My guess is that those who have already retired won't be affected, both because of the situation you mentioned, in addition to the fact that the elderly vote...big time.
So my guess is the older Gen X folks and Boomers will go on as is, while the younger Gen X, Millennials and Gen Z on down will have to pay in more while also getting their benefits reduced to offset the huge gap. Aside from raising revenue (and the incoming admin wants to do the opposite of that), I don't see any other way.
What about those in their 40's. Let's use my nephew as an example. He works for a large insurance company, makes a hell of a salary (over 100k). He's worked for them for roughly 18 years and has moved up the ladder. He's paid into SS for all that time.
He'll receive nothing or little at retirement. So maybe now, he'll get a big tax break and that's good for him. So he can save more for retirement. I'd have taken that deal back then..
Here's the problem.. The money he's paying in now is paying for me. I paid for my parents, he's paying for me. Sooner or later, the cash flow will come to an end.
The real problem is those in their 50's and 60's that have NOT yet retired.
My Brother in law hasn't retired. He's 65 and doesn't want to retire until he has too. (70 is his companies mandatory age).. He's paid in his whole life... Is he safe or is he screwed?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
I’m in my 40s. I resemble your nephew. A lot of people don’t realize that millennials are as old as we are now. Some distorted image that we’re still young kids or something.
And yes, that is a problem. We are paying in to support the generation(s) ahead of us, but the chickens will come home to roost.
Someone will have to start paying for the generation that saw our country go from being the world’s biggest creditor to the world’s biggest debtor.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
Wonder when last time Ballpeen was in an actual REAL classroom- public HS, Jr HS, or elementary school...I'd bet not recently. He's dated, like me with wetback and queer comments- no current understanding of society. OCD- sure things- death and taxes.....but you nailed it---change is a constant.
But, history repeats, just in different forms. Some traditionalist would say- how dare you change military base names- Bragg, Stewart,etc, etc- why not continue to honor Confederate soldiers--- easy in my book- a large percentage of our population isn't happy with honoring former citizens who left the Union, southern heritage sure exalts STATES rights vs. FEDERAL rights.....keep telling yourself that--that's bogus---slavery was the issue, economics was the issue, white land barons with black slaves suffering was the issue---- I'm glad we finally changed the names of bases and moved the statues from key spots in our cities-- long overdue.
Change for the good for ALL people is good. Peace and almost Merry Chrismas. I'm a white, former Rep, and ex-military.
"You've never lived till you've almost died, life has a flavor the protected will never know" A vet or cop
This is nothing new. Many Europeans showed up pregnant at Ellis Island. Not yet legal citizens and nobody had an issue then. What’s your beef? The constitution was written to protect all citizens born in the USA and is clearly stated in our constitution.
The beef is, and always been, people that enter illegally.
that might be your beef individually, but the masses aren't making that distinction much anymore.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I’m at the vanguard of the millennials, like you are with X. We did have it pretty tough. Graduated from law school, which I paid for, in 2009 right after all the ish hit the fan. Had my job at a larger firm pulled from me. Worked at a sweat shop for two years making peanuts for backbreaking work because graduating JDs at the time were a dime-a-dozen.
Youngest of six kids which include Boomers, X and me as a millennial. My middle-child brother and I are the only two who don’t have some sort of dumpster fire going on in life. I get to be the executor of my mom’s estate and she doesn’t take a word of my advice, which makes for a lot of fun, haha.
i got saved from a lot of that economic struggle stateside because i was deployed so much when i joined the army at 18 in 2006. i just got orders to Germany in 2007 when people were starting to worry about the potential crash, and deployed to iraq early 2008 while all of that was going on.
i remember being 20 years old in the middle of the desert getting ready for another convoy op, listening to civilian contractors who work for KBR that we were escorting discussing the economy. even after the tax free checks we get, i maybe made 45k the whole year deployed? those contractors that we escorted were semi-truck drivers, same job as my unit, making over 200k a year. just thinking back on it now, its crazy that i was part of an illegal war getting peanuts, while the defense contractor guys made over 100k easy and making fun of all the people hurting back home. and all i could do was keep my mouth shut.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
This is nothing new. Many Europeans showed up pregnant at Ellis Island. Not yet legal citizens and nobody had an issue then. What’s your beef? The constitution was written to protect all citizens born in the USA and is clearly stated in our constitution.
The beef is, and always been, people that enter illegally.
that might be your beef individually, but the masses aren't making that distinction much anymore.
Correct, it’s undocumented migration and it’s been happening since the beginning of our great country. Nothing new but the legal process. It’s become the bottle neck. When the great migration happened on Ellis Island they could have immigrants processed in hours. And they had hundreds of children born on the island. Didn’t seem to be that big of a deal. USA was great enough to handle it then.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
You are imaging things at this point to semi support riots.
