Delete Elon and Trump from existence and nothing will get better.
Why?
Because Americans are dumb as fuck and they’ll still be dumb as fuck when and if those two are gone.
I’m old enough to have seen the same pattern multiple times. Republican leadership fails spectacularly, even pissing off many conservatives in the process. But as soon as the next cycle begins, those conservatives are back onboard voting for the absolute shittiest candidates.
Because to them an actual, literal dictator is better than a Democrat as president.
Our society is circling the toilet and it almost certainly won’t get better within our lifetimes. Prepare yourselves for that.
It took Rome 1000 years to collapse. I expect instability in the us for the rest of my lifetime. I’m struggling to balance that reality and also living my life.
Also- I think COVID is to blame too. More people started living from the survival mindset and actually getting sick impacted their brain. Dictatorships help people feel safe.
It took Rome 1000 years to collapse.
I mean, if you want to get extra snarky, Rome’s still there. Still one of the wealthiest cities on earth, to this day. The infrastructure is what makes the city and that can be repaired or rebuilt, improved even, as generations come to their senses.
More people started living from the survival mindset and actually getting sick impacted their brain. Dictatorships help people feel safe.
I pin this far more on the toxic media atmosphere than COVID, although the pandemic definitely took its toll. That said, the current hysteria around migrants and Woke feels a lot more like the post-9/11 moment than COVID. Democrats rolling over sheepishly while a Republican wields unitary executive power to disappear dissidents and intimidate
What folks on here don’t want to accept is that this isn’t the first time we’ve had a President behave like this. Its not even the first time in our lifetimes (for the most part - sorry teenagers). This is more normal than not, in fact. Reagan’s War on Drugs, Nixon’s War on Crime, Eisenhower’s Red Scare, and FDR/Truman’s Japanese Internment echoed all the same fascist tendencies.
What’s really changed in 2025 is the abysmal long term economic outlook. Liberals in 1984 could duck their heads and glare at the rampant poverty around them and mutter “If those hippie slackers had earned an education rather than smoking dope and fucking around, they wouldn’t get picked on by the police”. But now… fucking kids at Columbia University are being targeted. Surgeons are getting targeted. Judges are getting targeted.
Literally the only thing you can do to avoid these purges is Be MAGA. And “Just be MAGA, you won’t get hurt” isn’t something liberals can quite bring themselves to do yet (although keep an eye on Gavin Newsom and Richie Torries and Andrew Cuomo, because its coming).
Dictatorship isn’t making people feel safe. It’s making them feel terrified and helpless.
The city of Rome still exists but the Roman Empire does not. That is the long term future of the us.
The brain drain is necessary for the dictatorship to fully take over. Just like in Russia, I also expect people to eventually have to play along - or lose their job, house etc.
Dictatorship only scares the non maga. Maga feels safer with it.
The city of Rome still exists but the Roman Empire does not.
Absent that brief ill-conceived stint at empire under Mussolini, sure. But the roadways and the ports and the political connections and the religious iconography that centered Rome within the ancient world continue to persist. It isn’t the center of a sprawling intercontinental kingdom, but it holds a privileged place within the modern sprawling intercontinental kingdom of NATO.
Just like in Russia, I also expect people to eventually have to play along - or lose their job, house etc.
Russia’s in a peculiar place precisely because brain drain and privatization and punitive sanctions and the latest round of pointless horrifying bloodshed has sapped it of so many talented and driven young people. But the dictatorship - the bourgeois dictatorship, anyway - came under Yeltsin, following the Gorbachev coup. It brought in an entirely illegal dismantling of public industry and services, a looting of pensions and public reserves, and a fire sale of military hardware which set off a wave of ugly overseas wars in Africa, Oceania, and Latin America.
Only after the country had been hollowed out economically, by a cartel of untouchable oligarchs, did the public warm to the idea of a new singular strongman dictator. And the call for dictatorship was, at its heart, a plea for someone to drag the cartels back into line as part of a national project.
People have to play along in every system, because we’re not self-sustaining little monoids. We are hugely interdependent and most efficient when we are working together in concert as collaborative specialists. What we’re searching for is leadership. But all we seem to be offered is different flavors of oligarchy or autocracy.
The city of Rome still exists but the Roman Empire does not.
That’s because its called Vatican City now.
They’re symptoms, not the problem. Even if they were vanished from existing by will of a djinni or something, another would just take their place.
