Stidmatt

https://apnews.com/article/biden-cancer-prostate-be18c98abe341cd91277e1d3b75d5cd5?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us

So apparently Biden has prostate cancer which has metastasized to his bones. Not only that, but this bombshell hit today too:

https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/may/18/biden-book-health-original-sin

So not only does Biden have rapidly advancing prostate cancer which I’m guessing he had while he was president and kept a secret from the public while running for president, but many loyal democrats are clear that while Biden was president his memory was failing, and he could not recognize some of the most famous people in the world, who he had met before, that anyone with a basic cultural awareness and full mental cognition would recognize instantly.

I feel sorry for the Biden family that a member of their family has cancer. Cancer is horrible. But I am also furious that they were dishonest with the American people about the health of the president. Millions of people could tell Biden’s health was failing as they pretended that he was extremely healthy. He wasn’t.

Again, I send my condolences to his family that he has a serious form of cancer. No one deserves to go through this.

But I am furious about the lying.

Democrats have a choice. We can defend every last thing Biden did to our deaths or we can learn from our mistakes and win elections. We cannot do both.

To Americans who are inconsistent voters who lean Democrat, seeing that Biden and his entire cabinet lied to the American people about his health is a big fucking deal. Now, based on the polls which I have already written about here on my blog it’s not the first major miscalculation by the New Democrat Caucus.

The Taliban taking over Afghanistan was a big fucking deal and Biden’s approval plummeted 20 points over the month following that horrible day. There was no other major event at that point in time to explain why 20% of Americans went from approving of his job to disapproval. Acknowledge and learn from it or lose elections.

The majority of Democrats and Independents support Ukraine and believed Biden should have done more to support Ukraine.

The majority of Democrats do not support Israel’s onslaught on Gaza.

On every major foreign policy decision, Biden was out of step with his party, and in line with what Donald Trump would have done in his stead. This lost voters. I voted for Harris in November, I do vote for the Democrat every time I can. But many voters don’t, and it is the job of the Democratic Party to run candidates who will do a good job and win elections. They have no other job.

And now this.

Not only was Biden instrumental in three major global human rights catastrophes, but now it turns out his entire team was lying about his health through at least the last year of his presidency while he was running for reelection. This is crass, reprehensible, and irresponsible.

Not only that, but doctors claimed Biden is a superager last year. https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-appears-superager-doctors-say-1858473

That was clearly a complete and total lie. It is extremely unlikely that this mestasized in less than 12 months, which means Biden’s doctors lied. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/bone-metastasis

CDC guidelines state clearly that men who are over 70 should not get screened for prostate cancer routinely. Biden had the best health care in the world as president. Perhaps they didn’t screen him once in four years, but when he’s the president, I find this hard to believe.

More importantly, he probably had PSA 9 testing while he president according to this scholar from Harvard. So I find it pretty inconceivable the president would not be getting tested for such things.

Given how far his cancer has mestasized it is possible Biden had early stage prostate cancer back in 2020. I’m just guesssing here, I’m not a doctor, but it sure looks like it based on those numbers. He was definitely getting annual prostate cancer screens as a former Vice President man over the age of 70. But they couldn’t handle having another progressive nominee, so he kept going when he knew he had health problems.

When they go low, we go high.

What happened to that spirit?

The lying from the Biden administration about his health combined with his disastrous foreign policy led right into Trump’s victory last year. That is why Trump won the popular vote.

Of course I’m angry Biden lied. You should be too.

It was so obvious that 70% of Americans when polled stated that they believed Biden did not have the health to serve as President last June. Americans could tell his health was failing, and knew that his entire administration was lying to the world. I was worried about losing a Key to the White House. But it is now obvious he should have chosen not to run for reelection by the middle of 2023, giving us plenty of time for a proper primary.

