10 hours ago, Fortean1 said:

The U.S. military gives their oaths of service to support and defend the U.S. Constitution.  During my service 1970-1990, the President is only the Commander-in-Chief.  President Trump is torqued from the buddy-buddy celebration and the military parade in China.

That should also mean that they wouldn't execute and murder the 11 civilians on the boat outside Venezuela, if that was the case. 

That was really a case of bad judgement. There are other ways to stop their drug trafficking, than murder them. Take the boat into arrest and prosecute them is the human thing to do.

But this is America under Trump. And he wants the peace price..

On 9/7/2025 at 11:06 AM, stevenl said:

I think his main aim this election was staying out of jail. But it's a hard choice between that and grifting.

Yet none of the prosecutions were brought against until after he announced he would run for reelection. 

 

Interesting that yes?

39 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Yet none of the prosecutions were brought against until after he announced he would run for reelection. 

 

Interesting that yes?

Not interesting at all. After his 2020 loss he had no choice but run again. An announcement was immaterial.

Just now, stevenl said:

Not interesting at all. After his 2019 loss he had no choice but run again. An announcement was immaterial.

So the fact that the DOJ waited 3-7 years, and then days after Trump announces his for reelection three prosecutions start, on the same day, and it's a coincidence. Right.  

18 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So the fact that the DOJ waited 3-7 years, and then days after Trump announces his for reelection three prosecutions start, on the same day, and it's a coincidence. Right.  

Wheels of justice grind slowly. Now if the investigations started after his announcement you have a point.

On 9/7/2025 at 10:39 AM, WDSmart said:

I have no ability to "crusade" against the Thai government. I am not a citizen, so, have no vote. I do vote in the USA, but only on federal issues, like electing a president.

To me, the Thai government enacting policies is a matter of governance (democracy - kind of), not an economic issue (socialism). Thailand has an economy that is a mix of capitalism and socialism, as does the USA. In Thailand, however, the percentage of socialism in that mix is greater than that in the USA. I think that's commendable and hope the USA will start increasing the percentage of socialism in its mixed economy.

I do have a lovely home in the mountains of northeast Thailand. Previously, I did participate in the capitalistic system in my home country, the USA. That was the only way to survive in that economy unless you were willing to accept being homeless. I paid taxes, some of which were used for public projects, which is socialism. Now, as I said above, I would like to see my home country increase the percentage of socialism in its mixed economy.

 

I'm sure hypocrisy comes frequently to your mind. Socialism comes frequently to mine.

you just ignore it when it suits you for a comfortable life

 

hypocrite

On 9/7/2025 at 12:18 AM, stevenl said:

Fallen for the trump narrative. Countries with a negative trade balance with the US were hit with tariffs. Why do you think services were not included? Why do you think a country like Bangladesh exports more to the US than it imports?  Why do you consider a negative trade balance bad?

 

Let’s not pretend this is about "falling for narratives."You asked why services weren’t included, because tariffs are a tool aimed at goods, not intangibles. Services trade is governed differently, and the U.S. actually runs a surplus in services worldwide. As for Bangladesh, that’s a textbook example: the U.S. buys textiles and garments because they’re cheaper there, while Bangladesh doesn’t need to import American goods on the same scale. A trade deficit isn’t automatically "bad," but decades of chronic deficits in strategic industries mean lost leverage, lost jobs, and greater dependence on rivals. That’s why tariffs were used as leverage, to push for fairer terms. So, calling tariffs a "narrative" misses the point. They’re not about eliminating every deficit, they’re about rebalancing relationships where the U.S. was clearly getting the short end.

On 9/7/2025 at 12:16 AM, thaibreaker said:

These job numbers speak for themselves. They have a clear trend downwards, and it won't get any better. Trump's policy is responsible for these numbers, and the coming ones.

 

 

 

Charts don’t explain themselves, you need context. Job numbers fluctuate with Fed policy, global demand, energy prices, and investment cycles. Pointing at a dip and declaring "Trump is to blame" is a political talking point, not serious analysis. Every president inherits momentum from the last, and it takes more than a few months for policies, good or bad, to show in the data. If we want to talk economics, let’s look at long-term productivity and investment, not cherry-picked snapshots.