I actually don’t consider this an issue of being dumb. It IS an issue with being under-educated (often deliberately in R states) and fed a ton of propaganda
There’s ignorance and there’s stupidity. Stupidity will stubbornly resist any attempt to correct its ignorance.
Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease.
Against stupidity we are defenseless.
Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed — in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical — and when facts are irrefutable, they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack.
For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.
…
If we want to know how to get the better of stupidity, we must seek to understand its nature. This much is certain, that it is in essence not an intellectual defect but a human one. There are human beings who are of remarkably agile intellect yet stupid, and others who are intellectually quite dull yet anything but stupid.
That’s willful ignorance. While the willfully ignorant can be stupid (lack of intelligence) more often it seems to be due to arrogance and/or just being an asshole in general
literally googling tariffs, brings you to a government page that lists tariffs, duties, and taxes under the same fucking definition.
How people like this DO NOT understand this shit, is beyond me. I can respect the humility in changing your position after being that stupid though, please, due your due diligence before mindlessly repeating the shit other people tell you, so you don’t look stupid.
What, visit a website, read it, then comprehend it? What, like a book?! May as well ask them to make a phone call.
yeah, otherwise you’re a dumbass, and will look like one to everyone around you, unfortunately.
This is normal behavior. Ironically they would probably be more than willing to make a phone call.
Your telling me the US government can’t just demand other countries pay them money for no reason?
/j
My job has been impacted by Trumpas well. Stock prices falling and tariffs have caused them to do layoff of 2500 people. I fucking hate this so much. I work with many international customers and Trump/Musk has been brought up constantly and in my line of work people typically avoid political discussions but it’s kinda nice to hear our allies don’t actually hate Americans and know what the real problem is.
deleted by creator
The only difference would be that money we spent would be going to the companies instead of the government. Tarrifs are a government putting taxes on their people to strangle industries in other countries. In both scenarios we pay the same, but the flow of money is different
Not necessarily: the company can choose to absorb part or all the tariff, since the demand would drop at the higher price anyway, and they might make more overall profit at a lower margin per item. But generally yes, most of the cost will be passed on to the consumer and prices will increase on average.
Example:
found the economics student
The difference is that this way it’s much easier to calculate prices.
If the tax were 20%, the exporter would have to do the inverse calculation. That is, “which price will result in me gaining $1000?” Which is not 1200, since 20% of 1200 is 240. x = 0.8y -> y = (1/0.8)*x -> y = 1.25x. so the exporter would have to price it at 1.25x the price, $1250. 20% of 1250 is 250.
So it’s unintuitive that a 20% tax would result in a 25% price increase. That’s my guess why tariffs are applied to the importer instead of exporter.
Wouldn’t refunding the amount of the tariff to the customer fix this? Ignoring the very important diplomatic and retaliation tariffs which makes the whole post unusable for real life
- Canada sells a product A $100.
- Tariffs makes it $120 when you buy it
- so Canada gets $100, USA gets $20, USA customer pays $120.
- USA has now $20, they can directly refund the customer for $20 via a policy to reduce the price of the category of A.
- So customer gets $20 reduction of the product A via tax something, so USA now has $0 and USA customer actually paid only $100.
- Except now if USA company make the product A they can sell it for like $100 and customer pays $80.
- There is a slight increase of imported goods price here because tariffs cannot actually refund $20, it will be a % of the local vs imported production.
- Over time you can expect to get a local advantage because of this price inequality, so local companies will be subsidized by imports until imports are no longer significant.
Where am I wrong here ?
In your scenario how is the local made $100 item bought at $80? Where is a $20 refund paid from? You are double spending it on both imported and local goods
the end consumer always foots the bill.
Or the consumer can’t/won’t take on the extra burden of cost, and the business loses enough sales to go under.
It’s why they’re called “pass-through costs.”
deleted by creator
Important note - literacy isn’t simply about being able to recognize and pronounce letters and words. A person can sound out every word in English, and understand what each word says, and still be illiterate if they cannot comprehend the message the words express together.
That’s where this illiteracy arises - it’s a failure of reading comprehension. In this light, I imagine many of us have attempted conversation online with somebody functionally illiterate.
Literacy is also about English (at least as commonly reported in the US). About 1/3 of functionally illiterate adults in the US are foreign born. I have never seen literacy stats that measure “literate in any language”.
