North Korea and US politics

[Playford7]

As unpopular trump might be within the media and certain circles I find him refreshing, I’d much rather support MAGA 2020 than slump further into the clown world we currently are living in...
Honk honk!!!.

 

[goatwack]

Who says Trump is unpopular

 

[mack341]

This is what your president is selling you for the best and biggest deal ever, he even insisted on a new name - a 0.35% improvement over Nafta in six years View attachment 107633

Source: US International Trade Commission: "The report estimates the deal would raise GDP by 0.35% and create 176,000 jobs after six years."

According to Mr. T, NAFTA was the worst deal ever. So he just made the worst deal less bad by 0.35% over six years! View attachment 107633

How great is that!

According to the cnbc article it said the deal would increase real U.S. gross domestic product by an estimated $68.2 billion, so in money terms that's still a fair bit. Although I did read something about poultry and chicken again, so hope there's more to it than bleached chicken exports.

my biggest concern with Nafta if I was american would've been the loss of jobs that seem to happen after nafta came in and the tariff system changed, people working in the manufacturing sector suddenly had the rug pulled out from underneath them, they were made redundant and the job was relocated abroad.

Regarding the collusion with russia issue I'm pretty sure William Binney, former technical director of the NSA, has said the DNC leaked emails were not hacked via the internet but copied onto a storage device like a usb stick, something a whistle blower working there could've done and then passed to wikileaks [which is I think how they get most of their information/stories]

 

[slotplayer]

Mates, What year is it now, oh wait, 2019?

let's go down memory lane.

Published on Dec 13, 2007

 

[slotplayer]

Comey never claimed to have the best brain or best memory contrary to your idol, Mr. T.

Just take this:

MR. T in 2016: I love Wikileaks
Mr. T in 2019: I know nothing about Wikileaks

Is it that hard for you to acknowledge that your president is a lying braggard and that all you can do is deflect, deflect, deflect??

Its not deflecting, its pointing out your post has no merit. Its spin.
Who said I did not acknowledge it. I said it last year, When it comes to the Donald I see what you see, it carries less weight for me. Maybe I'm desensitized to it, that's all.

 

[Harry_BKK]

According to the cnbc article it said the deal would increase real U.S. gross domestic product by an estimated $68.2 billion, so in money terms that's still a fair bit. Although I did read something about poultry and chicken again, so hope there's more to it than bleached chicken exports.

my biggest concern with Nafta if I was american would've been the loss of jobs that seem to happen after nafta came in and the tariff system changed, people working in the manufacturing sector suddenly had the rug pulled out from underneath them, they were made redundant and the job was relocated abroad.

Regarding the collusion with russia issue I'm pretty sure William Binney, former technical director of the NSA, has said the DNC leaked emails were not hacked via the internet but copied onto a storage device like a usb stick, something a whistle blower working there could've done and then passed to wikileaks [which is I think how they get most of their information/stories]

All are minor adjustments. The Obama team had already negotiated for a small increase in diary products that could be exported tariff-free into Canda. Mr. T got something like 0.25% more than that.

The estimates rely on that automobile manufacturers adhere 100% to the new agreement (75% of parts has to be made in N-America, etc.) which they will not. The other option is to pay 2.5% tariff. Now, think about it, how many will build new factories, train people, pay higher wages which in total will go into billions of $ to save 2.5%, and that only on the part that is not within the new NAFTA agreement?

Plus, the US will have a net loss in GDP if Mr. T keeps his tariffs on steel and aluminium. Every report/study also says that the US consumer will see a slight increase in prices due to the new NAFTA. So, in the end the US consumer is paying for Mr. T's "victory lap".

Those manufacturing job losses were happening, NAFTA or not. Go and read in the archives how many manufacturing jobs were lost in the decade prior to NAFTA. The argument is a "dead horse" as the US was in full swing of globalization. You could also argue, that new and different jobs were created because of NAFTA and it helped keeping consumer prices lower because most tariffs were removed.