Here’s the problem for the New Democratic Caucus… they were all in on it and they don’t have any other candidate who will be able to win the presidential election in 2028. This combined with everything else will hopefully remove everyone from Biden’s cabinet from being considered for the presidency in 2028. It’s far too risky. That means AOC is the highest polling Democrat right now in the primary. The second highest is Cory Booker. Gavin Newsom is shooting his campaign in the foot with his transphobic comments. Tim Walz killed his future by running on a ticket with Harris. Josh Shapiro is out of line on foreign policy.

The next president will likely be AOC or Cory Booker, and New Democrats are freaking out about it.

Because if we have a progressive and intelligent president who can quickly clean up Trump’s mess after the multiple foreign policy disasters under Biden’s administration it will be damn near impossible for the New Democrats to gaslight their way out of this one.

Not only that but if either of them win the entire argument that Harris lost because she was black will be proven wrong. On top of that, if AOC wins then the reason Harris lost will clearly not be because she is a woman…

But we already know that it wasn’t because she was a woman because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and President Barack Obama is the only Democrat to win a majority of the popular vote twice since President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

So we already know it was a policy and keys issue. The “Americans won’t vote for an African American or a woman” nonsense has been debunked at this point in history.

I hope we will have a strong progressive as president in 2029. But I’m pissed off that this is the way we are going to get there.

I know that Republicans do the same thing all the time. I don’t really care about that.

Biden did some great things on domestic policy and pushed for many important reforms as president. I have a clear track record of praising his domestic policy. If you ever cared about Biden’s domestic policy wins, you need to care that we can keep Democrats elected and don’t feed this easy fodder to Republicans to run against us with.

Coping will not win the presidency in 2028. If coping and suck up to the centrist nominee was going to win elections, Kamala Harris would be president. But she is not. Because the strategy of the New Democrats has lost 4/5 of the last elections where they were the nominee.

Biden’s decisions have destroyed his legacy. His domestic wins will be overshadowed by setting up a situation where Donald Trump could win a second term in the history books.

We need a different strategy. This is not working. We need to be honest, we need to be clear. We need to win elections and pass good policy which improves people’s lives. Lying is not going to get us there.

One of the cardinal rules of politics is don’t hand your opponents easy wins. Play with a clean slate all the time. Don’t feed the animal. This sort of reckless behavior breaks that most important rule.

Democrats need to win. Biden made that significantly more difficult through his reckless behavior.

I’m pissed off.

Vote Blue.

I think this summer is going to be marked by Ukrainian victories, as long as the calls for ceasefires from Moscow end.

Ever since Ukraine took the Kursk region Moscow has been calling for ceasefire after ceasefire, which they consistently break. Moscow does not want a ceasefire, they want Ukraine to cease firing.

But this brings up an important question with a very simple answer… why is Russia calling for a ceasefire now but not when Biden was president?

The first reason is that while Biden was timid on Ukraine he was not on Russia’s side.

The second reason is that, according to Tsar Putin, Russia is running out of weapons.

When Ukraine stops firing into Russia it gives Russia time to maneuver its weapons for the next attack. This is the purpose of a ceasefire. When Russia is on the backfoot, have Ukraine stop firing weapons to restart the endless stalemate.

There were a handful of ceasefires in the war so far, and Russia violated all of them.

So the right strategy is obvious.

1. Send Ukraine everything we can so they can blow up Russian military bases.
2. Do not start any more ceasefires until it is a peace treaty with a complete defeat for Russia.

Otherwise the war will continue forever, as I have outlined in this decision tree I made last year:

I think this war could end this year if Ukraine has the right weapons and the right strategy. This will be followed up by unilateral security guarantees until Ukraine can join both the Common Security and Defence Policy as well as NATO. It will end the same way Assad was defeated, a slow grind until Russia runs out of ammunition leading to a sudden collapse of the front line and Ukraine winning the war.

We saw it in Syria last year. I think the end of the Invasion of Ukraine will end the same way.

This is the true purpose of every cease fire agreement Russia begs for. They must prevent Ukraine from getting an advantage at which point they will break through the Russian front line and win the war.

