Liberal Forum

I think the Supply Side Fairy is a bit pooped.


Trump’s Foreign Adventures Will Cost Taxpayers Billions

In the past, the US raised taxes to pay for military action. Now it’s piled onto the debt.

Franklin D. Roosevelt had a lot on his mind in the spring of 1942, as he girded the US for a long, brutal battle against the Axis powers in Europe and the Pacific. There was the daunting challenge of retooling factories to make bombs and tanks. The logistics of moving thousands of troops overseas and supplying them with uniforms and food. And the public-relations campaign to prepare Americans for the grim reality that many of the millions of young men drafted to fight wouldn’t be returning home. 


Amid all this hurried planning, the president was also preoccupied with another urgent question: How would the US pay for this enormous undertaking, which at the height of the war consumed the present-day equivalent of $250 million a day? FDR was determined not to simply pile up public debt. Instead, he made the hard case for funding the conflict “as we go,” in part by imposing higher taxes on corporations and a 94% tax rate on personal income above $200,000. Roosevelt cautioned Congress against “passing on to future generations more than their just share of its sacrifices and burdens.”

You don’t hear anything like that from the current occupant of the White House. Donald Trump clearly relishes sending the US military to flex his prerogatives around the world. He removed Venezuela’s president and has hinted he’d do the same in Colombia, suggested he’ll deploy troops to hunt drug cartels inside Mexico, vowed to seize control of Greenland “whether they like it or not,” put himself at the center of Gaza’s uneasy future, escalated his pressure campaign on Iran’s embattled regime and boasted about a plan to go into Nigeria “guns-a-blazing.” Yet Trump has been comparatively quiet about how much his ever-multiplying foreign adventures will cost—and who’ll get stuck with the bill.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-billions


The title is, of course, a double entendre.



I'm gonna give @Vegas  a chance to explain it.

President Trump. Greatest of all time. Thank God for President Trump.

Do any of you two time Scrub voters recognize the scent?

Don't tell me...

"We'll steal their oil to pay for it!"

Until fairly recently, American presidents had to win over the public before calling up troops. “Going all the way back to the War of 1812, in times of war, taxes were raised—by a lot,” says Linda Bilmes, a public finance professor at the Harvard Kennedy School and author of The Ghost Budget, a forthcoming book on wartime accounting. Voters needed to be convinced that the hard-earned dollars they were forced to surrender—along with the lives of their children—wouldn’t be squandered on some far-flung lark. During World War I, Woodrow Wilson argued tax hikes would ward off inflation and war profiteers. Harry Truman made hundreds of speeches insisting taxes were the “sensible and honest” way to pay for the Korean War, instead of trying to “escape the financial cost of defense by borrowing.” 

Of course, there’s no comparing Trump’s idiosyncratic portfolio of bombing runs and tactical strikes to the enormity of last century’s major wars. But the basic calculus—is it worth it, and how will we pay for it?—is the same for all commanders-in-chief weighing a military action of any size, Bilmes says. The difference is that, today, “we no longer discuss the cost of military operations.”


ibid 

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 8:52 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 8:52 am

I think the Supply Side Fairy is a bit pooped.


Trump’s Foreign Adventures Will Cost Taxpayers Billions

In the past, the US raised taxes to pay for military action. Now it’s piled onto the debt.

Franklin D. Roosevelt had a lot on his mind in the spring of 1942, as he girded the US for a long, brutal battle against the Axis powers in Europe and the Pacific. There was the daunting challenge of retooling factories to make bombs and tanks. The logistics of moving thousands of troops overseas and supplying them with uniforms and food. And the public-relations campaign to prepare Americans for the grim reality that many of the millions of young men drafted to fight wouldn’t be returning home. 


Amid all this hurried planning, the president was also preoccupied with another urgent question: How would the US pay for this enormous undertaking, which at the height of the war consumed the present-day equivalent of $250 million a day? FDR was determined not to simply pile up public debt. Instead, he made the hard case for funding the conflict “as we go,” in part by imposing higher taxes on corporations and a 94% tax rate on personal income above $200,000. Roosevelt cautioned Congress against “passing on to future generations more than their just share of its sacrifices and burdens.”

You don’t hear anything like that from the current occupant of the White House. Donald Trump clearly relishes sending the US military to flex his prerogatives around the world. He removed Venezuela’s president and has hinted he’d do the same in Colombia, suggested he’ll deploy troops to hunt drug cartels inside Mexico, vowed to seize control of Greenland “whether they like it or not,” put himself at the center of Gaza’s uneasy future, escalated his pressure campaign on Iran’s embattled regime and boasted about a plan to go into Nigeria “guns-a-blazing.” Yet Trump has been comparatively quiet about how much his ever-multiplying foreign adventures will cost—and who’ll get stuck with the bill.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-billions


The title is, of course, a double entendre.



I'm gonna give @Vegas  a chance to explain it.

What does it take to supply the idea anything else is possible tomorrow creating people demanding equal human rights to defy all they been since conceived daily here cradle to grave?

Educated idiot like you suggesting nobody knew genetic outcome are always alive as eternally separate soles daily here.

Blackvegetable » 17 Feb 2026, 12:58 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Feb 2026, 12:58 pm

Do any of you two time Scrub voters recognize the scent?

Ewww that smell.. can't you smell that smell??

Theres a 40 million gallon a day raw sewage creek flowing into the Potomac north of DC ... Maintained by DC Water on National Park Land.. It's been flowing for over a week and evidently Georgetown is smelling like a giant used child adult diaper.  They can't stop it for at least another week for repairs..  FEMA is on it. (Which means the poop smell will be present for the 250 year celebrations)

Of course it's Maryland Governor Wes Moore's fault, he should have made sure Washington DC managed their sewage properly and he should have made sure to monitor the federally controlled property the leak is on..

If it fits.. It's ****...
 

You think?

Blackvegetable » 18 Feb 2026, 6:26 am » wrote: ↑

18 Feb 2026, 6:26 am

Until fairly recently, American presidents had to win over the public before calling up troops. “Going all the way back to the War of 1812, in times of war, taxes were raised—by a lot,” says Linda Bilmes, a public finance professor at the Harvard Kennedy School and author of The Ghost Budget, a forthcoming book on wartime accounting. Voters needed to be convinced that the hard-earned dollars they were forced to surrender—along with the lives of their children—wouldn’t be squandered on some far-flung lark. During World War I, Woodrow Wilson argued tax hikes would ward off inflation and war profiteers. Harry Truman made hundreds of speeches insisting taxes were the “sensible and honest” way to pay for the Korean War, instead of trying to “escape the financial cost of defense by borrowing.” 

Of course, there’s no comparing Trump’s idiosyncratic portfolio of bombing runs and tactical strikes to the enormity of last century’s major wars. But the basic calculus—is it worth it, and how will we pay for it?—is the same for all commanders-in-chief weighing a military action of any size, Bilmes says. The difference is that, today, “we no longer discuss the cost of military operations.”

ibid

I am doing the taxes.. at first glance.. I gotta say.. 2025  and the BBB seems to be giving us more back surprisingly..  Mrs qualifies for an additional 6K deduction for over 65 years old folks..   I sense a plan to give them money to kill themselves faster... Harris wanted 6K per kid..  Trump pumps in 6K per dead... Even if they save it, it will probably be taxed on hand me down after departure to electric butterfly rainbow land,

I am not 100% there yet.. Detailed analysis will be provided as possible... I am curious if the BBB will help a schmuck like me.. I heard on average about 600$ more per filer..


 
 

JohnnyYou » 2 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

2 minutes ago

I am doing the taxes.. at first glance.. I gotta say.. 2025  and the BBB seems to be giving us more back surprisingly..  Mrs qualifies for an additional 6K deduction for over 65 years old folks..   I sense a plan to give them money to kill themselves faster... Harris wanted 6K per kid..  Trump pumps in 6K per dead...

I am not 100% there yet.. Detailed analysis will be provided as possible...

Over 65?   Are you younger than her?

BuckNaked » 18 Feb 2026, 7:00 am » wrote: ↑

18 Feb 2026, 7:00 am

Over 65?   Are you younger than her?

Yes..
 

JohnnyYou » 18 Feb 2026, 7:03 am » wrote: ↑

18 Feb 2026, 7:03 am

Yes..

you married an older lady?   Oh boy it’s ok pre 40s but in the 60s ?  Yikes 

Buck Naked » 18 Feb 2026, 3:38 pm » wrote: ↑

18 Feb 2026, 3:38 pm

you married an older lady?   Oh boy it’s ok pre 40s but in the 60s ?  Yikes 

Reverse role playing the theme from 50 shades of grey. remember the woman that trained the guy? She was a generation gap older than he was.

this will be in PG in less than an Hour. BV has to maintain is intellectual superiority with symbolism over substance behavior..