Axios: Trump Dreams About a $2 Trillion Infrastructure Plan

Axios:

“At last month’s St. Patrick’s Day lunch in the Capitol,President Trump told Richard Neal, the powerful Democratic chairman of the House’s tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, that he wants to spend close to $2 trillion on infrastructure, according to two sources to whom Neal recounted his conversation.

The big picture: Trump’s 2020 Budget calls for just $200 billion in additional infrastructure spending. A spokesperson for Neal did not comment on this reporting. A former senior White House official told me that on infrastructure, Trump’s instincts are much closer to Elizabeth Warren’s than they are to his tight-fisted acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.”

Try not to laugh.

Mick Mulvaney is Blompf’s Chief of Staff. The conservatives running the Trump administration are 180 degrees at odds with the president on policy. And yet, he is too lazy to fire them and too incompetent to hire people who are actually capable of executing a populist agenda.

Note: President Yang won’t have this problem. He isn’t a polarizing, blustering, incompetent moron. He is going to be the exact opposite of Blompf in that respect.

About Hunter Wallace 12381 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

10 Comments

  1. Remember when Mick Mulvaney put Medicare cuts into Trump’s symbolic budget and now Bernie and other Democrats will spend all of 2020 running on it?

  2. Yea, I get a feeling when Yang wants to build something, it is likely is going to get done. Quietly. efficiently, and without a bunch silly bluster. God, I want real competence running things again, not stupid Diversity Cults, or Boomer style political shows. Just fix something that matters! Like a dog that’s going to attack your cat. A dog that doesn’t really mean it will bark up storm, while doing nothing serious to the cat. A dog that means it lays back its ears and goes for that cat without a lot of yap, means it.

    • Yeah, buddy….them thar damn chinamen, boy, now THEM folks know how to git stuff done!
      No..he won’t.
      “I know a squealer when I see one, and..”
      Yang’s the diversion. Fall for it and see.
      When all this momentum for Yang (based on low-ambition greed) gets scattered to the four winds by him being Biden’s running mate, where are all the White Nationalists going to turn to so late in the reelection game?
      Back to Trump?
      Some will..
      Some may actually follow the herd off the cliff and vote for Biden to get Yang in there as VP.
      That will give Biden a SWEEPING victory which he will then use as a mandate to do all kinds of political loose-end tying for the Sanhedrin.
      Ready for that?
      Or lets say no Biden…Who then?
      Yang will NOT wind up as the presidential front runner, but will assimilate with the democrats program in the end to become SOMEONE’S VP
      running mate…
      Oprah/Yang 2020???

      • If Yang doesn’t win the nomination, it really won’t change anything.

        Sure, we won’t get the $1,000 a month, but the automation that Yang is drawing attention to will continue to chew through the working class and middle class regardless of who is president. It doesn’t matter who is president in 2021 because whoever is president in 2021 is going to have to confront rapid social and economic dislocation caused by technological change.

        In the event that Yang loses, we will continue doing what we are doing here today, which is to say, the political punditry that I have been doing for years now, covering current events, cultural criticism, book reviews, posts about history, maybe deep dives into economics and philosophy. I’m not going to vote for Joe Biden, but I will continue to analyze the race.

        • I’ll vote for Yang, I’ll vote for (((Uncle Bernie))), and I would even (maybe) consider voting for Warren if she shows the ability to squash Orange Man.

          Buttplug, Biden, or Kamala I’ll sit out.

        • Job Automation is NOT our biggest threat.
          Are robots going to write your articles?
          No.
          Cultural Miscgenation is our most serious threat.
          Its not a pleasant fact because it presents the hardest scenario possible: Social and political ostracization and neutralization in a slow boil…and we’re almost “done”…
          Our demographic is scattered far and wide with no clear unifying platform other than weariness, anger and frustration.
          I would love to see us all unite under a confederation of groups, for positive purposes, but the current regimes won’t even allow us free speech or assembly to reach that point…
          and at the moment only our survival as a group unites us, and poorly at that.
          Fight the nearest fire first, Hunter…

  3. When Trump says he wants 2 trillion dollars for his infrastructure plan for the country, what country is he talking about, the United States or Israel?

Comments are closed.