The Proper Response

Trump Executive Orders

Now that Congress has proven utterly incapable of performing its most basic duties in the face of a protracted national crisis, President Trump has stepped in to deliver the proper response.
President Trump Saturday signed four executive actions to provide Americans financial relief from the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.
America is currently suffering from record unemployment and the worst recession in our history. This suffering is the direct result of government-imposed restrictions. Taking drastic measures to protect its citizens' lives in drastic circumstances is a valid function of government. But at the same time, the government must take responsibility for the secondary evils its acts cause and work to mitigate them.

That legislators of both houses and parties cannot bestir themselves to relieve the severe burdens they themselves imposed on ordinary Americans shows their seething contempt for us.

When the people cannot have relief due to the legislative process breaking down, it is incumbent upon the executive to make up for Congress' failure.

Here are the relief measures President Trump has ordered:
$400 weekly federal unemployment aid
Trump's executive action calls for $400-per-week in supplemental unemployment aid. Unemployed people were getting $600-a-week extra until the federal program expired at the end of July.
Trump's action would require states to pay for 25 percent of the $400 weekly benefit, while the federal government would pick up 75 percent.
Trump would divert up to $44 billion from FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund to cover the unemployment program.
The extra unemployment help would last until Dec. 6 or until the Disaster Relief Fund balance drops to $25 billion, "whichever occurs first," according to the White House memo.
This supplemental aid is on top of existing state unemployment benefits. State payments vary widely, from $235 a week maximum in Mississippi to $1,234 in Massachusetts.
 This is where the Mammon Mob will clutch their pearls and shriek about "Moral hazard" and "Paying people not to work." The fatal flaw in those knee-jerk gripes is that they assume it's still 1988 and our rulers don't openly hate us.

If the government insists on economic strictures that put 40 million Americans out of work while at the same time continuing to import foreign workers, then the government has a moral imperative to make the workers they've wronged whole.
Assistance to Renters and Homeowners
Congress passed the CARES Act in March that issued a 120-day temporary eviction moratorium on renters in federal housing assistance programs or those who live in a property with a federally backed mortgage. That eviction moratorium expired in July.
Trump's executive action would encourage federal efforts to help renters and homeowners avoid eviction or foreclosure for failing to make their monthly payments. He directs his administration to identify available funds to "provide temporary financial assistance to renters and homeowners who, as a result of the financial hardships caused by COVID-19, are struggling to meet their monthly rental or mortgage obligations."
Payroll Tax holiday
Trump defers the payroll tax from Sept. 1 to Dec. 31, 2020, for employees making $100,000 or less a year. The tax, deducted from workers' paychecks, funds Social Security and Medicare. Employees would need to repay the federal government once the tax holiday ends without further action.
Millennials and Zoomers are never going to get a dime of Social Security or Medicare. Subjecting them to the payroll tax is forcing their participation in a pyramid scheme wherein their money is confiscated and transferred to members of older, far wealthier generations.

Trump's order is a step in the right direction. Next he should absolve taxpayers of having to repay the government after the tax holiday and suspend payroll taxes indefinitely.
Extension of Student Loan Relief
The executive action suspends federal student loan payments and sets interest rates to 0 percent through Dec. 31, 2020. The current student loan relief programs were to expire on Sept. 30.
The federal student loan program is a con game that has duped multiple generations of youth into lifelong debt slavery. It also gives official sanction to the mortal sin of usury.

If oppose the federal funding of Planned Parenthood but insist that student debtors must cooperate with government-enforced usury, your morality is gravely inconsistent.

Forgiving all federal student loans is a moral imperative. Again, Trump is headed in the right direction. If he does enact student loan forgiveness, he will win the election with a groundswell of Millennial support.

Even if Trump's orders don't survive the inevitable Democrat legal challenge, the President's clear populist sympathies are encouraging.

Never forget how much the Death Cult that runs most of the government and the whole entertainment industry hates you. Don't give them money.

Don't Give Money to People Who Hate You


  1. then the government has a moral imperative to make the workers they've wronged whole.

    I agree. The problem is that giving people money for nothing does not seem to help them, long term. It's not good for the human spirit to be treated like a pet. I admit we're in unusual times, and something must be done to help Americans, but I find this solution troubling.

    1. It may not help them long term, but most of those moral hazards come with it being a "long term" solution rather than a stopgap.

    2. The problem isn't long term. When the petty tyrants let businesses re-open, this problem will go away, but that alone can't restore the lives of people ruined by months of government ordered joblessness.

    3. From another perspective, we're already eating our seed corn, because otherwise, we'd starve. Arguing about whether or not to save any given pile of seed corn until Spring is fatally short-sighted if refusing to eat it means we'll die before it's time to plant again.

    4. Zaklog

      In my country I've received 2000$/month since March due to losing my job due to the virus.
      I'll have to declare the amount next year for my taxes. So it's not free money. Also every month I have had to renew the request.

      It's helped me immensely. In the meantime, I was offered a job that begins at the end of this month.
      So I no longer need it.

      I understand your position but when people can't work due to the situation's gravity and extraordinary restrictions in place,it's incumbent for the public authority to mitigate the grave ills arising therefrom.

      Giving money to regular people is never wasteful and it advances the common good.


  2. This is a Xanatos Gambit for Trump. Heads, he gets his populist and much needed legislation made a reality, tails the blatantly unconstitutional SCOTUS ruling making EO's the equivalent of Imperial Decrees is challenged and rescinded (bye bye DACA etc). The first is best for the people short term, the second long term. I'd love to get both at once, but as strategic setups go, this is still a masterstroke. This is what we elected him for: to push the envelope as hard as he could. We still aren't voting our way out of this mess, but it's nice to see the king fight for the people rather than for a faux nobility with no concept of noblesse oblige.

    1. Exactly. We're under enemy occupation. First let's cast off our enemies' yoke. Then we can argue about marginal tax rates.

  3. "If oppose the federal funding of Planned Parenthood but insist that student debtors must cooperate with government-enforced usury, your morality is gravely inconsistent."

    What if you oppose Planned Parenthood funding as a moral abomination but recuse yourself from the student loan debate because you have too much debt yourself to be a disinterested commentator? :)

    1. Why would you recuse yourself from a debate in which your neck in on the line?

    2. The defense would certainly try to hay out of that, but in general a junkie should bear witness against his drug peddler.

    3. According to the Left, men must recuse themselves from the abortion debate because they have no skin in the game. According to Conservatives, debt slaves must recuse themselves from the usury debate because they have too much skin in the game.

      What if whether or not a commentator is disinterested is irrelevant to telling right from wrong?

    4. A good point, and to be honest, while I wouldn't object to forgiveness of my debt load, I'd be willing to struggle under it while supporting forgiveness for the majority.

    5. Agreeing, arguendo, with the usury is sin, that the sin has been committed against you gives you no reason to recuse from the debate. That's like saying you can't call bearing false witness wrong because someone slandered you in court. I suspect you're merely being playful/clever, but it's not a helpful mental space to put yourself in.

      Being wronged does not render you unable to opine on whether the thing that wronged you is wrong.

    6. No, I was being sincere--given my circumstances, I felt that it would be difficult to distinguish whether I was arguing for the common good or out of self-interest. This was, however, without the supposition that the loans were usurious and thus per se immoral.

  4. Before the DACA ruling, I'd have said that this was probably unconstitutional. SCOTUS has now said otherwise, so let the progressives live with their "victory". The EO's are a good idea in any case.

    1. Indeed. The Dems will sue to overturn Trump's Corona EOs, and they may succeed in the lower courts. But it will lead to a Supreme Court battle that must needs revisit Roberts' DACA ruling.

      Contra what some are saying, there's no guarantee Trump will prevail in SCOTUS, but such a two-faced ruling will alert even more normal people that the rule of law is dead, which is vital.

    2. If a SCOTUS judge were to literally implode after being stabbed in the knee by a halfling with a barrow-blade, I would only be half-surprised.

    3. NERD ALERT-_
      You're mis-remembering what actually caused the Witch-king's death: Eowyn stuck her sword into his face after Merry hamstrung him.
      Either way, ridding the earth of a great evil is a step in the right direction.

    4. Yes, I may have confused how Merry helped kill a Nazgul with how Pippin helped kill a troll. Corrections gratefully accepted.