What exactly do welfare recipients produce again...???
In my case welfare produced a soldier, and later a college graduate who now has productive job and pays his taxes. Not to mention helping feed my kids who now have their own jobs and pay their own taxes.
Frankly, I find your "question" personally insulting. Most welfare money is spent on people who need temporary help. The "cheatin' welfare momma" of conservative propaganda is mostly a myth.
What exactly do welfare recipients produce again...???
In my case welfare produced a soldier, and later a college graduate who now has productive job and pays his taxes. Not to mention helping feed my kids who now have their own jobs and pay their own taxes.
Frankly, I find your "question" personally insulting. Most welfare money is spent on people who need temporary help. The "cheatin' welfare momma" of conservative propaganda is mostly a myth.
Another cultural fable brought to us by Saint Ronnie. His "welfare queen" example was, I suppose, technically that. She was also a full-scale con artist on a FAR greater level than just someone scamming the government welfare system, and was also likely involved in kidnapping and possibly murder. She was a career criminal and using her as an example of your average welfare recipient was wholly disingenuous at best and malicious at worst. But instead, because of Reagan's "folksy charm", we've been stuck with this bullshit stereotype about single urban mothers as if they are sitting at home eating beluga caviar and washing it down with chilled Grey Goose. But frankly, in this regard, Reagan was practically another proto-Trump. On MANY occasions he just made shit up, and would frequently describe scenes from one of his shitty movies as if they had actually taken place in real life.
The aid package for the farmers is going to clock in at $16 billion dollars, with nearly all of it being direct payouts. For some context, subsidized housing costs the federal government $40 billion dollars a year. Which mean this single package is costing 40% as much as federally assisted housing supplements for the ENTIRE country. And it's happening strictly because Trump cannot afford to NOT pay off these farmers he is depriving of their markets with his trade war with China. Though I will still have to hear them, this should be the end of all the "welfare state" arguments from the right, in the same way the tax cut obliterated their endless rhetoric about the deficit. This is the second bedrock principle of conservative governance that has been exposed as a complete and utter sham in the last two years (well, 3 if you count the whole "morality" aspect of the religious right). So what exactly is the defining principle of conservative political beliefs at this point?? Because as far as I can tell, it has now been reduced to "whatever Donald Trump needs them to be in any given 24 hour period".
My guess is that these farmers are providing a 'strategic commodity' and that's why they're protected. Any country that can't feed itself is vulnerable to food price fluctuations that can jeopardize their existence. Energy, food and building materials fall under this category. Whether it's 'welfare' is debatable when the supply of strategic resource is in question. Sorry, but folks getting welfare assistance aren't creating anything of value in exchange...
I don't think this is a credible argument. The farmers growing soybeans are doing so specifically for export to China, so it's neither a strategic commodity nor for home use. You can see from this graph of production vs consumption of soybeans that there's essentially no US market for the stuff at any price - which is why the crop is rotting in storage rather than going to alternative destinations now China is not purchasing it.
Of course, the fact that the argument is not credible would have no bearing on whether Trump makes it anyway .
Another key point is this. If China isn't buying soybeans from us, they are buying them from someone else. And they aren't just going to RETURN to buying from American farmers once the tariffs are lifted and totally cut off their relationship with whoever they are buying them from since this happened. And I heard a stat today that in some cases sales of US soybeans have dropped almost 70%. Which is, I don't have to tell anyone, catastrophic. So yeah, we are at this point paying farmers to make a product that is going to rot. And let's be perfectly clear why. Trump decided to do this. He is 100% responsible for the soybean crisis that is going on right now. It's entirely on him as an individual. He has personally tanked the entire US soybean market on purpose. So his only option is to buy the farmers off with massive checks. I don't know what else we should be doing with 16 billion dollars, but I can imagine just about anything is better than paying farmers to grow a product that is almost certainly destined to rot in a silo.
