volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@yodaladywhooo I think you're giving him too much credit.

Trump doesn't get much profit from things like raising tariffs. It's another example of him being too damn stupid to know how any of this works, so he shoots himself in the foot once again.

That's how he ended up committing felonies in the first place, after all. He doesn't understand how the world works at all.

This isn't about Trump doing something that profits himself. He doesn't even know how that works. This is him just doing random things because that's how he lives his life.

His supporters fall for it because they don't know how it works either.

@glynmoody

@null_aleph this article seems confused about which branch of government issues the documents.

It's a pretty sensational headline, but I think it's misleading.

@yacc143 consumers will still benefit, though.

It's good for everybody when we have a rule of law.

@glynmoody

@yodaladywhooo we've had months of reports from small business owners dealing with these tariffs.

But in the end there is no benefit here. Trump did damage to people, and this is about maybe undoing some of the damage that he did. The people are not made whole, but at least some of the damage can be mitigated.

So this is neither about rich people nor about benefits. This is about Trump doing something really stupid and making up for that.

@glynmoody

@LevZadov The problem was that she was being told different things by two different governments, so she was being asked to violate state law.

This whole thing is a mess, and people don't really recognize just what a mess it is.

@knutson_brain The problem is that there is no objective way to define what fair maps are.

Everyone wants fair maps. The problem is conflicting interests where different people will have different ideas of what that means.

@Nonilex

@yogthos It's worth emphasizing that those refunds are not particularly chaotic. The US trade system has facilities built in to deal with this kind of thing.

There's a lot of people fretting that the court case would throw everything into chaos, but it really wouldn't.

@cwarzel.bsky.social Well because it's the law.

We elected crappy lawmakers, so we got crappy laws.

We should stop reelecting crappy lawmakers.

@Lyle the headline is incorrect.

SCOTUS didn't rule on this at all.

They issued an order, not a ruling, temporarily pausing a lower court order while the issue is working its way through an appeals process that already has it.

It's a huge difference.

@epicdemiologist @BakerRL75

The headline is wrong.

What the Court did was to temporarily pause a lower court order while a separate court is addressing the dispute.

Full SNAP payments are not blocked. That's not how that legal process works.

@shimon the headline is wrong.

SCOTUS didn't block full SNAP payments. It paused a lower court ruling while a separate appeal is in progress.

The admin is no less free to issue full SNAP food aid payments after the order.

@mason

Ketanji Brown Jackson is hardly known to be a fat cat...

The reason for the temporary stay is that there's already an appeal in process, that's expected to be resolved any hour now, so they wanted to pause this case until that one comes down.

It makes sense.

@carstenfranke That's not quite how it works.

Just because there is money in the account does not mean that the office responsible for spending the money itself is funded.

There are a lot of parts of government that are experiencing exactly that right now, where there is technically funding appropriated, but the offices needed to write the actual checks aren't funded so the money can't be released.

That's just how the federal government works.

@LilHulkQ No it just makes it clear that they would prefer not to take something called the nuclear option, and it has a name like that for a reason...

Seriously, when something is reasonably called a nuclear option, we shouldn't be so quick to say, well why don't they pull the trigger on that?!

Democrats are voting against the legislative process under the current rules. Yes, it is possible to pull the nuclear option and change the rules, to flip the table, but that's not exactly something we should be proud of encouraging...

@carstenfranke Yes that's the point!
It was a compromise that could barely make it through because different congresspeople wanted different things, and this is where they met in the middle, a compromise that didn't make many people happy overall.

But again, you're relitigating the last fight. We've moved on to this new one. That's done, it's not on the table right now.

What's on the table right now is whether to fund SNAP and other government programs now, and Democrats are voting against the funding while Republicans are voting in favor of funding SNAP.

@arrrg marketing

@jhy001 blue has been voting to block the legislation that would open government....

If the shutdown is worth it strategically, fine, but they need to own that. And be held accountable for shutting it down.

@MrBirch I think the article misses the important thing right off the bat:

The government shutdown is a fantastic warning against putting government even more in charge of healthcare.

@jonchevreau.bsky.social

I don't think that's right, though.

Trump calls these names because his supporters cheer for it. There's no deeper logic. There's no deeper connection. It gets cheers at rallies so he says the thing that gets cheers.

The real observation is that his supporters don't understand who he is. That's the point of engagement.

Really Trump just follows the crowd.