President Donald J. Trump Is About to 'Roll' the Communist Chinese

posted by Tom Tradup at Townhall 

History’s great Benjamin Franklin is credited with saying, “Nothing is certain except death and taxes.”

I would paraphrase Franklin’s wise words with this update: “Nothing is certain except these people always being wrong: former Congressman Joe Walsh…MSNBC’s prince of darkness Lawrence O’Donnell…and virtually any cast member on The View.”

This week has provided all the proof one needs to know how Trump Derangement Syndrome has poisoned the brain cells of these and other Trump haters. That list also includes Erik Erickson…Jonah Goldberg…the late Jennifer Rubin—who quit the Washington Post to launch a website that likely has fewer readers than one finds in the stands at your average Pop Warner football game—onetime “conservative” Charlie Sykes, and the follically challenged George Conway. I do not wish to appear unkind, but George likely will be the inspiration for reintroducing that 1988 infomercial sensation, the FloBee Home Haircutting System. 

As President Trump launched or increased tariffs on dozens of nations around the world—seeking to level the economic playing field and ratchet up the pressure on countries like China, which have been ripping America off for decades—the howls arose from coast to coast as “progressives,” and RINOs bemoaned the “madman” in The White House. One by one, they formed a nationwide conga line of querulous criticism that Donald Trump was plunging the United States into (a) chaos, (b) a recession, or (c) a depression by starting a “trade war” with China. These folks compromise a 2025 Fifth Column—aided and abetted by biased coverage from the Associated Press.  No story is too large or too small to be turned into an anti-Trump smear.

Cheering for America to fail is sad and unsightly, but cooler heads generally ignore this crowd and turn instead to Asia experts like Gordon Chang.

On the Salem news program THIS WEEK ON THE HILL with Tony Perkins, Chang provided a wise perspective on the Sino-American tariff standoff and stated flatly that President Trump holds all the winning cards. “I think China’s move from 84-percent to 125-percent tariffs on American goods was largely symbolic. That’s because at the 84-percent rate—plus all of the Chinese government’s informal policies against American retailers, U.S. goods were not getting into China anyway.”  He adds, “But China, of course, doesn’t have very much ammunition in this trade war because they’re the “trade surplus” company and they’re the smaller economy…President Trump is holding all the high cards.”

Chang, a Senior Distinguished Fellow at the Gatestone Institute, is realistic about America's economic challenges but has an upbeat outlook on the end result. “The only thing China can do at this point is to try and intimidate President Trump…to force him to back down. The Chinese strategy is to use Wall Street, Main Street, the agricultural lobby, and others to try to pressure Trump to give in.  I don’t think that our President is going to surrender, though, because he does know the U.S. market can’t be replaced.”

Bottom line: Chang predicts President Trump is going to win the Tariff Wat with China, but he cautions that things will be close and contentious because China knows they will lose their economy if they lose this tariff war.

Now, contrast that outlook with “Nobel laureate” Paul Krugman (he marinates in that title like a kid getting a Participation Medal at his middle school science fair.)  “Anyone sounding the all-clear on tariffs, or Trump economic policy in general, should be kept away from sharp objects and banned from operating heavy machinery,” Krugman wrote on Substack…adding that Trump is—in his Nobel laureaty lingo “stupid, weak, and erratic.”  Wow. I appreciate that Alfred Nobel is most famous for inventing dynamite and blasting caps. Still, I wonder if he ever envisioned his name being pasted on a “laureate” like Krugman, whose grasp of the economy apparently is subjugated to his penchant for snotty character assassination. (Add Krugman to the ladies from The View and Trump-obsessed former Congressman Joe Walsh and you’ve got yourself a full table of grumps for your Easter brunch.)

The Chinese would be wise to consider HBO “Real Time” star Bill Maher's recent dinner with Trump at the White House.  During their sit down, Maher says he found Trump to be gracious, funny, and self-deprecating…” unlike his public persona. I challenged him at times, and he didn’t get mad or call me a left-wing lunatic. He took it in.” 

