Regarding djt's threats to annex Canada

Trigger warning: This post is TL/DR for some people. Sorry.

_____________________________________________________________________________

The AP reported that in a Feb. 9 interview at the Superbowl, djt reiterated his childish, incoherent threat to annex Canada:

djt said he is serious about wanting Canada to become the 51^st state in an interview that aired Sunday during the Super Bowl preshow. “Yeah it is,” he told Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier when asked whether his talk of annexing Canada is “a real thing” — as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently warned. “I think Canada would be much better off being the 51^st state because we lose $200 billion a year with Canada. And I’m not going to let that happen,” he said. “Why are we paying $200 billion a year, essentially a subsidy to Canada?”

In this 1:04 video from yesterday (Feb. 21, 2025), djt goes unleashes a profoundly insulting and threatening screed about annexing Canada. He says Canada can keep "O Canada" as the anthem of the 51^st state. Either he is actually serious about annexing Canada, or he is posturing for trade negotiations. Either way, Canadians can reasonably now see the US as a powerful, aggressive foreign authoritarian enemy.

Lloyd Axworthy, a former Canadian Cabinet Minister and now the current chair of the World Refugee and Migration Council, wrote this open letter about djt's threats:

Canadians now face a stark reality: living beside a powerful neighbor presided over by an uber-President who seeks to erode our sovereignty and absorb us into his imperfect union.

What was once dismissed as a joke or a negotiating tactic is beginning to look disturbingly real. Donald Trump wants Canada – not for our social-safety net, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms or our history of cultural tolerance, but for our resources: our minerals, water, oil and Arctic region.

How far will he go? We already know he’s wielding tariffs as a weapon. We’ve seen his daily insults directed at our leaders, his mockery of our national identity – all well-worn techniques of ambitious autocrats.

We should also brace for a more insidious threat: election interference. With his tech-obsessed ally Elon Musk, Mr. Trump will likely work to manipulate our upcoming election, amplifying far-right candidates and undermining trust in our democratic system. Compared to what these two could unleash, past Russian and Chinese meddling might seem amateurish, just softening us up for the kill.

While the immediate focus is on the tariff war, the larger issue at stake is nothing less than Canada’s survival as an independent state. We must prepare our democracy to withstand the onslaught, and to do that, we should look to Ukraine – as a warning.

In early 2019, then-foreign minister Chrystia Freeland asked me to lead the Canadian observer mission for Ukraine’s presidential election. She recognized this as a turning point in Ukraine’s democratic survival. Upon arrival, the threat was obvious. The Putin regime was working to discredit the election and install its loyalists in key positions. A previous pro-Kremlin Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych, had already tried to drag Ukraine back into Russia’s orbit – until Ukrainians forced him out. Yet Russia’s disinformation and intimidation tactics continued.

Ukraine responded with unity, military preparedness and international partnerships. But here’s the sobering truth: despite all its resilience, despite the heroism of its people, Ukraine may soon find itself outmuscled. If Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin negotiate a settlement, Ukraine could be forced into territorial concessions or a weakened sovereignty.

This should serve as a wake-up call for Canada. Ukraine’s struggle shows the dangers of underestimating authoritarian threats, of relying too much on U.S. protection, and of failing to build strong alliances. There are signs that Canadians are already pushing back – boycotting U.S. goods, cancelling winter vacations, voicing their defiance in arenas and grocery stores. But the real test is yet to come. Will we set aside partisan divides, power struggles and media bias to use our election as a unified rebuke of Mr. Trump’s delusions?

Even former prime minister Stephen Harper – no stranger to economic pragmatism – said that citizens should “accept any level of damage” to ensure the country preserves its independence. Five former PMs called for Canadians to fly our flag. 

