Rofl, World leaders that have to manage economy and Government don't operate based on simple personality competitions (unless your a nutjob like Kim).
The U.S. has all the power and leverage in anything with Mexico, Mexico is reliant on the U.S. just to survive, not the other way around.
Take a look at China, Trump spent virtually the entire time going after China and instantly now their best friends working together.
These world leaders don't care about our little partisan politics.
Remittances is a much more complicated beast then you make out, a vast amount of remittances comes from Immigrants that the U.S. Government supports via welfare (75% of Immigrants gain Government welfare assistance).
Ergo a huge amount of remittance is not from 'work' but from the U.S. Government's welfare program, Which is a very old criticism.
Yeah, maybe they are sending food stamps and low-income housing subsidies over the wire to their relatives in Zapopan.
Mexico in ages past banked very hard on a huge reliance on the U.S. for its economy rather then diversifying, It actually did work (NAFTA) but the problem with putting your eggs in one basket is that it is an enormous long-term risk and only ended with U.S. essentially having enormous sway over Mexican economy.
So the U.S. can get whatever they want.
it's similar to Venezuala, they are sitting on one of the biggest oil reserves on the planet, and yet their starving to death? They didn't diversify to take advantage of that.
For everyone who has been freaking out about this.....the timeline of her tweets on this subject is absolutely absurd. One denial is not enough, two denials, three denials are not enough. The people questioning her seem to want her to write a contract in her own blood and burn a picture of a saint in her hand before they let her off the hook for something she isn't even doing.
So Trump wants to cut the corporate tax rate. Is he's really looking out for those rust belt workers? Sure if they are profiting more than $18,333,333 per year then he wants to cut their tax rate from 35% to 15%.
And that one tax return that Trump leaked to the media where he paid tax, he paid the AMT (alternative minimum tax), otherwise he would have paid way less than what he paid. And what do you know, he wants to do away with the alternative minimum tax now.
Republican leaders are eager to cut corporate taxes, but for various reasons they don't want to add to the country's debt. And a 15% corporate rate could drive up deficits by a lot.
The Tax Policy Center estimated in November that Trump's 15% proposal, coupled with a repeal of the corporate Alternative Minimum Tax, could reduce revenue by nearly $2.4 trillion in the first decade.
To put that in context, that's about $240 billion a year -- which is almost as much as the $304 billion the government spent last year on income security programs such as food stamps, unemployment benefits and child nutrition. So the aim is more Republican corporate welfare.
Trump is all about "hey I'm president, I won the electoral college in a "landslide", now I can do whatever I want because the elections over". Will he be able to push through this gift to the super rich? Possibly. I hope not this is just nuts. Again.
Republicans don't care about the deficit. They care about the deficit when Democrats are in office. The Tea Party supposedly started under the auspices that they were worried about the debt, despite those people being silent for 8 years while George Bush put two ground wars on the credit card. Not a peep. The instant Obama took office, the debt become a #1 issue. Now that Obama is gone, the debt, again, does not matter. Trump possibly borrowing to build the wall?? They don't care. Massive corporate tax cuts that will blow an even bigger hole in the deficit?? That doesn't count. This rule is very simple and it changes INSTANTLY on a dime the moment the Presidency switches hands. Democrats?? They never pretended the debt was a big deal in the first place (and it isn't). Republicans do, but it's entirely disingenuous.
The high corporate tax rate is one of the reasons that companies go overseas.
Its also one of the few bipartisan issue's that both Democrats and Republicans agree on and want to lower substantially.
Lowering the Corporate tax rate won't 'drive up the deficit' because companies already simply move overseas to avoid it, which is worse since those companies invest in the overseas country instead.
This is a fairly well known issue.
I don't know where 'looking out for the working class' comment comes on, looking out for the working class has very little to do with company taxation, And the working-class losing their entire Industry because companies move overseas is a little bit more problematic.
Didn't we go through this in this thread, with the same people in this thread before? Seems like were just repeating the same things.
Jimmy Carter is also considered one of the worse Presidents for the U.S.
Apparently it's not North Korea we have to worry about here in the U.S. Trump says it's the bloody Canadians. Who knew?
