Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

looksee

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

All these climate change policies sound great until it comes time to pay for them
These Climate change policies are in essence we tax some people to subsidise other people

The world economy is driven on 2 things, cheap oil and greed.
To change any of these drivers has the potential to cause an economic depression the likes the world has never seen

When Lehman brothers collapsed it sent shockwaves that are still felt today
What we will never know is how close Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley came 10 years ago to collapsing and even now it is not fully known how truly strong these banks are financially.

If Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley were to collapse that would be it. There would be no saving us it would be anarchy
The last 7 years of growth realistically has been driven by China and Asia and the reports on chinas economy is it might be slowing. That can be a good thing but if China were to go into recession we could be looking at the beginning of the end and the potential of most of Europe including Ireland to look like Greece.

Trump is a business man and he is wisely using cheap carbon based resources to drive the American economy now.
The simple fact is the reason why climate friendly energies is pointless is they are very very expensive and America and europe can not afford them
China And the Middle East will have to loan us the money and with that will come a new dynamic which I am not sure people like you have thought out. I will give you one hint. Bye bye welfare state.
We should have started thirty years ago going green before China has become what is now.

Given the obduracy of many people now, when we can easily see the consequences of climate change, how could 'going green' possibly have happened 30 years ago. But you do seem to agree 'going green' could have had an effect on something - surely not the climate change that you don't believe in?

Or, oh, you do believe in climate change but the short term profit is way more important than the long term consequences? Long term is now getting to be easily countable numbers of years.

SeamusFX

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

The American dream and American way is more linked to trump and Reagan then any other presidents in recent times
Those kids in “cages” are the blame of their family, criminals and the Mexican state

The climate change comment is just silly. Very pretentious of you

Regan, Trump and Republicans don’t own the American dream, that’s only in their false words, if anything Trump is trying to destroy the American dream!

Putting kids in cages is 100% Trump’s fault and you need to wake up to reality!

Climate change is real and idiot Trump is rolling back regulations that could help save the planet. It’s kind of ironic that you’re calling me pretentious, since you’re pretending that Trump has intelligence, since he’s a failed businessman, who doesn’t know what he’s doing and everything he does is based on greed, ego and stupid arrogance.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

obama finally is speaking up

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-warns-democrats-against-creating-circular-firing-squad

Igotadose

SeamusFX wrote: »

Regan, Trump and Republicans don’t own the American dream, that’s only in their false words, if anything Trump is trying to destroy the American dream!

Putting kids in cages is 100% Trump’s fault and you need to wake up to reality!

But at least Trump is dangling the american dream as he's now allowed more temporary guest workers! (Which he vowed to reform, but hey, where would Mar-a-Lago get its waitstaff from?)

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/29/dhs-increase-temporary-worker-visas-senator/

1eg0a3xv7b82of

SeamusFX wrote: »

Regan, Trump and Republicans don’t own the American dream, that’s only in their false words, if anything Trump is trying to destroy the American dream!

Putting kids in cages is 100% Trump’s fault and you need to wake up to reality!

Climate change is real and idiot Trump is rolling back regulations that could help save the planet. It’s kind of ironic that you’re calling me pretentious, since you’re pretending that Trump has intelligence, since he’s a failed businessman, who doesn’t know what he’s doing and everything he does is based on greed, ego and stupid arrogance.

i have lived and worked in america, if you think trump is trying to destroy the american dream then you are confused by what the american dream is.

putting illegal immigrants in secure safe cells is happening because mexico and other central/south american countries wont do what they are told and stop the flow. the blame lies with them 100%. its their issue to solve.

climate change is real and has been happening since time began and will continue to do so regardless of humans.
my advice to all regards climate change is to direct all your energy to how you can reduce your carbon footprint.
when people lecture me about climate change I always have to laugh, they nearly always have the largest of carbon footprints themselves, 2 plus children, own a SUV, fly abroad 2 plus times a year, live in large houses, buy cheap throwaway products made in sweat shops, i could go on.

if people want to lecture about trump destroying the plant, they better come to the discussion with clean hands

ancapailldorcha

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

obama finally is speaking up

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-warns-democrats-against-creating-circular-firing-squad

Don't dump links here please. If you're going to post something, it should have an original opinion with it.

Dakota Dan

looksee wrote: »

Given the obduracy of many people now, when we can easily see the consequences of climate change, how could 'going green' possibly have happened 30 years ago. But you do seem to agree 'going green' could have had an effect on something - surely not the climate change that you don't believe in?

