hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 2454 of 2527 FirstFirst ... 14541954235424042444245124522453245424552456245724642504 ... LastLast
Results 49,061 to 49,080 of 50525

Thread: USA Politics Thread

  1. #49061
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    16,258
    Liberals are the root of the fucking problem. Ya'll need more Marx in your life.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  2. #49062
    Movember 2012 I Legionnaire's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,697
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Liberals are the root of the fucking problem. Ya'll need more Marx in your life.
    The solution for to much liberalism is more liberalism?

  3. #49063
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    10,395
    Quote Originally Posted by I Legionnaire View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Liberals are the root of the fucking problem. Ya'll need more Marx in your life.
    The solution for to much liberalism is more liberalism?
    He was suggesting shooting intellectuals, not liberalism...
    meh

  4. #49064
    Jori McKie's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 8, 2014
    Location
    Lumpy
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    You get screeched at for defending the retarded foreign policy of your President, not because you're American. Just take a look at how people react to Lachesis.

    Tapapapatalk
    Yes and about 40% of the US population thinks its a swell idea to destroy our relationships. The other 55-60% are trying to white knuckle their way through to Nov when there's hopefully some checks on this President.

    This is like the dumbass who was fantasizing about destroying the IT/finance of the US for :reasons:. Industries that are liberal dominant, and are concentrated in and benefit liberal cities. Checkmate liberals, i guess?

    Stop thinking of us as a monolithic block, and you might encounter less attitude
    I was that dumbass . To make my argumentation short:
    - I know US citizens aren't a monolithic block but on the other hand you guys elected the Orange.
    - The Orange with GOP backup, for now, for whatever dumb reasons is trying to start a trade war.
    - To change that you need some heavy artillery aka threatening the US where it hurts and it will hurt the most in the US service industry. Trade surplus isn't only about products, check out trade balance as a whole which includes products and services.

    I really hope after next midterms the political landscape change and you will have a blue senate and congress or at least enough blues to stop the Orange from making existential mistakes.
    Last edited by Jori McKie; June 12 2018 at 07:55:05 AM.

  5. #49065
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    16,258
    Quote Originally Posted by I Legionnaire View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Liberals are the root of the fucking problem. Ya'll need more Marx in your life.
    The solution for to much liberalism is more liberalism?
    The solution for too much liberalism is stop trying to solve everything with broken market structures which appeal to base human tribalism and actively disenfranchise the worst off in society.
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post

    He was suggesting shooting intellectuals, not liberalism...
    Shoot the Koch brothers. I don't think there are many 'intellectuals' to shoot in America.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  6. #49066

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    3,884
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dorvil Barranis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    So just curious, the U.S. tariffs/trade barriers are bad, but EU and Canadian tariffs/trade barriers are ok, is that about the gist of it?
    Starting a trade war with political and economic partners is bad. Canada and EU issuing counter tarrifs in response is a predictable outcome.

    Not sure if you are trolling, if so, ha ha, you got me.
    Not trolling at all, and not referencing "counter tariffs". I'm asking about exisiting tariffs and trade barriers already in place prior to the new steel/aluminium tariffs.
    If a country feels that tariffs are not fair, there's the WTO, an institution specifically designed for that purpose, to officially articulate your complains at. The WTO (or its predecessor GATT) was founded with the U.S. as a major proponent.

  7. #49067
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    7,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dorvil Barranis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    So just curious, the U.S. tariffs/trade barriers are bad, but EU and Canadian tariffs/trade barriers are ok, is that about the gist of it?
    Starting a trade war with political and economic partners is bad. Canada and EU issuing counter tarrifs in response is a predictable outcome.

    Not sure if you are trolling, if so, ha ha, you got me.
    Not trolling at all, and not referencing "counter tariffs". I'm asking about exisiting tariffs and trade barriers already in place prior to the new steel/aluminium tariffs.
    If a country feels that tariffs are not fair, there's the WTO, an institution specifically designed for that purpose, to officially articulate your complains at. The WTO (or its predecessor GATT) was founded with the U.S. as a major proponent.
    Except Trump seems to think that international institutions like the WTO and UN, founded and largely led by the US, are the problem.

  8. #49068
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    10,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post

    He was suggesting shooting intellectuals, not liberalism...
    Shoot the Koch brothers. I don't think there are many 'intellectuals' to shoot in America.
    Fair point.

  9. #49069
    Bartholomeus Crane's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    7,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bartholomeus Crane View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    So just curious, the U.S. tariffs/trade barriers are bad, but EU and Canadian tariffs/trade barriers are ok, is that about the gist of it?
    No, that's the typically black-and-white Trumpist take on tariffs and trade barriers.

    Both the US and the EU/Canada maintain tariffs on certain goods and services. They're just not the same ones for each country. Because all countries trade in different things, and set out to protect their internal markets in others. And they are there often there for good reason, either economic or politic. Whatever the ardent free traders may say.

