Left-wing conspiracy theories seem to have been ramping up in recent weeks, fired up by the right-wing MAGA split on President Trump and the Epstein files. Most conspiracy theories about the president revolve around his relationship to Russian dictator/President Vladimir Putin. These are easy conclusions to draw, from the inscrutable Helsinki meeting in 2018 after which Trump said he trusted Putin’s denial of 2016 election tampering over his own intelligence community’s official assessment that reported otherwise to Trump’s Friday meeting in Alaska with Putin, after which the US president changed his tune on whether he seeks a ceasefire first, or a peace plan first.

You do not come to The Hustings to discuss left-wing or right-wing conspiracy theories. This is the place for serious echo chamber-free discussion of such issues as the proposed peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine, and other issues and news of the day. 

Email your fact-based, civilly stated COMMENTS editors@thehustings.news and please indicate your political leanings (irrespective of the leanings of the particular comment) in the subject line. –Editors

_____
MONDAY 8/18/25

Commentary by Stephen Macaulay

“So there’s no deal until there’s a deal.” –Donald Trump

Maybe the spell will finally be broken.

Maybe people will realize that Trump is not a consummate dealmaker.

He may not even be a dealmaker who could get a good price at a used car lot.

Trump claimed that he would resolve the Russian war against Ukraine within 24 hours of his sitting down behind the Resolute Desk.

Funny thing: the Resolute Desk was a gift from Queen Victoria to 19^th president Rutherford B. Hayes.

One of the things Hayes did was withdraw federal troops from the South, thereby helping put an end to Reconstruction.

One of the things that Trump is doing is putting troops in the streets of US cities, thereby helping create a greater divide in our body politic.

Another thing that Hayes did was push for merit-based government appointments as opposed to the spoils system.

Another thing that Trump is doing is deploying the spoils system in a way that makes those in the 19^th century seem like amateurs.

Some seven months after sitting down behind that desk, he still hasn’t delivered. (Of course, one of the things he now says is that he was just joking about forging peace in Ukraine. Ever notice how if there is something that is in some way wrong, he claims he wasn’t serious or it is in some ways fake or has something to do with someone else, generally Biden?)

Trump met with Vladimir Putin, ostensibly to create a “deal.”

And Putin — after reportedly stroking Trump’s ego by claiming everything from the 2020 US presidential election being rigged in part because of mail-in ballots and by saying that had Trump been president in 2022 the war in Ukraine wouldn’t have occurred (consider how bizarre that is: Putin invaded Ukraine; if he didn’t want the war to start, he wouldn’t have done that and it wouldn’t have mattered who was in the Oval Office or any other office, for that matter) — climbed back into his Ilyushin II-96-300PU and returned to Moscow, where he could continue directing his troops to continue to blow up apartment houses, hospitals, schools, and whatever else in Ukraine.

No deal.

What deals has Trump made?

There were the 90 deals in 90 days that were supposed to occur regarding the so-called reciprocal tariffs.

They didn’t occur.

And while there have been many “deals” announced, by and large these are “frameworks” or parts of “on-going negotiations.”

Consider: To deal with Putin, Trump would need to deploy things like strong communications skills (since taking office, his meandering answers to questions lead some people to wonder whether Grandpa should spend more time sleeping and less time on Truth Social in the middle of the night) and the ability to perform strategic thinking.

To deal with countries that he’s arbitrarily applied tariffs to, it isn’t a matter of give-and-take, it is essentially Trump saying, “This is my country and if you want to do business with my country, you have to go through me.” That’s not a “deal.” That’s Trump being a bully. (And if there is any doubt about whether these tariffs are part of a strategic plan, then consider the additional tariffs applied to Brazil because Trump doesn’t like the way Bolsonaro is being treated by the democratically elected government or the absurd tariffs (based on “national security” and drug trafficking) with our closest and once-best-ally Canada.)

And consider this: On August 13, Trump said there would be “very severe consequences” for Russia if Putin didn’t agree to end the war after the two leaders met.

They met.

There are not consequences.

Hell of a deal.

Macaulay is pundit-at-large for The Hustings.

