musk is not "saving" anything. he's slamming the brakes on the economy

[unblock]

government spending is a key component of economic growth. the economy doesn't really care if it's "waste, fraud, or abuse" or actually serves some intended policy. any government spending stimulates the economy because it goes into the hands of someone who then uses it to buy goods and services or invests it, and the money then circulates to create more spending and investing and so on.

now, some government spending is more effective than others; most notably, spending on poor people tends to be a very effective stimulus because they are more likely to spend it locally and quickly, as opposed to rich people who may save it or send it overseas whether as spending or investment. but that's a bit of a nuance. all government spending stimulates the economy.

now, the government shouldn't spend willy-nilly, it should certainly make sure spending aligns with intended laws and policies. but from an economist's point of view, even spending that goes to a fraudster stimulates the economy because the fraudster will spend it on goods and services or invest it.

so *even if* their lies about massive "waste, fraud, and abuse" are accurate (which they are very not), suddenly stopping all of it is slamming the brakes on the economy. it's part of why GDPNow is currently predicting a 2.4% *contraction* for the first quester of 2025. negative growth. not less positive growth, actual negative growth.

uncertainty from tariff whiplash is getting more attention, and yes, that's certainly putting a lot of private investment on hold, hurting the economy. but the reduction in government spending is also directly damaging the economy.

note that this isn't politics as usual -- typically an administration opposed to certain spending builds more conservative numbers into *next year's* budget. musk is coming in and stopping payments *right now*, so it has an immediate effect on government spending and the economy.


a sitting president often gets credit or blame for an economy when they didn't necessarily have a huge impact on it.

this recession, however, is practically engineered by donnie and musk. there was *no* reason for the economy to go into a recession now, until they showed up and immediately went about ruining everything.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

1. Cutting jobs / spending to the poor (aged, disabled, children) has immediate impact on economy

Families that are living paycheck to paycheck have little or no discretionary spending to cut back on. They immediately have to "tighten their belts" even more and that means fewer goods: a little less food, a little less clothing, make do longer with what they have, wait another year to replace the fridge.

Cutting jobs also has an immediate impact.

Any beneficial effects from tariffs are years away from having the same degree of impact. Factories take a long time to build.

Thus expect TrumPain to last a year minimum and maybe his whole term, however abbreviated it might turn out to be or not.

[unblock]

2. There's no theoretical economic benefit from tariffs the way he's doing them

If tariffs were expected to be in place long term -- not even necessarily right now, but in the future -- then businesses could plan and build or expand u.s. manufacturing and such.

But with Donnie's on again, off again approach, why would anyone risk a capital expense that could be a money-loser depending on what mood Donnie is in down the road?

Of course, he's doing this as a shakedown. Affected industries need to kick back something to Donnie, or otherwise please him, to adjust policy. This is why he loves tariffs -- it gives him a tool to reward or punish industries or even individual businesses.

That's just businesses that were chugging along fine then tariffs came along and messed it up, so now they have to pay Donnie to fix the problem he created. Why would a business build a plant predicated on a certain tariff policy, they would be committing to being at his mercy.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. Both tRump and Muck got an economics degree from Wharton. . . . nt

[Hugin]

7. How much either attended or gained from the experience remains an open question...

It’s good you caught that.

Way back in the day, Wharton was very actively trying to recruit me. In retrospect, it’s probably a good thing I took a pass.

[unblock]

9. Wharton is excellent

Rest assured, Donnie and musk's understanding of economics is in spite of Wharton, not because of it.

Also, Donnie's Wharton experience was some kind of two-year undergraduate thing, not the usual MBA

[Hugin]

10. What you say is likely true and why the fraud squad is so eager to claim an association with it.

Like every snake oil salesman is a “Doctor”.

At the end of the day every educational experience is what one makes of the opportunity.

[GreenWave]

3. Bastard is rigging the government and economy to benefit himself.

Musk takes over FAA; NASA, etc... Pounds Rivian into submission. But do help Caucasian South African farmers...

[unblock]

6. Funny how the departments investigating musk were first on the chopping block

In some cases, the actual individuals involved.

It's infuriating what the media goes ape over when it comes to democratic scandals, compared to what they gloss over for republicans. It's almost as if they see everything from the Republican point of view. Funny that....

[Kid Berwyn]

5. Downturns is a great time to buy stocks.

And if you've got billions to spend, it's the best time.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

8. Even billionaires can get injured trying to catch falling knives. . . . . nt

[Kid Berwyn]

11. One can only hope it hurts bad.

Real bad.

[JCMach1]

12. Tariffs get a Recession, slashing government spending gets you

The D word.

A big one and probably no lube.