Ok, you guys are making me reassess my views on welfare. I'll just say that my feelings about it are colored by my experience in the Michigan U.P. when I was in college. There and then folks used to accost me at the entrance to the grocery store and try to sell me their food stamps (at a discount) so they could buy booze with it...
Seems odd that it would be possible to buy and sell food stamps in the first place. Wouldn't it make more sense, and be slightly less expensive, to use a special credit card with a PIN so that the only person who could benefit from it was the person it was assigned to? It would make it more difficult to trade food stamp dollars and also be a bit more efficient.
Seems odd that it would be possible to buy and sell food stamps in the first place. Wouldn't it make more sense, and be slightly less expensive, to use a special credit card with a PIN so that the only person who could benefit from it was the person it was assigned to? It would make it more difficult to trade food stamp dollars and also be a bit more efficient.
I think they do that now. My experience was back in the 80's...
Should House Democrats be trying to go after Trump's tax returns from a point in time *before* he became a political candidate? Should they be going after the tax returns of his family members? Doesn't turning the IRS into a political weapon set a dangerous precedent?
Not really. Everyone else who has ever run for president in modern history has opened up their taxes so that the public can see who they are and what they have done for a living. There won't be any dangerous precedent if future candidates are open in that way.
Voluntarily releasing one's tax returns is a perfectly acceptable situation and no one has a problem with that. *Demanding* someone's tax returns, then obtaining them forcibly via subpoena, is a wholly different and completely unacceptable situation. Of course, Congress could amend the laws to require all people seeking an elected office at the Federal level to disclose all their tax returns, but they won't because then we will see where and how most of them have been making, as well as hiding, their money.
Seems odd that it would be possible to buy and sell food stamps in the first place. Wouldn't it make more sense, and be slightly less expensive, to use a special credit card with a PIN so that the only person who could benefit from it was the person it was assigned to? It would make it more difficult to trade food stamp dollars and also be a bit more efficient.
Not necessarily. There was a case here in Texas a few years ago where a convenience store owner/operator would offer people cash for access to their SNAP card (the State-issued debit card which replaced actual food stamps long ago), albeit at a reduced rate. If their card got loaded for $500 he would offer then something like $400 cash then he could use the full amount on the card and basically buy from himself, thereby pocketing the difference. He skimmed about $1.5 million before he got caught.
*************
As I noted about tariffs earlier, both my right-wing economics teacher in high school and my left-wing economics professor in college were of the opinion that tariffs are a bad idea.
The aid package for the farmers is going to clock in at $16 billion dollars, with nearly all of it being direct payouts. For some context, subsidized housing costs the federal government $40 billion dollars a year. Which mean this single package is costing 40% as much as federally assisted housing supplements for the ENTIRE country. And it's happening strictly because Trump cannot afford to NOT pay off these farmers he is depriving of their markets with his trade war with China. Though I will still have to hear them, this should be the end of all the "welfare state" arguments from the right, in the same way the tax cut obliterated their endless rhetoric about the deficit. This is the second bedrock principle of conservative governance that has been exposed as a complete and utter sham in the last two years (well, 3 if you count the whole "morality" aspect of the religious right). So what exactly is the defining principle of conservative political beliefs at this point?? Because as far as I can tell, it has now been reduced to "whatever Donald Trump needs them to be in any given 24 hour period".
My guess is that these farmers are providing a 'strategic commodity' and that's why they're protected. Any country that can't feed itself is vulnerable to food price fluctuations that can jeopardize their existence. Energy, food and building materials fall under this category. Whether it's 'welfare' is debatable when the supply of strategic resource is in question. Sorry, but folks getting welfare assistance aren't creating anything of value in exchange...
I don't think this is a credible argument. The farmers growing soybeans are doing so specifically for export to China, so it's neither a strategic commodity nor for home use. You can see from this graph of production vs consumption of soybeans that there's essentially no US market for the stuff at any price - which is why the crop is rotting in storage rather than going to alternative destinations now China is not purchasing it.
Of course, the fact that the argument is not credible would have no bearing on whether Trump makes it anyway .
