The Trump Presidency - Chapter 2

[JPhillips]

A wizard sits alone, high in a tower of gold, calm and confident.

He whispers to himself, "I'm always right," picks up a pen and drafts a new tome of wisdom.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Arles

People have been using the "chicken little" export tariffs on US goods forever. They rarely occur (outside of maybe China). The US has had tariffs on Europe and Japan before and didn't get nailed there. I don't think we should have tariffs on Europe or Japan, and usually the ones we have done in the past are pretty minimal.

If Trump starts putting a 10-15% tariff on everything imported, I will be right beside you guys against it.

We literally had to do a $25 billion bailout for soybean farmers because of retaliatory tariffs.

Trump's massive farmer bailout failed to make up for the 'self-inflicted' trade damage

92 Percent of Trump’s China Tariff Proceeds Has Gone to Bail Out Angry Farmers | Council on Foreign Relations

[RainMaker]

I'm just trying to see how these auto tariffs benefit us.

1) American pays an extra $20,000-$30,000 for an inferior car.

2) Auto makers make more money as they can keep margins high and don't need to innovate or price competitively. Banks make money on the additional loans to cover that higher price.

3) High prices keep people in gas powered vehicles which are cheaper. Good for the Saudis, Iran, and Russia. Not so great for the climate.

4) Extra profits are used to buyback stocks boosting the share price for the wealthiest Americans and executives of these companies. No real tax revenue here since we don't tax unrealized capital gains (well for rich people) and buybacks reduce the company's corporate tax liability.

5) ???????

6) Americans somehow come out on top?

I'm just trying to see where the tariffs benefit the average American. Who makes up for that extra price I have to pay for a car? Because to me it seems like a workaround for a regressive national sales tax and elimination of income tax which overwhelmingly benefits wealthy people.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

We literally had to do a $25 billion bailout for soybean farmers because of retaliatory tariffs.

Trump's massive farmer bailout failed to make up for the 'self-inflicted' trade damage

92 Percent of Trump’s China Tariff Proceeds Has Gone to Bail Out Angry Farmers | Council on Foreign Relations

at least for the ones that didn't commit suicide...

[GrantDawg]

Fox News anchor Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense. The first nomination out of left field. Or Right field, I guess. I guess we should be glad he didn't nominate a war criminal.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Why can't those companies just create a better product or lower their prices?

Because we're stuck with the bane of consumer existence, the fucking labor unions.

[GrantDawg]

Oh. He was the guy that lobbied Trump to pardon the war criminals. Now, he can direct the military to commit those crimes on American soil. Cool. Cool. Cool.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Because we're stuck with the bane of consumer existence, the fucking labor unions.

Nah, labor costs have gone down as a percent of revenue and profits. But that's some next level bootlicking.

[flere-imsaho]

Some of you guys need to pace yourselves if you're going to get through the next four years without a coronary.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Fox News anchor Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense. The first nomination out of left field. Or Right field, I guess. I guess we should be glad he didn't nominate a war criminal.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Lol A guy who thinks germs aren't real.

[Ksyrup]

Sounds like business interests have gotten to Trump or his people because all of a sudden I'm seeing a couple articles about Trump softening his "mass deportation" plans to focus on illegal immigrants who commit crimes.

[JPhillips]

Looks like the plan is for the House to use tariffs as a way to lock in the Trump tax cuts permanently. The problem is it will take universal tariffs of maybe 20% to make the math work for reconciliation.

[NobodyHere]

Trump taps Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead Department of Government Efficiency

Honestly it sounds like a good idea but with these clowns it will probably be counter-productive.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Some of you guys need to pace yourselves if you're going to get through the next four years without a coronary.

I haven't listened to any talk radio/news/etc...since it was called. I can't stomach it. I'm going to try and not pay attention the next 4 years and hope the world doesn't end

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Sounds like business interests have gotten to Trump or his people because all of a sudden I'm seeing a couple articles about Trump softening his "mass deportation" plans to focus on illegal immigrants who commit crimes.

