SURVEY: Do you want Trump to finish his first term?

[lannarebirth]

1 hour ago, riclag said:

A Moore moment ,referencing Mr. and Mrs. Joe Blo(protest vote). So how does it end ? ("Plus, when they take him out I figure he'll take out a sacred cow or two with him").

 

I don't know how it ends or if it ends. Given Trump's predelictions and the fact he doesn't really know how government works, I'm sure he has or will overstep the boundary between himself and independent agencies. Nothing too nefarious IMO but procedurally wrong and DC and the media are much more concerned with process than substance because it is much easier to spin which is what they live off of. Ironically, Trump could have used an apprenticeship. Maybe he has commited actual crimes as well, I don't know but I assume Mueller will discover it if he has.

 

No, it won't all be one sided. The DNC has more trouble coming its way I would think. By the time this presidency shakes out I think both parties will have been bloodied up pretty well. While it is the strength of America's institutions that allows for such a novice to more or less govern, I expect we'll be hearing more about how just about every one of America's institutions is captured by whichever entities it is their job to regulate. All in all a good thing as nothing gets any better if you never name the problems. It will take decades to rectify of course, if it ever happens at all.

Edited January 30, 2018 by lannarebirth

[Slip]

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

Whatever, guarantee Trump supporters will immediately update their prior position to Trump's without any thought. So far as I understand the current positive economic trends were firmly in-place as an outcome of the prior administration's policies. Possible there will be a an economic downtown should Trump continue with his self absorption and protectionist policies. IMO, Trump's daily self aggrandisement is damaging to the greater good.

"'For certain purposes, of course, that is not true. When we navigate the ocean, or when we predict an eclipse, we often find it convenient to assume that the earth goes round the sun and that the stars are millions upon millions of kilometres away. But what of it? Do you suppose it is beyond us to produce a dual system of astronomy? The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them. Do you suppose our mathematicians are unequal to that? Have you forgotten doublethink?"

[Silurian]

10 hours ago, riclag said:

It seems that the POTUS has all the experience he needs in his admin,right at his side. Generals . He loves his Generals!

* "Just what in tarnation do “the generals” — Chief of Staff John Kelly, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster — think they’re doing?

The answer, I think, is: the Lord’s work. And I’m inclined to agree with them".

*NY Post

 

Wow, so the WH is being influenced by some invisible sky fairy? So only one religion is allowed to dictate policy? Maybe they should be consulting various supernatural entities for guidance. Perhaps they could consult Tarot cards or maybe throw some animal bones while they are at it. There are plenty of fortune tellers in Thailand that would be able to suss out various paths.

 

One can sleep safe knowing that the WH is following such esoteric advice.

 

[boomerangutang]

I'd like Trump to finish his first term (and extended terms) with all conveniences paid by taxpayers:  .....in prison, not in the WH.

[boomerangutang]

10 hours ago, Hamuraii said:

and one nice war to secure his 2nd term, I'm suggesting nuke Sweden.

Iceland is closer and has a smaller army.  Echoes of Reagan sending US military to attack Grenada. 

Whatever, it's great diversion.   He's a card-carrying member of the Actors Guild, so he knows "there's no such thing as bad publicity."   He's more concerned about squelching the investigation - which bothers the crap out of him.

[stevenl]

15 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Iceland is closer and has a smaller army.  Echoes of Reagan sending US military to attack Grenada. 

Whatever, it's great diversion.   He's a card-carrying member of the Actors Guild, so he knows "there's no such thing as bad publicity."   He's more concerned about squelching the investigation - which bothers the crap out of him.

More non-whites in Sweden.

[Silurian]

It looks like the WH is a full on autocracy now. The administration is ignoring Congress and just implementing its own policy. Yet another example of America first (right after Russia).

 

Quote

The decision to neither impose nor publicly announce sanctions left other lawmakers worried that the Trump administration had both ignored the will of Congress and abdicated its responsibility to hold Russia accountable for its destabilizing actions in the U.S. and eastern Europe.