Parliament must now be recalled, ending its past churlish behaviour to pass an all-party resolution affirming Canadian independence, and asking Canadians to follow suit (and no, there should not be any non-confidence votes at this moment). Active efforts to overcome internal trade barriers must be a provincial priority, not just talking points. There must be reckoning on the financial plight of our colleges and universities following the snafu on international students. The recruitment for our military must be streamlined and peacekeeping restored as a career path. Housing the homeless is an imperative.

Beyond our borders, we must forge new diplomatic and economic partnerships with allies who recognize the danger of Mr. Trump’s autocratic vision. The world order he seeks to dismantle – built on law, co-operation, and stability – must be defended.

Canada should take bold action, starting with Ukraine. We should secure a defence agreement that deepens military ties, including procurement of Ukraine’s advanced drone technology for our Arctic security. No more hand-me-downs from the U.S. We should also signal to European allies, now rattled by JD Vance’s threats to gut NATO, that Canada remains steadfast in its commitments.

Beyond defence, we should help in forging a multilateral effort to fill the void left by America’s retreat from global leadership. Canada has pioneered international initiatives before – on land mines, the International Criminal Court and human rights. Now, we must step up again to combat climate change, corruption and poverty. Our chairing of the G7 meetings this spring is a prime opportunity – and Russia should not be in attendance, no matter how hard Mr. Trump tries to swing an invite.

Ukraine’s experience is not just a lesson in defiance – it’s a cautionary tale. Canada must act now, while we still have the power to shape our own future.

Believe it or not, djt is openly attacking American allies who are sovereign democratic nations. He threatens to impose dictatorship and kleptocracy. The damage djt does to American interests and national security is incalculable.

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

For readers not already at the TL/DR stage.

 

Why is he doing this?

A Perplexity search using China's DeepSeek AI (my first search with it):

Q1: What are the most plausible reasons for Trump threatening NATO and democracies like Canada? Is it mostly a matter of him being a dictator and hating democracy and the rule of law? Or is it that he is mentally very ill, e.g., he is emotionally childish and thin skinned and angry at criticisms? Or is it some combination of those and other causes?

A1: Donald Trump's threats against NATO and democracies like Canada stem from a complex interplay of his political strategy, personality traits, and ideological leanings, as evidenced by his rhetoric, policy actions, and expert analyses. Below is an assessment of the contributing factors:

Authoritarian Tendencies and Disregard for Democratic Norms
Trump’s actions reflect a pattern of undermining institutions that challenge his authority, consistent with authoritarian leadership styles:

Hostility toward alliances: He has repeatedly questioned NATO’s value, threatening to abandon collective defense commitments unless members increase defense spending to 2% of GDP 1 10 12. This transactional approach treats alliances as financial bargains rather than partnerships rooted in shared democratic values.

Erosion of rule of law: His threats to prosecute political rivals, weaponize the Justice Department, and deploy the military domestically via the Insurrection Act 9 13 align with authoritarian playbooks seeking centralized power.

Contempt for dissent: Trump’s attacks on media, protesters, and critics—including labeling them “vermin” and “enemies of the people”—reveal a desire to suppress opposition 9 13.

Personality Traits: Narcissism and Emotional Reactivity
Psychological analyses and observed behavior highlight traits that fuel his confrontational stance:

Malignant narcissism: Experts describe Trump as exhibiting “grandiose self-importance,” “vengeful destructiveness,” and a lack of empathy 5 6. His threats against Canada (e.g., proposing tariffs or annexation) often followed perceived slights, suggesting a retaliatory streak 2 11.

Thin-skinned reactivity: Trump’s sensitivity to criticism drives punitive policies. For example, his tariff threats against Canada emerged after disputes over immigration and defense spending 2 14, while his NATO remarks often followed complaints about “unfair” burden-sharing 1 10.

Cognitive concerns: Over 230 mental health professionals have flagged signs of cognitive decline, including diminished verbal fluency and impulse control, which may exacerbate erratic decision-making 6.


Strategic Objectives: Leveraging Chaos for Gain
Trump’s threats also serve pragmatic goals:

Extracting concessions: By destabilizing alliances, he pressures NATO members to boost defense budgets and secures leverage in trade negotiations (e.g., using tariffs to force Canadian compliance) 8 14.