I've always read there would be a prioritization. Focus on illegal felons, national security people (fentanyl) has been on the top of the list. After that, it's been cloudy on plan/logistics.

Honestly, just as I believe MSM has been conflating legal & illegal into just immigrants (and now the delineation is coming back in MSM), things are getting more clear now as next steps are happening.

I've watched a couple Homan YT videos. We can argue about his stats; his pro-Trump, anti-Joe bias; but it's obvious to me that he is very passionate in wanting to stop illegal immigration (and I mean "very"). Pretty hardcore guy, looking forward to his plan and the inevitable confrontations with lawmakers and MSM.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Pretty hardcore guy, looking forward to his plan and the inevitable confrontations with lawmakers and MSM.

You're looking forward to them deporting US citizens and dreamers?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

You're looking forward to them deporting US citizens and dreamers?

Er, no? I can see how you read the below as looking forward to (whatever being done). I meant it as looking forward to reading/understanding his plan ...

Focus on illegal felons, national security people (fentanyl) has been on the top of the list. After that, it's been cloudy on plan/logistics.

Pretty hardcore guy, looking forward to his plan and the inevitable confrontations with lawmakers and MSM.

Specific to re: deporting US citizens. Not in any plan that I've read other than for fraud. I'll refer you to post #6301 to 6305 below.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - POTUS 2024 - Harris vs Trump - General Election Discussion

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Specific to re: deporting US citizens. Not in any plan that I've read other than for fraud. I'll refer you to post #6301 to 6305 below.

The new border czar literally said families can be deported together if certain members are here illegally when asked about it

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

We literally had to do a $25 billion bailout for soybean farmers because of retaliatory tariffs.

Trump's massive farmer bailout failed to make up for the 'self-inflicted' trade damage

92 Percent of Trump’s China Tariff Proceeds Has Gone to Bail Out Angry Farmers | Council on Foreign Relations

Originally Posted by Lathum

at least for the ones that didn't commit suicide...

And yet the vast majority of farmers I know still vote Trump.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

The new border czar literally said families can be deported together if certain members are here illegally when asked about it

I believe the below is where this stems from below. If there are others, please provide source.

Access to this page has been denied

When journalist Cecilia Vega asked, “Is there a way to carry out mass deportation without separating families?” Homan responded: “Of course there is. Families can be deported together.”

How I read that is, the US citizen family members can stay if they wish, but if they want they want to stay together, then the legal (voluntarily) & illegal (involuntarily) family members can leave together.

But yes, if there is forced/involuntary deportation of US citizens (non-fraud), that would be very bad. But no, I don't believe that is in the plan.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Some of you guys need to pace yourselves if you're going to get through the next four years without a coronary.

I read somewhere (not sure where? )that policy wise the parties are basically the same so not voting D wouldn't make a difference. I'm not even sure why this thread is here?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I believe the below is where this stems from below. If there are others, please provide source.

Access to this page has been denied


How I read that is, the US citizen family members can stay if they wish, but if they want they want to stay together, then the legal (voluntarily) & illegal (involuntarily) family members can leave together.

But yes, if there is forced/involuntary deportation of US citizens (non-fraud), that would be very bad. But no, I don't believe that is in the plan.

Having to choose between deportation or being permanently separated from a loved one is de facto forced deportations.

If you don't see the absolute cruelty and inhumanness in it you need to get a soul.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Having to choose between deportation or being permanently separated from a loved one is de facto forced deportations.

It is not forced, it is voluntary. There is a choice. Hard choices, but still a choice.

If you don't see the absolute cruelty and inhumanness in it you need to get a soul.

I'll use the Bill Maher quote. Not taking the GOP and the broader public's concern and not acknowledging it is a crisis has resulted in below ...

The HBO star (Bill Maher) then quoted The Atlantic’s David Frum, who warned “If liberals insist that enforcing borders is a job only fascists will do, then voters will hire fascists to do what liberals won’t.”

“Voters keep saying over and over again we are not comfortable with this level of immigration. I understand why. It doesn’t make you a racist to say that,” Maher said.

I absolutely do not deny its tough choices, no doubt. And Holman will probably take it further right than I would prefer, but yeah ... here we are.

