Jump to content
IGNORED

Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)


Nebraska

Recommended Posts

I'm not defending anyone here, but this whole entire Russia conspiracy theory peddling is really ridiculous. Can someone provide any proof at all that Russia is meddling with our government? I hope to god not to have another "Saddam has WMDs" incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That interview with Bannon in Hollywood reporter is quite interesting, btw.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/steve-bannon-trump-tower-interview-trumps-strategist-plots-new-political-movement-948747

 

Helps to get past the hysteria and outrage about the coming Trump administration, imo. Have to admit I'm growing really tired of most of the media just doing what they have been doing the entire campaign: looking for anything to be outraged about. I understand the concerns, but all this emotional outrage and taking some imaginary moral high-ground is really a waste of time and an annoyance. But I'm sure it sells and creates money for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That interview with Bannon in Hollywood reporter is quite interesting, btw.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/steve-bannon-trump-tower-interview-trumps-strategist-plots-new-political-movement-948747

 

Helps to get past the hysteria and outrage about the coming Trump administration, imo. Have to admit I'm growing really tired of most of the media just doing what they have been doing the entire campaign: looking for anything to be outraged about. I understand the concerns, but all this emotional outrage and taking some imaginary moral high-ground is really a waste of time and an annoyance. But I'm sure it sells and creates money for them.

 

 

indeed. the media isn't really serving its purpose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That interview with Bannon in Hollywood reporter is quite interesting, btw.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/steve-bannon-trump-tower-interview-trumps-strategist-plots-new-political-movement-948747

 

Helps to get past the hysteria and outrage about the coming Trump administration, imo. Have to admit I'm growing really tired of most of the media just doing what they have been doing the entire campaign: looking for anything to be outraged about. I understand the concerns, but all this emotional outrage and taking some imaginary moral high-ground is really a waste of time and an annoyance. But I'm sure it sells and creates money for them.

 

very interesting indeed. i'm intrigued with this infrastructure plan, really hope it works out.

 

 

 

yeah.. it's a shame it's coupled with all kinds of racism, misogyny, anit immigrantation ferver etc etc.. not to mention whatever security apparatus is brewing. i think that these people do speak in rhetoric and bannon is a guy who is always going to be on message.. the article is a good story on him. a look into who these people are and what's guiding them. 

 

as always.. we'll see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not defending anyone here, but this whole entire Russia conspiracy theory peddling is really ridiculous. Can someone provide any proof at all that Russia is meddling with our government? I hope to god not to have another "Saddam has WMDs" incident.

 

They were meddling but the extent and effectiveness is overblown. Major nations do that all the time. The US in South American, UK in former commonwealth nations, France in former colonies, China in Africa and SE Asia, Japan and Asia in WW2, USSR and now Russia in former states, etc.

 

Same with Trump and Putin's interests, I think that is very speculative. I'm skeptical there is a deep conspiracy between him and Russia over say, the Ukraine. Even if he is just gesturing it is still troublesome and wrong for the POTUS to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pence is awful. i hope boos follow him around forever.  really.. he's a terrible prick of a human being. 

 

the hamilton cast was respectful though.. not sure what the hubbub is about. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a summary of his policy stances. wrong in every possible way. against minimum wage increases cos they "hurt the working poor" (somehow?!), against public healthcare cos it "encroaches on private life" (lol) - how does someone live with this doublethink?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a summary of his policy stances. wrong in every possible way. against minimum wage increases cos they "hurt the working poor" (somehow?!), against public healthcare cos it "encroaches on private life" (lol) - how does someone live with this doublethink?

 

he's nuts.  he's done awful things as governor of indiana. some of it is truly just astounding.. 

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/mike-pence-isnt-boring-hes-one-americas-most-extreme-governors

 

http://www.indems.org/mike-pence-to-run-on-record-really/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pence is awful. i hope boos follow him around forever. really.. he's a terrible prick of a human being.

 

the hamilton cast was respectful though.. not sure what the hubbub is about.

 

https://twitter.com/GeorgeTakei/status/799981762793394176

Lol and they have the nerve to call the "left" soft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

against minimum wage increases cos they "hurt the working poor" (somehow?!)

devils advocate: in low cost of living and rural places raising minimum wage would force many small employers a lot of layoffs and eliminate incentive gaps in income between entry level workers and experienced/competant employees

 

That is the exception more than the rule though and it is a larger point that such regions have high unemployment, high levels of welfare, less social and health services, high levels of drug use, and lower standards of living. IIRC the very red state of mississippi has the highest enrollment in Medicaid and a school district with both the highest number of children who are undernourished and the highest number of students who are obese. Yet those are the same states that fight off soda tax and slash food stamp programs.

