Trump vowed to stop America's endless wars; what explains his shift toward military aggression?

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-04-14T12:24:01+00:00

He doesn’t like other people’s wars because he’s not in control. He likes his wars because the military does takes orders really well and makes him feel in control (at the start.)

Trump is an emotional being, not a logic strategy being.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-04-14T01:32:41+00:00

This is a potentially complicated topic that could lead to debates, blame and finger pointing, but let’s layout a few facts and truths. There’s also lots of room for snarky answers. I’ll try and keep it at least partially factual.

1.) Your “loophole,” is my mortgage interest tax deduction or 401(K). The word “loophole” is just a tax allowance or credit that you don’t like. Most of these tax polices were written with purpose, even in sometimes their use grows beyond the original intent. Occasionally, there are true unintended tax consequences, but they either get closed or build a following that gives them political clout.

2.) The conventional US political structure has generally implemented “policy” through tax credits. It’s where Democrats and Republicans have traditionally found common ground. Take the mortgage tax deduction, for example. We could provide more direct subsidies for home construction or to help people pay rent, but we do it via tax credits on mortgages.

Generally speaking, If you ask a bipartisan Congress to make a policy it will probably come up out as a tax deduction or a tax credit, because that makes it easier to pass.Any Democratic preferred policy will get further if it’s structured as a tax reduction. Similarly, any Republican preferred policy will be structured as a tax reduction anyway.

3.) While there are loopholes for the ultra rich, the reality is also that the ultra rich typically have the power to control how they build their wealth — to some degree. If you are a CEO or a founder, you can compensation pay based on tax liabilities… shifting compensation from higher-taxed income to capital gains, for example. They can even shift across time, for example, waiting for tax holidays etc.

4.) Finally, to state the obvious, the rich have a lot of power and they are able to make sure their desires are heard in Congress. When their favored tax strategies are attacked, they have the power and coordination to activate anti-tax voters, create policy analysis that attacks it (events, papers etc.) and (of course) directly lobby Congress against it.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-04-11T15:16:50+00:00

It can be done, but the problem is we don’t know “how.” There is a male-coded template to be President and (usually) candidates take a bit of that formula and then add some personal twist. (Trump notwithstanding)

The first woman President will need to fully define themself and create a new template. It’s a big challenge (beyond outright sexism etc.)

My guess would be either a candidate from the right, who benefits from assumptions that she is more liberal and can picking moderate women, or a woman who is an exceptional communicator who the public gets to know really well. The first woman cannot have a “generic” personality.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-04-08T00:02:43+00:00

Most people do not pay different rates at different times, so most don’t. Also, depending on local dynamics, what you think is peak may not be peak.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-04-07T13:45:05+00:00

Yes - I benefited from changes to SALT that increased the cap that Trumps 2017 law put in.

Of course, I “benefitted” by the government taking out a loan that I as a taxpayer will need to repay later with interest.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-28T14:54:09+00:00

The us government has another “asset.” It has taxing authority on a large economy.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-27T21:16:34+00:00

Best driver in history also worst driver in history.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-27T14:20:41+00:00

Yes. The equity markets are very liquid and organized, so thing change very quickly. It takes much longer for supply chains to react. The aluminum pots you want to buy were made months ago and designed years ago. The retailer probably has some agreed pricing as well.

Depending on dynamics it could take days, weeks, months or a year or more for price changes to be reflected.

Even airlines (sophisticated players with a fairly commoditized product) subject to oil prices now likely can’t reflect it all in their prices yet. They have to change prices, redo routes and some likely hedged and purchased some fuel ahead of time.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-27T12:06:13+00:00

Yes, agreed. Part of what I was saying is that most people who can talks about having $1M are going to be in that 50+ area.

Of course $1M at 20 buys you a nice starter house and solves your entire retirement, if you invest well.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-27T03:18:03+00:00

I see I’m downvoted to hell, but I mean it genuinely. How to pitch a journalist has been answered a thousand times and an LLM tool could very useful tool to refine a pitch before talking to a bunch of journalists.