Maher shared with his TV audience this weekend that people on the Left are furious with him, saying it was “wrong” for him to break bread with Donald Trump.   Maher says that says more about the Left than it does about him: “I feel it’s emblematic of why the Democrats are so unpopular these days,” Maher added:  “A crazy person doesn’t live in the White House… you can hate me for it, but I’m not a liar. Trump was gracious and measured.” 

With all this as a backdrop, I’d counsel the Internet trolls and “Hands Off” marchers to think about how silly they will look when the history of 2025 is written. And China? You, too.  Since it appears you’re going to eventually lose the tariff battle anyway, it might be a good time to punch your ticket and hop on board the Trump Train.  Less agita, and instead of empty posturing, you can get back to Making China Great Again.

X22, And we Know, and more- April 14

 

Judicial Imperialism: The House of Boasberg and the Left’s War on Sovereignty

posted by Charleston Allen at American Thinker 

The Supreme Court’s order on Monday granting the Trump administration’s emergency granting the Trump administration’s request to lift a lower court stay on deportations of certain Venezuelan nationals was unsigned, swift, and unmistakable in its signal—or signals.

For now, the executive branch retains its sovereign authority to enforce immigration law. And for President Trump, now in his second, non-consecutive term, the ruling marked an early victory in a week that would yield several more.

But if constitutionalists interpret this as a decisive turning point, they misread the terrain. The Left’s lawfare brigades remain dug in—launching salvo after salvo—with their campaign of sabotage unfolding in courtrooms and press releases alike, aimed less at justice than at jurisdictional chaos, narrative warfare, and no matter what, thwarting the duly-elected president of the United States.

Make no mistake: this is a war of attrition—not waged with ballots or legislation, but with briefs and bench rulings. It aims to nullify the last presidential election—and a statute nearly as old as the Constitution itself. Its arsenal: blunt injunctions and the sharpened blades of ideological jurisprudence.

This latest flashpoint emerged from a power grab cloaked in humanitarian concern. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg of Washington, D.C., issued a temporary restraining order halting the deportation of alleged members of Tren de Aragua, Venezuela’s most violent criminal syndicate—now embedded within U.S. borders, a legacy of the Biden-era’s open-border indulgence.

The pretext? A thin, uncorroborated assertion that deportees might suffer mistreatment upon return—despite repeated designations of Tren de Aragua by U.S. and allied authorities as a transnational criminal and terrorist organization. That dubious claim, transformed by judicial alchemy, became a sweeping due process theory—crafted to trigger habeas-like relief without the inconvenience of habeas itself.

Yes, you read that paragraph right: the court was seriously entertaining the claim that confirmed members of a violent, terror-affiliated syndicate faced undue risk if returned to El Salvador—or to Venezuela, the failed narco-state that birthed them.

It is not merely misguided but absurd to suggest that the United States must offer asylum and sanctuary to such actors under the pretense of civil liberty.

This isn’t law—it’s the resistance in judicial vestments, cloaked in authority but animated by politics.

The administration responded with emergency filings to the Supreme Court—warning of dire national security implications and the usurping of the president's core executive authority.

In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court lifted Judge Boasberg’s stay. Chief Justice Roberts joined Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh.

The dissents came from Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson—and Justice Barrett, who partially dissented on procedural grounds. Her equivocation underscores a sobering reality: even on bedrock questions of executive power, the Court’s center-right bloc now hedges where once it would have roared.

Reasonable minds can debate whether ACB is center-right—or simply wears a stripe all her own. The spirit of David Souter lives on.

The ruling was handed down through what critics deride as the “shadow docket”—a phrase invented not to inform but to impugn decisions that obstruct progressive priorities.

Pro tip: If you see those words in coverage, the odds are that the Left lost.

But there was nothing shadowy here. Boasberg’s order purported to affect individuals beyond his jurisdiction—many of whom were held in Texas, already deported or in international airspace when the order was issued.

Boasberg’s reach wasn’t legal—it was imperial. His ruling crossed state lines and national borders, arrogating to a D.C. courtroom powers the Constitution never envisioned. It was judicial maximalism masquerading as executive oversight.

Even more telling, the plaintiffs initially filed their case as a habeas petition—the one legal pathway the Supreme Court recognizes under the Alien Enemies Act. Then they dropped it. Why? Because habeas requires jurisdiction in the district of confinement—Texas, not Washington.