    Canada, for example, wants to protect it's dairy industry. Which they have regulated heavily to prevent environmentally unsound over-production (which is killing off hundreds of Wisconsin small farmers, BTW). The EU wants to protect it's citizens from the US's antibiotic infused beef, its chlorinated chickens, its genemodified grain, and its contaminated milk, etc. Meanwhile the ardent free traders in the US, on both sides of the aisle, (but especially the GOP in thrall to billionaire industrials like the Koch brothers), have not just slashed regulations domestically (making so many agricultural products unpalatable for the EU/Canada); they have also slashed, unilaterally often, tariffs/trade barriers with the rest of the world. Because it rewards the big players in the US domestic market, at the cost of the bit-players in the same.

    The story remains the same: it is not the rest of the world taking advantage of the US, least of all Canada, or the EU. It is the big players taking advantage of their (monetary) influence in the US to take advantage of the bit-players, and ultimately everyone else in the US. Often, especially in the EU and Canada, tariffs and trade barriers were put into place to protect EU and Canada citizens with being dragged down the same rabbit-hole.

    In the end, if Trump really wanted to do something about the US's trade deficit and those trade barriers and tariffs, he should be concentrating on cleaning up the US itself. But, obviously, that's too difficult for him, and totally unpalatable for the (backers of the) GOP. So instead he just starts (what is all too likely) an illegal tradewar (under WTO rules) by claiming that steel and aluminium is now a national security issue (protip: it isn't).

    The problem is, ofcourse, that (free) trade, trade deficits, tariffs, and trade barriers are a complicated issue. No proper solution will ever fit on the back of a McDonalds napkin. So Trump will never be able to grasp it. And will never get to that solution either. So now we're, again, stuck with a petulant manchild throwing all his toys out of his pram, fucking things up for everyone. I.e., damage limitation, because the US is lead by an absolute moron. Again.

    While you're still here parroting the Fox News agenda, dividing the world into black and white.
    Republicans are corporatist free traders, generally. They're anti-tariff. I expect you knew that, and knew that the FOX agenda is more the Republican agenda than the Trump agenda.

    I suggest you give Mark Levin a listen when he discusses Trump and tariffs, fun times.

    Bernie was pro tariff in the last cycle.

    So if Trump wanted to rebuild the U.S. Steel industry, how should he do it?
    I not only knew that, I specifically mentioned it as one reason for why the US has lower tariffs (and trade barriers) with the rest of the world. The reason for that is ideological, and driven by primarily the GOP. As I pointed out Trump is completely out of lock-step with the GOP on tariffs and free-trade. Including FOX news, as it used to be; before it became the Trumpist propaganda channel.

    As for rebuilding the US steel industry, he could start by recognising that US steel is, by and large, outdated and outmoded. And that it, currently, isn't competing with the modern EU steel manufacturers (which specialises in high-grade, specialty steel) in the EU. And that the US hardly imports steel from, say, Canada and/or Mexico. US steel is in competition with similarly `low tech` steel from China. On which the US already leverages a massive tariff! How much good has that done for US steel? Pretty much nil.

    What US steel needs to do is up it's game, and do what EU steel already from the 80ies onwards. That is: down scale in volume but up tech quality. The simple fact is that, also the US, doesn't need steel in the quantifies that it needed during WW2 and the Cold War.

    So what Trump should have done is talk with his friends and allies in the EU and NAFTA (etc.) and coordinate an even stronger tariff response towards Chinese steel dumping. The EU, for example, also leverages a massive steel tariff on China, so there is something there to work with. Coordinated, that would kill off the effect of China dumping cheap steel on the world market.

    In addition, he could stipulate that all of the US military steel needs are manufactured right there in the US, with temporary exemptions for those types of steel not currently manufactured there. With the understanding that when US steel does start producing those types of steel, they would get those contracts in the future as well. Certainly the EU wouldn't like that, and respond likewise, but it would provide a direct incentive to US steel to modernise and become competitive again. And, yes, he would be able to use the 'national security' angle for that.

    In addition he could persuade congress to start investing in US infrastructure again. It's crumbling and already in dire straits. And it uses a shitload of steel to build bridges and the like. And as an incentive to US steel, he could stipulate, again, that only US steel, where possible/available, be used for that too. No, he can't use 'national security' for that; but he can use the 'buy american' slogan, and lets face it, others countries are doing the same thing. And with the higher tariffs on cheap steel from China, that wouldn't be too expensive either.

    The point of all these things is that if Trump really cared about US steel (and he obviously doesn't), he should be more targeted, and more intelligent with his protectionism. Just slapping tariffs on all steel and aluminium, no matter where it comes from, just pisses everyone off, friend and foe alike, and actually doesn't do US steel any good anyhow. It's a dumb move.