Strengthening autocratic alliances: His admiration for dictators like Putin and willingness to negotiate unilaterally with Russia suggest a preference for deals with strongmen over democratic consensus 3 10.

Domestic political mobilization: Polarizing rhetoric (e.g., framing Canada as a “military free-rider”) rallies his base by portraying him as a disruptor of “globalist” elites 14.

Combination of Factors
The interplay of these elements creates a feedback loop:

1. Authoritarian instincts drive a desire to dismantle checks on executive power.

2. Personality traits amplify confrontational tactics, often in response to perceived disrespect.

3. Strategic calculus exploits instability to extract short-term gains, even at the cost of long-term alliance cohesion.

For example, Trump’s threat to encourage Russian aggression against NATO members 1 10 served both to punish allies and position himself as a “dealmaker” who could strong-arm concessions. Similarly, his tariff threats against Canada 2 11 combined economic coercion with personal pique over policy disagreements.

Conclusion
Trump’s threats are not solely attributable to mental instability or a dictatorial mindset but rather a confluence of his authoritarian governance style, psychological profile, and transactional worldview. His actions reflect a deliberate strategy to undermine multilateral frameworks in favor of unilateralism, amplified by personal grievances and a propensity for retaliation. While mental health concerns may exacerbate his behavior, the primary drivers appear ideological and strategic, aimed at consolidating power and reshaping international relations to align with his “America First” doctrine.

Q2: In view of the complex realities of national and global politics and the human condition (cognitive biology and social behavior), the assertion that Trump is explained by a "confluence of authoritarian governance style, psychological profile, and transactional worldview", strikes me as a mind or person in power being mentally unstable and a dictator. I take into account factors like Trump's open corruption, lawlessness and laws he supports that are anti-democratic and anti-civil liberties. The dominant traits here arguably are mental instability and a mindset that is both autocratic and kleptocratic.

A2: Donald Trump’s behavior—marked by open corruption, disregard for democratic norms, and authoritarian governance—reflects a dangerous convergence of psychological instability, autocratic tendencies, and kleptocratic self-interest. While multiple factors contribute to his actions, the evidence from his political career and academic analyses highlights patterns consistent with authoritarian strongmen and kleptocrats, amplified by traits of narcissism, impulsivity, and a transactional view of power. Below is a synthesis of the key dynamics at play:

.... long analysis ....

Strategic Chaos and the “Madman Theory”
Trump’s unpredictability serves tactical goals:

Extracting concessions: By destabilizing alliances (e.g., threatening NATO with abandonment), he pressures allies to meet demands while portraying himself as a “deal-maker”7 12.

Enabling autocratic alliances: His admiration for dictators like Putin and willingness to negotiate unilaterally with adversaries undermines multilateral frameworks 7 12.

Domestic mobilization: Polarizing rhetoric (e.g., framing immigration as an invasion) rallies his base by stoking fear of “radical left lunatics” and “globalist elites” 1 13.

This approach mirrors Nixon’s “madman theory,” where irrationality is weaponized to intimidate opponents 7. However, Trump’s blend of impulsivity and kleptocratic self-interest heightens risks of miscalculation.

Conclusion: Autocracy as Pathology
Trump’s actions cannot be disentangled from his psychological profile or kleptocratic instincts. His governance reflects a feedback loop: authoritarian impulses drive power grabs, narcissistic aggression fuels retaliatory policies, and kleptocratic corruption enriches his inner circle. While strategic elements exist (e.g., leveraging chaos for deals), his mental instability—marked by grandiosity, impulsivity, and paranoia—amplifies the threat. As scholars warn, this combination erodes democratic norms and emboldens autocrats globally 2 8 13. The result is a leader whose behavior aligns more with strongmen like Putin than traditional U.S. presidents, posing existential risks to both domestic liberties and international stability. (emphasis added)

Well, those analyses and conclusions are well-aligned with my own view of djt being a mentally deranged authoritarian, kleptocratic monster. 

