Trump outrage of the day

[nereo]

Why does this feel like a continuation of Trumps feud with Jeff Bezos?

[Glenstache]

He just retweeted a "Fire Fauci" post, and if I had to venture a guess, I think the esteemed doctor will be out by May 1 at the latest. And then he'll bring in another sycophant -- someone who won't try to hold him back. And then...

Well, we'll see.

Maybe Dr Oz?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/opinion/coronavirus-trump-dr-oz.html

I mean, it is the perfect reality TV play.

[Kris]

He just retweeted a "Fire Fauci" post, and if I had to venture a guess, I think the esteemed doctor will be out by May 1 at the latest. And then he'll bring in another sycophant -- someone who won't try to hold him back. And then...

Well, we'll see.

Maybe Dr Oz?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/opinion/coronavirus-trump-dr-oz.html

I mean, it is the perfect reality TV play.

I could definitely see it. Pathetic, but true.

[DaMa]

Do you need the highlights from today's free nationally broadcasted Trump rally?  First, Dr. Fauci totally backtracked his comment and basically said Trump is great.  Then Trump aired his new campaign ad.  Then he spent 45 minutes outlining how all the news was fake, and he's the greatest ever.  Then I couldn't watch anymore. 

OH, and 2/1/20 - 3/10/20 never happened.  Those days just disappeared.

[Just Joe]

And now he wants to kill the post office.

Good.  Nobody's using the post office any more in this age of social isolation.

I certainly didn't carefully weigh out my letters to make sure I got one to each niece and nephew with my existing stamps, and then put more stamps on my shopping list.

I would never hand write a card to my mother to try to cheer her up. Because she doesn't still have the last hand written card I sent her hanging in her craft room.

And she hasn't sent a card to every single child, child in law and grandchild for their birthday and anniversaries ever since the eldest first went to college.

I bet deliveries are way down too.  What with people trying to get out and mingle as much as possible with others.  :P

And let's not forget all of the orders people are placing that say they're going through UPS or other private delivery companies... but which those private businesses actually send through the USPS for final delivery, because either they can't handle the load, or aren't interested in driving things out into the sticks, or a host of other reasons.

That certainly hasn't been happening at all, either.

Because private enterprise is always cheaper and more efficient. No worries that sending a birthday card to Nephew in Wyoming will cost $6.50...

[Glenstache]

So, does this mean we have Navarro's permission. To criticize Trump?
https://www.newsandguts.com/video/navarro-challenges-60-minutes-to-show-previous-administrations-prepared-for-pandemics/

[Travis]

Fauci indirectly questioned Trump's slow reactions to the coronavirus and now Trump is retweeting #FireFauci.

I originally guessed he'd be gone by Easter so I'm changing my guess to...May 1, when Trump will try to restart the economy. "He's not needed anymore."

I don't think this will help Trump's numbers. Fauci seems to be liked and is the "national" doctor of the coronavirus response. He's not an unknown general or chief of staff.

Everybody who has worked for this administration was the GOAT until they were Twitterfired and declared they were in fact the worst ever.  Nobody is immune and the party loyal go right along with it every time.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

I'm a kiwi, I'm not expert on USA politics. I did see today that Trump has declared his authority absolute while two different sets of governors are making their own plans for their areas reopening. So question.... if Trump wins this round, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you? And if the states win, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you?

[Travis]

I'm a kiwi, I'm not expert on USA politics. I did see today that Trump has declared his authority absolute while two different sets of governors are making their own plans for their areas reopening. So question.... if Trump wins this round, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you? And if the states win, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you?

It depends on the subject matter. Nothing like this has come up in US history so it's a gray area just how much authority the federal government has in enforcing these quarantines. Related events (natural disasters, large scale riots) would put most decision-making authority with the governors.

[OtherJen]

I'm a kiwi, I'm not expert on USA politics. I did see today that Trump has declared his authority absolute while two different sets of governors are making their own plans for their areas reopening. So question.... if Trump wins this round, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you? And if the states win, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you?

