Yea fair enough. I was expecting my comment to be removed just for containing the slurs in the first place, so I'm not bent out of shape about it. Thanks for trying to keep this place clean.
I agree with most of that but not all. People don't notice single digit, but it's still meaningful when you're talking real wage growth. Wages grew faster than inflation, even if only by single-digit. The reality was overruled by the fact that post COVID inflation had raised prices. The Democrat plan was to maintain positive, compounding real wage growth.
Biden identified falling industrial output and employment and enacted subsidies via CHIPS etc al which resulted in real shovels in real dirt building semiconductor plants in upstate NY, new construction of wind and solar plants, etc. Biden identified high pharmaceutical prices and enacted the first ever group negotiated purchasing rates for 10 drugs with more on the way for his 2nd term. Anticompetitive practices, Lina Khan. Crimes against the state, Jack Smith. Historically low violent crime rates, a successful opioid addiction policy seeing massively falling OD rates...
He and Kamala had two practical failures in Merrick Garland and Palestinian policy. The rest was an optical nightmare, and I'm not sure where the failure was but I'm not sure it was with "the donors". Kamala spent a shitload more money than Trump and somehow all anyone ever heard was "Killer Kamala" and "but she laughs weird". Whatever caused that, I think is the ultimate failure of the party.
I'm not going to say Biden was perfect, but many of the "investments" Trump is using as proof of victory came as a direct result of Biden policies like the inflation reduction act, chips act, etc. He inherited inflation directly as a result of Trump abandoning "project lightspeed" and choosing to let COVID run wild, which triggered free money which triggered severe inflation, which is why people were pissed off. By 2024, prices were still elevated but inflation itself was under control. Kamala ran on "we beat inflation, and its all uphill from here" (they did, and their policies are continuing to benefit Americans), and Trump ran on "I'll reduce prices to what they were pre-COVID" (deflation is usually bad). Lina Khan was actually pursuing antitrust suits for the first time in this millennium, and the department of labor was generally siding with unions. I think the reality is that Democratic party PR is absolute shit. The main pressure of inflation was under control late in Biden admin, and Trump sold the voterbase a myth with directly lower prices.
I get what you're saying about people being desperate, but the reality is that real wage growth was higher under Biden than Trump 1 and they chose Trump 2 anyways.
Perhaps it's both? Democrats certainly failed to get fence sitters to vote, but lots of people actively chose (and are still choosing) Trump. Look at the young male Black and Latino demographics. They didn't just sit out a Democrat vote, they actively chose Trump. The Dems may be reasonably accused of failing to activate the leftist voters who sat it out/voted third party, but Trump is STILL sitting at 35%+ approval. Americans DID choose Trump. Trump is a symptom of the disease, not the cause. They love ICE abducting people. They love tariffs. They love him attempting to bully Canada, Mexico and Europe.
It's easy to lose sight of this on Lemmy which is pretty far left of the current Overton window, but enough normies actively support what's going on. It may be a minority of Americans, but between MAGA core and undecideds, it's very foolish to say America did not choose Trump actively. The leftist no vote/undecided demographic the Dems lost was far smaller than the MAGA and MAGA curious.
I mean, kind of not really from the sounds of things. It was a joke about a veteran who lost his legs to a landmine running over his foot in the Moscow subway with the skateboard he used for mobility. Not exactly any social benefit from the joke, just a crass ablist jab. Apparently the audience didn't really appreciate the joke either so I doubt it's just lost in translation.
Horrendous to be jailed for a joke, but I also don't think it was a good joke.
I mean, a weaker currency really does boost your export value. That's why Canadian farmers tend to consider the weaker CAD a benefit - they get paid more CAD per yuan when exporting soy or canola for example.
The issue is that the US intentionally positioned itself with a strong dollar so they can import stuff cheaper. The deal for American "exorbitant privilege" was essentially "hey America, you can have the world as your shopping mall with a strong currency for cheap imported goods, but in exchange you'll provide the backing for collective defense with your extra budget, stay stable, and buy our goods". Trump wants to have his cake and eat it too, maintaining the effective global tax via USD transactions but also have a weaker dollar for American exporters. This is all that hubbub about "reducing trade deficits"... which were created intentionally as part of that deal in the Bretton Woods/post-Bretton Woods Era.
US consumers like cheap phones, TVs, imported fruits, and travel. The strong dollar is a necessity for this. Much of the US debt is heavily subsidized as a side effect of a strong dollar as part of that exorbitant privilege exchange. They can have their weaker dollar but they'll lose the benefits from it and I don't think they'll accept that easily. Throwing all that away to strengthen your export market is deeply foolish, but the mechanisms at play do work generally as they claim.
The gold and silver market is another sign if a softening dollar. The treasuries will be slower to move, but record high gold and silver prices are a terrible sign for investor sentiment. In 2023 I said dedollarization was a meme. 2025 made it obvious it was inevitable. The question is just when Europe and the rest of the world will take back the US's exorbitant privilege, and how badly they'll react when we do.
We should absolutely be divesting from any industry that requires US cooperation to be profitable. Not only that, but US automakers have stagnated, resting on their laurels and refusing to innovate thanks to deep protectionist schemes. Time to retool our steel and aluminum refining and manufacturing industries to make something that's not poorly designed and built cars.
Yes the US wins any individual conventional conflict for sure. But putting up a resistance force on Greenland could dissuade the US from trying, as even military win may prove to be a loss, especially if the rest of NATO can take some Americans with them when Greenland falls.
Simply pulling out of Greenland is a non-option, even if the US would win the battle for Greenland.
This is the mentality they are banking on, it's the Russian mentality since time immemorial that's kept Europe in the cuck chair for so long. "Yes but if we respond, they might escalate things!"
Gotta tell you, as a Canadian I don't love the concept of the US having even more leverage over our already tenuous logistical connection to European allies. Keeping the Atlantic un-dominated is important for us.
I believe I misread something - the majority of the accused are Somali-American, although there are some large damages caused by non-Somali people as well. I'll delete my original comment as misleading.
Yea fair enough. I was expecting my comment to be removed just for containing the slurs in the first place, so I'm not bent out of shape about it. Thanks for trying to keep this place clean.