Why are we not dumping it on Japan? So farmers can make more profit?
President Trump has made requests for the paperwork of four individuals, who have been accused or convicted of war crimes, for the purpose of pardoning them on Memorial Day.
One is for Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher, a Navy Seal who is scheduled to stand trial at the end of May for shooting unarmed civilians – specifically, a young woman and an unarmed elderly man, as well as killing a 15-year-old captive with a knife while deployed to Iraq in 2017. Second is Major Mathew Golsteyn, an Army Green Beret convicted of killing an unarmed Afghan in 2010. Third, a group of Marine Corp snipers who urinated on the corpses of dead Taliban fighters. Fourth, a Blackwater contractor convicted of shooting dozens of unarmed Iraqis.
The blackwater incident lead to the Iraqis revoking US forces' immunity from prosecution operating in their borders, which forced Bush and Obama to withdraw our troops from there prematurely.
Blackwater (they've changed their name but are still around), is owned by Eric Prince, our Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos's brother.
If the president follows through on these pardons, he will demonstrate a profound lack of understanding or appreciation for Memorial Day, the military justice system, and the law of armed combat. Rather than honor the military personnel who have and continue to serve our nation, his pardons will do a great disservice to them and to the country for which they have defended and sacrificed so much.
The aid package for the farmers is going to clock in at $16 billion dollars, with nearly all of it being direct payouts. For some context, subsidized housing costs the federal government $40 billion dollars a year. Which mean this single package is costing 40% as much as federally assisted housing supplements for the ENTIRE country. And it's happening strictly because Trump cannot afford to NOT pay off these farmers he is depriving of their markets with his trade war with China. Though I will still have to hear them, this should be the end of all the "welfare state" arguments from the right, in the same way the tax cut obliterated their endless rhetoric about the deficit. This is the second bedrock principle of conservative governance that has been exposed as a complete and utter sham in the last two years (well, 3 if you count the whole "morality" aspect of the religious right). So what exactly is the defining principle of conservative political beliefs at this point?? Because as far as I can tell, it has now been reduced to "whatever Donald Trump needs them to be in any given 24 hour period".
My guess is that these farmers are providing a 'strategic commodity' and that's why they're protected. Any country that can't feed itself is vulnerable to food price fluctuations that can jeopardize their existence. Energy, food and building materials fall under this category. Whether it's 'welfare' is debatable when the supply of strategic resource is in question. Sorry, but folks getting welfare assistance aren't creating anything of value in exchange...
I don't think this is a credible argument. The farmers growing soybeans are doing so specifically for export to China, so it's neither a strategic commodity nor for home use. You can see from this graph of production vs consumption of soybeans that there's essentially no US market for the stuff at any price - which is why the crop is rotting in storage rather than going to alternative destinations now China is not purchasing it.
Of course, the fact that the argument is not credible would have no bearing on whether Trump makes it anyway .
Why are we not dumping it on Japan? So farmers can make more profit?
That graph is over 10 years old. It’s from 2007. China buys 1/3rd of the global soyabean stock and other countries also grow and sell the crop and cater to smaller markets like Japan and Iran. Japan isn’t just going to import more soy just because the US has it for sale.
China is close to 60%. The U.S. is our next biggest buyer at 9%. If the US has a similar distribution by country, losing 60% of your sales can be devastating.
China is close to 60%. The U.S. is our next biggest buyer at 9%. If the US has a similar distribution by country, losing 60% of your sales can be devastating.
It's a similar picture for the US - it's not easy in the short term to adjust to such a big shift in demand ...
President Trump has made requests for the paperwork of four individuals, who have been accused or convicted of war crimes, for the purpose of pardoning them on Memorial Day.
One is for Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher, a Navy Seal who is scheduled to stand trial at the end of May for shooting unarmed civilians – specifically, a young woman and an unarmed elderly man, as well as killing a 15-year-old captive with a knife while deployed to Iraq in 2017. Second is Major Mathew Golsteyn, an Army Green Beret convicted of killing an unarmed Afghan in 2010. Third, a group of Marine Corp snipers who urinated on the corpses of dead Taliban fighters. Fourth, a Blackwater contractor convicted of shooting dozens of unarmed Iraqis.