It depends on the subject matter. Nothing like this has come up in US history so it's a gray area just how much authority the federal government has in enforcing these quarantines. Related events (natural disasters, large scale riots) would put most decision-making authority with the governors.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. The GOP is usually the party squawking about state's rights. They'll either have to buck the party leader or expose themselves (yet again) as massive hypocrites.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

I'm a kiwi, I'm not expert on USA politics. I did see today that Trump has declared his authority absolute while two different sets of governors are making their own plans for their areas reopening. So question.... if Trump wins this round, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you? And if the states win, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you?

It depends on the subject matter. Nothing like this has come up in US history so it's a gray area just how much authority the federal government has in enforcing these quarantines. Related events (natural disasters, large scale riots) would put most decision-making authority with the governors.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. The GOP is usually the party squawking about state's rights. They'll either have to buck the party leader or expose themselves (yet again) as massive hypocrites.

As an outsider, and not an especially well informed one, it seems to me that Trump has been banging on for this whole drama about the states going alone/federal gov isn't responsible for very much. Now he wants to say he has complete authority. You cant have it both ways. If I was the governors of one of the states like NY, I'd be wondering why the hell I'm paying tax/fealty/whatever else to a federal gov that doesn't actually do anything......

[LennStar]

Anna! You sound like you were expecting Trump (and Republicans) to be a rational person who does hold everyone's fortune higher than his own interest???

Trump's opinion (or reality) is always what he thinks suits him best at the moment, and the Republican Party officials have always had the "grab whatever you can get away with" mentality. They don't care if they are caught in the act of stealing, because to their voter base stealing from Dems is totally Robin Hood! And you can frame most things as stealing from Dems; as long as you say you steal more from them as from Reps it's okay. You may kill Reps with preventing Corona Safety Measures, but by Io! that will kill more Dems, and anyway, it's a Hoax.

Fauci indirectly questioned Trump's slow reactions to the coronavirus and now Trump is retweeting #FireFauci.

I originally guessed he'd be gone by Easter so I'm changing my guess to...May 1, when Trump will try to restart the economy. "He's not needed anymore."

I don't think this will help Trump's numbers. Fauci seems to be liked and is the "national" doctor of the coronavirus response. He's not an unknown general or chief of staff.

Conservatives are slowly turning against Fauci now, because Trump is. So by the time Trump fires him, Fauci will be the enemy. I'm already seeing people on social media calling him a shill for Big Pharma and all sorts of other nutty accusations about him.

Putin's Internet Army?

[OtherJen]

Anna! You sound like you were expecting Trump (and Republicans) to be a rational person who does hold everyone's fortune higher than his own interest???

Trump's opinion (or reality) is always what he thinks suits him best at the moment, and the Republican Party officials have always had the "grab whatever you can get away with" mentality. They don't care if they are caught in the act of stealing, because to their voter base stealing from Dems is totally Robin Hood! And you can frame most things as stealing from Dems; as long as you say you steal more from them as from Reps it's okay. You may kill Reps with preventing Corona Safety Measures, but by Io! that will kill more Dems, and anyway, it's a Hoax.

This seems accurate, at least at the party leadership level. And a sizeable proportion of rank-and-file Repubs seem to truly hate liberals and want to see them suffer. That's Trump's base.

[ixtap]

Anna! You sound like you were expecting Trump (and Republicans) to be a rational person who does hold everyone's fortune higher than his own interest???

Trump's opinion (or reality) is always what he thinks suits him best at the moment, and the Republican Party officials have always had the "grab whatever you can get away with" mentality. They don't care if they are caught in the act of stealing, because to their voter base stealing from Dems is totally Robin Hood! And you can frame most things as stealing from Dems; as long as you say you steal more from them as from Reps it's okay. You may kill Reps with preventing Corona Safety Measures, but by Io! that will kill more Dems, and anyway, it's a Hoax.

This seems accurate, at least at the party leadership level. And a sizeable proportion of rank-and-file Repubs seem to truly hate liberals and want to see them suffer. That's Trump's base.

Most of the Trump supporters I know also have the grab what you can mentality.

