Trump Alone at the Top

[DC Tom]

Any opinions on Trump talking to the President of Taiwan? First POTUS(elect) to do so since 1979, I believe.

 

Not too bright, pissing off your biggest trading partner.

 

But the issue of US-ROC-PRC relations is so byzantine and odd that I really don't know what Trump was supposed to do in this case. Not take the call? Pass it off to Preibus or someone else? I think the bigger issue is that anything Trump does with respect to China is bound to be interpreted in the worst way possible, since the foundation of his PRC platform is "They're stealing our jobs."

[Deranged Rhino]

Correct, allegedly. You could argue the idea that Russian government had zero to do with it as the conspiring media and dem leaders were all heard pushing the russian hacker story within hours or less of each other which supports the DC Tom theory that the AP or some other "source" put that crap out there and they all just ran with it. A lazy convenient excuse.

 

It's certainly possible that's how we got here, I can't discount that possibility. But despite my recent posts I also can't completely discount the possibility that Russia did us dirty in countless ways leading up to the election. They certainly have the means and motive to do just that (as do about a dozen other nations not including our own). However, I believe that if they had actual actionable evidence that made that case we would have seen it by now, classifications be damned. Since we haven't, I'm suspect.

 

And with good reason. Assange has been taken off the board, no one is talking about it because his outfit is being used as a shell by those folks who have him in custody (or an umarked grave). Before he was taken out he wouldn't out his sources but did explicitly state it wasn't coming from Moscow and hinted it was coming from within the US's own intelligence services. Now, Assange himself is/was shady, no question, but his work has been flawless when it comes to its veracity. Based on various other pieces of the puzzle (the supposed coup in the FBI, Comey's letter, the anger NSA and other intelligence services harbor to this day towards HRC and her exposing state secrets on her illegal servers), this seems much more likely than it being as black and white as the State Department, NY Times and Wash Post want us to believe.

 

Especially considering how the neo-mcarthyism fueling the media and both the right and left started in 2012 with the Ukrainian coup that backfired and carried on into the Syrian quagmire. It's been an ongoing theme, even before Trump announced he was running. Throughout that period of time we've been shoveled lie after lie by the State Department in an attempt to paint the Bear as the end-all-be-all of international threats while ignoring our own misdeeds. It's blatant propagandizing at it's worse, designed to get us comfortable with a shooting war with Russia.

 

The neocon agenda has always had regime change in Moscow as their number 1 goal, they have never been shy about admitting that. The neocons swarmed HRC's campaign and advisory roles because she was promising to give them just that as we saw with her escalating rhetoric on No Fly Zones and Russian aggression when she campaigned.

 

Now that she lost, the propaganda barrage that the neo liberals and neocons have been pushing for several years has become weaponized by a media that's looking to blame anyone but themselves for the outcome. In turn that has given the neocons and neoliberals a new play: quashing domestic dissent and curtailing the civil liberties they missed out on stripping away earlier: namely freedom of speech and press.

 

Putin isn't a nice guy and Russia is a geopolitical foe. But this isn't about them. It's about the media trying to cover their own ass and the deep state pushing for more authoritarian control.

[TH3]

One saved job in America is one less job in Mexico.

Feel the Cuomo pulse through your veins!

[Prickly Pete]

But the issue of US-ROC-PRC relations is so byzantine and odd that I really don't know what Trump was supposed to do in this case. Not take the call? Pass it off to Preibus or someone else? I think the bigger issue is that anything Trump does with respect to China is bound to be interpreted in the worst way possible,

 

yep.

 

It's certainly possible that's how we got here, I can't discount that possibility. But despite my recent posts I also can't completely discount the possibility that Russia did us dirty in countless ways leading up to the election. They certainly have the means and motive to do just that (as do about a dozen other nations not including our own). However, I believe that if they had actual actionable evidence that made that case we would have seen it by now, classifications be damned. Since we haven't, I'm suspect.

