Trump picks Ohio Sen. JD Vance for vice president

[Kamaji]

That depends on where the point of elasticity is relative to how much the economy can grow.  The flaw with this discussion though is what is being advocated.  What is more important?  Funding government?  Or growing the economy.  Personally, I don't give a damn with whether lowering taxes will raise more revenue.  I care whether lowering taxes will free up the ability for our economy to grow.

The government doesn't need more money.  The government needs to reduce spending.  A lot.  And cutting government spending will do far more to grow our economy than will any revenue-increasing tax cut.  Right now, our government is printing up new money (to fund itself) faster than our economy is growing.  Which means we are going backwards.  Balance the budget first.  Then we can talk about taxes.

That's a different discussion.

[LMAO]

That is called throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
It's a headfake. It's the magician's right hand.

It's the left hand you should be watching. And the left hand is in his record. Easy to see.

If people support both Vance's and Trump's economic positions, that's fine. But will they accept the consequences

If people support protectionist tariffs, will they be fine with the consequences?

Do they accept the consequences of raising the minimum wage?

Do they accept the consequences of government intervention in the economy?

Do they accept the consequences  of  the federal reserve printing money to prop up GDP numbers?

Do they accept the consequences of the  government devaluing the dollar?

Do they accept the consequences of the government picking winners and losers in the economy?

People tend to think that economics follow their personal feelings

[LMAO]

Ilistened closely to JD Vance’s speech at the Republican Convention. I was surprised, even gob-smacked. Vance sounded like a socialist. I am told that he represents what in America is called the “New Right”. Those of us who still suffer from the influence of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, and our own PV Narasimha Rao, end up puzzled about what is Right about this New Right.

Vance does not like free trade. To hell with Adam Smith and David Ricardo; welcome French physiocrats. Those of us who have been taught about the disastrous 1930 interventions of Reed Smoot and Willis Hawley cannot but shudder a little bit. Vance articulates a passionate faith in industrial policy. Those of us who want investment decisions to be determined by entrepreneurs and markets find this approach quite puzzling and definitely not Right.

Vance wants government policy to favour what we in India in the old days would refer to as “backward areas”. We remember the days when our government forced factories to be set up in economically unviable spots in pursuit of this policy of favouring backward areas. Vance rants against Wall Street. It is not clear if he is entirely against all financial markets. But evidently, he is deeply suspicious of them. Would he prefer that capital be allocated by fiat instead of by anonymous auctions? That sounds a little bit like Xi Jinping.

https://theprint.in/opinion/jd-vance-his-new-right-cant-be-dismissed-glibly-he-appeals-to-something-deep-necessary/2181819/

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I'm willing to admit I'm getting old. I don't want to see a Republican party comprised only of folks who are as old - and older - than I. This guy's analysis is interesting:


After Decades Of Geriatric Leaders, J.D. Vance Offers Hope For Millennials
At 39 years old, he reflects much of what is best about his generation and understands much of what is wrong.
By: Auguste Meyrat
July 19, 2024Read the rest at The Federalist

DeSantis is a Millennial, military vet, etc.. The difference is that he is an actual conservative who believes in a limited federal government and market economy.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Oh, brother! 

That is not thinking. That is foolishness! You are not seeing an end to global dominance. You are just authorizing the pickers and choosers. What eco-socialist government EVER has not crushed the the 'bottom two quintiles? Stand back and watch what you've done... Because it is surely coming.

What is being formed is Feudalism - except in Corporatism, where the ultra-elite will reside. You have chosen them. Watch and see.

The TRUTH is that *NO* government can save you. ANY government promising to is LYING, it doesn't matter their colors. It's not just a lie. It's a damn lie.

You will find your populists are no better at running this mammoth government than the Democrats were. You will find that the voice has changed, but the breath smells the same. Because it must.

The problem is too much government, not who runs it.
And now the Right, of all things, has embraced big government too.
Thrown down the sword and capitulated.
The last gasp of liberty - And y'all are cheering.

It disgusts me. I am thoroughly disabused of the notion that folks are basically Conservative. They are not. They bow before government and beg for it to save them.
And government will eat them alive.
It happens EVERY TIME.
It will happen this time too.

Your messiah will destroy much.
He already has.

Thanks for taking the time to write that.  I'd almost slid backwards into thinking I could vote for Trump, but the Vance pick showed me that every single concern I had about Trump was valid.