By dismissing their habeas claims and seeking class-wide declaratory and injunctive relief instead, the plaintiffs and their legal counsel effectively admitted what the Court later confirmed: their filing was forum-shopping disguised as civil rights litigation.

Boasberg took the bait and granted provisional class certification for “[a]ll noncitizens in U.S. custody who are subject to” Presidential Proclamation No. 10903—transforming a handful of cases into a nationwide blockade of immigration enforcement.

This is imperial lawfare by battering ram—assaulting the presidency and dismembering well-settled law, all under the pretense of equitable relief.

The Supreme Court made that plain, vacating his order and reminding the bench that under Ludecke and Heikkila, judicial review under the Alien Enemies Act is strictly limited—and venue lies solely in the district of confinement.

For these detainees, that means Texas, not Washington. Boasberg had no business taking the case, much less freezing national deportation policy from chambers well beyond the reach of his jurisdiction.

Justice Sotomayor’s dissent claimed the Alien Enemies Act cannot be invoked because the U.S. is not formally at war with Venezuela. That argument may find favor in Ivy League faculty lounges, but it collapses under textual and historical scrutiny.

The AEA explicitly applies in cases of invasion. Given the cartel-fueled incursion at our southern border—overseen and excused by the previous administration—the threshold has been met. Congress hasn’t issued a formal declaration of war since 1942. Are judges now the arbiters of armed conflict and foreign threats?

Justice Jackson’s dissent was even more revealing. She faulted her “fly-by-night” colleagues in the majority for failing to demonstrate urgency—a strange threshold for a case involving terrorism-linked deportations and foreign affairs. But what, precisely, is more urgent than a federal judge overriding national security deportation protocol?

Notwithstanding the dissents, the AEA remains a binding precedent. It is not some dusty relic but a cornerstone of wartime executive authority in times of incursion and national peril. If the Left wishes to repeal it, let them try through legislation.

Until then, it governs, and judges who disregard it are not interpreting the law but trespassing into the realm of the two political branches.

Yet this case was never truly about Venezuelan gang members. It was about jurisdiction and venue shopping, media manipulation, and the sabotage of immigration law through procedural sleight.

The Left’s strategy is tired but effective: file in friendly jurisdictions—D.C., San Francisco, Manhattan—seek emergency relief, spin the narrative, and dare the executive to fight back.

While limited in scope, the Supreme Court’s ruling delivers a necessary check on the wholesale venue shopping that has increasingly defined the Left’s legal strategy.

The Lords Temporal of the Legal Left are evolving their playbook, refining old tactics with fresh legal cosmetics and deeper entrenchment. The ACLU has already begun seeking class-action certification in at least one case.

It would function as a nationwide injunction in all but name if granted. But federal law—specifically, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(f)(1)—forbids lower courts from enjoining immigration enforcement on a class-wide basis. Only the Supreme Court has that power.

President Trump understands the institutional battlefield. Every legal victory is met with fresh filings and new injunctions. For the activist bench, defeat is never a setback—it’s merely the fault of a “far-right” Supreme Court stacked with flag-waving Republican appointees.

Never mind that it falls to the high court to correct the constitutional overreach of the courts below. The left-wing legal cabal will file again—somewhere, anywhere—until the judiciary finally says no.

And when it does, the same crowd that preaches reverence for “our sacred institutions” will savage them without hesitation or shame.

This ruling was a necessary and overdue correction. But if the conservative majority hopes to repel the judicial coup against executive power, one ruling won’t suffice. They must hold the line—ruling after ruling, challenge after challenge.

For now, this is a win. But make no mistake: the war is far from over. It has only just begun. Stay tuned—the next battle is already on the docket.

Democrats Found Their Next Anti-Trump Conspiracy

posted by Derek Hunter at Townhall 

You knew it was coming: the next big conspiracy theory about President Trump. They clung to Russia as long as humanly possible, parlayed that into “He’s Putin’s puppet,” and rolled into the idea that he’s corrupt beyond belief without being able to name anyway in which he is, in fact, corrupt, which would seem like a crucial element of a corruption charge. Well, now they’ve collectively come up with a new one, still vague, but new – insider trading.