Ceasefires do not bring peace or safety to Ukrainians, quite the opposite really. Ceasefires are Russian realignments meant to enable their troops to reposition themselves to rape Ukrainian women, murder Ukrainian men, and kidnap Ukrainian children. They are timed when Ukraine gets an advantage.

So the rest of NATO needs to follow Chancellor Merz’s lead and send Ukraine as many weapons as possible, especially unmanned equipment in order to destroy Russia’s military bases in Russian territory.

This is the only way the war can end.

Slava Ukraine.

Start by reading this article: https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/experts/2022/04/7/7137272/

History of the North Caucasus
Eras:
• Pre-historic Iranian and Turkic cultures
• Scythians: 900 BC – 300 BC
• Sarmations: 600 BC – 500 AD
• Huns: 370s-469
• Khazars: 650-969
• Cumania: 900 – 1241
• Mongols: 1238 – 1502
• Ottoman Empire: 1476 – 1774
• Russia: 1557 – present
The North Caucasus has been inhabited for tens of thousands of years, originally by a mixture of Turkic and Mongolic cultures until the arrival of Russi in the 16th century.

Scythian is an Iranic language.

Sarmatian is an Iranic language.

Khazars are a Turkic people, the ancestors of the Ossetians.

Cumans spoke a Turkic language. They are the ancestors of the Crimean Tatars.

The Mongols invaded in 1238 and remained in power until 1502.

The Ottoman Empire ruled Crimea and the area around the Sea of Azov until they were defeated by Russia.

Russia invaded the North Caucasus in 1557 and rule to the present.

The North Caucasus were a primarily Iranian region until the Russians invaded, with some Turkish people as well.

Ukrainians were originally based around Kyiv. Ukrainians moved into what is now Crimea following the victory of the Russian Empire and conquering of Crimea in 1774. To this very day the most densely populated regions of Ukraine are the areas which were part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Regarding Ukraine’s demographics, most of them self-identify as ethnic Ukrainians. There are ethnic Russians in Crimea, primarily because they were sent there during the ethnic cleansing of the Tatars in 1944 when all Tatars were sent to Central Asia. Russia has no legitimate claim to Crimea. They can either accept Crimea is Ukrainian or leave.

Crimean Tatars are currently being abused by the Russian government in Crimea. Cases of torture, arbitrary detentions, and forced disappearances are widespread. Russia is a totalitarian fascist state, and it must be forced out of Crimea.

Colonialism is a classic story around the world. All of the Americas were colonized by Europeans. The thing is that while most countries in the Americas today are democratic and everyone has a vote, Russia is not a democracy. This is the fundamental difference between these two heavily colonized regions. Russia’s republics are truly colonies where the people have no voice. This arrangement is purely exploitative and needs to end.

Regarding Krasnodar Krai… 48% of respondents in the 1926 Census of the region reported as being ethnically Ukrainian. In1939 the number was down to 4%. Either they were forced to falsely identify as Russian, or they were killed. https://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CK%5CR%5CKrasnodarkrai.htm

Stavropol Krai was 35% Ukrainian in 1926 but heavily Russified in the 1930s. https://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CS%5CT%5CStavropolkrai.htm

I cannot find data on the linguistic demographics of Rostov Oblast before the Great Famine.

Belgorod Oblast was part of Ukraine from 1917-1921.

These Oblasts were taken from Ukraine by Russia and Russified.

The remaining federal subjects of Russia on their southern border with Georgia and Azerbaijan are not majority Russian. They should all be independent.

The key question remaining is what to do with Russia. It cannot be acceptable for a state like Russia to remain militarized. That would be unacceptable.

Russia is a mafia state. It is ruled by oligarchs, there is little to no social mobility and the average person lives in poverty. I do not know how to keep Russia pacified if Russia remains as a unified state. It would require constant monitoring by the European Union to ensure they don’t build a military. Given the immense size of Russia I do not believe it is possible to do this.

This leaves only one option which is that Russia needs to be divided in order to prevent them from being a threat to global stability. Every federal administrative area in Russia needs to become independent. Their foreign relations will be managed by the European Union which will manage their necessary democratization.