[roamer_1]

If people support both Vance's and Trump's economic positions, that's fine. But will they accept the consequences

If people support protectionist tariffs, will they be fine with the consequences?

Do they accept the consequences of raising the minimum wage?

Do they accept the consequences of government intervention in the economy?

Do they accept the consequences  of  the federal reserve printing money to prop up GDP numbers?

Do they accept the consequences of the  government devaluing the dollar?

Do they accept the consequences of the government picking winners and losers in the economy?

People tend to think that economics follow their personal feelings

They don't understand, or they don't care. One of the two. And either one is the death of fiscal conservatism, and with it, Conservatism itself. One cannot exist without the other.

[libertybele]

Thanks for taking the time to write that.  I'd almost slid backwards into thinking I could vote for Trump, but the Vance pick showed me that every single concern I had about Trump was valid.

Well, Trump is the nominee.  I will vote for him because he is a true patriot.  As for his pick of JD as VP, I also believe it was a very poor choice and quite frankly he troubles me. (Donalds was my preference or Sanders or Burgum). 

It is what it is and you either vote DEM, abstain or vote down ballot.

I believe it was absolutely by the grace of God that Trump is alive and hopefully He will steer him and JD in the right direction.

[roamer_1]

Thanks for taking the time to write that.  I'd almost slid backwards into thinking I could vote for Trump, but the Vance pick showed me that every single concern I had about Trump was valid.

The entire theory of Conservatism (as it touches politics) revolves around small government - A government AFRAID of its constituents. The money ain't the thing. Small government is the thing... But fiscal conservatism is the leash on the dog called government.

[libertybele]

They don't understand, or they don't care. One of the two. And either one is the death of fiscal conservatism, and with it, Conservatism itself. One cannot exist without the other.

@roamer_1   We'll see what happens and I believe Trump fully understands, but I tend to think Trump is going to set his economic policies and not JD's.  JD has a lot to learn and it is Trump who is going to teach him a few things.  Trump has been around the block many times and JD has only gotten his shoes muddied for a short while.

[libertybele]

Ilistened closely to JD Vance’s speech at the Republican Convention. I was surprised, even gob-smacked. Vance sounded like a socialist. I am told that he represents what in America is called the “New Right”. Those of us who still suffer from the influence of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, and our own PV Narasimha Rao, end up puzzled about what is Right about this New Right.

Vance does not like free trade. To hell with Adam Smith and David Ricardo; welcome French physiocrats. Those of us who have been taught about the disastrous 1930 interventions of Reed Smoot and Willis Hawley cannot but shudder a little bit. Vance articulates a passionate faith in industrial policy. Those of us who want investment decisions to be determined by entrepreneurs and markets find this approach quite puzzling and definitely not Right.

Vance wants government policy to favour what we in India in the old days would refer to as “backward areas”. We remember the days when our government forced factories to be set up in economically unviable spots in pursuit of this policy of favouring backward areas. Vance rants against Wall Street. It is not clear if he is entirely against all financial markets. But evidently, he is deeply suspicious of them. Would he prefer that capital be allocated by fiat instead of by anonymous auctions? That sounds a little bit like Xi Jinping.

https://theprint.in/opinion/jd-vance-his-new-right-cant-be-dismissed-glibly-he-appeals-to-something-deep-necessary/2181819/

I highly doubt Trump is going to listen to JD, especially on economic policy. Trump has spent most of his life dealing with his own financial path. He grew his own dynasty.  Do you really think Trump is going to allow JD to come in and change that??

The problem is -- Trump is aged.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Name me one time that he vetoed a bill sent to his desk by Nancy Pelosi.


Trump failed the first time, what makes you think he will succeed the second time?

Is this a trick question of some sort?

Pretty easy to tee that one up.  There were 10, with 1 overridden

You are listening to too many TDS-inflicted on this site.

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/vetoes/TrumpDJ.htm

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1   We'll see what happens and I believe Trump fully understands, but I tend to think Trump is going to set his economic policies and not JD's.  JD has a lot to learn and it is Trump who is going to teach him a few things.  Trump has been around the block many times and JD has only gotten his shoes muddied for a short while.

Nonsense. His record belies your statement. He does not understand. His tariffs devastated business. his lockdowns brought tremendous financial destruction. He doesn't understand shit.

[mountaineer]

DeSantis is a Millennial, military vet, etc.. The difference is that he is an actual conservative who believes in a limited federal government and market economy.

He was my first choice.