How? It doesn’t matter, really. We’re not dealing with people who are dealing with reality here, we’re dealing with Democrats.

If Donald Trump were half the monster Democrats claim he is, they would be terrified to speak out against him. I don’t know if they know this or not, but fascist dictators aren’t big fans of people calling them fascist dictators, they’re kind of funny that way. They also have a habit of disappearing people who call them out for, well, anything. Yet, MSNBC still exists. CNN still exists. Every columnist at every left-wing corporate media outlet still exists.

OK, fewer of them still exist as their industry is collapsing – and it couldn’t happen to a nicer, more deserving group of people – but while their overall numbers are dwindling, the percentage of hacks in their ranks remains at 100 percent. 

Grumblings about “insider trading” and “stock manipulation” come from the same people who, just 2 weeks ago, were insisting that they were going to “take down Tesla’s stock price,” which seems like an attempt at stock manipulation and would allow for someone to short the stock for big profit. But that was different, that was them. Nothing is a problem when a Democrat does it.

Elizabeth Warren told a reporter, “I think we need a full independent investigation into who was trading, who made money, who knew what and when they knew it.”

The same day, Thursday, Dick Blumenthal told reporters his own version of the same lie and call for an investigation, which was not met with an immediate, “Hey, do you have any proof of that?” but rather, “How’s Congress do that with Republicans running it?”

Eventually, he was asked if he had any evidence, to which he responded, “Just the indications and trading patterns, and the knowledge that people in the White House, the administration, had prior knowledge of what the President would do. It’s at least a mandate for some kind of investigation.”

You know who else has “prior knowledge of what the President would do”? Anyone who paid attention to anything he said about trade and tariffs over the last 20 years, at least. Everything the President has done is everything he said he would do; what he campaigned on. If you missed it somehow, or were caught off guard by it, you’re a moron. 

If you panicked and sold, that’s on you. If you didn’t buy back in until after the dip, that’s on you too. The Dow Jones Industrial Average free-fell thousands of points in raw numbers, but really only dipped about 5 percent at its bottom, which is almost nothing. Even the stocks that went down 10 percent, regained it, which is a margin that is hardly worth risking going to prison for stock manipulation over. 

But Democrats are desperate. Adam Schiff and the gang were sending out fundraising emails left and right. Schiff wrote, “It doesn’t pass the smell test. Especially not from a president who will do anything to enrich himself and his family.” What constitutes “anything”? He doesn’t say.

Schiff continued, “Let’s not forget, this is also someone who surrounds himself with grifters,” but never named any of these “grifters.” Why? Because the absolute immunity from liability or any legal consequence only exists for what they say in the floor of the House or Senate, nowhere else. Democrats are evil, not stupid – they know if they called any random White House employee as a grifter or accused them of a crime they would face a civil suit they would lose. 

Keep it vague, keep it alive. 

By not adding any details or specifics, Democrats allow the vacuous minds of their supporters to fill in the blanks with whatever adolescent fantasies of Bond villains they need to imagine Trump, Elon Musk or anyone who disagrees with them being, to distract from their own failures.

But conspiracy theories fade away, progressive’s failures endure. That’s what they’re most afraid of. 

So, be ready for this “idea” to spread in the media over the next week, as the focus groups have filed their results and the talking point memos have gone out. The hive mind doesn’t need to be ordered, it just knows to obey. And obey they will, until it runs its course, then they’ll move on to the next great “Trump is corrupt Hitler” conspiracy theory. 

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

Trump White House Plans Bold Return to Faith for Holy Week After Biden's Trans Day of Remembrance

Sarah Arnold reporting for Townhall 

In a striking contrast to the often secular tone of past administrations, the White House under President Donald Trump is planning an “extraordinary” Holy Week, emphasizing Easter's spiritual and cultural significance. As the nation prepares to mark the holiest days on the Christian calendar, Trump ensures the observance receives the reverence it deserves—offering a clear nod to the values of faith, tradition, and religious liberty that remain central to millions of Americans. 