I agree with Juray Mesik. The world needs to be prepared for Russia’s disintegration. I believe it is not a matter of if, but when. Russia has never seen such a decline in military equipment as it is seeing now. As they run out of weapons their ability to respond to rebellions by Russian peasants will be minimal. If there are protests across Russia to undo the corrupt mafia state there is nothing the oligarchs will be able to do now that they are running out of weapons.

The best thing to do now is to arm Ukraine to the teeth, destroy Russia’s military, and let the state collapse. Ukraine regains all of their territory and Russia will collapse.

The future of Königsberg is simple, turn it into a Freistadt like Danzig was from 1920-1939. Russians will be deported and it will receive immediate EU/Schengen membership under a special arrangement.

Karelia will be returned to Finland, and all occupied historically Ukrainian territories will be returned to Ukraine.

Given how Chukotka is primarily inhabited by ethnic groups closely related to the Inuit, Chukotka could either be an independent republic or join Alaska. It’s up for them to decide.

Time will tell, but I do believe that by the end of the decade we will see monumental change in Russia. Will it be the division of Russia into many different states or the formation of a democratic Russia with all of its current territory? I don’t know for sure, but I do not think Russia will have the same borders it has today in 5 years.

I’m thinking about why I focus so much on Europe, since there are so many other parts of the world to explore, but I always come back to reading about the politics of Europe. But why? Why not Africa? Why not South America?

Let’s explore the world by looking at regions. I will use the 9 regions of the world as defined by the fantastic website Objective Lists, which, as a nerdy political scientist turned data scientist, is one of my favorite websites. The regions can be grouped as follows:

• The World
  • East Asia
  • Everywhere else
    • Abrahamic World
      • Muslim World
        • Middle East & North Africa
        • Central Asia
      • The West
        • The North & Australasia
        • Central & South America
    • Everywhere Else:
      • Southeast Asia and Oceania
        • South Pacific
        • Buddhist World
          • South Asia
          • Southeast Asia
      • Africa
        • Sub-Saharan Africa
        • Southeast Asia

The North & Australasia

This is the region of the world I live in. It is divided into three regions.

• Anglo World: British Isles, US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
• Europe
• North Eurasia: Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia

I’m not sure why Georgia and Armenia are put in with North Eurasia even though they are closer to Bulgaria than Russia.

I focus on this region because I live here, simple as that. The foreign relations of the European Union are truly fascinating. Given how the Anglo World is grouped with Europe in one category, it makes sense to look first at the region we are part of compared to others. It intrigues me that the US and especially Canada share most of the attributes of the European Union, so an expansion of the European Economic Area and Schengen Area to include North America is not out of the question.

This is not just my opinion, it’s based on fact. If you look at the world from the perspective of the Arctic, Canada is a natural extension of the European political system and the United States through Canada. Australia and New Zealand are on the other side of the world, but merging the Trans-Tasman agreement and the Schengen Area seems like a good idea.

Regarding North Eurasia, I find it interesting that Ukraine is listed in the top ten similar countries to Georgia but not Russia. I believe the gap between Ukraine and Russia will widen over time.

The expansion of democracy in Eastern Europe and expansion of European institutions has been gradual over the last 25 years, with something exciting happening almost every year. It is the region in the world which is most likely to change over the next few years. The economic power of Europe makes it important for everyone on Earth. This is why I follow European politics closely.

Central & South America

Latin America is the most similar region to the North based on the calculations I have made with this dataset. Most of these countries are democratic. They are so similar that most of them are grouped under one subcategory. Venezuela and Nicaraguan democracy are under threat, but the rest of them are democratically strong. Brazil is separate because it speaks Portuguese instead of Spanish, but it is definitely a Latin American country.

With democratic systems, the main distinguishing factor between Latin America and the North is their economic well-being. They have a lower average years of schooling compared to countries in the North, and this reverberates across their economy. In time, as their mean years of schooling increase and corruption is rooted out, expect the line between Latin America and the North to become very small. They will probably be statistically one region within 50 years.

