Patel won't be able to do jack shit by himself. He needs a cadre of Federal employees willing to do his bidding, particularly if investigations are initiated in the top-down fashion of William Barr.

That is where the proposal to end background checks by the Trump team kicks in. If one fills the ranks with people outside the meritocracy of working experience, then anybody can run any part of government. The last vestige of professional conduct will join the other extinct species.

Love the dehumanisation of people in that post. Nice to see a win of Trump have you show your true colours more clearly.

It’s an apt metaphor, in my book.

Your metaphors are obviously not the only thing that are dogshit.

Patel won't be able to do jack shit by himself. He needs a cadre of Federal employees willing to do his bidding, particularly if investigations are initiated in the top-down fashion of William Barr.

That is where the proposal to end background checks by the Trump team kicks in. If one fills the ranks with people outside the meritocracy of working experience, then anybody can run any part of government. The last vestige of professional conduct will join the other extinct species. — Paine

FBI directors are given a ten year tenure for a reason: that they wouldn't be political appointees that are replaced as the administration changes. It's very telling here that @NOS4A2, for whom Kash Patel is a good pick, gives no reason why the present FBI director that Trump has appointed has to be fired.

If that doesn't matter, why then wait for supreme court judges to die, why not simply replace those who Trump doesn't like, who aren't loyal enough for Trump? Trump has already shown that he doesn't care a rats ass about the separation of powers in a democracy. At least the Trump team is totally transparent here: they want Kash Patel to be the FBI director that they can go after the opponents of Trump (including the media) and to have an FBI director that is totally loyal to POTUS Trump. This has been the already the real job of Kash Patel in the previous Trump administration. It was Kash Patel who tried to find the anonymous Trump official who wrote the famous "I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration" article. Did Kash Patel find Miles Taylor, who wrote the piece? Of course not, but his loyal devotion of being an unwavering sycophant to Trump is now awarded.

And if Patel, author of Trump children books, get's the job, then there's the obvious "And then what"-question. Just think how the outsidersthat Kash Patel picks to do the work inside the FBI will be looked inside the bureau. Even the "Whizkids" of McNamara were likely seen in a more positive view by the military than the "Patelists" in the FBI creating havoc in the bureau, which is the sole intention in the end.

* * *

Lastly, Trump's second term will follow similar roads as the last year of Trump in the previous administration. By manning his administration place with sycophant loyalists, that not necessarily have other credentials than being loyal Trumpists, will simply fail. Basically the start of the Trump administration will be a combo of "Brexit" and "Trussonomics" with steroids.

Trying to deport every thirty third inhabitant from the US will create huge supply-chain problems, far more than just when UK decided to kick out few hundred thousand Polish immigrants. Then have at the same time trade wars with other countries. Then cut trillions from the Government budget, which likely means to go for Medicare and Medicaid and raising the pension age many years simply won't pass. There simply isn't trillions being wasted, only perhaps just some hundreds of millions wasted. Great to get that into order, but it won't mean anything in the bigger picture.

I, too, worry about 'sycophant loyalists'. The point I was making about the supporting staff is that there is a paradoxical blowback from hiring profoundly ignorant people. They have nothing to say when informed people in their organization tell them something is not real or possible. Compare that predicament with making a deal with the likes of Bill Barr. He understood the DOJ inside and out. He had developed ties over years to get particular results from particular people.

If Patel gets his job at the FBI, he will be entering a structure and a culture of which he has had negative experience. Past directors came up through decades of work and oversight of complex investigations. The only way for him to gain control in that situation is if he replaces enough of his office with MAGA zombies. But even that move will collide with the sphere of actual agents. Making something dysfunctional may serve some people's interest. But it is not an advance of power per se.

The same dynamic is in play with all the other federal agencies.

A lot of people are saying the Trump is first pushing the MAGA crazies first and thus to see who goes through, and only then gives other candidates. I disagree with this. First of all, in the second Trump administration will likely come and go just like in the first administration. They will want to implement the crazy stuff Trump has said he wants to do, then when they either fail or create a huge mess (like Liz Truss), then they have to go. This creates a revolving door. And Trump is Trump, he won't change.
The idea that Trump is playing some 4D Chess is only the wishful thinking of the Trump cult, just like is the idea of his other superb capabilities. A great populist orator he his, no doubt about that. But otherwise.

Just like Trump sees himself:


So with the trade wars and the deportations, it's going to be a Brexit-like experience for Americans.

I think you're right. I'll add this about the majority of Republicans in Congress: they embraced Trump in order to enhance their own power (better a Republican President than a Democratic one). The question is: how far will they bend toward Trump's will, in order to effect the policies THEY hope for.

The question is: how far will they bend toward Trump's will — Relativist

Up until the point where it becomes a liability:

When prices continue because of tariffs.
When the US can't sell goods overseas because other nations will impose tariffs in response.
When there is a shortage of workers because of deportations.
When the effects of climate change can no longer be ignored
.

I think you're right. I'll add this about the majority of Republicans in Congress: they embraced Trump in order to enhance their own power (better a Republican President than a Democratic one). The question is: how far will they bend toward Trump's will, in order to effect the policies THEY hope for. — Relativist

With the Republicans, the fear of Trump is actually a fear about the MAGA crowd and the voters in the next election. How will that go if inflation picks up and the economy goes south? This might alienate especially the part of the voters who voted for a better economy, but aren't in the MAGA cult.

We've learnt from the UK experience of Brexit that just like the Brexiteers were in denial about the negative consequences of the Brexit deal, likely so will be the MAGA crowd if the economy tanks thanks to Trump's actions. First of all, the economy is so complex and understanding of economics so little, that obvious reasons can be hidden from plain sight. Just think of the huge transfer of cash to the population during Covid and then the obvious effect of inflation next year. People still say that the reason was Ukraine war and everything else than money transfers to the public. Deportations and trade wars won't have an instant effect (assuming Wall Street doesn't panic), they economic effects take half a year to a year to be seen and then the public discourse has moved on.

:up: :up:

See ya.

Oh hello.

Oh hello. — NOS4A2

That honor is bestowed on the person who has wielded the greatest influence "for good or for ill."

Kamala surrogates: “There is no crisis at the border”.

Analysis: Recent Immigration Surge Has Been Largest in U.S. History

The immigration surge of the past few years has been the largest in U.S. history, surpassing the great immigration boom of the late 1800s and early 1900s, according to a New York Times analysis of government data.

Annual net migration — the number of people coming to the country minus the number leaving — averaged 2.4 million people from 2021 to 2023, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Total net migration during the Biden administration is likely to exceed eight million people.

That’s a faster pace of arrivals than during any other period on record, including the peak years of Ellis Island traffic, when millions of Europeans came to the United States. Even after taking into account today’s larger U.S. population, the recent surge is the most rapid since at least 1850.

The numbers in the Times analysis include both legal and illegal immigration. About 60 percent of immigrants who have entered the country since 2021 have done so without legal authorization, according to a Goldman Sachs report based on government data.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/11/briefing/us-immigration-surge.html

Undocumented labor is one of the ways the government undermines the power of labor in the US. Tariffs plus deportation would lay the groundwork for an economic revolution.

Undocumented labor is one of the ways the government undermines the power of labor in the US. Tariffs plus deportation would lay the groundwork for an economic revolution. — frank

This "economic revolution" can only have negative effects during the foreseeable future, as domestic laborers will need to be paid more to pick crops, and other "menial" jobs (homebuilding, custodial work, lawn care). Also, the cost of imported products will rise, due to the tarriffs.

There are additional downsides to Trump's "Operation Wetback 2.0". Every person who is deported is one less consumer in the U.S., so it will generally reduce demand for products (lower GDP). It will also result in less social security and income taxes being paid (undocumented workers pay into social security, but never get to collect).

Further adding to the misery will be the effect of retaliatory tarriffs on US exports. If Trump follows through on his threats to violate the USMCA, it will make other countries less apt to negotiate deals with us.

On the bright side, if we stay the course, and accept the suffering, it will all settle out in 10-20 years.

You left out this part:

"Whatever the number in a second Trump term,the recent immigration surge has probably ended. Mr. Biden’s crackdown since the summer has caused net migration to drop sharply, and Mr. Trump has promised even tougher border policies when he takes office. Many would-be immigrants will be less likely to try to enter the country, knowing that their chances of success are lower."

It was politically costly for Biden to wait so long to do something about the surge, but it's not clear that we really need to do anything more draconian that what Biden put in place.

It sure would be nice if laws were changed, so that all the immigration issues could be dealt with on a more permanent basis. Expect legal challenges to executive orders (there's already lawsuits against Biden's anti-asylum policy).

Undocumented labor is one of the ways the government undermines the power of labor in the US. Tariffs plus deportation would lay the groundwork for an economic revolution. — frank

Understand your thinking here, but no. It's not going to go like that.

There is a concentrated effort against trade unions and the labor movement, and this will surely continue during the Trump years. Just look at the billionaires that are the backers of Trump.

Even when the inflation starts again because of Trump's trade wars and deportations, remember the very old lie about what is the reason why inflation happens? It's because labour unions and workers have demanded and gotten too high salary increases, In a wonderful way the cart is put in front of the ox and said it makes the two to move.

The lie works all the time. It's the reason that is taught in school books for inflation. Not things like the Central Bank printing too much money. That is only told in history books, because this time it's different.

There is a concentrated effort against trade unions and the labor movement, and this will surely continue during the Trump years. Just look at the billionaires that are the backers of Trump. — ssu

This is the problem with Trump's theory of economic change which is that it completely ignores the role of big business in getting us where we are. It's not just the dirty immigrants who make stuff cheaper. And as far as I can tell these businesses are gonna be given way more influence in this upcoming administration than any previous administration I've seen, even under Trump's last government. The billionaires who benefitted the most from this neoliberal era are not gonna save us from neoliberalism.

There is a concentrated effort against trade unions and the labor movement, and this will surely continue during the Trump years. Just look at the billionaires that are the backers of Trump. — ssu

It's still true that free trade and undocumented labor are two ways American labor is undermined. If either of those was reversed, it would lead to changes in the American economy in favor of labor. Don't let Trumpitis make you blind to the facts.

The central problem is the ever-increasing degree of income disparity between those at the top and everyone else. Moving from the visions of free trade gurus will not address that problem if the global wealth structure is secure. Trump needs that for his grifts. Thus his popularity amongst the very wealthy.

Analysis: Recent Immigration Surge Has Been Largest in U.S. History — NOS4A2

Migration has many causes, overpopulation, war, even bad weather. As climate change ramps up, so does the surge of migrants. The US will need to accept even more. Canada has so much wide open space, it can take even more than the US.

@Metaphysician Undercover,

"... so much wide open space..." has what to do with taking " even more migrants than the US"?

Housing infrastructure, social attitudes, job/business opportunities might be a better measure of capacity to take in migrants.

No argument about your general idea, Though treat migrants as a resource that needs extra care and thought in its handling compared to inanimate resources.

sad smile

I just assumed "treat migrants with care" is a principle we all take for granted. Since the capacity to do this requires that we give up a handful of precious cash, then it might be a problem if the billionaires of the world frown on this principle.

This is the problem with Trump's theory of economic change which is that it completely ignores the role of big business in getting us where we are. It's not just the dirty immigrants who make stuff cheaper. — Mr Bee

This is the problem? Trump is just hot air of populism, basically anti-elitism, that the present elites are evil and screwing the ordinary people and he will solve everything. That's the Trump line. Anything else is just opportunistic tweets that Trump thinks his base will like. Otherwise it's simply the same old GOP agenda now fitted in the new "Project 2025" mold from the Heritage Foundation, which likely is the real "theory of economic change". A continuation of the agenda the Heritage Foundation has pushed for decades just now put into the Trumpist mold of talking about the deep state. Above all, the Heritage Foundation is for big business. Of course they are against a corporations that have given money to the democrats, but otherwise it still is for big business, the guys who support them.

It's still true that free trade and undocumented labor are two ways American labor is undermined. — frank

I agree. Yet trade wars and less trade won't make us more prosperous. Or just you. If you think that less goods with higher prices makes your life better, then let's follow the trade policies of the 1930's. And those undocumented workers? Well, would you like to go and pick berries in California for a living? And on what salary? But you can close the border. We closed our border to Russia. Places that my family could shop for quality stuff at the border went bankrupt and the little municipality is really struggling because the border is closed, but that was a price I guess we had to pay (and I'm Ok with that, because Putin is a murderous thug).

But back to trade. The issue is not about trade itself, it's about the income distribution, who gets the wealth. That's the real issue here. Is it few billionaires who reap the profits or a billion people with billionaires not being so abundantly rich? I think a far better way would simply be to demand universal workers rights, which would not only increase the costs of the corporations using sweat shops, but also force improving the prosperity of workers abroad. Now high tariffs will simply will be circumvented with some middlemen gaining the income and many having it worse. How a sales tax is worshipped as a blessing is beyond my understanding. But please think that the American industries are so fragile and non-existent, that you need these trade barriers to defend your own manufacturing. Africa as a continent is a great example where this thinking leads to.

Naturally the Simpson's again had an insight to this:

If you think that less goods with higher prices makes your life better, then let's follow the trade policies of the 1930's — ssu

We can just go back to 1987. That actually would help American labor. I understand why you aren't concerned with that. You're a world away.

Trump is just hot air of populism, basically anti-elitism, that the present elites are evil and screwing the ordinary people and he will solve everything. — ssu

He has the appearance of a populist because calls out the elites when it comes to things like censorship (particularly censorship of him) or when they go after his crimes, but when it comes to his economic grievances he's gonna blame the immigrants, the government, and other countries. They are stealing your jobs, they are bringing in crime and drugs, and they're taking your money. Inflation is caused by too much wasteful government spending and it's spending on other countries that don't deserve it or "woke" programs that help people who aren't you.

Migration has many causes, overpopulation, war, even bad weather. As climate change ramps up, so does the surge of migrants. The US will need to accept even more. Canada has so much wide open space, it can take even more than the

The government of Canada recently decided to freeze its disastrous immigration policies because it can’t keep up with the effects. The cost of living is unsustainable. Getting healthcare means an 8-hour wait in ER. Senior tax-payers are barely scraping by on their meagre state pensions amid rising costs. Everything is taxed to shit. Migrants might fare better fixing their own countries.

Migrants might fare better fixing their own countries. — NOS4A2

I don't think this addresses the problems I mentioned. Things like war and climate change result in loss of housing, and loss of inhabitable land in some areas of the world, conditions which are impossible for the people to fix. An eight hour wait at the emergency room, instead of getting immediate medical attention after leaving the comfort of your home, is nothing compared to not having a place to call home.

The problems you mention doesn’t entail a flight to the Americas and being trafficked through the Darién Gap to the United States and Canada.