[neonstatic]

I think pinning this on one guy is a gross oversimplification driven by personal dislike for that guy. In my opinion larger forces are at play. I don't mean it in a conspiratorial way; simply put, the structure of global trade, economy, military power, etc. have shifted to such a degree, that this process has become inevitable.

[ferfumarma]

The Clinton administration ran a budget surplus

[dannyfritz07]

He ran a surplus by (In Bill Clinton's own words) "ending welfare as we know it". This was his description of the Personal Responsibility Act he signed. That attack on labor and bolstering of the financial markets was a huge contributor to our economic disasters. Keynesian was never meant to be a permanent solution to a growing capitalism system. And the Hayekian system we have now is just pillaging by neoliberals.

[tasuki]

> ending welfare as we know it

> That attack on labor

How is ending welfare an "attack on labor"?

(I live in a welfare state and am quite happy about it, despite it having very real financial consequences for me. Welfare state does not benefit "labor", but rather benefits the various people who either can't or don't want to perform labor)

[dannyfritz07]

Why do laborers have to work for the right to live when capitalists only have to provide capital and are always assumed to be worthy? Capital and labor is combined to produce new capital. Yet we only expect labor to prove their worth. We're always holding labor's feet to the fire and killing them through policy that allows their poverty by assuming they are lazy.

There is basically zero consequence for capitalists when they decide to withhold capital from laborers. Therefore taking away labor's ability to generate new capital. They took down the entire rust belt by doing this. Why shouldn't we hold them accountable? Why does everyone blame labor and say welfare is only for people in poverty?

[tasuki]

> Why do laborers have to work for the right to live

I don't know why, but this is sort of the definition of a laborer, no? Someone who labors.

People who live on welfare are – by definition – not laborers. That was my whole point: "ending welfare" is not "an attack on labor", it's an attack on non-labor.

[dannyfritz07]

I reject your definition of welfare. You're thinking far too narrowly about the benefit to society by taking care of your citizens' needs.

[neonstatic]

Again, that's a domestic issue. It was at a time, when all US adversaries were either in trouble or not stabilized yet.

[throwaway315314]

Because such a system isn't just sunshine and rainbows like OP mentions and has real costs like ever increasing debt burdens and wealth and social inequality which naturally create political instability as lower classes and institutions become increasingly stressed. Trump is just a symptom of sentiment created by these consequences.

[LightBug1]

There is nothing inevitable about strategically moronic war, a super power supporting an ethno-religious genocide, and an orange dildo ripping up international order.

[neonstatic]

You insist on making it about this administration and your dislike for it, when I am talking about wider shifts like China's ascent, America's de-industralization, Europe's stagnation, drone revolution, shale revolution...

This admin's shortcomings don't need to be listed, anyone with eyes can see. I will just remind you about Biden's "minor incursions" comment, that opened to the door to invasion of Ukraine...

[LightBug1]

I'm not insisting on anything.

I'm fully conscious of tectonic plates shifting and creating huge change and the need for response. But, again, none of what we've seen the current admin engaged in has been inevitable.

And no, comparing to Biden will not do here. I couldn't care less really about which side is in power (except when there is significant spillover like now). I'm outside of the USA. But I have never seen anything so ridiculous as the current "strategic" choices of the current admin.

[neonstatic]

I am outside of the USA too. And I don't care either. Plus, once again, when I said inevitable, I meant the process of US losing it's primacy, not whatever this admin is doing.