Latin America is fascinating politically. Several free trade and free movement agreements exist in the region with the Andean Community, Mercosur, and CA4. I predict Mercosur and the Andean Community will merge into one free movement organization. Chile will be the last to join since it is the wealthiest country in Latin America.

Foreign relations are very stable in Latin America. Bolivia is the only country that joined Mercosur since it was formed and has stayed a member. It joined in 2024. The Andean Community has not changed since 1969. So once you understand the relationship there isn’t too much to follow. The region will continue to develop economically and corruption will continue to be reduced over the next few decades. It is an exciting time for the region, and the biggest change that is likely to happen is a full merger of the Andean Community and Mercosur into one free travel bloc.

In the rplot of the world, Latin America is the region most similar to the North.

Middle East & North Africa

I find this region to be the least interesting. These countries suffer from institutional rot. They are not democracies. The problems are myriad and complex, with systems rooted in corruption and exploitation. The countries that are moving towards democracy have undergone serious conflicts, which have destroyed their economies. Terrorism is widespread and uncontrolled, further undermining institutions. Oil has been a plague to the region, increasing corruption and graft. The rich have gotten richer and use their riches to cement their authoritarian power. Ethnic conflicts exist in every country in the region. Even when Tunisia started to break out, its current president has consolidated power, with extreme democratic backsliding.

There is not much else to say from a political angle. It’s a depressing region. It will take over a century for the tyrants of the region to be finally be fully defeated. The democratization of the Middle East will not happen in my lifetime.

Syria is the country right now with the best shot at developing. I hope they succeed.

The Middle East is the region of the world which is most similar to the North and Latin America.

Sub-Saharan Africa

This is a very diverse region. Some countries are extremely poor, some are moving in the right direction. Ghana is a standout on the Gold Coast with the least corrupt most democratic system, and the most prosperous economy in the Gold Coast. There is hope for the Gold Coast.

The Congos suffer from extreme poverty, low levels of education, and extreme corruption. Rwanda has suffered from extreme backsliding. Without removing their dictators, they can’t develop. The same can be said about many other countries.

The former British colonies in East Africa have the cleanest governments and most democratic systems, along with South Africa, Namibia, Lesotho, and Botswana. Their economies are the most developed, and regional integration is growing. Angola, Zimbabwe, and Eswatini stand out as they struggle with extreme poverty and institutional rot.

Mauritius is so developed and unique that it is calculated not to be part of Africa, but instead Latin America.

Southern Africa can be viewed as two distinct regions.

Some are democratic and moving in the right direction.

Some are extremely poor, extremely corrupt, and this corruption goes back before the colonial era. These countries were ruled by the kings who sold slaves to European slave traders, taking the wealth from the Europeans to further enrich their authoritarian rule. This created extreme rot which was continued through the colonial era, and even into the post-colonial era. It did not start with colonialism, the colonial powers just took advantage of the already existing political situation which continues to this day. Slavery systems are very difficult to undo. But as we saw with Europe and the development of capitalism, it is not impossible.

I do not believe Sub-Saharan Africa is doomed to poverty. Many countries in the region prove my point. But the ones which have not developed yet need to change their ancient institutions in order to improve their quality of life. Other regions have done this very thing and have benefited.

I don’t study this region much because I find it depressing, the lessons are pretty much the same once you learn them, and things don’t change frequently. Studying developmental economics showed the answers countries have used to develop can be applied elsewhere, but they threaten the powers in charge of the region, leaving only revolution as a way for many countries in the region to change. Revolution is never a guarantee.

Sub-Saharan Africa is closest to Oceania and South East Asia. These three regions form a sibling branch with the North, Latin America, and the Middle East.

South Asia

South Asia is fascinating to me. Comprising of only 5 democracies, it is stable. Corruption is rife which keeps the countries in the region poor. Education is lacking, and child labor remains a problem. But they are democratic so there is hope and I believe every country in this region will develop over my lifetime. India shares an open border with Bhutan and Nepal.

South Asia is most similar to Southeast Asia. These two branches form what I call the Buddhist World.

