To be fair, the trump crew don’t observe any real security anyway, so all of the more competent competent competitors likely already know our secrets.

I mean, assuming that trump doesn’t just tweet them out, he’d absolutely sell our secrets for some graft.

I’d rather have it replaced with a sovereign wealth fund…

I’d rather not have it replaced with a sovereign wealth trump slush fund

The reason that sovereign wealth funds have cropped up recently in discussions is that trump really, really wants to have an unaccountable slush fund like his authoritarian buddies.

It makes like zero sense for a country like the US

They’re installing them into the agencies to act as comisars to enforce political purity and root out dissent.

It’s a pretty obvious next step after them gaining control of the treasury payment systems and people’s private data. Can’t have internal pushback on weaponizing these to attack Americans more broadly.

Yep. It’d be inconvenient for them to note that the funding issues are primarily driven by increasing concentration of income which falls above the Social Security withholding cap. If they’d just remove that cap, then no issue.

Well, the competent ones are zealots pursuing terrifying things. I’d say they’re more damaging. Head of the OMB being a great example.

No, they didn’t. When did they have a chance to pass a constitutional amendment?

Corpratist, center right infotainment networks?

Wow, there are people who actually believe that in real life? Huh. Good luck with your glorious revolution

Well, that would be a good way to guarantee republican dominance, yes.

It shouldn’t mean lower prices; deflation is bad, we just want a low rate of inflation. What we do want is for wages to outpace that, and for the past couple of years, they have for people at the lower end of the scale (which is also good)

It’s a really interesting test of how much conventional campaigning and turnout strategies really matter nowadays.

Quite a bit of what we do is because “we’ve always done it this way,” and there’s surprisingly little data on what actually makes a difference in an election at this level where both of the candidates are universally known.

I’d start by assuming that he’s either being paid somehow for suddenly supporting TikTok or if there’s something else in it for him. With trump, usually “it’s grift” is the likely explanation for many things.

If one of them gets into power, Canada might just pay for that wall.

This assumes that the mass shootings are a problem that they’d want to solve, but it’s not since mass shootings are useful to them. They’re flashy, get lots of media coverage, and feed a sense of chaos and societal breakdown. With that, they make the case the current system can’t keep you safe, and we need an authoritarian to bring order, which they’re happy to provide.

I get the reflexive urge to both-sides things, but rail workers did end up getting their sick leave:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/01/railroad-workers-union-win-sick-leave

Biden wanted to avoid the disruption that a rail strike would bring, especially when we were trying to deal with inflation, but like many things, they quietly got it done.