That’s still really bad. If 2/3 of illiterate people were born in America, that really highlights how inconsistent education is in America.
When I was a kid, I lived in a regular suburban neighborhood but the middle school and high schools that I was zoned for were so awful that my parents enrolled me into a charter school. (The elementary school was fine) Since then, some of the crappy schools in my city are now magnet schools and so my parents’ house appears to be zoned to different schools. There appears to be less public schools now. That’s probably not a good thing.
Im still surprised by that , the quality of education in my country is low but holly fuck im stunned by the lack of education in the states
It’s by design.
It is highly regional, too.
Despite the existence of the Department of Education (which Trump is trying to dismantle), there is no national standard for education in the US. In general, each state is free to decide upon its own policies and standards.
Some states, such as those in the northeast, have very high-performing school systems. So when that “1 in 5 are illiterate” statistic is mentioned (I actually have not verified that number, just quoting the prior claim as an example), it would be caused by low-performing states where the situation is much more dire dragging down the national average.
Here’s a general look at quality of education in the US by state, though recommend folks look up their own numbers because I haven’t validated the numbers pulled in the article I grabbed this from.
It’s not a perfect divide between red states and blue states (Florida appears good, California less so, as an example), but in general we see the lower performing states located mainly in the South where the Republicans have more support. Basically, a less educated populace is easier to manipulate.
For extra fun, look into where school districts allocate their funding and how it relates to their rankings. Some of the worst performing public schools spend a lot more on athletics than they spend on anything else. It’s like they want to be professional athlete mills instead of functioning adult mills.
I was reading into this recently and the reason Florida is so high on these lists is because post-secondary education is very cheap. Their K-12 education is on the garbage end of the spectrum.
“Are you saying 1 fouth of Americans are removed?” “Yeah at least 1 fourth.”
He’s a sucker. And his news media knows it.
I distinctly remember learning about tariffs in Social Studies. That was back in elementary / middle school. I understood it then and so did my classmates.
There are people who don’t know how tariffs work?
If America is the sole buyer, then the tax would be shared between both countries. (Lower demand will lower the price that the foreign supplier can ask for, making up some of the extra tax cost). But since USA is doing these tariffs on so many countries, other countries will just lay new trading routes.
So yeah, USA will feel it.
I don’t understand how they think this works
A lot of them think that the country with the tarrifs levied against them needs to pay the country they are exporting to to sell the goods there like a “If you want to do business here” tax on the country exporting.
But in all honesty even if it did work that way, the exporting country would just jack the prices up to cover it. The end result for US citizens would be the same.
But in all honesty even if it did work that way, the exporting country would just jack the prices up to cover it. The end result for US citizens would be the same.
This. It doesn’t matter whether the exporter or importer is payign the tariff, the result is the same - it increases the cost of goods, and that cost is going to get passed down the line, plus margin.
I think it actually can’t work that way at all if he does that. Theoretically, it’ll work upto 100% tarrifs but it’s way worse.
Imagine mr T says 100% tarrifs on product X, that costs $20.
If consumers pay it then it just costs $40 and it’s over. If the original country pays it then they have to pay $20 to sell $20 product, which is not profitable at all. But if they jack the price to $40, then they have to pay $40, again not profitable. So this system only works for smaller % tarrifs so that they can raise the price to cover that.
Suppose you have $2 profit (10%) on $20 item, and 20% ($4) tariffs. You can’t pay more than your profit, so you increase the price from 20 to 26, now you have 30% ($8) profit, you pay 20% ($5) tarrifs and get total 10% profit. So you see with 20% tariff you get 30% increase in cost. So this would work worse than consumers directly paying 20% tariffs.
You’re right on the math front, what I’m saying is that the exporting company/country isnt going to take a loss to sell their goods.
The question is “How do they think it works?”
Well they are a tax that other countries will pay so they are half right. But the point is the other countries will place tariffs on our stuff. Trade wars don’t usually end well, just fucking over consumers.
No.
A tariff on foreign products entering the US is paid by American consumers.
It’s to discourage Americans from buying foreign products and to pursue cheaper local options instead.
Except America hardly manufactures anything anymore.
Yes that’s what I was trying to communicate, I guess I didn’t phrase it well.