X program shouldn't exist!
I thought you were using that program?
Of course I am, I am entitled to it!

I have an anti government relative on food stamps and the only healthcare anyone in the family has is CHIP and WIC. Lived in housing provided by relatives for about 10 years, rarely paying any rent at all. Still tells anyone who will listen that no one has ever given him anything.

[talltexan]

I'm a kiwi, I'm not expert on USA politics. I did see today that Trump has declared his authority absolute while two different sets of governors are making their own plans for their areas reopening. So question.... if Trump wins this round, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you? And if the states win, you guys are no longer the united states under a representative leadership are you?

It depends on the subject matter. Nothing like this has come up in US history so it's a gray area just how much authority the federal government has in enforcing these quarantines. Related events (natural disasters, large scale riots) would put most decision-making authority with the governors.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. The GOP is usually the party squawking about state's rights. They'll either have to buck the party leader or expose themselves (yet again) as massive hypocrites.

It's just another case of Trump needing to stake out an extreme position in order to win the news cycle. We'll all have forgotten about this by Friday. The idea of hypocrisy is meaningless in an environment when the sheer volume of news is so high that everyone will move on within 48 hours.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

[nereo]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

It just seems so clunky. I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

[nereo]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

It just seems so clunky. I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

I think this is what you aren’t understanding or where the confusion lies. Despite what trump says or thinks, the State governors, senators and other state legislators are NOT subservient to the Federal government or a representative of a representative. Governors do not answer our report to the president or anyone in the federal government.

This arose from the fact that the USA arose from thirteen sovereign States. Each has its own autonomy, but banged together (controversially) ... not unlike today’s E.U. During our first go at it each state even has its own money and raised its militia.  Over time the federal government became far more powerful and

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

It just seems so clunky. I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

I think this is what you aren’t understanding or where the confusion lies. Despite what trump says or thinks, the State governors, senators and other state legislators are NOT subservient to the Federal government or a representative of a representative. Governors do not answer our report to the president or anyone in the federal government.

This arose from the fact that the USA arose from thirteen sovereign States. Each has its own autonomy, but banged together (controversially) ... not unlike today’s E.U. During our first go at it each state even has its own money and raised its militia.  Over time the federal government became far more powerful and

Yes, I don't understand. I'm not sure what NY for example, is actually getting from having a president at all. What's the pay off? I assume that states fund the federal gov? So what are they getting for their money?

[former player]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

It just seems so clunky. I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

I think this is what you aren’t understanding or where the confusion lies. Despite what trump says or thinks, the State governors, senators and other state legislators are NOT subservient to the Federal government or a representative of a representative. Governors do not answer our report to the president or anyone in the federal government.

This arose from the fact that the USA arose from thirteen sovereign States. Each has its own autonomy, but banged together (controversially) ... not unlike today’s E.U. During our first go at it each state even has its own money and raised its militia.  Over time the federal government became far more powerful and

Yes, I don't understand. I'm not sure what NY for example, is actually getting from having a president at all. What's the pay off? I assume that states fund the federal gov? So what are they getting for their money?

A vey big military.

[Kris]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

It just seems so clunky. I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

I think this is what you aren’t understanding or where the confusion lies. Despite what trump says or thinks, the State governors, senators and other state legislators are NOT subservient to the Federal government or a representative of a representative. Governors do not answer our report to the president or anyone in the federal government.

This arose from the fact that the USA arose from thirteen sovereign States. Each has its own autonomy, but banged together (controversially) ... not unlike today’s E.U. During our first go at it each state even has its own money and raised its militia.  Over time the federal government became far more powerful and

Yes, I don't understand. I'm not sure what NY for example, is actually getting from having a president at all. What's the pay off? I assume that states fund the federal gov? So what are they getting for their money?

The red states get tax money from the blue states.

[nereo]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

It just seems so clunky. I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

I think this is what you aren’t understanding or where the confusion lies. Despite what trump says or thinks, the State governors, senators and other state legislators are NOT subservient to the Federal government or a representative of a representative. Governors do not answer our report to the president or anyone in the federal government.

