I’m trying to understand why what you presented—nice and helpful presentation and lists —is necessarily a bad thing. Do you have a philosophy of what the federal government should do and not do? Do you have a view as to the proper % of GDP the federal government should process? Are all government programs sacrosanct? Project 2025 has a c…
I’m trying to understand why what you presented—nice and helpful presentation and lists —is necessarily a bad thing. Do you have a philosophy of what the federal government should do and not do? Do you have a view as to the proper % of GDP the federal government should process? Are all government programs sacrosanct? Project 2025 has a coherent philosophy. Just attacking it without a countervailing philosophy seems to me to be unhelpful. But again thank you for the list.
To call Project 2025 a coherent philosophy is very interesting. Could you explain that philosophy cause it seems far from coherent to me. It's certainly not set up to reduce the deficit or promote peace.
Perhaps an overstatement. A comprehensive process to reduce the scope of the federal government, rather than a coherent philosophy. When you ask people, they support that goal of shrinking government and shrinking the deficit—-in abstract. If you want to counter Project 2025, just calling it the destruction of America doesn’t cut it, you need to offer an alternative. The past administration, and the Obama adminstration offered an alternative—-massive government growth—and I don’t think it has turned out well, or accomplished much other than handicapping the younger generation with unsurmountable debt.
You're still missing the point. Libertarians have been repeating your arguments for years. We live in a nation where we have the right to make these arguments come to fruition through Congress, not through the actions of someone who wistfully self-fetishes as an American version of Rodrigo Duterte.
The vast majority of programs being slashed by Project 2025 have already been allocated by congressional law. The fact that Congress is now populated by his sycophants and is abandoning its responsibility to itself does not change the argument that those of us who object to Project 2025 are making.
As for the claim that my headline is hyperbolic? Deal with it.
I’m trying to understand why what you presented—nice and helpful presentation and lists —is necessarily a bad thing. Do you have a philosophy of what the federal government should do and not do? Do you have a view as to the proper % of GDP the federal government should process? Are all government programs sacrosanct? Project 2025 has a coherent philosophy. Just attacking it without a countervailing philosophy seems to me to be unhelpful. But again thank you for the list.
There is a process for addressing government spending. Google “schoolhouse rocks.”
They're violating every constitutional principle this country has been governed by for two centuries.
To call Project 2025 a coherent philosophy is very interesting. Could you explain that philosophy cause it seems far from coherent to me. It's certainly not set up to reduce the deficit or promote peace.
Perhaps an overstatement. A comprehensive process to reduce the scope of the federal government, rather than a coherent philosophy. When you ask people, they support that goal of shrinking government and shrinking the deficit—-in abstract. If you want to counter Project 2025, just calling it the destruction of America doesn’t cut it, you need to offer an alternative. The past administration, and the Obama adminstration offered an alternative—-massive government growth—and I don’t think it has turned out well, or accomplished much other than handicapping the younger generation with unsurmountable debt.
You're still missing the point. Libertarians have been repeating your arguments for years. We live in a nation where we have the right to make these arguments come to fruition through Congress, not through the actions of someone who wistfully self-fetishes as an American version of Rodrigo Duterte.
The vast majority of programs being slashed by Project 2025 have already been allocated by congressional law. The fact that Congress is now populated by his sycophants and is abandoning its responsibility to itself does not change the argument that those of us who object to Project 2025 are making.
As for the claim that my headline is hyperbolic? Deal with it.