To be sure, Trump has eviscerated the Environmental Protection Agency (which has helped coal mining), softened financial oversight (great for bank stocks), and has shown little interest in anti-trust enforcement (a welcome development for tech monopolies such as Amazon and Google).
Why does less financial oversight boost banks? I thought the whole point about such oversight was so that the bureaucrats should make sure the banks don’t go bust? But if less oversight boosts the stocks then the markets clearly disagree, no?
The thing that puzzles me is the very existence of the massive EPA. Surely environmental decisions should be as local as possible with a federal agency only acting as referee to ensure that actions in one state don’t adversely affect another state. When friends deplore any of Trump’s decisions, I ask them whether they prefer their local council to rule on bin collection or whether it should be decided in Brussels. They never seem to be able to grasp the point. I conclude that Remoaners and anti-Trumpeters, and there is a significant overlap, are mentally defective. Just look at Snippa, Soapy Jo and everyone who writes/ejaculates for the Guardian
‘To be sure, Trump has eviscerated the Environmental Protection Agency’
Thanks, Donald! Now get back to work. Take out the whole damn alphabet agency network.