Commentary by Hugh Hansen

How does one even consider Bidenomics vs. Trumponomics? There has not been much time for the new administration's actions to yield numbers, except numbers around sentiment and expectations (bad and down, primarily). It's unreasonable to use 45's results, since 47's personnel and stated goals (with the exception, natch, of extending his huge tax cut expiring later this year) are so different.

Forty-six -- President Biden -- was right to pick essential, strategic American interests for both protection and investment (e.g. the Chips program and green energy). He was wrong? Slow? Short-sighted? Allied with impractical people? Not to mate that with vigorous, targeted deregulation of both techie stuff like what it takes to make changes to the electrical grid, and maddening rules around new housing. Biden and Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell rolled boxcars, maybe twice in a row, to bring inflation down without a recession.

Forty-seven and his people are now making noises about "detoxing" as a way to pre-gaslight the pain and damage, that there's a good chance their wild lurches of firings and tariffs will cause. 

I've known a lot of New Age sorts who would proclaim the body's wisdom and that anything that felt bad, was bad -- unless it was a sanctioned thing that felt bad, which could only mean that the bad feeling was necessary "detoxing". No toxins were found in, say, the sweat or urine or exhalations of the people feeling bad. Perhaps a Tesla pickup truck and a $Trump coin will protect the detoxing (former) recipients of Medicaid like crystals and algae powder did their ‘90s counterparts. 

Contributing Pundit Hugh Hansen is a retired physics and math teacher, living in Northern Michigan.