This arose from the fact that the USA arose from thirteen sovereign States. Each has its own autonomy, but banged together (controversially) ... not unlike today’s E.U. During our first go at it each state even has its own money and raised its militia.  Over time the federal government became far more powerful and

Yes, I don't understand. I'm not sure what NY for example, is actually getting from having a president at all. What's the pay off? I assume that states fund the federal gov? So what are they getting for their money?

The states do not fund the federal government - tax revenue largely does (both income tax from individuals and corporate taxes).  States do not pay into the federal coffers.  Actually, much of that money is then re-allocated back to the states in various forms — interstate highway funds, Medicare grants, etc.  Unlike many countries we do not have a federal Value Added Tax (VAT).  The federal government also gets revenue from tariffs and the lie.

What do the states get out of it?  Well, yes, a large and powerful military, a single currency, a host of federal programs (though there’s some truth to what Kris says - that currently more money flows to people in ‘Red’ states).  Citizens in all states get a retirement plan (Social Security) that’s (mis)managed at the federal level. The federal government also deals with all international trade as well as interstate commerce.  Otherwise there would need to be 50 trade agreements to buy and sell stuff from Germany, for example.

[Travis]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

It just seems so clunky. I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

I think this is what you aren’t understanding or where the confusion lies. Despite what trump says or thinks, the State governors, senators and other state legislators are NOT subservient to the Federal government or a representative of a representative. Governors do not answer our report to the president or anyone in the federal government.

This arose from the fact that the USA arose from thirteen sovereign States. Each has its own autonomy, but banged together (controversially) ... not unlike today’s E.U. During our first go at it each state even has its own money and raised its militia.  Over time the federal government became far more powerful and

Yes, I don't understand. I'm not sure what NY for example, is actually getting from having a president at all. What's the pay off? I assume that states fund the federal gov? So what are they getting for their money?

The states do not fund the federal government - tax revenue largely does (both income tax from individuals and corporate taxes).  States do not pay into the federal coffers.  Actually, much of that money is then re-allocated back to the states in various forms — interstate highway funds, Medicare grants, etc.  Unlike many countries we do not have a federal Value Added Tax (VAT).  The federal government also gets revenue from tariffs and the lie.

What do the states get out of it?  Well, yes, a large and powerful military, a single currency, a host of federal programs (though there’s some truth to what Kris says - that currently more money flows to people in ‘Red’ states).  Citizens in all states get a retirement plan (Social Security) that’s (mis)managed at the federal level. The federal government also deals with all international trade as well as interstate commerce.  Otherwise there would need to be 50 trade agreements to buy and sell stuff from Germany, for example.

It's difficult to explain without this being a full blown civics lesson, but the US Constitution sets specific powers for the federal government and says to the effect "if it's not here in black and white, the states get to do it."  The Constitution doesn't cover every eventuality and sometimes we make it up as we go.  If it involves foreign governments, it's almost exclusively a federal power.  If it involves or affects multiple states, it's a federal power or requires significant federal involvement.  Individuals and businesses pay state and federal taxes separately.  Money I pay to the state government won't be sent to the federal coffers, but taxes I pay to the feds may come back to the state in the form of a social program, construction, or something that Congress or the President decided on.  Sometimes that last one gets people really pissed off if an influential member of Congress "earmarks" a ton of the public's tax dollars for a project that only affects his constituents.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

It just seems so clunky. I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

I think this is what you aren’t understanding or where the confusion lies. Despite what trump says or thinks, the State governors, senators and other state legislators are NOT subservient to the Federal government or a representative of a representative. Governors do not answer our report to the president or anyone in the federal government.

This arose from the fact that the USA arose from thirteen sovereign States. Each has its own autonomy, but banged together (controversially) ... not unlike today’s E.U. During our first go at it each state even has its own money and raised its militia.  Over time the federal government became far more powerful and

Yes, I don't understand. I'm not sure what NY for example, is actually getting from having a president at all. What's the pay off? I assume that states fund the federal gov? So what are they getting for their money?