And he isn't even the president.
Quote
I don't understand your point of mass deportations with soldiers on the streets? I would say deport the wetbacks and put the soldiers in hotel rooms and give them spending cards. Screw the illegals
You keep showing us who you really are. If you're born in this country you are a citizen of this country. That's the law according to the constitution. It doesn't allow for exceptions. I know it isn't the second amendment so you probably don't care about it but all of the constitution counts the same. Not just the parts that you like and even includes the people you call racial slurs.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
That includes every visa that has expired too. It also includes naturalized citizens in Trumps mind. So, Elon might not realize that is what he is… the first poor person the denaturalize, dems will call for Melania’s and Elon’s deportation. Just to prove a point of course.
And what happens when they run out of brown people? Who’s next? Those at the top don’t ever know when enough is enough… we live in disturbingly interesting times. I’m actually beginning to feel Trump will kill the MAGA movement all by himself during these next four years. And I would still like to know if he SOLD his presidency to Elon. I’m thinking he did after the display of leadership this week. We’ll see how that goes. But they have definitely started an Oligarchic rule. FAFO Nation.
No.
You should get our of the screaming left echo chamber and take a breath.
I’m at the vanguard of the millennials, like you are with X. We did have it pretty tough. Graduated from law school, which I paid for, in 2009 right after all the ish hit the fan. Had my job at a larger firm pulled from me. Worked at a sweat shop for two years making peanuts for backbreaking work because graduating JDs at the time were a dime-a-dozen.
Youngest of six kids which include Boomers, X and me as a millennial. My middle-child brother and I are the only two who don’t have some sort of dumpster fire going on in life. I get to be the executor of my mom’s estate and she doesn’t take a word of my advice, which makes for a lot of fun, haha.
i got saved from a lot of that economic struggle stateside because i was deployed so much when i joined the army at 18 in 2006. i just got orders to Germany in 2007 when people were starting to worry about the potential crash, and deployed to iraq early 2008 while all of that was going on.
i remember being 20 years old in the middle of the desert getting ready for another convoy op, listening to civilian contractors who work for KBR that we were escorting discussing the economy. even after the tax free checks we get, i maybe made 45k the whole year deployed? those contractors that we escorted were semi-truck drivers, same job as my unit, making over 200k a year. just thinking back on it now, its crazy that i was part of an illegal war getting peanuts, while the defense contractor guys made over 100k easy and making fun of all the people hurting back home. and all i could do was keep my mouth shut.
Ohhhhhhh defense contractors…..
You bring up another good point. I can’t say this definitively, but I would speculate that our generation makes up the largest population of the primary fighting force for the two longest wars in US history.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
Trump again calls to buy Greenland after eyeing Canada and the Panama Canal
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — First it was Canada, then the Panama Canal. Now, Donald Trump again wants Greenland.
The president-elect is renewing unsuccessful calls he made during his first term for the U.S. to buy Greenland from Denmark, adding to the list of allied countries with which he’s picking fights even before taking office on Jan. 20.
In a Sunday announcement naming his ambassador to Denmark, Trump wrote that, “For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.”
Trump again having designs on Greenland comes after the president-elect suggested over the weekend that the U.S. could retake control of the Panama Canal if something isn’t done to ease rising shipping costs required for using the waterway linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
He’s also been suggesting that Canada become the 51st U.S. state and referred to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “governor” of the “Great State of Canada.”
Stephen Farnsworth, a political science professor at the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Virginia, said Trump tweaking friendly countries harkens back to an aggressive style he used during his days in business.
“You ask something unreasonable and it’s more likely you can get something less unreasonable,” said Farnsworth, who is also author of the book “Presidential Communication and Character.”
Greenland, the world’s largest island, sits between the Atlantic and Arctic oceans. It is 80% covered by an ice sheet and is home to a large U.S. military base. It gained home rule from Denmark in 1979 and its head of government, Múte Bourup Egede, suggested that Trump’s latest calls for U.S. control would be as meaningless as those made in his first term.
“Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale,” he said in a statement. “We must not lose our years-long fight for freedom.”
Trump canceled a 2019 visit to Denmark after his offer to buy Greenland was rejected by Copenhagen, and ultimately came to nothing.
He also suggested Sunday that the U.S. is getting “ripped off” at the Panama Canal.
“If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America, in full, quickly and without question,” he said.
Panama President José Raúl Mulino responded in a video that “every square meter of the canal belongs to Panama and will continue to,” but Trump fired back on his social media site, “We’ll see about that!”
The president-elect also posted a picture of a U.S. flag planted in the canal zone under the phrase, “Welcome to the United States Canal!”
