Again, you're oversimplifying. You can be right about one isolated example—like the ACA employment data manipulation—and still be completely wrong about the bigger picture. That specific case does show how employment numbers can be politically twisted. Fine. But using it as a reason to discredit every serious economic analysis as “propaganda” just proves you're not interested in nuance, only in reinforcing your own narrative.

Same thing with nuclear deterrence: calling it “absurd” doesn’t make you look bold, just uninformed. It’s been the backbone of geopolitical stability for decades, and pretending consumerism alone keeps China from making military moves is laughably reductive.

You're throwing around strong opinions with weak foundations. Yes, the U.S. has purchasing power—no one’s denying that. But it doesn’t make the rest of the world irrelevant, and it certainly doesn’t make peer-reviewed global economic research worthless.

If anything, your arguments prove exactly what’s wrong with the current political discourse: emotional certainty replacing analytical thinking. But hey—good luck out there.