DJT unleashes a damaging economic attack on California

The NYT reports (not paywalled) about a major attack that DJT has launched to damage California's economy:

Trump Officials Release Water in California

That Experts Say Will Serve Little Use

Local officials and experts said the water the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers began sending downstream on Friday could have been helpful to farmers later this year. President Trump, in an apparent reference to the move, called it a “victory”

Trump administration officials began releasing significant amounts of water from two dams in California’s Central Valley on Friday in a move that seemed intended to make a political point as President Trump continued to falsely blame the Los Angeles wildfires on water policies in the Democratic-run state.

The releases, as ordered, have sent water toward low-lying land in the Central Valley, and none of it will reach Southern California, water experts said. Nonetheless, President Trump said on Friday that the same action would have prevented the Los Angeles wildfires on the other side of mountain ranges over which that water has no way of traveling.

“Photo of beautiful water flow that I just opened in California,” President Trump posted on Friday on social media in an apparent reference to the dam releases. “Everybody should be happy about this long fought Victory! I only wish they listened to me six years ago — There would have been no fire!”

Experts expressed dismay on Friday that releasing so much water now served little use for farmers, who typically have higher irrigation needs in the spring and summer months when agricultural fields are abundant.

“I’ve never seen them do this, other than in a major flood,” said Robert Thayer, a supervisor in Kings County, which is downstream of the Tulare County dams.

Water supplies from Northern California played no part in the ability of firefighters to combat the flames in Los Angeles County. Hydrants in Pacific Palisades went dry because the municipal water system was not designed to fight so many fires simultaneously. A reservoir that fed the neighborhood was empty because of maintenance issues, not because of a lack of supply to Southern California.

In my opinion, this crosses a major red line. This is an unwarranted attack on California and its economy. DJT is intentionally wasting precious water, knowing that it will do no good now. He clearly hopes that this will cause serious harm later in the year when a lot of water will be needed for irrigation. 

This action is pure authoritarian revenge against a state that voted against DJT, MAGA and their plans for turning America into a morally rotted, callous, authoritarian kleptocracy. 

Q: Is there another plausible way to see this other than authoritarian revenge, if so, what is it?

Global warming update: Risk assessments and economic cost estimates

This discusses data from a March 2024 risk assessment analysis. Total average global warming economic cost was running at ~$400 billion/year. Projected annual cost in some number of years is ~$1 trillion.   

A risk assessment by Lloyd's Futureset and the Cambridge Center for Risk Studies, Extreme weather leading to food and water shock: How vulnerable is the global economy to extreme weather and food shocks?, estimates ~$5 trillion in loss over 5 years in the event of a major (1 in 50 years) food and water shock caused by extreme weather. In an extreme food and water shock scenario (1 in 1,000 years), the estimated 5 year loss is projected to be ~$17.6 trillion.

A handy-dandy cost estimator

As we all know, a trillion here and a trillion there, and pretty soon you're talking about some real money. And lots of misery for affected people. Probably tends of thousands of deaths, but these risk assessments do not consider human deaths or impacts. These risk assessments deal only with economic losses, not human deaths. This global warming thing is starting to heat up figuratively and literally.

MAGA update: Planning for DJT's 3rd term; Regarding the Trump catastrophe

Some folks are now seriously considering ways that DJT could get a 3rd term in office, assuming he lives that long. Politico writes:

It’s the stuff of liberal nightmares and MAGA dreams: a third Trump term.

But it can’t happen, right? After all, the Constitution imposes an explicit two-term limit on the presidency — even if those two terms, like Trump’s, are non-consecutive. “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice,” the 22nd Amendment mandates.

Even Trump, notorious for bending norms and breaking laws, couldn’t possibly circumvent that clear constitutional stricture, right?

Don’t be so sure.

Around the globe, when rulers consolidate power through a cult of personality, they do not tend to surrender it willingly, even in the face of constitutional limits. And Trump, of course, already has a track record of trying to remain in office beyond his lawful tenure.

If Trump decided he wanted to hold onto power past 2028, there are at least four paths he could try:

• He could generate a movement to repeal the 22nd Amendment directly.
• He could exploit a little-noticed loophole in the amendment that might allow him to run for vice president and then immediately ascend back to the presidency.
• He could run for president again on the bet that a pliant Supreme Court won’t stop him.
• Or he could simply refuse to leave — and put a formal end to America’s democratic experiment.

Each path would face serious political, legal and practical impediments. But the prospect of a third Trump term shouldn’t be dismissed with a hand wave.

Trump, after all, is definitely not dismissing the prospect. He’s been openly floating it for years.

In August 2020, he told supporters: “We are going to win four more years. And then after that, we’ll go for another four years.”

One can only wonder what horrors are in store for us.

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

DJT blamed Biden and DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) for the tragic airplane and helicopter crash in Washington DC a couple of days ago. He has no evidence of DEI involvement. So instead of asserting evidence, he claimed his allegation is a matter of common sense. The fact is that the control tower was understaffed because DJT gets rid of federal employees and weakens the FAA.