The United States built the canal in the early 1900s but relinquished control to Panama on Dec. 31, 1999, under a treaty signed in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter.
The canal depends on reservoirs that were hit by 2023 droughts that forced it to substantially reduce the number of daily slots for crossing ships. With fewer ships, administrators also increased the fees that shippers are charged to reserve slots to use the canal.
The Greenland and Panama flareups followed Trump recently posting that “Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State” and offering an image of himself superimposed on a mountaintop surveying surrounding territory next to a Canadian flag.
Trudeau suggested that Trump was joking about annexing his country, but the pair met recently at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida to discuss Trump’s threats to impose a 25% tariff on all Canadian goods.
“Canada is not going to become part of the United States, but Trump’s comments are more about leveraging what he says to get concessions from Canada by putting Canada off balance, particularly given the precarious current political environment in Canada,” Farnsworth said. “Maybe claim a win on trade concessions, a tighter border or other things.”
He said the situation is similar with Greenland.
“What Trump wants is a win,” Farnsworth said. “And even if the American flag doesn’t raise over Greenland, Europeans may be more willing to say yes to something else because of the pressure.”
Trump has tapped an unprecedented 13 billionaires for his administration. Here's who they are
The nominees make up the richest presidential administration in modern history.
President-elect Donald Trump has assembled the wealthiest presidential administration in modern history, with at least 13 billionaires set to take on government posts.
They include a wrestling magnate, a private space pioneer, a New York real estate developer, the heir to a small appliance empire, and the wealthiest man on the planet -- with several being donors and close personal friends of the incoming president.
In total, the combined net worth of the wealthiest members of his administration could surpass $460 billion, including Department of Government Efficiency co-head Elon Musk -- whose net worth of more than $400 billion exceeds the GDP of mid-sized countries.
Even discounting Musk, Trump's cabinet is still expected to be the wealthiest in history, with reported billionaires Howard Lutnick nominated as commerce secretary, Linda McMahon nominated as education secretary, and Scott Bessent nominated as treasury secretary. Together, Trump's expected cabinet is worth at least $7 billion.
Trump's ambassador picks also include several billionaires, including financier Warren Stephens, who has been tapped to serve as the ambassador to the United Kingdom, Conair executive Leandro Rizzuto Jr., tapped to serve as the ambassador to the Organization of American States, Charles Kushner, named the ambassador to France, and Tom Barrack, named the ambassador to Turkey.
"It's not a surprise that [Trump] surrounds himself with people who come from the same world that he does," said Jordan Libowitz, vice president of communications for the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. "The billionaire class of businessmen is who he is and who he wants to be seen as, and who he wants to be seen with."
The wealth of Trump's current cabinet rivals only that of his first-term cabinet -- which had a combined net worth of $3.2 billion -- and dwarfs the $118 million combined net worth of President Joe Biden's cabinet.
During Trump's first term, his secretary of education, Betsy DeVos, boasted the highest net worth, with Forbes estimating it to be roughly $2 billion. In contrast, the wealthiest official in the Biden administration is White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients, whose disclosures from 2021 showed his net worth ranging between $90 million and $443 million.
While it's common for people with careers in business to serve in government, watchdog groups told ABC News that ultra-rich individuals with complex financial backgrounds and previous business dealings raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest.
"Being wealthy by itself is not a disqualifier," said Kedric Payne, senior director of Ethics at Campaign Legal Center, formerly deputy chief counsel of the Office of Congressional Ethics. "It's just simply the potential conflicts of interest that are the concern."
"The American people re-elected President Trump by a resounding margin giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail, and his Cabinet picks reflect his priority to put America First," Trump-Vance transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told ABC News. "President Trump will continue to appoint highly-qualified men and women who have the talent, experience, and necessary skill sets to Make America Great Again."
Under federal ethics laws, Trump's wealthy nominees and appointees will have to divest themselves of stock holdings that could raise conflict issues, and will be required to release their financial disclosures. It's not yet clear if Musk and Ramaswamy will fall under the disclosure requirements, due to their DOGE positions being described as "outside" of the government -- despite the potentially massive impact they could have on the government.
"Luckily, there are laws in place that address this specific problem, and they're typically enforced," Payne said.
The Office of Government Ethics will review presidential nominees and appointees' assets and financial interests before the Senate confirmation process, and provide advice on how to avoid conflicts of interests if they are confirmed, according to Payne.
Here are the Trump administration's wealthiest members and how much they're reportedly worth.
Elon Musk, Department of Government Efficiency co-head: $439 billion
Musk is the world's richest person, with his stakes in Tesla, SpaceX, Twitter, and artificial intelligence startup xAI making him worth over $400 billion, according to Forbes. The tech mogul spent over a quarter of a billion dollars to help return Trump to the White House, and has emerged as one of the most influential figures in Trump's orbit.