    The problem is, ofcourse, that Trump is only capable of dumb moves that piss everyone off to no gain for anyone ...
    Quote Originally Posted by Miep View Post
    ...i have no idea whats realy going on...

  10. #49070
    Bartholomeus Crane's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    7,531
    Also, on the Singapore summit, an actually good article in the guardian.
    Quote Originally Posted by Miep View Post
    ...i have no idea whats realy going on...

  11. #49071

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    3,884
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dorvil Barranis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    So just curious, the U.S. tariffs/trade barriers are bad, but EU and Canadian tariffs/trade barriers are ok, is that about the gist of it?
    Starting a trade war with political and economic partners is bad. Canada and EU issuing counter tarrifs in response is a predictable outcome.

    Not sure if you are trolling, if so, ha ha, you got me.
    Not trolling at all, and not referencing "counter tariffs". I'm asking about exisiting tariffs and trade barriers already in place prior to the new steel/aluminium tariffs.
    If a country feels that tariffs are not fair, there's the WTO, an institution specifically designed for that purpose, to officially articulate your complains at. The WTO (or its predecessor GATT) was founded with the U.S. as a major proponent.
    Except Trump seems to think that international institutions like the WTO and UN, founded and largely led by the US, are the problem.
    More likely: Trump doesn't even know the GATT/WTO is basically a U.S. creation.

  12. #49072
    Bartholomeus Crane's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    7,531
    Well, the Singapore summit was a damp squib ...

    They're laughing their arses off in Pyongyang this evening ...

    Trump is a massive boob. News at 11.
    Quote Originally Posted by Miep View Post
    ...i have no idea whats realy going on...

  13. #49073
    Donor Rami's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    London/Snuffbox
    Posts
    1,357
    I like how he didn't even consult the South Koreans on the whole 'we shall stop with dem exercises' prior to promising it. Did NK actually agree to anything in detail at all? Or anything they haven't said they would do before then didn't? This closes the door on calling Kim's outfit an illegitemate outfit too.

  14. #49074
    Bartholomeus Crane's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    7,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Rami View Post
    I like how he didn't even consult the South Koreans on the whole 'we shall stop with dem exercises' prior to promising it. Did NK actually agree to anything in detail at all? Or anything they haven't said they would do before then didn't? This closes the door on calling Kim's outfit an illegitemate outfit too.
    Yes, one thing, sort of. NK promised the return of US remains from the Korea war, immediate if already identified. Sort of, because it's almost a non-promise, as NK will deny that it has any remains to return immediately, and then stall on providing access to return the other US remains; if they don't outright deny any remains are still left in NK (which, to be fair, is possible, as I wouldn't put it beyond the Kim dynasty to have destroyed any and all US/UN remains a long time ago).

    Other than that: NK committed to work towards the complete denuclearisation of the Korean peninsular before in pledges in both the early 90ies and in 2005. Only then they included an inspection regime and a verification process (respectively). This time they did not. So it's not even close to complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantlement.

    In fact, this pledge is basically on the level of the many speeches Obama made calling for a nuclear-free world: pretty much pie-in-the-sky, i.e., will never happen. Not least because NK will insist that the US will withdraw it's nuclear capabilities and canopy away from not just South Korea, but also Japan, even the rest of the world. In reality fat Kim is saying that NK will give up nuclear weapons when everyone else will.

    BTW, not only is this nothing new, in fact worse, from the 90ies and 2005, it is basically something fat Kim already pledged during the Korean/Panmunjom meeting. It meant nothing then either. Trump just got a pledge he already gave!

    And so for all this heap of nothing, Trump gave fat Kim everything that he could possibly have hoped for, which the Kim dynasty could only dream of for decades: propaganda material NK will run for years on end; the fat one on a stage, as equals, with the most powerful man on the planet; full recognition of the Kim dynasty for all the world to see; and possible a halt to the military exercises, and the hint that the US will withdraw it's military from South Korea, etc.

    Now there's nothing to stop fat Kim from stalling/blowing up the negotiations once again, as for now he's got everything he needs from the US.

    Just imagine that: just 6 months the US had NK and fat Kim on the ropes. Even the Chinese were willing to throw him under the bus. Now he'll come home a hero, laden with kudos, for next to nothing in return, his domestic hegemony guaranteed by the US, and safe for a decade.

    How difficult will it be to maintain those sanctions now? There's basically now no pressure on either Russia or China to keep them strictly enforced. What's the US state department going to say? After Trump called it an honour to meet the murderous bastard?

    Art of the deal! Right? Fucking moron ...
    Quote Originally Posted by Miep View Post
    ...i have no idea whats realy going on...