“President Trump promised millions of Christians across the country that he would create a White House Faith Office, and he delivered on that promise," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said. "The White House Faith Office has put together an extraordinary weeklong celebration for Holy Week ahead of Easter Sunday." 

According to the new White House Faith Office, President Trump will attend several events to celebrate and honor the holiest day of the year leading up to Easter. The president is scheduled to mark Holy Week through various events, including a special video message, hosting a pre-Easter dinner, and an Easter service for White House staff. 

“The newly created White House Faith Office is grateful to share that President Trump will honor and celebrate Holy Week and Easter with the observance it deserves," faith director of the White House Faith Office Jennifer Korn said, adding that it "will be a special time of prayer and worship at the White House to be shared with Americans celebrating the week leading up to Resurrection Sunday." 

On Palm Sunday, Trump shared a heartfelt video message wishing Jewish families in the United States and Israel a “blessed” Passover, underscoring his continued commitment to faith and tradition. On Monday, he’s expected to release a similar message honoring Holy Week—part of what insiders call a meaningful and unapologetically reverent celebration of Christianity. The week will culminate in a special Easter dinner on Wednesday, featuring hymns from the Marine Corps Band, a performance by Christian opera singer Charles Billingsley, prayers, and remarks from President Trump himself—offering a powerful contrast to the secular tone often seen in previous administrations. 

Meanwhile, on Thursday, Trump will host a staff worship service at the White House. The service will feature Rev. Franklin Graham, Pastor Greg Laurie, and Pastor Jentezen Franklin, who will lead a prayer, scripture, service, and communion. 

This is a sharp difference from how the Biden Administration celebrated Holy Week last year. Former President Joe Biden marked Easter by hosting the White House’s first Transgender Day of Visibility. The Biden White House issued a statement recognizing Transgender Day of Visibility, praising the courage and contributions of transgender Americans and reaffirming the nation’s commitment to equality for all— not the significance of Easter. 

Only Trump Is Brave Enough for This Job

Only Trump Is Brave Enough for This Job

Commentary by David Bossie 

President Donald Trump speaks during the National Republican Congressional Committee dinner at the National Building Museum on April 8, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—Aside from congressional Democrats, there’s widespread agreement among the American people that the failed status quo in Washington must be confronted immediately.

There’s also agreement that navigating our country around the economic iceberg that is rapidly approaching after decades of bad policy decisions is not a task for the faint of heart. During the 2024 presidential race, President Donald Trump campaigned on implementing the difficult but necessary reforms that have been “punted” by weak-kneed career politicians and was elected by historic margins because he has a record of keeping his promises.

And nearly 80 days into his second term, Trump, the steel-spined change agent, is busy bringing common sense back to America to change our downward trajectory before it’s too late.

No one with any credibility can argue that our $36 trillion national debt can be ignored, that our trade agreements are fair, or that allowing an enormous tax increase is sound policy.

And because he listens to the American people intently, Trump is laser focused on dealing with these three consequential issues once and for all to supercharge our economy both in the short term and for future generations. Taking on entrenched power is never easy, but entrenched power has never butted heads with a fearless visionary like Trump.

The radical Left is trying to block Trump’s fiscally responsible spending reforms and the Department of Government Efficiency’s cost-cutting recommendations at every turn, but he won’t be deterred.

On taxes, Democrats are employing garden variety class warfare tactics, but Trump knows that every American is taxed too much, and people deserve the certainty that comes along with making low tax rates permanent.

And regarding the issues of trade and tariffs, Trump will never bow to concocted media hysteria or hollow threats from powerful self-interested elites who can’t fathom a much-needed change in direction.

He believes deeply—and happens to be 100% correct—that America has spent decades entering into trade deals that put our country at a strategic disadvantage on the world stage. Americans are grateful that we finally have a leader with the guts to look out for millions upon millions of working families who have been struggling to get by for far too long.

The American people are more than willing to be patient with Trump’s reforms because they understand how badly previous leaders let things veer off track. Folks understand this president’s language, like when he says that America needs to go in for a long overdue medical procedure and the recovery won’t happen overnight.