[LMAO]

I highly doubt Trump is going to listen to JD, especially on economic policy.

You sure? What economic policy do they disagree on?

[LMAO]

The Trump /Vance economic strategy is to benefit some some parts of the economy at the expense of others.

Tariffs can protect certain American industries. But it makes everything more expensive for everyone else. Same with dollar devaluation. The idea is to make exports cheaper, but it raises costs on imports and makes things more expensive for American's and business that rely on imports

[Hoodat]

Is this a trick question of some sort?

Pretty easy to tee that one up.  There were 10, with 1 overridden

You are listening to too many TDS-inflicted on this site.

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/vetoes/TrumpDJ.htm

Only one of those ten bills was a spending bill.  And Trump vetoed it because he wanted even more spending.

[mountaineer]

Apparently, leaked memos show that J.D. Vance is so hardcore against wokeness that he froze dozens of ambassador nominations over their views on gender transition and DEI. ...

https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1814471956877746668

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Only one of those ten bills was a spending bill.  And Trump vetoed it because he wanted even more spending.

The bill you are referencing was for funding Defense, and he wanted higher pay raises for military and equipment, normally a conservative priority as it is the primary function of the federal government.

He also vetoed it as it had some onerous provisions that by all rights needed to be changed that I highlight.

Here's what he vetoed that was overridden:

The $740 billion bill includes pay raises for America's soldiers, modernizations for equipment, and provisions to require more scrutiny before troops are withdrawn from Germany or Afghanistan. President Donald Trump had threatened to veto the bill because it did not include a repeal of 1996 legislation shielding internet companies from being liable for what is posted on their websites by third parties. The bill also includes a provision to limit the president's use of emergency declarations to divert military construction funds to finance the expansion of the Mexico–United States barrier. Another provision within the act would require the military to rename bases that were named after figures from the Confederacy. The act also contains multiple anti-money laundering provisions and effectively bans anonymous shell companies.

Which of these provisions do you disagree with?

[catfish1957]

My greatest hope is after we become energy dominant again, we reinvest that windfall in reducing the defict.  If Trump does that he'll be up there with Reagan.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

My greatest hope is after we become energy dominant again, we reinvest that windfall in reducing the defict.  If Trump does that he'll be up there with Reagan.

My greatest hope is we reduce the size of the federal government by at least a third or more, as well as half its employees, who are paid much more than private sector counterparts that are also being held accountable rather than holding lifetime positions.

Government spending is our problem, not more revenue being taken in, whether it be from taxes or higher sales of oil and gas.

[Bigun]

My greatest hope is we reduce the size of the federal government by at least a third or more, as well as half its employees, who are paid much more than private sector counterparts that are also being held accountable rather than holding lifetime positions.

Government spending is our problem, not more revenue being taken in, whether it be from taxes or higher sales of oil and gas.

And getting rid of all these "Green" energy mandates would be the icing on the cake!

[libertybele]

Well, my greatest hope right now is that Trump is re-elected.  That would be a great start. 

[LMAO]

They don't understand, or they don't care. One of the two. And either one is the death of fiscal conservatism, and with it, Conservatism itself. One cannot exist without the other.

They would care if Trump and JD Vance were running on the Democrat side. There was a thread recently, where Biden was proposing rent control. Everybody agreed it was a stupid idea

If Trump and JD Vance did the same, their backers would either ignore it or support it

We are going to see a lot of  government intervention in the economy regardless of who gets elected. At least Obama admitted his shovel ready jobs program didn’t work

Prepare for Peron lite. And when that doesn’t work, watch his supporters blame the free market

[LMAO]

My greatest hope is we reduce the size of the federal government by at least a third or more, as well as half its employees, who are paid much more than private sector counterparts that are also being held accountable rather than holding lifetime positions.

Government spending is our problem, not more revenue being taken in, whether it be from taxes or higher sales of oil and gas.

That would mean actual reductions. Not just slowing the rate of growth or replacing government employees with his own lackeys

[LMAO]

My greatest hope is after we become energy dominant again, we reinvest that windfall in reducing the defict.  If Trump does that he'll be up there with Reagan.

Trump says he  believes that opening ANWAR will pay for Social Security so that’s already out the window

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-06/trump-pledges-to-expand-drilling-to-pay-for-senior-benefits

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/can-social-security-be-saved-selling-americas-oil-gas-reserves


Trump is not gonna change his political positions at this point because they’re already ingrained