Leandro Rizzuto Jr., Ambassador to the Organization of American States: $3.5 billion
Rizzuto's family made billions growing the hair product company Conair from a small family business run out of a Queens, New York, garage into one of the largest private companies in the United States. Forbes estimated the family's net worth at approximately $3.5 billion in 2017.
Rizzuto briefly served as Trump's principal officer at the U.S. Consulate General in Bermuda in 2020 after his 2018 nomination to be ambassador to Barbados failed in the Senate
Warren Stephens, Ambassador to the United Kingdom: $3.4 billion
Stephens has spent his entire career with his family's Little Rock-based investment bank, becoming the firm's CEO and president in 1986.
He spent $2 million in 2016 to support a group that aimed to stop Trump from winning the Republican nomination, but donated to Trump in the 2020 presidential race, and eventually supported Trump 2024 election after initially throwing his support behind other Republican candidates.
Linda McMahon, Education Secretary: Up to $3 billion
McMahon, with her husband Vince McMahon, founded the company that later became World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. Under her leadership, WWE became the world's largest wrestling entertainment company, with Vince McMahon worth over $3 billion in 2024. The McMahons have since separated, and it's unclear how much of the company Linda owns individually.
A Trump supporter, she was the head of the Small Business Administration during Trump's first term in office.
Howard Lutnick, Commerce Secretary: $2.2 billion
Lutnick, who has been tapped to serve as the Secretary of the Department of Commerce, is the CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, a financial services firm he joined in 1983. The billionaire businessman has led the investment first since 1991 and owns about 60% of the company, according to Bloomberg.
Charles Kushner, Ambassador to France: $1.8 billion
Kushner is a real estate developer who made his fortune building thousands of residential units across New Jersey. In 2005, Kushner was sentenced to 24 months in prison after pleading guilty to multiple felonies, including making false statements to the Federal Election Commission, assisting in the filing of a false tax return, and retaliating against a cooperation witness.
During his plea hearing, he admitted to retaliating against his sister for cooperating with law enforcement by having a prostitute seduce her husband and covertly film them having sex.
After serving his sentence, Kushner made a series of successful investments in the New York real estate market, including the purchase of a midtown skyscraper for nearly $2 billion. He was subsequently pardoned by Trump at the end of Trump's first term.
His son Jared Kushner is married to Trump's daughter Ivanka Trump, and the Kushner family's overall net worth is approximately $1.8 billion according to Forbes.
Jared Isaacman, NASA Administrator: $1.8 billion
Isaacman is a pioneer in private space exploration who made his fortune by founding the payment processing company Shift4 Payments.
In addition to his stake in Shift4 -- which processes a third of the customer payments made to American hotels and restaurants -- Issacman sold his tactical aircraft company Draken International, LLC, to the investment company Blackstone for a reported nine-figure sum.
Thomas Barrack Jr., Ambassador to Turkey: $1 billion
In 1991, Barrack founded the private equity real estate firm Colony Capital, which now manages more than $80 billion as DigitalBridge Group.
A close friend of the president-elect, Barrack chaired Trump's first inaugural committee and in 2022 was acquitted of federal charges accusing him of illegal foreign lobbying on behalf of the United Arab Emirates.
Steven Witkoff, Special Envoy to the Middle East: $1 billion
After first meeting Donald Trump in a New York deli in the 1980s, Witkoff climbed New York's real estate ladder alongside Trump, ultimately building a personal fortune of a billion dollars.
Witkoff has remained close to Trump for decades, testifying as an expert witness at his New York civil fraud trial in defense of the former president, and golfing with Trump during his second assassination attempt in September. Despite his limited experience in foreign affairs, Witkoff was named Trump's Special Envoy to the Middle East.
Frank Bisiganano, Social Security Administration Commissioner: $1 billion
Bisiganano was one of JPMorgan Chase's most influential executives during the 2008 recession, before taking over the financial services company First Data Corporation. Bisiganano became the CEO of Fiserv -- a leading financial technology firm -- when the company bought First Data in 2019. A hefty executive compensation package -- more than $100 million in 2017 -- and his stake in the company contributed to his net worth exceeding $1 billion, according to Fortune.
Scott Bessent, Treasury Secretary: Reported billionaire
A protege of Democratic megadonor George Soros, Bessent worked as the chief investment officer of Soros Fund Management before founding his own firm, Key Square Group. Bessent developed a reputation for bold bets on macroeconomic trends, including making more than a billion dollars by betting against the British pound in the 1990s, followed by a similar trade against the Japanese yen in 2013 that netted more than a billion dollars in profits.
At one point, Bessent's Key Square Group managed more than $5 billion.
During the campaign cycle, Bessent was a major fundraiser and emerged as a key economic adviser to Trump.
