Australian PM describes frank call with Trump after Washington Post reports angry exchange

[Neurath]

7 hours ago, Thechook said:

Not exactly.  He has agreed to take them for vetting and and this will take months.  If they dont pass the process then he doednt take them.  What's the odds they dont pass?  He has still kept his end of the agreement.

Bloody hell, Australia has been "vetting" them for what, 5 years? "Very, very, extreme vetting" might take another 20.  Since Trump knows that these people are very bad Hombres maybe he can house them in Guantanamo? Conditions probably a bit worse, but the terms of the imprisonment don't seem to be that different.

[Neurath]

5 hours ago, Pdaz said:

But how many cab drivers and semi literate house bound baby machines does the country need ?

I was asked the same question by a Thai women in Udon Thani. 

[craigt3365]

40 minutes ago, optad said:

Alcohol and muslims is a myth perpetuated by those that prefer the stereotype. 

I've had some great times out drinking with Muslims.  Some countries are more open than others!

[DriveByTrucker]

6 hours ago, Pdaz said:

 But how many cab drivers and semi literate house bound baby machines does the country need ?

baby machines?!?!......how dare we liberals call Trump and his supporters misogynist, after all they love these machines!

[giddyup]

33 minutes ago, Neurath said:

Nonsense. Most of them are from India, China, Vietnam and other parts of Asia. Lot's of English and New Zealanders too, but they don't qualify as Christians - well, good ones anyway.

I don't know about most, but I was talking more about the migrants from the 50's and 60's the ones who helped build Australia. The races you mentioned have contributed and integrated well though.

 

32 minutes ago, mikebike said:

1. Yes, we are aware that conflict has existed since the beginning of time in ALL parts of the world. What does that have to do with the current middle-eastern conflict and its origins (oil)?

2. "Conflict in the middle-east was never started by the west." Huh? Crusades come to mind...

And they have never forgotten it. They still carry the grudge today.

Edited February 3, 2017 by giddyup

[DriveByTrucker]

3 minutes ago, giddyup said:

 

 

And they have never forgotten it. They still carry the grudge today.

Have you forgotten loony George W's crusade already then? Thats worrying.....

[Pdaz]

1 hour ago, louse1953 said:

Stop repeating lies,it is not illegal to seek asylum.Aust with our allies caused these people to be refugees by bombing their countries based on a lie.

It's not illegal to seek asylum through the correct channels.

Paying somebody to smuggle you past border controls so you can enter a country without documentation is illegal.

Do you present yourself at immigration with a valid passport when you travel or do you avoid those formalities ? 

It's not lies to present the facts. Take off your rose tinted glasses and wake the ***k up.

[giddyup]

5 minutes ago, DriveByTrucker said:

Have you forgotten loony George W's crusade already then? Thats worrying.....

Oh, they were pissed off at the West long before that. After all, they saw all those US sitcoms where the typical American family was living in a big house with 2 cars in the driveway, while they were grubbing it out in mud huts and herding goats. How could you not be a tad jealous?

Edited February 3, 2017 by giddyup

[DriveByTrucker]

Just now, giddyup said:

Oh, they were pissed off at the West long before that. After all, they saw all those US sitcoms where the typical American family was living in a big house with 2 cars in the driveway, while they were grubbing it out in mud huts and herding goats.

Well at least they had a TV in their mud huts to watch those sitcoms....

[mikebike]

And they have never forgotten it. They still carry the grudge today.

2, then 3 major religions claiming the same holy land will cause conflict and grudges... now throw in oil... fun stuff.

[DriveByTrucker]

1 minute ago, mikebike said:

2, then 3 major religions claiming the same holy land will cause conflict and grudges... now throw in oil... fun stuff.

And American sitcoms played a role apparently too

[giddyup]

2 minutes ago, DriveByTrucker said:

Well at least they had a TV in their mud huts to watch those sitcoms....

I think there was one pedal operated that the whole village watched.

[Prbkk]

The best thing Turnbull could do would be to take the 1250 refugees and resettle them in Australia. The smugglers have been stopped and it's unlikely that they will resurface. 

