Trump calls for contest to create futuristic ‘Freedom Cities’

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Trump has frequently spoken of American innovation, uniqueness, courage.  He's done so not only at rallies for years, he included this theme in the 2020 SOTU address:

The American nation was carved out of the vast frontier by the toughest, strongest, fiercest, and most determined men and women ever to walk on the face of the Earth. Our ancestors braved the unknown; tamed the wilderness; settled the Wild West; lifted millions from poverty, disease, and hunger; vanquished tyranny and fascism; ushered the world to new heights of science and medicine; laid down the railroads, dug out the canals, raised up the skyscrapers. And, ladies and gentlemen, our ancestors built the most exceptional republic ever to exist in all of human history, and we are making it greater than ever before.

This is our glorious and magnificent inheritance. We are Americans. We are pioneers. We are the pathfinders. We settled the New World, we built the modern world, and we changed history forever by embracing the eternal truth that everyone is made equal by the hand of Almighty God.

America is the place where anything can happen. America is the place where anyone can rise. And here, on this land, on this soil, on this continent, the most incredible dreams come true.

This nation is our canvas, and this country is our masterpiece. We look at tomorrow and see unlimited frontiers just waiting to be explored. Our brightest discoveries are not yet known. Our most thrilling stories are not yet told. Our grandest journeys are not yet made. The American Age, the American Epic, the American adventure has only just begun.

Our spirit is still young, the sun is still rising, God’s grace is still shining, and, my fellow Americans, the best is yet to come.

Thanks for clarifying this.

Apparently, neither you nor Trump can tell the difference between the maximized individual choice, economic freedom, and minimalist (at times non-existent) government that actually built this great country, and the stifling central planning and central direction of economic resources he is now advocating for his ridiculously misnamed "Freedom Cities".  The idea of the federal government choosing the sites and plans to build new cities, and then funding it, is fundamentally in opposition to the history and founding principles of this country.

This idea absolutely reeks of being the Trumpian equivalent of a Soviet Five-Year plan -- the central planning staple of Communism that helped drive economic growth into the ground.  As I said before, I'd have been stunned if Bernie Sanders himself had dared propose such a statist solution to a non-problem.  Yet somehow, Trump managed to outflank Bernie from the left with this one.

Biden himself wouldn't have proposed something this stupid.

[LMAO]

Thanks for clarifying this.

Apparently, neither you nor Trump can tell the difference between the maximized individual choice, economic freedom, and minimalist (at times non-existent) government that actually built this great country, and the stifling central planning and central direction of economic resources he is now advocating for his ridiculously misnamed "Freedom Cities".  The idea of the federal government choosing the sites and plans to build new cities, and then funding it, is fundamentally in opposition to the history and founding principles of this country.

This idea absolutely reeks of being the Trumpian equivalent of a Soviet Five-Year plan -- the central planning staple of Communism that helped drive economic growth into the ground.  As I said before, I'd have been stunned if Bernie Sanders himself had dared propose such a statist solution to a non-problem.  Yet somehow, Trump managed to outflank Bernie from the left with this one.

Biden himself wouldn't have proposed something this stupid.

A while back, I stated that a fight may take place in the GOP that pits Big government populism represented by Trump vs conservatism

It's getting worse than I could have even predicted. And the primary season hasn't even begun

Right now, Trump is leading in the polls amongst primary voters because, it's early, he's enjoying the front runner status so far, and Alvin Bragg

But these can turn quickly. In the Summer of 1988, Dukakis was over 20 points in the polls over GHWB. Once the campaign season really got going, GHWB turned that wide deficit into a solid win for the WH

[Maj. Bill Martin]

A while back, I stated that a fight may take place in the GOP that pits Big government populism represented by Trump vs conservatism

It's getting worse than I could have even predicted. And the primary season hasn't even begun

Right now, Trump is leading in the polls amongst primary voters because, it's early, he's enjoying the front runner status so far, and Alvin Bragg

But these can turn quickly. In the Summer of 1988, Dukakis was over 20 points in the polls over GHWB. Once the campaign season really got going, GHWB turned that wide deficit into a solid win for the WH

Well, he may still win the nomination.  There just may be more populists than conservatives in the party.