Trump’s reciprocal tariff policy—simply charging countries the same amount that they charge us—has drawn the expected response from those riding the gravy train, but we’re already starting to see the president’s grand plan in action with over fifty countries lining up to make deals. For example, the European Union is reportedly offering a “zero for zero” tariff deal and Israel, Japan, India, Vietnam, Taiwan, and Indonesia—to name a few—have all indicated they are ready and willing to negotiate new agreements with Trump.

Instead of premature hyperventilation over daily stock market ups and downs and AstroTurf drama to drive clicks, ratings, outrage, and division, Democrats and their allies in the mainstream media should consider rooting for American success for a change. It wasn’t so long ago that liberals would line up to fight for the working class.

These early moves by reasonable nations stand in stark contrast to Communist China. The Chinese Communist Party seems eager to start a trade war with the United States instead of acknowledging what everyone else already knows—that it’s taken advantage of flawed U.S. policy for years and Trump is now working to level the playing field.

By choosing a course that is fraught with peril, China is running the risk of exposing itself as a bad actor on the world stage by refusing to act in good faith for the benefit of all peaceful nations. The CCP needs to understand that it doesn’t have former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden to kick around anymore.

It will take time for some to get used to a president who puts America first again. Regardless of how hard the decisions are or how well-funded the opposition to saving America is, Trump is going to plow forward with his robust economic plan because he realizes we can’t kick the can down the road any longer.

Whether it’s tackling spending and debt, tariffs and trade, taxes and regulations, or the size and scope of the federal bureaucracy, this president is the perfect leader to handle it all in short order. Trump understands better than most that time is of the essence and that he was made for this moment.

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

GDP is a Poor Measure of Economic Health

GDP is a Poor Measure of Economic Health

J. R. McLeod for mises.org

Gross domestic product (GDP) is the most common measure of national wealth and economic growth. Yet the layman—and even many businessmen and economists—is taken aback when mainstream commentators and professionals get very excited about changes to GDP, which seem to have little to no impact on real economic conditions. While GDP can sometimes reflect real economic conditions, this is often when conditions are very favorable or unfavorable and where other techniques would still give a better indication of economic conditions, how those conditions developed, and how they could be changed.

The fundamentals of calculating GDP are C + I + G + (X − M) = GDP, where

• C = personal consumption expenditures
• I = gross private domestic investment
• G = government consumption expenditures and gross investment
• X = exports
• M = imports

First, GDP focuses exclusively on final consumption, ignoring Say’s law—one of the best concise English language statements I can think of—which states that production must occur before consumption. An economy can suffer from serious structural problems, yet GDP won’t provide any information about these issues since it only focuses on the final part of economic activity.

Government “investment” receives a prominent role in GDP, yet government intervention is by nature noneconomic. Money is not willingly handed over to the government, meaning the first choice for that money’s use goes unfulfilled. From the perspective of economic value, government intervention only destroys value, redistributes value, or produces added value less efficiently than is otherwise the case. Yet, in the GDP framework, government intervention will always make a positive contribution.

Nor does GDP adequately reflect the effects of inflation. Focusing entirely on numerical monetary value actually goes beyond ignoring inflation to providing a rationale for it. The creation of additional fiat money does not add to wealth if we define wealth properly in terms of goods and services. Yet the more money the government creates and injects into the economy, the more the GDP increases. The money is viewed as spurring further activity, meaning it has a multiplying effect. Therefore, under the GDP framework, each person can make an argument for being handed large sums of money, as Murray Rothbard famously detailed.

The fortunes of the GDP inevitably follow fluctuations in the money supply. As artificial credit is injected into the economy, GDP increases. However, Austrian business cycle theory explains how, rather than creating true and stable growth, the boom induced by artificial credit leads inevitably to bust. When the bust occurs, the GDP framework views it as a fall in consumption, government expenditures, and other components that make up aggregate demand. So, the answer under this framework is to create more artificial credit to boost aggregate demand, boost GDP, and supposedly turn the business cycle around.

However, it is artificial credit expansion that causes the boom-bust cycle in the first place. GDP has no room for concepts that explain the cycle, such as malinvestment, the structure of production, the heterogeneous nature of capital, or even any capital theories at all. Rather, GDP sees capital as an undifferentiated, homogeneous fund.