If Trump wants to break the deal, he should do so....and free Australia from the likelihood of some unpalatable request as a quid pro quo at some point in the future.

Take the high moral ground and leave Trump to stumble on. It would be hard for Turnbull to do, but it is the right decision in the circumstances.

[DriveByTrucker]

1 minute ago, giddyup said:

I think there was one pedal operated that the whole village watched.

Except for the unlucky ones who had to herd the goats of course. They missed Archie Bunker lay the foundation for the Jihad against the infidels.

[giddyup]

2 minutes ago, DriveByTrucker said:

Except for the unlucky ones who had to herd the goats of course. They missed Archie Bunker lay the foundation for the Jihad against the infidels.

The goat herders had "fringe benefits".

[elgordo38]

2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

I think Trump genuinely couldn't give a crap about other leaders, who he upsets or what their opinions are. He's an isolationist who thinks as he's the POTUS, leader of the biggest super power, he can do and say whatever he likes. And if anyone doesn't like the content or the way it's said then hard luck. 

 

He's certainly different! 

Yes he certainly is. No political norms for this guy. Could be a lonely place at the top in time to come. 

[simple1]

1 hour ago, giddyup said:

Oh, they were pissed off at the West long before that. After all, they saw all those US sitcoms where the typical American family was living in a big house with 2 cars in the driveway, while they were grubbing it out in mud huts and herding goats. How could you not be a tad jealous?

Mud huts in Iran

 

[mtls2005]

Some sources are reporting that it was nearing the end of a long day (5 PM) for the President and he was tired. Of course this is the guy who said HRC didn't have the stamina to be President.

 

Trump’s regular army of apologists is arguing that the call came “at the end of a long day” and that Trump was snippy with the Australian PM due to “fatigue.”

 

If he had been good they would have let him watch FInding Dory again.

 

On the plus side, he didn't threaten to invade Australia, and the call went better than the Yemen raid.

 

 

 

Edited February 3, 2017 by mtls2005

[Redline]

23 hours ago, optad said:

Andaman Al, we are in a post ethics age. 

 

Trump lived obliviously through those decades. Untouched in an aspergers way. Removed and unscathed emotionally. Neutered yet intact.  

 

We are the infected persons with a tint of right and wrong when foul things happen,  a moral here or there and a sense of something beyond ourselves, the  commonweal. But today this is just a sign of money misspent on education.  

I think Australia should open it's doors to Americans that want to leave.  With extreme vetting of course.  In reality, it seems that it would be low on the list for immigrants because there is no affordable healthcare system.  

[Redline]

On 2/2/2017 at 5:11 PM, dunroaming said:

And the Trumpsters will condemn the Australian PM as they do anyone else who disagrees with their hero.  Trump continues live up to the expectations and never (it appears) to disappoint his disciples.

His disciples ignore all of it

[giddyup]

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

Mud huts in Iran

 

Is that the Anzob "tunnel of death"? No, it's the Tohid tunnel that's full of cracks and leaks like a sieve.

Edited February 3, 2017 by giddyup

[JackThompson]

5 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

You mean like opposing a rise in the minimum wage?  Appointing a viciously anti-labor person as head of the labor department?  Cutting back on health and safety regulations?  Slashing taxes on the wealthy and corporations? And the big one: slashing regulations on wall street firms and the big banks so we can have another financial disaster and more working people can be thrown out onto the street by the likes of Steve Mnuchin our new secretary of the treasury?

Imagine a Hillary Clinton WH with the current Congress.  We'd get more of the same awful "bi-partisan" globalism, but with even more wars.  She has much more in common, policy-wise, with the GOP-Establishment-types than does Trump, except for a few "wedge/social" issues (guns, religion, abortion).  I think there is no doubt that working-class Americans will get a better deal than Trump, primarily because the Clinton-bar is so low.  It would be hard to imagine what could be worse than those policies.

