No, mhaze, I never said “overnight,” and you know that.

//Oh so Labor's housing policy is long term and we need to wait. But Trump's economic policies need to change everything overnight or they don't exist.//

The point was about what counts as “delivered.” If a policy is blocked in court, reversed, or still unresolved, then calling it “delivered” is, at best, premature.

Again, if courts struck down the funding mechanism, then you’d have a point. But they haven’t.

//Now you're trying to pivot to say Trump hasn't delivered because some of his policies are being challenged in the lower courts.//

That's not a pivot. I've been saying that the whole time.

//The OBBB has passed...Ditto with tariffs…Ditto, illegal aliens being removed…//

OBBB passed, yes, but with major concessions and legal pushback. Tariffs? Several had to be scaled back after they triggered inflation, supply chain disruptions, and economic fallout. As for immigration, removals are happening - but so are mass legal challenges and reversals.

Your “ditto”s are doing a lot of heavy lifting.

//USAID is no more.//

And this is good… why?

USAID still exists, by the way. It’s been downsized, not abolished.

//MAHA is being progressively implemented. NATO has now acceded to Trump's demands…//

NATO member spending began rising in 2014. Years before Trump’s pressure campaign. He may have accelerated the trend, but he didn’t start it.

//That the minnows slow things for a short period at the edges is immaterial.//

But that’s not immaterial, it’s the point.

If policies are consistently being slowed, challenged, or struck down, that’s not just “minnows at the edges.” It’s the kind of resistance that only kicks in when there are serious legal, constitutional, or practical flaws.

You talk as though the obstacles exist in a vacuum, with no connection to the policies themselves. But, the pushback is often a direct consequence of what those policies are designed to do or how it's proposed they'll be implemented.

Brushing it off as minor interference just avoids engaging with why it’s happening in the first place.

Just semantics now JD.

Trump said he'd reverse the illegal alien invasion. Border crossing are now basically finished. Tens of thousands have already been sent back and even more have self deported. Yet because a handful are held up by lower courts, you want to pretend that means Trump hasn't delivered.

Mere semantics.

The same with tariffs. Trump never delineated what the level of the tariff would be so just because he allowed some to be negotiated down doesn't mean he failed. His promise was that he'd reverse the massive trade deficits that other nations had with the US, not that the tariffs would be at a particular level. And those trade deficits are being addressed. A policy promised and implemented.

As to NATO spending, now you're just making stuff up. Trump said he wanted them to spend at 5% of GSP. They've opposed that for years. Now they've conceded and are complying.

"If policies are consistently being slowed, challenged, or struck down"

What policy has been struck down. Challenged yes. Of coarse those who lose under Trump's policies are challenging them. But none have been struck down. Again just fantasising about a world that exists only in your mind.

"USAID still exists, by the way. It’s been downsized, not abolished."

False. USAID is finished. A few of its more minor functions have been absorbed into the State Dept but all of its wanton distribution of funds to favoured groups is over..

"Several had to be scaled back after they triggered inflation, "
Rubbish. Indeed economists are now trying to work out why inflation hasn't been triggered.

Just on the Australian beef ban. I found this old post while teaching Paul about how he got it wrong...

"ME: "And I'd be willing to bet that the Australian quarantine control authorities are currently re-examining the trade barriers against US beef."
JD: "Where is the proof."

That my boy, is how you do predictions.

mhaze,

When someone gets caught overselling, it always becomes "just semantics." But words matter, especially when you're claiming delivery of contested, delayed, or reversed policies.

//Trump said he'd reverse the illegal alien invasion. Border crossings are now basically finished.//

False.

Border crossings remain high, with hundreds of thousands monthly as of mid-2025. Even conservative sources acknowledge the “invasion” isn’t over, it’s evolving.

//Yet because a handful are held up by lower courts, you want to pretend that means Trump hasn't delivered.//

It’s not a handful. Key policies like expedited removals, asylum bans, and TPS revocations have all been delayed or blocked. That’s not incidental. That’s structural pushback.

//The same with tariffs... just because he allowed some to be negotiated down doesn't mean he failed.//

The failure wasn’t just about rates. It was about the fallout. Tariffs triggered inflation, disrupted supply chains, and required backpedalling. That’s not precise delivery. That’s messy improvisation.

//His promise was to reverse trade deficits... and those are being addressed.//

Except they aren’t. The US trade deficit in goods hit record highs in 2022 and remained historically elevated into 2025. “Addressed” doesn’t mean “reversed.”

//Trump said 5% NATO spending. They've opposed it for years. Now they’ve conceded and are complying.//

No, they haven’t. NATO reaffirmed the 2 percent target agreed to in 2014, well before Trump. There is zero evidence of 5 percent compliance.

//What policy has been struck down?//

Plenty.

- DACA rescission: struck down
- Birthright citizenship EO: blocked
- Asylum bans: rejected
- Family separation: halted

You’re pretending judicial rebukes don’t count unless they come from the Supreme Court. But many rulings stand without appeal.

//USAID is finished.//

USAID.gov is still active, with updated programs and missions as of July 2025. It’s been restructured, not abolished.

//Inflation hasn’t been triggered.//

Tariff-driven inflation did happen, especially in consumer goods, construction, and agriculture. Economists aren't denying it. They’re parsing why it lasted longer.

//That my boy, is how you do predictions.//

Actually, it’s how you cherry-pick one outcome and pretend it validates an entire worldview. The beef reversal doesn’t retroactively vindicate everything you’ve claimed.

Try again.

Whew I just speed read through this thread and lots about government
/business/union conferences, pollie lies but nothing about energy.
Don't you lot have a look at what is happening in Europe on NetZero ?
The whole wind farm business is falling in a heap because the governments cannot afford the subsidies required.
They are cancelling here, but doesn't that alarm you ?
Hydrogen was always a no goer as the scientists said, energy is lost
every time you change its type.
Aaaarrrggghhh !

Bezza,

There’ve been some hiccups with wind rollout in parts of Europe, but does that mean Australia should ditch renewables entirely?

That would be like scrapping broadband because the NBN had teething problems.

Wind and solar are still expanding globally. Costs are trending down long-term, and most of the challenges are economic or regulatory - not technological dead-ends.

Hydrogen has niche uses, but that's all they are at this point: niche.

It sounds like you're mistaking bumps in the road for a sector collapse.