But there aren't enough populists to win a general election.

[roamer_1]

A while back, I stated that a fight may take place in the GOP that pits Big government populism represented by Trump vs conservatism

It's getting worse than I could have even predicted. And the primary season hasn't even begun

That's because Conservatives are not represented, except in the Freedom Caucus and a handful of senators, and lately a couple rising star governors.

The real fight right now is between the big government populists and the globalist neocons and right facing liberals...

And really, if you calculate, that is a distinction without a difference. Big government nationalism is as much a whistle stop toward globalism as socialism is a whistle stop toward communism.

The prerequisite essence necessary to stop both is small government and federalism.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

That's because Conservatives are not represented, except in the Freedom Caucus and a handful of senators, and lately a couple rising star governors.

The real fight right now is between the big government populists and the globalist neocons and right facing liberals...

And really, if you calculate, that is a distinction without a difference. Big government nationalism is as much a whistle stop toward globalism as socialism is a whistle stop toward communism.

The prerequisite essence necessary to stop both is small government and federalism.

 

[Right_in_Virginia]

Thanks for clarifying this.

Apparently, neither you nor Trump can tell the difference between the maximized individual choice, economic freedom, and minimalist (at times non-existent) government that actually built this great country, and the stifling central planning and central direction of economic resources he is now advocating for his ridiculously misnamed "Freedom Cities".  The idea of the federal government choosing the sites and plans to build new cities, and then funding it, is fundamentally in opposition to the history and founding principles of this country.

This idea absolutely reeks of being the Trumpian equivalent of a Soviet Five-Year plan -- the central planning staple of Communism that helped drive economic growth into the ground.  As I said before, I'd have been stunned if Bernie Sanders himself had dared propose such a statist solution to a non-problem.  Yet somehow, Trump managed to outflank Bernie from the left with this one.

Biden himself wouldn't have proposed something this stupid.

 . "Conservatives" are now even failing at hyperbole. 

[LMAO]

We have example after example in history, that this has failed every time it’s been tried.

There are still people who think that Socialism/Marxism is a noble pursuit, despite its history of consistent failure and oppression. When confronted, those that seek Socialism/Marxism have some variation of “the right people weren’t implementing it.”

We are seeing the same mindset here. This is not encouraging innovation or “thinking outside the box.”  This is just another example of bringing failed 20th century ideas into the 21st-century

[LMAO]

You know what’s tragically funny. We all provided examples and history why this, and other forms of central planning, have fail spectacularly and instead of providing examples were it’s succeeded, our resident MAGA tells us how fearful we are and how we are discouraging innovation and how “we have boxes to help navigate a messy world”

Mind boggling. Absolutely mind boggling. I can’t relate to that much disconnect

[Maj. Bill Martin]

You know what’s tragically funny. We all provided examples and history why this, and other forms of central planning, have fail spectacularly and instead of providing examples were it’s succeeded, our resident MAGA tells us how fearful we are and how we are discouraging innovation and how “we have boxes to help navigate a messy world”

Mind boggling. Absolutely mind boggling. I can’t relate to that much disconnect

The thing is that the entire subject has no business in the Republican Party period.  I could see Democrats perhaps debating it because they believe in centralized economic planning and the wisdom of "experts" rather than the market making important investment decision.  Maybe they'd try to make their perfect "green and sustainable" cities.  It would still be out there even for them, but they're the party that is supposed to be constantly pushing things to the left.   Even if the GOP isn't consistently "small government" any more, it still believes in less government and less economic planning when compared to Democrats.

So when this idea is defended on the grounds that we should "look outside the box", it really is asking us to leave the "box" of believing in a market economy, to jump into the box of very large scale central planning.  That may be where Trump wants to take the GOP, but there's no way in hell I'd want anything to do with that.