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

against minimum wage increases cos they "hurt the working poor" (somehow?!)

devils advocate: in low cost of living and rural places raising minimum wage would force many small employers a lot of layoffs and eliminate incentive gaps in income between entry level workers and experienced/competant employees

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Right, but that would also happen if the minimum wage was $0.40/hour and you raised it to $2.00/hour.

 

And as a footnote, minimum wage increases have a ripple effect where ALL wages readjust to retain differential incentives (although the effect dissipates the further 'up' you look). But this effect happens geographically, too: if (say) Portland, OR sets a $15/hour minimum wage, then the wages of surrounding cities will readjust likewise (and the effect will dissipate the farther 'out' you look).

 

But anyway, I think the hidden premise of min-wage hike critics is often that markets should decide wages, but hey politics is a game of pragmatism, and so you gotta toss these Marxists some occasional crumbs so they won't storm the gates. And what? They want *more*? But they're already getting way more than they deserve!

Edited by LimpyLoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ i am thinking the same thing about "bringing the jobs back to america" actually. all this talk about the terrible trade deals and the jobs... (as we are below 5% unemployment)

 

what is the mechanism by which we keep the jobs here? is it artificially adding expense to getting cheap labor, materials and products from abroad? or just not allowing it?

 

as an employer, how would you feel about donald trump preventing you from getting cheap resources for your business? call it a trade deal if you want, it seems like an infringement of freedom.

 

the result will be the job creators having to spend more... therefor being less successful.

 

so we will retrieve some mexican factories, and in exchange there will be less business growth and creation.

 

those factory jobs that apparently we want so bad will be replaced by automation anyway. we want to be the ones programming the robots, not the ones getting replaced by the robots.

 

this is the country of silicon valley, of google, facebook, amazon, etc, in the era since nafta. that will change if we implement trade rules aimed at locking out the resource market

 

i don't see how we are not trading the good jobs for the bad jobs if we go that way, and offering up some of our freedom at the same time.

 

but it made a good sound bite

Edited by very honest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ i am thinking the same thing about "bringing the jobs back to america" actually. all this talk about the terrible trade deals and the jobs... (as we are below 5% unemployment)

 

what is the mechanism by which we keep the jobs here? is it artificially adding expense to getting cheap labor, materials and products from abroad? or just not allowing it?

 

as an employer, how would you feel about donald trump preventing you from getting cheap resources for your business? call it a trade deal if you want, it seems like an infringement of freedom.

 

the result will be the job creators having to spend more... therefor being less successful.

 

so we will retrieve some mexican factories, and in exchange there will be less business growth and creation.

 

those factory jobs that apparently we want so bad will be replaced by automation anyway. we want to be the ones programming the robots, not the ones getting replaced by the robots.

 

this is the country of silicon valley, of google, facebook, amazon, etc, in the era since nafta. that will change if we implement trade rules aimed at locking out the resource market

 

i don't see how we are not trading the good jobs for the bad jobs if we go that way, and offering up some of our freedom at the same time.

 

but it made a good sound bite

Adam Smith's "invisible hand" was essentially the painfully-naive notion that a corporation would stay in America because the people in it like America and Americans and want it/them to succeed, and so they'd factor America's well-being into their bottom line.

 

In (the current) reality, it takes things like massive tax breaks and tariffs/duties to incentivize businesses to stay (and disincentivize them from leaving, if there's a difference). And this also puts (downward) pressure on wages. Plus there's also PR/brand 'value' in operating in America.

 

But anyway it's essentially just a massive web of incentives and disincentives that determine whether a business stays or goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I read a summary of his policy stances. wrong in every possible way. against minimum wage increases cos they "hurt the working poor" (somehow?!), against public healthcare cos it "encroaches on private life" (lol) - how does someone live with this doublethink?

 

he's nuts.  he's done awful things as governor of indiana. some of it is truly just astounding.. 

 

 

yeah he's really the most stereotypical asshat republican out there

 

270rQW2Kl95zUf6Vc9G1OqzTK7O8gYVNp37VKe7o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.