_____
MONDAY 8/18/25

Yet another of our contributing pundits responds to the discussion by Rich Corbett and Stephen Macaulay over President Trump 47’s inscrutable economy, while Pundit-at-Large Macaulay is back in the right column for more on the tariff folderol:

Trump’s Remix Redux -- China (and Russia) continue to dine on our TACOs while we the public become ever more complicit in the theft of our own attention. We Didn't Start the Fire's (Billy Joel) 119 event references span 40 years; Trump fills a half-assed remix in six months and we keep Xing in requests to play it again. –Hugh Hansen

•••

Agree with Corbett or with Macaulay and Hansen? Somewhere in-between, or way to their left or right? Whatever your position, this is the echo chamber-free place for it, so long as it’s stated with civility and without getting personal. 

Email your COMMENTS to editors@thehustings.news and please indicate whether you lean right or left (irrespective of a single position on a particular subject or issue) in the subject line so we may post your letter to ed in the proper column. –Editors

_____
THURSDAY 8/14/25

Commentary by Stephen Macaulay

On August 1, Donald Trump fired Erika McEntarfer, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Commissioner.

Why?

Because the BLS came out with jobs data which show the employment numbers aren’t what the White House wants them to be.

Consequently they are, in Trump’s words, “faked” and “rigged.”

There is no supporting evidence presented, of course.

The BLS recalculated its numbers for May and June — something that is completely common — and determined there was a reduction of 258,000 in the number of jobs created — that’s COVID jobs category.

And the BLS determined that in July the economy only added 73,000 jobs.

Were that number to be readjusted, there would be a serious, serious issue.

But again, realize that the numbers adjustment isn’t something that has occurred only during during the Trump administration. Large data is hard.

Trump, of course, didn’t like the numbers, so he had the person delivering them fired.

This whole notion of firing people because he doesn’t like the economic numbers they provide is Trump’s M.O.

Over this past weekend Trump took to his social media site and wrote that Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon “should go out and get himself a new economist.”

Why?

Because Goldman Sach’s economics team, led by Jan Hatzius, came out with a note saying through June US consumers have absorbed 22% of the cost of tariffs and that the bank anticipates it could go to 67%.

That, of course, flies in the face of the false claim that foreign countries and companies are paying the tariffs. US companies and US consumers are.

Takes Time

Now there seems to be some notion that the people who claimed the tariffs would have an immediate consequential effect on the economy are in the Chicken Little category.

We should be happy that there hasn’t been some sort of collapse.

But how is it that General Motors, a bastion of manufacturing, can announce it lost $1.1 billion in a single quarter due to tariffs and it doesn’t make people a little uneasy — to say nothing of the fact that the company anticipates it may lose $5 billion this year because of tariffs?

Is it plausible that a company that is losing money of that magnitude is going to (a) hire a whole bunch of people or (b) buy a whole bunch of automation because it can do the work without as many high-priced people.

(Let’s face it: the reason why GM makes vehicles in places like South Korea and Mexico is because it is more cost-effective for it to do so — and those cost savings are, in part, passed along to the consumers. The argument about a massive influx of manufacturing jobs as a consequence of the tariffs is simply flawed. Will there be reshoring? Yes. Will there be a sufficient number of jobs created to offset the costs that will be carried by consumers as a consequence of the tariffs? Not by a long shot.)

About Your Groceries

While a strong stock market is good for our 401Ks and we should all want that to continue, Wall Street is not the same — as we heard a lot during the presidential campaign from the likes of JD Vance, but not so much of late — as Main Street.

And we buy our goods on Main Street.

There seem to be some huzzahs! associated with this week’s Consumer Price Index numbers, including Trump’s claim that “tariffs have not caused inflation,” let’s look at the opening of the BLS release: “The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) increased 0.2 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis in July, after rising 0.3 percent in June, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Over the last 12 months, the all items index increased 2.7 percent before seasonal adjustment.”

Seems to me that words like “increased” and “rising” are indicative that things are getting more expensive. Sure, those numbers are small now. But they are going in the wrong direction.

While Trump is not responsible for the full 12 months, he’s now been in office for more than half of that time, and just like he hasn’t ended the war in Ukraine, he hasn’t caused prices of groceries to go “way down.”

In February the price of food, according to the BLS, was up 0.2% over the price in February. In March it was up 0.4% over February. In April, there was an -0.1% decline, followed by an 0.3% increase in May, and another in June. Remember those are month-over-month increases, which means that it is compounded. Even small numbers matter when you’re at your local Kroger.

Overall, prices were up 2.7% in July 2025 compared to July 2024.

Again, while small numbers, it was proclaimed there would be movement in the opposite direction, and that is not happening.

Out of Your Pockets

In addition to which, not only does Goldman Sachs see an increase in costs for consumers, there is the Yale Budget Lab calculating the average consumer will have a hit of between $2,400 and $3,800 and Moody’s Analytics seeing a $2,400 premium paid by the average household.