The blackwater incident lead to the Iraqis revoking US forces' immunity from prosecution operating in their borders, which forced Bush and Obama to withdraw our troops from there prematurely.
Blackwater (they've changed their name but are still around), is owned by Eric Prince, our Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos's brother.
If the president follows through on these pardons, he will demonstrate a profound lack of understanding or appreciation for Memorial Day, the military justice system, and the law of armed combat. Rather than honor the military personnel who have and continue to serve our nation, his pardons will do a great disservice to them and to the country for which they have defended and sacrificed so much.
I've said it a dozen times, Erik Prince is a totally malevolent force without a single redeeming quality. Blackwater were mercenaries and essentially unaccountable butchers in Iraq. They made roughly 5x the amount of money as any actual service member and had no accountability whatsoever. As for these possible pardons, I can't think of anything more egregious. In the case of the one guy, his OWN SQUAD turned him in because he was acting in such a murderous and brutal fashion. For a group of NAVY Seals to turn on their brother, you can just about imagine what kind of savage and murderous behavior he was involved in. And then this comes out 4 hours ago:
Trump Organization lawyer Marc Mukasey started working on the case in recent months, according to sources familiar with the situation. Former NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik, a former business partner of Trump ally and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, also is helping with Gallagher's case. Kerik, who once served three years in federal prison for charges including tax fraud and lying to officials, was nominated as homeland security secretary by President George W. Bush but withdrew from consideration due to potential tax violations. He has regularly appeared on Fox News as a surrogate for the President.
I don't even know what to say about these people anymore. It's so wholly and utterly corrupt that I almost don't feel like there is any point to giving examples anymore. However, although the yellow ribbon on the SUV crowd who thinks displaying one "supports" the troops may lap this up, I'm guessing alot of rank and file military members are going to be absolutely disgusted if these end up going through.
We continue to approach and then roll right past dangerous crossroads. This one may be one of the most ominous. From TPM:
For everyone who’s been worried about Attorney General Bill Barr’s lawless reign at the Department of Justice last night was the big moment. As you’ve likely already seen President Trump gave Barr blanket authority to access and declassify any and all classified information from the country’s dozen and a half intelligence agencies in his quest to “investigate the investigators” of the Russia scandal.There’s hardly any way to overstate just how big a deal this is or how dangerous it is in the hands of a corrupt official like Bill Barr.
First, this power is totally unprecedented. The President is the ultimate arbiter of what is and is not classified. There are processes in place and guidance he’s supposed to listen to to exercise that authority. But he doesn’t have to. Barr is free to disregard those rules, overrule the heads of the intelligence agencies in question in question or not even tell them what he’s doing.
There’s nothing sacrosanct about the judgment of the heads of these different agencies. The issue is that Barr has an agenda to help the President and punish his perceived enemies. Giving someone like that this kind of power is a recipe for disaster.
Barr has a proven record of selectively disclosing information with the aim of deceiving the public. That was what the Barr Letter was all about and he’s demonstrated that proclivity for deception ever since he took over the DOJ. This is the Barr Letter on steroids. Trump has given him the ability to selectively declassify information to create a narrative of events which supports the President. It goes without saying that if you can choose only the facts you want and sheer them of their context you can create almost any story you want. And that’s what Barr is about to do.
If anyone wants to declassify more information that clarifies the meaning of whatever Barr chose to declassify they won’t be able to. Because that’s up to the President or Bill Barr.
There’s a secondary part of this which doesn’t touch directly on propaganda creation. But it may be more important. This level of power basically gives Barr a whip hand over the entire Intelligence Community. And he seems to want to get his hands on the Russia desks especially. As the Times notes, “Mr. Barr wanted to know more about what foreign assets the C.I.A. had in Russia in 2016 and what those informants were telling the agency about how President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia sought to meddle in the 2016 election.” These are likely among the most closely held secrets the US government has. They will all but certainly be communicated directly to the President.