  15. #49075
    Lachesis VII's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 20, 2011
    Location
    Egghelende
    Posts
    1,834
    Quote Originally Posted by I Legionnaire View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Liberals are the root of the fucking problem. Ya'll need more Marx in your life.
    The solution for to much liberalism is more liberalism?
    If, after 2500 pages of this thread, 1000 pages of the political shots fired thread, and 1500 pages of the Brexit thread, you still haven’t learned that socialism and liberalism are distinct ideologies that are in conflict with one another, I dunno what to tell you man.

    Liberalism, as the guiding ideology of both major American parties from, say, 1972 until 2012, is why we are in this messs as a nation. Prior to 1972, the Democrats were arguably a social democratic party, and since 2012 the Republicans have become reactionary.

    Between these dates you have broad bipartisan consensus on liberal economic policy, policy that hollowed out the American middle class, left our public services and infrastructure teetering, and, due to the tone-deafness and plutocracy of both parties, paved the way for an authoritarian right wing reaction.

    The Dems walked away from their responsibility to protect the working class and joined the republicans in liberal rich-kid land, and made their entire political agenda about identity politics in an attempt to win the diverse professional class and poor minorities. Who knows, maybe in the 70s it wasn’t possible to both support racial, ethnic, and sexual minorities while also standing up for the working class, but I suspect it was more an issue of ideology than practicability.

    That decision is now haunting the republic. And the way to fix it, now that the GOP is sliding into full fascism land, is to move back towards social democratic or socialist policies that help the working class and address the inequality that drives reaction. Defuse the GOP pressure cooker.

    But instead the liberals are intent on doubling down on liberalism, both as it relates to economic policy, and as it relates to identity politics. In doing so, they fail to recognize the role they played in creating the present situation.

  16. #49076
    Kai's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 2, 2012
    Posts
    6,534
    This is why it's hilarious to have the Liberal Party be captured by reactionary elements in Australia.

  17. #49077
    Lachesis VII's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 20, 2011
    Location
    Egghelende
    Posts
    1,834
    Why? The connection between liberalism and reaction is not a new political phenomenon. It’s a really disappointing one, though.

  18. #49078
    Bartholomeus Crane's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    7,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Jori McKie View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    You get screeched at for defending the retarded foreign policy of your President, not because you're American. Just take a look at how people react to Lachesis.

    Tapapapatalk
    Yes and about 40% of the US population thinks its a swell idea to destroy our relationships. The other 55-60% are trying to white knuckle their way through to Nov when there's hopefully some checks on this President.

    This is like the dumbass who was fantasizing about destroying the IT/finance of the US for :reasons:. Industries that are liberal dominant, and are concentrated in and benefit liberal cities. Checkmate liberals, i guess?

    Stop thinking of us as a monolithic block, and you might encounter less attitude
    I was that dumbass . To make my argumentation short:
    - I know US citizens aren't a monolithic block but on the other hand you guys elected the Orange.
    - The Orange with GOP backup, for now, for whatever dumb reasons is trying to start a trade war.
    - To change that you need some heavy artillery aka threatening the US where it hurts and it will hurt the most in the US service industry. Trade surplus isn't only about products, check out trade balance as a whole which includes products and services.

    I really hope after next midterms the political landscape change and you will have a blue senate and congress or at least enough blues to stop the Orange from making existential mistakes.
    Trump has a +71 favourables and a 86% approval rating among Republican voters. And don't the Republican 'anti-Trump' primary candidates know it.

    Still think it'll be a walkover for the Democrats in the midterms?

    Talking to my very liberal friends in the US, Trump may be hated by non-republicans, but the democratic party (and plenty of their candidates), aren't particularly loved either.

    White knuckling through till November hoping it'll be better afterwards may not be enough.
    Quote Originally Posted by Miep View Post
    ...i have no idea whats realy going on...

  19. #49079
    thebomby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    6,976
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    You get screeched at for defending the retarded foreign policy of your President, not because you're American. Just take a look at how people react to Lachesis.

    Tapapapatalk
    Yes and about 40% of the US population thinks its a swell idea to destroy our relationships. The other 55-60% are trying to white knuckle their way through to Nov when there's hopefully some checks on this President.

    This is like the dumbass who was fantasizing about destroying the IT/finance of the US for :reasons:. Industries that are liberal dominant, and are concentrated in and benefit liberal cities. Checkmate liberals, i guess?

    Stop thinking of us as a monolithic block, and you might encounter less attitude
    I don't think of you as a monolithic block, and I apologise that I generalise sometimes.
    Будь смиренным, будь кротким, не заботься о тленном
    Власти, данной Богом, сынок, будь навеки верным...
    Я люблю Росcию, я - патриот

  20. #49080
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    10,395
    I just find it pretty hilarious people think his is somehow he worst it’s ever been or something. I guess once they fuck every up completely, maybe they’ll learn a bit of perspective, once we’ve had a good, generation killing war...
    meh

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •