Good point, well made.

Is the problem not enough democracy, or too much?

No cabinet member wins an election for their post, nor are they generally named until after the election. Historically, it's the appointees who have won elections (generally senators and representatives) who tend to be, at least on paper, the least qualified to run their departments. When someone gets chosen who isn't a politician, it's actually been the rule that they tend to be the ones that are more likely to be career civil servants or otherwise experts in their department's purview. Whereas politicians are often tapped as a political favor, or simply because they are popular.

Donald Trump won the most votes in the most recent election. He won pretty decisively; his party also took over the House and Senate. Right now, a generic Republican is polling 8+ points ahead of the Democrats. Polls also indicate that the average American views the Democratic party more unfavorably on average. Trump himself has a significantly higher approval rating than Congress or President Biden when he left (although he is benefiting from the usual start of term boost).

If President Trump and many of his appointees are terrible picks for leadership (I think they absolutely are), it hardly seems that the problem here is lack of democracy. In terms of what Musk has done, Trump was very up front about wanting to gut foreign aid. People voted knowing that; it wasn't a secret. And, while it is bad policy, gutting foreign aid is broadly popular and has been for some time. So again, this is in line with democratic preferences, not against it.

There is certainly a greater democratic mandate for gutting foreign aid than Biden's massive expansion of immigration. He also used executive power alone for that. It's a deeply unpopular policy position. While people generally disagree about how much to decrease migration, actually increasing it polls worse nationally than Harris did in rural Southern counties. It isn't remotely popular. But Biden's expansion wasn't minor either. It was held up by COVID and court cases, but once it got going net migration ended up significantly higher across his one term (really more like half a term due to COVID) than it was during the entirety of the Bush II or Obama administrations. Adding 10.4 million residents is a much more drastic policy shift than rolling up a $40B budget into another department and reducing it, by any measure, and this was done without any legislative input. DEI expansion is a similar case, and polling suggests ending it is more popular than sustaining it.

For better or worse, the President has an extremely wide latitude for policy decisions, one that has only grown as Congress's disfunction has led to a long series of Presidents getting away with major policy changes by simply instructing federal departments to not enforce existing laws. Yet if anything, this is also more democratic, because turnout for Presidential elections is much higher and Congress is extremely far from proportional representation, not to mention gerrymandering, the filibuster, etc.

Easily the most disastrous Trump proposal is to make virtually all federal employees political appointees. Yet this is advocated for precisely because it is "more democratic." "Get rid of unelected government officials and make the state responsive to the electorate!"

Of course, a strong, independent bureaucracy is generally seen as one of the three or four core pillars of a successful modern state. Yet this is in large part precisely because popular policies are often bad policies, and the independent bureaucracy has a better idea about how to effectively manage their sector of the state and economy.

So, I'm not sure if the problem with a populist demagogue is a dearth of democracy. People knew who Trump was and what he planned to do and they voted for him. Obviously, the Democrats own abject failure to run a good campaign/candidate was part of their problem. However, a big part of Trump's win was because people were positively motivated for him.

That's completely ridiculous. The US government doesn't even have a health service, and barely an education service. And the resolution of the problem is anyway completely automatic, and built into the financial system. If the government overspends, inflation balances the books by effectively reducing everyone's wealth and earnings. That regime is then liable to be removed at the next election.

This is factually incorrect. The US has government provided healthcare for senior citizens and the poor. These are extremely large programs, particuarly because seniors consume a very disproportunate share of all healthcare. To Frank's point, US government spending on healthcare alone is higher than the OECD average per capita. Obviously, the system is horrendously dysfunctional in that we have higher government outlays, and then a huge private outlay on top of this, while still having fairly poor health outcomes. Yet it certainly isn't for lack of spending money and racking up debt.

In the US, K-12 education is handled at the local level. The US spends more per student than every OECD nation except for Switzerland. Federal spending is low because the feds mostly just do regulations and grant awards such as IDEA (for special ed), Title I (for low income), etc. The education system is comparatively much better than the healthcare system, and some US states top the world (e.g. Massachusetts is top three for all PISA categories), whereas others preform quite poorly.

But again, to Frank's point, it's not lack of spending that would be the problem here.

Mea culpa.

Is the problem not enough democracy, or too much? — Count Timothy von Icarus

:up:

I feel like the USA I grew up in is gone. — frank

What was it like?

I think Trump's vision of securing Canada and Greenland is genius. — frank

Does this dream of Manifest Destiny promise to bring the old USA back?

The presence of Musk, Vance, and Vought signals that visionaries are gathering around Trump. — frank

Musk and Zuckerberg run global empires whose fortunes will increase after having fellated Trump. The control of the communication environment is shrinking to the needs of predatory capitalists. MAGA is their mascot now.

It is so cute when it sits up and begs.

Does this dream of Manifest Destiny promise to bring the old USA back? — Paine

Step back and try to understand what's happening as if you're reading a history book. Be the psychologist, the anthropologist, the philosopher, etc...

I try to see through those lenses. But my personal and family quality of life will suffer if those changes occur. My workplace will change for the worse. My city will become more fearful and less diverse.

When you said that your old world had disappeared, you sounded excited by the prospect of a new one.

When you said that your old world had disappeared, you sounded excited by the prospect of a new one. — Paine

I loved what I thought the USA stood for. I'm broken hearted. This isn't really the place for that kind of expression though. It would be like crying into a pool of fucking sharks.

So, I'm not sure if the problem with a populist demagogue is a dearth of democracy. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Very sane post, as always. Trump is a demagogue, of that there is not a shred of doubt. But Elon Musk's activities are another dimension to his disastrous rule. Do peruse that article linked in the OP.

Why do you think he wants Greenland and Canada? — frank

The thought has crossed my mind. If so, that is a particularly odious kind of evil: at the one hand, deny climate change as strenuously as possible, dooming most life on the planet to catastrophe. One the other hand, profit from it, by any possible means.

Words fail me.

Any system that doesn't have proper safeguards is bound to such a fate, surely? — Outlander

But it does have layers of safeguards, very strict security requirements. But Musk and his troupe just barge in, basically saying 'Don't you know who we are??' and demanding access. Some of the Musk personnel didn't even have the level 1 security clearances required to gain authorisation. The story relates that some of the senior officials in those departments that tried to refuse Musk access were told that US Marshalls would be called and they would be arrested unless they complied. This is the outrage of it - there has been no vetting, no Congressional approval, no real authority beyond Musk invoking the support of Trump. (There's also a story circulating that some of those who tried to refuse access to Musk will now be facing indictment for interferring with Government enquiries.)

The US government doesn't even have a health service — unenlightened

"Fast fact: As of November 2022, Medicaid and Child's Health Insurance Program covered more than 91.7 million individuals in the United States."

Fast fact 2. The British NHS covers every citizen. The N stands for "National".

Fast fact 3. chttps://www.cnbc.com/2013/06/25/medical-bills-are-the-biggest-cause-of-us-bankruptcies-study.html

But I have already pled guilty and withdrawn my accusation.

Anyone else? Surely there must be an alarm bell ringing somewhere about this? — Wayfarer

As I've stated again and again. Elon Musk will be the most hated man in the US in the future. You see, it will be alright for the South African born billionaire to be hated even by the Trump crowd, as God-Emperor Trump cannot do anything else than his genius blessed acts. But Elon can go. Because this won't end happily, really. The man is bouncing too hard here and there.

Let's start from the basics. Musk owns a very overvalued car manufacture. Somebody now buying a Tesla will make a clear political statement. And that is bad. This is the reason just why corporate leaders usually try stay out of the media limelight. And the demand for Tesla has started to plummet dramatically. As he hasn't at all put on hold his previous business life, the way that classical a business leaders like McNamara did when becoming the Defense minister, giving the fig leaf to being in a government position, he has painted himself a clear target. And what about then SpaceX? How about it now, if SpaceX suddenly wins contracts to build rockets to Mars? Will that bring the country together as the Apollo-missions did? Will that feel like the country getting together and showing what the nation can do or will it be something else. Just ask yourself.

What basically is happening in the US is what happened in Hungary. Basically one should learn what Victor Orban has achieved in Hungary, as that would be the objective of Trump.

Here's the problem. Trump is too much mesmerized with the tariffs. Don't think that he will leave it this, to 30 days and forget about them. Nope, this is just the start and the nasty EU hasn't even been bullied yet. Usually these things work when the response IS NOT things like Canadians booing during the singing US national anthem. And in the end there will be a trade war and this will cause inflation, the "pain" that Trump is now hinting. Now what does this have to do with Elon? Everything. As he will cut things, then when things get bad, they will likely have to give aid to otherwise collapsing industries or financial institutions. So likely the cuts in the larger picture won't happen.

I guess the thinking is to make a shock and awe multifaceted attack immediately on everything and then hope that by the midterms everything will look rosy again. But that's unlikely. Elon is just so intoxicated about power that he's going all over places, even into domestic politics of other countries. That shows a lack of focus and serious breach of respect, which is typical for a billionaire who for example started manufacturing flame throwers because he was bored. But getting entangled in British and German domestic politics? Yes, you will take the center stage in a fancy ball if ogle and grope the wives of others. At first the couples might be just taken back, but soon fists will fly. It is Elon that will be the lightning rod and will take the hits. After all, he isn't part of the administration and Trump won't do anything to help others. That's not Trump.

Interesting what the views would be in a year from now.

:100:

Somebody now buying a Tesla will make a clear political statement. — ssu

I read an article, I think even before the election, about some lucky internet trader, who's making a small fortune selling these bumper stickers:

What basically is happening in the US is what happened in Hungary. Basically one should learn what Victor Orban has achieved in Hungary, as that would be the objective of Trump. — ssu

The media has been reporting the Republican infatuation with Orban for a long time https://wapo.st/40KD1NN . The Republican Party, or should we now say, the MAGA party, is clearly wanting to implement something similar.

They clearly did. They wanted something similar, yet they also got a lot with that. Notably Trump and also Musk, which the latter they might not have anticipated.

And do you know that under Orban, Hungarian military has gone into Africa, into Chad specifically, perhaps to act like the Russian Africa Corps (ex-Wagner)? When typical domestic politics is boring, do something exciting!



For Orban reality set limits here. The Hungarian contingent is supposed to be from 200 to 400 strong for two years and is there to help the Chadian military (and perhaps get lucrative deals for Hungary, read Orban). That's as much as the puny Hungarian armed forces can do in another continent. But it tells something about the thinking of these people.

For Trump and Musk, what is the limit? So why not annex Greenland and Panama and talk about expanding the territory of the US? It's not so wild off, isn't it? What possible could go wrong? That Denmark would raise it's military spending to 5% to protect itself from ...whom? Equally with the DOGE, why think about contracts and Congress approved spending, when you can simply stop it on the weekend?

This is why the Republicans by becoming the loyalist MAGA party are pinning everything on Trump and Musk, and just can now observe what they are getting.

Well, there is no effective opposition. The Democrats are in a complete muddle, leaderless and rudderless. All of the Republican opposition to the Musk oligarchy has been driven out or marginalised. Who honestly is going to listen to a Liz Cheney or Mitt Romney now? Trump doesn't even need to try and hound them, they've become irrelevant. The readers of NY Times and Washington Post are outraged, but they're the minority even if a sizeable minority.

What I think might bring Trump down is what I'm expecting him to deliver: an economic mess (if not catastrophe, and let's hope not). He still thinks, to this day, that the Chinese pay the American tarrifs on their exports and nobody can persuade him otherwise. He lives in an alternative reality, one devoid of fact, but the unfortunate thing is that tens of millions of people have decided to join him there.

What I think might bring Trump down is what I'm expecting him to deliver: an economic mess (if not catastrophe, and let's hope not). He still thinks, to this day, that the Chinese pay the American tarrifs on their exports and nobody can persuade him otherwise. He lives in an alternative reality, one devoid of fact, but the unfortunate thing is that tens of millions of people have decided to join him there. — Wayfarer

He will start to insist on the actions he talks about. No way to avoid that. This is why we will have the trade war. Rubio, clearly a normal Republican politician with a sane mind, will likely be pushed out at some time.

