Trump was a Socialist. No way around that fact.

[Doomsday Dallas]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARES_Act


The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, also known as the CARES Act, is a $2.2 trillion economic stimulus bill passed by the 116th U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump on March 27, 2020, in response to the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_Appropriations_Act,_2021


The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (H.R. 133) is a $2.3 trillion spending bill that combines $900 billion in stimulus relief for the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States with a $1.4 trillion omnibus spending bill for the 2021 federal fiscal year (combining 12 separate annual appropriations bills) and prevents a government shutdown. The bill is one of the largest spending measures ever enacted, surpassing the $2.2 trillion CARES Act, enacted in March 2020. The legislation is the first bill to address the pandemic since April 2020. According to the Senate Historical Office, at 5,593 pages, the legislation is the longest bill ever passed by Congress.

The bill was passed by both houses of Congress on December 21, 2020, with large bipartisan majorities in support. The bill was the product of weeks of intense negotiations and compromise between Democrats and Republicans during the lame-duck session. After initially criticizing the bill, President Donald Trump signed it into law on December 27.

https://mchenry.house.gov/uploadedphotos/mediumresolution/6eba4d22-34ed-4200-8066-60030d33ebbb.png





https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/535885-how-socialism-saved-america

How socialism saved America


Socialism saved the United States. It rescued it from the disastrous social and economic effects of COVID-19. It is both stunning and comforting that Democrats and Republicans in the Senate and House quickly embraced socialism, however temporarily, and passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act last March. The law pumped unprecedented sums of money to prop-up the country’s economy. So far, this adoption has had mostly positive effects on economic growth and employment and none of the dreaded ill-effects, such as promoting lazy citizens who would increasingly depend on government hand-outs.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Trump supporters don't care about his policies.
They just like that he yelled a lot.

[iamgine]

A governing body has to strike a balance between capitalism and socialism, depending on what the country need at the time.

[Jasper]

The history of social democracy stretches back to the 19th-century socialist movement. It came to advocate an evolutionary and peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism, using established political processes, in contrast to the revolutionary socialist approach to transition associated with orthodox Marxism.[8] In the early post-war era in Western Europe, social democratic parties rejected the Stalinist political and economic model then-current in the Soviet Union, committing themselves either to an alternative path to socialism, or to a compromise between capitalism and socialism.

Socialism and capitalism is a fine line ... democracy can be tainted much like Stalin did , and Trump rubbing elbows with Russia.

[Doomsday Dallas]

The Cares Act was America's first real step towards socialism.

Bush gave us a little stimulus, Obama gave us a bailout, but Trump took the first real step.

Biden will take it a step further... but won't be long after that until we start seeing things collapse.


https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/anatomy-of-covid-19-stimulus-package-3.jpg


https://www.usdebtclock.org/current-rates.html

$30 Trillion today.... $50 Trillion by 2026.

[SATAN]

It's never going to be paid back and every politician knows it.

[bladefd]

A governing body has to strike a balance between capitalism and socialism, depending on what the country need at the time.

That's something that OP will never understand. He needs to understand that every capitalistic country has some socialism in it. There is no such thing as 100% capitalistic country, just like there is no such thing as 100% socialist country.

One can argue social security, medicare, Medicaid, military, NIH, NASA, intelligence agencies, public education, anything that is funded with public funds is socialistic. Even the idea of federal income taxes and federal government's trade deals can be argued as socialist ideas.

You are constantly juggling on a balancing scale between capitalism and socialism. We are definitely much more capitalistic than socialistic, but it's not a question of one or the other. You just don't want to be more socialistic than capitalistic.

[Doomsday Dallas]

That's something that OP will never understand. He needs to understand that every capitalistic country has some socialism in it. There is no such thing as 100% capitalistic country, just like there is no such thing as 100% socialist country.

One can argue social security, medicare, Medicaid, military, NIH, NASA, intelligence agencies, public education, anything that is funded with public funds is socialistic. Even the idea of federal income taxes and federal government's trade deals can be argued as socialist ideas.

You are constantly juggling on a balancing scale between capitalism and socialism. We are definitely much more capitalistic than socialistic, but it's not a question of one or the other. You just don't want to be more socialistic than capitalistic.

Bull$hit... don't give me this "we've always been a balance between socialism & capitalism" nonsense.

Trump socialized $4.5 trillion in 2020 alone, that's around 15%+ of the entire National Debt... in 1 year.

If there was ever a time the American people got f*cked in the ass economically by the Federal Government... it was when Trump signed the CARES Act and the The Consolidated Appropriations Act into law.

God only knows how many government corporate elitists got rich off those two spending bills. The Fed cuts us a check, and then they cut their inner-circle corrupt friends an even bigger check who pretend to spend that money on beneficial public services. The Corrupt rich get richer and the poor get stuck with inflation.

It's all a scam... and the little people get f*cked in the end. If our salaries went up at the same rate as the cost of living does... all would be well in the world. But the world doesn't operate like that when the Federal Government is printing money faster than we are making it.

$1.00 in 2000 has the same power as $1.60 in 2020 (up 60%)

the average income in 2000 was $31,600.... today it's $35,700 (up 13%)... that figure should be closer to $50,500.

The average person who was making $31,600 in the year 2000 would have the same financial freedom as somebody making $50k in todays world.... that's how much worse we've gotten.

I remember because I was making $31k at my first job in the year 2000, and that was enough money pay rent for a 2 bedroom apartment, get all my bills paid, and have enough money left over for entertainment.

You have to making $50k to have the same experience I did in the year 2000.... the average person doesn't make $50k. The average person makes $35.7k. See the difference?

Who's to blame for this? The Federal Government's out of control spending gets most of the blame.

[bladefd]

Bull$hit... don't give me this "we've always been a balance between socialism & capitalism" nonsense.

Trump socialized $4.5 trillion in 2020 alone, that's around 15%+ of the entire National Debt... in 1 year.

If there was ever a time the American people got f*cked in the ass economically by the Federal Government... it was when Trump signed the CARES Act and the The Consolidated Appropriations Act into law.

God only knows how many government corporate elitists got rich off those two spending bills. The Fed cuts us a check, and then they cut their inner-circle corrupt friends an even bigger check who pretend to spend that money on beneficial public services. The Corrupt rich get richer and the poor get stuck with inflation.

It's all a scam... and the little people get f*cked in the end. If our salaries went up at the same rate as the cost of living does... all would be well in the world. But the world doesn't operate like that when the Federal Government is printing money faster than we are making it.

$1.00 in 2000 has the same power as $1.60 in 2020 (up 60%)

the average income in 2000 was $31,600.... today it's $35,700 (up 13%)... that figure should be closer to $50,500.

The average person who was making $31,600 in the year 2000 would have the same financial freedom as somebody making $50k in todays world.... that's how much worse we've gotten.

I remember because I was making $31k at my first job in the year 2000, and that was enough money pay rent for a 2 bedroom apartment, get all my bills paid, and have enough money left over for entertainment.

You have to making $50k to have the same experience I did in the year 2000.... the average person doesn't make $50k. The average person makes $35.7k. See the difference?

Who's to blame for this? The Federal Government's out of control spending gets most of the blame.

That has nothing to do with capitalism versus socialism.

You're having a separate argument from the argument of "capitalism vs socialism." Your reasoning is against corruption, overspending, & debt, not socialism. One could say your argument concerns crony capitalism. Crony capitalism (extreme money printing and excessive spending) doesn't automatically equate to more socialism.

[Doomsday Dallas]

That has nothing to do with capitalism versus socialism.

You're having a separate argument from the argument of "capitalism vs socialism." Your reasoning is against corruption, overspending, & debt, not socialism. One could say your argument concerns crony capitalism. Crony capitalism (extreme money printing and excessive spending) doesn't automatically equate to more socialism.

It's Government. Period.

GDP to Federal Debt ratio is on WWII levels. That's pretty extreme but nobody seems to be giving a F*ck.

https://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/The-national-debt-is-on-an-unsustainable-path_0.jpg


https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S

we're at 120% - 130% right now.... stay at that pace and it's just a slow economic death for everybody.