It's Trump thinking Canada needs the US more than they need Canada. He is being blinded by one or two industries in a hope he can strong arm Trudeau into giving him what he wants.
Small Wisconsin Dairies are against it. They do not see Canada squeezing them out, but mega corporate dairy farms over saturating the market, and want to adopt Canada's model of supply management for their side of the border. If supply management was eliminated, small dairies on both sides of the border will be squeezed out so people can save pennies while buying cheese and butter.
Soft Lumber wars are a decade too late. BC has been shipping to Asia and won't see too big of a hit from this. Small mills in Ontario and Quebec may feel the pinch, but the government will bail them out if things get dragged through the courts.
Canada also controls a good chunk of the US power supply that they get on the cheap. If Trump keeps huffing, this will be placed on the table by the Canadians. Right now though, Canada is being its polite self, listening to his concerns and will probably negociate with repersentatives who know what they are talking about in good faith on these issues.
Honestly, IMO, this is just all bluster till he hits Day 100. On day 120, this will all be forgotten as he smacks a golf ball somewhere in Florida.
Apparently it's not North Korea we have to worry about here in the U.S. Trump says it's the bloody Canadians. Who knew?
It's Trump thinking Canada needs the US more than they need Canada. He is being blinded by one or two industries in a hope he can strong arm Trudeau into giving him what he wants.
Small Wisconsin Dairies are against it. They do not see Canada squeezing them out, but mega corporate dairy farms over saturating the market, and want to adopt Canada's model of supply management for their side of the border. If supply management was eliminated, small dairies on both sides of the border will be squeezed out so people can save pennies while buying cheese and butter.
Soft Lumber wars are a decade too late. BC has been shipping to Asia and won't see too big of a hit from this. Small mills in Ontario and Quebec may feel the pinch, but the government will bail them out if things get dragged through the courts.
Canada also controls a good chunk of the US power supply that they get on the cheap. If Trump keeps huffing, this will be placed on the table by the Canadians. Right now though, Canada is being its polite self, listening to his concerns and will probably negociate with repersentatives who know what they are talking about in good faith on these issues.
Honestly, IMO, this is just all bluster till he hits Day 100. On day 120, this will all be forgotten as he smacks a golf ball somewhere in Florida.
I hope you're right. I live in Michigan so messing with our biggest trading partner could have serious consequences for us who live here. (And Michigan really does border Canada!)
Apparently it's not North Korea we have to worry about here in the U.S. Trump says it's the bloody Canadians. Who knew?
It's Trump thinking Canada needs the US more than they need Canada. He is being blinded by one or two industries in a hope he can strong arm Trudeau into giving him what he wants.
Small Wisconsin Dairies are against it. They do not see Canada squeezing them out, but mega corporate dairy farms over saturating the market, and want to adopt Canada's model of supply management for their side of the border. If supply management was eliminated, small dairies on both sides of the border will be squeezed out so people can save pennies while buying cheese and butter.
Soft Lumber wars are a decade too late. BC has been shipping to Asia and won't see too big of a hit from this. Small mills in Ontario and Quebec may feel the pinch, but the government will bail them out if things get dragged through the courts.
Canada also controls a good chunk of the US power supply that they get on the cheap. If Trump keeps huffing, this will be placed on the table by the Canadians. Right now though, Canada is being its polite self, listening to his concerns and will probably negociate with repersentatives who know what they are talking about in good faith on these issues.
Honestly, IMO, this is just all bluster till he hits Day 100. On day 120, this will all be forgotten as he smacks a golf ball somewhere in Florida.
I hope you're right. I live in Michigan so messing with our biggest trading partner could have serious consequences for us who live here. (And Michigan really does border Canada!)
He's determined to piss off someone.
He's tried with Australia where he had a heated insulting conversation with their leader. He's constantly been attacking Mexico's government and called Mexicans rapists, they are taking steps to separate their dependency on the USA because of him. He's called China (and others) currency manipulators and verbally insulted them in other ways though he's flip flopped on the currency issue. He's insulted Angela Merkel and Germany. He's verbally attacked the EU, NATO and the UN. There's this stuff with Canada.
