Heritage Foundation unveils “Project 2025” to dismantle the U.S. federal government in Trump’s second term

Are you concerned?


  • Total voters
    43

hashmander

Hale End
Supporter
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
19,042
Reputation
4,538
Daps
81,411
Reppin
The Arsenal
Is there a cliff notes version of the rule changes they are proposing? The heritage.com link is down right now.

All i found was this on the Project 2025 site.


I'd co-sign 1&2 strongly.

Disagree with #3. DoE doesn't need to be broken up but def needs to be reformed. We've fallen really far behind the rest of the world in eduction.


From the Times article:



Neutral on the FTC and FCC argument. I don't think the President needs to have power over these agencies but at the same time these agencies give in to lobbyists so maybe it'll be an ok counter influence.

Impounding funds sounds sketch and seems it could easily go against the will of the people.

100% on board with stripping employment protections from lazy ass government workers. Being tenured in government is a joke and IMO is a major reason for government inefficiency and competency.

Also on board with hunting down political intelligence agents. They are a threat to the public interest and undermine the will of the people.

From the Guardian article:


I already know this will be an unpopular thought but investing in gas infrastructure is important and critical for the next few decades. Fossil fuels aren't going anywhere - even if you eliminate them from cars, petroleum products are still heavily used in everything else that we use. This green rush is really fukking expensive and right now its a bit of a lie. Your electric Tesla is still getting its power from fossil fuel plants. Until we go full nuclear, "green" energy is disingenuous. With the rise of BRICS, which controls a large portion of the oil market, we NEED to have a counter - and thats domestic production. Besides economic reasons, this is a major security issue if BRICS ever goes up against us. Most Americans cannot afford a Tesla, cannot afford a $3000 charging station at their house, cannot afford a 20k battery replacement, etc. Going green is very expensive and prices out a majority of Americans. Paying premiums for clean energy is driving up costs across the board and during a time of high inflation, I don't think that benefits most Americans. Investing in gas infrastructure, opening up safe drilling platforms, and rebuilding our national stockpile would do far more wonders for the average American and lowering gas prices would be a major boost to reviving our economy right now.
who is we and our? mother russia or greater israel?
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,838
Reppin
the ether
Lol did you just find a way to bring gender concern trolling into THIS topic?

Man you are something else....

@Rhakim wasn’t lying :dead:
@the cac mamba bringing trannies up whenever y’all debate.lol

I remember reading your post the other day saying such about him.

@the cac mamba is a bigoted piece of shyt cac that wants to go back to a society that will reinforce white supremacy.


This is the third time he's tried to start an argument with me on trans issues in just the last five days ... and i don't even care about trans issues. Twice he brought it up himself out of nowhere and the other time he leaped off Napolean bringing it up.
 

Voice of Reason

Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
44,079
Reputation
263
Daps
124,892
This is the third time he's tried to start an argument with me on trans issues in just the last five days ... and i don't even care about trans issues. Twice he brought it up himself out of nowhere and the other time he leaped off Napolean bringing it up.


He knows that these heritage foundation ideas will impact Black men the most and that this trans shyt is a distraction.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,838
Reppin
the ether
co-sign 1&2 strongly.

Disagree with #3. DoE doesn't need to be broken up but def needs to be reformed. We've fallen really far behind the rest of the world in eduction.

Neutral on the FTC and FCC argument. I don't think the President needs to have power over these agencies but at the same time these agencies give in to lobbyists so maybe it'll be an ok counter influence.

Impounding funds sounds sketch and seems it could easily go against the will of the people.

100% on board with stripping employment protections from lazy ass government workers. Being tenured in government is a joke and IMO is a major reason for government inefficiency and competency.

Also on board with hunting down political intelligence agents. They are a threat to the public interest and undermine the will of the people.


Blew my mind that you took that shyt at face value. They've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they don't want to "restore integrity" to the DOJ, "depoliticize" intelligence, or fire "lazy" government employees. They just want to wipe out the entire staff of every agency and put their own people in charge. They want those positions MORE politicized, not less. Come on now.



I already know this will be an unpopular thought but investing in gas infrastructure is important and critical for the next few decades. Fossil fuels aren't going anywhere - even if you eliminate them from cars, petroleum products are still heavily used in everything else that we use. This green rush is really fukking expensive and right now its a bit of a lie. Your electric Tesla is still getting its power from fossil fuel plants. Until we go full nuclear, "green" energy is disingenuous.

Nah, that's factually wrong. An electric car is far more efficient than an internal-combustion car and produces far less emissions no matter where it sources its electricity. Even a bunch of gas-powered plants producing electricity well and capturing most of the emissions is far more efficient and cleaner than running that gas through a billion different poorly designed engines with limited capture tech.

And, of course, there's also the infrastructure lag issue. If you convert the fleet to electric now, your energy becomes green as fast as the plants go green. But every batch of internal combustion engines you produce ensures 10-20 more years of heavy emissions regardless of how green the grid is.