Vivek Ramaswamy, Department of Government Efficiency co-head: $1 billion
Ramaswamy, a biotech entrepreneur and 2024 presidential candidate, made his fortune through his 10% stake in Roivant Sciences, a biotech company he founded in 2014. After leaving Roivant in 2021, he founded Strive Asset Management, which manages approximately $1.7 billion -- including offering an "anti-woke" index fund.
During his long shot bid for the White House, Ramaswamy loaned and contributed $26 million to his own campaign.
David Sacks, AI and Crypto Czar: Net worth unknown
Sacks is a member of the so-called "PayPal Mafia," a group of tech entrepreneurs who founded successful companies after eBay purchased PayPal in 2002. He launched a series of companies including the workplace communications company Yammer and the venture capital firm Craft Ventures. Sacks' podcast with fellow venture capitalists Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, and David Friedberg hosted Trump for a one-hour episode in June.
As Trump's AI and crypto czar, Sacks is tasked with supercharging the development of AI and cryptocurrency development with minimal regulation.
Kelly Loeffler, Administrator of Small Business Administration: $800 million
Loeffler is a former Georgia senator and the former CEO of Bakkt, a cryptocurrency trading platform. She owned a minority stake in the WNBA's Atlanta Dream in 2010 before selling her stake in 2021 amid criticism stemming from the Black Lives Matter movement. Loeffler is married to billionaire and major Trump donor Jeffrey Sprecher, the CEO of Intercontinental Exchange, which owns the New York Stock Exchange.
She was appointed to fill a vacated Senate seat in Georgia in 2020 but was defeated in a special election in 2021. Trump recently named Loeffler to serve as the co-chair of his inaugural committee and nominated her to lead the SBA.
Doug Burgum, Interior Secretary: $100 million
Burgum, the former governor of North Dakota, got his start in the software business in 1983 when he mortgaged a quarter million dollars worth of farmland to found Great Plains Software. Microsoft eventually purchased the company for a billion dollars in 2000, and Burgum went on to run a real estate development firm and venture capital company.
He was elected governor of North Dakota in 2016 and was reelected in 2020. He ran a long shot presidential campaign and dropped out before the primaries, though he was one of Trump's final three picks for vice president.
Mehmet Oz, Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: $100 million
Dr. Oz is a heart surgeon-turned-TV-host who became famous for his program "The Dr. Oz Show." He was previously the director of the Cardiovascular Institute at New York Presbyterian Hospital and vice-chairman and professor of surgery at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.
In 2003, Oz began his television hosting career with his show "Second Opinion" on the Discovery Channel, and later became a regular on "The Oprah Winfrey Show." In 2009, Oz debuted his own "Dr. Oz Show," which ran until 2022, when Oz ran for the Senate in Pennsylvania and lost.
During the coronavirus pandemic, Oz promoted the treatment of hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malaria drug unproven in treating COVID-19. He has faced criticism over his claims about weight-loss products and over his past statements on vaccination.
Oz has defended his endorsement of controversial medical products by saying that he goes against the "established grain," and that he always puts patients first.
During his Senate run, he valued his assets between $100 million and $315 million, according to a federal financial disclosure.
Trump again calls to buy Greenland after eyeing Canada and the Panama Canal
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — First it was Canada, then the Panama Canal. Now, Donald Trump again wants Greenland.
The president-elect is renewing unsuccessful calls he made during his first term for the U.S. to buy Greenland from Denmark, adding to the list of allied countries with which he’s picking fights even before taking office on Jan. 20.
In a Sunday announcement naming his ambassador to Denmark, Trump wrote that, “For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.”
Trump again having designs on Greenland comes after the president-elect suggested over the weekend that the U.S. could retake control of the Panama Canal if something isn’t done to ease rising shipping costs required for using the waterway linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
He’s also been suggesting that Canada become the 51st U.S. state and referred to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “governor” of the “Great State of Canada.”
Stephen Farnsworth, a political science professor at the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Virginia, said Trump tweaking friendly countries harkens back to an aggressive style he used during his days in business.
“You ask something unreasonable and it’s more likely you can get something less unreasonable,” said Farnsworth, who is also author of the book “Presidential Communication and Character.”
Greenland, the world’s largest island, sits between the Atlantic and Arctic oceans. It is 80% covered by an ice sheet and is home to a large U.S. military base. It gained home rule from Denmark in 1979 and its head of government, Múte Bourup Egede, suggested that Trump’s latest calls for U.S. control would be as meaningless as those made in his first term.
“Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale,” he said in a statement. “We must not lose our years-long fight for freedom.”
Trump canceled a 2019 visit to Denmark after his offer to buy Greenland was rejected by Copenhagen, and ultimately came to nothing.
He also suggested Sunday that the U.S. is getting “ripped off” at the Panama Canal.
“If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America, in full, quickly and without question,” he said.
Panama President José Raúl Mulino responded in a video that “every square meter of the canal belongs to Panama and will continue to,” but Trump fired back on his social media site, “We’ll see about that!”
The president-elect also posted a picture of a U.S. flag planted in the canal zone under the phrase, “Welcome to the United States Canal!”
The United States built the canal in the early 1900s but relinquished control to Panama on Dec. 31, 1999, under a treaty signed in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter.
The canal depends on reservoirs that were hit by 2023 droughts that forced it to substantially reduce the number of daily slots for crossing ships. With fewer ships, administrators also increased the fees that shippers are charged to reserve slots to use the canal.
The Greenland and Panama flareups followed Trump recently posting that “Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State” and offering an image of himself superimposed on a mountaintop surveying surrounding territory next to a Canadian flag.
Trudeau suggested that Trump was joking about annexing his country, but the pair met recently at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida to discuss Trump’s threats to impose a 25% tariff on all Canadian goods.
“Canada is not going to become part of the United States, but Trump’s comments are more about leveraging what he says to get concessions from Canada by putting Canada off balance, particularly given the precarious current political environment in Canada,” Farnsworth said. “Maybe claim a win on trade concessions, a tighter border or other things.”
He said the situation is similar with Greenland.
“What Trump wants is a win,” Farnsworth said. “And even if the American flag doesn’t raise over Greenland, Europeans may be more willing to say yes to something else because of the pressure.”
that's a lot of spending the party of limited government plans on doing
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
When I see absurdity like this, it makes me want to watch what they are actually doing. This is all distraction for something worse.
It's called trolling. He is telling our neighbors they need to get a little more in line. Trust me, we have no intention of making Canada the 51st state. He is just sending a message.
On a similar note, I see the Province of Canada is running ads on Fox about being a solid ally to the north. How they have always stood with us in the past and will be well in to the future.
I see that as Ontario saying they stand with us and not the French wimp. Maybe Ontario is saying they would be willing to be the 51st state? At minimum it looks to be a message to not include them in any tariffs.
I could go with that.
As for Panama, it is a natural choke point from illegals out of S. America. It makes sense to lean on them a bit. We still have Howard AFB in Panama. With China mucking around down there, we need it more than ever. The Panama Canal is still a vital link between the Atlantic and Pacific. I don't know what sort of forces we have down there at the AFB, but I'd say a large garrison of Army or Marine troops wouldn't be a bad idea.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
BS. Why would any neighbor (Sovereign Nation) need to be bullied be the leader of the free world and the leader of the greatest democracy on earth? That’s fascist autocratic bullying crap just like Putin does. You’re so lost that it’s mind boggling.
It’s also completely absurd idiocy and Trump|Elon’s presidency elect is the laughing stock of the world. But hey, he’s so great…. Smh.
As you can see, bullying and threatening everyone at every turn, more our allies than our enemies, is what passes as foreign policy now.
i cant believe this needs to be stated, but people should've seen it as a huge red flag that trump is aggressive toward our own allies, but passive against the US's enemies.
everybody would see and say something to someone in our family who acted like that, a teammate on a sports team acting like that, or someone in the work environment acting like that.
but not Trump. Americans allows and encourage trump to act like a schoolyard bully with no real pushback. for me, that also speaks volumes of the voters individual character traits...
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I think most who voted for him did so for "part" of what he wants to do more so than who he is and some of the more idiotic things he says and does. But when he lets his crazy out they tend to either try to excuse it or remain silent about it. I mean, I think people on both sides do that to some extent because the choices we have been given these days aren't even close to the best. But they already knew who this guy was and this makes the third time he has been chosen as their party leader.
As the wise and thoughtful orator George W. Bush once said...... “There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.” (Did I need purple for that?)
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
So I guess all the immigrants are out EXCEPT for silicon valley, they want special visas to import foreign (Indian) engineers. Sparks and fireworks in MAGAland tonight. Lmao, and these idiots want to lead.
This article boggles my mind, especially this quote:
Pennsylvania Trump voter Lori Mosura described the billionaire as “more attuned to the needs of everyone instead of just the rich” in an interview with the Washington Post. She lives below the poverty line, receiving $1,200 a month in food stamps and Social Security benefits.
But she has a message for Trump.
“We helped get you in office; please take care of us,” Mosura said, shifting the conversation as though she were speaking to Trump. “Please don’t cut the things that help the most vulnerable.”
——————————————
I mean, WTF did she expect???? I’m not for people who abuse welfare, and it does happen rampantly, but I also don’t honestly know what the people in this article were thinking. It makes zero sense, at least at first blush.
