placeholder

That was back when he wasn't calling it a beautiful program. In fact, his characterization of the program was far from flattering. Which makes sense if you're claiming it operates as a "cheap labor program." But calling a "cheap labor program" beautiful, not so much.

He's now calling it a beautiful program. So it's a beautiful program being utilized as a "cheap labor program"?

Sounds like you're making irrelevant personal comments. In other words, you've got nothing.

Which Trump are you asking me disagree with? The one who denounced it as a cheap labor program or his even more evil twin who supports it?

Great idea. Violate international law based on a feeling. The same kind of feeling that the leaders of China and Russia experience. As for the Monroe Doctrine, not exactly the most popular doctrine given the devastation inflicted in its name on so many nations in the Americas. And, of course, it enjoys no legal status internationally and never did. It started as an empty threat created by the President it's named for.

Trump says he's not changed his mind on H-1B visas as debate rages within MAGA coalition President-elect Donald Trump had previously promised to end the use of H-1B as a 'cheap labor program' https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-says-hes-not-changed-his-mind-h-1b-visas-debate-rages-within-maga-coalition

Remember when Donald Trump fulminated against Tik-Tok and wanted it banned? Trump Asks Supreme Court to Delay TikTok Ban So He Can Weigh in After He Takes Office Trump Signs Executive Order That Will Effectively Ban Use Of TikTok In the U.S. President Trump on Thursday invoked his emergency economic powers to impose broad sanctions against TikTok, a move that steps up pressure on the Chinese-owned app to sell its U.S. assets to an American company. In the order, which takes effect in 45 days, any transactions between TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, and U.S. citizens will be outlawed for national security reasons. In practice, experts told NPR the order likely will mean the viral video service could no longer receive advertising from American companies and the app could be removed from Apple and Google's app stores. https://www.npr.org/2020/08/06/900019185/trump-signs-executive-order-that-will-effectively-ban-use-of-tiktok-in-the-u-s Then came this: When the Biden administration said in March that it supported legislation that could ban TikTok, Tony Sayegh jumped into action. Sayegh, the head of public affairs at one of TikTok’s biggest investors, had become an unofficial adviser to the Chinese-owned social-media giant as it navigates survival in the geopolitical crosshairs of the world’s two superpowers. He turned to a seemingly unlikely potential savior for TikTok: Donald Trump, then the presumptive Republican nominee for president, who had initiated the effort to ban TikTok in his first term. Sayegh started back-channeling to Trump’s closest advisers, making the case that it was foolish to hand wins to both President Biden, who would appear tough on China, and Meta Platforms, which Trump believed had hurt his re-election bid in 2020... “If you get rid of TikTok, Facebook and Zuckerschmuck will double their business,” Trump posted on his social-media network Truth Social, referring to Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg with a Yiddish obscenity. https://archive.ph/I1zjg Then this: Trump Asks Supreme Court to Delay TikTok Ban So He Can Weigh in After He Takes Office President-elect Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court on Friday to pause the potential TikTok ban from going into effect until his administration can pursue a “political resolution” to the issue. The request came as TikTok and the Biden administration filed opposing briefs to the court, in which the company argued the court should strike down a law that could ban the platform by Jan. 19 while the government emphasized its position that the statute is needed to eliminate a national security risk. https://time.com/7203951/trump-supreme-court-delay-tiktok-ban/ And now this: Trump says it could be worth keeping TikTok in US for a little while "I think we're going to have to start thinking because, you know, we did go on TikTok, and we had a great response with billions of views, billions and billions of views," Trump told the crowd at AmericaFest, an annual gathering organized by conservative group Turning Point. "They brought me a chart, and it was a record, and it was so beautiful to see, and as I looked at it, I said, 'Maybe we gotta keep this sucker around for a little while'," he said. Trump met with TikTok's CEO on Monday. https://archive.ph/gvTBN#selection-1435.0-1445.39

Certainly, in an era when Trump treats allies like opponents and opponents like allies, acquiring nuclear weapons does make a lot of sense for America's friends to nuke up.

The reason the rates are skyrocketing is really simple. Unfortunately it's due to something that the right wingers deny is really a thing: anthropogenic climate change. There's been a prolonged drought in Panama. The lake that feeds the canal is very low. So the canal can't accommodate as many ships as it once did. That means there is now a bidding war to get through the canal. That way, Panama can make up for some of the lost income due to lower traffic. The canal doesn't cost nothing to run.

You're the one who frame the issue as a dichotomy: rich versus poor. Housing is also being built for the middle class. As for how illegal immigration benefits the poor? If wages are lower, that results in lower prices. Do you think poor people benefit from lower prices or not?

Thanks for the throwing money at it cliche. You expect government programs to cost nothing? You think these governments don't want to solve this problem? Have you got a free solution to offer? Or even a very low cost one?

As I recall now, some businessman complain to him about the allegedly exorbitant rates that Panama was charging to transit the canal. So Trump gets angry and starts making things up.

Because Trump would never stoop to lie? Or believe a random source if it suited him?

"Maybe Trump knows something/? That's pretty much giving him a blank check to lie. And given that you write here about how the current Panamanian government has cooled on China, his claim continues to make no sense.

Thanks for the link, I fully and freely acknowledge I got it when when when I claimed that you were using a mistaken comment by a member to deflect. You never said any such thing. It was other members, not you.

So it's a establishing a military presence with no actual soldiers? Or do you believe Trump's claim: "Merry Christmas to all, including to the wonderful soldiers of China, who are lovingly, but illegally, operating the Panama Canal."?

I find myself in the unusual position of citing blaze master to use as evidence against you. Here it goes:

Whenever I clicked on on what you provided all I got was a page that featured the image alone. All you had to do was simply provide a link.

Stupid generalizations like this actually do tend to make me believe that you are an American Trump supporter. But until I see your passport, I'm suspending final judgement.

Now you're the one distorting facts. All I did was ask you to provide a link to a post of mine you claimed misatttributed a comment to you. You refused to provide the link. And if I did misattribute the post to you, I stated that I would openly acknowledge it. And I'm beginning to suspect that you're not just a Canadian but a French Canadian. I say that because a 'lie" is a falsehood told on purpose. But a falsehood can also be an honest mistake. You would probably know this if your native language was English.

You're the one who repeatedly and compulsively raises the issue of a member's nationality.. Not that it matters, but I suspect you're a Canadian.

Please share with the rest of us proof that you are an American.

"Isn't China establishing a presence in all three areas?" Oh no!China is establishing a presence! Could you be a little more vague? Probably not.

Wealth countries have tried all sorts of measures to halt the decline in fertility. While France has been the most successful largely because of its excellent (and expensive) maternity and post maternity care, even there the rate is too low. What's more, even if a program defied the odds and was successful, you're going to have to wait almost 20 years for that even to begin to make a difference. So, in your view of American, either you're rich or homeless? That's ridiculous.

As the H-1B program now stands, I'm against it. Yes, given how inadequate the visa system currently is, I'm for illegal immigration. Without it the American economy would face severe economic problems. The fertility rate in American is well below replacement levels. Without immigration, legal and illegal, America's population would be a lot older and facing the same kind of problems that Europe and much of Asia, including China and Thailand, are facing. As for it benefitting the rich...all those houses being built in texas and elsewhere aren't being built only for rich people.