With the rise of BRICS, which controls a large portion of the oil market, we NEED to have a counter - and thats domestic production. Besides economic reasons, this is a major security issue if BRICS ever goes up against us.

Now you're directly contradicting your previous two points. If we want to be less vulnerable to foreign manipulation of the oil markets, then we should want LESS domestic consumption of oil, not more. What's the point of pumping more oil if you just use it right away? We already have elite capacity to pump oil, it's stupid as fukk to keep ruining that leverage by burning it all the moment it's out of the ground. Domestic oil only works as leverage against BRICS if we haven't used it yet.

And unless you forgot to mention, "Nationalize the oil industry", you should already know that domestic oil production hardly has any impact on securing cheap energy prices at home, cause it all goes straight to the global market.



Most Americans cannot afford a Tesla, cannot afford a $3000 charging station at their house, cannot afford a 20k battery replacement, etc. Going green is very expensive and prices out a majority of Americans.

2023's average new car price is $49,500, whereas you can buy a new Tesla for $40,000. So it's actually cheaper than the average new car.

You can get a Hyundai Kona Electric for $33,550, a Mini Cooper SE electric for $29,000, a Nissan Leaf for $28,000, a Chevy Bolt EUV for $27,800, or a regular Chevy Bolt for $26,500. And those will keep getting cheaper every year. So come on now, the cheapest new EVs are only a few thousand more than the cheapest gas-powered cars, and you'll make up the difference in gas savings within a year or two.

In terms of your home grid, everyone I know personally who has installed solar has saved money in the long run. Most other examples of going green involve less consumption and less spending, not more.

Not that I think green tech is the full solution - we need to drastically reduce consumption to stop the already collapsing ecosystems from dying completely. But green tech has to be part of the solution or we're fukked. I don't see how your plan to juice the economy and ramp up consumption even more can work on any time frame.
 

Robbie3000

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 20, 2012
Messages
29,350
Reputation
5,129
Daps
129,348
Reppin
NULL
I havent read the article yet but does he plan to do this by executive order? I would think the Senate and House would be filled to deadlock any of his plan becoming law

This is the same shyt Bannon was talking about in 2016 and we see how that worked out. The greatest asset and liability of the U.S government is its built in resistance to change.

Republicans are not serious people and they get more ridiculous each year. Good luck if you think you can walk in to DC and be able to 50,000 federal government employees. :heh:
 

Payday23

Superstar
Joined
Nov 20, 2014
Messages
14,940
Reputation
1,546
Daps
55,873






I'm afraid this won't stop with Trump. Another republican will eventually win the WH and watch out.
 

MushroomX

Packers Stockholder
Supporter
Joined
Aug 17, 2013
Messages
26,633
Reputation
8,953
Daps
113,574
Reppin
Wisconsin
I'm afraid this won't stop with Trump. Another republican will eventually win the WH and watch out.

I really don't see a Republican winning the White House until they begin to accept Climate Change / The Housing Crisis. Gen Z don't believe they will ever own a home, along with holding pro-Abortion and believing Climate Change. Some are Fiscal Conservative, but when a Gen Z asked the people at the Republican Debate about Climate Change, Haley was the only one who believed in it.

Republicans have a serious Gen Z problem, not just because a ton of them are for Democrats but the Republican Gen Z also believe in Climate Change... hard to deny it after this year.
 

Payday23

Superstar
Joined
Nov 20, 2014
Messages
14,940
Reputation
1,546
Daps
55,873
I really don't see a Republican winning the White House until they begin to accept Climate Change / The Housing Crisis. Gen Z don't believe they will ever own a home, along with holding pro-Abortion and believing Climate Change. Some are Fiscal Conservative, but when a Gen Z asked the people at the Republican Debate about Climate Change, Haley was the only one who believed in it.

Republicans have a serious Gen Z problem, not just because a ton of them are for Democrats but the Republican Gen Z also believe in Climate Change... hard to deny it after this year.
They still only make up so much of the voting block
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,838
Reppin
the ether



It's very important to note that the two "liberal" organizations in question are the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Omidyar Network Foundation.


Both of these were created by major billionaires who virtue signal liberalism when it comes to identity politics and social issues, but turn around and vote with their pocket when it comes to conservative economics that actually impacts people in need on a large scale.

It's not the least bit surprising that organizations like that would choose their personal economic welfare over everything else. Reminds me of certain posters here in specific and the Democratic establishment in particular.
 
Last edited:

mastermind

Rest In Power Kobe
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
62,584
Reputation
5,952
Daps
165,166
It's very important to note that the two "liberal" organizations in question are the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Omidyar Network Foundation.


Both of these were created by major billionaires who virtue signal liberalism when it comes to identity politics and social issues, but turn around and vote with their pocket when it comes to conservative economics that actually impacts people in need on a large scale.

It's not the least bit surprising that organizations like that would choose their personal economic welfare over everything else. Reminds me of certain posters here in specific and the Democratic establishment in particular.
That’s literally all wealthy liberals.
 
Top