 

[mack341]

All are minor adjustments. The Obama team had already negotiated for a small increase in diary products that could be exported tariff-free into Canda. Mr. T got something like 0.25% more than that.

The estimates rely on that automobile manufacturers adhere 100% to the new agreement (75% of parts has to be made in N-America, etc.) which they will not. The other option is to pay 2.5% tariff. Now, think about it, how many will build new factories, train people, pay higher wages which in total will go into billions of $ to save 2.5%, and that only on the part that is not within the new NAFTA agreement?

Plus, the US will have a net loss in GDP if Mr. T keeps his tariffs on steel and aluminium. Every report/study also says that the US consumer will see a slight increase in prices due to the new NAFTA. So, in the end the US consumer is paying for Mr. T's "victory lap".

Those manufacturing job losses were happening, NAFTA or not. Go and read in the archives how many manufacturing jobs were lost in the decade prior to NAFTA. The argument is a "dead horse" as the US was in full swing of globalization. You could also argue, that new and different jobs were created because of NAFTA and it helped keeping consumer prices lower because most tariffs were removed.

I don't know if this new USMCA is any good, I certainly don't think Trump has 'won', but he has probably gained a few compromises and concessions. Although he's president he can only go so far against the tide of opinion in the senate/congress and elsewhere, and as you say globalization is fully underway. Though Germany compared to the USA seems to have not been as affected and instead kept hold of most of its manufacturing sector, so I'm not sure the loss of US manufacturing jobs was inevitable more that the mindset of the corporations and banks was different which made it happen.

Globalization in my view of seeing it unfold is a process of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer in the 1st world countries, and global mega corporations and billionaires becoming more powerful and wealthy and paying less tax overall than before.

The suicides in the foxconn factories in china gives an insight into the demands put on workers in these developing nations where a lot of jobs have been offshored to.

This is a good article explaining some of problems of nafta on the 20th anniversary [1994-2014]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

"More than 845,000 U.S. workers in the manufacturing sector have been certified for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) since NAFTA because they lost their jobs due to imports from Canada and Mexico or the relocation of factories to those countries. The TAA program is quite narrow, covering only a subset of jobs lost at manufacturing facilities, and is difficult to qualify for. Thus, the NAFTA TAA numbers significantly undercount NAFTA job loss."

"NAFTA contributed to downward pressure on U.S. wages and growing income inequality....As increasing numbers of workers displaced from manufacturing jobs joined the glut of workers competing for non-offshorable, low-skill jobs in sectors such as hospitality and food service, real wages have also fallen in these sectors since NAFTA. "

"The average annual U.S. agricultural trade deficit with Mexico and Canada under NAFTA stands at $800 million, more than twice the pre-NAFTA level.... Despite an overall 188 percent rise in food imports from Canada and Mexico under NAFTA, the average nominal price of food in the United States has jumped 65 percent since NAFTA went into effect."

"The reductions in consumer goods prices that have materialized have not been sufficient to offset the losses to wages under NAFTA"

• 
  "The export of subsidized U.S. corn did increase under NAFTA, destroying the livelihoods of more than one million Mexican campesino farmers and about 1.4 million additional Mexican workers whose livelihoods depended on agriculture."
  
  

 

[Harry_BKK]

Its not deflecting, its pointing out your post has no merit. Its spin.
Who said I did not acknowledge it. I said it last year, When it comes to the Donald I see what you see, it carries less weight for me. Maybe I'm desensitized to it, that's all.

Your president lying into your face has no merit for you. Got it!

 

[pinnit2014]

Your president lying into your face has no merit for you. Got it!

To be fair, that’s pretty much what most politicians do; just some are more savvy at it

 

[slotplayer]

Your president lying into your face has no merit for you. Got it!

Its the politicians that says what is politically expedient that is more troublesome 2 me. Those are the real deceivers.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Its the politicians that says what is politically expedient that is more troublesome 2 me. Those are the real deceivers.

And Mr. T doesn't do that? He's the deceiver-in-chief, simply read the Mueller report to find out how often he instructed people to lie or lied himself. And that for something he claims to be innocent.