I have been vindicated by AI!! Therefore, I must be right. 

Regarding djt's vindictive dictatorship

In this 57 second video, djt publicly threatens to withhold all federal funding from the state of Maine. The dispute is over a transgender athlete ban law. He threatened that after Maine's governor, Janet Mills, said she would comply with state federal law. djt responded: "We are the federal law. You better do it (comply with the MAGA law) because you're not going to get any federal funding at all of you don't. .... your population doesn't want men playing in women's sports. .... And enjoy your life after governor because I don't think you'll be in elected politics." 

That is dictatorship, plain and simple.  

So there we have it. If a state fights in court against a MAGA law, djt threatens to withhold all federal funding.

In my vision of American democracy and rule of law, djt's threat constitutes an impeachable offense. But as we all know, impeachment is no longer a viable threat to a Republican president. It will stay that way until the day that another party controls the House and has the votes to impeach in the Senate. For now, that day in nowhere on the horizon. That other party may not be the Dems. 

Inching toward a grand unified theory of politics

Trigger & TL/DR warning: This post is wonky, long and highly speculative. I did not find any research papers that draw the conclusions I postulate here. So, this probably is way out on a limb.

CONTEXT

Universal movement

Lévy walk (left), Brownian 

motion or walk (right)

Brownian motion, a kind of a Lévy walk, is the random movement of particles in a fluid, caused by collisions of small particles, e.g., bacterial cells, with atoms. The phenomenon is named after Scottish botanist Robert Brown, who first observed it in 1827. I first saw Brownian motion in high school when looking at bacteria in water under a microscope. Lévy walking is how movement by many things happen, including subatomic particles, living things, dead things, including fossilized microbes, global warming, and American politics. 

However, when one gets to the scale of a galaxy, galaxy cluster or larger structures, ordered but random motion imposed by gravity and the expansion of the universe negates Lévy walk constraints. Well, at least that's what the boffins say. However, even with structures bigger than galaxy clusters, there's this bit of ambiguity: Although huge web-like structures in the universe suggest some form of Lévy walk-like behavior, the movement within these structures is more akin to a coordinated flow rather than the random, superdiffusive motion of Lévy walks.

An example for humans is taking a walk in the park or elsewhere with a hard, flat surface to walk on. Most steps are fairly uniform, but occasionally there is a longer step in the walk. The longer step happens occasionally and unpredictably, sometimes a couple are bunched together. That is Lévy walking.

Bacterial Brownian motion

bacteria moves when a water molecule bumps into a cell 

Bacterial motility (swimming) toward 

food (the sugar crystal) is not Brownian motion

but nonetheless is a form of Lévy walking

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

A recent STD article reported that subatomic particles from colliding atomic nuclei in atom smashers move in a Lévy walk manner:

Particles in high-energy nuclear collisions move in a way that follows a pattern known as Lévy walks, a motion found across many scientific fields.

Named after mathematician Paul Lévy [in his 1937 paper describing the phenomenon], Lévy walks (or, in some cases, Lévy flights) describe a type of random movement seen in nature and various scientific processes. This pattern appears in diverse phenomena, from how predators search for food to economic fluctuations, microbiology, chemical reactions, and even climate dynamics.

Lévy walking in hadronic scattering studied via femtoscopy 

(femtosecond-scale study of the space-time structure of nuclear collisions)

The authors of the Nature research paper write:

The process of Lévy walk, i.e., movement patterns described by heavy-tailed random walks, plays a role in various phenomena, from chemical and microbiological systems through marine predators to climate change. .... In high-energy collisions of heavy nuclei, the strongly interacting Quark Gluon Plasma is created, which, similarly to the early Universe, undergoes a rapid expansion and transition back to hadronic matter. In the subsequent expanding hadron gas, particles interact until kinetic freeze-out, when their momenta stop changing, and they freely transition toward the detectors. Measuring spatial freeze-out distributions is a crucial tool in understanding the dynamics of the created matter and the interactions among its constituents.