The U.S. national debt is rising at a pace never seen in the history of America. With a current debt exceeding $28 trillion – an increase of nearly $5 trillion in 14 short months, Washington is now debating an infrastructure bill with a price tag close to $2 trillion. Even without this additional spending, the national debt will approach $89 trillion by 2029 according to USDebtClock.org. This would put the country’s debt-to-GDP ratio at 277%, surpassing Japan’s current 272% debt-to-GDP ratio. The good news is that the U.S. economy grew by 6.4% in the first quarter of the year. The bad news is that, after we return to normal, future economic growth will not be as robust, primarily due to the burgeoning debt. Yes, America is losing, or perhaps already has lost, control of its public spending. But it hasn’t always been that way.

Looking at data since 1901, federal government receipts and expenditures were mostly in line until the early 1970s. Sure, we had a deficit at times, including during WWI, the Great Depression, and WWII. Even then, Washington had some measure of control over its spending as the country was still under the gold standard. However, when Nixon abandoned the gold standard in 1971, the shackles were removed and Congress was free to spend, or rather overspend.

[bladefd]

It's Government. Period.

GDP to Federal Debt ratio is on WWII levels. That's pretty extreme but nobody seems to be giving a F*ck.

https://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/The-national-debt-is-on-an-unsustainable-path_0.jpg


https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S

we're at 120% - 130% right now.... stay at that pace and it's just a slow economic death for everybody.

I don't disagree with anything you are saying about debt, but that does not mean we have suddenly embraced socialism. Crony capitalism/corporatism is not socialism. They are both on complete opposite ends of economics.

The Cares act was a stimulus to prevent an economic crash. Call it a short-term financial relief for disaster relief to buy time through covid to prevent the chance of a collapse. In a socialistic system, there is no public ownership, or at least very limited, because everything is nationalized (owned by the federal government). The Cares act or any act for that matter did not end private ownership or transfer ownership into the hands of the government. The government doesn't now own the means of production, distribution and transportation across the country.

You might be saying that we had wealth redistribution. Yes, initially we did have some wealth redistribution from rich to poor, but it was short lived. Eventually the rich ended up getting even richer to the point that the rich overall made out like bandits. Why? Because they were in the position to capitalize off the short-term stock market crash in 2020. They were also in better shape to come out stronger on the other end of the shutdowns.

[Doomsday Dallas]

I don't disagree with anything you are saying about debt, but that does not mean we have suddenly embraced socialism. Crony capitalism/corporatism is not socialism. They are both on complete opposite ends of economics.

The Cares act was a stimulus to prevent an economic crash. Call it a short-term financial relief for disaster relief to buy time through covid to prevent the chance of a collapse. In a socialistic system, there is no public ownership, or at least very limited, because everything is nationalized (owned by the federal government). The Cares act or any act for that matter did not end private ownership or transfer ownership into the hands of the government. The government doesn't now own the means of production, distribution and transportation across the country.

You might be saying that we had wealth redistribution. Yes, initially we did have some wealth redistribution from rich to poor, but it was short lived. Eventually the rich ended up getting even richer to the point that the rich overall made out like bandits. Why? Because they were in the position to capitalize off the short-term stock market crash in 2020. They were also in better shape to come out stronger on the other end of the shutdowns.


It's still socialism to me.... In the Cares Act, you had $500 Billion going to State & Local Governments, as well as public services. These were Social Services to begin with, or a way of developing new Social Services like "Covid Response" which somebody in Congress figured it should cost $274 Billion. Not $200 Billion, Not $250 Billion... but somebody came to the conclusion it will cost $274 Billion like it's no big deal. God only knows which bank accounts that money rests in today.

Yes, Individuals, Small Business and Corporations got bailouts and were stimulated, which could fall under your definition crony capitalism.... but 26% of the Cares Act could be defined as strict socialism and only makes Big Government that much bigger.


One definition of socialism is to make individual responsibilities public responsibilities. Depending on how the bailout is structured -- maybe some liabilities fall on the shoulders of taxpayers, with inadequate compensation to the government. Seems like a reasonable definition for socialism. Similar to how if a person gets sick, and the government picks up his medical bills.