[Lathum]

JFC it’s not a choice and the cruelty is the point.

IIRC you immigrated here. I’d be nervous if I was you. No idea how far they will take this.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Having to choose between deportation or being permanently separated from a loved one is de facto forced deportations.

If you don't see the absolute cruelty and inhumanness in it you need to get a soul.

They could be flung out of fucking planes without parachutes afaic, preferrably into piranha infested waters.

That'd be a good start at least.

[JPhillips]

Stephen Miller has told us the plan. De-naturalization turbo-charged. They are absolutely planning to strip citizenship and deport some number of current Americans.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

JFC it’s not a choice and the cruelty is the point.

Yes, it's definitely a tough choice.

IIRC you immigrated here. I’d be nervous if I was you. No idea how far they will take this.

Naturalized citizens that went through the legal process don't have much to worry about. The de-naturalization, from what I've read, is from "fraud".

Yes, there may be some exceptions here and there e.g. how "fraud" is defined, but that'll work itself through the courts. But vast majority of naturalized citizens can sleep well.

[Lathum]

You realize they want to remove birth right citizenship? What makes you think they won’t denaturalize people who came here legally? Though I’m sure you’re safe because your skin isn’t brown.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Stephen Miller has told us the plan. De-naturalization turbo-charged. They are absolutely planning to strip citizenship and deport some number of current Americans.

I can easily believe Holman/Miller want to increase the review of fraudulent citizenship cases. That is my understanding but admittedly, I might have missed something. But if not, what's wrong with de-naturalizing people that got citizenship under fraudulent pretenses?

See link of de-naturalization.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Trump's Immigration Reform

If you have links that say they want to do de-naturalization for non-fraudulent cases (or A-D in my link above), provide the source.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

You realize they want to remove birth right citizenship?

re: birthright, see below, posts #6301-6305.

POTUS 2024 - Harris vs Trump - General Election Discussion - Page 127 - Front Office Football Central

In summary, we know there'll be a fight about it. If it works itself through the legal system (and it'll have to eventually), I'm okay with the final decision even though I personally prefer limits to birthright (e.g. one parent is a citizen or PR).

What makes you think they won’t denaturalize people who came here legally?

Because I've not seen any reports of plans to do it for non-fraud cases? There may be some extreme situations (see below) about but it's certainly not going to be widespread.

If you have something, provide a source that is not Twitter/X/TickTok that I can read in its full context.

I've provide link to my source above. But I'll requote the key stuff

A) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if he or she procured naturalization illegally
B) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if there is deliberate deceit on the part of the person in misrepresenting or failing to disclose a material fact or facts on his or her naturalization application and subsequent examination.
C) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if the person becomes a member of, or affiliated with, the Communist party, other totalitarian party, or terrorist organization within five years of his or her naturalization.
D) Other than Honorable Discharge before Five Years of Honorable Service after Naturalization

Though I’m sure you’re safe because your skin isn’t brown.

You sure about that?

[HerRealName]

You entered your yearly income as 68,000 but your W-2 for that year indicates that you only made $67,139.17. That's fraud, you're deported.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by HerRealName

You entered your yearly income as 68,000 but your W-2 for that year indicates that you only made $67,139.17. That's fraud, you're deported.

Nope, not as far as de-naturalization goes. See link below.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Trump's Immigration Reform

Here's the conditions of "fraud" as it relates to citizenship.

A) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if he or she procured naturalization illegally
B) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if there is deliberate deceit on the part of the person in misrepresenting or failing to disclose a material fact or facts on his or her naturalization application and subsequent examination.
C) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if the person becomes a member of, or affiliated with, the Communist party, other totalitarian party, or terrorist organization within five years of his or her naturalization.
D) Other than Honorable Discharge before Five Years of Honorable Service after Naturalization

So yes, Melania "may" fall under these conditions. Prince Harry also (whenever he becomes naturalized). But we all know the rich and powerful get away with things regular folks don't.