GDP is a Keynesian metric, and we should ask why we rely so heavily on a tool of a body of work that was proven to be substantially false quite a long time ago. It is also intrinsically linked with a Keynesian view of political economy that stresses heavy government intervention in the macroeconomy.

While GDP ignores the effects of inflation, the framework recognizes in theory the deleterious effects of price inflation. Yet the track record of the GDP shows it doesn’t take this threat seriously enough. It only recognizes runaway price inflation as meaning higher consumer prices, but it doesn’t imply that there is anything inherently problematic about inflation itself.

There are logical flaws in the way GDP calculates total output as well as the price deflator it uses to take account of inflation. Prices are exchange ratios between money and units of different goods and services. These different goods and services cannot be mathematically mixed together. As Frank Shostak explains:

Suppose two transactions were conducted. In the first transaction, one TV set is exchanged for $1,000. In the second transaction, one shirt is exchanged for $40. The price or the rate of exchange in the first transaction is $1000/1TV set. The price in the second transaction is $40/1shirt. In order to calculate the average price, we must add these two ratios and divide them by 2. However, $1000/1TV set cannot be added to $40/1shirt, implying that it is not possible to establish an average price.

It is interesting to note that in commodity markets, prices are quoted as Dollars/barrel of oil, Dollars/ounce of gold, Dollars/tonne of copper, etc. Obviously, it wouldn’t make much sense to establish an average of these prices.

Mark Skousen’s gross output statistic provides a superior metric for national income accounting. It takes proper account of business-to-business spending and the production economy. It also integrates with Austrian capital theory and the model first referred to as Hayek’s triangles. Skousen’s work seeks to develop and quantify a model that runs through the work of Carl Menger, Friedrich von Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and Roger Garrison. It also integrates with mainstream measurements, which in many ways is an advantage, though perhaps means that it has not fully escaped flaws associated with GDP.

The general sense is that Western economies are not strong, even if interpretations differ about how these problems developed and their future solutions. Studies that praise present conditions rely heavily on GDP. They also rely on people failing to understand trajectory through time. Yes, we have iPhones now that we didn’t have in 1950, but the structure of the economy, as well as the rate at which it was improving, was better then than it is now. We could be doing better today than we are; talking at length about conditions from half a century, or even hundreds of years, ago in what are meant to be studies of economies today only obfuscates this fact.

The commonly used GDP per capita doesn’t give useful information about the average standard of living. Equatorial Guinea has a high GDP per capita but virtually no middle class. San Francisco has a high GDP per capita, but the widespread presence of drug-addled homeless people on the streets severely impacts quality of life.

A survey should instead attempt to determine the economic condition of the average citizen of today and should include his assessment of the state. It should take a holistic view of the economy, based on a sound understanding of economic theory, and measure factors that drive real economic growth, such as savings.

Unfortunately, GDP measures regard savings as a “leakage” from the system and a drag on economic growth. Thus, Keynesians believe that the real value of capital spending is not the creation of capital itself but rather the spending that goes with it. This is not a prescription for a strong, growing economy but rather an economy feeding upon itself.

Elon Musk is Doing What Eric Holder Dreamed of Doing

Sundance reporting for CTH 

HAT TIP to Elon Musk sycophant, Mario Nawfal, who gleefully writes:

“Elon’s DOGE just teamed up with Palantir — the AI data company co-founded by Peter Thiel — to help the IRS build a massive “mega API.”

What’s a mega API? Think of it like a giant, turbo-charged plug that lets computers talk to each other. This one would let the IRS finally access all of its scattered, ancient tax data in one place.

For 3 days straight, Palantir’s tech geniuses, DOGE officials, and IRS engineers have been locked in a digital war room, trying to modernize a system that still faxes things like it’s 1997.

It’s like giving a flip phone the powers of ChatGPT — if ChatGPT worked for the IRS and wanted your W-2s. Yes, it’s weird. Yes, it’s real.” (LINK)

Yes, Elon Musk and Palantir (CEO Alex Carp) are going to create the IRS interface that links your tax identification to all other government monitoring databases.  The sourcing is HERE and HERE.