Finally he's always had a good word about Putin and Russia even when his fake toughness might be better focused there. And that's just a few of his foreign diplomatic blunders off the top of my head.
Apparently it's not North Korea we have to worry about here in the U.S. Trump says it's the bloody Canadians. Who knew?
It's Trump thinking Canada needs the US more than they need Canada. He is being blinded by one or two industries in a hope he can strong arm Trudeau into giving him what he wants.
Small Wisconsin Dairies are against it. They do not see Canada squeezing them out, but mega corporate dairy farms over saturating the market, and want to adopt Canada's model of supply management for their side of the border. If supply management was eliminated, small dairies on both sides of the border will be squeezed out so people can save pennies while buying cheese and butter.
Soft Lumber wars are a decade too late. BC has been shipping to Asia and won't see too big of a hit from this. Small mills in Ontario and Quebec may feel the pinch, but the government will bail them out if things get dragged through the courts.
Canada also controls a good chunk of the US power supply that they get on the cheap. If Trump keeps huffing, this will be placed on the table by the Canadians. Right now though, Canada is being its polite self, listening to his concerns and will probably negociate with repersentatives who know what they are talking about in good faith on these issues.
Honestly, IMO, this is just all bluster till he hits Day 100. On day 120, this will all be forgotten as he smacks a golf ball somewhere in Florida.
Lumber trade disagreements with Canada is nothing new, at least if you've been around for awhile.
U.S. has been going back and forth since the 1980's with this, and every President has slapped tariffs and bounced around.
The reason why Trump had to deal with it is because the last trade deal expired at the end of 2015 and the Obama Administration failed to come to an agreement.
The U.S. lumber industry has been hit hard and have petitioned President's to do this since the 1980's too and Presidents always complied in a variety of ways.
Apart from the media hysteria over every little thing Trump has done, In fact pretty much every past President has done something like this.
I think the post-election furor in the US is quieting down too. Once the 100 days are over it'll likely quiet down even more. It's impossible for most normal people to stay fired up for months on end. Your own problems eventually catch back up with you and overwhelm your politics.
After 200 pages, I've found that the discussion ebbs and flows. It varies from page to page, but the political bent, tone, and subjects all slowly shift back and forth depending on who is active and what they're thinking about.
@Mathsorcerer: If the thread isn't what you want it to be, why not start posting again? You could fill in any gaps in the discussion the rest of us have been overlooking.
This thread, after all, is nothing more than what we put into it.
Nah, Honestly the most interesting discussions has been around non-Trump issue's because there's less partisanship around it (and repeating ad nausea old tired talking points).
The last most active discussion was around Constitution and Gun Rights which is evident because that got the most participation of non-regular posters of this thread.
Some people have tried posting news other stuff, but that tends to get drowned out by the regulars wanting to post stuff about Trump again and usually the exact same thing again.
I do wish we saw more attention paid to other subjects, but to be fair, Trump is the most powerful man in the world, and will be so for another 4 years. It is only appropriate that he be a major focus of the discussion.
Trump keeps us on our toes because he's constantly lying, screwing up, or trying to benefit the rich at the expense of the rest of Americans.
Today Ivanka was booed in Germany after she had the gall to claim her dad was a "tremendous champion" of families and women.
I think underneath all the bluster, he's still really unpopular outside his bubble and he realizes it. So he hides from the public and events he can't tightly control. That's why he's afraid to go throw the first pitch at a baseball game and why he's scared of the White House Correspondence dinner and is shaking in his boots about another press conference. Sure he'll go on Fox and answer some softball questions from a friendly interviewer. "I launched misses at Iraq!" Interviewer: "You mean Syria?". "Yes Syria."
As long as he keeps acting like himself, being an embarrassment, and trying to implement harmful policy, people are going to be upset.
Your welcome to your opinion @smeagolheart. But that sort of posts isn't really one that encourages discussion since it is almost complete ad hominem's so i'm afraid theres little reason for me to address it.
Here's an incredibly interesting article, actual data analysis of geographic concentration of journalists and media to ascertain the 'media lives in the bubble'.