Near as I can tell, NO US financial firms predict that consumers will pay lower prices as a result of tariffs.

While the administration boasts of the money that is coming into the Treasury as a result of tariffs, that money is not being paid by the foreign governments that are “ripping us off.” No, that is money that is being paid by companies that are purchasing foreign goods. The consensus is that those companies are, in many cases, absorbing those costs. This means they are taking a financial hit. Which will not make their investors very happy. So at some point, they are going to have to pass a larger percentage of those costs to consumers. Which gets us to that $2,400 that consumers are going to be paying overall per annum.

Going back to the GM example, many auto analysts predict that the average price of a new vehicle is going to increase $2,200 because of the tariffs.

Let’s assume that because of that price increase, fewer people are going to afford a new vehicle. So they hold on to their old one (which also becomes more expensive to maintain due to the 25% tariff on auto parts — and as most auto parts are made of things like steel, aluminum, and copper, there’s a 50% tariff on that, too). This means companies are going to need to be building fewer cars because there are fewer people buying.

So if you are running a factory and have less demand for the products you’re producing, do you keep all of your employees, or adjust the number to meet the demand?

And this applies to products across the board.

Trump can fire all of the people in government that he finds aren’t parroting his claims. He can post that executives at private companies should get fired.

But at the end of the day, the costs are going to be borne by all of us.

Maybe $2,400 isn’t much to Trump, Lutnick and Bessant, but it certainly matters to many Americans—even those who voted for Trump who thought what they pay at the supermarket would be less, not more. 

_____
THURSDAY 8/14/25

Commentary by Stephen Macaulay

If frantic, unfocused activity is the name of the game in terms of running the United States, then the Trump Administration is superb in its execution of, well, everything that it is doing.

Not that I am suggesting that this is all good — and I must admit it is difficult to find much goodness in what it is doing (no, I am not saying that this is necessarily evil, just bad for the citizens of the country in many cases).

But there is continual, frantic activity such that things that are being done aren’t questioned because suddenly there is something else occurring that is even more bizarre. When, for example, has a president ever called for the firing of the CEO of a public company?

Or doesn’t it seem strange that there seems to be an inability to keep people in important positions:

Marco Rubio, for example, who has a big job as Secretary of State, was also named acting National Security Advisor. Scott Bessent, Secretary of Treasury, has been named acting head of the IRS. Sean Duffy, Transportation Secretary, is also interim NASA director. (Well, one might argue that NASA is transportation-adjacent.)*

Every one of these jobs is a big one, so somehow this inability to get people in positions and keep them there is an indication that there is no handle on human resources. If this was a company, the head of HR would be long gone. But in these

cases, there are too many distractions to pay attention to the fundamentals like

having someone in charge of internal revenues (tax cuts or not, the government still

needs to collect income, and it isn’t all based of tariffs).

Another problem takes the form of the multitudinous cuts that were made to government programs by various unappointed people (the minions at DOGE) and appointed people (the Secretary of Health and Human Services). In the first case, it is the addressing of alleged “waste, fraud and abuse,” which is often stated but rarely proven. In the latter case, it is predicated on an ideology that doesn’t use evidence as a basis as much as belief — which works for religion, but not science.

The severe impacts that these undertakings have are far more consequential than might be imagined.

In an interview with Paul Krugman, Helene Rey, a professor of economics at the London Business School, said: 

“I think the constant attacks on institutions of the United States, which are undermining the credibility of the currency, are actually very serious. So tariffs are one thing, okay, and that's a non-trivial issue. There's a lot of uncertainty, et cetera. But the constant attack of this administration on the traditional institutions underpinning US long-term growth and US strength in innovation, in technology, such as the attack on universities, but also on the financial side — the attack on the Federal Reserve. All this, I think, is extremely serious and I think is really leading to a reassessment in the rest of the world of the dollar as a currency that one can fully trust.”

The fact that US universities have given rise to some of the most amazing technologies that are commercialized and invested in is something that isn’t helped when the Trump administration freezes some $2.2 billion to Harvard. 

Other countries invest in the US because it is expected that there will be innovation that will lead to growth; Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s cancellation of half-a-billion dollars in federal funding for mRNA research is exactly the opposite of that (to say nothing of the potential negative health implications because a guy who has NO background in medicine or science doesn’t like the tech).

