Our view, a minority one...and widely viewed as ‘defeatist’...is that these things take place regardless of what anyone thinks. History marches along, thoughts get in step.
As a former Naval Aviator, a lot of us would simply say that you cannot win a defensive war. You only have to lose that war once. So if your plan is to hunker down, build shields, and allow your enemies sworn to destroy you to get stronger and stronger, you will lose that race.
I haven't noticed any enemy carriers cruising off our coasts ready to launch at a moments notice. I don't think Mexico or Canada are threatening to attack and we have two fairly large moats on the left and the right. So why are we sending our military to meddle all over the globe? The US is in a unique geographical position. We can afford not be sticking our noses in everyone elses business.
With $38 trillion debt load and adding 1 trillion every 90 days, we can't afford this military that has 800 bases around the globe. But empires gotta do the stupid shit.
No doubt there are no enemy carriers nearby. But there are thousands of nuclear missiles pointed at us, and by folks who want to control the world. We just happen to be in their way. I do agree that if we send our military out it that there has to be a clearly defined reason and time frame. Also agree we can't afford any waste, including the military, but most of the waste (mainly consisting of corruption) is in our social programs.
We have thousands pointing back and we were the first to deploy them. We were also the only country to have used nukes. Check out who has the most military installations around the globe. 800 or so for the US. Russia next with about 13. China even less. As for the defense budget the US is spends more than all the other countries on the planet combined. Who's the hegemon?
Yes, another America hater with half-truths and analysis out of context. Russia and China have killed millions of their own citizens, but I guess that's not an issue with you. Do you think countries with this mindset would not hesitate to kill millions of citizens in our country? Only deterrence and the willingness to show and use force would keep the China's and Russia's of the world in check. Hence, the need for military installations.
I love my country and have served it in the Marine Corps. It's what the gov't does that I sometimes disagree with. I refuse to follow blindly. 800 vs 13 and less and you see no disparity there?
I'm not a military expert. The only way to determine which military installations serve a useful purpose is to evaluate each one and all in context, not just recite a number. By the way, why are you concerned with parity with regimes that have proven themselves to be brutal oppressors against their own people? Why would you want parity? I would want overwhelming superiority against these regimes.
This is true. But most other countries with nukes are not the moral equivalent of the US. Iran has pledged to erase Israel as soon as it can. And if we did not have nukes some other country would have long ago decapitated our military and taken effective control of our government. We did use them 80 years ago to save lives. But, and I say unfortunately, we let other countries develop nukes and get strong, too. Their goal is to conquer the world as soon as they can overpower us, but we don't share that goal. If we did, we could have achieved that decades ago.
Are we pretending another country has not taken effective control of our country? An awful lot of politicians seem to have another country as their top priority. Moral equivalent? Have you been paying attention to the Epstien files?
John Keegan's "The Price of Admiralty" explained much of this.
If you think of U.S. history some nineteenth century examples might be familiar: certain interventions along the Barbary Coast and the situation the last time Washington was attacked and burned.
But haven't all the "offensive" wars since the 1960s resulted in a country that is slowly collapsing from within similar to what happened the Roman Empire? Could you point to any positive outcomes from all our offensive wars? Haven't Vietnam and the Taliban won defensive wars against the US?
But what lead to the collapse of Rome seems to be happening here- overextended military forced the government to dilute the currency, an elite more concerned about their diversions (e.g. Bezos just dropped $70 million on a mediocre documentary at the same time he's laying off workers) and money than their country, and moral degeneration. Looks like we are on the same path - especially with the revelations of the extensive involvement of the elite in the Epstein blackmail operation.
Vietnam was just a political stunt? But the US dropped more bombs on Vietnam than they dropped during WW2. My point was it was an example of a successful defensive war, maybe we can add the Soviet Union's defeat of Germany as an example too. Maybe we should give the Taliban credit also for a defensive war - during a French media interview a Taliban fighter said "The Americans have the watches but we have the time".
At least we can't complain that Bill isn't offering solutions. As someone that only collects "rent" from people and businesses that occupy real estate I own, I can't relate to the ". . . subsidies, bailouts, welfare, giveaways and shake-downs."
I'm not sure cutting Defense by about two-thirds is a bright idea. Defense is one of the few things that our Constitutionally defined federal government is actually supposed to do.
Two thirds might or might not be the right number, but when our budgets include items the military doesn't even want, there has to be tremendoous waste.
But does "Defense" include over 800 military bases scattered throughout the world? Speaking of the Constitution do you think the guys who wrote it had this in mind? Some of them were even against maintaining a standing army and Washington warned us against foreign entanglements.
There is no question that there is waste and abuse (and possibly fraud) in the Pentagon's budget (everyone remembers the $400.00 toilet seats). I'm just not sure that you can cut it to the extent that Mr. Bonner is suggesting to Mr. Trump.