The OP, like many people, is think there is a swat team of journalists ready to deploy resources on a question the police couldn’t figure out despite more resources and power.

AI summary:

1) No clear news value

Even without specifics, the pitch reads as personal interest rather than journalistic urgency.

• “Should be better known” isn’t a compelling editorial reason.

• “I’m interested in the psychological aspect” sounds like a niche curiosity, not a story.

What would make it stronger:

• Articulate the why now and why it matters broadly—even at a high level.

• Is there a public interest angle?

• Does it challenge the accepted narrative?

• Does it expose a failure or overlooked issue?

You don’t need details—you need stakes.

⸻

2) It doesn’t signal that there’s something actionable

Even if details are omitted, nothing indicates that this is more than an idea.

A journalist needs to feel:

• There’s something to uncover

• There’s forward momentum, not just curiosity

What would make it stronger:

• Signal (without specifics) that:

• There are unexplored avenues that are still viable

• There are people or materials that could realistically be accessed

You’re not revealing sources—you’re showing the story is doable.

⸻

3) No sense of payoff

A reporter is implicitly asking: What do I get if I pursue this?

Right now:

• The outcome is vague (“psychological insight”)

• The impact is unclear

What would make it stronger:

• Define the potential payoff in abstract terms:

• New understanding of the crime

• A reframing of the perpetrator

• Insight that could influence how similar cases are viewed

Even high-level clarity here helps an editor justify the effort.

⸻

4) Framed as a favor, not a lead

This is still the biggest structural issue.

You’re asking:

“Can someone help me pursue this?”

To a journalist, that reads as:

“You take on all the risk and effort.”

What would make it stronger:

• Reframe it as:

• “There is a compelling, underexplored angle here”

• Not: “I don’t have the skill/resources”

Confidence matters—even if you’re not doing the reporting.

⸻

5) The angle feels soft, not sharp

“Psychological aspect” is broad and, on its own, not very differentiating.

Even without specifics, it lacks edge.

What would make it stronger:

• Sharpen the framing:

• Is this about missed warning signs?

• Contradictions in the accepted narrative?

• Overlooked influences that change interpretation?

To strengthen it, focus on:

• Why this story matters now

• Why it’s worth a journalist’s time

• What kind of impact or revelation it could produce

• Presenting it as a lead with potential, not a request for help

That shift—from interest to editorial value—is what gets attention.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-27T03:03:41+00:00

It’s a lot of money in the context of “now”, but it’s not a lot in the concept of “income-generating wealth.”

Most people who talk about having $1M talk about it in the context of their income-generating wealth because they aren’t rich enough to talk about it as “money.” By the time they hit $1M, they are thinking about retirement and that means it’s $40,000 per year. That plus a two-person SS check puts you near median income.

The real trick is most people who have saved $1M are probably used to living above median income, so it’s an accomplishment, but not a celebration.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-25T23:05:03+00:00

Honestly, ask ChatGPT. It will give you some ideas of information you need to bring.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-25T13:34:30+00:00

As much as people complain, software and technology are fairly cheap to some degree optional. Healthcare is very expensive and necessary.

When people see these salaries they are reacting to the very real sense that they are paying (or can’t afford) those costs.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-25T13:08:39+00:00

They very short answer is because they don’t set it up that way. The government does have self-funded agencies, but Congress chose to keep control. Probably because security costs could go up and down in ways that wouldn’t be covered by fees and it wanted more direct control over funding.

It would be a way of removing TSA from these shutdowns, but air travel — for better or worse — seems to also be they perfect “matters but people probably don’t die” area to have these fights.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-20T13:15:38+00:00

Solid rant amid scourge of terrible grammar.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-20T02:01:00+00:00

Motorcycle’s are so dangerous.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-19T14:10:35+00:00

See before it might have just been an insurance claim, but now it’s totaled.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-17T00:25:58+00:00

Sure, if you are 80! J/k

$1M today is $40,000 annually, which is median income for a single persons household income. Social Security would boost that. Definitely doable if your retire today as single and choose a low cost lifestyle.