Sarah even lied to the investigators saying her comments about Comey's firing were a "slip of the tongue" made "in the heat of the moment" when TV recordings clearly show she was reading from a transcript. So she lied about a lie. Exactly mimmicking Mr. T, who always doubles down on a lie.

Mr. T will soon have more "acting secretaries" than congress-confirmed ones. That is not a coincidence and surely not draining the swamp or being an honest broker.

 

[vorcirion]

Its the politicians that says what is politically expedient that is more troublesome 2 me. Those are the real deceivers.

So you prefer a criminal instead of normal politician? You actually like how Trump talks...but he just can't get anything done 'cause he's a really bad negotiator. I don't understand...do you want to get things done or do you just want to whine about them?
Trump can't solve anything 'cause he doesn't know anything and he doesn't listen to anyone...and you still prefer him. Doesn't make sense to me.

 

[slotplayer]

So you prefer a criminal instead of normal politician? You actually like how Trump talks...but he just can't get anything done 'cause he's a really bad negotiator. I don't understand...do you want to get things done or do you just want to whine about them?
Trump can't solve anything 'cause he doesn't know anything and he doesn't listen to anyone...and you still prefer him. Doesn't make sense to me.

Trump is not the problem its congress.

 

[slotplayer]

Mates, What year is it now, oh wait, 2019?

let's go down memory lane.

Published on Dec 13, 2007

The irony is if you listen to Hillary on NAFA in 2007 she sounds like, yup, The Donald. I actually wanted that Hillary to win back then, not Obama.

 

[mack341]

The irony is if you listen to Hillary on NAFA in 2007 she sounds like, yup, The Donald. I actually wanted that Hillary to win back then, not Obama.

I think Hillary could've been president but Obama was too good an opportunity for the liberal mainstream, he was persuasive and a smooth operator, also from a mixed race background so he ticked more boxes than she did, plus for some it would always feel a bit incestuous or like a banana republic to have had a husband and wife both become president, they'd be wary of that I think as it feels odd, too much of the same.

And If Trump had stood against Obama in 2007 I think Donald would've lost, which reinforces my view that it's the recent past failures of the centre/left presidents that have led to the USA being ready to take a gamble with a maverick like Trump; Ross Perot's presidential's campaigns before were an inkling that an 'independent' could gain votes from people fed up with the two main parties which is really what Trump managed to do.

Hillary might've won the last election but she gave the game away with her deplorables comment.

 

[slotplayer]

I think Hillary could've been president but Obama was too good an opportunity for the liberal mainstream, he was persuasive and a smooth operator, also from a mixed race background so he ticked more boxes than she did, plus for some it would always feel a bit incestuous or like a banana republic to have had a husband and wife both become president, they'd be wary of that I think as it feels odd, too much of the same.

And If Trump had stood against Obama in 2007 I think Donald would've lost, which reinforces my view that it's the recent past failures of the centre/left presidents that have led to the USA being ready to take a gamble with a maverick like Trump; Ross Perot's presidential's campaigns before were an inkling that an 'independent' could gain votes from people fed up with the two main parties which is really what Trump managed to do.

Hillary might've won the last election but she gave the game away with her deplorables comment.

It's actually Obama that unleashed the social justice/pc/id bs on the nation which gave the country the Donald. I don't hear much pc bs these days. In 2017 the Dr. Seuss racist bs and my state canceling the Halloween Party because it was not inclusive enough, not to mention all the statues they were tearing down. The only thing I heard recently is another state is renaming Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples' Day. The pause on the pc bs is because of the Donald.

The country was war weary and Hillary was too hawkish that is why Obama won. That Hillary in 07 was not the swamp creature she became in 2016.

Speaking of Perot, I came across this short video when pulling up the Iowa debate video. The part that I found interesting is he mentions a young people's revolution, well he was right and its here now. The country is at a turning point, its either going to continue to be a pure capitalist system or a socialist/social democracy. That is why I said the pig is about to walk on two feet in a previous post.

