President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill officially passes the House

[Ignorant]

I don't know much about it other than the nefarious AI aspects and basically 'more federal centralisation' which is always bad in my book, but this was an interesting essay /discussion I read today I think you might find enlightening, if obviously bias, it still has a lot of salient points.
Especially in regards to crashing the dollar and profiting the rich, since 'they' know the dollar is going to go down anyway: 

https://michael-hudson.com/2025/07/why-a...wn-future/

Plunder capitalism

The Trump cultists will ignore your post. The macro-economic consequences of Trump's policies aren't easy to grasp and even harder to talk about with people whose understanding of the bill goes as far as "tax cuts, yay!". But they are what we should be talking about.

Hudson is right, of course. Trump's isolationism combined with huge deficit spending is going to greatly undermine the dollar as the world's reserve currency which will ultimately make life in America more expensive.

The benefits to local industry remain as dubious as ever (besides, why is this even a pursuit? Unemployment is low). As Hudson mentions, it's a fantasy to think that things the American economy has long outsourced are going to come back so easily. The only way labor-intensive industry ever comes back is if American labor becomes a whole lot cheaper, and do Americans really want that? Americans, used to their comforts and relative wealth, want to compete with Chinese sweatshop workers? I think not.

He makes another good point about the tax cuts to the rich, which is one of the primary features of the bill. The theory is good old trickle down economics: You give the wealthy more money, they will invest it and create jobs! Except we know by now that no, they mostly won't. They will invest it in stocks and bonds and the American taxpayer, who is going further into debt to finance this bill, is not going to see a dime.

[Ignorant]

[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image...ERhXQ.jpeg]

"Restores fiscal sanity, slashing deficits by roughly $2 trillion"

Do you actually believe them when they claim things like this?

[putnam6]

I don't know much about it other than the nefarious AI aspects and basically 'more federal centralisation' which is always bad in my book, but this was an interesting essay /discussion I read today I think you might find enlightening, if obviously bias, it still has a lot of salient points.
Especially in regards to crashing the dollar and profiting the rich, since 'they' know the dollar is going to go down anyway: 

https://michael-hudson.com/2025/07/why-a...wn-future/


Plunder capitalism

Thanks for this man, Ive read it once and I want to read it again, and comment when Im not in morning brain mode

Im a complete novice in the areas where I regularly regurgitate my dogma. I know a lot less about the financial implications, but I am smart enough to know that's what makes the world go round.

There's a reason the politicians, moguls, corporations, and complexes are neck deep; most times financial aspect is the prime objective, if not the secondary one. 

Secondly, I have no doubt America's position is changing, China has advantages that America doesn't have. China is building a huge manufacturing area the size of San Francisco. For America to do that would take 10 billionaires getting together with the same vision, or even less likely, a President and Congress. China has built areas in anticipation of speculation of growth, which has never materialized and its no big deal, In America we would go bug shit... aka the bridge to no where among other examples

So I try and pay attention. I'll be back with questions...

[putnam6]

Probably.

But you're forgetting about the forgotten majority. Democrats and Republicans are about 30%~ each. That means independents, third parties, and undecideds are the majority.

You're right though, the left will do everything, including be hypocritical to shame Trump and the right. 

But, if we're being honest, I suppose actions speak louder than words. And if it makes things easier, we could omit Trump from the discussion as he's so polarizing to have good faith debate. What has the right done in the last, idk, four decades? Take a look at debt, spending and foreign policy and tell me it's "common sense". Forgive me for this debate, you might be thinking that I'd say it would be better if it was someone from the left instead of them. I'm not, that's not my point. 

Every president in my life time has failed the American people. Very few people I know in life would disagree with that.

In my lifetime, this country has been unified on our direction and choice of President very few times, and it's hard to do in modern times. We will never see Reagan-type dominance again

Our system of governance REQUIRES, some would say, demands constant compromise between the parties, or we have less than efficient governance. We rarely have that, right after 9/11 briefly, but even in the Reagan, Clinton, and Obama years, the opposing 30% or more pretty much has always been there. The difference when Obama was elected we bitched and moaned before hand but I don't recall the widespread attacks, sure he would do ABC and some would reply XYZ but it wasn't the daily onslaught, even ATS was tame in comparison to the last 8 years

Now it's how the GP can and does react to it, in such a quick and immediate fashion. It's on display here on Deny Politics, and elsewhere, and has been as the internet and social media replaced MSM as our main source of news and information. 

My mantra is that these azzhats politicians weren't supposed to be celebrities and on social media TV every night spouting thier dogma. The people elected their representatives so the people wouldn't have to constantly monitor every legislative move like following a damn bill through a committee, or even giving a damn about every aspect of said bill before or after it's signed. 

