DarthOne
☦️
Mind telling us which?
Trump Investigations Thread
- Thread starter Rocinante
- Start date
He can find a way or else he isn't worth supporting.
I want to see tens of thousands of Federal employees jobless and facing destitution.
Fuck the managerial classes.
Vyor
My influence grows!
Sure.
Restarting the pipeline is impossible, the companies that wanted it have pulled out both in the US and in canada.
He has no authority to shrink the IRS by that much (and it would be a fucking bad idea to begin with).
50% of the government isn't even underneath the executive branch and the majority of the ones that are are military, pretty sure firing 100% of our military is considered a Bad Idea.
And while he could revoke all EOs from Biden, Bush, and Obama... that would be fucking retarded to do because most of them involve personal security?
Some people here would rather see our military shrink to pre Lincoln levels
Err... no?
The vast, VAST majority of the Federal government from an employee perspective is under the Executive Branch. Every "Departments of X" is an Executive Branch Agency. Any organization that the President appoints people to are part of the Executive Branch unless specifically set up as somehow separate by the law instituting it's creation (and that's... an arguably legal status that's never been upheld in court).
Every FBI agent, every person in the State Department, ever bureaucrat in the IRS, EPA, or Energy Department; every Treasury Agent, US Marshal, and other Federal police officer; ever Park Ranger or other National Park employee; everyone in Veterans Affairs, Interior, etc. They're ALL working for executive agencies. The entire Administrative State is part of the Executive Branch. The next largest branch, by employees, is the Judicial Branch, but that is limited to the Judges, clerks, and the various employees that work in the courthouses. The Justice Department, the Federal prosecutors, all those, those are under the Executive Branch too.
The issue with firing 50% of Federal government employees isn't that they aren't under the Executive Branch, likely some 70-90% are, the issue is that doing so will require massive court battles before it can happen... court battles that likely would take longer than four years to complete, which means that the next administration would have to then continue fighting them. Something I don't foresee any Democrat President doing so success would entirely depend on Republicans winning in 2028. Further, because of the nature of firings and hirings, you can be assured the courts WILL slap a temporary injunction on the matter to prevent it from happening until the case is full resolved.
I personally don't think firing 50% of the Federal government's employees is the right play, TBH. While it appears to the vengeful side of things, it won't actually help reform things. To reform things you need a more tactical approach. Nuke anything related to DEI, fire strategically and replace with people who will work to deradicalize institutions and are willing to stand up to radicals and refuse to budge. In that environment many of the worst will leave. I'd even suggest something like a hiring freeze for all Federal agencies, budget caps, and salary caps, as well as ending the expansive Federal benefits packages people can get. These have been major factors in the academia to govie pipeline as well as the ridiculous wealth disparity between the DC metro region and the rest of the country.
Blasterbot
Well-known member
The main reason to do a cut by percentage is to get around some protections for avoiding political firings. since there are protracted legal battles to fight when trying to fire a bureaucrat for cause. straight downsizing is the way around it. it has been so long since we cleared out the dead wood in these institution I would lean more towards over doing the initial wave and maybe needing to hire back some over the next few years than undershooting it and needing more waves.
I just want to point out that there are a lot of federal services/agencies that the day to day person kinda needs just to have a safe living environment, and to have a country that is effective and functional at the scale the US works at.
I can think of a few off the top of my head:
OSHA, Fish And Wildlife Service, Customs and Border Protection, the EPA, the IRS, US Marshals, Dept of Transportation, DoJ, USGS, FDA, and Dept of Energy just to name a few.
What Milie is doing in Argentina is only possible because Argentina does not have the global responsibilities, or internal realities of the US, even just in terms of geography.
It does not do Trump any favors to ask him to nuke large parts of the mundane gears that keep us from having rivers that catch fire, dams that fail, bridges that collapse on a regular basis, and keep the lights on.
I can think of a few off the top of my head:
OSHA, Fish And Wildlife Service, Customs and Border Protection, the EPA, the IRS, US Marshals, Dept of Transportation, DoJ, USGS, FDA, and Dept of Energy just to name a few.
