730
'Your question is so stupid' Trump snaps when asked how much economic pain he'd tolerate
(www.rawstory.com)
this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2025
730 points (99.1% liked)
politics
22874 readers
4694 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So apparently Drumpf is taking a lot of advice from the convicted criminal Peter Navarro. Navarro, it turn, takes a lot of his information from Ron Varro, a persona totally fabricated BY Navarro, and quoted extensively by himself in 5 of his academic books. (Ron Vara is an anagram of naVarRo). Why has the Economics community not come out against a guy who quotes himself in academia as an expert source? Why have those 5 books been withdrawn as academic literature, when they are in fact, fantasy? Just curious why this academic fraud has not been rejected by the Economic community....
I've very recently also seen this.
Basically uh, yeah, that tracks, that seems completely inline with the rest of how completely ridiculous this all is.
So... why haven't the books been withdrawn?
Because academia, academics, ... they regulate and peer review Journals. Published papers. Textbooks used in classes.
Not books designed for popular consumption, pop-econ, pop-psych, pop-whatever.
Why hasn't he been rejected by the Econ community?
Ironically, because of the nature of the incentive structure of the field of Econ.
Way, waaay too much overlap with politics and business, so its basically split into psuedo religious ideological camps, who often realize they can make way more money or have may more power by working for a hedge fund or being some kind of propogandist.
So... in that sense... the academic Econ community rarely is even capable of coming out as a unified body of academics and rejecting someone. There are too many different ideological camps, they're all arguing with each other all the time.
There is no broad consenus view as there is with say all climate scientists saying climate change is real, all biologists and archaeologists and geologists saying evolution is real and the earth is 4.5b years old.
But with Navvaro... he apparently hasn't done much or any really groundbreaking research, spent about two or three decades teaching, and during that time he realized he could make way more money selling pop-econ books to people who want to be able to argue about Econ to support their ideology without actually learning Econ.
You know, pretentious blowhards.
Anyway he also went to jail for Contempt of Congress for lying to the Jan 6th committee.
He is an absolute hack fraud at this point.
So there, me with a BSc. in Econ, I'm calling him out rofl.
Thanks for your answer, I have a Masters, but in a medical field, and there's no way that kind of fraud could fly in my world. I appreciate your time and insight :)
No problem!
But uh... I dunno exactly what your masters in the medical field is, but the medical field is also absolutely chalk full of people with sometimes real, legit degrees and sometimes absolute bullshit ones like chiropracty and naturopathy...
Who routinely publish pop-medical books oriented toward the general public, using their official credentials for clout, often promoting dubious or utterly false and dangerous misinformation.
Yout field is not immune... though yes, there generally is a better unified official condemnation... but only after a certain person has reached a certain level of popularity/infamy, and the seeds of nonsense have already been sewn.
Then the official condemnation is seen as censoring heroic truth warriors and the conspiracy theories abound.
I'm in Australia, and I don't see much of what you are suggesting is rampant. Yes, it happens, but there's no way a charlatan like Peter Navarro would have risen to advisor to our political leaders without having been called out long before. Certainly, policy based on his fraudulent claims would have been tarred and feathered and ridden out of town.
Ah.
I am American.
I live in hell.
We have a much broader problem of corrupt grifters in... basically everything, at every level of society.
=[
Sorry for doing the American thing and assuming you are also American.
No problem at all. In more normal times, you'd be correct to do so. There's a saying to the effect that when America sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold. Basically, we're all in this boat, hence the interest from off shore. Our Stock market lost billions today, for example... I'm watching with great interest, and just wish there was more I could do. Best wishes to you and every American who is sane :)