This article boggles my mind, especially this quote:
Pennsylvania Trump voter Lori Mosura described the billionaire as “more attuned to the needs of everyone instead of just the rich” in an interview with the Washington Post. She lives below the poverty line, receiving $1,200 a month in food stamps and Social Security benefits.
But she has a message for Trump.
“We helped get you in office; please take care of us,” Mosura said, shifting the conversation as though she were speaking to Trump. “Please don’t cut the things that help the most vulnerable.”
——————————————
I mean, WTF did she expect???? I’m not for people who abuse welfare, and it does happen rampantly, but I also don’t honestly know what the people in this article were thinking. It makes zero sense, at least at first blush.
you helped a dude who wants to cut your benefits get into office. it would be like me, a person who needs mental health treatment, voting for someone who wants to defund and close mental health facilities down. pretty stupid.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
The Hill In shift, Trump downgrades soaring rhetoric on campaign promises Brett Samuels Sun, December 29, 2024 at 6:00 AM EST5 min read
976
President-elect Trump on the campaign trail made grandiose promises to voters to bring down costs quickly, to end the war in Ukraine before he even took office and to use tariffs to bolster the U.S. economy and manufacturing.
Since winning November’s election, Trump has indicated delivering on those promises may not be as simple as advertised.
Trump in a recent “Meet the Press” interview said he could not guarantee tariffs would not lead to higher consumer prices.
Advertisement He acknowledged in a Time magazine interview for his Person of the Year honor that it’s difficult to bring down the cost of groceries once they’ve gone up.
And in his first post-election press conference from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., Trump suggested ending the war in Ukraine would be more difficult than easing tensions in the Middle East.
While Democrats and critics accused Trump of lowering expectations or signaling he would not deliver on his campaign promises, the Trump transition and other allies argued it was the president-elect shifting from sweeping campaign rhetoric to the nuances and realities of governing.
“The American people re-elected President Trump by a resounding margin giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail. He will deliver,” said Karoline Leavitt, a spokesperson for the transition and the incoming White House press secretary, in a statement.
Advertisement One Trump ally argued the president-elect was not contradicting his promises on the trail, but he rather was shifting away from the sales pitch rhetoric that is typical of campaigns.
Trump made improving the economy, and inflation in particular, a core part of his campaign for the White House in 2024. He frequently railed against the Biden White House for the high cost of groceries specifically, and he often told supporters he would bring down costs by increasing the energy supply, which would have a ripple effect on overall prices.
“Prices will come down. You just watch. They’ll come down, and they’ll come down fast. Not only with insurance, with everything,” Trump told supporters in North Carolina in August.
At a rally in Pennsylvania on the eve of Election Day, Trump said a vote for him meant “your groceries will be cheaper.”
Advertisement More in Politics
Why Trump is targeting Panama, Greenland, Canada The Hill
Michelle Obama sparks backlash after posting 'Happy Holidays' video Fox News
Trump says Bill Gates asked to meet in apparent message to Musk CNN But in comments to Time on Nov. 25, Trump was more circumspect about his ability to bring down the cost of groceries. Asked if his presidency would be a failure if prices did not decline, Trump said he didn’t think so. “Look, they got them up. I’d like to bring them down. It’s hard to bring things down once they’re up. You know, it’s very hard,” Trump said. “But I think that they will. I think that energy is going to bring them down. I think a better supply chain is going to bring them down. You know, the supply chain is still broken.”
Democrats were quick to jump on Trump’s comments, suggesting it amounted to a broken campaign promise before he even took office.
“Candidate Trump promised to lower grocery prices, but now it seems he isn’t even going to try,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) posted on the social platform X. “While champagne corks pop at Mar-a-Lago, President-elect Trump says that he can’t really lower grocery prices because it’s ‘very hard.’ Sad. It’s the start of a broken promise.”
The Democratic National Committee highlighted Trump’s comments about groceries and compared them with comments he made on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange last week about trying to slash the corporate tax rate further.
Advertisement The president-elect also struck a defiant tone on tariffs throughout the campaign, pushing back on anyone who suggested they would raise consumer prices, upend the economy or alienate allies hit with tariffs.
Since winning the election, Trump has largely maintained that posture, even as he has acknowledged the possibility that some companies might pass on costs to consumers.
“I can’t guarantee anything. I can’t guarantee tomorrow,” Trump told “Meet the Press” earlier this month. “But I can say that if you look at my — just pre-COVID, we had the greatest economy in the history of our country. And I had a lot of tariffs on a lot of different countries, but in particular China.”
In other areas of U.S.-foreign affairs, Trump has hearkened back to his more bombastic style — suggesting Canada become a 51st state, the Panama Canal be returned to U.S. control and again went after Greenland by suggesting U.S. ownership was “absolute necessity.” It’s possible Trump is using those warning as leverage for negotiating tactics involving tariffs and lowering the cost for American ships to cross from the Pacific to the Atlantic.