The states do not fund the federal government - tax revenue largely does (both income tax from individuals and corporate taxes).  States do not pay into the federal coffers.  Actually, much of that money is then re-allocated back to the states in various forms — interstate highway funds, Medicare grants, etc.  Unlike many countries we do not have a federal Value Added Tax (VAT).  The federal government also gets revenue from tariffs and the lie.

What do the states get out of it?  Well, yes, a large and powerful military, a single currency, a host of federal programs (though there’s some truth to what Kris says - that currently more money flows to people in ‘Red’ states).  Citizens in all states get a retirement plan (Social Security) that’s (mis)managed at the federal level. The federal government also deals with all international trade as well as interstate commerce.  Otherwise there would need to be 50 trade agreements to buy and sell stuff from Germany, for example.

But isn't the bolded part above exactly what's happening with PPE and ventilators?

I don't know why you guys need such a large military. You could just stop invading and policing countries that want nothing to do with you.

[Moonwaves]

Why don't your state governors just get together and run the country? What's the point of the president exactly? It appears that he doesn't really have power over what the states do anyway. Wouldn't it be better to be directly represented by someone you voted in at a local level?

In a way I think you are over thinking this. Trump often declares that he has (or should have) absolute authority even when he clearly doesn’t, while simultaneously saying he carries no blame. That’s been his MO his entire life.

Regarding the break down between state powers and federal, in most cases it’s pretty clear cut, though both sides always jockey for more power. In brief, the federal government has authority matters and interstate commerce (ie the commerce clause) as well as the power to tax and raise an army. State governments have Authority for all internal matters including things like laws, education, Marriage requirements etc.

The federal government does carry the big stock of federal revenue, so it can insist on certain compliance in exchange for federal dollars, like education standards, Highway speeds (used in the 1970s). The constitution gives citizens certain rights that neither the state nor federal government can deny (with reasonable limits - though what is “reasonable” is a intense legal battle). Free speech, due process, religion, etc.

It just seems so clunky. I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

I think this is what you aren’t understanding or where the confusion lies. Despite what trump says or thinks, the State governors, senators and other state legislators are NOT subservient to the Federal government or a representative of a representative. Governors do not answer our report to the president or anyone in the federal government.

This arose from the fact that the USA arose from thirteen sovereign States. Each has its own autonomy, but banged together (controversially) ... not unlike today’s E.U. During our first go at it each state even has its own money and raised its militia.  Over time the federal government became far more powerful and

Yes, I don't understand. I'm not sure what NY for example, is actually getting from having a president at all. What's the pay off? I assume that states fund the federal gov? So what are they getting for their money?

The states do not fund the federal government - tax revenue largely does (both income tax from individuals and corporate taxes).  States do not pay into the federal coffers.  Actually, much of that money is then re-allocated back to the states in various forms — interstate highway funds, Medicare grants, etc.  Unlike many countries we do not have a federal Value Added Tax (VAT).  The federal government also gets revenue from tariffs and the lie.

What do the states get out of it?  Well, yes, a large and powerful military, a single currency, a host of federal programs (though there’s some truth to what Kris says - that currently more money flows to people in ‘Red’ states).  Citizens in all states get a retirement plan (Social Security) that’s (mis)managed at the federal level. The federal government also deals with all international trade as well as interstate commerce.  Otherwise there would need to be 50 trade agreements to buy and sell stuff from Germany, for example.

But isn't the bolded part above exactly what's happening with PPE and ventilators?

I think that's part of the big issue in the US at the moment. The procuring and distributing PPE and ventilators in an emergency situation like now should be taken over by the federal government but hasn't been. Since the state are being left to do it themselves, they are having to compete with each other instead of the federal government becoming (for a while) the one big customer.

Disclaimer: Not a US citizen and have never lived there - most of my knowledge of US politics comes from things like watching the West Wing.

[Kyle Schuant]

You know, not saying anything about either guy personally, but when the Soviet Union only had elderly men to choose from among its leaders, the country itself wasn't heading anywhere good.