This was satire,which I still love, in the 80s, but now it's considered news  




As for political malfeasance, I grew up in the Watergate flap and remember it quite well, loved All the President's Men, and wanted to be a reporter because of the portrayals of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein in the movie. I wonder how that would be portrayed today. After all of the questionable moves of almost all the ensuing Presidents, Nixon's I am not a crook seems rather tame.

Most politicians are crooked, it's somewhat how governance works. Honest politicians exist, often driven by principle, but they swim against a tide of incentives that reward self-interest. Governance in principle isn’t inherently corrupt; it's just when we add the human component.

Some take the malfeasance to the next level... besides Carter's Iranian Adventure, every other President has had thier scandals, some more than others 

For example, USAID is off the charts 

The difference was that before the dawn of social media, some of the media/entertainers/movies pointed out the hypocrisy... lately the pendulum has swung towards a collusion between the DNC and Hollywood it's not a good look

[xuenchen]

The Trump cultists will ignore your post. The macro-economic consequences of Trump's policies aren't easy to grasp and even harder to talk about with people whose understanding of the bill goes as far as "tax cuts, yay!". But they are what we should be talking about.

Hudson is right, of course. Trump's isolationism combined with huge deficit spending is going to greatly undermine the dollar as the world's reserve currency which will ultimately make life in America more expensive.

The benefits to local industry remain as dubious as ever (besides, why is this even a pursuit? Unemployment is low). As Hudson mentions, it's a fantasy to think that things the American economy has long outsourced are going to come back so easily. The only way labor-intensive industry ever comes back is if American labor becomes a whole lot cheaper, and do Americans really want that? Americans, used to their comforts and relative wealth, want to compete with Chinese sweatshop workers? I think not.

He makes another good point about the tax cuts to the rich, which is one of the primary features of the bill. The theory is good old trickle down economics: You give the wealthy more money, they will invest it and create jobs! Except we know by now that no, they mostly won't. They will invest it in stocks and bonds and the American taxpayer, who is going further into debt to finance this bill, is not going to see a dime.

How can billions of dollars a day in world trade and global military presence and multi national negotiations be called "isolationism" ? 

[putnam6]

How can billions of dollars a day in world trade and global military presence and multi national negotiations be called "isolationism" ? 

Because they are in the same mind as the person(s) who said to "trust the science", and a "dark winter" is ahead for the unvaccinated.

Let's not forget the academic elite insisted on the need to get boosters every 6 months... for a respiratory illness that had a 1.1% death rate.

Check how low it was for persons below 65...

 

The infection fatality rate (IFR) for COVID-19 among persons aged 65 and younger in the United States, based on pre-vaccination data (2020–early 2021), is approximately 0.05–0.1%. This estimate reflects seroprevalence studies and excess mortality data, with IFRs ranging from 0.0003% for ages 0–19 to 0.4–1.4% for ages 60–65. Higher U.S.-specific comorbidities slightly elevate this range compared to global estimates. 

[Ignorant]

How can billions of dollars a day in world trade and global military presence and multi national negotiations be called "isolationism" ? 

I mean that Trump's foreign policy is a course reversal compared to the Bretton Woods era and that America is now on a path towards isolation. If you want to call it something else that's fine by me.

[sahgwa]

I mean that Trump's foreign policy is a course reversal compared to the Bretton Woods era and that America is now on a path towards isolation. If you want to call it something else that's fine by me.

It's inadvertent economic isolation in some cases, but it's not outright isolation.
The USA is pushing hard to retain it's dollar hegemony with nothing to back it up except bluster and a stretched thin military with a huge budget.
It would do better with more diplomacy but we haven't played that game in awhile. 

It's usually pallets of cash or money laundering or corporate kick backs. Afghanistan was great for big pharma.
It's just more overt now like I opined above. 

On paper the tariffs will make people buy from countries other than China and more domestic, and it has happened in my line of work, but I dont think it's really much more than gamesmanship while plundering goes on. 
But I am not an insider trader I am just an average idiot. 
 
This is the worst part that they are hiding

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/big-be...egulation/

Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill: - forbids states from regulating AI for 10 years, -centralizes control at the federal level -integrates all AI systems nationwide into federal government agencies. Do you get it yet?

BORG CONTROL SYSTEM
Get ready for the dollar to crash so they can initiate CBDC
Or Fed Dollar
Are you up to date on your corporate bucket list of loyalties and vaccines ?

[DBCowboy]

 
Are you up to date on your corporate bucket list of loyalties and vaccines ?

I have my MAGA tramp stamp

[xuenchen]

I mean that Trump's foreign policy is a course reversal compared to the Bretton Woods era and that America is now on a path towards isolation. If you want to call it something else that's fine by me.

Why didn't you say so before you were questioned??
If no one had mentioned it, were you all ready to "let it go" unexplained? 
So how is The Bretton Woods "Era" comparative?