Trump and power

I kept predicting Trump would have taken power by now. He has not. But he is getting there.

Some officials issued a new list of forbidden words, not exactly on Trump’s instructions, on their own initiative, but likely on their own initiative because they got word of his displeasure.

 Banned  My suggested replacement
 vulnerable  living on crime and welfare
 diversity  Helicoptered into jobs they cannot perform
 entitlement  privilege
 transgender  pervert
 fetus  baby
 evidence-based  trick to hide the decline
 science-based  consensus formed behind closed doors

Meanwhile, Trump moves to take control of the actual apparatus of coercive power, with which he will be able to punish enemies and reward friends.

30 Responses to “Trump and power”

  1. R7 Rocket says:

    It took more than ten years for Tsar Putin to assume Tsar powers.

  2. Glenfilthie says:

    Yes, I prefer your terms myself, Jim! A hundred thumbs up!

    Perhaps Trump is testing the waters before jumping in? His tax break has leftist rage heads exploding everywhere. When he recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital the third world chimped out – setting the stage for slashing foreign aid. All those are huge steps and would have been impossible a few years ago. Trump has moved too far, too fast in the past and has learned from it. His big moves will probably be made in his second term.

    • CanSpeccy says:

      The thing is, a tax cut without a spending cut is likely to transfor a visible tax on income to an invisible tax via inflation. So what spending programs will Trump cut and by how much will he cut the deficit as a result?

      • peppermint says:

        okay, make them make it explicit. Also, SS was never going to get the money it loaned to the Treasury back and everyone should have known it.

      • jim says:

        Pretty sure this tax cut will more than pay for itself. It should be obvious that the corporate tax rate was far above the laffer limit.

        The reason that everyone else in the world has a substantially lower tax rate on corporations is because high taxes on corporations just do not work.

        • Carlylean Restorationist says:

          Peter Schiff’s pretty spot on with this I’m afraid.

          A lot of higher paid professions are going to become LLCs so the loss of revenue will be higher than expected.

          Historically pathetic earnings need to be topped up so (mal-)investment will be lower than under Reagan as corporations move money to shareholders instead of trying to build stuff nobody can afford to use.

          Government splurging will more than offset any revenues that do come in, even if estimates are about right, and they won’t be.

          Then the left will blame the collapse that was already inevitable on Republicans giving hand-outs to the rich and the rich keeping the profits for themselves and their shareholders.

          Just another part of Trump’s fetish for rewarding God’s chosen people: happy Chanukah Bernie!

          • jim says:

            > Peter Schiff’s pretty spot on with this I’m afraid.

            Politically correct economics.

            Remember that Trump promised to revive coal, and every economist swore on a stack of bibles that coal was obsolete, and “those jobs are not coming back?”

            Well guess what happened.

            Economics 101. You get more of what you subsidize and less of what you tax. The reason every other nation has a lower corporate tax rate is that every other nation has discovered that politically desirable tax rates are far above the short term Laffer maximum.

            • Carlylean Restorationist says:

              With the greatest of respect, that’s not fair at all.

              Schiff’s not a milquetoast Republican shill. He’s not shied away from facing up to the nonsense around ‘sexual harassment’ and he voted for Trump for most of the right reasons. He’s wrong on immigration (but right on globalism, weirdly) and he’s wrong on gold (but right on Bitcoin).

              If you want someone who takes the opposite view to Schiff, it’s Jeff Tucker of FEE: he wrote a book on right-wing authoritarianism in response to Trump being literally Hitler but lately has come out with a glowing assessment of Trump’s first year of deregulation and tax cuts.

              We need to see past the identity of the people making the points. The tax cuts are going to turn out to be larger than people think, and this will result in lower revenue. There’s no reason to think Art Laffer’s right at all. Why would anyone ever pay taxes they didn’t have to?
              Sure, if you make the cost of the taxes lower than the cost of the accountants then fine it’ll work, but it’s not a curve that works in and of itself.

              Trump’s economics were always going to be a mixed bag. Austrians lamented his protectionism but people in our circles saw through the mistake of globalism in a progressive world. That leaves his non-chalance regarding debt. Strategic indifference or bog standard stupidity?

              I suppose ultimately we’ll have to wait and see, but if you’re not concerned by the prospect of a $22T national debt then it’s hard to see why you were concerned by a $16T one.
              Me I was worried by Reagan, let alone Bush, let alone the Woggo.

