Sunday, March 2, 2025

Advice to Democrats on Trump’s March 4 speech to Congress

 Be the adults in the room. To do that, I suggest following four simple suggestions:

1. Be present and attentive. You don’t like it, but under our cherished system of government, Trump is the elected president. You would have appeared for Harris; show up for Trump. You would have been attentive to Harris; be respectful of the Office of the President, even if you despise its current occupant. When Trump is introduced to the joint gathering of Congress, stand, showing your respect for the Office and its traditions.

2. When Trump says something you disagree with, meet it with stony silence. Clasp your hands together on your lap and leave them there unless a situation covered by suggestion 3 occurs. Keep your focus on Trump. Don’t roll your eyes at your friends. Feel free to look daggers at Trump, but keep your mouth shut and quiet. Showing no more response than this will drive Trump bonkers. He feeds on negative reactions to his statements and stunts—do not fall for it. Let him fail or succeed entirely on his own words, not your reaction to it.

3. Should Trump happen (and yes, I know this is unlikely) to say anything you agree with, show your agreement by clapping, just as you would have for Harris. If you really agree, stand up and cheer. Despite everything news and social media feed us, there are many things Republicans, Democrats, and Independents agree on. It is not impossible that Trump will mention at least one of these. Should that occur, respond positively to show you can recognize common ground and will work across the aisle to solve issues.

4. You showed unity in voting against the recent House Budget Resolution. Allow whomever the party designates as its spokesperson to respond for the entire party. Refer all requests for comments, interviews, etc. to that person’s response. There will be plenty of time for each of you to let your individual responses be known, but for this news cycle, let the contrast be between whatever Trump says in his speech and the single response.

Thank you for your attention.

Thursday, February 27, 2025

The House Budget Resolution won’t solve the debt problem

When the House Republicans passed their 2025 Budget Resolution[i], only one Republican voted against it, Thomas Massie (R-KY). His post on X stated: The GOP budget extends the 5 yr. tax holiday we’ve been enjoying, but because it doesn’t cut spending much, it increases the deficit by over $300 billion/yr. compared to letting tax cuts expire. Over 10 years, this budget will add $20 trillion to US debt.[ii]

I might choose to argue whether the cuts in spending are “much” or not, but the House Budget Resolution, if implemented, will indeed add an estimated $20 trillion to the US debt. The policy statement included with the budget resolution includes as its first and third findings:

(1) The United States faces a significant debt crisis, with the national debt currently exceeding $36 trillion, or 123% of GDP (Ed. note: Gross Domestic Product, the total market value of all goods and services produced during the year)

(3) This debt poses a significant risk to the country’s long-term fiscal sustainability, with implications for future generations.

I agree that we are in a crisis of our own making and using the ratio of national debt to GDP is a fair approach of viewing the situation. Not solving this issue will have not only severe consequences for future generations, but it will have severe consequences for current generations, as well.

And yet, the budget resolution increases the accumulated debt to $56 trillion by 2034. That is an increase of over 50% in ten years’ time, about 4.4% compounded each year.

During the 21st century, GDP grew faster than 4.4% in only one year[iii]. In 2021, it grew 5.8%; however, that followed the 2.21% decline in 2020. Combined, those two years averaged just 1.7% (compounded) growth.

To assume we will magically find our way (while decreasing immigration) to increase our GDP by more than a compounded 4.4% a year is unrealistic.

Therefore, Republicans identified the number one concern that debt was 123% of GDP, and after ten years, their proposed budgets will leave us with debt significantly greater than 123% of GDP.

How much greater? That depends on how fast GDP actually grows. The average compound growth rate for the 21st century has been slightly under 2.5%. If we assume that continues, in ten years, the ratio of debt to GDP climbs to 187%. If GDP increased at 3% per year, the ratio is “only” 142%.

With this expected explosion of increased debt, the budget resolution proposed to increase the statutory debt limit by only $4 trillion, covering only two of the ten years. While I think having a debt limit is counterproductive at best and insane at worst, if Republicans want to propose budgets that will increase US debt by $20 trillion, then they should be transparent and raise the debt limit to cover it.

In a future post, I’ll provide my thoughts on how the budget resolution allocates cuts and where it provides for increased spending.

Monday, January 13, 2025

When (2 + 2) is less than 4

 I am starting the writing year facing two tasks I thoroughly enjoy and two I absolutely despise.

What I am looking forward to

I have been working on and off (actually, more off than on) creating a new series featuring Ashley Pendergast Prescott, who is initially an FBI undercover agent. My plan is to develop a three-book series (and if those do well, then more). In researching this blog, I was shocked to discover I had begun writing the first book, currently titled Niki Undercover, in early 2019. Just before Christmas this year, Jan finished her read through of that WIP, found a few typos and misplaced commas and pronounced it the best novel I have yet written.

My next task is to listen to Niki Undercover one last time because when I listen, I always catch a problem or two that my eyes and Jan’s never found. It’s a fun task. I get to lie on the couch and listen to an AI voice tell me a story and giggle at its mispronunciations. Plus, when I am done, I can call the story complete. Well, almost—see below for the tasks I am not looking forward to.

I wrote the first draft of the second book in the Niki Undercover series (tentatively titled Niki Unleashed) in the spring of 2021 and completed the second draft in January 2022. Jan read it then, made some suggestions. The manuscript sat just shy of three years before I picked it up this past December and gave it a read through. It needs work, but between Jan’s comments and my recent notes, I am cranked to write the third draft—my second enjoyable task. Yes, it will be a formidable task, ripping away the parts that don’t work and creating a tighter, edgier plot. But I know what I want that story to do, and that is exciting.

What I am not looking forward to

After Jan’s read through of Niki Undercover, she said, “You really should try to get an agent for this. It’s the best thing I’ve read recently.” I tend to think whatever book I just finished is my best (even though during its creation, I was sure it sucked, and I should abandon it). Jan has never made a statement like that about anything I’ve written.

I had planned to self-publish the new series. I figured I would wait until later this year when I had the second novel in decent shape and a draft of the third novel complete. That way, I could start pre-orders for the second book at the same time I published the first.

And then Jan damned me with that great praise. As a result, the first dismal task I need to complete is to craft a synopsis for Niki Undercover. Even though I have created synopses that won publishing contracts, I claim zero expertise and one-hundred-percent dread. I’ll get it done; I know I will. But until I do, it’s like rolling Sisyphus’ rock up the hill while the Sword of Damocles dangles by that single thread over my head.

And then, when I get that sucker done as well as I can, I must accomplish my second dread-laden task: researching literary agents to find ones who might be interested in my novels. Sending out the actual emails (or filling in online forms) is drudgery, but I have no fear of rejection. If they all say no, I am back to my original plan of self-publishing. If one signs me on, I know I have another round or two of revisions ahead of me.

To keep sane, each day I will work on both enjoyable and apprehensible tasks. I’ll start with the stuff I abhor and then reward myself with work I want to do.

I hear there is an open betting line in Vegas about whether I can pull this off. What odds do you give me?

* * * *

This post was first published on Writers Who Kill on 1/7/25.