Well we all kind of knew this, but its really interesting to see hard data and graphs over how the bubble is heavily geographic (in Democratic areas).
Your welcome to your opinion @smeagolheart. But that sort of posts isn't really one that encourages discussion since it is almost complete ad hominem's so i'm afraid theres little reason for me to address it.
Here's an incredibly interesting article, actual data analysis of geographic concentration of journalists and media to ascertain the 'media lives in the bubble'.
Well we all kind of knew this, but its really interesting to see hard data and graphs over how the bubble is heavily geographic (in Democratic areas).
Exactly who are you to decide what encourages discussion and what constitutes a frank debate?? No doubt you have arbitrary parameters for what qualifies, but #1 no one knows them except you and #2 even if others here DID know, they aren't bound to adhere to them.
Barrack Obama has started to speak in some public venue's and commented of how social media and MSM contribute to increasing partisanship.
While i can never be a fan of Obama or his administration for its toppling of foreign Sovereign Governments and the untold death its caused, I did always think he may be a Jimmy Carter.
A decent person personally but simply inadequate to deal with the various issue's in Government such as the NSA spying, war interventionism etc.
Unfortunately even a decent person (if he is one) does not make a good President necessarily.
Hopefully he can do some good being in an element he is more comfortable in.
Your welcome to your opinion @smeagolheart. But that sort of posts isn't really one that encourages discussion since it is almost complete ad hominem's so i'm afraid theres little reason for me to address it.
Here's an incredibly interesting article, actual data analysis of geographic concentration of journalists and media to ascertain the 'media lives in the bubble'.
Well we all kind of knew this, but its really interesting to see hard data and graphs over how the bubble is heavily geographic (in Democratic areas).
Wow, who would have THOUGHT that the places with the most jobs are the places with the most people. Shocking.
I'm not surprised by this.
"Resist—if you can—the conservative reflex to absorb this data and conclude that the media deliberately twists the news in favor of Democrats. Instead, take it the way a social scientist would take it: The people who report, edit, produce and publish news can’t help being affected—deeply affected—by the environment around them."
That said, there is a lot of good stuff in that article. It's just that it shouldn't be surprising. I like this gem near the end:
"Similarly, Breitbart has seen huge success sticking it to liberals, implicitly taking the side of the “real America” against the coastal bubbles. Breitbart now attracts more than 15 million visitors a month...But is this really America, either? It’s worth mentioning that Fox and Breitbart—and indeed most of the big conservative media players—also happen to be located in the same bubble. Like the “MSM” they rail against, they’re a product of New York, Washington and Los Angeles. It’s an argument against the bubble, being waged almost entirely by people who work inside it."
So what can be done about it? As the article points it, it's underlying economics that has gotten the media into the situation that it's in. Rural papers can't afford to keep up, losing market share to major papers and internet media. For socioeconomic reasons, major papers and internet media are both found in the big cities, which are liberal leaning.
So, you concede that journalists are overwhelmingly liberal and agree with the underlying economics for it, but this doesn't mean that they are biased in favor of democrats...because that's a conservative reflex and people are affected by their environment? I don't get it. Still looks like a clear cut case of demonstrable evidence for general left wing media bias, to me.
Conservatives have done exceedingly well in the online realm of new media where they can't be shut out or violently protested against, places like Youtube are absolutely dominated by conservatives, even the left admits this. So I don't mind the overwhelming media bias in establishment media to be honest, they're an irrelevant sinking ship.
So, you concede that journalists are overwhelmingly liberal and agree with the underlying economics for it, but this doesn't mean that they are biased in favor of democrats...because that's a conservative reflex and people are affected by their environment? I don't get it. Still looks like a clear cut case of demonstrable evidence for general left wing media bias, to me.
Conservatives have done exceedingly well in the online realm of new media where they can't be shut out or violently protested against, places like Youtube are absolutely dominated by conservatives, even the left admits this. So I don't mind the overwhelming media bias in establishment media to be honest, they're an irrelevant sinking ship.
Yes read the comments section on YouTube. Filled with hate speech, I guess that's conservative?