[catfish1957]

The thing is that the entire subject has no business in the Republican Party period.  I could see Democrats perhaps debating it because they believe in centralized economic planning and the wisdom of "experts" rather than the market making important investment decision.  Maybe they'd try to make their perfect "green and sustainable" cities.  It would still be out there even for them, but they're the party that is supposed to be constantly pushing things to the left.   Even if the GOP isn't consistently "small government" any more, it still believes in less government and less economic planning when compared to Democrats.

So when this idea is defended on the grounds that we should "look outside the box", it really is asking us to leave the "box" of believing in a market economy, to jump into the box of very large scale central planning.  That may be where Trump wants to take the GOP, but there's no way in hell I'd want anything to do with that.

What I find also fascinating, is my contingent on FBN (including Kudlow and Payne) , and conservative punditry in general has been quiet on calling out Trump on this particular campaign promise.    It's almost like they are afraid of him.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

What I find also fascinating, is my contingent on FBN (including Kudlow and Payne) , and conservative punditry in general has been quiet on calling out Trump on this particular campaign promise.    It's almost like they are afraid of him.

My guess is that they'd say something like:

"Look, this is kind of a kooky idea, and I don't know what he was thinking about when he said it.  It was just Trump being Trump and saying something he probably shouldn't. But it's not going to happen anyway, so I'm not wasting time on it."

Which completely ducks the issue, but that's my guess.

[GrouchoTex]

I personally don't care either way as long as tax dollars aren't being used to pay for it.  If Elon Musk (for example) wants to try to finance some Trumpian Metropolis, it's no skin off my butt.

It's no business of government, though.

Agreed.

[Smokin Joe]

Would you buy a used "Camelot" from this man?

[LMAO]

The thing is that the entire subject has no business in the Republican Party period.  I could see Democrats perhaps debating it because they believe in centralized economic planning and the wisdom of "experts" rather than the market making important investment decision.  Maybe they'd try to make their perfect "green and sustainable" cities.  It would still be out there even for them, but they're the party that is supposed to be constantly pushing things to the left.   Even if the GOP isn't consistently "small government" any more, it still believes in less government and less economic planning when compared to Democrats.

So when this idea is defended on the grounds that we should "look outside the box", it really is asking us to leave the "box" of believing in a market economy, to jump into the box of very large scale central planning.  That may be where Trump wants to take the GOP, but there's no way in hell I'd want anything to do with that.

This laughingstock of an idea isn’t being debated in the abstract. We have, over and over and over and over and over given example after example of this failing. Yet MAGAs believe, in their heart, despite all evidence to the contrary, this will all be just so good.

The JFK Space Race comparison is faulty. By the time JFK pushed the idea of sending a man to the moon, the USSR already launched a satellite and put a man in space.

Top it off with the flying cars and the bonuses for all the new babies in this glorious MAGA city is proof that his mind no longer occupies the reality realm

This is no different than the left pushing green energy as the answer to replace fossil fuels despite the glaring evidence of its failures

It’s hard enough to fight the far left to keep them from bankrupting the country with their cockamamie plans. We don’t need the MAGAs joining them

[Maj. Bill Martin]

This laughingstock of an idea isn’t being debated in the abstract. We have, over and over and over and over and over given example after example of this failing. Yet MAGAs believe, in their heart, despite all evidence to the contrary, this will all be just so good.

The JFK Space Race comparison is faulty. By the time JFK pushed the idea of sending a man to the moon, the USSR already launched a satellite and put a man in space.

Top it off with the flying cars and the bonuses for all the new babies in this glorious MAGA city is proof that his mind no longer occupies the reality realm

This is no different than the left pushing green energy as the answer to replace fossil fuels despite the glaring evidence of its failures

It’s hard enough to fight the far left to keep them from bankrupting the country with their cockamamie plans. We don’t need the MAGAs joining them

Can't disagree with any of that.   It is such a freaking strange idea coming from a candidate for national office -- much less a Republicans -- that people just kind of glaze over it with perhaps a "he can't be serious" dismissal.

[LMAO]

Can't disagree with any of that.   It is such a freaking strange idea coming from a candidate for national office -- much less a Republicans -- that people just kind of glaze over it with perhaps a "he can't be serious" dismissal.

