially those in positions of greater responsibility – such as corporate management and government positions (elected or appointed).

 

The Traveler

[Phoenix_person]

17 minutes ago, Traveler said:

History has demonstrated that even the military must be untrusted and comprised of citizens and citizen oversite to maintain freedom and liberty. 

Do you believe the same about the police? My experience tells me that a lot of conservatives don't. It always seemed odd to me that people policing foreign countries (as is the primary role of our current military, for better or worse) get far more oversight and scrutiny than those policing US citizens on US soil.

17 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I believe that there should not be classified material except during a time of war and declared emergency (which is then unclassified at the war’s end or emergency end).  I also believe that providing any information that is helpful to anyone (foreign or domestic) that endangers citizens, to be a capitol crime of treason, punishable by death – especially those in positions of greater responsibility – such as corporate management and government positions (elected or appointed).

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, you believe that espionage and treason should be capitol offenses, but that they should also be easier to commit?

[NeuroTypical]

30 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

It always seemed odd to me that people policing foreign countries (as is the primary role of our current military, for better or worse) get far more oversight and scrutiny than those policing US citizens on US soil.

I'm thinking about how police use of dashcams and bodycams have exploded in popularity and funding over the last decade.  AFAICT, our law enforcement folks love bodycams, because it proves that certain events happened, and usually ends up giving strong evidence in favor of the cop's narrative.  They're like "yes, please put us under this microscope - I'd love you all to be able to see what I have to see".  

I've also watched many oversight/scrutiny policies spread and become commonplace.  Mandatory investigation after a use of deadly force.   Mandatory leave when a cop does certain things while the investigation takes place.  The "Internal Affairs Department" seems to have grown in transparency, power, and independence.  I know in my county, if something happens bad enough, it's an automatic process to have a different force take control.  Meaning like, if a city cop is accused of a felony, the investigation will be run by county investigators, not city.  And vice-versa.  

I'm not sure that cops get less oversight/scrutiny than our military at all.   Maybe public opinion sways a certain way, but in actual practice?

[Traveler]

5 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

Do you believe the same about the police? My experience tells me that a lot of conservatives don't. It always seemed odd to me that people policing foreign countries (as is the primary role of our current military, for better or worse) get far more oversight and scrutiny than those policing US citizens on US soil.

In an ideal society – police are hardly necessary.  Free individuals that uphold their responsibilities and will have oversite of police.

On this point – I was white water rafter last week, mostly on federal (government) waterways.  It was necessary to deal with some forest rangers.  One reason is that it seems that a lot more people are involved in outdoor activities and the accessible outdoor areas are limited.  I was surprised to learn that most people when approached by rangers are defensive and belligerent.  They were overly surprised that I was cooperative and nearly dumbfounded when I asked what our group could do to help.  Under the circumstances I could easily observe that a lot of people were unprepared (untrained) and confused with white water protocol.  This means they are not upholding their responsibilities.  Thus, it is absolutely necessary, that when people do not uphold their responsibilities, that they, of necessity, are no longer free but are governed by their government.

There are always exceptions, but I believe that individuals that have problems with police (law enforcement officials) are somewhat unprepared for the circumstance and would not (either because of ignorance or preparation, respond positively to any suggestions to conform to the known good and safe practices that govern white water participation.

Freedom does not mean doing what you want.  It means you are responsible for what you do.  I do not understand why any citizen would disagree – I do understand why those seeking power over others desire control more than responsibility.

Quote

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, you believe that espionage and treason should be capitol offenses, but that they should also be easier to commit?

Again, I do not believe it is a matter of easy or hard but rather a matter of being responsible.  If you are not taking responsibility within your country and desire to serve the interests of another country that has desire to cause harm to citizens of your country – and then yet you remain in this country – I believe this country has to right (obligation) to try you for treason.   If there is sufficient evidence – you should suffer the consequences.

 

The Traveler

[mirkwood]

5 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

our law enforcement folks love bodycams

 

I would NEVER work without one again.  It proved so many things we were saying about ourselves that was...well...accurate.

[LDSGator]

14 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

 

I would NEVER work without one again.  It proved so many things we were saying about ourselves that was...well...accurate.

I think body cams are something both sides can say is a good thing. Not only did it show the good side of cops and the pressures you guys have, it exposed the 1% of bad ones. 

[mirkwood]

There were plenty of lefties who got upset when the BWC footage supported what we had been saying all along.  Still others demanded we stop using them.