It's no terrible idea, and it would not rip Europe apart: just like the USA, we're currently ripped apart by all the Pudding/Dumpf & similars-sponsored demagoguery and BS. Stop that, then start taxating the super-rich properly, and the rest is going to sort out itself on its own.
Instead, right now, even our 'socialist' parties are foremost taking care 'their' super-rich not to pay too much taxes...
....and taxating the super-rich is no 'witch hunt', but a matter of necessity. Back in the 1960s, Eisenhower was taxating the super-rich and corporations in the USA with 90%. The USA were flourishing (plus able to fight the Cold War, plus two major wars abroad, and still run its space program) and nobody was complaining.
Ah yes, and regarding 'Trump is no FSB asset': check the book 'Putin's People'. Everything nicely explained there (and then in all the necessary detail).
Yep, after WWII even in Europe right wing parties in France, Germany and UK, ... taxed super rich up to 90% and they paid it, although even in that time they could avoid some of it and still they didn't do it. Why? because these rich people were shi*ted scared of communism and still had fresh memory of nacism.
Now, with all of that globalisation and tax haven countries etc. it's easy as pie to avoid taxes when you set them high and almost all riches do it. And you bet many economists have scratched their head how to fix it but found nothing. (Except some total isolation, which would do more harm).
Sure. And now they can be scared of a new form of Nazism - or emigrate. I do not see why should anybody who's paying 0 taxes while earning literal dozens of billions still enjoy the rights and privileges of the citizenship.
It's not nazism, it's more like corporativist fascism what is in Russia and coming in U.S.A. One think is that this kind of business - politics oligarchy has been attractive for many rich people always and nowadays they have a "good example" in Russia that it works "well" - rich became richer, poor poorer and more easy to manipulate. As a bonus, no need to worry about business competitors, if rich stay loyal to the leader, they keep their wealth. So no reason to be scared or to emigrate for rich and loyal. (Russia has the greatest income inequalities in the world.)
What's more a problem that these rich crooks are elected by poor people. And I do not get how current elites screwed up. There is possibility to make new political party (still, fortunately). But if you start to speak about taxes and inequalities etc. just few would listen to you.
During the Trump campaign, many of his voters mentioned high inflation, worsened economic situation, etc. But clearly, Trump with his promised tariffs could not make it better. The problem is, that these Trump voters do not care so much about economy, they voted Trump because of his covert racism, misogyny, chauvinism, but they do not want to say it openly.
Studies I have seen state that 'effective' tax rates back in the glory days of the '90 percent' tax rate on the rich were netting essentially the same amount in taxes as were collected after the tax rates were slashed. There were many 'write off and loopholes that reduced the income subject to taxation.
"The top 1 percent of income earners paid an average effective income tax rate of 16.9 percent in the 1950s, according to data compiled by the Tax Foundation from a 2017 paper by economics professors. That figure includes all federal, state and local income taxes.
When including additional federal and local taxes, such as payroll, property and estate taxes, the Tax Foundation reported that the top 1 percent of income earners had a 42 percent average effective tax rate in the 1950s. In 2014, that number was lower – 36.4 percent."
One of the factors lowering that nominal rate was the fact that much of the 'super rich's' 'income' was from capital gains and income which was taxed at a lower rate as an incentive for investment and when that income was deducted the remainder also fell into a lower bracket.
Of course the new idiocy is the topic/headline on an email I got from a Trump supporting source that - 'Trump confirms that he will replace the income tax with tariff.s..'
As a recent analysis pointed out -
"The federal government collected about $2.2 trillion in individual income taxes in Fiscal Year 2023 — half of all government revenue. U.S. imports totalled about $3.8 trillion in 2023. Therefore, a tariff rate of 58% would have been required to offset income tax revenue that year — but only if imports remained at this level."
And one of the justifications from Trump for tariffs is that foreign companies are unfairly competing with American companies and tariffs are necessary to level the playing field and induce Americans to 'buy American.'
Obviously if Americans stop buying the foreign goods then there will be no tariffs...
Sadly logic and deductive reasoning are not a strong points in the general public (on either side of the political divide).
Complete self destructive nonsense from a guy who can't think clearly, but knows what sounds good. The American industrial base has withered to the point that without massive investment public and private it won't come back. They will have to pay more in tariffs for stuff they can't make anymore.
You forget that the taxation policy of the 1950s had such 'incentives' like investment into education, research etc. Means: the more one was investing into the well-being of the society, the less taxes was one paying.
Nowadays, Musk, Bezos etc are paying 0-2% tax, and investing only into getting ever richer. While the state is damned as 'incompetent' and 'corrupt', and is bankrupt.
Unsurprisingly, even if the state is collecting ever more taxes, it's not enough, because those at the top - and they own over 95% of what is to own - are not paying their fucking taxes. While those at the bottom are paying ever more taxes, and that's 'still not enough'...
BTW, that problem is not reserved to the USA alone. One can monitor similar patterns all over Europe, too. The reason is everywhere the same: the super-rich - the oligarchy - is bribing the politics to administer in their interest, while the politics is custom-tailored to foster compromise, instead of leadership and determination.
Re. taxes: is another thingy I'm looking forward for Dumpf to press home. The results are going to be such a shock for the USA, that I'll be ROFL-ing around... Sure, the USA have a strong service sector, but that's about all. The USA not only have no serious industry left, but they lack one thing nobody is talking about: quality control. What's left of the US industry, and what's been 're-built' in recent years, can't do things well (should there be any doubts: see Boeing and other corporations from the defence sector). At most, they excel in wasting yet more of taxpayer's money for obsolete products that do not work.
....and that's not going to change because the oligarchy there has 0 incentive to improve the quality control.
No one was complaining because no one was paying that high taxes. And the tax burden on the society as a whole was much lower than current and much much lower than the level of taxation in Europe.