Instead of mocking people who made the effort to find examples were this has failed, it would be more productive if the MAGAs would provide examples were this type of centralization was successful

[GtHawk]

. "Conservatives" are now even failing at hyperbole.

Why yes, yes you are

[DCPatriot]

For me...futuristic cities have natural gas appliance stores in every zip code and gas/diesel stations every block.

... and "open carry" ... and old fashioned baseball without the clock!   

[Right_in_Virginia]

Trump Again Defines National Priorities
American Greatness, Mar 28, 2023

The former president has again defined the territory over which an upcoming national election will be fought. And in so doing, he’s done the nation a great service.

Political observers and partisan activists debate whether Donald Trump or some other Republican candidate has the best chance of beating a Democratic rival in the 2024 presidential election. But earlier this month, Trump demonstrated that just as he did in 2016, he is raising campaign issues central to America’s future, issues that no other candidate is talking about. The latest flare-ups of what have been nearly eight years of relentless, orchestrated prosecution of Trump are a massive distraction but don’t change this reality.

Candidate Trump in 2016 raised issues Michael Anton adroitly summarized in “The Flight 93 Election” as “open borders, lower wages, outsourcing, de-industrialization, trade giveaways, and endless, pointless, winless war.” Making these neglected issues the themes of his campaign, Trump beat the odds and won the election. These are now among the most public and polarizing issues in America. They may be unresolved, but they are now central instead of peripheral.

This time, Trump’s 2024 campaign website includes under his agenda a list of the issues that have defined him since his political debut. They include deregulation, opportunity zones, fair trade, reshoring of industry, energy dominance, secure borders, reclaiming national sovereignty, war on drug cartels, law and order, military readiness, parents’ rights, ending censorship, election integrity, and more. Anyone questioning the coherence of Trump’s policy agenda is invited to read this list, which is long on specifics. But in a video released on his campaign website on March 4, Trump looked into the future.

The Future According to Trump

Trump challenges Americans to once again “pursue big dreams and daring projects.” He points to previous national accomplishments, such as the settlement of the frontier, the interstate highway system, and the deployment of communications satellites. In what he characterized as America’s next “quantum leap” in progress, Trump calls for a national contest for urban developers to submit designs for new “Freedom Cities,” with 10 winning designs to be allocated federal land for their construction.

Trump then enumerates several related goals, including calling for American industry to win the race to commercialize airborne mobility, revitalization of economically depressed regions by investing in the manufacturing assets we’re going to need as we disconnect from China, and initiatives to lower the cost of a car and lower the cost of a single-family home. Trump also wants “baby bonuses” to encourage a new baby boom in America. Finally, Trump says he would challenge the state governors to make cities and towns more livable and build monuments to American heroes.

At the conclusion of Trump’s four-minute video, he vows to “dramatically increase living standards and build a future that brings our country together through excitement, opportunity, and success.”

Trump is on to something. Every one of his goals is a driver of productivity and innovation, starting with new cities. Why shouldn’t the federal government allow for the privatization of a mere 0.5 percent of federal land in the United States? That would be roughly 5,000 square miles which, if split evenly and allocated as squares, would be 10 new cities, each 22 miles on a side.

What’s intriguing about this proposal is that at its core it is a libertarian notion—turning public land back over to the private sector. Digging deeper, it invites Americans to create 10 futuristic scenarios for urban development on a blank slate. The mix of public and private funding could be left up to the individual participating states. How these cities planned to manage their transportation, energy, food, water, and waste management challenges could differ greatly, and how successful each of them would be could then become an instructive model for urban revitalization all over America.

Red states might strike a balance between innovation and sticking with more cost-effective conventional building codes and enabling infrastructure, whereas in blue states, one might expect new cities that aspire to become models of sustainability, hopefully in sufficiently practical applications. Plenty of innovations are at our disposal today, including using laminated timber for construction of high-rise and mid-rise structures, innovative ways to reuse water and harvest nutrients from wastewater, indoor agriculture, and radical expansion of transportation conduits, both underground and in the air.