Heavy tail vs Gaussian tail (exponential decay)

A Gaussian tail walk is a random walk where the step lengths follow a Gaussian (normal) distribution. This means that the probability of taking a step of a certain length decreases exponentially as the step length increases. The Gaussian distribution is symmetric around its mean, implying that positive and negative steps are equally likely.

A heavy tail walk such as a Lévy walk is characterized by step lengths that follow a heavy-tailed distribution, where the probability of taking a very long step is higher than in a Gaussian distribution. The tails of heavy-tailed distributions decay slower than exponentially, meaning that extreme events (very long steps) occur more frequently than expected under a Gaussian distribution. Some heavy-tailed distributions have infinite variance or even infinite mean, leading to a higher likelihood of extreme events, e.g., bouts of extremism politics.

To test for the presence of Lévy walks biologists and ecologists partition telemetry data into sequences of ‘steps’ (bouts of near-unidirectional travel) and ‘turns’ or ‘stops’ that break directional persistence. If the step lengths are Gaussian distributed then the most commonly occurring steps will make the dominant contribution to the overall movement pattern. But this is not the case for Lévy walks. A defining hallmark of a Lévy walk is step-length distribution with a ‘heavy’ tail that decays more slowly than a Gaussian distribution. In a Lévy walk, the longest step dominates at least for a while, dwarfing the contributions from other steps in the movement pattern. 

Linkage to politics: Real or illusion? Maybe real

Never having heard of Lévy walking before I checked it out to see what it is. Being interesting in coming up with a grand unified theory of politics, I checked to see if Lévy walking is relevant to politics. Turns out, it arguably is relevant. Maybe.

For living things, Lévy walking is believed to be the most efficient way to search space and time to find what is needed, e.g., resources such as food and water, a mating partner or room for social change. For some humans, that seems to include an overpowering need to find wealth and/or power. 

T cells in the body search for cancer cells by Lévy walking. Sharks look for food hunt the same way. Climate change happens the same way. From what I can tell humans influence climate and that influence can follow a Lévy walk pattern. That strikes me as a rationale to argue that humans truly are playing Russian Roulette with the climate and environment. In politics, one can envision political change as humans collectively searching for the best outcomes. We get a big change (a long step), e.g., Obamacare, often followed by lots of ripples (short steps), states implementing the new law. 

The bottom line: In my not quite novice opinion, i.e., possibly wrong, bouts of extremism in politics are inevitable. We cannot avoid it. I therefore conclude that extremism such as djt and MAGA are unpredictable and rare, but nonetheless inevitable in human history and evolution. As far as I can tell, this observation provides no specific way to make it go away or block it. But if you look closely at the first image posted at the top, notice that sometimes long steps are clustered somewhat due to the heavy tail. That implies to me that there really could be a major backlash against the authoritarianism, cruelty and corruption that dominates the long step of djt and MAGAism. 

How likely is a major backlash? I do not know. After thinking about politics from a Lévy walk point of view for a while, my intuition is that a backlash (a long step) is more possible than I thought before. But I just don't have a feel for how much more possible. Also, that assumes that a backlash amounts to a long step in a Lévy walk. Short step backlash would probably be insufficient to restore something akin to the pre-djt and MAGA situation. 

Reality check

Q: Can humans searching for the best solution for the human condition, e.g., democracy, authoritarianism, honesty, dishonesty, rationality or irrationality, be seen as a form of Levy walking?

A: Yes, humans searching for the best solution for the human condition, such as democracy, authoritarianism, honesty, dishonesty, rationality, or irrationality, can indeed be seen as a form of Lévy walking. Here's how this analogy applies:

Short Steps and Frequent Adjustments: Incremental Changes: Much like the short steps in a Lévy walk, human societies often make incremental changes to their political, social, and economic systems. These adjustments can be seen in policy reforms, shifts in public opinion, or changes in leadership, reflecting the frequent, small steps of a Lévy walk.