 

Trump Administration Baffles and Enrages Lawmakers With Latest Punt on Russia Sanctions

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-administration-baffles-and-enrages-lawmakers-with-latest-punt-on-russia-sanctions

 

Edited January 30, 2018 by Silurian

[Thakkar]

9 minutes ago, Silurian said:

It looks like the WH is a full on autocracy now. The administration is ignoring Congress and just implementing its own policy. Yet another example of America first (right after Russia).

 

 

Trump Administration Baffles and Enrages Lawmakers With Latest Punt on Russia Sanctions

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-administration-baffles-and-enrages-lawmakers-with-latest-punt-on-russia-sanctions

 

 

“No, no puppet, you’re the puppet”

[F4UCorsair]

YES!!!

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

EVERY country wants a strong currency no matter what they say. But only if that strong currency also comes with a strong economy with a more or less fair balance of trade. You can mark the decline in US standards of living from the time its Balance of Trade went from positive through neutral and then turned sharply negative. How do you encourage domestic consumption, domestic investment, foreign investment, stronger exports and fewer imports? Weaken the currency until the Balance of Trade is more favorable. Once it is more favorable the currency rises no matter the government's intent or stated wishes.

It was not my intent to begin a debate on the pluses and minuses of a strong currency.  It was too point out that the strength of a currency is a measure of international confidence in an economy, and by extension a measure of the strength and  influence of the country,  The currency strengthened 29% under eight years of Obama, and declined 9% under one year of Trump

 

I would like to know what objective measure you refer to when you "mark the decline in the US standards of living".

 

The issues of currency strength and measured balance of trade are far from simple.  Global supply lines, hidden money transfers (how much money has entered the US from corrupt officials and oligarchs who want ill-gotten gains stashed somewhere safe?), financial gymnastics for tax purposes, etc. make accurate measurement of the trade deficit impossible. 

 

Also, the US dollar is the global currency for trade, and the most important currency to have in a developing country's currency reserves.  The US trade deficit started to grow rapidly after the 1997 Asian crisis, when developing countries started building up their dollar reserves.  As these countries economies, most notably China's, economies have grown so has their stash of US dollars.  This definitely drives up the US trade deficit, but is a strong vote of confidence in the US economy, and a strong financial incentive for foreign governments to keep the US economy strong.

 

Ok, I started by stating it was not my intent to enter this debate, then entered the debate.  I'll end by re-iterating that the point of the post is that a declining currency is an indication of a lack of faith in the US economy, and the US dollar has declined significantly under one year of Trump.

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I think there are very very few "Trump supporters". I think Trump was a protest vote against a 2 party machine content to manage the decline of a nation.  Can Trump do anything about it? Absolutely not; but he provides a catalyst for change. Plus, when they take him out I figure he'll take out a sacred cow or two with him.

 

Everything is part of a process. The process that brought us to this point in our nation's history and the process that will take us out the other side. I try to look at these things over a longer time frame and not just react to the news of the day save to rib posters who deify horribly flawed politicians of whichever stripe.

Rationally thought out change is good.  That is not what Trump promises.  He is a threat to a complex system of US alliances, business, military and financial relationships, a global economy dependent on cooperation, and world peace.  You don't fine tune a complex piece of machinery with a sledge hammer.

[lannarebirth]

7 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Rationally thought out change is good.  That is not what Trump promises.  He is a threat to a complex system of US alliances, business, military and financial relationships, a global economy dependent on cooperation, and world peace.  You don't fine tune a complex piece of machinery with a sledge hammer.

 

Trump's not going to destroy the nation. It might destroy him though but I think we can all live with that. If the nation is ever destroyed the people will do it. You know the "You are!" "No, you are!" crowd

[boomerangutang]

5 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

Trump's not going to destroy the nation. It might destroy him though but I think we can all live with that. If the nation is ever destroyed the people will do it. You know the "You are!" "No, you are!" crowd

I agree Trump is not going to destroy the USA.  But he can inflict a lot of damage without destroying it.  If I borrow your p.u. truck, and bring it back with the brakes & clutch burned out, holes in the oil pan, gunk in the gas tank, broken windows, and McDonald's left-overs and puke  covering the seats, ......the truck is not destroyed, but.....