"Necessity is the Mother of Invention" What necessity does the U.S. have to defeat Russia? What necessity does Europe? I mean real standard-of-living necessity, not political structure--democracy, Monarch, autocracy etc. I feel you're losing sight of the prize. The prize is not freedom or sovereignty. The prize is economic growth and security. Wherever the rich are, Russia, Ukraine or the U.S.--they don't really complain ;)
I agree with you about the incompetence, but that question is secondary to why isn't competence valued? I believe the reason why is we measure competence by what it does. If I have 10 trucks that need fixing and someone comes and fixes them they're "competent."
If I get paid by the number of mechanics I have working on trucks, not on if they are fixed, than incompetence is the rational choice for me! Again, incompetence is a function of desired results.
Skipping a lot of steps, the prize is OIL/GAS, MINERALS and BLACK SOIL.
Europe can't just admit that's what they want while at the same time promising equity to everyone within their borders and universal human rights.
So we have lots of people working on the trucks who are incompetent, as you have explained. The goal is to give them work, not to get the trucks fixed--Russian resources seized.
There's a lot of hysterics. It's NOISE. Interferences. Ultimately everyone will have to drop their pretenses and fight over resources. When I look at it that way everything lines up. The prize is RUSSIA! (for us). The prize for Russia is UKRAINE.
For many ideological reasons I believe "we" should win. But in the end, maybe I just want the resources too ;)
Hard to understand for me too! I never let my assumptions take a breather ;) Yes, I'd say maritime trade really focuses our attention on that! The Greek and Roman wars. The opium trade. The South China Seas these days. Security becomes extortion and prosperity becomes security becomes extortion--haha. I've never read much of that history but I bet it explain A LOT. Your thoughts on this situation?
Security is real standard-of-living necessity, though many people don't think about it until it is compromised (like, one doesn't think much about password complexity until it gets brute-forced).
I can definitely say that Russian invasion significantly decreases real standard-of-living. Take a look at Abkhazia and Transnistria, compare nowadays Finland and Karelia. And, of course, occupied parts of Ukraine are a clear example too. Even non-occupied parts have issues, because missile strikes on civil infrastructure tend to somewhat decrease quality and, sadly, sometimes even duration of life.
Elites and "the people" look at standard-of-living differently. Elites measure it in power. The people measure it with the price of eggs. I think it a mistake to conflate the two. Ukraine is fighting for price of eggs. Russia is fighting for power (the elites using money, effective lower price of eggs for those who fight). The U.S. is only interested in the "power" question. It doesn't see a connection to the price of eggs (though eventually there will be one). My point is that wars really go to that next level when both interests are aligned. Right now, they are only aligned in Ukraine.
While I agree that Russia is fighting for power, price of eggs and price of lives is hardly comparable. So I have a feeling you try do downplay it regarding Ukraine.
US might be interested in power, but since it has an elected government, every 2-4 years it has to focus on the price of eggs. And you know, elites have their eggs too - just more expensive ones.
My view here is no-win. Like if you have a daughter and she comes home with a guy you know is only in it for the sex. You love your daughter so you point it out and she only reads it as your saying she isn't worth a good guy or happiness, etc. So she hates you and continues with the guy. What can you do?
I have been trying to support Ukraine from the beginning. What to do if I see someone she loves not loving her back in the way she should be loved? Europe doesn't care about democracy--or not enough to die for it. Ultimately, they want Russia's resources. Ukraine, like the daughter, has to believe in love even though deep down she may see the reality. Arggh. You see where I'm coming from?
Ah, man, you kind of hit the right spot. I guess I should gain more trust from my daughter since the case you described might happen to me in 5+ years.
Yes, ultimately Europe wants resources (not necessarily from Russia - it just happens they offer them cheaply). But, looking at the easternmost countries, which experienced Russian occupation more or less recently (Poland, Finland, Estonia...) I have a feeling they value security more than cheap resources.
Comparing countries with relatives is an interesting perspective, actually. For me, Russia looks like an abusive mother-in-law, which first offers some "benefits" (let me cook you something..., let me help you with the kid..., let me clean your house...), and then leverages them to morally abuse her children and in-laws (thankless child - you can do nothing without my help!.. you never do anything right!.. and you owe me a big one!..)
I remember Biden trying to create all kind of European-Ukrainian agrrements to finance the war after the elections. He explained that trouble is coming, they need to be carefull, etc.
Fast forward the Europeans are shocked and with empty pockets, Zelenski is shocked about the European shock.
BTW, there's even no need for channeling the money away from citizens' welfare or any similar kind of measures: just tax the super-rich properly.
Our situation in this regards is exactly the same like in the USA. The money is available: there is more money than ever before. Just the taxation system is screwed up and the super-rich are coming away with paying 0-2% income tax a year.
There is an opinion that the US may want to counterbalance China by empowering Russia to compete with it as a regional leader. And moderately strong Russia would transfer EU funds from business investments to armed forces.
Basically, USA neutralizes other world powers, namely China and EU, by supporting an emerging competitor at their borders.
This PoV is based in works of Mearsheimer and Machiavelli and IMO it should not be discarded.
We know the US doesn't have enough ammo and production capacity to sustain a long term conflict. This diminishes their capability to counter China. To change that, they decided to reduce their defense budget by 8% for five years.
Or maybe they don't really care about China and a smaller defense budget allows them to lower tax rates for the rich even more.
Primarily, the defense of Taiwan. Theoretically, supporting the Philippines and other nations that are being bullied in the South China Sea by the Chinese navy. That last remains mostly a theory to date.
Mearsheimer? Machiavelli was a smart guy but build his thinking on small Italian city states. But first and foremost. Trump has not and will not read such books. Of course someone can come up with such ideas. The real problem anyhow is that Russia isn’t strong enough. Even slightly supported. And Russias central territory and interest is in its western borders. After all StP and Moscow are in the western part. Siberia is were they send looser to die.