What Milie is doing in Argentina is only possible because Argentina does not have the global responsibilities, or internal realities of the US, even just in terms of geography.
It does not do Trump any favors to ask him to nuke large parts of the mundane gears that keep us from having rivers that catch fire, dams that fail, bridges that collapse on a regular basis, and keep the lights on.
The IRS shouldn't even exist because federal income tax is fundamentally un-American and I would even argue is theft. AFUERA CHORROS DE MIERDA!
The EPA doesn't protect the environment it protect green retards AFUERA HIPPIES DE MIERDA!
DOJ should also not exist it has proven itself disloyal and infested with commies. Cerrarlo y que se jodan todos.
The FDA is as bad as the CDC so don't care if they go begging.
The EPA doesn't protect the environment it protect green retards AFUERA HIPPIES DE MIERDA!
DOJ should also not exist it has proven itself disloyal and infested with commies. Cerrarlo y que se jodan todos.
The FDA is as bad as the CDC so don't care if they go begging.
edgeworthy
Well-known member
Do people realize that the IRS does more than just collect Income Tax?
Arguably disbanding the IRS would also require changing the 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Arguably disbanding the IRS would also require changing the 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
No, not really.
I'm more a fan of burning the tax code down to a single page with no exceptions.
After that...the IRS shrink by default
Err... let's actually go through this list.
OSHA - Workplace safety and regulation isn't part of the remit of power to Congress in Article 1, the way they get around that is by the overly expansive interpretation of the Commerce Clause. Further, this isn't something that the Federal government even needs to be directly involved it, State governments can handle it.
Fish and Wildlife - Arguably justified for aiding in maintaining Federal land as well as Ocean management, both clearly areas of Federal responsibility.
Customs and Border Protection - Yup, very much the Federal government's responsibility, they've just been shirking it.
EPA - Now this gets complicated. There actually is an argument that the Federal government has a role to play in that a lot of pollution issues can cross state lines, and thus lawsuits and the like that are generated from such pollutive harm automatically would be in the Federal courts per Article 3. This does give some justification for a unified legal framework in regards to pollutants. On the other hand, it is very much captured by the Greens and likely needs to be brought down a few pegs because of that.
IRS - Sadly justified, and bear in mind IRS is subordinate to the Treasure Department. Treasury is going to need SOME group to manage taxation, but they still deserve a purge after their political antics under Obama.
US Marshals - There needs to be some form of Federal Law enforcement, and of the existing ones the US Marshals seem to be the least corrupt and politicized.
Department of Transportation - So this one does in fact have direct Constitutional justification. One of the explicit powers given to Congress was the authority to build and maintain postal roads for carrying mail and goods between the states... thus some department would need to exist to manage the building and maintaining of such roads. It also handles a lot of things that are legitimate under the commerce clause when it comes to regulating ACTUAL interstate commerce. That said, it likely could be cut down as the vast majority of transportation spending and work is done at State level, and using funding for the Dept. of Transportation is a popular way of bribing states to do things, which I find distasteful.
USGS - Now this is one I'm not entirely sure about? I can see where it came from and arguably it's constitutional justification (surveying, studying, and mapping Federal lands and territories). That said, I'm not sure if it is entirely justifiable now without vast land tracs that are explicitly held by the Federal government as territories.
FDA - One of those agencies dependent on a more expansive reading of the Commerce Clause, though one I think you can argue fits within the original intent. Really though the FDA shouldn't be able to regulate food and drugs produced and sold strictly within a single State. That said, likely needs a purge as they've gotten way to cozy with Big Pharma.
Department of Energy - This one is arguably the LEAST justified one here beyond perhaps as an organization to establish electrical standards for the country (under the Congressional power in article 1 to define a uniform standard of weights and measures). Beyond that though almost everything they do should be handled at State level, or be part of the DoD...
I disagree, simply because of how many companies operate across state lines, and that silo'ing by state might mean needed safety update after accidents don't get industry and nation wide dissemination.