A perfect storm could be brewing, between Brexit and the US if they don't get it right, we could have a global recession. I'm planning accordingly.

Biden is announcing next week, we'll see if the left media (or the other Dems) covers the $1 billion his son Hunter and Kerry's son received from China for their hedge fund.

 

[mack341]

It's actually Obama that unleashed the social justice/pc/id bs on the nation which gave the country the Donald. I don't hear much pc bs these days. In 2017 the Dr. Seuss racist bs and my state canceling the Halloween Party because it was not inclusive enough, not to mention all the statues they were tearing down. The only thing I heard recently is another state is renaming Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples' Day. The pause on the pc bs is because of the Donald.

The country was war weary and Hillary was too hawkish that is why Obama won. That Hillary in 07 was not the swamp creature she became in 2016.

Speaking of Perot, I came across this short video when pulling up the Iowa debate video. The part that I found interesting is he mentions a young people's revolution, well he was right and its here now. The country is at a turning point, its either going to continue to be a pure capitalist system or a socialist/social democracy. That is why I said the pig is about to walk on two feet in a previous post.

A perfect storm could be brewing, between Brexit and the US if they don't get it right, we could have a global recession. I'm planning accordingly.

Biden is announcing next week, we'll see if the left media (or the other Dems) covers the $1 billion his son Hunter and Kerry's son received from China for their hedge fund.

Funny I drafted a long post yesterday on the political situation but deleted it and I wrote that the uk media coverage of brexit is very similar to the US coverage of Trump, both have popular support and a mandate and both are attacked relentlessly, the deep state/establishment in our respective countries want to stop brexit and get rid of Trump.

But without addressing the core issues behind them occurring; it feels in the UK as if everything is on pause as we're in an impasse, the media on behalf of the establishment is tentatively trying to convince the public of the need for a 2nd referendum when the result of the first has not been fulfilled. It's a difficult task without admitting our democracy is basically a mickey mouse one.

Yeah hillary's hawkishness was a big factor, she likes to talk war, very much like blair, strongly pc yet strongly warmonger, it's odd some people don't see the disconnect there...

Speaking of Perot, I came across this short video when pulling up the Iowa debate video. The part that I found interesting is he mentions a young people's revolution, well he was right and its here now. The country is at a turning point, its either going to continue to be a pure capitalist system or a socialist/social democracy. That is why I said the pig is about to walk on two feet in a previous post.

No I did read that about the pig walking on two feet but my memory of 'animal farm' had faded..."All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" is one of the famous lines I remember. The thing is I don't think the US is a pure capitalist system otherwise the banks would have been allowed to fail and not bailed out, but it is a very capitalist system/ethos compared to, say, the scandinavian countries. I know what you mean though, you're at a crossroads or tipping point for progressive/socialist politics, the like of which you've never really had, to take power. It's the underlying demographics moving that way too.

The open borders policy which billionaires like soros are fond of, seems to actually create more disorder and poverty and reduce prosperity and quality of life, I was looking at the pictures yesterday of the yellow vest protests and it all looks like something out of a dystopian movie or book, police wearing heavy body armour and gas masks, add on top a never ending war on terror climate ... how's it all going to get solved so we can go back to a semblance of normality

 

[Steviedoo]

It's actually Obama that unleashed the social justice/pc/id bs on the nation which gave the country the Donald. I don't hear much pc bs these days. In 2017 the Dr. Seuss racist bs and my state canceling the Halloween Party because it was not inclusive enough, not to mention all the statues they were tearing down. The only thing I heard recently is another state is renaming Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples' Day. The pause on the pc bs is because of the Donald.

The country was war weary and Hillary was too hawkish that is why Obama won. That Hillary in 07 was not the swamp creature she became in 2016.

Speaking of Perot, I came across this short video when pulling up the Iowa debate video. The part that I found interesting is he mentions a young people's revolution, well he was right and its here now. The country is at a turning point, its either going to continue to be a pure capitalist system or a socialist/social democracy. That is why I said the pig is about to walk on two feet in a previous post.