But if we followed Bill's suggestion of a $500 billion budget we would still be spending more than China and Russia. Perhaps we need some DOGE cost cutters with defense spending and procurement experience to take a good look at our defense spending? You would think that a "successful" businessman like Trump would have done that. Shouldn't that be the responsibility of any new management team taking over a business?
Given the push back to DOGE even when they started by trying to cut low hanging fruit, I think it's a safe bet that they looked at the Military budget as a sacred cow that could not/cannot be gored at the/this time. These institutions and departments were created and grown over many decades, it's going to take more than one President and more than two terms to straighten out the mess.
Let's get the voter ID requirement passed so we don't have illegal aliens voting for Democrats, or Democrats voting multiple times or dead people voting for Democrats, then we'll see who the serious cost cutters are.
As is often the case, despite readers who always condemn Bill, this brutal approach is the only one that can save us as a country the residents continue to enjoy. Politicians currently are unable or unwilling to accept what they are doing to accelerate the decline, rather than reduce it. The Chief Scam Artist running things certainly doesn’t think beyond his own egotistical gold-plated grifter persona.
So Biden and his drug addled son weren't scam artists and grifters? I guess you'd rather have Marxists, Socialists and Leftists running the show with an auto-pen.
I can't argue with you about politicians. They don't think past their next election and how much money they can raise toward that end. Unless and until term limits are imposed, not much will change.
Yes, I've met some of them. The problem with the Trump haters on this page is that if you agree with some of the things Trump is doing, they accuse you of always agreeing with him.
You Warhawks can’t remember one of the few good things that Trump has done and that is to name that department for what it really is and has been since WWII: Department of WAR!
Talk about rents that cannot be a limited.How about the ending of EV subsidies, the end of the green new deal scam, USAID, Corporation for public radio, Planned Abortion Non parenthood? Many others and a long way to go. Show me any other President in my lifetime tha has done as much.
Agree on many points , though , ethanol is a scam.
As a former naval aviator you'll appreciate this: Canada once had the most advanced interceptor on Earth — the Avro CF-105 Arrow. They cancelled it in 1959 to buy American Voodoos integrated into NORAD.
Canada flew the Voodoo interceptor. Washington controlled the trigger.
That's what system membership looks like from the inside.
Your point about defensive war is serious and I took it seriously. But the doctrine that makes forward defense necessary also requires allies to fold their sovereign capability into the system — and the exit doors lock from the outside.
Canada learned that in 1959. Ukraine learned it in 1994.
Interesting commentary. The first thing that came tom mind is to make lobbying illegal. Second thing is make it illegal to fund pork for any state. The federal government is there to protect the citizens, protect property rights, and free enterprise with no monopolies. Politicians spend more than 50% of the time trying to get re-elected. They cater to the people that receive freebies. Term limits is the answer. One other thing, all politicians will have the same health care as the general public and no pensions. Just a thought.
Abe, I agree with many of your points, but not on lobbying. If you strip our government back to its fundamental purpose of protecting individual rights instead of giving out favors and free stuff, lobbying would disappear because there would be nothing that could be gained from it. That's where the emphasis should be - stripping back government. Besides, there are those that lobby only to protect their company or industry from intrusive government regulation.
The ethanol mandate is so telling of our corruption. Making ethanol uses more BTUs of energy than the manufactured ethanol produces. Ethanol is bad for engines. Farming the corn to produce the ethanol is environmentally bad. Growing all that corn on fertile land makes other agricultural products more expensive. I guess this is how a dying society dies.
The corn industry that makes ethanol still gets one bushel of corn free from the government to make a gallon of ethanol. It takes three bushels of corn to make one gallon, Not bad when you get 1/3 of your raw material free from the government.
Great column, reminiscent of PJ O’Rourke’s “pigs at the trough” analogy. The sad irony is that our current administration has shown little inclination to shift from reactive to proactive mode à la Milei. It might yank some squealing piglets from the sow, but it has others lined up to take their place.
Very Good Billy. You've near perfectly encapsulated the problem and solution; now how do we get there-I'm not so sure we can. Seriously, excellent column.
Another mixed bag from Bonner, but to his credit, more good than bad. With all the fraud being exposed in government welfare programs, I don't recall him mentioning that these should be cut substantially. Bonner wants to make big cuts only in defense it seems... well, I agree in principle that there is probably a lot of wasteful spending in defense as well, but I also suspect that among reasonable people that there would be disagreement about what is in America's interest or what a rational policy of self-defense would consist of. I wouldn't just be waiting for the missiles to be flying through the air at us to put up the defenses. It would start long before that. In some cases, this would mean eliminating threats before they metastasize into full blown wars.