[nereo]

So Trump has decreed that all stimulus checks contain his name and signature in the memo, possibly slowing the mailing of said checks by several days.  Nevermind that it was congress who voted for the stimulus package, and congress who has the power of the purse.

I think we should put the name of every member of the legislature  on the check, in really, really, really tiny font :-P

[Leisured]

In reply to Anna, post 1457. I am Australian, a Federation, where the States manage internal matters, and the Fed manages external matter, as nereo pointed out for the US in post 1473. In Australia, this arrangement broke down early this year, during our disastrous wildfires, where the Fed took a long time to mobilise the Australian Army to help fight bushfires, because bushfires are a state responsibility, even though bushfires do not respect state boundaries.

Throughout history, government officials have had to deal with erratic monarchs. I cite the example of Edward 8th of England, a narcissistic, irresponsible and incompetent king, reminds me of someone, whose reign mercifully lasted a little under a year. I have been impressed with the way world leaders have worked around Trump, recognising that Trump is hos own mouthpiece, not influenced by the US State Dept.

In Nov this year, I urge all right thinking Americans to GET OUT AND VOTE against Trump.

[Kris]

So Trump has decreed that all stimulus checks contain his name and signature, possibly slowing the mailing of said checks by several days.  Nevermind that it was congress who voted for the stimulus package, and congress who has the power of the purse.

I think we should put the name of every member of the legislature  on the check, in really, really, really tiny font :-P

Apparently he can’t sign them (which I’m actually surprised Treasury stood up to him on) so his name is going to be in the memo.

Which makes this even more fucking stupid and juvenile.

[Lews Therin]

Which makes this even more fucking stupid and juvenile.

50/50.

A lot of people are going to receive checks from Trump. That's great for him, he gets to say he sent everyone money.

On the other hand, it's going to be a one-off check, that won't even come close to covering needs, so hopefully people will hate him for giving them a single check, and then leaving them alone as if that solved the issue.

Hopefully people will put it into perspective.

[nereo]

So Trump has decreed that all stimulus checks contain his name and signature, possibly slowing the mailing of said checks by several days.  Nevermind that it was congress who voted for the stimulus package, and congress who has the power of the purse.

I think we should put the name of every member of the legislature  on the check, in really, really, really tiny font :-P

Apparently he can’t sign them (which I’m actually surprised Treasury stood up to him on) so his name is going to be in the memo.

Which makes this even more fucking stupid and juvenile.

Thanks for the correction (and edited above). 
Makes me happy that my stimulus check has arrived via e-deposit, sans memo. It just says "US Treasury" on the vendor line.

I propose a drinking game: whenever Biden & Trump get about to debating, take a drink every time Trump mentioned how "I" sent HUGE checks to Americans (note the singular possessive).

[former player]

Which makes this even more fucking stupid and juvenile.

50/50.

A lot of people are going to receive checks from Trump. That's great for him, he gets to say he sent everyone money.

On the other hand, it's going to be a one-off check, that won't even come close to covering needs, so hopefully people will hate him for giving them a single check, and then leaving them alone as if that solved the issue.

Hopefully people will put it into perspective.

It associates the name of Donald Trump with coronavirus/covid-19 and after the first flush of spending that association may stick around longer than the money does.

[nereo]

Which makes this even more fucking stupid and juvenile.

50/50.

A lot of people are going to receive checks from Trump. That's great for him, he gets to say he sent everyone money.

On the other hand, it's going to be a one-off check, that won't even come close to covering needs, so hopefully people will hate him for giving them a single check, and then leaving them alone as if that solved the issue.

Hopefully people will put it into perspective.

It associates the name of Donald Trump with coronavirus/covid-19 and after the first flush of spending that association may stick around longer than the money does.