Central Asia

Turkey is an American ally and quickly developing. They are a member of the European Customs Union. If they can keep their democracy and implement necessary reforms they will join the European Union in my lifetime.

Mongolia is a sparsely populated democracy squeezed between the two most powerful authoritarian regimes in the world. If they were invaded there would be next to nothing they can do.

The remaining countries are authoritarian to various levels. Kyrgyzstan is experiencing democratic backsliding and the remaining countries are depressing dictatorships.

I don’t study this region much, things don’t change a lot and most of them are depressing.

Unsurprisingly, Central Asia is a sibling branch to the Middle East.

East Asia

PRC, Taiwan, North Korea, South Korea, and Japan. Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are stable democracies. They are highly developed and their first world problems can be solved.

The People’s Republic of China is in a period of transition. The question remains… can a dictatorship become wealthy on manufacturing without a change of government? It’s never happened before. We will see.

North Korea is the worst country in the world.

Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are the most likely region outside of the North to form a free travel agreement given their clean governments, well educated populations, and prosperous economies. The 5th most similar country to Japan according to Objective Lists is Italy. If the Schengen Area were to expand outside of the region known as the North, it would expand to these three countries in East Asia first. The only major differences are demographic and culture.

In the rplot of the world provided by Objective Lists East Asia stands separate from all other regions of the world. I find that interesting.

Southeast Asia

I want to travel to Southeast Asia. Burma, Laos, and Vietnam are dictatorships, but the remaining countries are very interesting politically and economically. Corruption is an issue which harms their economies and education levels are lower than they should be… but I believe if they make the right investments they will develop into high income countries over the next few decades. They are all members of ASEAN, which is unnikely to grow.

I have a lot of hope for the region.

Southeast Asia is a sibling branch to South Asia, forming the Buddhist World.

Oceania

Most countries in Oceania are very small, but they are all democratic. The biggest issue facing these countries is the size of their population and their extreme isolation, but this is not insurmountable. Many people in Papua New Guinea remain uncontacted to this day.

They tend to have lower incomes, but they are all free. This is the least populated region defined by Objective Lists.

Oceania is a sibling branch to the Buddhist World.

Comparing regions to Europe

When analyzing all the regions of the world, Europe stands out with several main characteristics.

• All but two countries in Europe are democratic.
• Most countries in Europe have strong economies.
• Europe has the largest economy in the world, regardless if the country in question had colonies or not.
• You can travel by land to most countries in the region.

There is no larger bloc of developed democracies which share land borders with each other than the European Union.

When analyzing countries which struggle with issues, whether they are from education systems, economics, or just plain old corruption, its pretty easy to find good answers on how to solve these problems.

Europe is different because it is unique in how it is highly developed, highly democratic, and highly integrated. It is the only place in the world with these three characteristics, and there is no other region in the world which is going to be like Europe in the next 30 years. The one place which I believe could be similar to the European Union in the next 50 years is Latin America.

Every other region has clear issues which distinguish them from Europe.

• Latin America: Middle income, low mean years of schooling.
• Middle East: corruption and authoritarianism.
• Sub-Saharan Africa: corruption, authoritarianism, and poverty.
• South Asia: corruption and poverty.
• Central Asia: Corruption, authoritarianism, and poverty.
• East Asia: Very democratic and wealthy in some, very authoritarian in others. Only a few countries.
• Southeast Asia: Corruption remains an issue, but democracy exists and economies are developing.
• Oceania: Very small population, very poor, but democratic.

So that’s how I am viewing the world right now.

World Governance Indicators

I have been frequently using the World Governance Indicators in a way to filter out countries to study. They are very useful because they include every UN member state except the Vatican with indicators which allows an efficient and accurate way to understand how a country is doing on social issues.

If we filter out all countries which score positively on these six indicators outside of the North, Latin America, and Oceania, along with a GDP per capita of at least $10,000, we end up with only Japan, Seychelles, South Korea, and Taiwan. Every other country misses at least one of these indicators.