 

The GOP Platform of 2016 included reinstating Glass-Steagall (a Tea-Party demand).  The new Treasury-Secretary (Mnuchin) has balked at this (in Senate hearings), but said he would support a "modernized" version.  What Larry Summers and Rubin gave us (under Bill Clinton) was supposed to be that "modernized" version, and spectacularly failed.   Keep in mind, that absent creating a new currency / financial-system from scratch, these types (Goldman Sachs, etc) are literally holding the US-Economy hostage.  They can capital-strike us into a major depression in a heartbeat - as I suspect they would have done to Bernie (see Venezuela) - blame it on "leftists in govt," flip their people back in in the next election-cycle, and we have gotten nowhere.

As to whether people such as the new labor-secretary (who previously advocated for easy foreign-labor for his fast-food joints) will keep his word, and represent the American People with the same passion that he applied to serving his stockholders - time will tell.  I find the absence of Kris Kobach (author of E-Verify) from the lineup, very troubling.  I share your skepticism of these Wall St types - but if their expertise is utilized for the "America-First Agenda," they could be very effective.  I'm not holding my breath, but I find it odd that the new blood is getting the most bad-press from the left, while the  "revolving door" types (like Elaine Chao, Sen McConnell's wife), are those with whom I find the least "hope" for meaningful change. 

I don't see a problem with lowering corporate-taxes - in fact, necessary unless we want all businesses packing up and headquartered in Ireland and Singapore.  I am not in favor of lowering personal income-taxes on the top 0.1% (to be differentiated from the "1%" which starts at about $300K - small business owners primarily).  I'd rather one more bracket starting at $1M/yr with a 15% bump, applied directly to deficit-reduction (must be directed to buy-back foreign-owned T-bills).  But if the deal being made is, "You can make lots of money, but must hire American citizens at decent wages," then the trade-off is worth it.  They are, essentially, being offered a swap of "cheap-labor savings" for "lower-taxes and regulations."  Most regulations are lobbyist-driven, rather than "health/safety."  Try "getting it all" from them, and they just leave or organize a capital strike.

As to the min-wage - when min-wages go up, rent usually follows almost immediately - because it is artificial.  Same for pell-grants - tuition goes up the same semester.  Food-stamps provide corporate-welfare for Frito Lay, because are not limited to basic foodstuffs (thanks to lobbying).  It's a racket with govt-mandates / systems.  I think we would get more long-term, inflation-adjusted, higher-income from a combination of shrinking the labor-supply and increasing demand with tax-structures for businesses which reward hiring and producing in the USA. 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, JackThompson said:

Imagine a Hillary Clinton WH with the current Congress.  We'd get more of the same awful "bi-partisan" globalism, but with even more wars.  She has much more in common, policy-wise, with the GOP-Establishment-types than does Trump, except for a few "wedge/social" issues (guns, religion, abortion).  I think there is no doubt that working-class Americans will get a better deal than Trump, primarily because the Clinton-bar is so low.  It would be hard to imagine what could be worse than those policies.

 

The GOP Platform of 2016 included reinstating Glass-Steagall (a Tea-Party demand).  The new Treasury-Secretary (Mnuchin) has balked at this (in Senate hearings), but said he would support a "modernized" version.  What Larry Summers and Rubin gave us (under Bill Clinton) was supposed to be that "modernized" version, and spectacularly failed.   Keep in mind, that absent creating a new currency / financial-system from scratch, these types (Goldman Sachs, etc) are literally holding the US-Economy hostage.  They can capital-strike us into a major depression in a heartbeat - as I suspect they would have done to Bernie (see Venezuela) - blame it on "leftists in govt," flip their people back in in the next election-cycle, and we have gotten nowhere.

As to whether people such as the new labor-secretary (who previously advocated for easy foreign-labor for his fast-food joints) will keep his word, and represent the American People with the same passion that he applied to serving his stockholders - time will tell.  I find the absence of Kris Kobach (author of E-Verify) from the lineup, very troubling.  I share your skepticism of these Wall St types - but if their expertise is utilized for the "America-First Agenda," they could be very effective.  I'm not holding my breath, but I find it odd that the new blood is getting the most bad-press from the left, while the  "revolving door" types (like Elaine Chao, Sen McConnell's wife), are those with whom I find the least "hope" for meaningful change. 