Goods coming in are paid by the consumers to our government, making it pretty much a tax on ourselves. The point of this is to manufacture stuff at home. I actually hope it ends up well because sometimes I want to buy stuff from people with fair wages and it’s hard to do so. Like finding stuff like electronics related is all from China.
And then there is the other tariff from our country to other countries which is placed on our American goods entering in their country. This mainly is hurting ourselves and the best case scenario is we end up being self sufficient. I’m not sure if it will turn out this way or things will stay how it is, manufactured elsewhere and imported in at a higher cost.
Also what little we do manufacture is generally more localized and smaller scale. You aren’t gonna suddenly increase the output of the guys building manufactured goods on the small scale just because there’s a tarrif.
No they are a tax that importers pay. Not exporters or their government.
and every one of the millions who
wereare just as dumb, will forget the lessons learned well before the next election and vote for it all over again.nice of you to assume there’s gonna be a NEXT election.
…next election?
You know, the one Trump wins with 106% of the totaled votes.
So bring on the downvotes, but can anyone tell me what the alternative plan was to bring manufacturing back to the states? And wasn’t that always going to make things more expensive?
Granted, this is being done with complete reckless regard, and the effects could’ve been spread out, but what’s the alternative?
People will tell you subsidies and positive reinforcement but honestly that is just more government spending to make a few rich. The answer is, there isn’t an alternative. All options aren’t great.
Manufacturing working conditions are horrible. As a country develops workers rights, unions, safety regulations, etc, it becomes almost impossible to compete on a global scale for manufacturing. Naturally the manufacturers in countries where those things don’t exist do very well.
In certain countries, the labor is just a few steps off of slave labor, which we all know is highly profitable and highly unethical. In other countries their dollar is so weak that net exports are the obvious choice for profitable businesses. Manufacturing thrives in these conditions and attracts a great deal of foreign investment - because hey, if the shipping costs are outweighed by the operational savings - it’s a sound business plan!!
Tariffs upset that equilibrium and guess who pays American tariffs? AMERICAN COMPANIES. The government gets a benefit, US becomes less likely of an export destination for countries to trade with, the dollar gets messed with in funky ways, and there is some amount of global loss of productivity due to this forced shift.
Basically, I view tariffs as a tax on the benefits of cheap overseas labor.
I think you’re right. And I think the unspoken policy off anti-tariff politicians is, ‘We’re never bringing those jobs back.’
can anyone tell me what the alternative plan was to bring manufacturing back to the states?
what’s the alternative?
A better plan would have involved local subsidies and tax rebates for various industries that have the ability to be cheaper than existing outsourced infrastructure if they were to be developed with a large enough economy of scale, to incentivize them to engage in local production.
And for industries in which we wouldn’t experience lower prices even with larger local economies of scale, such as those involved in mining mineral deposits we simply don’t have enough of here in the states, we just… wouldn’t do anything to tariff anybody or provide incentives if it wouldn’t be something we were capable of benefiting from via local production?
And wasn’t that always going to make things more expensive?
These other methods would make things more expensive too, (albeit much less so) but they would directly incentivize local production, and crucially, only cost money when production was actually made locally. Nobody would get a tax rebate or subsidy if nobody was actually starting local production. With tariffs, however, everyone begins paying a higher cost, regardless of if local manufacturing is even happening, let alone if it’s cost effective or possible in the first place.
Tariffs are just an inefficient way of incentivizing local production compared to other options, because they primarily exist to punish other countries and their economies, rather than uplift our own. They can be used to incentivize local production, but if not properly linked with subsidies, rebates, and job programs, they aren’t terribly effective at doing that, and they will almost always lead to higher prices on an ongoing basis.
You’re singing my song. Everything you’re saying is spot on.
I think the eventual solve will be small batch manufacturing capability, progressively complex according to population density. But those means of production will need to be nationalized for planning & control, and it’s simply not possible under capitalism.
But the current power structure is built on “market solutions” by using collective punishment to force capitalists to make concessions without directly regulating them. It’s the whole reason the manipulate interest rates.
It’s a dead industry to an economy that doesn’t need it anymore. The same way you don’t kill your chicken, produce your own oil, make your own shoes, shoelaces, clothes…etc. That’s how the imbalance of economies work.
What you don’t understand is that Trump knows this, and he cultivated both hope AND fear in enough people to get him into office. His end goal is to force you into buying dumb shit that is made better elsewhere because him and his cronies can’t sell it elsewhere for profit, and they own all of it. He’s literally trying to force you into paying money to people who own dead resources.
Trump is the guy walking up to you on the street asking you to buy the watches he just “found in a dumpster”. I’m sorry you had to find out this way.
Democrats have been selling the promise of bringing back manufacturing jobs for just as long. The difference is they never had any intent on following through. Granted, the GOP didn’t intent to keep those promises either, but Trump works outside of that dynamic. So regardless of how badly this goes, to the common voter, this is going to look like Trump is the only one willing to follow through on his promised policy goals. By doing what both party’s always promised to do, he’s forced them to openly admit it was always a lie.
They may snag a few wins here and there, but I don’t see the Democratic Party ever making a full recovery from this. It’s a capitalist party, and they will always be subservient to capitalists. They’ll never be in a position where they can deliver on their promises to voters.
If a socialist and/or pro worker party manages to gain a foothold in our country’s electoral politics, they will peel off so many people from the base of both parties that they would completely dominate American politics. Both parties know this, and that’s why both of them are working to ban ranked choice voting and suing leftist candidates off of the ballots.
Where did you get the idea that tariffs are supposed to increase domestic production in any way?
That’s the openly stated goal of tariffs from both parties.
I can tell you! It’s just not a quick, easy, single bill that we can pass. It takes a fundamental change in the way Americans think, it’s gonna take at least 2 generations to make this move.
Here’s the plan: we’re gonna promote cooperation. We’re gonna get people to notice the systematic problems in the way they are treated by their authorities. We need to aggressively be better than our enemies, both in practice and knowledge.
Here’s the method: (Essay ahead).
We need to disrupt almost every single system that currently exists. They’re basically all fucked. Start with the ones that get the most people motivated - their basic needs first, entertainment second, their wellbeing third. That feels wrong and it is, we need 2 generations to fix this because we’ve been beat down by this system so bad the priorities aren’t even correct anymore. I’ve been using this tagline recently “People in homes, food in bellies, minds entertained and health maintained.”
You as an individual can and, if you want to have an impact of saving literally the world and not just America, probably should start doing your part for this plan. Give away what you can, but never what you need. And be careful, because you might need that later. Never let that get in the way, though, of giving what you can. Bring your neighbors grocery money when you have a bit of extra cash, and offer to start a food co-op to make sure they never go hungry. It sucks, because I know damn well I wanna go spend that extra 20 bucks to treat myself and you probably do too. But if you go give it away instead, it’ll come back to you. Not immediately, and not always symmetrically. But it will come back to benefit you in some way. We need to shift the focus towards the community instead of the individual. I have plans for the other steps, if you’d like I can go into them. But the food co-ops are the best first step IMO
Why would it take generations to fix an issue that only started a few decades ago? What a load of shit.
A few generations to fix
An issue that only started a
a few decades2 generations agoBecause generations are only 25 years, not the 100 that your generation will survive. These issues started, or at least became severely worse, about 3 generations ago with Reagan.
It took that long because they were attempting the slow boil method. We can course correct immediately.
There are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen.
We can but how do you as an individual plan to convince Americans to start the revolution? Personally, I think we need to build them up and show them the systemic issues they’re dealing with in order to convince them.
There are decades where nothing’s happensThere are decades where you don’t pay attention to what’s happening in the background, andthere are weeks where decades happenweeks where those decades of planning come to fruition.I’m not an accelerationist, but if I was then I would say Trump is doing it quite well. If this keeps up, people will be more open than you’d think to revolution.
I don’t disagree with you, and I’ve made this point to someone else as well. I’m not a revolutionary yet because people haven’t been burned enough to be convinced by a revolutionary yet
Bring on the downvotes but the correct answer is don’t. Free trade causes jobs in each country to align with recardiant advantage in those countries. We have the jobs we want now. Unless we are in the middle of a depression we don’t want government to “provide more jobs”. We don’t need more jobs. We want better jobs. The whole reason why manufacturing has slowed down in the US is that the global market for manufacturing doesn’t pay as well per man hour as other opportunities we already have.
Tariffs disrupt existing jobs to bring back old jobs. Old jobs we shouldn’t want as much as the jobs we have now.
Why else do Republicans love to defund education? Conservatism requires people to be ignorant about reality in order to have any chance at succeeding.
Omg. We’ve come full circle now that smart people are telling idiots to do your own research…