It is therefore a matter of fair and balanced common sense to believe that since DJT is the president, the FAA is under his control, and DJT weakened the FAA because he hates and wants to get rid of government, the tragic accident and the deaths are his fault.

Henceforth, we can rationally blame DJT of the accident and the deaths. We can refer to it as "Trump's catastrophe."

And, for some context:

Q: What actions did Trump take regarding the FAA in the days before the air disaster in Washington DC?

A: In the days preceding the midair collision near Washington, D.C., the Trump administration implemented significant changes to federal aviation oversight:

Leadership and Personnel Changes

FAA Leadership Vacancy: The FAA was without permanent leadership at the time of the crash, as Administrator Michael Whitaker resigned during the transition period after clashing with Trump ally Elon Musk.

TSA and Coast Guard Firings: Trump dismissed Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Administrator David Pekoske and Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Linda Fagan, both critical to aviation and maritime security.

Advisory Committee Dissolution: All members of the Aviation Security Advisory Committee—a panel established post-1988 PanAm bombing to advise on safety—were removed.

Policy Shifts
Federal Hiring Freeze: On January 20, Trump issued an executive order freezing civilian federal hiring, including air traffic controllers, despite bipartisan legislation mandating their recruitment. Critics warned this could exacerbate existing staffing shortages.

DEI Rollbacks: On January 21, Trump signed an order eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives at the FAA, reverting to “merit-based” hiring. This followed claims that DEI policies lowered standards, though no evidence linked these changes to the crash.

Of course none of that supports or contradicts DJT's excuses or his critics allegations. A serious professional investigation is needed. One can reasonably believe that a neutral, professional investigation will never happen. Given his track record, DJT will make damn sure any investigation will show he had nothing to do with it, even if he did. Nonetheless, it is a fact that DJT was president and the disaster happened on his watch. On that basis alone this is Trump's catastrophe. 

The buck stops with DJT. He demanded power and fought dirty to get it. Now he has it, everything is on him.

MAGA update: Reward the rich, screw the rest

Diligently serving the little guy

since Jan. 21, 2025,

or maybe a lot longer than that

ProPublica reports about GOP thinking about cutting social safety net spending to pay for tax cuts for wealthy people and corporations, which are just humble people in need!: 

To Pay for Trump Tax Cuts, House GOP Floats Plan to 

Slash Benefits for the Poor and Working Class

A menu of options being circulated by congressional Republicans also includes new tax cuts for corporations and the ultrawealthy

In order to pay for the cuts, Republicans have started to eye some targets to raise money. Among them: cutting benefits for single mothers and poor people who rely on government health care.

The proposals are included in a menu of tax and spending cut options circulated this month by House Republicans. Whether or not Republicans enact any of the ideas remains to be seen. Some of the potential targets are popular tax breaks and cuts could be politically treacherous. And cutting taxes for the wealthy could risk damaging the populist image that Trump has cultivated.

For the ultrawealthy, the document floats eliminating the federal estate tax, at an estimated cost of $370 billion in revenue for the government over a decade. The tax, which charges a percentage of the value of a person’s fortune after they die, kicks in only for estates worth more than around $14 million.

Among those very few Americans who do get hit with the tax, nearly 30% of the tax is paid by the top 0.1% by income, according to estimates by the Tax Policy Center think tank. (Many ultra-wealthy people already largely avoid the tax. Over the years, lawyers and accountants have devised ways to pass fortunes to heirs tax free, often by using complex trust structures, as ProPublica has previously reported.)

Another proposal aims to slash the top tax rate paid by corporations by almost a third.

In Trump’s first term, he brought the top corporate rate down from 35% to 21%, where it’s at now, taking the U.S. from a high rate compared to other OECD nations to about average. The proposed cut to 15% would make the United States’ rate among the lowest of such countries.

To pay for new tax cuts, the House Republicans’ proposal floats a series of potential overhauls of government programs. One major focus is possible cuts to Medicaid, the health care program for people with low incomes that is administered by the states. Medicaid expansion was a key tenet of the Affordable Care Act, passed under President Barack Obama. Many Republican governors initially chose not to take advantage of the new federal subsidies to expand the program. In the intervening years, several states reversed course, and the program has expanded the number of people enrolled in Medicaid by more than 20 million, as of last year.

Other proposals would eliminate tax breaks for families with children. Currently, parents can get a tax credit of up to $2,100 for child care expenses. The House Republican plan floats the elimination of that break. The cut is estimated to save $55 billion over a decade.

Another proposal in the list of options takes aim squarely at parents raising children on their own. The provision would eliminate the “head of household” filing status to collect almost $200 billion more in taxes over a decade from single parents and other adults caring for dependents on their own.

It must be so tempting for MAGA in power. There are just so many ways to transfer wealth and power from the people and the public interest to elite authoritarians. And it will all be justified by insulting lies and drivel like “tax cuts pay for themselves”, “the vast new wealth will gush down, and everyone will be prosperous and happy”, there will be an “investment boom”, and “federal debt will go down because tax revenues will skyrocket”!

Aw, that's adorable,

not deplorable!