The Russia is so much dependent to China that's impossible for them to move away. They need a huge outlet/customer for their hydrocarbons now that they destroyed their European market.
And without the tacit support of Chinese dual use technology (like drones) they would've lost already.
If Trump expects to break Russia away from China, he's for a huge surprise
See what the Trump admin planned for the today's UN SC session.
They will propose a resolution about Ukraine with no mention of territorial integrity. Russia adores that. What about China? If China vetoes the resolution, that would show that it despises their "friend" Russia. If they approve it, they lose the level of "territorial integrity" about Taiwan.
That's a clear Machiavellian move. Let other powers struggle among themselves while USA enjoys the dividend of peace. Divide and prosper.
There is the danger that such a move may awaken Europe, I'm not sure the US wants a strong Europe, they've gone to great lengths to keep us 'tame' and dependent for decades.
Using Russia to balance China is a fools errand I think, primarily because the Chinese leadership aren't as stupid some people like to delude themselves. They'll see through such strategies.
And now they'll fill the void left by USAID shutting down..
Russia was already balancing China in Middle East, post-Soviet countries and India. If it disappears, China would rule unchallenged over the entire continental Asia.
I was referring to your comment about the US now letting Russia be moderately strong to drain European business investment towards military investment, in the context of the US perhaps pulling back from Europe and Ukraine.
This may, possibly, with a lot of luck, lots of stars aligned, lead to Europe re-emerging as a major player. I'm not optimistic, but it is possible with the right leadership (definitely not Macron or Starmer). If I were to guess I'd place my bet on the next strong European leader coming from Eastern Europe.
It has been US policy to leave Russia/USSR intact and moderately strong for at least the past 35 years, they fought against the breakup of the USSR, they ignored the Ichkerian and Georgian wars, the Krym invasion, because it served their purposes. Rather have a slightly belligerent Russia than new and unknown strong entities, or, god forbid, a revitalized Europe with muscle.
Altho, nowadays, thanks to how poorly the West have done in regards to Ukraine, Russia and China are working together in many domains, and will probably do so until they break the US led dwindling dominance of the West. How much they're balancing each other out now I'm not sure. The Chinese play a much longer game than the Russians.
They're both competing for our allies (like India and Pakistan), in the Middle-East Turkie is rising rapidly as Russias influence fades.
I think Trump does not want it to threaten the US dominance in global economy but does not care about the EU influence in global hard power game - as EU is kind of friendly to US politically and culturally. Thus his move is about EU sacrificing a part of its economy to increase its military power, while the US lowers its military expenses to improve its economy.
There is no Trump strategy other than to do what Putin tells him. Why can’t people understand this? Trump has no grand strategy. Trump is not playing 4 dimensional chess. I guess people can’t psychologically accept that such stupidity is ruling the world and try to reassure themselves by seeing non-existent patterns.
Meanwhile, Musk is also working with Putin. Since Trump is so stupid he has been told to just go along with anything Musk does.
Trump doesn't want to let Europe go. He expects Europe to build convențional armies which will be subordinated to US. No nuclear force or independent coalition.
It's arguable the Euros were warned in 2014 and again in 2022 and now it's 2025 and they're screaming that if the USA leaves then they'll be incapable of fighting off the rusting remnants of the Russian military..... Absolutely ridiculous. Either 11 years or 3 years ago and still the European NATO members barring 1-3 exceptions simply don't take their armed forces seriously.
Of course Europe can. What people doesn’t seem to understand is that Europe isn’t interested. We would prefer not to fight. We don’t want to conquer or rule Russia (who really wants to rule Russia? Bankrupt, drunken, underdeveloped, underskilled…). Our preference is in some ways «noble». It is also dead wrong, and we need to fix it. And we haven’t. But fixing it is not so much a question of building an army as understanding the need. Mind you, not saying this makes it easier.
Since primary SBU task is ‘protection of the Constitution and internal order’ in Ukraine, and currently the biggest threat to the Constitution and internal order in Ukraine is Russia - SBU is doing exactly what it has to do.
Even if the principal nature of the SBU is 'military' (at least that's the way the service is understood in Ukraine, and therefore it's servicemen are considered 'military personnel'), it's simply not its job to 'fight conventional wars by conventional means'.
Yes, that's why there are no SBU line infantry units. They are more like spec-ops: intelligence, snipers, counter-terrorist forces, etc. I guess nowadays their area of responsibility overlaps with GUR somewhat. It's like functional redundancy by duplication, for higher reliability, I guess.
Trump is a Russian asset. He's not smart enough to be a full-fledged mole but certainly has proved himself to be a very "useful idiot". The Kremlin is celebrating the greatest coup in the history of their intelligence services: the "capture" of a US president with all that entails. Yes, Five Eyes as far as the US is concerned, is dead. Compromised agencies like the NIA, the CIA, FBI and the military, now, are no longer to be trusted. I've said as much on several comments to articles in the NYTimes which, no surprise, were not published. I wonder why. US media is also compromised and subservient to Trump and his media moguls. I absolutely agree with all you've written here with, perhaps, one caveat: I am very concerned for Zelensky's safety. Heretofore Ukraine's security services need only watch out for Russian assassination attempts. Now, because of Trump and his anti-Ukraine "ship of fools", they will have to watch out the US does not know his whereabouts. You can be sure it would be leaked to the Russians by any number of Trump's people. Say what you like about Zelensky but his asasassination would be an enormous morale blow to Ukraine and "gift from heaven" to Trump. "Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest". I said as much in a NYTimes comment-also not published (but not the quote from Henry II...that would be construed as a threat) .
More likely he will pull out US forces when the EU answers his tariffs with their own. Funny how he demands Europe spend 5% on defense while he plans to cut 8% each of the next 5 years. Because there's a "big beautiful ocean" between? I'm sure he doesn't know about the mess U Boats made off the East Coast in 1942.