Let's look what actually has happened with Trump's idea of annexing Panama ...or more likely the Canal Zone.

Marco Rubio on his new job made his first trip to Panama:

PANAMA CITY, Feb 2 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday warned Panama's President Jose Raul Mulino that Washington will "take measures necessary" if Panama does not immediately take steps to end what President Donald Trump sees as China's influence and control over the Panama Canal.
Mulino, after the talks with the top U.S. diplomat in Panama City, signaled he would review agreements involving China and Chinese businesses, and announced further cooperation with the U.S. on migration, but reiterated that his country's sovereignty over the world's second busiest waterway is not up for discussion.

Here the MAGA-enthusiasts will declare victory of the Trump 4D-Chess of getting Panama to "review agreements involving China and Chinese businesses" and "announced further cooperation with the U.S. on migration" as obvious victories of the new US policy. Those are policies of a conventional Republican administration, unlike the possible annexation of the Canal Zone.

What they won't care about is that Panama's president reiterated that the "country's sovereignty over the world's second busiest waterway is not up for discussion". They won't understand that there's a price to pay for making someone do something by threatening their sovereignty. Above all, notice that Rubio didn't take up in any way what Trump was talking. Just read closely the Department of State brief about the meeting with Rubio and Mulino:

Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino and Foreign Minister Javier Martínez-Acha today in Panama City to address critical regional and global challenges. Secretary Rubio informed President Mulino and Minister Martínez-Acha that President Trump has made a preliminary determination that the current position of influence and control of the Chinese Communist Party over the Panama Canal area is a threat to the canal and represents a violation of the Treaty Concerning the Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal. Secretary Rubio made clear that this status quo is unacceptable and that absent immediate changes, it would require the United States to take measures necessary to protect its rights under the Treaty.

Secretary Rubio also emphasized the importance of collaborative efforts to end the hemisphere’s illegal migration crisis and thanked President Mulino for his support of a joint repatriation program, which has reduced illegal migration through the Darien Gap. The Secretary underscored the desire for an improved investment climate and ensuring a level playing field for fair competition by U.S. firms. The Secretary also praised President Mulino’s regional leadership in support of a democratic, free Venezuela.

Secretary Rubio expressed his gratitude for the productive discussion and underscored the United States’ dedication to making both nations safer, stronger, and more prosperous. He noted this meeting marks an important step in reinvigorating the strategic relationship between the United States and Panama, in line with President Trump’s vision.

OK. Is the annexation of the Canal Zone even been spoken of? NO! Such absurd ludicrous issue is not mentioned here, and what is likely simply been dropped is the Panamian insistence, which likely was said, that they have sovereignty to their own territory.

It all might go under the radar for a while, but in the end it won't do. Trump cannot tolerate that there would be "the adults in the room" that would water down his effeorts. The idea that "oh well, Trump just blurts these things out to get attention" won't fly.

As Elon Musk digs into the federal bureaucracy in his crusade to slash government spending, he has a tool that no aspiring cost-cutter has had before: his own giant social media platform to debate, shame and bludgeon anyone who stands in his way.

Since the inauguration, Mr. Musk has attacked journalists and X users for posting the names of people working with him, calling it “a crime.” He’s accused Treasury Department officials of “breaking the law every hour of every day.” And Mr. Musk has mocked Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, as “hysterical.”

On Monday, Mr. Musk celebrated his progress, posting he had fed the U.S. Agency for International Development, the government’s lead agency for humanitarian aid, “into the wood chipper.”

And on Tuesday, Mr. Musk began a poll on X: “Would you like DOGE to audit the IRS?”

The comments show how Mr. Musk, who unlike traditional government figures rarely holds news conferences or speaks to reporters, is using his social media site as a powerful tool to promote his goals as part of the Trump administration. Since the inauguration, Mr. Musk has unleashed a barrage of posts to his more than 215 million followers, promoting conspiratorial rumors about his adversaries, pressuring senators to confirm the president’s cabinet picks and weighing in on foreign elections.

On top of that, Mr. Musk’s account is becoming one of the few sources for information about the billionaire’s secretive stampede to slash the federal budget, an initiative he calls the Department of Government Efficiency.