Is Breitbart speaking for real America or is the MSM? Where do most Americans actually live? Most Americans live on the coasts and big cities, so "real America" is the coasts and big cities.
Your welcome to your opinion @smeagolheart. But that sort of posts isn't really one that encourages discussion since it is almost complete ad hominem's so i'm afraid theres little reason for me to address it.
Suit yourself, most people do not accept the normalization of Trump. Believe me.
Comments
So the U.S. can get whatever they want.
it's similar to Venezuala, they are sitting on one of the biggest oil reserves on the planet, and yet their starving to death? They didn't diversify to take advantage of that.
For everyone who has been freaking out about this.....the timeline of her tweets on this subject is absolutely absurd. One denial is not enough, two denials, three denials are not enough. The people questioning her seem to want her to write a contract in her own blood and burn a picture of a saint in her hand before they let her off the hook for something she isn't even doing.
And that one tax return that Trump leaked to the media where he paid tax, he paid the AMT (alternative minimum tax), otherwise he would have paid way less than what he paid. And what do you know, he wants to do away with the alternative minimum tax now.
Republican leaders are eager to cut corporate taxes, but for various reasons they don't want to add to the country's debt. And a 15% corporate rate could drive up deficits by a lot.
The Tax Policy Center estimated in November that Trump's 15% proposal, coupled with a repeal of the corporate Alternative Minimum Tax, could reduce revenue by nearly $2.4 trillion in the first decade.
To put that in context, that's about $240 billion a year -- which is almost as much as the $304 billion the government spent last year on income security programs such as food stamps, unemployment benefits and child nutrition. So the aim is more Republican corporate welfare.
Trump is all about "hey I'm president, I won the electoral college in a "landslide", now I can do whatever I want because the elections over". Will he be able to push through this gift to the super rich? Possibly. I hope not this is just nuts. Again.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/24/news/economy/trump-corporate-tax-rate/index.html
Trump:
Days in office: 95
Laws passed: 0
Executive Orders: 24
Approval rating: 42%
Its also one of the few bipartisan issue's that both Democrats and Republicans agree on and want to lower substantially.
Lowering the Corporate tax rate won't 'drive up the deficit' because companies already simply move overseas to avoid it, which is worse since those companies invest in the overseas country instead.
This is a fairly well known issue.
I don't know where 'looking out for the working class' comment comes on, looking out for the working class has very little to do with company taxation, And the working-class losing their entire Industry because companies move overseas is a little bit more problematic.
Didn't we go through this in this thread, with the same people in this thread before?
Seems like were just repeating the same things.
Jimmy Carter is also considered one of the worse Presidents for the U.S.
Small Wisconsin Dairies are against it. They do not see Canada squeezing them out, but mega corporate dairy farms over saturating the market, and want to adopt Canada's model of supply management for their side of the border. If supply management was eliminated, small dairies on both sides of the border will be squeezed out so people can save pennies while buying cheese and butter.
Soft Lumber wars are a decade too late. BC has been shipping to Asia and won't see too big of a hit from this. Small mills in Ontario and Quebec may feel the pinch, but the government will bail them out if things get dragged through the courts.
Canada also controls a good chunk of the US power supply that they get on the cheap. If Trump keeps huffing, this will be placed on the table by the Canadians. Right now though, Canada is being its polite self, listening to his concerns and will probably negociate with repersentatives who know what they are talking about in good faith on these issues.
Honestly, IMO, this is just all bluster till he hits Day 100. On day 120, this will all be forgotten as he smacks a golf ball somewhere in Florida.
Wisconsin does not border Canada.
He's tried with Australia where he had a heated insulting conversation with their leader. He's constantly been attacking Mexico's government and called Mexicans rapists, they are taking steps to separate their dependency on the USA because of him. He's called China (and others) currency manipulators and verbally insulted them in other ways though he's flip flopped on the currency issue. He's insulted Angela Merkel and Germany. He's verbally attacked the EU, NATO and the UN. There's this stuff with Canada.