Logic and Trump administration don't go together, I suppose.
It's a waste of time trying to rationalize their actions. Greed and ignorance and "damn the consequences" are probably enough driving forces for the resulting chaos...
Pulling out the US tripwire forces is an invitation to Russians to invade the Baltic countries (at least), and sets the scene for the destruction of NATO from within, from the only state to invoke the Article 5 in all these decades of its existence.
Just a correction: spending more money in defence and security is a necessity and is improving defence and security but is not good for economy (unless you develop something you may sell abroad).
What is flourishin if you produce a stuff to destroy other stuff and fixing that broken stuff? Only companies involved in that useless destruction, other parts of society suffer. E.g. see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ds41zZzvZQ "The myth behind the economic benefits of war" and many other sources.
Mate, please, do not 'force' me to start listing a 'few' good books about economies at war (with other words: sorry, no YouTube videos are ever going to 'impress' me).
I think Western elites are now doing a perfectly fine job of dividing Western democracies into rival camps of pitchfork and torches people without Putin's help, and they have been for quite some time. Divide et impera. Only one side of this oligarchy believes in the traditional post-1990 security architecture, the other side believes in something else; what that is exactly is hard to say, but the 2016-era typing of Trump as an FSB plant has even gone out of fashion on CNN. He may well be, but perhaps it is less relevant if he is. Just like the last time, he got on the order of $100M from a certain Adelson. The ludicrous technofeudalist-cum-"libertarian" Musk bought his way into executive power with something like $40M, so what's $100M? $40 per West Bank Palestinian? Or an even "better" "deal"?
Tom, thanks for the review and your personal position. I would like to share some comments on the current situation.
When Ukraine was left without American aid a year ago, there was hope for its quick resumption, aid from Europe did not stop, the front held, the energy sector was not yet so badly damaged and missile and drone attacks were episodic.
Now there is no need to expect any aid or support from the US, European powers are going into "their" problems
Uniting Europe and defeating Pudding&Dump is nice but your recipe of cutting ties is not enough. The AfDs of Europe exist for a reason. And it is not that 1/4 and trending higher of the electorate are stupid and evil. Europe has been not in a cute crisis but in a long long stagnation. Most of the people are feeling poorer than a decade ago or two and rightly so. Living standards have been in a free fall. The afds are a result. For all the rant about our oligarchy, half of our industry is at the altar of the Green Gods to be sacrificed in a grand ceremony and the rest is overtaxed and over-regulated. Energy prices are exorbitant - for example. How to run steel mills, chemicals production? How can you create surplus that can go towards arms production!? If you work in an auto factory to be closed because EU mandarins through mandates are ruining a back-bone industry, for whom are you going to vote? Would you agree to be taxed (via higher inflation or straightforward higher taxes) to save Ukraine but not your job? If EU for example just doubles the CO2 credits (much more is being burnt on the front and behind it without being “credited”) traded, it will be a free lunch - energy prices will fall and industrial production will increase. But our idiots are looking for the net zero in 2050 in a burning and exploding world. As if had FDR and his “liberal” coalition around him lost WW2, Hitler and Co would have agreed to a UN, chapter of universal human rights, etc….
The Dumpf whoever you name, is simply doing whatever possible to avoid russia turning into a chinese province. That much must be clear to a lemur somewhere east of Antananarivo. Some Ukraine is irrelevant for that purpose to him. Whatever it takes, including land, lifted sanctions and re-filled russian pockets with oil and gas money. Now, if that is a good or bad global policy, don't ask me. I can't make my mind. In any case that is what is happening (plus the money part of course).
That's like what they have in games. Your character may specialize in buffs or in debuffs.
* Previous administrations buffed their friends, leading the strongest alliance of this planet.
* The current administration debuffs other great powers and pushes them against each other, remaining secure and prosperous in its corner of the world.
thanks for the many good piece. Since that seems to be a central issue for Ukrainian air defense, can they find alternatives to the U.S. Patriots? Can SAMP-T be deployed and trusted within a few months, or are there other alternatives? There's much information around but hard to find a trustworthy synthesis.
...especially: how to do this fast enough?
Sorry, right now: no idea.
It's no terrible idea, and it would not rip Europe apart: just like the USA, we're currently ripped apart by all the Pudding/Dumpf & similars-sponsored demagoguery and BS. Stop that, then start taxating the super-rich properly, and the rest is going to sort out itself on its own.
Instead, right now, even our 'socialist' parties are foremost taking care 'their' super-rich not to pay too much taxes...
....and taxating the super-rich is no 'witch hunt', but a matter of necessity. Back in the 1960s, Eisenhower was taxating the super-rich and corporations in the USA with 90%. The USA were flourishing (plus able to fight the Cold War, plus two major wars abroad, and still run its space program) and nobody was complaining.
Ah yes, and regarding 'Trump is no FSB asset': check the book 'Putin's People'. Everything nicely explained there (and then in all the necessary detail).
Yep, after WWII even in Europe right wing parties in France, Germany and UK, ... taxed super rich up to 90% and they paid it, although even in that time they could avoid some of it and still they didn't do it. Why? because these rich people were shi*ted scared of communism and still had fresh memory of nacism.
Now, with all of that globalisation and tax haven countries etc. it's easy as pie to avoid taxes when you set them high and almost all riches do it. And you bet many economists have scratched their head how to fix it but found nothing. (Except some total isolation, which would do more harm).
Sure. And now they can be scared of a new form of Nazism - or emigrate. I do not see why should anybody who's paying 0 taxes while earning literal dozens of billions still enjoy the rights and privileges of the citizenship.
It's not nazism, it's more like corporativist fascism what is in Russia and coming in U.S.A. One think is that this kind of business - politics oligarchy has been attractive for many rich people always and nowadays they have a "good example" in Russia that it works "well" - rich became richer, poor poorer and more easy to manipulate. As a bonus, no need to worry about business competitors, if rich stay loyal to the leader, they keep their wealth. So no reason to be scared or to emigrate for rich and loyal. (Russia has the greatest income inequalities in the world.)