A perfect storm could be brewing, between Brexit and the US if they don't get it right, we could have a global recession. I'm planning accordingly.

Biden is announcing next week, we'll see if the left media (or the other Dems) covers the $1 billion his son Hunter and Kerry's son received from China for their hedge fund.

The Biden China story was all over the news recently so I don’t why you’re saying this.. newyorktimes, daily, newyorkpost etc... Washington post....
If you’re waiting for cnn to report it. Forget it they’re like fake news Fox.

 

[mack341]

It's actually Obama that unleashed the social justice/pc/id bs on the nation which gave the country the Donald. I don't hear much pc bs these days. In 2017 the Dr. Seuss racist bs and my state canceling the Halloween Party because it was not inclusive enough, not to mention all the statues they were tearing down. The only thing I heard recently is another state is renaming Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples' Day. The pause on the pc bs is because of the Donald.

The country was war weary and Hillary was too hawkish that is why Obama won. That Hillary in 07 was not the swamp creature she became in 2016.

Speaking of Perot, I came across this short video when pulling up the Iowa debate video. The part that I found interesting is he mentions a young people's revolution, well he was right and its here now. The country is at a turning point, its either going to continue to be a pure capitalist system or a socialist/social democracy. That is why I said the pig is about to walk on two feet in a previous post.

A perfect storm could be brewing, between Brexit and the US if they don't get it right, we could have a global recession. I'm planning accordingly.

Biden is announcing next week, we'll see if the left media (or the other Dems) covers the $1 billion his son Hunter and Kerry's son received from China for their hedge fund.

Perot was a bit quirky but he had a plan, manufacturing based on making the best quality items, like germany and japan have a reputation for, build a tax base from exports etc.. and pay off the national debt. And he was right it is a burden round the next generation's neck, the current financial commitments leveraged on today's young people paying it off, or most likely just servicing the debt, in the future. A bit like passing a huge mortgage onto your children..

 

[slotplayer]

The Biden China story was all over the news recently so I don’t why you’re saying this.. newyorktimes, daily, newyorkpost etc... Washington post....
If you’re waiting for cnn to report it. Forget it they’re like fake news Fox.

I didn't see the newspaper articles.

 

[slotplayer]

Funny I drafted a long post yesterday on the political situation but deleted it and I wrote that the uk media coverage of brexit is very similar to the US coverage of Trump, both have popular support and a mandate and both are attacked relentlessly, the deep state/establishment in our respective countries want to stop brexit and get rid of Trump.

But without addressing the core issues behind them occurring; it feels in the UK as if everything is on pause as we're in an impasse, the media on behalf of the establishment is tentatively trying to convince the public of the need for a 2nd referendum when the result of the first has not been fulfilled. It's a difficult task without admitting our democracy is basically a mickey mouse one.

Yeah hillary's hawkishness was a big factor, she likes to talk war, very much like blair, strongly pc yet strongly warmonger, it's odd some people don't see the disconnect there...



No I did read that about the pig walking on two feet but my memory of 'animal farm' had faded..."All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" is one of the famous lines I remember. The thing is I don't think the US is a pure capitalist system otherwise the banks would have been allowed to fail and not bailed out, but it is a very capitalist system/ethos compared to, say, the scandinavian countries. I know what you mean though, you're at a crossroads or tipping point for progressive/socialist politics, the like of which you've never really had, to take power. It's the underlying demographics moving that way too.

The open borders policy which billionaires like soros are fond of, seems to actually create more disorder and poverty and reduce prosperity and quality of life, I was looking at the pictures yesterday of the yellow vest protests and it all looks like something out of a dystopian movie or book, police wearing heavy body armour and gas masks, add on top a never ending war on terror climate ... how's it all going to get solved so we can go back to a semblance of normality

I was watching a series on Brexit/Immigration on the Smithsonian channel, (much better than that HBO one). So if Cameron got his 7 years of welfare reform for illegal migrants from the EU why did he go ahead with the referendum?

Back of the Queue.

 

[mack341]

I was watching a series on Brexit/Immigration on the Smithsonian channel, (much better than that HBO one). So if Cameron got his 7 years of welfare reform for illegal migrants from the EU why did he go ahead with the referendum?

Back of the Queue.

I think he got some concessions on the benefits legal migrants from the EU could claim but it was seen as a bit of a negotiating failure at the time and more evidence that the EU was like a dictatorship, and we had to go there with a begging bowl approach.

Not sure if Cameron held the referendum to kind of get back at the EU or it was because they were haemorrhaging conservative voters to farage's ukip and holding a referendum and 'remain' winning would've probably meant nigel retiring and the end of ukip.

Or perhaps the political establishment of the country felt a fresh mandate was required because of the EU army and other further EU federal integration was going to start happening, and if and when people complained the response would've been 'we've just held a referendum and the public voted to remain part of the EU.' luckily we voted to leave but I'm sure our establishment is going to water it down so in reality it's kind of half leaving.

The EU is a big federal project so they have a timeline by which they want to achieve certain things like an EU army, probably that's 2025, then it will be a EU police force by 2030. [maybe a bit like the FBI, so they can travel into any country of europe and have seniority of the local police force ] They'll have an idea what they want the EU to be like in 2050, slowly putting every country into a stranglehold from which they can never escape...

 

[slotplayer]

I think he got some concessions on the benefits legal migrants from the EU could claim but it was seen as a bit of a negotiating failure at the time and more evidence that the EU was like a dictatorship, and we had to go there with a begging bowl approach.

Not sure if Cameron held the referendum to kind of get back at the EU or it was because they were haemorrhaging conservative voters to farage's ukip and holding a referendum and 'remain' winning would've probably meant nigel retiring and the end of ukip.

Or perhaps the political establishment of the country felt a fresh mandate was required because of the EU army and other further EU federal integration was going to start happening, and if and when people complained the response would've been 'we've just held a referendum and the public voted to remain part of the EU.' luckily we voted to leave but I'm sure our establishment is going to water it down so in reality it's kind of half leaving.

The EU is a big federal project so they have a timeline by which they want to achieve certain things like an EU army, probably that's 2025, then it will be a EU police force by 2030. [maybe a bit like the FBI, so they can travel into any country of europe and have seniority of the local police force ] They'll have an idea what they want the EU to be like in 2050, slowly putting every country into a stranglehold from which they can never escape...

The EU army I could see but I thought that was just wishful thinking.

An EU police force is a going to create a police state.

 

[mack341]

The EU army I could see but I thought that was just wishful thinking.

An EU police force is a going to create a police state.

The thing is if you're going to create a superstate, a bit like the usa, you have to have a central army and some kind of central police power too, probably going to be a gradual process so that people in the individual countries don't object, and philosophically or logically I can't see why the EU wouldn't want these things, it will increase their grip on power. [ any politician in opposition to the EU could then be arrested on a trumped up charge and jailed.]

It probably seems like this could never happen, but looking how things have changed in the last 30 years, this brexit debacle wouldn't happened 30 years ago, a vote result would've be honoured but not now, so some of the core democratic principles/values are dissolving.

I wonder what would happen in the US if one of the states held a referendum and said we want to leave the union and no longer recognise washington's authority, I think the army would probably be sent in, it's the ultimate deterrent.

 

[slotplayer]

The thing is if you're going to create a superstate, a bit like the usa, you have to have a central army and some kind of central police power too, probably going to be a gradual process so that people in the individual countries don't object, and philosophically or logically I can't see why the EU wouldn't want these things, it will increase their grip on power. [ any politician in opposition to the EU could then be arrested on a trumped up charge and jailed.]

It probably seems like this could never happen, but looking how things have changed in the last 30 years, this brexit debacle wouldn't happened 30 years ago, a vote result would've be honoured but not now, so some of the core democratic principles/values are dissolving.

I wonder what would happen in the US if one of the states held a referendum and said we want to leave the union and no longer recognise washington's authority, I think the army would probably be sent in, it's the ultimate deterrent.

CalExit