Long Steps and Significant Shifts: Major Political Reforms: Occasionally, there are significant shifts in political systems or ideologies, representing the long steps in a Lévy walk. Examples include the transition from authoritarianism to democracy, the rise of social movements, or the adoption of new economic models.

Fractal Patterns and Complexity: Fractal Nature of Political Discourse: The fractal pattern of Lévy walks, where the movement looks similar at different scales, can be seen in the complexity of political discourse. Political debates, policy discussions, and public opinion often exhibit self-similarity, where the same themes and arguments recur at different levels of detail.

Oh yeah, forgot about the fractal pattern thingy. A Lévy walk fractal pattern is a random movement pattern with a heavy-tailed distribution of step lengths. It amounts to a self-similar fractal structure where the pattern appears similar at different scales. Thus when one zooms in on any part of the walk, one sees a similar pattern of short bursts interspersed with occasional long jumps. Boffins believe that kind of movement is ideal for efficient searching in complex environments. This pattern is often observed in animal foraging behavior. Presumably it applies to politics too (humans foraging for whatever drives them).

Sharks hunt via a Lévy flight movement pattern

 Lévy flight is a special class of movement characterized by many small steps punctuated by longer relocations. As the patterns show little invariance over a range of different scales, the processes associated with these movements are closely linked with fractal geometry.

MAGA's emerging rule of law subversion tactic: Find or make ways to ignore court decisions

“This is an attempt to describe generally the process of legal reasoning in the field of case law, and in the interpretation of statutes and of the Constitution. It is important that the mechanism of legal reasoning should not be concealed by its pretense. The pretense is that the law is a system of known rules applied by a judge; the pretense has long been under attack. In an important sense legal rules are never clear, and, if a rule had to be clear before it could be imposed, society would be impossible. The mechanism accepts the differences of view and ambiguities of words. It provides for the participation of the community in resolving the ambiguity by providing a forum for the discussion of policy in the gap of ambiguity. On serious controversial questions it makes it possible to take the first step in the direction of what otherwise would be forbidden ends. The mechanism is indispensable to peace in a community.” -- Former US Attorney General, Edward H. Levy, An Introduction to Legal Reasoning, 1949

Over the years, I have discussed the concept of our sloppy laws and Constitution. Congress is sloppy about writing laws and the Constitution itself have major sources of ambiguity. Also, because the English language tends to be imprecise, court decisions often leave room for varying interpretation. All of that fuels endless disagreements resolvable only by democratic compromise or authoritarian coercion or force. On top of that mess, humans in partisan politics mode are usually morally weak and more irrational than not. MAGA is the epitome of deceit-driven, irrational and immoral politics. That's little different from authoritarian fascism, communism and Christian theocracy were in their day. 

A key hallmark of authoritarianism and kleptocracy is the rule of those in power instead of the rule of law. Dictators, theocrats and plutocrats all tell the world they obey the rule of law, but that is a flat out lie. They make the laws and enforce them as they see fit. A NYT article (not paywalled) discusses MAGA's tactic of disobeying court inconvenient decisions by finding or creating loopholes: 

The Trump administration is systematically exploiting loopholes to effectively keep much of the president’s blanket spending freezes in place, accounts by officials and court filings show, despite restraining orders from judges who have told agencies to disregard the directives.

The administration’s strategy is to have political appointees embedded in various agencies invoke other legal authorities to pause spending, while posturing as if those officials had undertaken the efforts independent of President Trump’s original directives.

As we can all see, corrupt djt administration officials pay lip service to complying with the letter of the court orders while violating their spirit. This aggressive, nimble tactic shows allows the djt administration to keep funds blocked. Judge have to deal with enormous complexity when they try to compel the administration to release the money. 