Or, oh, you do believe in climate change but the short term profit is way more important than the long term consequences? Long term is now getting to be easily countable numbers of years.

What consequences are you seeing?

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Igotadose wrote: »

But at least Trump is dangling the american dream as he's now allowed more temporary guest workers! (Which he vowed to reform, but hey, where would Mar-a-Lago get its waitstaff from?)

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/29/dhs-increase-temporary-worker-visas-senator/

Controlled immigration Is something trump backs and is needed by all developed countries mainly cheap Labour but some highly skilled too
The American citizens want their government to control illegal migration
What you or I or the illegal migrants think don’t matter a jot

Wanderer78

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote:

if people want to lecture about trump destroying the plant, they better come to the discussion with clean hands

'Clean hands', what does this mean, and does any human truly have them?

I wonder does trade agreements such as nafta have anything to do with the Mexico issue?

The American dream died a long time ago, particularly since the introduction of neoliberal/neoclassical policies, this administration is just making sure this continues

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

obama finally is speaking up

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-warns-democrats-against-creating-circular-firing-squad

The link is self explanatory
Obama is rightly worried that the Democrat hopefuls are going to eat their own and whoever ends up facing trump will be so damaged they won’t have a chance
Anyone watching Beto o rourke constantly apologizing for being a man and white cannot but see how damaging this will be if he ends up facing trump
Talk like that will not win him the key swing states he needs never mind of even having a chance in Texas.

everlast75

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

Controlled immigration Is something trump backs and is needed by all developed countries mainly cheap Labour but some highly skilled too
The American citizens want their government to control illegal migration
What you or I or the illegal migrants think don’t matter a jot

What do you think of Trump calling immigrants "animals"?

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Wanderer78 wrote: »

'Clean hands', what does this mean, and does any human truly have them?

I wonder does trade agreements such as nafta have anything to do with the Mexico issue?

The American dream died a long time ago, particularly since the introduction of neoliberal/neoclassical policies, this administration is just making sure this continues

point 1 - no they dont and that was my point
point 2 - of course it has, its a terrible deal for america
point 3 - My view is americas greatest enemies come from within. the media, democratic party, unions and socialism.

Wanderer78

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote:

point 1 - no they dont and that was my point point 2 - of course it has, its a terrible deal for america point 3 - My view is americas greatest enemies come from within. the media, democratic party, unions and socialism.

Do you have 'clean hands'?

By any chance was it a terrible deal for the average Mexican to, many large American corporations seem to be doing well out of nafta?

Since the introduction of neoliberal/neoclassical policies, unionisation has been rapidly in decline, leading to a rapid rise in inequality, maybe this is a bad thing for the average person? Maybe the average worker had more bargaining power as a collective in unions? Why are unions bad, in your opinion?

Outlaw Pete

everlast75 wrote: »

What do you think of Trump calling immigrants "animals"?

He was specifically referring to certain immigrants which the US had to deport.

You know fine well he wasn't referring to all immigrants, so why suggest it?

Rhetorical question of course.

Neither of the quotes offered in a popular meme featuring Hitler and Trump was a literal one, and Trump's quote more specifically described MS-13 gang members as "animals."

...

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He was specifically referring to certain immigrants which the US had to deport.

You know fine well he wasn't referring to all immigrants, so why suggest it?

Rhetorical question of course.


...

Yeah Pete.

And it used to be that the "fake news" media was the enemy of the people.

Now its just "the media".

In June 2015, while Trump was a presidential candidate, he said, "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best."

He added: "They're sending people that have a lot of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

When he says stuff like that, do you think his people hear "certain immigrants"? No.

It's inexcusable.

It's a dog whistle.

You know it.

He knows it.

And his base knows it.

amandstu

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Do you have 'clean hands'?

We all ** have "dirty hands" in common.

Those defending inaction on MMGW like to dismiss arguments for action by this form of personal attack.

The truth is that the polluter must be made to pay ,both at the individual and the communal level- and really at every level in the chain.

Those with the broadest shoulders have to bear the greatest load .

Trump needs to be called out by his supporters on Climate Change. Why cannot they do it?


**excluding our children

Wanderer78

amandstu wrote:

The truth is that the polluter must be made to pay ,both at the individual and the communal level- and really at every level in the chain.