Eliminating support for electric vehicles — both in terms of tax credits for the purchase of the vehicles and the spending to build out infrastructure — means that the US vehicle manufacturers are now more interested in building internal combustion engine-powered vehicles because they can make more money on them — while Chinese and European vehicle companies innovate. The US becomes a smog-covered island in terms of its auto industry.

The US dollar is a reserve currency, meaning that it is held by and used by other countries for trade, which positively redounds to the US. By using dollars, the dollars become more valuable. While it says “In God We Trust” on the dollar, by being the main global reserve currency central banks around the world are saying, in effect, “In the US We Trust.”

But, Rey suggests, the US is losing its credibility around the world.

If another currency — the euro, the yuan — becomes the reserve, then the US has a problem.

This doesn’t make America great, it makes it an outlier.

But something else is going to happen to distract us from what is seemingly inevitable if the country continues to be run by unserious people.

•••

*One of the things to think about regarding many of the appointments: These people are comprehensively unqualified for their positions so they are immediately over their heads. Were someone staffing a business they would do a better job of selecting from the resumes than the Trump Administration has done.

Macaulay is pundit-at-large for The Hustings.

_____
TUESDAY 8/12/25

Commentary by Rich Corbett

In 2025, President Donald Trump’s economic policies have propelled the United States toward a new era of prosperity, delivering impressive results for workers and businesses while setting the stage for continued growth. His bold agenda — centered on tax cuts, deregulation, strategic trade policies and a push for monetary policy reform — has solidified America’s economic strength, with a promising outlook for the future.

The extension of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, signed into law as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on July 4, 2025, stands as a flagship achievement. By preserving lower tax brackets, eliminating taxes on tips, taxes on overtime pay and expanding the standard deduction for seniors, the new legislation ensures families and businesses keep more of their hard-earned money. The Tax Foundation projects an 0.8% increase in GDP over the long term from these tax provisions, fueling economic activity and consumer confidence.

Deregulation has been another pillar of Trump’s 2025 success. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has streamlined federal operations, slashing red tape and offering recommendations to cut bureaucratic overhead. This will save taxpayers billions and businesses over $220 billion in annual savings from deregulatory efforts. Small businesses in America is growing again, with confidence levels reaching new highs, as reported by the Small Business Administration.

On trade, Trump’s “America First” approach has reshaped global relationships to prioritize US interests. The April 2 “Liberation Day” tariffs, including a 10% baseline on all imports and higher rates on countries like China, have spurred domestic manufacturing. A 2024 study cited by the White House noted that first-term tariffs strengthened the U.S. economy by encouraging reshoring of industries like steel and aluminum. Recent trade deals with the European Union, Japan and South Korea, securing 15% tariffs, demonstrate Trump’s ability to negotiate favorable terms while maintaining global partnerships. The USMCA’s continued success ensures North American trade remains a cornerstone of economic stability.

The Trump administration has voiced concerns about the Federal Reserve’s interest rate policies under Chairman Jerome Powell, which have posed challenges for young Americans aspiring to homeownership as well as for the automotive industry. Elevated rates have driven up mortgage costs, making it harder for first-time buyers to enter the housing market, and have increased financing costs for new car purchases, impacting both consumers and manufacturers. Trump has called for a more accommodative monetary policy to ease these burdens, advocating for lower rates to stimulate homebuilding and auto sales, which would further boost economic growth.

Despite headwinds from high interest rates, Trump’s policies have kept the economy strong, with second-quarter GDP growing at an annualized 3%, fueled by continued consumer spending and increased domestic production. Unemployment remains low at 4.2%, and wage growth of 3.9% continues to empower American-born workers. Inflation, holding steady at 2.7% in June, reflects the resilience of Trump’s economic framework, which continues to deliver for families and businesses alike.

Looking ahead, the future is bright. Trump’s focus on energy independence, through expanded fossil fuel production and a plan to refill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This promises lower fuel costs for all Americans and will enhance energy exports. Ongoing tariff negotiations and anticipated Federal Reserve leadership changes will further stabilize markets and support growth by addressing high interest rates, paving the way for greater affordability in housing and automotive sectors. With consumer spending driving progress and businesses investing in American-made goods, 2025 is poised to end as a landmark year, fulfilling Trump’s vision of a new economic golden age.

_____
TUESDAY 8/12/25

WARNING: The Bureau of Labor Statistics releases the July Consumer Price Index Tuesday morning, August 12, without the chief administrator fired by President Trump after a dismal July jobs report and severe downgrading of May and June numbers. 

Watch the middle column for the latest CPI and then look to the left and right columns for commentary. 

Scroll down with the trackbar on the right to read “Who is the Real Radical?” in the right column by Pundit-at-Large Stephen Macaulay, and “The Language of Immigration Shapes Perception” by contributing pundit Jerry Lanson. 

Then weigh in with comments of your own. The Hustings always welcomes civil comments on all current political issues. Email your COMMENTS to editors@thehustings.news and please indicate your political leanings in the subject line, irrespective of your position on a specific issue, so that we may post your comments in the proper column.  –Editors

_____
MONDAY 8/11/25

In which a contributing pundit on the right responds to left-column contributing pundit Jerry Lanson’s “The Language of Immigration Shapes Perception”:

Jerry Lanson’s personal story and opinion on US immigration laws was a solid argument to change legal immigration numbers. It is … and has been … a debate Americans have had for decades. If border security was taken seriously by all those who take an oath to live by and “uphold the laws of the United States” and if “carrots” were not dangled in front of those who would like to immigrate to this country illegally, Congress would find it easier to compromise on needed immigration reform and numbers. If the same cycle of rewarding illegal aliens with benefits and extending hope for amnesty without consequences continues, don’t expect the American people and Congress to agree on changing US immigration law. –Rich Corbett

_____
MONDAY 8/11/25

Commentary by Jerry Lanson

Words matter. They shape the way we think about people born elsewhere, especially if they crossed into this country without proper papers.

For as long as I can remember, these immigrants have been referred to widely as “illegal aliens.” Today, the Trump Administration regularly uses the term even for those living, working and studying in this country legally.

In the last week, The Boston Globe wrote about a Jamaican-born seasonal police officer at Old Orchard Beach in Maine who was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and shipped to the Plymouth Country Correctional Facility in Massachusetts though his working papers in this country extended to 2030 and The Washington Post and other outlets told of a 20-year-old, Korean-born Purdue University student, the daughter of an Episcopal priest. She was abducted from a New York City immigration courthouse where she had gone to renew her visa and shipped to a Louisiana ICE detention center. She was released five days later after nationwide outrage led by the faith-based community.

ICE officials referred to both as “illegal aliens.”

Whomever the term is applied to conveys the message that these people are (a) criminals and (b) from another planet, or at least strange and different.

In fact, the overwhelming majority of immigrants, documented and undocumented, are neither.

Most often even those entering the country without documents are ordinary and sometimes courageous people -- husbands and wives, mothers and fathers seeking better lives in the United States, often fleeing oppressive governments, wars or gangs that make it difficult and dangerous for them to stay in their countries of origin. They and their children face threats, violence and extortion.

Any amateur student of history knows that sometimes immigrants have no choice but to flee their countries of birth. Their lives are on the line. Think of Europe in the 1930s. Look back at your own family members, wherever they came from, and ask yourself whether any of your descendants came here because they had no choice.

My father was fortunate to enter this country legally from England through Ellis Island early in 1937. His uncle already lived in this country and could sponsor him. But he certainly did not flee Germany “legally.” Though baptized a Lutheran, he was culturally 100 percent Jewish. He recognized his life in Nazi Germany would soon be in peril (his father died of a heart attack, the day after Adolph Hitler was appointed German chancellor in early 1933).

So one day in the summer of 1935, my dad took a hike with a non-Jewish girlfriend in the hills along along the Czechoslovakian border. At the summit, she hiked back into Germany. My dad hiked into Czechoslovakia. In his shoes were thousands of dollars, his own money but inheritance he would have been forbidden to take out of Germany.

What’s my point?

When Gunther Lichtenstein, who years later would become Gunther Lanson, hiked into Czechoslovakia, he clearly was an undocumented immigrant – a so-called “illegal alien.” So were tens of thousands of others who fled the Nazi extermination camp machine to countries bordering Germany, seeking to make their way by land and sea to safety.

Would those of you who use the term “illegal aliens” to describe those who come to this country, often to flee oppression, have scorned people like my dad? I doubt it. Should today’s immigrants follow the murky letter of our immigration laws even if leaves them as prey for dictatorships, terrorists and gangsters in home countries from Afghanistan to El Salvador?

It is true that there are millions of undocumented people in this country. Some have lived here since childhood, uncertain how to change their status. Are they illegal? Aliens? Or contributing members of our society?