What's more a problem that these rich crooks are elected by poor people. And I do not get how current elites screwed up. There is possibility to make new political party (still, fortunately). But if you start to speak about taxes and inequalities etc. just few would listen to you.
During the Trump campaign, many of his voters mentioned high inflation, worsened economic situation, etc. But clearly, Trump with his promised tariffs could not make it better. The problem is, that these Trump voters do not care so much about economy, they voted Trump because of his covert racism, misogyny, chauvinism, but they do not want to say it openly.
Then call it 'market-shares dominance' or whatever.
I'll call it Nazism. Because Nazism entails racism, misogyny, chauvinism and plenty of other, similar ideas.
Studies I have seen state that 'effective' tax rates back in the glory days of the '90 percent' tax rate on the rich were netting essentially the same amount in taxes as were collected after the tax rates were slashed. There were many 'write off and loopholes that reduced the income subject to taxation.
"The top 1 percent of income earners paid an average effective income tax rate of 16.9 percent in the 1950s, according to data compiled by the Tax Foundation from a 2017 paper by economics professors. That figure includes all federal, state and local income taxes.
When including additional federal and local taxes, such as payroll, property and estate taxes, the Tax Foundation reported that the top 1 percent of income earners had a 42 percent average effective tax rate in the 1950s. In 2014, that number was lower – 36.4 percent."
One of the factors lowering that nominal rate was the fact that much of the 'super rich's' 'income' was from capital gains and income which was taxed at a lower rate as an incentive for investment and when that income was deducted the remainder also fell into a lower bracket.
Of course the new idiocy is the topic/headline on an email I got from a Trump supporting source that - 'Trump confirms that he will replace the income tax with tariff.s..'
As a recent analysis pointed out -
"The federal government collected about $2.2 trillion in individual income taxes in Fiscal Year 2023 — half of all government revenue. U.S. imports totalled about $3.8 trillion in 2023. Therefore, a tariff rate of 58% would have been required to offset income tax revenue that year — but only if imports remained at this level."
And one of the justifications from Trump for tariffs is that foreign companies are unfairly competing with American companies and tariffs are necessary to level the playing field and induce Americans to 'buy American.'
Obviously if Americans stop buying the foreign goods then there will be no tariffs...
Sadly logic and deductive reasoning are not a strong points in the general public (on either side of the political divide).
Complete self destructive nonsense from a guy who can't think clearly, but knows what sounds good. The American industrial base has withered to the point that without massive investment public and private it won't come back. They will have to pay more in tariffs for stuff they can't make anymore.
You forget that the taxation policy of the 1950s had such 'incentives' like investment into education, research etc. Means: the more one was investing into the well-being of the society, the less taxes was one paying.
Nowadays, Musk, Bezos etc are paying 0-2% tax, and investing only into getting ever richer. While the state is damned as 'incompetent' and 'corrupt', and is bankrupt.
Unsurprisingly, even if the state is collecting ever more taxes, it's not enough, because those at the top - and they own over 95% of what is to own - are not paying their fucking taxes. While those at the bottom are paying ever more taxes, and that's 'still not enough'...
BTW, that problem is not reserved to the USA alone. One can monitor similar patterns all over Europe, too. The reason is everywhere the same: the super-rich - the oligarchy - is bribing the politics to administer in their interest, while the politics is custom-tailored to foster compromise, instead of leadership and determination.
Re. taxes: is another thingy I'm looking forward for Dumpf to press home. The results are going to be such a shock for the USA, that I'll be ROFL-ing around... Sure, the USA have a strong service sector, but that's about all. The USA not only have no serious industry left, but they lack one thing nobody is talking about: quality control. What's left of the US industry, and what's been 're-built' in recent years, can't do things well (should there be any doubts: see Boeing and other corporations from the defence sector). At most, they excel in wasting yet more of taxpayer's money for obsolete products that do not work.
....and that's not going to change because the oligarchy there has 0 incentive to improve the quality control.
No one was complaining because no one was paying that high taxes. And the tax burden on the society as a whole was much lower than current and much much lower than the level of taxation in Europe.
I believe that modern "European democracy" is sliding into ochlocracy (the power of the crowd of people) and populism.
All these pseudo-values, chatter and "different opinions" lead to the inability to react adequately.
In the same Rome, during the war, a "Dictator" was elected for 3 months, who had concentrated power.
"Necessity is the Mother of Invention" What necessity does the U.S. have to defeat Russia? What necessity does Europe? I mean real standard-of-living necessity, not political structure--democracy, Monarch, autocracy etc. I feel you're losing sight of the prize. The prize is not freedom or sovereignty. The prize is economic growth and security. Wherever the rich are, Russia, Ukraine or the U.S.--they don't really complain ;)
I agree with you about the incompetence, but that question is secondary to why isn't competence valued? I believe the reason why is we measure competence by what it does. If I have 10 trucks that need fixing and someone comes and fixes them they're "competent."
If I get paid by the number of mechanics I have working on trucks, not on if they are fixed, than incompetence is the rational choice for me! Again, incompetence is a function of desired results.
Skipping a lot of steps, the prize is OIL/GAS, MINERALS and BLACK SOIL.
Europe can't just admit that's what they want while at the same time promising equity to everyone within their borders and universal human rights.
So we have lots of people working on the trucks who are incompetent, as you have explained. The goal is to give them work, not to get the trucks fixed--Russian resources seized.
There's a lot of hysterics. It's NOISE. Interferences. Ultimately everyone will have to drop their pretenses and fight over resources. When I look at it that way everything lines up. The prize is RUSSIA! (for us). The prize for Russia is UKRAINE.
For many ideological reasons I believe "we" should win. But in the end, maybe I just want the resources too ;)
Hard to understand for me too! I never let my assumptions take a breather ;) Yes, I'd say maritime trade really focuses our attention on that! The Greek and Roman wars. The opium trade. The South China Seas these days. Security becomes extortion and prosperity becomes security becomes extortion--haha. I've never read much of that history but I bet it explain A LOT. Your thoughts on this situation?
Security is real standard-of-living necessity, though many people don't think about it until it is compromised (like, one doesn't think much about password complexity until it gets brute-forced).
I can definitely say that Russian invasion significantly decreases real standard-of-living. Take a look at Abkhazia and Transnistria, compare nowadays Finland and Karelia. And, of course, occupied parts of Ukraine are a clear example too. Even non-occupied parts have issues, because missile strikes on civil infrastructure tend to somewhat decrease quality and, sadly, sometimes even duration of life.
Elites and "the people" look at standard-of-living differently. Elites measure it in power. The people measure it with the price of eggs. I think it a mistake to conflate the two. Ukraine is fighting for price of eggs. Russia is fighting for power (the elites using money, effective lower price of eggs for those who fight). The U.S. is only interested in the "power" question. It doesn't see a connection to the price of eggs (though eventually there will be one). My point is that wars really go to that next level when both interests are aligned. Right now, they are only aligned in Ukraine.
While I agree that Russia is fighting for power, price of eggs and price of lives is hardly comparable. So I have a feeling you try do downplay it regarding Ukraine.
US might be interested in power, but since it has an elected government, every 2-4 years it has to focus on the price of eggs. And you know, elites have their eggs too - just more expensive ones.
My view here is no-win. Like if you have a daughter and she comes home with a guy you know is only in it for the sex. You love your daughter so you point it out and she only reads it as your saying she isn't worth a good guy or happiness, etc. So she hates you and continues with the guy. What can you do?
I have been trying to support Ukraine from the beginning. What to do if I see someone she loves not loving her back in the way she should be loved? Europe doesn't care about democracy--or not enough to die for it. Ultimately, they want Russia's resources. Ukraine, like the daughter, has to believe in love even though deep down she may see the reality. Arggh. You see where I'm coming from?
Ah, man, you kind of hit the right spot. I guess I should gain more trust from my daughter since the case you described might happen to me in 5+ years.
Yes, ultimately Europe wants resources (not necessarily from Russia - it just happens they offer them cheaply). But, looking at the easternmost countries, which experienced Russian occupation more or less recently (Poland, Finland, Estonia...) I have a feeling they value security more than cheap resources.
Comparing countries with relatives is an interesting perspective, actually. For me, Russia looks like an abusive mother-in-law, which first offers some "benefits" (let me cook you something..., let me help you with the kid..., let me clean your house...), and then leverages them to morally abuse her children and in-laws (thankless child - you can do nothing without my help!.. you never do anything right!.. and you owe me a big one!..)
I remember Biden trying to create all kind of European-Ukrainian agrrements to finance the war after the elections. He explained that trouble is coming, they need to be carefull, etc.
Fast forward the Europeans are shocked and with empty pockets, Zelenski is shocked about the European shock.
That's because nobody warned them.
Indeed. A huge opportunity.
BTW, there's even no need for channeling the money away from citizens' welfare or any similar kind of measures: just tax the super-rich properly.
Our situation in this regards is exactly the same like in the USA. The money is available: there is more money than ever before. Just the taxation system is screwed up and the super-rich are coming away with paying 0-2% income tax a year.
There is an opinion that the US may want to counterbalance China by empowering Russia to compete with it as a regional leader. And moderately strong Russia would transfer EU funds from business investments to armed forces.
Basically, USA neutralizes other world powers, namely China and EU, by supporting an emerging competitor at their borders.
This PoV is based in works of Mearsheimer and Machiavelli and IMO it should not be discarded.
Get plenty of nukes! Or make alliance with another country that has them and is ready to use them on your behalf.
He's got Musk by his shoulder
The simplest explanation… well that would fit Oxhams razor…,
Or, as Hanlon's razor states, "Never attribute to malice anything that can be adequately explained by stupidity"
...and babbling all too much but to keep some kind of 'deep plays' secret.
We know the US doesn't have enough ammo and production capacity to sustain a long term conflict. This diminishes their capability to counter China. To change that, they decided to reduce their defense budget by 8% for five years.
Or maybe they don't really care about China and a smaller defense budget allows them to lower tax rates for the rich even more.
Where do they have to counter China? Are they going to make another D-day-style assault?
Primarily, the defense of Taiwan. Theoretically, supporting the Philippines and other nations that are being bullied in the South China Sea by the Chinese navy. That last remains mostly a theory to date.
Does the US really need those places far far away? When they already control their entire continent.
They may struggle with China for Africa and South America, though. But that is unlikely to involve infantry and heavy shelling by artillery.
Mearsheimer? Machiavelli was a smart guy but build his thinking on small Italian city states. But first and foremost. Trump has not and will not read such books. Of course someone can come up with such ideas. The real problem anyhow is that Russia isn’t strong enough. Even slightly supported. And Russias central territory and interest is in its western borders. After all StP and Moscow are in the western part. Siberia is were they send looser to die.
The Russia is so much dependent to China that's impossible for them to move away. They need a huge outlet/customer for their hydrocarbons now that they destroyed their European market.
And without the tacit support of Chinese dual use technology (like drones) they would've lost already.
If Trump expects to break Russia away from China, he's for a huge surprise
True, but I think we are giving team trump too much credit for the ability to plan and act rationally.
We don't see any negative (for USA) consequences of their planning and acting, do we?
See what the Trump admin planned for the today's UN SC session.
They will propose a resolution about Ukraine with no mention of territorial integrity. Russia adores that. What about China? If China vetoes the resolution, that would show that it despises their "friend" Russia. If they approve it, they lose the level of "territorial integrity" about Taiwan.