P.S. Bonner's comments on ethanol are spot on. Unfortunately, the more a government moves away from the protection of individual rights as its primary function and into other areas, the more the frenzy to get a piece of the pie and for the country to devolve into pressure group warfare.
Mr. Gallien, Excellent point about Bill not mentioning government welfare programs. And his comment about Pres. Milei is simply not true. If one actually looks at the cuts Mr. Milei made, they are very modest, and it cost him support; down from 56% to 41%. His party only survived because the opposition was fractured in the last election in Argentina. I admire him for making those cuts, but it is extremely difficult to cut lots of jobs and expect to get reelected in any first- or second-world country.
At least Bill finally acknowledged the serious ramifications if the GOP made draconian cuts quickly. I estimated about 25M-30M would be unemployed in a year's time, and Bill indicated 30M would be impacted in some way. So this would be a totally unrealistic situation because the Democrats will never do any cutting, and they have become extremely far-left radicals. The GOP would lose Congress and the WH in a major way; and, the Dems would open the borders, pass a massive amnesty for 20M third-world, govt.-dependent peasants, 98% who would of course vote Democrat. And this is just for starters. And, most importantly, the Dems would IMMEDIATELY REVERSE all the budget cuts Bill wants the GOP to fall on its sword to make. So realistically once again, Bill's cuts will only bring radical leftists to power with none of the cuts having any real impact when quickly reversed.
And Bill believing that a jobs depression in the U.S. caused by radical budget cuts would be supported by the folks if only a POTUS could convince them of this--is ludicrous, to say the least. Look at DOGE in 2025 with a measly few hundred thousand cuts, much of it through buyouts of folks close to retiring anyway. Then look at the Virginia state elections in late-2025, and the Dems, one of them wishing death on children, won easily, ousting republicans, yet there was nothing the state Dems could do about federal spending. But, because like Maryland, Virginia has an outsized number of fed. govt. employees, and even more fed.-govt.-financed contractors compared to the other 48 states, these folks, angry over these cuts backlashed against the GOP. Just look at where the overwhelming voter support for the Virginia Dems came from. So I have to marvel at Bill's naivety here. When you offer solutions, they have to be REALISTIC solutions. That is why I would go at the federal budget cutting very gradually, and even that might get the GOP tossed. The only answer might be to let things eventually crash and burn, with inflation sky-high after the Fed bails out the mess with trillions in phony money, and then see what happens. (And I think Bill's readers who praise his totally unrealistic solutions are affluent men who could easily survive a depression, just like Billionaire Bill. My wife and I could survive one, but we try to be realistic about matters.)
People who elect Democrats do so because they expect them to use the government to transfer money the government takes from those that have it to those the Democrats believe deserve it more.
The Republicans focus their wealth transfers to their major donors.
The taxpayer will go to jail for failing to remit their taxes
And roughly half of the John and Jill Q Taxpayers actually pay taxes; some actually receive money for filing a tax return.
Cutting the debt is a fantastic idea. Nice, when considered all by itself. It almost seems like a solution to the whole problem mostly because it seems so wonderful. However when considered for the ramifications it isn't a lasting solution at all and in fact has the exact opposite effect, i.e. it puts the communists in office and your body parts ready for the elite to live couple extra days.
What Trump is doing is showing the American people just how corrupt and ineffective and superficial and evil these policies are. Of course I can't honesty say the probability of success is very high. He has curtailed cutting off children's body parts to be replaced with plastic and men in girls sports and made progress on racism in admittance to US universities and censorship and defunding the police and stopping the illegal migrants into the US, that even Hilary Clinton now admits is destabilizing. Of course she is just trying to stay out of prison, which she deserves.
I'm loving the Epstein files where these elites, who have been milking the system, fall off the tit of government. Maybe if 100% of them fall off the sucking then even simplistic ideas like Bill's might work. Considering how pervasive the corruption that has been exposed it seems like the even simpleton ideas like Bill's might work. Like maybe asking the government / "civilization" to actually do something might actually be accomplished.
Trump cleaning up the voting is an honorable first step. Certainly Americans or any other country is going to vote in favor of their own interests other than a few bleeding hearts whose current positions allow them the freedom to worry about others. I have to believe people who don't read the nonsense the elite, the WEF, are pushing will vote for themselves. That's solid step in the right direction. What an amazing concept, voting for one's own interests. If we removed 100% of current politicians and all the regulations not in the interests of society the system might actually work to reduce societies costs. It's a possibility! How about removing all the current journalists and starting over? No prior journalists is allowed to produce journalism. Let's see what we get in terms of information to society. All prior journalists and shows are pried from those rich hands with obvious interests other than society's. Let's take a chance. It might turn out better. Anyway you get the idea i.e. cut the political power off everywhere, of current power relationships and see what happens.