Our international reputation and support for helping us invade Iran for no reason are going to be non-existent.
Countries will refuse to host our military because Trump is saying international unsanctioned murder is a-ok with America. Japan, for example, already has enough issues with multiple rapists and 'ugly American' behavior problems from American servicemen but pardoning mass killers could be the last straw. Will Trump pardon those rapist servicemen next? When these servicemen get arrested under host nation agreements they are often turned over to American authorities to face justice. Well Trump has made American justice a joke even if he doesn't follow through since he's apparently considered it enough to get the paperwork prepared already. I can see Germany and Japan easily using this as reasons to remove American forces.
So, here we have the crux of the Republican's problem and hypocrisy on abortion. Force women to have children, and then DELIBERATELY make it harder or impossible for loving same-sex couples who are WILLING to raise them to be able to adopt. And those people who said Trump would be good on LGBT issues are looking incredibly stupid at this point:
If a religious organization wants to operate off their own personal folklore as the rules, then STOP ASKING FOR FEDERAL FUNDING!!!! Buried at the end of this article, you see something that is perhaps even more disturbing, which is that they want doctors to be ALLOWED to discriminate against transgender patients.
Trump has bypassed Congress to approve the proposed $8bn weapon sale to Saudi Arabia - the justification for that is that the Iranian situation is a national emergency.
I wonder how many more of these situations will be created or invented? Trump has normalized conduct and actions that would have seemed impossible in the past. If he is able to normalize this one, such that most people eventually accept they are living in a permanent emergency, that would open the door to all sorts of actions - not holding scheduled elections because of the 'emergency' is for instance a favorite tactic of those trying to strengthen their grip on government.
Meanwhile, in the UK Theresa May has finally resigned. Despite having more stickability than chewing gum under a school desk she's now agreed to go on June 7th. The race to replace her had already been under way for some time before May confirmed her resignation of course and there's no shortage of candidates. That enthusiasm to stand does surprise me a bit as the chalice they will inherit will still be well and truly poisoned by Brexit.
To me, the Brexit options do now seem a bit clearer than they were in the past, though that's not saying much . An incoming prime minister is almost certain to take a stronger line on Brexit than May (as that's the general position of Conservative party members, who vote for the leader). However, without a general election such a line would not get through Parliament - and a new prime minister will not hold an immediate election while the conservatives are polling so badly. Off the top of my head that leaves options looking something like this:
1) Agree a deal with the EU. The deal previously agreed will not be accepted by an incoming prime minister. They may try to renegotiate that, but I think such an attempt would be doomed to failure. In the short term therefore I think a deal is off the table.
2) No deal exit. That would probably currently be supported by the majority of conservative MPs, but not by the majority of Parliament. See below for a comment on the possibility of this occurring by default.
3) No Brexit. I don't think this would be the goal of most MPs and, even for those for whom it is the goal, relatively few would be prepared to follow this course without a second referendum.
4) Further extension. There would be considerable resistance in the EU to another extension past October. Macron previously argued an extension could allow the UK to disrupt other EU business - and some of the Tory candidates for prime minister have suggested they would do this. If such a person became prime minister I think an extension would certainly be refused. Even if the prime minister adopted a more conciliatory approach there would need to be a good argument for an extension - for instance to allow time to hold a referendum or have a general election.
5) General election. While it's clear there won't be an immediate election, that would be a possible strategy in the early autumn if the Conservative vote shows signs of recovering. At the moment that seems pretty unlikely though.
6) Second referendum. Those opposing this generally argue that it's undemocratic to require another vote to confirm a clearly expressed opinion. Quite apart from the point that it was far from obvious what Brexit meant at the time and arguments now about that are very different from those during the referendum, this argument is generally getting weaker anyway just due to the passage of time since the 2016 referendum. If Parliament continues to be unable to agree any other option (which seems likely), and the government doesn't want to hold a general election, I think there would be a straight choice between letting the current extension expire (and leaving with no-deal by default), or agreeing a referendum. Even if the government did not support the latter, Parliament has already had a taste of flexing its muscles and I think would force a referendum rather than allowing a no-deal exit.