X has given Mr. Musk an unusual avenue to showcase his unapologetically confrontational approach to cost cutting in a way that appeals to President Trump’s base, tech policy experts said.

“The performative aspect of this is key. It’s a big part of what populism is,” said Sarah Kreps, the director of the Cornell Brooks School Tech Policy Institute. “To be able to have this very visible shake-up really is important to the constituency that rose the administration to power.”

Mr. Musk and a spokeswoman for the cost-cutting initiative did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Mr. Musk’s transformation of X into his political megaphone began when he bought the social media company in October 2022. The next year, he became the most followed person on the site. Engagement with his posts has since mushroomed, according to X’s metrics, making him the loudest voice on the platform.

Now, Mr. Musk, who is chief executive of Tesla and SpaceX, has charged into his new role to cut government spending, swiftly moving to transform at least half a dozen government agencies, challenging congressional authority and potentially breaching civil service protections.

His project has worked to shut down U.S.A.I.D. Leaders of the cost-cutting initiative have also pushed out top officials there and at the Treasury Department who objected to the actions of his representatives, and ended leases on government office spaces.

As part of those efforts, Mr. Musk has used his X account to critique federal agencies in his cross hairs. U.S.A.I.D. is “evil” and “a criminal organization,” Mr. Musk wrote in separate posts on Sunday.

Lawmakers including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, and Mr. Schumer have accused Mr. Musk of overreach.

Early Tuesday, Mr. Musk reposted a comment by Mr. Schumer, who said Congress must stop what amounted to an unauthorized hostile takeover of the government.

“Hysterical reactions like this is how you know that DOGE is doing work that really matters,” Mr. Musk said in response to Mr. Schumer. “This is the one shot American people have to defeat BUREAUcracy, rule of the bureaucrats, and restore DEMOcracy, rule of the people.”

Mr. Musk’s business portfolio, which relies in part on government contracts and subsidies, has raised conflict-of-interest concerns, although Mr. Trump has brushed off those fears.

After Ms. Ocasio-Cortez criticized Mr. Musk’s conflicts of interest, Mr. Musk replied, “Do you actually write these or am I replying to your intern?”

Mr. Musk also turned to the platform in recent days to defend those working on his initiative. The billionaire has likened identifying those assisting his cost-cutting effort to doxxing, an online harassment tactic that involves posting private information like addresses and phone numbers.

After several workers’ names were published in media reports, X removed some posts on the platform that publicized the employees’ identities and suspended some accounts that had shared the information.

“Don’t mess with @DOGE,” Mr. Musk wrote in a post on Monday night in response to people attempting to name and shame the workers.

Mr. Musk also boasted on X about the removal of the account for 18F, a digital services agency that is part of the General Services Administration. After fans raised concerns about projects the agency had worked on, including one that critiqued racial bias in facial recognition systems, Mr. Musk posted that the agency was “deleted.”

While its X account is gone, the agency so far has survived. — Elon Musk’s X Becomes Weapon in Government Cost Cutting

Not for long, one must surmise.


Source
Some of the nefarious activities undertaken by the criminal organisation.

The big picture as I see it is that what has been for decades happening more covertly and to a lesser extent is now beginning to happen more overtly and to a greater extent. This is exactly what should be expected. Desperate times lead to desperate measures. Trump has a mandate from the US electorate and so far seems to be doing exactly what he said he would.

The biggest problem with democracy is that the majority of electors are stupid, gullible, don't really understand the issues or don't really care about anything much beyond improving or preserving their living conditions, of which the most important elements apart form food, shelter and clothing are entertainment, comfort and convenience.

He still thinks, to this day, that the Chinese pay the American tarrifs on their exports and nobody can persuade him otherwise. — Wayfarer

He also doesn't have a clue what trade deficits mean. He believes that when Country A buys less stuff from County B than the reverse, this is a clear case of A ripping B off... unless Country A is the U.S.A., of course.

Around 8 p.m. on Sunday, a USAID staffer pushed forward $78 million for food and shelter to Palestinians living in Gaza. Two hours later, that staffer and contractors working in over 100 countries were locked out of their email accounts. Then just past midnight, staff received an email from Gavin Kliger, a young engineer working for Elon Musk, announcing that headquarters was closed for business. By Monday morning, the U.S. government agency that sends assistance to tens of millions of the world’s neediest people “from the American people,” as its motto states, was effectively dead.