What are some examples of nonsensical rules or narrative? Climate change which means one has to pay a tax on energy beyond the cost of energy, established news sources (because they are established) so the rich who own those sources can twist economic logic, ethanol where we expend more energy than is produced, constant rescuing of banks that lent too much "to save the system from collapse", oh to be a big bank, movie stars who always want to help people, censorship by the established news purveyors "who certainly don't have any interests detrimental to society", of course politicians have a say in what to censor "because they are representing their voters," LGBTQ certainly must have more rights "just because they are insane doesn't mean they have no rights", they should be called what they want to be called, plastic surgeons should be allowed to cut off children's body parts when they can convince some child it would help their psychology, Californians deserve the right to hide these surgeries from parents since the parents aren't aware of what is going on anyway, maybe they are high all the time. There is so much of this insanity that is reframed as empathetic that I wonder what empathetic means. That is the essence of propaganda. Anything that is empathetic should be outlawed for a decade. I'm sure the WEF would be in favor of that. We could all have nothing and be happy.
Like Trump's friend Larry Fink once said - It doesn't matter who wins the elections - especially when it comes to deficit spending. Both parties like to spend money we don't have.
“We have appeared, to many readers, to be critical of Mr. Trump.“ Now, that is an understatement! It is the reason for many of my posts on this site. Given that I signed up for financial advice and not political diatribes, I am encouraged by this Bonner Epistle, given it addresses politics on from a perspective that could affect my financial wellbeing. It is also crafted as advice that is positive in nature and civilized in tone. The cheap insults that I’ve read coming from Mr. Bonner are what DJT routinely does and which I dislike coming from anyone. So, thank you Bill and keep up the good work.
Bill, I beseech you to steer clear of driving or even passengering in, any sort of convertible car whatsoever!
Especially in Texan conurbations…
Even if it’s one of those new fangled EV ones, that promises much about saving the planet, but offers precious little protection from your run of the mill Soviet style defector coming in from the cold ~
Finally! Thank-you, This article must be in the top three of Bill Bonners Best and I agree with all of it! The only thing I would add is TERM-Limits. Get the octogenarians out of seats of power. Get fresh blood in to those seats. New perspectives are needed.
We need a concrete plan, call it "Shutting down the swamp without being killed”. Everything you said is spot on. Live within your means. Cut up the credit cards.
It is fascinating to me that for all the talk of inflation, affordability and transparency people generally remain ignorant of the fact that the US Dollar has lost 98% of its purchasing power over the last 100 years or so and as much as 21 points of that occurred in the last 5 years. Can you have capitalism and unity without a sound currency? I think not.
Sometimes you get a little cynical, beyond my own natural level, but you are spot on suggesting a return to sound currency and less government and warning we must not go down the path that past "empires" followed to demise by overcoming our own human proclivities. History is the perfect reference so why not use it.
Thanks Bill for your sheer doggedness in raising the alarm.
I agree with most of what you say. But how is he going to explain it to the people when almost all the media is ultra liberal and will only tell the people their agenda, not his.
Too bad Bill doesn't understand who controls the money in this country. Who voted for Obama Care, Billed Back Better, Big Beautiful Bill? Congress is nothing but one big money laundering enterprise. If you don't retire from Congress as a billionaire, then you are a dummy. As far as turning this country around, it comes down to basic math. USDEBTCLOCK.ORG says federal spending is $7T. Thanks to DOGE and the Somalis we know that there is a tremendous amount of waste and fraud. So how much is the question?
Cut 25% in waste/fraud = $5.25T Budget; 35% = 4.55T.
Revenues = $5.4T - look at that - a surplus! My wag is 50% - remember the $1T military has NEVER been audited.
BUT how do you get rid of the parasites in Congress? They are dug in like PA ticks. Vote them out? They control the ballot boxes and now with mail in ballots you'll never get them out. And the voters? MSM have brainwashed them. Over half are dumber than rocks. After watching Minneapolis, useful idiots come to mind.
All I can do is protect myself and loved ones and stay out of the way of the ongoing train wreck..............
Bill Bonner for President!
I agree although my guess is Bill wouldn't want the job.
He wouldn't want to take the pay cut.
Among the best articles you have written. Now if the people in power would read and adhere, we might last aa little, longer as a society.
As a former Naval Aviator, a lot of us would simply say that you cannot win a defensive war. You only have to lose that war once. So if your plan is to hunker down, build shields, and allow your enemies sworn to destroy you to get stronger and stronger, you will lose that race.
I haven't noticed any enemy carriers cruising off our coasts ready to launch at a moments notice. I don't think Mexico or Canada are threatening to attack and we have two fairly large moats on the left and the right. So why are we sending our military to meddle all over the globe? The US is in a unique geographical position. We can afford not be sticking our noses in everyone elses business.
With $38 trillion debt load and adding 1 trillion every 90 days, we can't afford this military that has 800 bases around the globe. But empires gotta do the stupid shit.
Spot on!
No doubt there are no enemy carriers nearby. But there are thousands of nuclear missiles pointed at us, and by folks who want to control the world. We just happen to be in their way. I do agree that if we send our military out it that there has to be a clearly defined reason and time frame. Also agree we can't afford any waste, including the military, but most of the waste (mainly consisting of corruption) is in our social programs.
We have thousands pointing back and we were the first to deploy them. We were also the only country to have used nukes. Check out who has the most military installations around the globe. 800 or so for the US. Russia next with about 13. China even less. As for the defense budget the US is spends more than all the other countries on the planet combined. Who's the hegemon?
https://www.ibon.org/us-russia-china-military-footprint/
Yes, another America hater with half-truths and analysis out of context. Russia and China have killed millions of their own citizens, but I guess that's not an issue with you. Do you think countries with this mindset would not hesitate to kill millions of citizens in our country? Only deterrence and the willingness to show and use force would keep the China's and Russia's of the world in check. Hence, the need for military installations.
I love my country and have served it in the Marine Corps. It's what the gov't does that I sometimes disagree with. I refuse to follow blindly. 800 vs 13 and less and you see no disparity there?
I'm not a military expert. The only way to determine which military installations serve a useful purpose is to evaluate each one and all in context, not just recite a number. By the way, why are you concerned with parity with regimes that have proven themselves to be brutal oppressors against their own people? Why would you want parity? I would want overwhelming superiority against these regimes.
This is true. But most other countries with nukes are not the moral equivalent of the US. Iran has pledged to erase Israel as soon as it can. And if we did not have nukes some other country would have long ago decapitated our military and taken effective control of our government. We did use them 80 years ago to save lives. But, and I say unfortunately, we let other countries develop nukes and get strong, too. Their goal is to conquer the world as soon as they can overpower us, but we don't share that goal. If we did, we could have achieved that decades ago.
Are we pretending another country has not taken effective control of our country? An awful lot of politicians seem to have another country as their top priority. Moral equivalent? Have you been paying attention to the Epstien files?
John Keegan's "The Price of Admiralty" explained much of this.
If you think of U.S. history some nineteenth century examples might be familiar: certain interventions along the Barbary Coast and the situation the last time Washington was attacked and burned.
But haven't all the "offensive" wars since the 1960s resulted in a country that is slowly collapsing from within similar to what happened the Roman Empire? Could you point to any positive outcomes from all our offensive wars? Haven't Vietnam and the Taliban won defensive wars against the US?
Rome was absolutely defensive when it fell. Vietnam and taliban.... Not wars,stupid political stunts.
But what lead to the collapse of Rome seems to be happening here- overextended military forced the government to dilute the currency, an elite more concerned about their diversions (e.g. Bezos just dropped $70 million on a mediocre documentary at the same time he's laying off workers) and money than their country, and moral degeneration. Looks like we are on the same path - especially with the revelations of the extensive involvement of the elite in the Epstein blackmail operation.
Vietnam was just a political stunt? But the US dropped more bombs on Vietnam than they dropped during WW2. My point was it was an example of a successful defensive war, maybe we can add the Soviet Union's defeat of Germany as an example too. Maybe we should give the Taliban credit also for a defensive war - during a French media interview a Taliban fighter said "The Americans have the watches but we have the time".
Great quote: "The Americans have the watches but we have the time".
Not many countries have been as invaded as often as Afghanistan in the past 1000 years.
Yet it endures (much like it did 1000 years ago)
You are correct.
I for one am willing to risk it.
At least we can't complain that Bill isn't offering solutions. As someone that only collects "rent" from people and businesses that occupy real estate I own, I can't relate to the ". . . subsidies, bailouts, welfare, giveaways and shake-downs."
I'm not sure cutting Defense by about two-thirds is a bright idea. Defense is one of the few things that our Constitutionally defined federal government is actually supposed to do.
Two thirds might or might not be the right number, but when our budgets include items the military doesn't even want, there has to be tremendoous waste.
As a former lobbyist for a major defense firm, your comment is on target.
But does "Defense" include over 800 military bases scattered throughout the world? Speaking of the Constitution do you think the guys who wrote it had this in mind? Some of them were even against maintaining a standing army and Washington warned us against foreign entanglements.
There is no question that there is waste and abuse (and possibly fraud) in the Pentagon's budget (everyone remembers the $400.00 toilet seats). I'm just not sure that you can cut it to the extent that Mr. Bonner is suggesting to Mr. Trump.
