So, public outreach and multilateral accords, I assume you want those to be binding as the Paris Agreement was not binding. Let's see how Trump the Master Negotiator gets on with that. It's almost like if the agreement was binding or had specific pushes to China specifically they would t sign on and we could pound sand. International agreements are hard. Also we pulled from Paris Agreement so why are you even bringing it up. The current Admin put that to rest so now instead of a weak pledge we have... Nothing. Great deal making.

China has enough coal to power itself, same as US, tariffs do Jack shit about that what's next.

Would you agree to let China "inspect our supply chain"? Why would they allow that from anyone else? You're going stick rather than carrot against a nation already at odds with us. You sound as smart a negotiator as the President.

I noticed what you didn't say is the US should do what we think is right and set a good example for the world and strengthen ties with our existing allies and show every other nation besides China how it can be done and generate wealth. Curious, almost like China is just a talking point to avoid the issue entirely.

You are in Fantasyland.

How can / should we the United States stop China from burning coal?

Legal residents are being extra judiciously deported to a Central American work prison for thought crimes without due process and denied habeas corpus in violation of both American Laws and in my shared opinion the core of American Values and the Presidential admin is currently sorting out how exactly to violate orders from The Supreme Court in order to continue holding people there.

Is that more accurate?

Mr President, we must not allow a whale oil gap!

Extrajudicial justice doled out by criminal organizations.
Yup that sure does describe the Republican Party!

I wasn't claiming it did, only the hypothetical to show the point, it's not as simple as dollars in dollars out. It's similar to every $1 you spend on enforcement at the IRS brings in like $4-6. No changes to the law just higher compliance numbers.

The number to compare to is the amount Americans spend on tax filing services and of this could be less over the next decade. Also has to be taken into account if Americans are not satisfied with those systems.

Welcome to politics I guess? There are plenty of things I don't like, I am not even arguing you against this actual issue, I think we would probably align up pretty well but there is a way to change that, every 2 and 4 years. I know who my members of Congress are and I know why they vote that way. They didn't abuse the system, they used it to pass things most of their constituents support.

Guess who votes most reliably? Older people. Guess who really likes supporting Israel? Older voters. It doesn't have to be more complicated than that. If you have actual evidence of something illegal happening you, yes you, can sue about that. In fact there are several organizations with money who would looooooove to support such a case but you have to have that case otherwise it's just empty populism.

If you just don't believe any of those things are actual issues then yeah, coal is cheap and abundant. Externalities aren't real anymore.

"Here is a lot of data from everywhere showing harms"

"No it doesn't"

Welp can't argue with that logic I suppose.

The status quo already "costs taxpayers millions" it just a matter of who gets that money and that's not what the GAO is saying if you actually read it, they are saying the startup costs should be calculated more accurately to guage those costs savings, they don't actually say the program would be a money loser, that's not how the government operates. The GAO isn't there to judge whether programs should exist or not, it's there to make sure they operate efficiently and accurately.

If the IRS direct-file program itself runs a loss of $20M but increases tax receipts by say $50M then did it lose money? Well yes but no. The government is not a business, it can make calculations like that.

Also this concept is popular, people want it, people don't like dealing with Intuit and MS for their basic tax filings.

Still not reeeeeeading....

Why doesn't it read?!

You know we have DOGE to thank for putting those talking points to bed. First it was $2T in savings from all those bad things (without specifics I might add, just like your list), then it was $1T then last week it was $150B and today I just read that number isn't even real, in the end the savings will be under $100B.

So we gave a brand new agency hundreds of millions, if not billions to find these things Republicans have told us about for decades despite the existence of several layers of accountability, Inspectors Generals, the GAO but that wasn't good enough so we created an entire new level of bureaucracy (but this one isn't wasteful?) and they have found, well, not much of anything outside of things they do not like politically and cut those.

You all need to learn the difference between actual fraud, actual abuse and not just "This money was spent 100% lawfully and I just don't like it or the purpose behind it"

You can stop paying taxes right now and not go to jail, so that is on you my friend.

Exactly, VAT is still a consumption tax.

Income tax as a way to fund the government is not bad but not great either, there are better systems we can implement but National Retail Tax isn't one of them, it also has a lot of holes to plug, just different ones.

Of course in my opinion they all pale in comparison to the one-true-tax, the Land Value Tax.

Marginal Utility