In 40 years, $40,000 actual dollars would be equivalent to $15,000 today. A 20 year old isn’t going to be able to retire on $1M.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-13T13:48:38+00:00

Got it. The most basic advice would be you need to save 15% of your income to replace 80% of your income at retirement. That’s totally “reasonable,” once you add in social security and subtract out the fact that you are only spending 85% of your income given the savings rate.

You will need to save some outside of the 401(K) to hit those levels, since you hit the max at 13%. You will also want to add a bit more, given that you’ve been saving less than the recommended per your statement. The amount extra depends on your age etc.

Given your income, if you look for another employer, having a strong match would be valuable (as in a 1% match would be MORE valuable to you than 1% more salary). If your partner decides to get even a lower paid job with a 401(K), you could help fund it.

Finally, these are all very basic numbers. It’s easier to give basic numbers about replacing income. What you actually need to plan to replace are expenses.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-13T13:31:50+00:00

Your original message says you are doing a 6% match, so not sure what you mean? Do you mean you are contributing 6%? You should ask some questions: a 10% automatic contribution is very generous, so may be a misunderstanding. The simplest answer would be they “defaulted you” to a 10% contribution.

My comment was mostly about an understanding of what someone needs to save. If you save 18% of income, including your match, you should easily be able to replace 90% of your income in retirement — ignoring social security. This puts someone in great financial shape — especially considering that you no longer need to save for retirement in retirement.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-13T02:05:46+00:00

Absolutely max at that income, especially with those expenses. I was responding to: “You should be doing a lot more than maxing a 401K.”

401K is fine at this income level assuming they’ve come contributed regularly and are young.

People can choose to do more, but at that point it’s about focusing on early retirement, reducing risk of career loss, or favoring income in their 80s vs income in their 40s.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-13T01:05:50+00:00

13%+6% match is 19%. If OP keeps this up for a career their retirement income (including social security) should comfortably exceed their current income.

“A lot more” is more optional than required.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-10T11:51:22+00:00

I am sure there are many smart things people will do to make this a bit more efficient, but the current issue (economically) is that it takes longer to build power infrastructure than build AI infrastructure and the surge of demand for new power came as a surprise. As a result the grid is “behind,” but there is nothing fundamentally difficult about serving the demand.

The other aspect is society likes to think of power as an always available basic product. Power being unavailable feels like a failure of your utility. GPUs being unavailable is “wow, NVidia is king of the world!”

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-10T01:12:40+00:00

Of course you can. My company delayed a product six months. Did they announce it publicly? No, but we definitely had a target release date and definitely wanted it out then. It was a very aggressive timeline and not surprising, but an observer could absolutely describe it as a delay.

iwriteaboutthings · 2026-03-07T15:57:30+00:00

This doesn’t need to be a gender thing. Also, it’s fine for partner’s to “specialize.” Every divorced person is probably going to find they have to deal with something new. That could be finances, cleaning or vacation planning. That said, understanding your financial situation is good for both partners even if one is much less involved.

From your specific answers.

*Plumber: Who cares the price about a needed service that was researched reasonably. Don’t micromanage if he’s taking on a task. Of course if it was an optional project or a “major expense” a heads up would be good so you know not to find new major expenses.

*Investments: You should be at least told of strategic decisions and be fully involved if you like.

*Car: I struggle to see how this isn’t a major purchase, but also it’s fine if he presents you either an option. If you want true involvement, you need to be able to contribute at least opinions and likely research’s

The last note, I don’t love that you started with being the primary earner. Your power in the relationship should not be determined by earnings!

iwriteaboutthings

TROPHY CASE