Our environmental issues are far more complicated than at the individual level, but we do all play a part in resolving them, will 'paying' for it truly work?

looksee

Dakota Dan wrote: »

What consequences are you seeing?

I will assume this is a genuine question for the moment and you have not been following any news/scientific discussion/articles on the subject.

Here is a very brief summary of the situation from a European point of view
https://ec.europa.eu/clima/change/consequences_en

amandstu

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Our environmental issues are far more complicated than at the individual level, but we do all play a part in resolving them, will 'paying' for it truly work?

No we have to get ahead of the game but "paying for it" is necessary if only to remind us of the ongoing costs of the cleanup operation (there does seem to be a natural justice in the principle though) .

The infrastructure for the sustainable economy needs a down payment on the future.

The environment is a horrendously complicated piece of machinery and we can only hope to correct obvious mistakes we make .

I wonder if a "respect for Nature" should be our guide to some of the decisions we make or whether it too can be a false friend.

As someone said "whatever gets you through the night"

amandstu

everlast75 wrote: »

.

It's a dog whistle.

You know it.

He knows it.

And his base knows it.

More like a clarion call at this sage.

hill16bhoy

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He was specifically referring to certain immigrants which the US had to deport.

You know fine well he wasn't referring to all immigrants, so why suggest it?

Rhetorical question of course.


...

Let me quote this Twitter thread in full so I can disabuse you of your delusions that Trump was only talking about MS-13 members - that simply is NOT true - it's a lie.



https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1114846511647600641

As it seems a campaign of gaslighting is well on its way to prevailing, I thought a few words might be in order to try to illuminate how we got to this point. Hope you’ll forgive me a longer thread.

In May 2018, a local sheriff prompted Trump with a scenario in which she *suspects* an immigrant of being in MS-13 but does not have enough evidence to get ICE to act on her suspicions. Trump didn’t wait for her to articulate a question and launched into his comments.



Trump’s words do not reference MS-13 or even people suspected of MS-13 membership without legally sufficient evidence (i.e., the real context). His words address “people coming into the country, or trying to come in” and a subset whom his administration is “taking ... out.”

Trump observes that his audience “wouldn’t believe how bad” are the people his administration is removing from the country (i.e., deportees), and that observation leads him to revise his description of the group. “They are not people,” he says. “They are animals.”

The immediate aftermath of these objectively dehumanizing comments about all deportees looked—for a hot second—like a thing. The language was so extreme, so redolent of the Nazis’ rhetoric, that the growing backlash appeared to present a real peril to the Trump admin.

The speed and fury of the pushback mounted by pro-Trump forces corresponded to the perceived peril. Trump’s remarks had been taken OUT OF CONTEXT and referred EXCLUSIVELY TO MS-13, they insisted, implausibly, calling people who accurately described the remarks “liars” and worse.

The backlash was aided by CNN’s @oliverdarcy, who published a piece portraying coverage of Trump’s remarks as false, at the same time hedging his own claim: “it appears likely” Trump meant violent gang members. https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/17/media/media-trump-animals-immigrants/index.html …

Mainstream outlets mostly knuckled under against this onslaught, retracting tweets and issuing corrections noting “the context.” Notably, WaPo stood by its original reporting.

Hardly anyone pointed out the true context—a sheriff’s unsubstantiated suspicion of an immigrant.

Trump himself adopted his defenders’ line, saying a day later that he had meant MS-13. And the story faded away. In the accelerated news cycle of the Trump era, it didn’t end up making much of a lasting impression.

Then, about eleven months passed. @markmobility reposted the video of Trump’s remarks this weekend, describing him as talking exclusively about asylum seekers.

That claim, to be sure, is not fully accurate. Still it’s *no less accurate* than the MS-13 claim that reporters have adopted and ratified. Under Trump’s policies, both gang members and asylum seekers are potentially part of the broad group Trump actually described—deportees.

Pro-Trump types and some reporters are frustrated that an old story they’d found a way to dismiss came back. But it’s worth recognizing that part of the reason it came back so strongly is Trump’s remarks are objectively shocking and the defense of them last year was unsound.

Dakota Dan

looksee wrote: »

I will assume this is a genuine question for the moment and you have not been following any news/scientific discussion/articles on the subject.

Here is a very brief summary of the situation from a European point of view
https://ec.europa.eu/clima/change/consequences_en

Maybe you don’t understand the question I asked what are the consequences you are seeing? In your post that I quoted you said that you can see the consequences. You can spend the day putting up links but it still doesn’t answer the question.