That's a clear Machiavellian move. Let other powers struggle among themselves while USA enjoys the dividend of peace. Divide and prosper.
It’s not Trump moving Russia away from China. It’s Russia moving the US away from Europe.
There is the danger that such a move may awaken Europe, I'm not sure the US wants a strong Europe, they've gone to great lengths to keep us 'tame' and dependent for decades.
Using Russia to balance China is a fools errand I think, primarily because the Chinese leadership aren't as stupid some people like to delude themselves. They'll see through such strategies.
And now they'll fill the void left by USAID shutting down..
Russia was already balancing China in Middle East, post-Soviet countries and India. If it disappears, China would rule unchallenged over the entire continental Asia.
I was referring to your comment about the US now letting Russia be moderately strong to drain European business investment towards military investment, in the context of the US perhaps pulling back from Europe and Ukraine.
This may, possibly, with a lot of luck, lots of stars aligned, lead to Europe re-emerging as a major player. I'm not optimistic, but it is possible with the right leadership (definitely not Macron or Starmer). If I were to guess I'd place my bet on the next strong European leader coming from Eastern Europe.
It has been US policy to leave Russia/USSR intact and moderately strong for at least the past 35 years, they fought against the breakup of the USSR, they ignored the Ichkerian and Georgian wars, the Krym invasion, because it served their purposes. Rather have a slightly belligerent Russia than new and unknown strong entities, or, god forbid, a revitalized Europe with muscle.
Altho, nowadays, thanks to how poorly the West have done in regards to Ukraine, Russia and China are working together in many domains, and will probably do so until they break the US led dwindling dominance of the West. How much they're balancing each other out now I'm not sure. The Chinese play a much longer game than the Russians.
They're both competing for our allies (like India and Pakistan), in the Middle-East Turkie is rising rapidly as Russias influence fades.
EU will emerge as a global player.
I think Trump does not want it to threaten the US dominance in global economy but does not care about the EU influence in global hard power game - as EU is kind of friendly to US politically and culturally. Thus his move is about EU sacrificing a part of its economy to increase its military power, while the US lowers its military expenses to improve its economy.
There is no Trump strategy other than to do what Putin tells him. Why can’t people understand this? Trump has no grand strategy. Trump is not playing 4 dimensional chess. I guess people can’t psychologically accept that such stupidity is ruling the world and try to reassure themselves by seeing non-existent patterns.
Meanwhile, Musk is also working with Putin. Since Trump is so stupid he has been told to just go along with anything Musk does.
Trump doesn't want to let Europe go. He expects Europe to build convențional armies which will be subordinated to US. No nuclear force or independent coalition.
He wants Europe from the 90s + US from 2030s
It's arguable the Euros were warned in 2014 and again in 2022 and now it's 2025 and they're screaming that if the USA leaves then they'll be incapable of fighting off the rusting remnants of the Russian military..... Absolutely ridiculous. Either 11 years or 3 years ago and still the European NATO members barring 1-3 exceptions simply don't take their armed forces seriously.
Of course Europe can. What people doesn’t seem to understand is that Europe isn’t interested. We would prefer not to fight. We don’t want to conquer or rule Russia (who really wants to rule Russia? Bankrupt, drunken, underdeveloped, underskilled…). Our preference is in some ways «noble». It is also dead wrong, and we need to fix it. And we haven’t. But fixing it is not so much a question of building an army as understanding the need. Mind you, not saying this makes it easier.
Since primary SBU task is ‘protection of the Constitution and internal order’ in Ukraine, and currently the biggest threat to the Constitution and internal order in Ukraine is Russia - SBU is doing exactly what it has to do.
Even if the principal nature of the SBU is 'military' (at least that's the way the service is understood in Ukraine, and therefore it's servicemen are considered 'military personnel'), it's simply not its job to 'fight conventional wars by conventional means'.
It's principal nature was counter-intelligence as it was a shard of KGB.
Also counter-terrorism actions. Russia is a terrorist state, so here comes SBU!
Yes, that's why there are no SBU line infantry units. They are more like spec-ops: intelligence, snipers, counter-terrorist forces, etc. I guess nowadays their area of responsibility overlaps with GUR somewhat. It's like functional redundancy by duplication, for higher reliability, I guess.
I fear that the betrayal from the US isnt enough to actually wake up europe
If not, then the USA are going to drag us into its own abyss.
Bravo!
Trump is a Russian asset. He's not smart enough to be a full-fledged mole but certainly has proved himself to be a very "useful idiot". The Kremlin is celebrating the greatest coup in the history of their intelligence services: the "capture" of a US president with all that entails. Yes, Five Eyes as far as the US is concerned, is dead. Compromised agencies like the NIA, the CIA, FBI and the military, now, are no longer to be trusted. I've said as much on several comments to articles in the NYTimes which, no surprise, were not published. I wonder why. US media is also compromised and subservient to Trump and his media moguls. I absolutely agree with all you've written here with, perhaps, one caveat: I am very concerned for Zelensky's safety. Heretofore Ukraine's security services need only watch out for Russian assassination attempts. Now, because of Trump and his anti-Ukraine "ship of fools", they will have to watch out the US does not know his whereabouts. You can be sure it would be leaked to the Russians by any number of Trump's people. Say what you like about Zelensky but his asasassination would be an enormous morale blow to Ukraine and "gift from heaven" to Trump. "Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest". I said as much in a NYTimes comment-also not published (but not the quote from Henry II...that would be construed as a threat) .
I am already worrying about the possibility of Trump deciding to send US armed forces in Ukraine, to fight along the Russian troops...
Sounds too farfetched?
More likely he will pull out US forces when the EU answers his tariffs with their own. Funny how he demands Europe spend 5% on defense while he plans to cut 8% each of the next 5 years. Because there's a "big beautiful ocean" between? I'm sure he doesn't know about the mess U Boats made off the East Coast in 1942.