But if we followed Bill's suggestion of a $500 billion budget we would still be spending more than China and Russia. Perhaps we need some DOGE cost cutters with defense spending and procurement experience to take a good look at our defense spending? You would think that a "successful" businessman like Trump would have done that. Shouldn't that be the responsibility of any new management team taking over a business?
Given the push back to DOGE even when they started by trying to cut low hanging fruit, I think it's a safe bet that they looked at the Military budget as a sacred cow that could not/cannot be gored at the/this time. These institutions and departments were created and grown over many decades, it's going to take more than one President and more than two terms to straighten out the mess.
Let's get the voter ID requirement passed so we don't have illegal aliens voting for Democrats, or Democrats voting multiple times or dead people voting for Democrats, then we'll see who the serious cost cutters are.
As is often the case, despite readers who always condemn Bill, this brutal approach is the only one that can save us as a country the residents continue to enjoy. Politicians currently are unable or unwilling to accept what they are doing to accelerate the decline, rather than reduce it. The Chief Scam Artist running things certainly doesn’t think beyond his own egotistical gold-plated grifter persona.
So Biden and his drug addled son weren't scam artists and grifters? I guess you'd rather have Marxists, Socialists and Leftists running the show with an auto-pen.
I can't argue with you about politicians. They don't think past their next election and how much money they can raise toward that end. Unless and until term limits are imposed, not much will change.
Then there are those "who always condemn Trump".
And, then there are those "who always praise Trump".
Yes, I've met some of them. The problem with the Trump haters on this page is that if you agree with some of the things Trump is doing, they accuse you of always agreeing with him.
You Warhawks can’t remember one of the few good things that Trump has done and that is to name that department for what it really is and has been since WWII: Department of WAR!
Talk about rents that cannot be a limited.How about the ending of EV subsidies, the end of the green new deal scam, USAID, Corporation for public radio, Planned Abortion Non parenthood? Many others and a long way to go. Show me any other President in my lifetime tha has done as much.
Agree on many points , though , ethanol is a scam.
Making some cuts is great, but when it's paired with the largest proposed budgets and deficits in history I can't get too worked up about it.
Me as well.
Who would possibly attack the US?
No one as there is no one who wants to. There is however one country that uses and abuses the US for their own benefit.
As a former naval aviator you'll appreciate this: Canada once had the most advanced interceptor on Earth — the Avro CF-105 Arrow. They cancelled it in 1959 to buy American Voodoos integrated into NORAD.
Canada flew the Voodoo interceptor. Washington controlled the trigger.
That's what system membership looks like from the inside.
Your point about defensive war is serious and I took it seriously. But the doctrine that makes forward defense necessary also requires allies to fold their sovereign capability into the system — and the exit doors lock from the outside.
Canada learned that in 1959. Ukraine learned it in 1994.
Bonner's fiscal question ties it all together.
https://lucaskandia.substack.com/p/empires-autonomy-and-the-price-of
As Lincoln would say, there is not an army on earth that could drink from the Ohio River by force.
Interesting commentary. The first thing that came tom mind is to make lobbying illegal. Second thing is make it illegal to fund pork for any state. The federal government is there to protect the citizens, protect property rights, and free enterprise with no monopolies. Politicians spend more than 50% of the time trying to get re-elected. They cater to the people that receive freebies. Term limits is the answer. One other thing, all politicians will have the same health care as the general public and no pensions. Just a thought.
Agreed
Cut government to only necessary departments
Abe, I agree with many of your points, but not on lobbying. If you strip our government back to its fundamental purpose of protecting individual rights instead of giving out favors and free stuff, lobbying would disappear because there would be nothing that could be gained from it. That's where the emphasis should be - stripping back government. Besides, there are those that lobby only to protect their company or industry from intrusive government regulation.
Abe,
Every citizen has a right to seek redress from our government
Term limits, yes. Essential
The ethanol mandate is so telling of our corruption. Making ethanol uses more BTUs of energy than the manufactured ethanol produces. Ethanol is bad for engines. Farming the corn to produce the ethanol is environmentally bad. Growing all that corn on fertile land makes other agricultural products more expensive. I guess this is how a dying society dies.
The corn industry that makes ethanol still gets one bushel of corn free from the government to make a gallon of ethanol. It takes three bushels of corn to make one gallon, Not bad when you get 1/3 of your raw material free from the government.
Reminds me that it takes five gallons of water to make one gallon of beer
Great column, reminiscent of PJ O’Rourke’s “pigs at the trough” analogy. The sad irony is that our current administration has shown little inclination to shift from reactive to proactive mode à la Milei. It might yank some squealing piglets from the sow, but it has others lined up to take their place.
Very Good Billy. You've near perfectly encapsulated the problem and solution; now how do we get there-I'm not so sure we can. Seriously, excellent column.