The NYT describes an example of djt's loophole tactic. This came in a declaration filed three days ago by MAGA thug Pete Marocco. Marocco is the appointee leading djt’s effort to get rid of the USAID by imposing a freeze on nearly all foreign aid spending. In the declaration Marocco said USAID officials were told not to enforce a court order releasing funds that had been frozen by djt. The money is still blocked because the agency’s payment system is nonfunctional. Thus it is impossible to keep humanitarian aid money flowing. 

Corrupt MAGA thug Morocco

That is not a legal loophole in the court order to unfreeze the money. But it is a subversion tactic implemented by sabotage. Here, the djt administration made a way to blow off a federal court order. The MAGA excuse is that djt wants tighter control over federal spending and is implementing new payment procedures. That is why payments cannot be made. The same tactic is being applied elsewhere. Other domestic grant programs are now also broken because the systems that allow them to draw down on the funds have remained inaccessible.

The depth and breadth of MAGA's cynical authoritarian intent and insulting mendacity cannot be much clearer. The rule of law is under direct attack and federal judges are incapable of fighting back so far. Of course, some are secretly complicit.

MAGA proposes a big Medicaid cut

To pay for ~$4.5 trillion in tax cuts for rich people and powerful corporations, djt proposes a mandatory $2 trillion cut in Medicaid. djt endorsed a House bill that breaks his promise to never touch Medicaid. House Republicans proposed a budget plan that raises the debt ceiling by $4 trillion and includes $4.5 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthy. The compulsory Medicaid cut will make health care more expensive, probably inaccessible for large swathes of America. $2 trillion cut spread over 10 years. As recently as a few days ago, djt said he wouldn’t make cuts to Medicaid. Oops.

According to one poll, about 38% of djt voters or a family member are on Medicaid. The data indicates that Red states will generally be hardest hit. So, some low income folks will be losing their health insurance. Maybe a lot of them. It will be interesting to see what reaction, if any, there is from the rank and file and Republicans in congress. They can always blame the Joe Biden crime family, Hillary, Benghazi, missing emails and Hunter's laptop, Jewish space lasers, windmills, brain worms, . . . . . . . 

As usual, Republicans trot out their classic “trickle-down” economics bullshit. They shamelessly lie to us. Repubs tell us their proposed budget is soooo good for all of us, but it really isn't. What a fracking insult.

House Republican Steve Scalise blithered, “There will be a lot of economic growth. And if you think about what happened in 2017—dramatic economic growth, possibly even more this time.” Really Steve?? Lying Repubs need to come up with something better than just gaslighting us. 

A history bit

The Reaganomics (1981-1986) tax cuts in the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 significantly lowered tax rates. That led to an unprecedented $1.3 trillion budget deficit. Since 2000, tax cuts reduced federal revenue by trillions, mostly benefitting the wealthy. From 2001 through 2018, tax cuts reduced tax revenue by $5.1 trillion. About two-thirds of that went to the top 20%, while deficit increased by ~$5.9 trillion. By the end of 2025, the tax cuts are projected to be ~$10.6 trillion. Nearly $2 trillion of this will have gone to the richest 1 percent. By then, the total impact on the deficit is projected to be ~$13.6 trillion, including interest payments.

Wheeee!! It works!!

(for the rich)

What do you think?

 

Philosophically speaking, here’s something rather on the heavy side:

We can’t all be movers and shakers, renowned for shaping world opinion.  But we can all contribute in some way to the human society (humanity).  So, I’m thinking/wondering…

Q: What do you believe is the most important* quality you, as an individual (or anyone really), can give to/leave behind as your legacy to humanity?

Give it some thought.  Thanks for posting and recommending.

(by PrimalSoup)

_____________________________

*Note- "Important" is a subjective-type attribute.  So if you want to use another word there, please do, and explain your reasoning.  I use the word "important” meaning “a force for construction rather than destruction”; also subjective terms, I grant you.  Maybe even not doing something (stealing, lying, cheating, etc.) can be a form of contribution.