 

And there's the issue of the US's image, as seen by those outside the US.  It's already on the ropes, and Trump is working each week to weaken it.  Putin and Xi are happy about that, ....but few Americans are.

[heybruce]

27 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Trump's not going to destroy the nation. It might destroy him though but I think we can all live with that. If the nation is ever destroyed the people will do it. You know the "You are!" "No, you are!" crowd

Literally destroy the US?  No.

 

Let China become overwhelmingly dominant in Asia, Africa, and the South Pacific, and allow Russia to start growing its empire by working west?  Yes he can, if he isn't stopped.

 

Turn US government into the kind of crony capitalism that the autocrats he admires have implemented?  That's his goal.

[Berkshire]

23 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Trump's not going to destroy the nation. It might destroy him though but I think we can all live with that. If the nation is ever destroyed the people will do it. You know the "You are!" "No, you are!" crowd

Figuratively, Trump is destroying the nation...bit by bit.  Take the environment.  Yes, Trump says stupid things, knows so little, and lies more than anyone alive.  But as President, his words can mean public policy. 

 

[Trump cast doubt on mainstream scientific findings about climate change in an interview aired on Britain’s ITV channel on Sunday night, saying “there’s a cooling and there’s a heating”.

“The ice caps were going to melt, they were going to be gone by now. But now they’re setting records. They’re at a record level,” he said.]

Response from scientists?

[“Glaciers and ice caps are globally continuing to melt at extreme rate,” said Michael Zemp, director of the World Glacier Monitoring Service which tracks hundreds of glaciers.

Trump’s implication that glaciers and ice caps are growing “is simply wrong. Or maybe he is referring to a different planet,” Zemp said.]

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-trump/trumps-view-that-ice-caps-setting-records-baffles-scientists-idUSKBN1FI1WK

 

Harmless stupidity?  If Trump ignores the scientists and favors coal over clean energy, then no, it's not harmless stupidity. 

[lannarebirth]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Literally destroy the US?  No.

 

Let China become overwhelmingly dominant in Asia, Africa, and the South Pacific, and allow Russia to start growing its empire by working west?  Yes he can, if he isn't stopped.

 

Turn US government into the kind of crony capitalism that the autocrats he admires have implemented?  That's his goal.

China already dominates Asia, Africa, and their contested waters. As far as the South Pacific goes they are buying a lot of real estate, just as the Japanese and Koreans did before them.That all came about prior to Trump.

[heybruce]

2 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

China already dominates Asia, Africa, and their contested waters. As far as the South Pacific goes they are buying a lot of real estate, just as the Japanese and Koreans did before them.That all came about prior to Trump.

China's influence across the world has grown with its economic clout.  That is unavoidable. 

 

US resistance to China's domination of the South China Sea and smaller countries on the Asian continent has disappeared under Trump.  His hostility to Africa will facilitate China's increasing influence there.

 

The TPP was designed to implement trade among Pacific nations according to western rules and standards.  By abandoning it Trump surrendered a lot, maybe most, US economic influence in the region and let China pick it up.

 

What's scary is that these things hardly register on the list of dumb things Trump has done.

[lannarebirth]

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

China's influence across the world has grown with its economic clout.  That is unavoidable. 

 

US resistance to China's domination of the South China Sea and smaller countries on the Asian continent has disappeared under Trump.  His hostility to Africa will facilitate China's increasing influence there.

 

The TPP was designed to implement trade among Pacific nations according to western rules and standards.  By abandoning it Trump surrendered a lot, maybe most, US economic influence in the region and let China pick it up.

 

What's scary is that these things hardly register on the list of dumb things Trump has done.

 

Like an Isaan loanshark, China is mainly hanging debt on Africa. A lot of it will be unservicable debt.