Another mixed bag from Bonner, but to his credit, more good than bad. With all the fraud being exposed in government welfare programs, I don't recall him mentioning that these should be cut substantially. Bonner wants to make big cuts only in defense it seems... well, I agree in principle that there is probably a lot of wasteful spending in defense as well, but I also suspect that among reasonable people that there would be disagreement about what is in America's interest or what a rational policy of self-defense would consist of. I wouldn't just be waiting for the missiles to be flying through the air at us to put up the defenses. It would start long before that. In some cases, this would mean eliminating threats before they metastasize into full blown wars.
P.S. Bonner's comments on ethanol are spot on. Unfortunately, the more a government moves away from the protection of individual rights as its primary function and into other areas, the more the frenzy to get a piece of the pie and for the country to devolve into pressure group warfare.
Mr. Gallien, Excellent point about Bill not mentioning government welfare programs. And his comment about Pres. Milei is simply not true. If one actually looks at the cuts Mr. Milei made, they are very modest, and it cost him support; down from 56% to 41%. His party only survived because the opposition was fractured in the last election in Argentina. I admire him for making those cuts, but it is extremely difficult to cut lots of jobs and expect to get reelected in any first- or second-world country.
At least Bill finally acknowledged the serious ramifications if the GOP made draconian cuts quickly. I estimated about 25M-30M would be unemployed in a year's time, and Bill indicated 30M would be impacted in some way. So this would be a totally unrealistic situation because the Democrats will never do any cutting, and they have become extremely far-left radicals. The GOP would lose Congress and the WH in a major way; and, the Dems would open the borders, pass a massive amnesty for 20M third-world, govt.-dependent peasants, 98% who would of course vote Democrat. And this is just for starters. And, most importantly, the Dems would IMMEDIATELY REVERSE all the budget cuts Bill wants the GOP to fall on its sword to make. So realistically once again, Bill's cuts will only bring radical leftists to power with none of the cuts having any real impact when quickly reversed.
And Bill believing that a jobs depression in the U.S. caused by radical budget cuts would be supported by the folks if only a POTUS could convince them of this--is ludicrous, to say the least. Look at DOGE in 2025 with a measly few hundred thousand cuts, much of it through buyouts of folks close to retiring anyway. Then look at the Virginia state elections in late-2025, and the Dems, one of them wishing death on children, won easily, ousting republicans, yet there was nothing the state Dems could do about federal spending. But, because like Maryland, Virginia has an outsized number of fed. govt. employees, and even more fed.-govt.-financed contractors compared to the other 48 states, these folks, angry over these cuts backlashed against the GOP. Just look at where the overwhelming voter support for the Virginia Dems came from. So I have to marvel at Bill's naivety here. When you offer solutions, they have to be REALISTIC solutions. That is why I would go at the federal budget cutting very gradually, and even that might get the GOP tossed. The only answer might be to let things eventually crash and burn, with inflation sky-high after the Fed bails out the mess with trillions in phony money, and then see what happens. (And I think Bill's readers who praise his totally unrealistic solutions are affluent men who could easily survive a depression, just like Billionaire Bill. My wife and I could survive one, but we try to be realistic about matters.)
People who elect Democrats do so because they expect them to use the government to transfer money the government takes from those that have it to those the Democrats believe deserve it more.
The Republicans focus their wealth transfers to their major donors.
The taxpayer will go to jail for failing to remit their taxes
And roughly half of the John and Jill Q Taxpayers actually pay taxes; some actually receive money for filing a tax return.
This system is amok
Cutting the debt is a fantastic idea. Nice, when considered all by itself. It almost seems like a solution to the whole problem mostly because it seems so wonderful. However when considered for the ramifications it isn't a lasting solution at all and in fact has the exact opposite effect, i.e. it puts the communists in office and your body parts ready for the elite to live couple extra days.
What Trump is doing is showing the American people just how corrupt and ineffective and superficial and evil these policies are. Of course I can't honesty say the probability of success is very high. He has curtailed cutting off children's body parts to be replaced with plastic and men in girls sports and made progress on racism in admittance to US universities and censorship and defunding the police and stopping the illegal migrants into the US, that even Hilary Clinton now admits is destabilizing. Of course she is just trying to stay out of prison, which she deserves.
I'm loving the Epstein files where these elites, who have been milking the system, fall off the tit of government. Maybe if 100% of them fall off the sucking then even simplistic ideas like Bill's might work. Considering how pervasive the corruption that has been exposed it seems like the even simpleton ideas like Bill's might work. Like maybe asking the government / "civilization" to actually do something might actually be accomplished.