Finally he's always had a good word about Putin and Russia even when his fake toughness might be better focused there. And that's just a few of his foreign diplomatic blunders off the top of my head.
U.S. has been going back and forth since the 1980's with this, and every President has slapped tariffs and bounced around.
The reason why Trump had to deal with it is because the last trade deal expired at the end of 2015 and the Obama Administration failed to come to an agreement.
The U.S. lumber industry has been hit hard and have petitioned President's to do this since the 1980's too and Presidents always complied in a variety of ways.
Apart from the media hysteria over every little thing Trump has done, In fact pretty much every past President has done something like this. Yeh threads dying for awhile since people aren't really interested in frank discussion i've found.
@Mathsorcerer: If the thread isn't what you want it to be, why not start posting again? You could fill in any gaps in the discussion the rest of us have been overlooking.
This thread, after all, is nothing more than what we put into it.
The last most active discussion was around Constitution and Gun Rights which is evident because that got the most participation of non-regular posters of this thread.
Some people have tried posting news other stuff, but that tends to get drowned out by the regulars wanting to post stuff about Trump again and usually the exact same thing again.
Just as long as he's not the only one.
Today Ivanka was booed in Germany after she had the gall to claim her dad was a "tremendous champion" of families and women.
I think underneath all the bluster, he's still really unpopular outside his bubble and he realizes it. So he hides from the public and events he can't tightly control. That's why he's afraid to go throw the first pitch at a baseball game and why he's scared of the White House Correspondence dinner and is shaking in his boots about another press conference. Sure he'll go on Fox and answer some softball questions from a friendly interviewer. "I launched misses at Iraq!" Interviewer: "You mean Syria?". "Yes Syria."
As long as he keeps acting like himself, being an embarrassment, and trying to implement harmful policy, people are going to be upset.
But that sort of posts isn't really one that encourages discussion since it is almost complete ad hominem's so i'm afraid theres little reason for me to address it.
Here's an incredibly interesting article, actual data analysis of geographic concentration of journalists and media to ascertain the 'media lives in the bubble'.
Well we all kind of knew this, but its really interesting to see hard data and graphs over how the bubble is heavily geographic (in Democratic areas).
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/25/media-bubble-real-journalism-jobs-east-coast-215048
While i can never be a fan of Obama or his administration for its toppling of foreign Sovereign Governments and the untold death its caused, I did always think he may be a Jimmy Carter.
A decent person personally but simply inadequate to deal with the various issue's in Government such as the NSA spying, war interventionism etc.
Unfortunately even a decent person (if he is one) does not make a good President necessarily.
Hopefully he can do some good being in an element he is more comfortable in.
I'm not surprised by this.
"Resist—if you can—the conservative reflex to absorb this data and conclude that the media deliberately twists the news in favor of Democrats. Instead, take it the way a social scientist would take it: The people who report, edit, produce and publish news can’t help being affected—deeply affected—by the environment around them."
That said, there is a lot of good stuff in that article. It's just that it shouldn't be surprising. I like this gem near the end:
"Similarly, Breitbart has seen huge success sticking it to liberals, implicitly taking the side of the “real America” against the coastal bubbles. Breitbart now attracts more than 15 million visitors a month...But is this really America, either? It’s worth mentioning that Fox and Breitbart—and indeed most of the big conservative media players—also happen to be located in the same bubble. Like the “MSM” they rail against, they’re a product of New York, Washington and Los Angeles. It’s an argument against the bubble, being waged almost entirely by people who work inside it."
So what can be done about it? As the article points it, it's underlying economics that has gotten the media into the situation that it's in. Rural papers can't afford to keep up, losing market share to major papers and internet media. For socioeconomic reasons, major papers and internet media are both found in the big cities, which are liberal leaning.
Conservatives have done exceedingly well in the online realm of new media where they can't be shut out or violently protested against, places like Youtube are absolutely dominated by conservatives, even the left admits this. So I don't mind the overwhelming media bias in establishment media to be honest, they're an irrelevant sinking ship.
Is Breitbart speaking for real America or is the MSM? Where do most Americans actually live? Most Americans live on the coasts and big cities, so "real America" is the coasts and big cities.