 

And with good reason. Assange has been taken off the board, no one is talking about it because his outfit is being used as a shell by those folks who have him in custody (or an umarked grave). Before he was taken out he wouldn't out his sources but did explicitly state it wasn't coming from Moscow and hinted it was coming from within the US's own intelligence services. Now, Assange himself is/was shady, no question, but his work has been flawless when it comes to its veracity. Based on various other pieces of the puzzle (the supposed coup in the FBI, Comey's letter, the anger NSA and other intelligence services harbor to this day towards HRC and her exposing state secrets on her illegal servers), this seems much more likely than it being as black and white as the State Department, NY Times and Wash Post want us to believe.

 

Especially considering how the neo-mcarthyism fueling the media and both the right and left started in 2012 with the Ukrainian coup that backfired and carried on into the Syrian quagmire. It's been an ongoing theme, even before Trump announced he was running. Throughout that period of time we've been shoveled lie after lie by the State Department in an attempt to paint the Bear as the end-all-be-all of international threats while ignoring our own misdeeds. It's blatant propagandizing at it's worse, designed to get us comfortable with a shooting war with Russia.

 

The neocon agenda has always had regime change in Moscow as their number 1 goal, they have never been shy about admitting that. The neocons swarmed HRC's campaign and advisory roles because she was promising to give them just that as we saw with her escalating rhetoric on No Fly Zones and Russian aggression when she campaigned.

 

Now that she lost, the propaganda barrage that the neo liberals and neocons have been pushing for several years has become weaponized by a media that's looking to blame anyone but themselves for the outcome. In turn that has given the neocons and neoliberals a new play: quashing domestic dissent and curtailing the civil liberties they missed out on stripping away earlier: namely freedom of speech and press.

 

Putin isn't a nice guy and Russia is a geopolitical foe. But this isn't about them. It's about the media trying to cover their own ass and the deep state pushing for more authoritarian control.

 

I can't believe how often I agree with GreggyT, considering how often we have clashed regarding the Bills (and Patriots/Brady). Or maybe it all makes sense.

Edited December 3, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

Neither did you.

 

The population grows. The demand increases. The jobs will change. There is a lot of competition coming from outside the US. It is very elastic. We're not talking about oil here.

 

People have options as the technology changes, it will affect the types of jobs needed. The manufacturing jobs (now staying in the US) will probably have to focus on operating machinery rather than brute labor force in Mexico (or other low wage earning country). I have no doubt that the margins are thin, so giving a company willing to give jobs to citizens should be given some incentive. It might even entice others to follow.

 

Government contracts (like tax payer money) is a not finite amount either, but rewarding AMERICAN companies should be a priority. Unlike Obama's administration who outsourced the ACA website to a foreign business.

I keep hearing this theory from the left that EVERYTHING is a finite resource. You can only be rich by making someone else poor. One job here means one less somewhere else.

 

Who's teaching this?

So you believe markets for the products/services produced by Carrier to be limitlessly elastic...

 

And I'm the one who has issues with my understanding of economics?

 

Also, I'll gladly point out that the ideals you are espousing are not capitalism.

 

So I assume your argument is that something other than capitalism is the best economic system.

[Deranged Rhino]

I can't believe how often I agree with GreggyT, considering how often we have clashed regarding the Bills (and Patriots/Brady). Or maybe it all makes sense.

[Prickly Pete]

 

It was hard for me to admit.

[Doc]

And the difference is..............?

 

There's a huge difference. For one, Ford, Carrier, and any other company looking to ship jobs out of the country are well-established, unlike the green companies Barry funded. Second those companies had friends or supporters running them making it cronyism. Third it was one sector, not different sectors. And lastly, it goes along with his campaign promises of punishing those who move jobs to make and sell products more cheaply here and wanting to reduce corporate tax rates.

[DC Tom]

So you believe markets for the products/services produced by Carrier to be limitlessly elastic...

