HawkShack.com

The Trump-Elon bromance is over. I'm sure no one saw this coming...

I'm surprised it took this long. I guess we'll see how this plays out as Elon can be a formidable enemy. Trump's sycophants will quickly turn against Elon. It looks like Musk must hate Stephen Miller as he took his wife when he left.

I imagine the Trump camp will push the Elon on drugs narrative, which anyone that invests in his companies or has listened to him knows he does. He smokes dopes, believes in psychedelics, and other drugs similar to Joe Rogan.

Let's see who takes the worst of this fight as neither one is known for backing down and both have immense resources to damage the other.

Here’s my brief political siting. It’s been popcorn all day. What a freaking s*** show.

They both have enough influence to permanently brand the other; one a druggie and the other a pedophile. This is good for neither but perhaps best for the rest of us.

The real winner might wind up being Vance. And the biggest loser the Republican party.

Yeah, Musk has been at odds with Trump since he started imposing the tariffs that hurt his company Tesla so badly. I'm actually getting a kick out of this very public feud, especially this latest one about Trump and the files about Epstein.

But this is nothing compared to the damage that Trump and/or Musk could do to our country if they are left to their own devices. Having just spent a couple days at a very nice federal campground a long way from nowhere (10 miles from the Montana-Idaho border between Missoula and Lewiston) and where the USFS employees actually live near the campground, it reminded me how this experience could be destroyed forever.

The 2026 season of TRUMPX is going to be lit!…….

River Dog wrote:Yeah, Musk has been at odds with Trump since he started imposing the tariffs that hurt his company Tesla so badly. I'm actually getting a kick out of this very public feud, especially this latest one about Trump and the files about Epstein.

But this is nothing compared to the damage that Trump and/or Musk could do to our country if they are left to their own devices. Having just spent a couple days at a very nice federal campground a long way from nowhere (10 miles from the Montana-Idaho border between Missoula and Lewiston) and where the USFS employees actually live near the campground, it reminded me how this experience could be destroyed forever.

It could be destroyed forever not by Trump, but by the insane financial mismanagement of the nation. We paid 882 billion interest on the national debt. That is 13 percent of U.S tax revenues on the interest of the debt without paying down any of the principal. We paid 1.52 trillion or 22.4 percent on social security which is funded by a 13.2 percent tax broken down between the employee and the employer. The interest payment on the debt and the debt itself are funded by nothing but taking money from other programs to pay the bill the government has built up.

I'm betting both political parties have given up on paying the national debt and are triaging the interest until they bankrupt the nation or can inflate their way out of this and try to gain some stability with massive money printing while cutting at the same time, something neither party wants to do. Democrats don't like to cut spending, they just keep spending more. Republicans don't seem to want to increase taxes, they keep cutting taxes and pretending trickle-down economics works when it doesn't.

Given how American politicians must obtain support for campaigns and votes, they have no choice but to appease the rich who pay for the campaigns and appease the voters who provide the support to take office. This careful balance has led to bad management of the nation as it seems to attract people more interested in running the government like a business in the Republican Party or a charity in the Democratic Party. Neither way is a good way to run a nation.

The American people themselves are culpable themselves as they support both of these ideologies whether it's wealthy business people in the Republican Party funding campaigns or the left where wealthy environmentalists and social crusaders fund the Democratic Party. No one is much interested in sensible management of a nation and government that was meant to be responsible and stay out of the way unless they have to step in.

We're already headed for an iceberg labeled the national debt and the only way they can think to keep us from hitting it is keep adding water to keep the ship farther away but making water worth less and everything else on the ship cost more hoping wages keep up enough Americans can afford life. It's getting stretched more and more to the point it has to break. When that happens, national camping grounds will be pretty low on the list of concerns.

it's funny the number of folks that think the debt doesn't matter as the interest payments become a larger and larger portion of the federal budget as they keep expanding the debt. Both parties keep implementing policy that isn't good for the national debt which leads to economics that aren't good for working people. Pretty terrible path American politicians have put us on with the largest generation in history retiring and on fixed income when they have to inflate the hell out of the economy to have some chance of getting control of the debt or the interest payments will keep eating the federal budget. They seem to want to convince us all the tax-supported social security and Medicare is the problem while they keep running up the debt and spending irresponsibly on other areas of the government.

It's something to watch. I think America is either going to have to move to European style socialism with higher taxes or a third-world stratified nation of wealthy and poor as the middle class is destroyed by inflation and debt mismanagement by both parties due to both parties keeping Americans at each other's throats so working class Americans never gain the power to gain control of this situation in a way favorable to them. Younger generation seems to be realizing they are screwed.

I don't disagree with anything you've said. The last POTUS to really care about balancing the budget and managing the national debt was Eisenhower. Since then, both parties haven't given a rip about it. Even Reagan increased the national debt with his tax cuts and military spending. Contrast that with Ike, who did not want to engage the Soviets in an arms race and was against the space program due to budgetary concerns. But the politicians are the product of the voting public. The root cause is the stupidity and gullibility of the American adult.

I see where Musk is walking back some of his comments about Trump. He deleted his tweet about the files on Epstein as they relate to DJT.

River Dog wrote:I don't disagree with anything you've said. The last POTUS to really care about balancing the budget and managing the national debt was Eisenhower. Since then, both parties haven't given a rip about it. Even Reagan increased the national debt with his tax cuts and military spending. Contrast that with Ike, who did not want to engage the Soviets in an arms race and was against the space program due to budgetary concerns. But the politicians are the product of the voting public. The root cause is the stupidity and gullibility of the American adult.

I see where Musk is walking back some of his comments about Trump. He deleted his tweet about the files on Epstein as they relate to DJT.

Elon may be a genius at managing assets and with science, but his arrogance and temper are going to cost him immensely. Pissing off both major political parties is super dumb when his companies are heavily dependent on government assistance whether it's Tesla's reliance no EV credits and Space X generating revenue from N.A.S.A. It is showing that Elon's arrogance is making him think he's untouchable and he's starting to learn that is not the case.

Can you believe the national debt is at 13 percent of the federal budge of 6.8 trillion? That's insane. I wonder how many people run their household where they are paying 13 percent of their monthly income in interest while continuing to run up the debt to increase the interest payment? Almost a trillion in just interest is nuts.

River Dog wrote:I don't disagree with anything you've said. The last POTUS to really care about balancing the budget and managing the national debt was Eisenhower. Since then, both parties haven't given a rip about it. Even Reagan increased the national debt with his tax cuts and military spending. Contrast that with Ike, who did not want to engage the Soviets in an arms race and was against the space program due to budgetary concerns. But the politicians are the product of the voting public. The root cause is the stupidity and gullibility of the American adult.

I see where Musk is walking back some of his comments about Trump. He deleted his tweet about the files on Epstein as they relate to DJT.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Elon may be a genius at managing assets and with science, but his arrogance and temper are going to cost him immensely. Pissing off both major political parties is super dumb when his companies are heavily dependent on government assistance whether it's Tesla's reliance no EV credits and Space X generating revenue from N.A.S.A. It is showing that Elon's arrogance is making him think he's untouchable and he's starting to learn that is not the case.

I'm not so sure that Musk is a genius. Although it does help to be smart, it's not necessary to be highly intelligent in order to be be a successful businessman. Donald Trump is living proof of that. It's kinda like that Kenny Rogers song about playing poker: Know when to hold'em, know when to fold'em, know when to walk away, and know when to run.

One of the few things that I do agree with DJT on is that Musk has gone nuts.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Can you believe the national debt is at 13 percent of the federal budge of 6.8 trillion? That's insane. I wonder how many people run their household where they are paying 13 percent of their monthly income in interest while continuing to run up the debt to increase the interest payment? Almost a trillion in just interest is nuts.

We spend more on the servicing of the national debt than we do on defense. The national debt has doubled in just the past 10 years. At some point, the chickens have to come home to roost.

River Dog wrote:We spend more on the servicing of the national debt than we do on defense. The national debt has doubled in just the past 10 years. At some point, the chickens have to come home to roost.

They keep blaming social security, but without this insane debt social security and Medicare would be funded.

They need to both increase taxes and decrease spending to lower this debt. Most likely they'll choose the same path they did after World War 2...inflate the economy until the debt is a smaller proportion then hope they can get control of spending. Future generations will be paying double or more what we paid for the same things just like you and I pay way more for the same things.

River Dog wrote:We spend more on the servicing of the national debt than we do on defense. The national debt has doubled in just the past 10 years. At some point, the chickens have to come home to roost.

Aseahawkfan wrote:They keep blaming social security, but without this insane debt social security and Medicare would be funded.

Social Security suffers from two basic problems: Increase in life expectancy and age demographics. People are living longer, and not enough younger workers are backfilling the jobs they're leaving. They have two basic choices: Cut benefits and/or raise taxes.

The easiest benefit to cut would be to take away the early retirement option and make everyone work until at least age 67. There are some smaller, incremental changes they could make, like giving people the option of deferring their benefit to later in life in lieu of a higher monthly benefit. That's what I did, deferred taking my SS until age 70, the max I could push it out. There's also rules about divorcees being able to collect a former spouse's SS that might not be as painful to cut, too. But they're going to have to make a significant increase in the payroll tax for both SS and Medicare to be fully funded.

Aseahawkfan wrote:They need to both increase taxes and decrease spending to lower this debt. Most likely they'll choose the same path they did after World War 2...inflate the economy until the debt is a smaller proportion then hope they can get control of spending. Future generations will be paying double or more what we paid for the same things just like you and I pay way more for the same things.

It's not going to happen under our current form of government unless a huge calamity happens, like a war or another Great Depression.

River Dog wrote:It's not going to happen under our current form of government unless a huge calamity happens, like a war or another Great Depression.

The cutting spending and increasing taxes won't happen, but the inflation is going to happen. They're going to lie to you about it as they do it. Both parties will play hot potato looking to blame the other while they keep the plebes at each other's throats on Fox, CNN, and CNBC and whatever other news media is out there, then both parties will inflate, inflate, inflate. Anyone owning assets or businesses they can liquidate will be happy, those having to work for fixed wages and paying property and other taxes will cry since inflation with percentage based taxes are painful if your income doesn't increase to offset the higher taxes, cost of living, and the like.

I think they'll slow roll it as much as they can with periods of high inflation. It's going to happen. I don't see how the politicians have any other choice since they won't cut spending and raise taxes with sole focus of reducing the debt.

No matter how they do it, it will be painful to the American middle and working class.

River Dog wrote:It's not going to happen under our current form of government unless a huge calamity happens, like a war or another Great Depression.

Aseahawkfan wrote:The cutting spending and increasing taxes won't happen, but the inflation is going to happen. They're going to lie to you about it as they do it. Both parties will play hot potato looking to blame the other while they keep the plebes at each other's throats on Fox, CNN, and CNBC and whatever other news media is out there, then both parties will inflate, inflate, inflate. Anyone owning assets or businesses they can liquidate will be happy, those having to work for fixed wages and paying property and other taxes will cry since inflation with percentage based taxes are painful if your income doesn't increase to offset the higher taxes, cost of living, and the like.

I think they'll slow roll it as much as they can with periods of high inflation. It's going to happen. I don't see how the politicians have any other choice since they won't cut spending and raise taxes with sole focus of reducing the debt.

No matter how they do it, it will be painful to the American middle and working class.

They're going to have to do something about Social Security and Medicare. Unless they infuse the fund with more cash, ie raise taxes, or cut benefits, it's going to run out in the early 2030's. Trump's proposal to eliminate taxes on SS income sounds great on the face of it, but all it's going to do is run the fund out of money earlier as that tax revenue is plowed back into the SS fund.

That's one of the reasons why I really like Nikki Haley as she is the only major candidate in either party that has broached the subject.

River Dog wrote:They're going to have to do something about Social Security and Medicare. Unless they infuse the fund with more cash, ie raise taxes, or cut benefits, it's going to run out in the early 2030's. Trump's proposal to eliminate taxes on SS income sounds great on the face of it, but all it's going to do is run the fund out of money earlier as that tax revenue is plowed back into the SS fund.

That's one of the reasons why I really like Nikki Haley as she is the only major candidate in either party that has broached the subject.

Have you even calculated if they will run out or are you parroting conservatives talking points paid for by the wealthy who want it gone? Because right now we can afford social security and Medicare quite easily if we don't continue to increase the debt and pay almost a trillion dollars in interest.

You have a real tendency to parrot conservative talking points without providing the actual math for why this would occur. I mostly hear very wealthy people who want this gone.

You sound like AOC right now with her 12 year call on global warming. None of the math I've seen indicates social security will run out in the 2030s, starting in around 5 years. So please provide sourcing. At the moment the main threat to social security and Medicare is severe mismanagement of the debt. You seem to want to support cutting social security, which is a talking point and issue pushed by very wealthy people using scare tactics like the left uses scare tactics to justify spending on environmental issues with their done in 12 years trash.

If you want to make a claim about social security, please prove that claim. I can do the math, so any article you post I can confirm or deny.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Have you even calculated if they will run out or are you parroting conservatives talking points paid for by the wealthy who want it gone? Because right now we can afford social security and Medicare quite easily if we don't continue to increase the debt and pay almost a trillion dollars in interest.

You have a real tendency to parrot conservative talking points without providing the actual math for why this would occur. I mostly hear very wealthy people who want this gone.

You sound like AOC right now with her 12 year call on global warming. None of the math I've seen indicates social security will run out in the 2030s, starting in around 5 years. So please provide sourcing. At the moment the main threat to social security and Medicare is severe mismanagement of the debt. You seem to want to support cutting social security, which is a talking point and issue pushed by very wealthy people using scare tactics like the left uses scare tactics to justify spending on environmental issues with their done in 12 years trash.

If you want to make a claim about social security, please prove that claim. I can do the math, so any article you post I can confirm or deny.

Well, I assumed that it was common knowledge as both liberals as well as conservatives are fully aware of the financial status of SS and Medicare, but I guess not.

Social Security isn't going to run completely out of money. However, by 2034 or 2035, the SS trust fund will not have enough funds to pay all beneficiaries in full. They will have to start reducing benefits in order to match the revenue coming in. It's not that complicated to figure out. The amount in the trust fund is a given, and revenue sources are for the most part predictable. But if you insist on proof, here's one article from CNN, not exactly a conservative rag:

Social Security and Medicare will not be able to fully pay benefits in just over a decade if lawmakers don’t act to address the pending shortfalls, according to reports released Monday by the entitlement programs’ trustees. While the trust funds’ finances improved slightly, they remain in dire shape.

The combined Social Security trust funds – which help support monthly payments to the elderly, survivors and people with disabilities – are expected to be exhausted in 2035, one year later than previously forecast, according to its trustees’ annual report. After that, payroll tax revenue and other income sources will only be able to cover 83% of benefits owed.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/06/politics ... index.html

And from our good friends at Fox News:

Social Security's trust funds are headed toward depletion, and without a fix from Congress, retirees will see steep payment cuts in less than a decade.

The annual Social Security trustees' report this week said the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) trust fund is on track to reach insolvency in 2033, at which point benefits would be cut by 21%.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/so ... ithout-fix

Both sides know it, and I'm surprised that you don't. And in reality, the budget deficit is actually helping the SS trust fund as the government has to pay the fund back with interest anything it borrows out of the fund.

Allowing Congress to borrow from Social Security is a good thing....without allowing the government to borrow money, Social Security would be saying goodbye to one of its three funding sources: interest income. For those of you harping on Congress to pay interest to Social Security, the federal government already is. The average yield across its numerous maturities is currently 2.9%. If Social Security were simply to hold cash, the program would be giving up an estimated $78 billion to $83 billion in annual income, according to intermediate-cost model estimates, between 2018 and 2027. This would almost certainly push forward the program's asset reserve exhaustion date from its current projection of 2034.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/her ... l-security

And as a side note, I got a kick out of this, from Fox News of all places, about the myth that it's the illegal aliens that are causing our problems with funding SS. From the same article:

Likewise, there's the pervasive myth that Social Security's cash is dwindling because its funds are being disbursed to undocumented immigrants. In reality, only American citizens who've earned the prerequisite 40 lifetime work credits are able to collect a benefit. If anything, it's actually the other way around, with some undocumented workers contributing into the program via the payroll tax without ever having an opportunity to collect a benefit.

I did some research as well. You are right, Riverdog. It won't be insolvent, but will need to drop to 76 percent of benefits. This is from the social security administration itself.

Their recommended remedy is to increase the tax rate to 14.4 percent or reduce benefits 13 percent to fund for the next 75 years. 7.2 percent employee and 7.2 percent for employer.

They better get on this or we'll have 70 year olds robbing people. That will be terrible.

I would raise the age to 70, eliminate early retirement, and raise the tax hopefully by less if we do that, but we'll see what path they choose.

I guess they are investing the social security funds in treasuries, which have been horrible for years. It may be better for social security if interest rates stay at 4 percent or higher. I wonder what interest rate they would need to improve social security solvency. The low interest rates have made treasury support from bonds negative. It does indeed seem true that the government has been using social security to fund the government at a net negative for social security. It is the old aphorism of robbing Peter to pay Paul. Terrible mismanagement of social security. If treasuries are going to be used to help fund social security, the interest rate would have to set equal to or above inflation to match the negative impact of inflation on fixed income.

I know many wealthy people, especially fund managers, want social security invested in the markets. They're salivating over the fees they could collect from managing social security and the amount of liquidity it would push into the markets to drive up stock prices. If they ever allow fund managers to invest social security, my goodness you better be invested in stocks or you are going to miss out on the massive infusion of liquidity.