Rjd2

relax carry on wrote: »

He's done it before.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/us/politics/trump-undocumented-immigrants-animals.html

.

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1114493750527578112

Done it before?

Its the same video from 2018 which NYT was referring to and he was calling MS-13 animals and tbf they are pretty dire people. Snopes gave him a slight benefit of the doubt back in 2018 with the comments and that deceptively edited short video.

looksee

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Maybe you don’t understand the question I asked what are the consequences you are seeing? In your post that I quoted you said that you can see the consequences. You can spend the day putting up links but it still doesn’t answer the question.

I am not going to engage in your exercise in pedantry. The answer I gave covers the rather silly point you are fussing over.

Wanderer78

amandstu wrote: »

No we have to get ahead of the game but "paying for it" is necessary if only to remind us of the ongoing costs of the cleanup operation (there does seem to be a natural justice in the principle though) .

The infrastructure for the sustainable economy needs a down payment on the future.

The environment is a horrendously complicated piece of machinery and we can only hope to correct obvious mistakes we make .

I wonder if a "respect for Nature" should be our guide to some of the decisions we make or whether it too can be a false friend.

As someone said "whatever gets you through the night"

this debate probably isnt for this thread, but in my opinion, approaches such as the polluter pays has severe limitations within the neoliberial/neoclassical ideology, 'paying for it', a lot of the time becomes just another tax for the individual

amandstu

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

All these climate change policies sound great until it comes time to pay for them
These Climate change policies are in essence we tax some people to subsidise other people.

They are like any government** policies -funded by tax.

Different people and groups can be taxed according to their circumstances with the aim of providing a benefit to all if the tax is wisely spent.

Since spending on renewable energy is probably the wisest way to spend such money (a renewable energy infrastructure) then the most benefit (survival ) is likely to accrue to the largest number of people.

**private individuals and groups can also have their own environmental policies which would not be directly funded by tax

amandstu

Wanderer78 wrote: »

this debate probably isnt for this thread, but in my opinion, approaches such as the polluter pays has severe limitations within the neoliberial/neoclassical ideology, 'paying for it', a lot of the time becomes just another tax for the individual

Maybe not for this thread but I hold Trump's administration as reprehensibly culpable for this area of (in)competence as any other.

Sure the "polluter pays" has limitations but it has its validity within its remit and serves to introduce moral responsibility into the debate.

Igotadose

So, Trump might've seat-of-his-broad-pants decided to support Israel's claim on the Golan Heights. Like, "hey guys, what's this Golan Heights thing? Oh, cool, let's support Israel here." And later he described Netanyahu as 'Your prime minister' to a group of Republicans. His incomparable public speaking gifts just keep on giving

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-golan-heights-israel_n_5ca9bf10e4b0a00f6d40e2e2

Midlife

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

The American dream and American way is more linked to trump and Reagan then any other presidents in recent times
Those kids in “cages” are the blame of their family, criminals and the Mexican state

Except the whole thing about liberty, equality and democracy.

Trump is about as un-American in terms of his values as any president has been.

Simply being right wing and cosying up to the gun lobby does not equate to American values.

Stick it on as many red hats as you want but Trump is essentially a betrayal of the core values of the united states. It's essentially unpatriotic to defend a lot of the stuff he does.

Midlife

Interesting piece in the Guardian about the coming about of Boeing's crisis.

Obvioulsy I only know what I just read in this article but linking deregulation to risk is fairly obvious.

"The Federal Aviation Authority has an enviable technical reputation, but over the past decade it has suffered from successive budget cuts and government shutdowns as the Republican party has waged war on federal spending and federal agencies. Donald Trump, before the crashes, said he wanted to privatise the agency and scale it back even more.

In order to function at all, the FAA has had to delegate regulation to airlines and manufacturers – the fox looking after the chicken coop. Essentially, Boeing decided that the Max 8 did not need recertification and this decision was not challenged by the FAA. Moreover, Boeing undertook much of the safety work itself without any independent review, although as yet the outside world does not know to what degree. What we do know is that 1,000 Boeing employees are seconded to the FAA. Boeing then decided to market the Max 8 as part of the 737 family rather than as a plane with wholly different flight characteristics and a new automated software system that, crucially, did not allow pilots to override in an emergency using standard, practised techniques. Instead, they would need special training, which was not offered or provided."