The results of the EU elections are due out on Sunday evening. The balance between leave and remain parties will potentially have a significant effect on the chances of the various options. For instance, if there were a majority of votes cast for leave parties (which I don't expect) that would substantially increase the possibility of a no deal exit.
I agree that the results of the EU elections will have a significant effect on our Brexit options. However, there is really only one "leave" party to vote for - the Brexit Party (the Conservatives have blown their chance), whereas the "remain" voters have pretty much all the other parties to choose from which will likely split their vote.
I don't think it's quite that clear. Of the major national parties the Brexit party will get the largest share of the leave vote, but both the Conservatives and UKIP are clearly committed to leave as well. The Lib Dems are likely to pick up the largest share of floating remain votes, although both the Greens and Change UK also have strongly remain positions.
The joker in the pack though is Labour. They've tried to avoid stating a clear position on Brexit, although officially they clearly do support leave. However, their desire for a deal including a customs union means that some people may class that as not really leaving, while statements from some individual MPs about supporting a second referendum have muddied the party's position a bit. That will all make it difficult to categorize what a vote for Labour means in relation to support for Brexit.
Trump has bypassed Congress to approve the proposed $8bn weapon sale to Saudi Arabia - the justification for that is that the Iranian situation is a national emergency.
I wonder how many more of these situations will be created or invented? Trump has normalized conduct and actions that would have seemed impossible in the past. If he is able to normalize this one, such that most people eventually accept they are living in a permanent emergency, that would open the door to all sorts of actions - not holding scheduled elections because of the 'emergency' is for instance a favorite tactic of those trying to strengthen their grip on government.
For YEARS I've been listening to people on both sides of the aisle talk about how Congress needs to reassert it's power in these situations. And finally, this year, they did so in some small fashion. Both the Senate and the House said we're not going to continue helping Saudi Arabia perpetrate this disaster in Yemen. And what do Trump, Bolton and Pompeo do?? Sell the weapons anyway. We are also, as of this moment, sending thousands of more troops to the region to deliberately provoke Iran. This idea that Trump was some kind of "dove" on these matters and an isolationist was always a complete and utter sham.
Trump has bypassed Congress to approve the proposed $8bn weapon sale to Saudi Arabia - the justification for that is that the Iranian situation is a national emergency.
I wonder how many more of these situations will be created or invented? Trump has normalized conduct and actions that would have seemed impossible in the past. If he is able to normalize this one, such that most people eventually accept they are living in a permanent emergency, that would open the door to all sorts of actions - not holding scheduled elections because of the 'emergency' is for instance a favorite tactic of those trying to strengthen their grip on government.
For YEARS I've been listening to people on both sides of the aisle talk about how Congress needs to reassert it's power in these situations. And finally, this year, they did so in some small fashion. Both the Senate and the House said we're not going to continue helping Saudi Arabia perpetrate this disaster in Yemen. And what do Trump, Bolton and Pompeo do?? Sell the weapons anyway. We are also, as of this moment, sending thousands of more troops to the region to deliberately provoke Iran. This idea that Trump was some kind of "dove" on these matters and an isolationist was always a complete and utter sham.
He has no position. He has Bolton and other chickenhawks in charge of foreign policy who are the same people who lied about Iraq and got us into the war there.
Trump is weak and easily fooled too of course. Bolton just has to say "Iran thinks you're weak" and Trump will overreact. You appeal to his pocketbook or ego. And Bolton and Trump are on the pocket of the military industrial complex.
Ha!!!! He did delete it (because he didn't spell Biden's name right). Been updated with Trump's new tweet. Most telling part of that is that he spelled his name correct, but kept all the other insane parts of it verbatim as they were. Point being, I totally trust murderous totalitarian dictators, and if they say something disparaging about my potential opponent, I'll be their BFF. Just imagine any other President saying something like this.
Comments
Busting the Myth of ‘Welfare Makes People Lazy’
Since "it doesn't affect anyone unless it's someone I know" tends to be a thing:
15 Famous People Who Grew Up on Welfare (PHOTOS)
8 Celebs Who Were Once On Welfare (and Ben Carson)
How Chris Pratt went from homeless waiter at Bubba Gump shrimp to $10 million ‘Jurassic World’ star
In my case welfare produced a soldier, and later a college graduate who now has productive job and pays his taxes. Not to mention helping feed my kids who now have their own jobs and pay their own taxes.
Frankly, I find your "question" personally insulting. Most welfare money is spent on people who need temporary help. The "cheatin' welfare momma" of conservative propaganda is mostly a myth.
Another cultural fable brought to us by Saint Ronnie. His "welfare queen" example was, I suppose, technically that. She was also a full-scale con artist on a FAR greater level than just someone scamming the government welfare system, and was also likely involved in kidnapping and possibly murder. She was a career criminal and using her as an example of your average welfare recipient was wholly disingenuous at best and malicious at worst. But instead, because of Reagan's "folksy charm", we've been stuck with this bullshit stereotype about single urban mothers as if they are sitting at home eating beluga caviar and washing it down with chilled Grey Goose. But frankly, in this regard, Reagan was practically another proto-Trump. On MANY occasions he just made shit up, and would frequently describe scenes from one of his shitty movies as if they had actually taken place in real life.
I don't think this is a credible argument. The farmers growing soybeans are doing so specifically for export to China, so it's neither a strategic commodity nor for home use. You can see from this graph of production vs consumption of soybeans that there's essentially no US market for the stuff at any price - which is why the crop is rotting in storage rather than going to alternative destinations now China is not purchasing it.
Of course, the fact that the argument is not credible would have no bearing on whether Trump makes it anyway
Ok, you guys are making me reassess my views on welfare. I'll just say that my feelings about it are colored by my experience in the Michigan U.P. when I was in college. There and then folks used to accost me at the entrance to the grocery store and try to sell me their food stamps (at a discount) so they could buy booze with it...
I think they do that now. My experience was back in the 80's...
Voluntarily releasing one's tax returns is a perfectly acceptable situation and no one has a problem with that. *Demanding* someone's tax returns, then obtaining them forcibly via subpoena, is a wholly different and completely unacceptable situation. Of course, Congress could amend the laws to require all people seeking an elected office at the Federal level to disclose all their tax returns, but they won't because then we will see where and how most of them have been making, as well as hiding, their money.
Not necessarily. There was a case here in Texas a few years ago where a convenience store owner/operator would offer people cash for access to their SNAP card (the State-issued debit card which replaced actual food stamps long ago), albeit at a reduced rate. If their card got loaded for $500 he would offer then something like $400 cash then he could use the full amount on the card and basically buy from himself, thereby pocketing the difference. He skimmed about $1.5 million before he got caught.
*************
As I noted about tariffs earlier, both my right-wing economics teacher in high school and my left-wing economics professor in college were of the opinion that tariffs are a bad idea.
Why are we not dumping it on Japan? So farmers can make more profit?
No Russia. Not enough to offset all of US exports, but with increased exports for South America, that is where China has been filling the US soy hole.
http://www.worldstopexports.com/soya-beans-exports-country/
https://www.fb.org/market-intel/china-uses-one-third-of-worlds-soybeans
One is for Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher, a Navy Seal who is scheduled to stand trial at the end of May for shooting unarmed civilians – specifically, a young woman and an unarmed elderly man, as well as killing a 15-year-old captive with a knife while deployed to Iraq in 2017. Second is Major Mathew Golsteyn, an Army Green Beret convicted of killing an unarmed Afghan in 2010. Third, a group of Marine Corp snipers who urinated on the corpses of dead Taliban fighters. