gus_fring

OP is oversimplifying a complex situation. I don't see any contradiction in my remarks.

Government bureaucrats can be part of the working class, but this depends on your definition of bureaucrat. I wouldn't consider an NIH scientist to be a bureaucrat, but some would. Most bureaucrats I would consider to be part of the professional managerial class, which should be analyzed separately from the working class due to their reactionary interests.

No, I don't think so. I think that by the end of his term, if he makes it that long, Trump will basically just be a figurehead. A triumvirate of Bessent, Miran, and Vance would be more than capable of ruling. White House reporting already makes it clear that Trump's wishy-washiness on tariffs has basically depended on whether he spends the day talking to Navarro (cuckoo Gordon Chang type guy) or Bessent. At the same time, the deep state and Wall Street are both looking for a steady hand at the helm, which Trump isn't right now.

Allegedly, Elon's departure from the WH is due to an argument with Bessent. If that does turn out to be the case, it wouldn't surprise me if the deep state and Wall street throw their weight behind Bessent, who then allies with Vance to rope in the Tech Right. Elon could be a wildcard that either falls in line or splits with the rest of the Tech right. Wouldn't be surprised if in a year we see tweets calling him "CCP Elon".

You don't think that political capital could have been better used elsewhere? It's a limited resource and Trump is running out of it.

When you consider how much political capital was expended trying to make a measly 2% cut, you might come to a different conclusion.

There were actually many!

I think this is the key. Previous admins were all reined in by the directives of the deep state (which is a thing, if you can get over the left/right synonym game). But the deep state is faltering, both from internal contradictions and from Trump's administration which has campaigned on an anti-swamp platform. That's opened the floodgates for all sorts of new agendas. Deep state/neocon solidarity has been replaced with a free-for-all. Let a hundred flowers bloom and all that.

Except Trump is a weak ruler, and he's surrounded himself with scheming viziers. Each of them has their own agenda that they want to implement. Each thinks that they can get what they want if they gain Trump's favor. Trump is not mentally prepared for this. It's not that he's necessarily senile, and it's not that he's unused to the attention. Rather, the game being played is just way over his head. He's a reality TV huckster, not a geopolitical grand strategist.

But I would caution against confusing executive branch gridlock with sheer incompetence. The Trump admin is not a monolith. Some of the people around Trump are quite competent. Miran and Bessent stand out as especially dangerous. If either of them manage to consolidate power, there could be trouble.

Development of productive forces is what pushes history itself forward. It's a good thing. Not unique to capitalism.

TBH I think that's the wrong takeaway. That polling result showed something like 25% of those polled would want to work in a factory if they could. If that result were valid for the entire US, that would be something like 50 million (out of ~210 million working age). For reference, peak manufacturing employment in the US was in the late 1970s with around 20 million people working in manufacturing out of ~110 million working age.

I don't find sheep adorable. They're also quite smelly. Cats however, are super adorable. That's why I don't eat them. Sharks? Ugly af, right into the soup pot.

Mushrooms are adorable though. You are a monster if you eat mushrooms.

If you try to advocate your ideology to random strangers going about their day, you will get yelled at. Doesn't matter if you're advocating for veganism or for Jehovah's Witnesses. I've never once yelled at a friend or acquaintance for talking about veganism during casual conversation.

DOGE killed USAID and made major cuts to NED, which is a huge win in my book. Other than that, I can't say from lack of familiarity. But the concept of DOGE is good. Just unlikely that it would produce the right outcomes in the american political environment. It's obvious to anyone who's looked at the numbers that the "welfare" system in America (which is just a bandaid covering up underlying market inefficiencies) is deeply inefficient itself. If you've ever worked in a bureaucracy, you know that without oversight, bureaucracy expands only to serve its own interests, not the people. Bureaucratic positions may not need to be subjected to market discipline, but they do need to be accountable to some sort of discipline.

DOGE cuts $150 billion, about 2% of the federal budget "DOGE has cut as much government as one could hope for"

Talk about damning with faint praise

Top policymakers are very much aware of the riot tax, in fact, the argument could be made that the current administration was propelled into power by popular resentment. Their strategy, as evidenced by the trade war, is to outsource the rioting to other countries.