ICE’s own data show that nearly three of four immigrants being abducted by our government from worksites, the street, their cars and their homes have never been convicted of any crime, not even the most minor ones. Some have lived in this country for decades. When jailed or deported by this administration, they leave behind children, many of them birthright citizens, some who’ve served in the military, are working or are enrolled in college.

When my father arrived in the United States, legally but after a journey that began with an “illegal” escape into Czechoslovakia, he still had some of the money that was in his shoes when he hiked out of Nazi Germany.

In New York City, he used this money to pay his bills while earning a dollar or two a day as an usher in a movie theater, where, watching movies over and over again, he gained greater mastery of the English language. He married an American girl, served as a master sergeant in the US Army, raised two sons, opened a printing business and, later, worked as director of sales promotion for an international lighting company.

He retired from Long Island to Vermont, where he chaired his local planning board, started a chess club and opened a local travel agency with a business partner. When heavy rains flooded the Connecticut River over its banks, inundating those living in low-lying areas, my mom and dad invited long-time locals to stay on their hilly property until the water receded.

Imperfections and all, Gunther Lanson lived the quintessential American immigrant story. He certainly was no “alien.” He was part and parcel of every community in which he lived as are many who come today from Latin America, Cape Verde, Haiti, Syria, Afghanistan and elsewhere. 

They live as our neighbors. They care for our elderly, our yards and gardens, our homes and more. They start businesses and, given the opportunity, often thrive.

Undocumented, no doubt, some are. But please, don’t call them illegal. Don’t call them aliens. Don’t make them different. We are lucky to have them in our communities.

This commentary first appeared in Lanson’s Substack, From the Grassroots.

_____
WEDNESDAY 8/6/25

Commentary by Stephen Macaulay

Donald Trump sent letters on July 31 to 17 of the leading pharmaceutical companies in which he tells them, in no uncertain terms, that they must lower prescription drug prices in the US, stating that if they “refuse to step up, we will deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families from continued abusive drug pricing practices.”

In the text he pointed out there was a May 12 Executive Order, “Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients,” which has the objective of stopping “global freeloading.” Which sounds good, but which is not the case.

While it is true that “brand name drug prices are up to three times higher on average than elsewhere for the identical medicines,” arguably there is a reason why this is the case in many instances in places like the European Union and Canada:

The governments negotiate prices.

Discussion. Bargaining. Compromise.

While the two words rhyme, their meaning is not the same:

Dictate/Negotiate

Throughout his campaign as well as during his time in office, Trump has railed against the “leftist, radical, extremist” etc. people who happen to be in the Democratic Party.

Yet here he is (not unlike his telling corporations that they should absorb the cost of tariffs), taking a page from the Communist Playbook.

In the dictates of communist ideology, there is the abolition of the profit motive, which is a fundamental part of capitalism.

There is centralized — as in “government” — economic planning: the State decides, for example, what prices are.

And there is no free-market competition. The State decides.

There is no discussion, bargaining or compromise. There is a dictate handed down from on high.

Should there be any resistance, then “every tool in our arsenal” will be used to crush the resistance.

I don’t like having to pay higher prices for prescription drugs more than anyone else. But I also understand there are things like market forces that need to be considered.

If the State decides how much drugs should cost — and let’s face it, the State probably doesn’t have the slightest idea of how much the cost associated with the drugs are (from the costs of development and testing through production and distribution, especially now that is evidently thinks that professionals are overrated) — then there is little incentive for pharmaceutical companies to create new drugs. How is that going to work out when the next pandemic arises?

And where does this control stop?

Should Trump be able to dictate the prices of everything, from gasoline to fast food, from toys to candy?

Liberals have always been in favor of the government playing a big role in the economy while conservatives want limited government and free market forces.

So where is the Republican Party, the ostensible conservatives, when it comes to pushing back on what is clearly a case of Statism?

Trump has signed some 180 Executive Orders which, in effect, supersede the authority of Congress to write laws. 

Similarly, although Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says “The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises” — which includes tariffs — the President has essentially taken over, claiming in many cases that it is based on “national security,” which makes you wonder how a Kia minivan imported from South Korea poses a military threat.

Again, where are all the congressional free-market people?

Lower drug prices seems a good idea — until the President decides that for whatever whim higher prices (say, by imposing a tariff on places like Switzerland, where several pharmaceuticals are made) are a better idea.

Yes, this is radical, leftist policy coming out of the White House.

Makes AOC and Bernie look like pikers.

Macaulay is pundit-at-large for The Hustings.

_____
WEDNESDDAY 8/6/25