The military threats include burning down other countries.

Now, people accept the "no angel" defense for Iran and Venezuela. Just like a cop is allowed to execute someone in the street if they have a criminal record. But now we have to work out how serious the threats against Western countries are, or whether they're just routine Trump bullshit for social media. Is there a real prospect of the use of force against Canada, or Canadian nationals in the US? Is there a limit to the trade sanctions? If the US can sanction individual ICC members, can't they exert pressure on Carney by debanking him too?

▲ exceptione 3 hours ago | parent [-]

We know from crime that the only way to solve a crisis is to escalate, because that is what zero-sum dynamics basically forces one too. In that process, everything becomes a tool and there is barely anything that is off-limits.

Putting aside the possible change of guards with the other party getting into power, the USA are long-term heading to a serious crisis. The dems were able to reduce deficits in the past (a bit surprisingly because that contradicts the narrative), but I think their space for maneuvering is getting increasingly small. There is a serious possibility that notwithstanding efforts to save the ship the long term trend cannot be reversed because so many critical processes had been set in motion, about which control has been lost.

What happens after a decade? You can do the math. A disgruntled electorate want final solutions to an increasingly heavier crisis. It takes real states(wo)men to re-architect the USA in favor of the public. Also, if you ever open 'social' media or regular media even, you could experience first-hand how hard it has become to reach the public. The vested interests are not willing to give up their power.

▲ rawgabbit 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

When a debt crisis occurs, there is only one good option and many bad ones. The good option is the debt holders realize they need to compromise and are willing to forgive part of the debt for proper governance. ie. forgive part of the debt as long as the US adheres to a strict budget which involves raising taxes and cutting services. And no more giving out tax breaks and tax holidays as if they were free.

All the other options are infinitely worse. The problem is that such a deal is political suicide. MAGA will run on repealing the deal like they ran on dismantling Obama care. They are the party of financial self immolation.

	▲	pjc50 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Such a deal is basically not possible. See the Argentina "pari passu" fiasco. Because US T-bills are everywhere. They are, to use a Claude-ism, load bearing for the world economy. There is no "adults outside the room" who can intervene to fix the situation. Either Americans sort things out among themselves, or they will end up with the traditional Latin American solution to a debt crisis: hyperinflation. Which some of the right have been salivating about ever since FDR.

▲ digitaltrees 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The window is still pretty large. Raising taxes at low to moderate levels would be sufficient to close the gap and restore confidence in debt without slowing the economy.

The problem is that every time democrats make progress republicans pass massive tax cuts. Four successive republican administrations have passed massive tax cuts. Trump alone is responsible for 30% of all debt.

The problem is that voters punish anyone who raise taxes. The first bush lost reelection because he broke his “read my lips no new taxes promise” when he was actually trying to behave responsibly.

	▲	exceptione an hour ago \| parent [-]
		`> The window is still pretty large. Raising taxes at low to moderate levels would be sufficient` Agreed, short term there is. But tax=theft narratives and other cultural beliefs are real obstacles. `> The problem is that every time democrats make progress republicans pass massive tax cuts. Four successive republican administrations have passed massive tax cuts. Trump alone is responsible for 30% of all debt.` True, but people won't believe you if you would tell them, or they will ignore it. Furthermore, the dems don't own the media, including the 'liberal media'. I expect blame games and victim-playing turned to the max on news stations after any change of guards. What doesn't help too is that every politician has to literally buy their seat, so sponsors have ultimately more power than the electorate.