15 hours ago, bristolboy said:

How many Presidents do you know who went bankrupt 4 times by paying way too much for assets (in other words got out-negotiated).got bailed out by their Daddy, and inherited almost 500 million in current dollars? 

I can hear him already.

"Bankruptcy?  NO ONE knows more about bankruptcy than me!"

"Inheritance?  NO ONE knows more about inheritance than me!"

And you know what?  He wouldn't be lying!

 

 

11 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

Not a great deal maker? Really? How about how he renegotiated NAFTA when people were saying it couldn't be done. The US is far better off for it. How about the on-going negotiations with China? They just offered to buy a TRILLION, yes TRILLION dollars of US goods as part of the fix for the trade deficit between the countries. How about negotiations with North Korea that have bought their nuke development to a halt? Just because Pelosi's hatred of the man is keeping her from agreeing to open the govt isn't his fault.

He just gave nafta a new acronym. That was perhaps the most drastic chance to the trade agreement.

 

oh, by the way, isn’t Mexico supposed to be paying for this wall? 

9 minutes ago, samran said:

He just gave nafta a new acronym. That was perhaps the most drastic chance to the trade agreement.

 

oh, by the way, isn’t Mexico supposed to be paying for this wall? 

The most drastic change is that none of the signor nations to NAFTA may enter into a trade pact with China without it first being being vetted by NAFTA signees. If those signees do not agree with the nation's Chinese trade pact that member may be removed from NAFTA. Don't know if it's a good provision or not, but it is significant and I think probably good for the local bloc.

4 hours ago, bendejo said:

I can hear him already.

"Bankruptcy?  NO ONE knows more about bankruptcy than me!"

"Inheritance?  NO ONE knows more about inheritance than me!"

And you know what?  He wouldn't be lying!

 

 

Most of the money made by scavenger investors of distressed properties is in the " loss carry forward" not in the property itself. Big "loss carry forwards" are like an innoculation against FIT, for years.

Edited January 22, 20197 yr by lannarebirth

8 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

The most drastic change is that none of the signor nations to NAFTA may enter into a trade pact with China without it first being being vetted by NAFTA signees. If those signees do not agree with the nation's Chinese trade pact that member may be removed from NAFTA. Don't know if it's a good provision or not, but it is significant and I think probably good for the local bloc.

Except that Canada and Mexico are now members of the TPP so it's extremely unlikely that either would enter into a bilateral pact with China.

23 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

The most drastic change is that none of the signor nations to NAFTA may enter into a trade pact with China without it first being being vetted by NAFTA signees. If those signees do not agree with the nation's Chinese trade pact that member may be removed from NAFTA. Don't know if it's a good provision or not, but it is significant and I think probably good for the local bloc.

Well depends on your perspective. Mine is that you want to encourage trade and commerce, wherever you get it. 

 

Basically it is a restraint of trade clause which I though would be the antithesis of what a normal republican would want. In a way, he’s just made it more like the EU, partially taking away a nations ability to trade wherever it sees fit. 

 

And as another poster has said, we also have the TPP, which makes Donald’s changes a damp squib, a bit like his presidency really. All tip and no iceberg....

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

You love the biggest liar in American presidential history and it's not even close.
 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/21/president-trump-made-false-or-misleading-claims-his-first-two-years/

I am sure they are looking at this with no agenda, zero animus and bias....

3 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

I am sure they are looking at this with no agenda, zero animus and bias....

I guess the majority of government workers do support the shutdown.

Build a wall for the Canadian border too!

 

MAGA...Not....

 

Any American who believes in MAGA is plainly ignorant.

Ready for debate!

1 hour ago, samran said:

Well depends on your perspective. Mine is that you want to encourage trade and commerce, wherever you get it. 

 

Basically it is a restraint of trade clause which I though would be the antithesis of what a normal republican would want. In a way, he’s just made it more like the EU, partially taking away a nations ability to trade wherever it sees fit. 

 

And as another poster has said, we also have the TPP, which makes Donald’s changes a damp squib, a bit like his presidency really. All tip and no iceberg....

Restraint of trade has been ajudged to be unconstitutional time and time again. It seems to me more a right of first refusal than restraint of trade. It's an anti back stabbingclause which is more germain whenever China is a possible party.

2 hours ago, Solinvictus said:

Build a wall for the Canadian border too!

 

MAGA...Not....

 

Any American who believes in MAGA is plainly ignorant.

Ready for debate!

Ignorant is too polite. It's a racist, xenophobic movement, let by a horrifying racist bully demagogue. 

 

Quote

 

Above all else, Trump is a bully

As the shambolic Trump presidency caroms and lurches into Year Three, a shameful governing philosophy has emerged: cruelty for cruelty’s sake.

Let us take stock:

Roughly one-quarter of the federal government has been closed for a month, in the longest shutdown in U.S. history.

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-governing-philosophy-cruelty-for-crueltys-sake/2019/01/21/868ee4b0-1dbb-11e9-9145-3f74070bbdb9_story.html

Edited January 22, 20197 yr by Jingthing