[JPhillips]

I don't know what Miller is planning, but turbo-charged is not a word I would use to describe uses in cases of documented fraud. There are going to be very few of those.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I don't know what Miller is planning, but turbo-charged is not a word I would use to describe uses in cases of documented fraud. There are going to be very few of those.

When there is widespread de-naturalization of US citizens beyond the A-D conditions I've quoted, then you can tell me how wrong I was.

Yes, there will be screwups and extreme cases but I stand by my statement that legally naturalized citizens, that don't fall under A-D, won't have to worry about getting de-naturalized.

[Mota]

In terms of DOGE priorities, certainly subsidizing a company's travel to Mars should be low on the list, right? High cost, low benefit to US citizens.

[Arles]

Immigration is an issue that both sides agree needs to be addressed. Just trying to find and deport illegals that commit crimes will take more than four years logistically. The idea that Trump is going to hamstring a bunch of businesses that supported him by tossing out legal and illegal workers seems pretty far fetched. He didn't do that from 2016-2020, so I doubt he starts now.

But, again, when we look the other way on a big problem -you have to understand that the people may elect someone who promises to come in and clean it up. Initially, that cleanup may be messier that most wanted - but I can't see this administration ever having the resources to start mass deporting legal citizens. There's no way that ever stands up in court and you will have millions of civil rights attorneys chomping at the bit to defend them (as they should).

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Some of you guys need to pace yourselves if you're going to get through the next four years without a coronary.

I voted for Harris and wanted no part of Trump. I can't stand the guy. But I also have some perspective and understand that we survived the first Trump "reign" and will also survive the second one. My main concern is that the SC judges hold on for another four years.

That said, I think people were so invested in Trump losing and so angry that they almost want massive "dire consequences" for the country because they voted for him. So anything that comes up over the next 3-4 months (tariffs, immigration, tax cuts, dept of education) is going to be framed as an unmitigated disaster that this country will never recover from. It sucks that he's president, but the die has been cast by the awful process and campaign the democrats ran. Now we just need to take a breath and realize everything will be OK. Worst case, if he really fucks things up, we can just vote someone in to fix it in four years.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Arles

Immigration is an issue that both sides agree needs to be addressed. Just trying to find and deport illegals that commit crimes will take more than four years logistically. The idea that Trump is going to hamstring a bunch of businesses that supported him by tossing out legal and illegal workers seems pretty far fetched. He didn't do that from 2016-2020, so I doubt he starts now.

Eh, what does he care? He's not going to have to face another election, he can do whatever he wants.

(This is why I kind of find it amusing if people still think Putin "has stuff" on him. What could possibly matter at this point? Whatever he could have won't matter with the electorate and wouldn't lead Republicans to do anything to him.)

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Arles

Immigration is an issue that both sides agree needs to be addressed. Just trying to find and deport illegals that commit crimes will take more than four years logistically. The idea that Trump is going to hamstring a bunch of businesses that supported him by tossing out legal and illegal workers seems pretty far fetched. He didn't do that from 2016-2020, so I doubt he starts now.

I can clearly see him "tossing out illegal workers". From what I've read, Homan will do some level of worksite raids (e.g. chicken processing operations).

[Arles]

It's certainly possible, but I would guess the initial focus will be on illegals that have committed crimes.

[miked]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I can clearly see him "tossing out illegal workers". From what I've read, Homan will do some level of worksite raids (e.g. chicken processing operations).

Boy, if people were complaining about their eggs being 50 cents more, wait until they see the price of chicken when the robber barons have to pay their workers...

[Ghost Econ]

Trump says he'll do something vague.
Centrists say he won't do that.
Trump does it.
Centrists say, well he won't do that other thing...

It's been like this for 8 years but sure, this time he won't do the thing he says he'll do.

My best guess, we have 12 weeks till our Reichstag Fire.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Ghost Econ

Trump says he'll do something vague.
Centrists say he won't do that.
Trump does it.
Centrists say, well he won't do that other thing...

It's been like this for 8 years but sure, this time he won't do the thing he says he'll do.

My best guess, we have 12 weeks till our Reichstag Fire.

8 years later the Democrats run supporting that thing.