I don't see a problem with lowering corporate-taxes - in fact, necessary unless we want all businesses packing up and headquartered in Ireland and Singapore.  I am not in favor of lowering personal income-taxes on the top 0.1% (to be differentiated from the "1%" which starts at about $300K - small business owners primarily).  I'd rather one more bracket starting at $1M/yr with a 15% bump, applied directly to deficit-reduction (must be directed to buy-back foreign-owned T-bills).  But if the deal being made is, "You can make lots of money, but must hire American citizens at decent wages," then the trade-off is worth it.  They are, essentially, being offered a swap of "cheap-labor savings" for "lower-taxes and regulations."  Most regulations are lobbyist-driven, rather than "health/safety."  Try "getting it all" from them, and they just leave or organize a capital strike.

As to the min-wage - when min-wages go up, rent usually follows almost immediately - because it is artificial.  Same for pell-grants - tuition goes up the same semester.  Food-stamps provide corporate-welfare for Frito Lay, because are not limited to basic foodstuffs (thanks to lobbying).  It's a racket with govt-mandates / systems.  I think we would get more long-term, inflation-adjusted, higher-income from a combination of shrinking the labor-supply and increasing demand with tax-structures for businesses which reward hiring and producing in the USA. 

Oh, I thought you were a Bernie Sanders supporter. My mistake. Clearly, you are some kind of libertarian and are parroting their falsehoods like the nonsense about rents rises usually following increases in the minimum wage almost immediately. Or that corporate taxes are too high in America. Or the food stamp nonsense.  As for producing in the USA, if you're talking about manufacturing, most of the job loss comes from robotics and automation. Even Germany, which is a manufacturing and export powerhouse, has seen the manufacturing sector of its labor force decline from 40% to 20%.  Imagine what it would have shrunk to if the German trade balance was close to zero.

 

[ilostmypassword]

17 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Imagine a Hillary Clinton WH with the current Congress.  We'd get more of the same awful "bi-partisan" globalism, but with even more wars.  She has much more in common, policy-wise, with the GOP-Establishment-types than does Trump, except for a few "wedge/social" issues (guns, religion, abortion).  I think there is no doubt that working-class Americans will get a better deal than Trump, primarily because the Clinton-bar is so low.  It would be hard to imagine what could be worse than those policies.

 

The GOP Platform of 2016 included reinstating Glass-Steagall (a Tea-Party demand).  The new Treasury-Secretary (Mnuchin) has balked at this (in Senate hearings), but said he would support a "modernized" version.  What Larry Summers and Rubin gave us (under Bill Clinton) was supposed to be that "modernized" version, and spectacularly failed.   Keep in mind, that absent creating a new currency / financial-system from scratch, these types (Goldman Sachs, etc) are literally holding the US-Economy hostage.  They can capital-strike us into a major depression in a heartbeat - as I suspect they would have done to Bernie (see Venezuela) - blame it on "leftists in govt," flip their people back in in the next election-cycle, and we have gotten nowhere.

As to whether people such as the new labor-secretary (who previously advocated for easy foreign-labor for his fast-food joints) will keep his word, and represent the American People with the same passion that he applied to serving his stockholders - time will tell.  I find the absence of Kris Kobach (author of E-Verify) from the lineup, very troubling.  I share your skepticism of these Wall St types - but if their expertise is utilized for the "America-First Agenda," they could be very effective.  I'm not holding my breath, but I find it odd that the new blood is getting the most bad-press from the left, while the  "revolving door" types (like Elaine Chao, Sen McConnell's wife), are those with whom I find the least "hope" for meaningful change. 

I don't see a problem with lowering corporate-taxes - in fact, necessary unless we want all businesses packing up and headquartered in Ireland and Singapore.  I am not in favor of lowering personal income-taxes on the top 0.1% (to be differentiated from the "1%" which starts at about $300K - small business owners primarily).  I'd rather one more bracket starting at $1M/yr with a 15% bump, applied directly to deficit-reduction (must be directed to buy-back foreign-owned T-bills).  But if the deal being made is, "You can make lots of money, but must hire American citizens at decent wages," then the trade-off is worth it.  They are, essentially, being offered a swap of "cheap-labor savings" for "lower-taxes and regulations."  Most regulations are lobbyist-driven, rather than "health/safety."  Try "getting it all" from them, and they just leave or organize a capital strike.