Logic and Trump administration don't go together, I suppose.
It's a waste of time trying to rationalize their actions. Greed and ignorance and "damn the consequences" are probably enough driving forces for the resulting chaos...
Pulling out the US tripwire forces is an invitation to Russians to invade the Baltic countries (at least), and sets the scene for the destruction of NATO from within, from the only state to invoke the Article 5 in all these decades of its existence.
Is perfectly within the possible.
Though easy to promptly kill: Dumpf can't do that without US bases in Europe.
Can't wait to see when exactly lord Edmure is going to demand from Ukraine limiting the size of its Armd Forces.
Just a correction: spending more money in defence and security is a necessity and is improving defence and security but is not good for economy (unless you develop something you may sell abroad).
DARPA. Silicon Valley. Nuclear Energy. Space tech.
Having battle-proven weapons in Ukraine is an excellent advertisement for European defense industry
Only total incompetents are creating economies that are not flourishing at the time of war.
Is a co-reason why I call our politicians 'zombie idiots'.
What is flourishin if you produce a stuff to destroy other stuff and fixing that broken stuff? Only companies involved in that useless destruction, other parts of society suffer. E.g. see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ds41zZzvZQ "The myth behind the economic benefits of war" and many other sources.
Mate, please, do not 'force' me to start listing a 'few' good books about economies at war (with other words: sorry, no YouTube videos are ever going to 'impress' me).
I think Western elites are now doing a perfectly fine job of dividing Western democracies into rival camps of pitchfork and torches people without Putin's help, and they have been for quite some time. Divide et impera. Only one side of this oligarchy believes in the traditional post-1990 security architecture, the other side believes in something else; what that is exactly is hard to say, but the 2016-era typing of Trump as an FSB plant has even gone out of fashion on CNN. He may well be, but perhaps it is less relevant if he is. Just like the last time, he got on the order of $100M from a certain Adelson. The ludicrous technofeudalist-cum-"libertarian" Musk bought his way into executive power with something like $40M, so what's $100M? $40 per West Bank Palestinian? Or an even "better" "deal"?
Tom, thanks for the review and your personal position. I would like to share some comments on the current situation.
When Ukraine was left without American aid a year ago, there was hope for its quick resumption, aid from Europe did not stop, the front held, the energy sector was not yet so badly damaged and missile and drone attacks were episodic.
Now there is no need to expect any aid or support from the US, European powers are going into "their" problems
https://nv.ua/ukr/world/geopolitics/viyskova-dopomoga-yevrosoyuzu-franciya-ta-italiya-mozhut-zavaditi-vidilennyu-20-mlrd-yevro-ukrajini-50492207.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawIobnhleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHdbZE7kWPJrWwJ5V_nGFclmkyGR-pcJln0UXgI-Kc26qPzghGTtB1LNVTg_aem_TezBVzMRQVEy0kVg7G3b0Q or even taking a pro-Russian (Orban and Fico) or pro-American (Tusk calls on Ukraine to closely cooperate with Trump) position, the front is rolling west, there is little left of the energy sector, the Russians have begun to destroy the oil and gas sector, and air attacks have become nightly and massive (267 drones last night!). Conclusion - Ukraine has no opportunity to wait for the situation to change in its favor and needs to agree to Trump's conditions in the hope of saving what is still intact, because even mega-aid from all Western allies taken together will not stop the destruction of the Ukrainian economy by air strikes.
Hi Tom,
Uniting Europe and defeating Pudding&Dump is nice but your recipe of cutting ties is not enough. The AfDs of Europe exist for a reason. And it is not that 1/4 and trending higher of the electorate are stupid and evil. Europe has been not in a cute crisis but in a long long stagnation. Most of the people are feeling poorer than a decade ago or two and rightly so. Living standards have been in a free fall. The afds are a result. For all the rant about our oligarchy, half of our industry is at the altar of the Green Gods to be sacrificed in a grand ceremony and the rest is overtaxed and over-regulated. Energy prices are exorbitant - for example. How to run steel mills, chemicals production? How can you create surplus that can go towards arms production!? If you work in an auto factory to be closed because EU mandarins through mandates are ruining a back-bone industry, for whom are you going to vote? Would you agree to be taxed (via higher inflation or straightforward higher taxes) to save Ukraine but not your job? If EU for example just doubles the CO2 credits (much more is being burnt on the front and behind it without being “credited”) traded, it will be a free lunch - energy prices will fall and industrial production will increase. But our idiots are looking for the net zero in 2050 in a burning and exploding world. As if had FDR and his “liberal” coalition around him lost WW2, Hitler and Co would have agreed to a UN, chapter of universal human rights, etc….
Of course it's not enough: could 'write a book' just listing the necessary measures.
The Dumpf whoever you name, is simply doing whatever possible to avoid russia turning into a chinese province. That much must be clear to a lemur somewhere east of Antananarivo. Some Ukraine is irrelevant for that purpose to him. Whatever it takes, including land, lifted sanctions and re-filled russian pockets with oil and gas money. Now, if that is a good or bad global policy, don't ask me. I can't make my mind. In any case that is what is happening (plus the money part of course).
That's like what they have in games. Your character may specialize in buffs or in debuffs.
* Previous administrations buffed their friends, leading the strongest alliance of this planet.
* The current administration debuffs other great powers and pushes them against each other, remaining secure and prosperous in its corner of the world.
Wrong. Trump is trying to turn the US into a Russian province.
Hi Sarcasto,
thanks for the many good piece. Since that seems to be a central issue for Ukrainian air defense, can they find alternatives to the U.S. Patriots? Can SAMP-T be deployed and trusted within a few months, or are there other alternatives? There's much information around but hard to find a trustworthy synthesis.
Moving to that in the Parts 4 and/or 5.
Waiting for parts 4 and 5.