Trump cleaning up the voting is an honorable first step. Certainly Americans or any other country is going to vote in favor of their own interests other than a few bleeding hearts whose current positions allow them the freedom to worry about others. I have to believe people who don't read the nonsense the elite, the WEF, are pushing will vote for themselves. That's solid step in the right direction. What an amazing concept, voting for one's own interests. If we removed 100% of current politicians and all the regulations not in the interests of society the system might actually work to reduce societies costs. It's a possibility! How about removing all the current journalists and starting over? No prior journalists is allowed to produce journalism. Let's see what we get in terms of information to society. All prior journalists and shows are pried from those rich hands with obvious interests other than society's. Let's take a chance. It might turn out better. Anyway you get the idea i.e. cut the political power off everywhere, of current power relationships and see what happens.
What are some examples of nonsensical rules or narrative? Climate change which means one has to pay a tax on energy beyond the cost of energy, established news sources (because they are established) so the rich who own those sources can twist economic logic, ethanol where we expend more energy than is produced, constant rescuing of banks that lent too much "to save the system from collapse", oh to be a big bank, movie stars who always want to help people, censorship by the established news purveyors "who certainly don't have any interests detrimental to society", of course politicians have a say in what to censor "because they are representing their voters," LGBTQ certainly must have more rights "just because they are insane doesn't mean they have no rights", they should be called what they want to be called, plastic surgeons should be allowed to cut off children's body parts when they can convince some child it would help their psychology, Californians deserve the right to hide these surgeries from parents since the parents aren't aware of what is going on anyway, maybe they are high all the time. There is so much of this insanity that is reframed as empathetic that I wonder what empathetic means. That is the essence of propaganda. Anything that is empathetic should be outlawed for a decade. I'm sure the WEF would be in favor of that. We could all have nothing and be happy.
Like Trump's friend Larry Fink once said - It doesn't matter who wins the elections - especially when it comes to deficit spending. Both parties like to spend money we don't have.
So true, so true: "Both parties like to spend money we don't have."
“We have appeared, to many readers, to be critical of Mr. Trump.“ Now, that is an understatement! It is the reason for many of my posts on this site. Given that I signed up for financial advice and not political diatribes, I am encouraged by this Bonner Epistle, given it addresses politics on from a perspective that could affect my financial wellbeing. It is also crafted as advice that is positive in nature and civilized in tone. The cheap insults that I’ve read coming from Mr. Bonner are what DJT routinely does and which I dislike coming from anyone. So, thank you Bill and keep up the good work.
Bill, I beseech you to steer clear of driving or even passengering in, any sort of convertible car whatsoever!
Especially in Texan conurbations…
Even if it’s one of those new fangled EV ones, that promises much about saving the planet, but offers precious little protection from your run of the mill Soviet style defector coming in from the cold ~
Finally! Thank-you, This article must be in the top three of Bill Bonners Best and I agree with all of it! The only thing I would add is TERM-Limits. Get the octogenarians out of seats of power. Get fresh blood in to those seats. New perspectives are needed.
We need a concrete plan, call it "Shutting down the swamp without being killed”. Everything you said is spot on. Live within your means. Cut up the credit cards.
Nice work Bill
Sound advice Bill.
It is fascinating to me that for all the talk of inflation, affordability and transparency people generally remain ignorant of the fact that the US Dollar has lost 98% of its purchasing power over the last 100 years or so and as much as 21 points of that occurred in the last 5 years. Can you have capitalism and unity without a sound currency? I think not.
Sometimes you get a little cynical, beyond my own natural level, but you are spot on suggesting a return to sound currency and less government and warning we must not go down the path that past "empires" followed to demise by overcoming our own human proclivities. History is the perfect reference so why not use it.
Thanks Bill for your sheer doggedness in raising the alarm.
I agree with most of what you say. But how is he going to explain it to the people when almost all the media is ultra liberal and will only tell the people their agenda, not his.
Too bad Bill doesn't understand who controls the money in this country. Who voted for Obama Care, Billed Back Better, Big Beautiful Bill? Congress is nothing but one big money laundering enterprise. If you don't retire from Congress as a billionaire, then you are a dummy. As far as turning this country around, it comes down to basic math. USDEBTCLOCK.ORG says federal spending is $7T. Thanks to DOGE and the Somalis we know that there is a tremendous amount of waste and fraud. So how much is the question?
Cut 25% in waste/fraud = $5.25T Budget; 35% = 4.55T.
Revenues = $5.4T - look at that - a surplus! My wag is 50% - remember the $1T military has NEVER been audited.
BUT how do you get rid of the parasites in Congress? They are dug in like PA ticks. Vote them out? They control the ballot boxes and now with mail in ballots you'll never get them out. And the voters? MSM have brainwashed them. Over half are dumber than rocks. After watching Minneapolis, useful idiots come to mind.
All I can do is protect myself and loved ones and stay out of the way of the ongoing train wreck..............