As to the min-wage - when min-wages go up, rent usually follows almost immediately - because it is artificial.  Same for pell-grants - tuition goes up the same semester.  Food-stamps provide corporate-welfare for Frito Lay, because are not limited to basic foodstuffs (thanks to lobbying).  It's a racket with govt-mandates / systems.  I think we would get more long-term, inflation-adjusted, higher-income from a combination of shrinking the labor-supply and increasing demand with tax-structures for businesses which reward hiring and producing in the USA. 

Still think that there's a chance in hell of Trump backing something like Glass Steagall?

Trump to order regulatory rollback Friday for finance industry, Wall Street, top aide says

President Trump plans to order a rollback Friday of regulations governing the financial services industry and Wall Street under the Dodd-Frank law and beyond.

Gary Cohn, White House Economic Council director, told the Wall Street Journal the administration would also move against a regulation designed to force retirement advisers to work in the best interest of their clients, the “fiduciary rule,” set to take effect in April and designed to eliminate conflicts-of-interests among professionals dealing with those enrolled in qualified retirement plans and IRAs.

In an interview with the Journal, Cohn, a former president of Goldman Sachs, said the order was a “table setter for a bunch of stuff that is coming.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/02/03/trump-to-order-rollback-friday-of-regulations-aimed-at-finance-industry-top-aide-says/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_mm-doddfrank-435am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.822192c7f264

[JackThompson]

8 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Oh, I thought you were a Bernie Sanders supporter. My mistake. Clearly, you are some kind of libertarian and are parroting their falsehoods like the nonsense about rents rises usually following increases in the minimum wage almost immediately. Or that corporate taxes are too high in America. Or the food stamp nonsense.  As for producing in the USA, if you're talking about manufacturing, most of the job loss comes from robotics and automation. Even Germany, which is a manufacturing and export powerhouse, has seen the manufacturing sector of its labor force decline from 40% to 20%.  Imagine what it would have shrunk to if the German trade balance was close to zero.

 

 

The "libertarians" - I've debated many.  They generally hate the working-class and treat money "found in the ground" =  "earned money" and think that "capital gains" are even more sacred and un-taxable.  I'm open to alternative systems of taxation, but not systems that are even worse for those at the bottom or in the middle.  In my world, not a dime would come out of pay until you reached $36K/yr.  If that means raising the caps on Social Security, so be it, because paying 15% on your first dollar, while over $115K is ss-tax-free, is evil.

 

I lived through min-wage hikes when I was young - a year later, I was poorer than before.  As I moved up in skills, I moved down in after-basics income/savings - consistently.  Outsourcing and Immigration were directly responsible.  I experienced the pell-grant/tuition combo directly.  These are not myths.

 

There are 3 Primary sources of distortion which break the free-market:

• Regulation-corruption plus long "intellectual property"/ patents (libertarians are split on the latter)
• Distortions to what a few can pay to buy assets, when that few claim to own vast swaths of natural-resources - essentially buried money - that no person or group ever made/earned (see Rockefeller's beginnings) (libertarians refuse to admit this even exists)
• Finance/Banking based on an imaginary monetary system - i.e. "How Blackstone financed the purchase of all those foreclosed homes with 'cheap-money' after the last crash," among other examples (Rockefeller part II /JP-Morgan).   I'm not a gold-bug - there are many alternative systems which could work (libertarians are gold-standard believers)

I agree about automation - this is the primary reason we need a "near zero" immigration policy.  It should be merit-based on proven-skills and/or academic excellence, and only the top 0.001% of applicants even considered when/if all American citizens with similar resumes are employed.  I think Labor-Union leader Caesar Chavez would agree.