[bladefd]

It's still socialism to me.... In the Cares Act, you had $500 Billion going to State & Local Governments, as well as public services. These were Social Services to begin with, or a way of developing new Social Services like "Covid Response" which somebody in Congress figured it should cost $274 Billion. Not $200 Billion, Not $250 Billion... but somebody came to the conclusion it will cost $274 Billion like it's no big deal. God only knows which bank accounts that money rests in today.

Yes, Individuals, Small Business and Corporations got bailouts and were stimulated, which could fall under your definition crony capitalism.... but 26% of the Cares Act could be defined as strict socialism and only makes Big Government that much bigger.

Short-term stimulus doesn't make it socialism. Now if we have an annual CARES act going forward with everyone getting an annual stimulus check for the foreseeable future then it would be socialism. This is why some of the programs and agencies I mentioned earlier can be considered socialistic since they are funded each year, have been for decades, and will be for decades to come. Things like social security, medicare, public education, etc.

The last stimulus check was what? A year ago? There are no plans for another stimulus anytime soon. CARES act was straight up financial aid.

[Doomsday Dallas]

Short-term stimulus doesn't make it socialism. Now if we have an annual CARES act going forward with everyone getting an annual stimulus check for the foreseeable future then it would be socialism. This is why some of the programs and agencies I mentioned earlier can be considered socialistic since they are funded each year, have been for decades, and will be for decades to come. Things like social security, medicare, public education, etc.

The last stimulus check was what? A year ago? There are no plans for another stimulus anytime soon. CARES act was straight up financial aid.


How about we call it contemporary socialism and call it a day.


https://www.meridianstar.com/opinion/columns/bill-crawford-republicans-ignore-their-own-plunge-into-socialism/article_35bd5c02-7708-5e31-8aee-94c8485def33.html

- Oct 11, 2020


Former Republican Sen. Judd Gregg told The Hill that Trump telling America companies to stop doing business in China “is a startling blunt exercise in socialism.” He added that the “explosion in the size of deficit spending now and for the foreseeable future” under Trump “can only be labeled for what it is: a form of socialist fiscal policy.”

A report in Reuters described the CARES Act as “an example of contemporary socialism.” It noted that “income redistribution is at the very heart of socialism” and said the CARES Act “passed by Congress and signed by Trump provided $2.2 trillion of that.”

The Denver Post described Trump’s farm bailouts as a “socialist endeavor.” Going further the Post said of the farm bailouts plus other efforts to influence free markets, e.g., the coal industry, “You would be hard-pressed to find better recent examples of the U.S. government trying to exert influence, if not outright control, over the means of production, both domestically and abroad.”

But the most pervasive socialist move may be the Federal Reserve Bank nationalization of government and corporate bond markets in response to Trump’s demand to keep interest rates low.

“’Nationalisation’ of bond markets helps calm nerves,” reported the Financial Times. “The Fed and other central banks effectively ‘nationalized’ the market for government and corporate bonds, strategists at Bank of America said in a note to clients in mid-July, helping lead to ‘irrationally’ high stock prices," reported Axios.com. “Free market enterprise no longer exists,” Scott Minerd, chief investment officer of Guggenheim Partners, told Axios. "The Fed by essence of what it's doing has taken control of the market."

The American Conservative publication last year warned of America’s drift “to the silly socialism of the 21st (century).” Now that drift has become a plunge, a major shift its Republican instigators choose to ignore.

[ZenMaster]

Short-term stimulus doesn't make it socialism. Now if we have an annual CARES act going forward with everyone getting an annual stimulus check for the foreseeable future then it would be socialism. This is why some of the programs and agencies I mentioned earlier can be considered socialistic since they are funded each year, have been for decades, and will be for decades to come. Things like social security, medicare, public education, etc.

The last stimulus check was what? A year ago? There are no plans for another stimulus anytime soon. CARES act was straight up financial aid.

You wouldn't consider SNAP a monthly stimulus to the economy?

[bladefd]

You wouldn't consider SNAP a monthly stimulus to the economy?

Is it funded regularly? I don't know what SNAP is.

[Mr. Woke]

I wish our elected leaders were more socialist/leftist.

Unfettered capitalism is bad.

The US is too right wing.