The EPA needs some house cleaning, that we agree on; the fundamental mission of the agency is still valid, but the rad greens and intersectional left have poisoned otherwise reasonable actions and policies.
I can understand disliking DoT funding being used as a bribe/incentive structure between states and DC.
I think the USGS does much more than surveying these days, and is very valuable for earthquake mitigation research and aiding the Corp of Engineers in large domestic construction projects.
Also is rather useful for being a one-stop-shop for geospatial research that doesn't fall under NOAA.
Yes, the FDA does need to be cleaned up, but not abolished.
I mean I think the Dept or Energy is a weird case, where the precedent for it didn't really exist in 1776, and it's purview is rather specialized.
However, I'm rather sure we are better off with it, due to the specialized work they do with fissile and heavy metals that we probably don't want to trust to the private sector.
strunkenwhite
Well-known member
I would love to hear that argument since as far as I know the 16th amendment is about permitting an income tax, not requiring it or requiring the IRS to be involved in its collection.
DarthOne
☦️
@S’task, ladies and gentlemen. Once again proving himself to be the single braincell of this website
"Operating across state lines" =/= "Engaged in Interstate Commerce" under the original understanding of Interstate Commerce. To be engaged, under the original understanding, one has to actively be selling goods or services in a state the company is not based in. Employment doesn't really qualify as that's being done under the local branch most of the time. You also severely overestimate how many companies operate over state lines, the vast majority of businesses in the US are small businesses that only operate in their local regions and thus should exclusively fall under State regulation, but still have to conform to Federal laws that are overreaching into private business due to this overly expansive reading of the commerce clause.
Heck, the original purpose of the Commerce Clause wasn't even to regulate private businesses, it was to prevent the States from doing things like setting tariffs on internal trade.
Just so you're aware, you're doing a thing many Liberals do where you axiomatically assume Government is more responsible and moral that Private Industry. Why shouldn't we trust the Private Sector to handle these things? In fact, in many respects there's MORE ways to hold the Private Sector accountable for damage done by their actions than the Federal Government, they're both easier to sue AND can be held criminally liable under Local, State, and possibly Federal law. On the other hand, as we have seen there is very little that can be done to hold the Federal government accountable by people, and those in the Federal government are just as, if not more corrupt, than many people in private industry.
The underlying assumption that you're not speaking here is that you assume that Profit motive is inherently immoral and that those seeking it will always seek to maximize it to the detriment of others. Thus government agents, who are not motivated by profit, will not be at risk for cutting corners or taking actions that harm others in order to maximize profit. And while to a degree you're correct that government actors are not motivated by profit motive (at least institutionally, all government employees tend to be seeing how Federal government jobs tend to pay better than similar private industry jobs), they do have their own sets of motives that are overlooked: a desire for power and control being the most common among them.
stephen the barbarian
Well-known member
i'm going to give you my theory on governments.
their like a fire: useful when under control, dangerous when uncontrolled. they will both consume whatever is available to feed themselves and grow unless you you keep and eye on them.
Typhonis
Well-known member
Again, I disagree with the assertion that the Commerce Clause was never meant to regulate businesses who operate in more than one state/cross state lines for business purposes.
And none of what you said actually disproves why OSHA should be around for the safety factor that is not silo'd by states.
No, you mistake me worrying about profit for me worrying about corpo laziness and abuses, and not wanting that to translate to fissile materials and heavy metals.
I am not sure how much you know about the corpo excesses that happened in the western US during the Gilded Age, where for a long time the eyes of the nations were at most a Cav fort a county over, and 'company towns' were often run counter even US or state law, simply because no one could enforce the law on them regularly.
I simply don't trust many private entities with the level of work on fissile materials and heavy metals that the Dept of Energy does.
Vyor
My influence grows!
If I put up solar panels in my backyard and connect it to the grid, that power would then be available to the entire country.
The power grid is the largest and most interconnected infrastructure project ever devised, dwarfing even the internet.
If it doesn't fall under the commerce clause, nothing does.
Texas has thier own so...technically