 

TPP was not a good trade pact and Americans intuitively knew that. Trump latched on to that vibe and ran with it.

[lannarebirth]

20 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Figuratively, Trump is destroying the nation...bit by bit.  Take the environment.  Yes, Trump says stupid things, knows so little, and lies more than anyone alive.  But as President, his words can mean public policy. 

 

[Trump cast doubt on mainstream scientific findings about climate change in an interview aired on Britain’s ITV channel on Sunday night, saying “there’s a cooling and there’s a heating”.

“The ice caps were going to melt, they were going to be gone by now. But now they’re setting records. They’re at a record level,” he said.]

Response from scientists?

[“Glaciers and ice caps are globally continuing to melt at extreme rate,” said Michael Zemp, director of the World Glacier Monitoring Service which tracks hundreds of glaciers.

Trump’s implication that glaciers and ice caps are growing “is simply wrong. Or maybe he is referring to a different planet,” Zemp said.]

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-trump/trumps-view-that-ice-caps-setting-records-baffles-scientists-idUSKBN1FI1WK

 

Harmless stupidity?  If Trump ignores the scientists and favors coal over clean energy, then no, it's not harmless stupidity. 

 

Economics will win the day as it always does in the US.  We're in a transition time and transitions are full of noise. Here's the truth of the matter:

 

 

Edited January 30, 2018 by lannarebirth

[heybruce]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Like an Isaan loanshark, China is mainly hanging debt on Africa. A lot of it will be unservicable debt.

 

TPP was not a good trade pact and Americans intuitively knew that. Trump latched on to that vibe and ran with it.

What deficiencies in TPP were so significant they outweighed the benefits of committing all major Pacific economies except China into a western rules based system of trade?

[Berkshire]

4 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Economics will win the day as it always does in the US.  We're in a transition time and transitions are full of noise. Here's the truth of the matter:

 

Ok, economics then....

 

[In the United States, more people were employed in solar power last year than in generating electricity through coal, gas and oil energy combined. According to a new report from the U.S. Department of Energy, solar power employed 43 percent of the Electric Power Generation sector's workforce in 2016, while fossil fuels combined accounted for just 22 percent.]

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2017/01/25/u-s-solar-energy-employs-more-people-than-oil-coal-and-gas-combined-infographic/#6cd51ff52800

[lannarebirth]

13 minutes ago, heybruce said:

What deficiencies in TPP were so significant they outweighed the benefits of committing all major Pacific economies except China into a western rules based system of trade?

 

Besides the obvious one of the benefits flowing primarily to the already rich this is the one that bothered me personally the most. You guys are always talking about undermining democracy, well this would do it with the strike of a pen.

 

Quote

The Trans-Pacific Partnership — a cornerstone of Mr. Obama’s remaining economic agenda — would grant broad powers to multinational companies operating in North America, South America and Asia. Under the accord, still under negotiation but nearing completion, companies and investors would be empowered to challenge regulations, rules, government actions and court rulings — federal, state or local — before tribunals organized under the World Bank or the United Nations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/business/trans-pacific-partnership-seen-as-door-for-foreign-suits-against-us.html

Edited January 30, 2018 by lannarebirth

[lannarebirth]

7 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Ok, economics then....

 

[In the United States, more people were employed in solar power last year than in generating electricity through coal, gas and oil energy combined. According to a new report from the U.S. Department of Energy, solar power employed 43 percent of the Electric Power Generation sector's workforce in 2016, while fossil fuels combined accounted for just 22 percent.]

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2017/01/25/u-s-solar-energy-employs-more-people-than-oil-coal-and-gas-combined-infographic/#6cd51ff52800

Truth is solar uses less workers per Kw hour produced and that is why we are transitioning to it. That there are more working in the field I put down to new installations both private and public.

 

We are both making the point the US is moving to solar based on economic considerations.

Edited January 30, 2018 by lannarebirth

[Berkshire]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

Truth is solar uses less workers per Kw hour produced and that is why we are transitioning to it. That there are more working in the field I put down to new installations both private and public.