Over the past 72 hours, a dozen sources recounted the final days of the U.S. Agency for International Development before an effort led by Musk and supported by President Donald Trump crippled the agency and put it under the control of Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is now acting director. It appears to be the first of an untold number of federal agencies that the Trump administration seeks to remake without the approval of Congress. Democrats have accused the administration of breaking the law.

As the agency began to crumble under an attack from its own government, staffers worked frantically to send money keeping hospitals and soup kitchens from Gaza to Sudan running, saying that people may die as a result of the chaos. As of Monday afternoon, they were trying to send $305 million to the World Food Program. “We’re blowing through all the normal processes to get this out as quickly as possible,” says one staffer. Employees couldn’t even tell their partner organizations, with which they were communicating regularly as recently as last week, how much money was coming. “I don’t think anyone has any idea what’s going on.” — New Yorker

Many people will die because of these actions. Perhaps that's OK with the American electors, although you can bet that their chosen media outlets will not report it.

Foreign aid (think USAID) has been unpopular for decades, mostly because of a gross misunderstanding. Polls reveal that quite a few people think foreign aid is one of the largest expenses in the Federal budget. It is not! All forms of foreign aid amount to no more than 1% of the federal budget. As a share of GNI, it's is a minuscule amount. Still, the USA is one of the largest donors -- in total dollars, not as a share of our resources.

The US is actually not all that generous, in terms of capacity to give: As a share of income, Norway gave 1.1% of its GNI [gross national income] and topped the list in 2023, followed by Luxembourg (1%), Sweden (0.9%), Germany (0.8%) and Denmark (0.7%). The U.S. gave 0.24% of its GNI in official development assistance, ranking No. 26 on the list.

In a democracy there is no way to limit government spending. Only an entity who does not answer to the people can do that. — frank

Of course there is: President Clinton's 1993 Economic Plan included $255 billion in spending cuts over five years.

Congress can cut future spending and fail to appropriate funds for previously approved spending. The president can veto spending bills, and unless congress overrides the veto, it stands. Congress can eliminate whole categories of spending. If the congress should so choose, it can eliminate the Education Department, for example. Or the Defense Department -- just don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. States are more responsive to budget pressures because there is no such thing as "state's debt". If tax collection shrinks--as it sometimes does--spending has to also shrink.

Trump may think he is anointed by God to Rule, Reign, and Ruin, but Congress actually is the source of program creation and spending.

Trump may think he is anointed by God to Rule, Reign, and Ruin, but Congress actually is the source of program creation and spending. — BC

That's the design, but the GOP leadership is letting Trump do whatever he wants.

The presence of Musk, Vance, and Vought signals that visionaries are gathering around Trump. — frank

Perverse visionaries!

But, remember, this guy has never been elected to any public office. — Wayfarer

"Unelected bureaucrat is appointed by President to cut costs associated with bureaucratic bloat."

As has been pointed out, Musk is the democratic bureaucrat, given that his job derives from a mandate. So if we are using principles of democracy to calculate whether the bureaucracy that Musk represents or the bureaucracy that Musk opposes should win out, obviously the bureaucracy that Musk represents wins out. Musk's job is to address the budget problem, and this is something the citizens of the U.S. have been desiring for decades. The U.S. debt is $36.4 trillion and counting.

Perverse visionaries! — BC

He didn't have any ideology the first time around. He does now. That was my point. But you know the European aristocracy said the same thing about the founders of the Enlightenment. Perverse! History is written by the...

As has been pointed out, Musk is the democratic bureaucrat, given that his job derives from a mandate. — Leontiskos

In what sense, derives from a mandate? He has been summarily appointed, without Congressional or Senate oversight, and the barest of instructions, no guidelines, and not even the appropriate security clearances. Of course the US debt is an international calamity, and economic collapse is a real possibility. But having an unelected, unsupervised oligarch making unilateral decisions that affect millions of lives and thousands of employees is not any kind of solution to that.