Against enormous backlash from those who believe Elon Musk, Peter Theil, Palantir and JD Vance are the saviors of our nation; while facing anger from those who define the telling of truth as a black pill – while shouting that failing to support Elon Musk is akin to attacking President Trump; CTH Previously warned about the most likely end game extensively. [HERE] and [HERE] and [HERE]

To all those voices who refuse to see what is becoming increasingly obvious, understand the core CTH baseline, we don’t care if information is uncomfortable, because the Truth has No Agenda.  Here’s the explanation from WIRED:

WIRED: […] “Corcos has discussed plans for DOGE to build “one new API to rule them all,” making IRS data more easily accessible for cloud platforms, sources say. APIs, or application programming interfaces, enable different applications to exchange data, and could be used to move IRS data into the cloud. The cloud platform could become the “read center of all IRS systems,” a source with direct knowledge tells WIRED, meaning anyone with access could view and possibly manipulate all IRS data in one place.

Over the past few weeks, DOGE has requested the names of the IRS’s best engineers from agency staffers. Next week, DOGE and IRS leadership are expected to host dozens of engineers in DC so they can begin “ripping up the old systems” and building the API, an IRS engineering source tells WIRED. The goal is to have this task completed within 30 days. Sources say there have been multiple discussions about involving third-party cloud and software providers like Palantir in the implementation. (more)

This is the one Musk endeavor that will not be opposed by either wing of the DC UniParty.  Remember, Palantir already has multiple government contracts in defense, intel and national security agencies throughout government.

I’m just going to cut to the chase and again outline where this is going, repeating an encapsulation we have provided repeatedly.

I’m sure there is some value in this process. In fact, I am certain that utilization of enhanced algorithmic AI software to streamline government data systems does hold merit. However, that’s not the big picture issue that concerns me.

Everything we see unfolding, from the Tech Bro alignment with Trump, to the network of influence after the election, to the selection and advisement of specific individuals to join the administration, all the way to the first-round expose’ of USAID, should be looked upon with a background forecast.

(1) gaining access to govt data was the goal; (2) monetizing the system with proprietary AI contracts (vis-a-vis Palantir) is the benefit; (3) however, a national security justified surveillance state is going to be the outcome.

As people are shocked at the USAID spending scandal unfolding, I would posit the USAID silo was chosen first for DOGE exploration specifically because the subsequent outrage would gain the highest amount of public support for the pending solution. It’s the pending solution to the crisis that we should be very focused on.

Their solution will never be about US, it will always be about THEM; what’s in their best interests. That’s their focus, not us, them.

Failing to STOP after crisis in the past always ended up with acceptance of their solution. Now we take off our shoes at the airport, go through body scans, accept pat-downs, wear masks, accept sketchy vaccines, click yes on 5,000-word terms of service for privacy statements we never read, align ourselves with Real ID, and generally accept the all-encompassing surveillance state; none of which is grounded upon liberty or freedom. It’s all based on govt control.

Yes, as poked by Musk the govt is in crisis, and just as sure as you are reading this the administrators within govt already have the solution ready to roll.

“We will use advanced technology and non-partisan AI programming, to make the government more efficient and ensure this level of corruption and wasteful spending never happens again.”  That’s the selling point.

Every dollar will be tracked, monitored and oversight will be transparent and available for everyone to see. Just ignore the part where the same efficiency system is monitoring your real ID, connecting your personage to the new govt and private sector interfaces, and click “I agree” on your next federal tax filing.

Trust us Comrade citizen, the new technologically advanced DODGE approved govt system cares about responsible stewardship and you. Swear.”

The process starts by downloading government data to an AI enhanced database for review and filtration.

You forgot to pay your XXXX fees (or taxes), ATM doesn’t work for you now. Oh and whoops, you can’t renew your passport or govt compliant DL either.

The streamlining and downsizing of government through the use of AI systems is a good thing, perhaps a very good thing. However, watch out for deployment into the DHS/IRS interface because that will give rise to consequences from the newly expanded Surveillance State.

Peaceniks don’t build bombs; and those who genuinely believe in liberty do not build nor support domestic surveillance networks that can be weaponized depending on who is in power. {BACKSTORY HERE and HERE}