              • jim says:

                > The tax cuts are going to turn out to be larger than people think, and this will result in lower revenue

                The historical record is that cutting taxes on poor people lowers revenue, cutting taxes on rich people raises revenue, cutting taxes on corporations raises revenue a lot.

                People soak the rich for emotional and religious reasons, and to destroy the status competition. They don’t soak the rich for rational and pragmatic reasons.

                If the state needs more money, there is no practical alternative to payroll tax and taxing food, clothes, and shelter. Everything else is tapped out.

                Further, it is entirely predictable that everything else would be tapped out. Why would they leave anything on the table?

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  Wow yes indeed, thank you. This way of thinking takes some getting used to. The old habits die hard, but it’s perfectly obvious you absolutely must be right Jim.
                  If (as libertarians and even many conservatives say) the state is a band of thieves writ large, of course they’re not going to be leaving anything on the table.

              • jim says:

                > Austrians lamented his protectionism

                Trump has shown little real interest in raising tariffs. He uses it as a threat to gain negotiating leverage.

                What he has done is dismantled the international regulatory bureaucracy erected in the name of free trade. Despite his rhetoric about tariffs, he has done more advance the cause of genuinely free trade than anyone.

          • jim says:

            If you form yourself into a pass through LLC does not affect your taxes.

            If you form yourself into a profit making LLC will substantially raise your taxes, but has the great advantage that lawyers cannot take your house away from you.

            If the reduction in tax rates on LLCs causes highly paid professionals to form themselves into LLCs, as it will, will substantially increase tax revenues and reduce lawsuits.

        • Carlylean Restorationist says:

          (Sorry if the anti-semitism was a bit rich…. for what it’s worth, I’m with you and Moldbug on this, overall……. but they really did get him good with Jerusalem, and now they’re ‘rewarding’ him by naming a station after him that just happens to rub it in to him that they’ve got a wall and he’s never getting one……. bit ticked off with the talmud right now…….)

  3. Alrenous says:

    Trump probably could have had power by now, except the part where the coup would have been risky. He could overtly tell the colonels to ignore their generals; it would be flashy, and while I would bet on Trump, it’s a long way from a guarantee.

    Also, chaos = ∆power. The more deliberately Trump gathers the reins, the less destructive.

  4. Alrenous says:

    The best part is the proggie medicine czars are trying to be all wink-wink nudge-nudge about it. The medicine czars want to make it only look like they’re trying to get along, much like ‘austerity’ means infinitesimally slower-than-planned growth. However, Trump will likely demand specific public concessions which are too costly to forge.

  5. vxxc2014 says:

    Trump’s main obstacle and threat is Mueller.

    Mueller can’t get him on mere accusation without evidence of Russian Collusion Fantasy however: Muller Special Prosecutor.gov still serves VITAL purpose of “Insurance” for DOJ/FBI and indeed the DC Power Lawyer Rings.

    As long as Mueller’s in operation Trump can’t fire people or discipline DOJ, investigate DOJ/FBI collusion with HRC/Dems and Clinton Family Foundation.

    Summary: as long as Mueller’s in operation Trump can’t Drain The Swamp at DOJ or at least it will be harder and take longer.

  6. Garr says:

    I miss three people who used to comment a lot here. I suppose that one’s saving his soul, another’s intent on keeping his own intact, and a third is busy taking over the world. A fourth, driven away longer ago by “screaming,” never made himself as congenial as these three, but I hope he’s doing well.

    • glosoli says:

      What were their names please?

      • Will says:

        I’m guessing he means turtle, B, cavalier and AJP, in that order

        • Garr says:

          Right on the first and last. I’m sure B’s okay — after all, he’s practically an action-hero on a superteam (a superteam with kids and territory, no less). I thought of the cryptical, debonaire Cavalier a couple of minutes after posting the comment. Doesn’t he already control large portions of the world?

        • peppermint says:

          I want to see a corvinus/glosoli debate on the future of xtianity

        • S.J., Esquire says:

          u guyz r nubs. I miss when *Charlton* used to post here.

    • Oliver Cromwell says:

      I miss Viking.

  7. Bane Blumpf says:

    Merry Christmas, Jim! Keep up the great posts next year big fella

  8. By the time he gets power, he’ll be out of office. 4-8 years not long enough and two of those years is wasted campaigning and structuring .

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      Putin is no longer president of Russia. He still runs Russia. If Trump’s son runs for president and Trump sits in the meeting and is delegated to speak in his name, what has changed?

Leave a Reply