If we remove our $10,000 indicator we find Botswana, Malaysia, and the Seychelles. The Seychelles is not included in Objective Lists. Malaysia will surpass my arbitrary GDP per capita mark soon.

Many countries in the Americas and most countries in Europe pass these 6 indicators from WGI.

Conclusion

That’s basically why I write more about Europe than other regions. I like development economics but as I said earlier, many of the issues faced by the other regions have solutions which are basically solved problems. Honestly, writing one article after another about countries facing the same issues gets boring.

It’s important, but when writing and doing analysis on an issue I like to be at the cutting edge.

I like to look at more cutting edge and more rapidly changing situations and Europe is very much at the cutting edge of diplomacy and changes more often than other regions of the world.

That is why I write more about Europe than any other topic on my blog.

Congressional Republicans are saying they want to extend the Trump tax cuts at the cost of $5 trillion over 4 years or $1.25 trillion per year. How can they offset these tax cuts with spending cuts?

They also want to increase military expenditure.

Using the Fiscal Year 2024 as our baseline… how could they cut the budget by a trillion dollars?

Total budget: $6.8 trillion.

We will not reduce discretionary defense expenditures, so that is $850 billion off the table. $6 trillion remaining.

We must pay interest on debt from previous (mostly Republican) budgets. With another $880 billion off the table, we have $5.1 trillion remaining.

Social Security OASI is $1.5 trillion, funded through payroll taxes. It does not contribute to the debt. It cannot be cut quickly, so we have $3.6 trillion remaining.

Medicare and Medicaid would be idiotic to cut. It would not save anyone money, and would be cruel to millions of Americans. So that’s another $1.4 trillion off the chopping block. $2.2 trillion remaining.

Income Security programs include programs like disability and unemployment. I doubt the Federal government will cut this. They cost $370 billion, so we have $1.8 trillion remaining.

This $1.8 trillion is every other program the government spends money on. The government cannot cut mandatory spending. Leaving us with only $960 billion in discretionary spending that Congress can cut this year to cover the $1.25 trillion hole they are proposing to make in the budget.

It is impossible to cover the $1.25 trillion hole through nondefense discretionary spending alone.

Of that nondefense spending, it goes to a myriad of different programs. The largest amount goes to Veterans Benefits. The second highest goes to transportation. The third highest goes to every education program the government funds. These three programs add up to $380 billion. Every other non-military discretionary program the government does costs $580 billion. I highly doubt they will seriously cut these budgets.

Covering $1.25 trillion with $580 billion of cuts is a fascinating way of doing math.

The idea that the federal government is wasteful is a myth.

People have debated spending a billion dollars on extending Max to Vancouver, Washington, for decades. The problem is that the existing buses from Portland to Vancouver are faster than Max will be, because it is a streetcar. It doesn’t make sense to spend a billion dollars on a slower mode of transport when you could instead add more double-decker buses to the commute.

So then I thought, well, if light rail doesn’t make sense, why not add a commuter rail between Portland and Vancouver, Washington? If you can get there in under 30 minutes, a commuter rail option would be preferable to any other mode.

It currently takes 26 minutes on Amtrak Cascades between Portland, Oregon, and Vancouver, Washington. The main issue is that the bridge across the Columbia River is 30 mph and is an indirect route.

But this can be easily solved.

Instead of running west of the Willamette River, they use the UP Portland Subdivision. A commuter rail could easily cut out time wasted going the long way around. Run the train across the Steel Bridge and drop passengers off at Portland Union Station.

It is possible to start a 20-minute commuter rail between Vancouver, Washington, and Portland, Oregon. Most of the infrastructure already exists. It will be twice the speed of the proposed Max extension, be separated grade, and the infrastructure already exists.

Why wait, Portland and Vantucky? Start the Portland-Vancouver commuter rail today!

The main point of Schengen is not so much about boosting tourism, though it is about that and does a great job at it… It is to ensure that if any member state starts to fall to fascism, there will be minimal barriers for citizens of member states to relocate.

The ability to quickly move to another country and get employment and housing quickly with minimal red tape is the strongest defense against fascism. This is why I believe the arrangement should expand outside of Europe.

Congress can be corrupted. Courts can be stacked.

It is far more difficult to repeal the ability of your citizens to leave.

Even when a country decides to leave a single market, like the United Kingdom did with Brexit, it is not feasible for them to completely undo the progress and integration that their membership in the European Union created. The UK-EU withdrawal agreement allowed citizens in the EU to stay in the UK, and the same for Britons in the EU.

This is the reality of attempting to undo a freedom of movement agreement. It’s not possible to do it fully without causing major economic disruptions. The integration of the United Kingdom with the rest of Europe is impossible to fully undo without putting the British economy into a full collapse, which will guarantee rejoining the European Union.

I can’t stress this enough. A true Brexit, a full Brexit where the privileges of EU citizens in Britain are fully revoked, is impossible.

The timing of Schengen is a remarkable achievement in history, unlike any other. It is the largest and wealthiest free travel bloc in the world. The period after World War II saw the evolution of Europe from a collection of fighting monarchies to the largest bloc of democracies in the world. The first part was the formation of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1952. This intertwined the coal and steel markets of France and Germany to make it impossible for them to fight with each other. This was followed up by the formation of the European Economic Community and European Atomic Energy Community in 1960.

The European Community was formed in 1967, merging these three organizations into one umbrella.

In 1993 the European Union was formed by the Maastricht Treaty, bringing more treaties, TREVI and the European Political Co-operation under one umbrella.

The Schengen Area was formed in 1995, 10 years after the treaty was signed in 1985. At this point, the economies of Europe were intertwined in many different ways, and freedom of movement as a right for citizens was fully established.

From this point on, any country in the bloc falling to fascism will face a triple threat. The intertwining of their economies would make war infeasible. The decline in their economies will cause severe hardship, reducing the popularity of their government. Plus, freedom of movement will cause citizens of the state engaging in foolish policies to move to other safer states, draining the distressed state of labor.

This means that any national policy that harms the economy of any member state will hurt them politically and demographically.

Likewise, the full withdrawal from the bloc will cause severe economic hardship, as seen in the United Kingdom. Britain has been unable to fully withdraw because of the treaties allowing EU citizens who already lived and worked in the UK to stay, and vice versa. This means full Brexit has not happened. If Britain were to start to fall to fascism, the EU citizens would move back, starving the British economy of essential workers at all levels, causing the economy to shut down. Also, British citizens who live in Europe will not move back in such a situation.

So, after withdrawing from such a treaty, you will never see a full withdrawal occur.

Given what is happening in the United States, it has never been more apparent that we need the Schengen Area to expand to the United States and Canada.

If we were a member state of Schengen, you would see large numbers of Americans moving to Canada and Europe, along with Canadian and European citizens who live here, leaving the USA. No one would move to the US to fill the empty jobs, causing a severe labor shortage. This would starve America of the labor we need at all levels for our economy to survive if another president tries the same trade madness we are seeing from Trump.

We need to remove the president’s ability to unilaterally levy taxes. It was insane to give him such power in the first place. We must repeal the Trade Act of 1974, Section 122, and move the power to tax back to Congress.

Here is another good article describing the legal basis of Trump’s madness.

Businesses have already sued the administration for the sweeping tariffs, but the US Court of International Trade sided with the Trump regime, claiming a lack of standing. This is why I said that courts are not an effective deterrent against radical regimes. They can be corrupted, as I fear the USCIT has been.

Another step to prevent fascism is to make it so the President needs a majority of Americans to vote for them, and we do that by amending the Constitution and replacing the racist Electoral College with instant runoff voting.

So that’s my plan:

• Roll back presidential power to levy taxes. All taxes must be passed through Congress as our founders intended.
• The United States and Canada join the Schengen Area.
• Replace the Electoral College with Instant Runoff Voting.

This is how we defeat Trump today and prevent a future President from abusing the power of the presidency like we are seeing today.