Trump - The positives - (see Mod note in OP)

In the coarsest sense, Trump did well by average Americans by continuing the GOP-led jihad against the IRS.

In Trump 1.0, the IRS shrunk mostly by not replacing retiring/quitting employees. This meant fewer audits and lower tax take by the government, by percentage of GDP, versus the past. Tax fraud is likely up, and people not paying taxes is up as well.

Biden budgeted something like $60bn more for the IRS as part of the Inflation Reduction Act.

If you ignore the 'weaponizing the IRS' junk the GOP fed to their base (later proven to be false), a big IRS means more audits for more people. One group that got more audits with a big IRS versus a smaller one, was those receiving Earned Income Tax Credits. These are typically poorer Americans - Congress decided aid could be given to people most efficiently through tax credits. This is another idea that really isn't good - people need money in their pockets - but it was better than nothing. Audit rates for minority EITC recipients went up under Biden.

With Trump 2.0, expect a smaller IRS, fewer audits and more people not filing taxes. This last point really gripes me, as someone that has dutifully filed their taxes for nearly 50 years, enduring the immensely complex process (Irish taxpayers have it so easy by comparison). Also, the IRS online systems are, overall, pretty pathetic and difficult, too. I don't expect them to improve either in Trump 2.0, they got a tad better under Biden. But, I think I'll have less chance of being audited.

And remember, this isn't a rich/poor thing. Everyone files taxes no matter how little you make - you still have to tell the US Government how little it was. Everyone's subject to an audit. We've all got anecdotes over how bad that experience can be, too.

So, yeah, Trump 2.0, smaller IRS, I can support that.

Huh? A requirement that everyone bend the knee to entitled, ego-driven claptrap is pretty much the hallmark characteristic of this administration. Trump is literally famous for demanding this.

The money that the IRS brings in, is an enormous amount of fines and penalties - it's not your tax liability. Often, if the person has enough assets they can contest the fines and occasionally win (in tax court, of all things.) Tax court isn't available for a lot of people, though, and it's a difficult process. But, people do win. A smaller IRS will mean fewer inappropriate fines. And, again, anecdotes and horror stories abound of IRS overstepping and destroying people.

Sorry, no one likes the tax collector, a smaller one is a good thing.

TBF, it's really hard to find anything positive about the Convict President.

His tariffs is equivalent to his first Presidency where Mexico will pay for the wall at the border……

I don't know why he's doing it to Mexico who has so much power over the border….

Tomorrow they could just stop policing the borders and the illegal immigration will be hundred times worse. You'd want to keep Mexico on board and work with them….

Madness

He seems to be obsessed with trade deficits. He wants to reduce the US trade deficit.

He thinks tariffs on foreign imports, and more protectionism, will evnetually reduce the US trade deficit.

Trade defecit means USA buys more from Canada or Mexico or China than those countries do from USA?

If you're the biggest economy, won't that always be the case? Manufacturing and such happens offshore.

The trade balance is the difference between the value of exports and imports of goods and services.

It can be expressed in terms of just goods, or just services, or both combined.

Here is our data for goods only:

As you can see, we have a large trade surplus in goods with the USA, which is why we are often mentioned.

This worries me a bit, but I am more worried about change to the CT regime, and future FDI.

I have a feeling you meant to use the word "alpha"?

This does seem like a truss moment for trump.

Maybe truss will get her wish and tanking future western economies will be called "doing a donald".

Also good to see the sycophants dealt with sharply. Seeing the odd one over on current affairs whose only contribution is to pretend the president that authoritarians love is somehow in charge.

This is a contradictory mess

By that reasoning, though, spending can never be cut as someone loses a goodie. This isn't Ireland with a constant source of external money that's generated without investment by Ireland, the products being produced (Megacorp IP licensing) require little or no investment by Ireland. Ireland, for instance, refuses to pay down its debt despite recent huge tax windfalls like the Apple decision, instead, it's government wastes the money or simply hands it over to the citizenry to drive up inflation. It doesn't invest in programs to improve education and it's healthcare funding approach is teacups bailing the Titanic.

The USA does have to pay for things from revenue it itself generates, so spending cuts are important.

Increasing tax rates in the USA on those most likely to be able to pay them seems reasonable to me and is something being widely clamored for, to solve the 'income distribution' problem.