From here-on out I think we should follow what Fox News had been doing for the first three years by simply calling this "The Trump Economy". 
e.g. "The Trump Economy posted 17 million unemployment claims in three weeks - by far the highest ever"
or "Former Fed Chair Janet Yalen believes the current unemployment rate of the Trump Economy is already 12-13%, and likely to climb"
or "Stocks in the Trump Economy have retreated to below what they were at the end of the Obama economy"

[talltexan]

So Trump has decreed that all stimulus checks contain his name and signature, possibly slowing the mailing of said checks by several days.  Nevermind that it was congress who voted for the stimulus package, and congress who has the power of the purse.

I think we should put the name of every member of the legislature  on the check, in really, really, really tiny font :-P

Apparently he can’t sign them (which I’m actually surprised Treasury stood up to him on) so his name is going to be in the memo.

Which makes this even more fucking stupid and juvenile.

Maybe somebody could handle things wrong, and--boom!--Trump is suddenly replacing Mnuchin as Treasury Secretary and Pence becomes President?

[nereo]

So Trump has decreed that all stimulus checks contain his name and signature, possibly slowing the mailing of said checks by several days.  Nevermind that it was congress who voted for the stimulus package, and congress who has the power of the purse.

I think we should put the name of every member of the legislature  on the check, in really, really, really tiny font :-P

Apparently he can’t sign them (which I’m actually surprised Treasury stood up to him on) so his name is going to be in the memo.

Which makes this even more fucking stupid and juvenile.

Maybe somebody could handle things wrong, and--boom!--Trump is suddenly replacing Mnuchin as Treasury Secretary and Pence becomes President?

Do we really what the self-described King of Debt and Master of Bankruptcy to be the one in charge of our treasury?
I can just envision on Day 1:  "I have decided we're just sending money to CHINA, who bought so many US bonds and took advantage of us through a MASSIVE TRADE DEFICIT. BONDS held by the CHINESE are now worthless, and frankly they never should have bought them in the first place. This will NOT IMPACT REAL AMERICANS.  Also, I will provide free loans and total debt forgiveness to real-estate developers on a case-by-case basis who are very important to this economy.  MAGA!"

[dandarc]

From here-on out I think we should follow what Fox News had been doing for the first three years by simply calling this "The Trump Economy". 
e.g. "The Trump Economy posted 17 million unemployment claims in three weeks - by far the highest ever"
or "Former Fed Chair Janet Yalen believes the current unemployment rate of the Trump Economy is already 12-13%, and likely to climb"
or "Stocks in the Trump Economy have retreated to below what they were at the end of the Obama economy"

Even better than my plan to refer to him only by his full name from now on - Donald "I didn't know the flu kills people" Trump.

[Samuel]

So Trump has decreed that all stimulus checks contain his name and signature, possibly slowing the mailing of said checks by several days.  Nevermind that it was congress who voted for the stimulus package, and congress who has the power of the purse.

I think we should put the name of every member of the legislature  on the check, in really, really, really tiny font :-P

Apparently he can’t sign them (which I’m actually surprised Treasury stood up to him on) so his name is going to be in the memo.

Which makes this even more fucking stupid and juvenile.

Every time I think he's reached peak pathetic he somehow finds another level I didn't think was possible. I hate to admit it but it's become actually entertaining now that my despair reserves are exhausted and I'm just left with the dark comedy of it all.

[talltexan]

So Trump has decreed that all stimulus checks contain his name and signature, possibly slowing the mailing of said checks by several days.  Nevermind that it was congress who voted for the stimulus package, and congress who has the power of the purse.

I think we should put the name of every member of the legislature  on the check, in really, really, really tiny font :-P

Apparently he can’t sign them (which I’m actually surprised Treasury stood up to him on) so his name is going to be in the memo.

Which makes this even more fucking stupid and juvenile.

Maybe somebody could handle things wrong, and--boom!--Trump is suddenly replacing Mnuchin as Treasury Secretary and Pence becomes President?

Do we really what the self-described King of Debt and Master of Bankruptcy to be the one in charge of our treasury?
I can just envision on Day 1:  "I have decided we're just sending money to CHINA, who bought so many US bonds and took advantage of us through a MASSIVE TRADE DEFICIT. BONDS held by the CHINESE are now worthless, and frankly they never should have bought them in the first place. This will NOT IMPACT REAL AMERICANS.  Also, I will provide free loans and total debt forgiveness to real-estate developers on a case-by-case basis who are very important to this economy.  MAGA!"