But Trump had also been more nuanced in recent days in speaking about the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, a war he said on the debate stage in September he would end “before even becoming president.”
The president-elect told reporters at a news conference this week he thought it would be more difficult to resolve the situation in Ukraine than it would be to lower tensions in the Middle East, a region that is rife with conflicts involving Israel, Iran, Syria and various proxy groups.
Trump told reporters Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin need to be prepared to make a deal to end the war, though he would not detail what either side should be willing to concede.
Zelensky, in an interview this week with Fox News correspondent Trey Yingst, said it would not be “simple” for Trump to influence Putin to end the war.
“But I think if to use all the issues what United States has, yes, he can. Because he is much more stronger than Putin,” Zelensky said. “He’s stronger. United States is stronger. Economy stronger. You know, money, big money. United States has big — very big influence.”
Trump in 2016 made a slew of campaign promises he struggled to deliver on. He repeatedly vowed he would build a wall along the southern border and that Mexico would pay for it, and while there was some new construction of barriers, Mexico did not foot the bill.
He also promised to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, known as ObamaCare. Republicans managed to get rid of the individual mandate portion of the law, but Trump and lawmakers failed to get rid of it or pass a health care plan of their own.
We knew it was going to happen. Hell, it happened last time, but people have goldfish memories, apparently.
The Dems have to do more, though, than just seize on the inevitable underwhelms. They have to actually relate and advocate for their constituents, and kick Pelosi and the elites to the curb. They’ve been flipping everything up since 2016.
Trump is a great marketer. I’ll give him that. To borrow a two-word phrase from Alan Greenspan, I’ve never seen someone invoke “irrational exuberance” in my lifetime like he has. For Dems to overcome that, there will have to be more than Trump not delivering. They need to present viability again.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
Haha, no. I think they need to get back to being genuine about appealing to their base and not take them for granted anymore.
The libtard media, and the whitehouse, treated Americans like a bunch of rubes and assumed people would believe their lies. Lies about many many things for the last 4 years. They lost all credibility. That, along with pushing extremist policies, alienated Americans. They expected their base to fall in line no matter how badly they behaved. There were some gullible libtards who fell in line, but it's no shock Trump won. And won dominantly. Anyone who can think critically could see it coming a mile away.
The libtard media and politicians don't seem to have learned anything either. They are doubling down on their toxic lies, fear mongering, tds, and bad behavior. Still treating Americans like rubes. It's going to end in an easy win for Vance in 2028.
To me, I think the one thing I’ve noticed is that the Dems’ base has woken up to the fact that the Democratic Party “TM” no longer represents their interests.
I sincerely hope that you all on the other side of the aisle realize the same at some point.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
Haha, no. I think they need to get back to being genuine about appealing to their base and not take them for granted anymore.
The libtard media, and the whitehouse, treated Americans like a bunch of rubes and assumed people would believe their lies. Lies about many many things for the last 4 years. They lost all credibility. That, along with pushing extremist policies, alienated Americans. They expected their base to fall in line no matter how badly they behaved. There were some gullible libtards who fell in line, but it's no shock Trump won. And won dominantly. Anyone who can think critically could see it coming a mile away.
The libtard media and politicians don't seem to have learned anything either. They are doubling down on their toxic lies, fear mongering, tds, and bad behavior. Still treating Americans like rubes. It's going to end in an easy win for Vance in 2028.
People voted over the economy. That's it. All this other imaginary nonsense is just that.
That's not just it, though it might have been a large factor. There were other issues people voted about, or issues that kept them home.
how many people do you think voted for Greenland being purchased by the U.S.?
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I believe you are correct that the economy isn't the only reason some people voted for trump. The thing about voters is some people wish to place all of them in one of two neat little boxes. Either an extreme liberal or a trumpian. But nothing could be further from the truth.
The fact remains that about one third of all voters are independent voters. And a lot of those voters vote based on what's going on in their own home. A great many voters in our country either don't really pay much attention to the news or even follow the news at all. When interest rates are so high and housing costs increase greatly at the same time for newer families, that will motivate them to vote. When food prices as well as everything else goes through the roof, they have to figure out how to pay their bills and buy groceries at the same time, that motivates them to vote.
For anyone willing to take a look it's been a global theme. This inflation crises was global. And time after time the incumbents have been being beaten handily as a result.
So while I certainly agree that in many cases it's not the only issue many voted for, in a lot of cases it most certainly was. And it was certainly at the top of the list for most voters.
I do not believe however the vast majority of people who voted for trump supported every word and crazy thing that spewed out of his mouth.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