 

And I'm the one who has issues with my understanding of economics?

 

Also, I'll gladly point out that the ideals you are espousing are not capitalism.

 

So I assume your argument is that something other than capitalism is the best economic system.

 

The argument isn't that It was Carrier's market that was the concern, it was the parent company's government market.

 

Which shouldn't be a concern, as it's really difficult for the government to play favorites in contracting (the Boeing tanker deal demonstrated that amply enough.)

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

The argument isn't that It was Carrier's market that was the concern, it was the parent company's government market.

 

Which shouldn't be a concern, as it's really difficult for the government to play favorites in contracting (the Boeing tanker deal demonstrated that amply enough.)

Let me get there please.

[Chef Jim]

Wow!

Why wow? Are you surprised that conservatives call each other out? And I'm not saying Trump is a conservative.

[Nanker]

Markets aren't frictionless no matter how much you might protest to the contrary. The other manufacturers "harmed" by Trump's protectionist policy have the ability to repatriate their manufacturing to the US and not face the tariffs he's saying his administration will impose on them. That will level the playing field. It'll be up to the businesses to make their own decisions on what's best for their companies. He's just served notice that the open southern (and northern) door policy is harmful to the US middle class, and he's taking action to address job losses in the US.

 

I'm not a Puritan. No one here believed for a nanosecond that Trump was/is a Conservative. The Conservatives lost in the primaries. He is what he is, and I'll take it over a Hillary Obama 3rd and 4th term any time.

[B-Man]

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that Trump's SNL tweet will get more play in media than Obama blaming "Fox News in every bars & restaurant"

 

[Azalin]

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that Trump's SNL tweet will get more play in media than Obama blaming "Fox News in every bars & restaurant"

 

 

When you go out on a limb, you pick some mighty sturdy ones.

[B-Man]

Trump is mapping out his plan to put ‘America first’

New York Post

 

Original Article

 

 

 

 

 

Trump Tweets: A 21st Century President Drives the Media Crazy

by Jeffrey Lord

 

Original Article

 

 

 

 

 

On substance and style, Trump may be a headache for China

Washington Post, by Simon Denyer

 

Original Article

[B-Man]

USA TODAY COLUMN:

 

Trump as FDR with the Fireside Tweet: Democrats think caring means a government program. Trump thinks caring is getting to keep your job, just as he promised.

[Chef Jim]

Fireside Tweet.

[B-Man]

Dick Cheney Tells CNN’s Barbara Starr that Trump Took Us To “the Point Where We Don’t Need You Guys Anymore.”

 

 

"I think one of the reasons people get so concerned about the tweets is it is sort of a way around the press. He doesn't have to rely upon, uh, rely upon -- this is the modern era, modern technology. He's at the point where we don't need you guys anymore."

[DC Tom]

Dick Cheney Tells CNN’s Barbara Starr that Trump Took Us To “the Point Where We Don’t Need You Guys Anymore.”

 

 

"I think one of the reasons people get so concerned about the tweets is it is sort of a way around the press. He doesn't have to rely upon, uh, rely upon -- this is the modern era, modern technology. He's at the point where we don't need you guys anymore."

 

I don't think it's true, but I love that he said it.

[B-Man]

Glenn Reynolds:

 

I’VE ALREADY EXPRESSED MY DOUBTS ABOUT A BIG TRUMP INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN, but this, alas, seems right: “We’ve spent 35 years having the ‘big government versus small government’ fight. Big government won. You can be mad about it, you can disagree with it, but it is what it is.”

 

 

I’m not opposed to better roads and airports, but the truth is, there’s been a lot of money thrown at those projects, and most of it seems to get diverted into graft, consultants, and environmental impact statements. If you really want to see infrastructure boom, get rid of a lot of that federal regulation and the existing money will go far enough to get us more and better new infrastructure than even a huge slug of new cash will get us without such reform.

 

But my approach offers fewer opportunities for graft.

96