It Might Be “The Jetsons”

Even some of Trump’s media detractors acknowledged that decentralized air mobility is just around the corner. Within a decade or less, we will begin seeing small passenger drones ferrying people from point to point within and between cities. The surprising simplicity of the technology, leveraging what we’re learning from unmanned drones and self-driving cars, may eventually bring the prices down within reach of the average consumer.

And Trump is absolutely right when he urges Americans to pioneer this technology, which will yield valuable technological spin-offs, relieve traffic congestion on the ground, and open up otherwise inaccessible real estate.

Several years ago, discussing his groundbreaking (pun intended) tunneling company, Elon Musk said, “the construction industry is one of the only sectors in our economy that has not improved its productivity in the last 50 years.” While Musk might have overstated his case, new developments in materials science, robotics, electronics, communications, and systems integration promise to revolutionize the construction industry. And again, to paraphrase Trump, that revolution is going to happen in America, or it is going to happen somewhere else.

The fact that we are developing the capacity to use new materials and technologies to build and manufacture at far lower costs brings credibility to Trump’s challenge to reduce the cost of cars, single-family homes, and the cost of living generally. Trump’s commitment to deregulation—clearly demonstrated in his first term—perhaps along with new and bipartisan antitrust legislation, could be the key to a new era of competition as major manufacturers and developers adopt new technologies to create 21st-century versions of the Model T concept: cars and homes that families with a single wage earner can nonetheless afford. This is a goal worthy of a great nation.


More:
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/28/trump-again-defines-national-priorities/

[Right_in_Virginia]

Trump’s 2024 campaign website includes under his agenda a list of the issues that have defined him since his political debut. They include deregulation, opportunity zones, fair trade, reshoring of industry, energy dominance, secure borders, reclaiming national sovereignty, war on drug cartels, law and order, military readiness, parents’ rights, ending censorship, election integrity, and more. Anyone questioning the coherence of Trump’s policy agenda is invited to read this list

More information/videos on this can be found here:

https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,490403.0.html

[bigheadfred]

Katie bar the door.

[Right_in_Virginia]

But in a video released on his campaign website on March 4, Trump looked into the future.

"Quantum Leap in the American Standard of Living" (Video)

https://mobile.twitter.com/TeamTrump/status/1631774056545411072

[Right_in_Virginia]

FTA:

A population crash in the United States is no joke. Our current replacement rate of 1.6 births per woman means that for every 1 million Americans today, there will only be 440,000 great-grandchildren. Put another way, if the time span of one generation averages 25 years, based on current birth rates, two-thirds of America’s total population will be wiped out within the next century.

There are only two ways to stop this: mass replacement of the population through immigration or increased native birth rates.

For Trump to launch a serious national dialogue about what it is going to take to increase birth rates in America is perhaps the most futurist oriented, and the most consequential, of all the new issues he’s raising. Trump is proposing “baby bonuses” in the form of financial incentives for couples to have more children.

But Trump’s other new priorities also should make it easier for young Americans to choose to have more children: creating room for growth in new cities, creating new job opportunities by reshoring manufacturing jobs, stimulating new technologies and boosting productivity with air mobility, and by making homes and cars affordable.

https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/28/trump-again-defines-national-priorities/

[Right_in_Virginia]

FTA:

Trump’s final priority, echoing themes he’s explored before, adds an intangible incentive for people to form families. As he put it, we will “bring our country together through excitement, opportunity, and success.”

There is a shared excitement created by beautifying America’s urban spaces, by making cities and towns more livable, and by building monuments to American heroes. It makes people feel like they’re part of something big and worthwhile. It is a unifying force with a natural attractive power completely missing from the leftist obsession to make “inclusion” a mandate.

Vivek Ramaswamy, who has announced his intention to compete with Trump for the GOP presidential nomination, seems pretty solid on many issues. He has repeatedly stated that one of the biggest challenges facing Americans today is to define “what does it mean to be an American?”

Trump, with the new issues he’s bringing before the American people, is answering that question. To be optimistic, successful, and excited by what promises to be a dazzling future.

https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/28/trump-again-defines-national-priorities/

[roamer_1]

FTA:

That entire statement is utterly absurd.