 

BTW - Trump is the first Republican POTUS-candidate I have encountered in my adult-life who is not "even worse" than the Democrat, particularly with regard to working-class income potential.  One of my favorite lines from a political speech is Ann Richards (RIP) saying of Bush Sr, "He was born with a silver foot in his mouth."   If Trump is fooling us, oh well, another Clinton-nightmare could not be any worse.  Besides, the Dems have gone stark-raving-mad with their hatred of anyone white, straight, and male.  I hate racism/sexism of any kind, my perspective closely mirroring MLK on race.

[ilostmypassword]

5 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

  Besides, the Dems have gone stark-raving-mad with their hatred of anyone white, straight, and male.  I hate racism/sexism of any kind, my perspective closely mirroring MLK on race.

Nonsense.

[JackThompson]

29 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Still think that there's a chance in hell of Trump backing something like Glass Steagall?

Trump to order regulatory rollback Friday for finance industry, Wall Street, top aide says

 

President Trump plans to order a rollback Friday of regulations governing the financial services industry and Wall Street under the Dodd-Frank law and beyond.

Gary Cohn, White House Economic Council director, told the Wall Street Journal the administration would also move against a regulation designed to force retirement advisers to work in the best interest of their clients, the “fiduciary rule,” set to take effect in April and designed to eliminate conflicts-of-interests among professionals dealing with those enrolled in qualified retirement plans and IRAs.

In an interview with the Journal, Cohn, a former president of Goldman Sachs, said the order was a “table setter for a bunch of stuff that is coming.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/02/03/trump-to-order-rollback-friday-of-regulations-aimed-at-finance-industry-top-aide-says/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_mm-doddfrank-435am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.822192c7f264

 

Depends which parts of Dodd-Frank, which was, itself, wholly inadequate to replace Glass Steagall, and some claim made things even worse.  The devil is in the details.  I'd probably need to spend 3 days reading all the details / proposed changes, to have a clue.  This article is just fear, uncertainty, and doubt, absent that analysis.

 

After how some banks sold junk-assets they knew were junk, and no one went to jail under Obama (or Bush), I'd say little has changed.  If Obama had been "for real," he could have made a difference.  Instead, he sold us out like a DLC-Dem, just like we would have expected from a Bush.

[ilostmypassword]

28 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

 

Depends which parts of Dodd-Frank, which was, itself, wholly inadequate to replace Glass Steagall, and some claim made things even worse.  The devil is in the details.  I'd probably need to spend 3 days reading all the details / proposed changes, to have a clue.  This article is just fear, uncertainty, and doubt, absent that analysis.

 

After how some banks sold junk-assets they knew were junk, and no one went to jail under Obama (or Bush), I'd say little has changed.  If Obama had been "for real," he could have made a difference.  Instead, he sold us out like a DLC-Dem, just like we would have expected from a Bush.

That's flat out untrue about Dodd Frank.  Glass Steagall did not address the issue of shadow banking. Dodd Frank does.  Because of Dodd Frank we have stress testing of the big banks. Some of them failed.  GE actually sold GE Capital actually sold itself because Dodd Frank made its risky moves impossible. Dodd Frank has turned out to be surprisingly effective. One indication of this is how much Wall Street dislikes it.

Obama's laxness in prosecuting wall street malefactors had nothing to do with Dodd Frank. Why are you trying to conflate the 2 issues?

And already Trump is enabling these malefactors to prey again on the public.  Now that trump is undoing the fiduciary rule, that means that financial counselors will be able to take commissions from hedge funds bundlers whose funds they recommend without telling their clients.  This is massively corrupt.  We actually had a case in Chiang Mai of somebody who in effect defrauded lots of retirees out of their savings by doing this.  

 

 

[dutchisaan]

14 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

Not the beginning at all. I have expressed the same sentiments long before he was elected and since. Certain posters refuse to believe that anyone who does not hate him obsessively can just give him the benefit of the doubt.

I actually like him better the more that he does now that he is power. That does not mean that I cannot see his negatives and he has plenty. The way that he treated a close ally is a legitimate example.

Like normally it's a nice bs talk from you. You keep saying that you don't support the donald, but than you keep defending him. If you are so open and don't take a side, than how come you never!!! say, or write something against the donald.

just keep dreaming, you're clown president you like so much will save you.

[Panda13]