Ah yes, cleaner energy, cheaper for the public, unlimited source, fewer workers to maintain but better paying jobs....naw, we can't have that. 

[lannarebirth]

3 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Ah yes, cleaner energy, cheaper for the public, unlimited source, fewer workers to maintain but better paying jobs....naw, we can't have that. 

 

Are you being purposely obtuse?  I'm agreeing with you. Actually you're agreeing with me but whatever.

[Berkshire]

3 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Are you being purposely obtuse?  I'm agreeing with you. Actually you're agreeing with me but whatever.

So you agree that Trump is harming the country by trying to bring back coal?  That's the point.  Trump doesn't believe in climate science (or claims not to) and is trying to help his coal baron buddies/donors unload their last inventory. 

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, Berkshire said:

So you agree that Trump is harming the country by trying to bring back coal?  That's the point.  Trump doesn't believe in climate science (or claims not to) and is trying to help his coal baron buddies/donors unload their last inventory. 

 

I didn't say that. What I said is that economic considerations will "trump" anything Trump says or wishes. Economic considerations point away from coal production to gas, hydro, wind and more and more solar.

[heybruce]

14 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Besides the obvious one of the benefits flowing primarily to the already rich this is the one that bothered me personally the most. You guys are always talking about undermining democracy, well this would do it with the strike of a pen.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/business/trans-pacific-partnership-seen-as-door-for-foreign-suits-against-us.html

I'm not sure what benefits you are referring to.

 

In the modern world, trade is limited more by discriminatory rules than by tariffs and quotas.  A trade deal in which companies would have had to negotiate countless legal systems to settle disputes would have been no trade deal at all.  Relying on tribunals organized by international institutions was a necessary compromise; no country could have sold the agreement to its citizens if it subjugated its companies to the court system of a competing company's country.

 

Trade deals are complicated, difficult, and require compromise.  The only thing that makes them worthwhile is that the alternative is worse.  The alternative to the TPP was to abandon the future of trading around the Pacific to China.  That is the alternative Trump chose.

 

Ironic, isn't it?  The great deal-maker has, to date, been nothing more than a great deal-breaker.

[heybruce]

3 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I didn't say that. What I said is that economic considerations will "trump" anything Trump says or wishes. Economic considerations point away from coal production to gas, hydro, wind and more and more solar.

Fellow reality tv star, failed presidential candidate and completely unqualified Secretary of Energy Rick Perry wants to subsidize coal and nuclear power.    https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2017/11/06/rick-perrys-coal-and-nuclear-subsidy-could-cost-10-billion-per-year-is-america-great-again-yet/#3b941fb130db

 

I read somewhere, I can't find the source without a lot of searching, that Trump was sympathetic.  Admittedly this could be another case of Trump agreeing with whoever talked to him last.  If the subsidies go through, they could delay the day of economic reckoning at great expense to the environment and the taxpayers.

[lannarebirth]

7 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I'm not sure what benefits you are referring to.

 

In the modern world, trade is limited more by discriminatory rules than by tariffs and quotas.  A trade deal in which companies would have had to negotiate countless legal systems to settle disputes would have been no trade deal at all.  Relying on tribunals organized by international institutions was a necessary compromise; no country could have sold the agreement to its citizens if it subjugated its companies to the court system of a competing company's country.

 

Trade deals are complicated, difficult, and require compromise.  The only thing that makes them worthwhile is that the alternative is worse.  The alternative to the TPP was to abandon the future of trading around the Pacific to China.  That is the alternative Trump chose.

 

Ironic, isn't it?  The great deal-maker has, to date, been nothing more than a great deal-breaker.

 

If you voted for judges and legislators and initiatives and propositions to create a certain kind of environment in which you choose to live and then some foreign corporation overrules that through offshore tribunals you never voted for isn't that a de facto undermining of democracy and sovereignty?

Edited January 30, 2018 by lannarebirth