I don't want him in charge of anything. But the Secretary of the Treasury is in charge of fewer things than the President.

[nereo]

The Name-on-each-stimulus-check thing is absurd and insulting, but largely irrelevant in the big picture

Two things which have come to light in the last 24 hours may carry more substantial outcomes:

1) in his quest to cast blame elsewhere, Trump has cut funding to the World Health Organization[1] during the largest pandemic in a century

2) The stimulus package will almost certainly be a windfall for real-estate developers who use pass-through corporations [2].  According to the budget office 82% of all tax benefits will go to those earning $1MM or more. The Trumps and Kushners stand to benefit enormously.

[dandarc]

#2 is not surprising at all, Donald "I didn't know the flu kills people" Trump openly bragged about probably turning out to be the most corrupt president ever. Paraphrasing of course; I think his actual words were about making the most money out from being president.

[LennStar]

So Trump has decreed that all stimulus checks contain his name and signature in the memo, possibly slowing the mailing of said checks by several days.  Nevermind that it was congress who voted for the stimulus package, and congress who has the power of the purse.

I think we should put the name of every member of the legislature  on the check, in really, really, really tiny font :-P

Na, just print in very very big letters slowed down by President Donald "judge me by the economomy" Trump
(I saw the typing error and decided it looks more realistic this way)

I know Germany has a federal model also, and that seems clunky too. I don't see the point of having representatives of representatives, and one old man to represent them all.

Just to make sure you understand: We Germans don't have representatives of representatives (except 50% of the Bundespräsident).
What we do have are reps at local level (towns), at regional level (states) and federal level (Germany).

[talltexan]

A lot of people I know are comparing US numbers to Germany and Italy ("But of course the US has more cases, Germany only has sixty million people).

Every Italian I know has told me that that Italy is a terribly run country. Every German I know tells me the opposite about Germany. No two of these are alike.

[Lews Therin]

US is canada's neighbor to the south (exact same conditions)

Their population is 10x ours, and somehow have more than 20x our cases, and more than 20x our deaths, and it continues to separate even more.

[nereo]

US is canada's neighbor to the south (exact same conditions)

Their population is 10x ours, and somehow have more than 20x our cases, and more than 20x our deaths, and it continues to separate even more.

What do you mean by "exact same conditions"?

[Lews Therin]

Island, same continent... General culture. We share most info.

If you prefer, similar conditions, apart from the political.

[nereo]

Island, same continent... General culture. We share most info.

I mean... I guess?  I've lived in both countries and they are remarkably similar in terms of general culture and are are both wealthy nations.  The weather for most (i.e. >50% of) Americans isn't really comparable to what the typical Canadian deals with.  And there's near-universal health-care disbursed by the provinces in Canada instead of the tens-of-millions in the US who either don't have or can't afford basic health care.  The social safety net in the US is comparitively terrible, which matters quite a lot in situations like this.

[talltexan]

(regarding Canada) Indeed I'm curious whether the Western Provinces general lack of density overcomes their general approach to public governance, i.e. reduced services and taxes.

[Lews Therin]

Tall texan: the taxes are lower because they are rich in oil.

Apart from that, unsure.

[ixtap]

US is canada's neighbor to the south (exact same conditions)

Their population is 10x ours, and somehow have more than 20x our cases, and more than 20x our deaths, and it continues to separate even more.

One huge discrepancy is in testing. Canada has testing rate is half again as high as the US

Another is in population density. Canada doesn't have anything that compares to NYC. Given the weather, they probably don't have any Feb/March festivals that compare to Marid Gras or Spring Break...

I am hoping, for their sake, that a third issue is messaging. The US has gotten such mixed messages throughout that it is little wonder that we still have masses of people flaunting what rules.

I also hope, for their sake, they don't have an equivalent of the evangelical idiots who insist that their right to worship is bigger than their responsibility for public health.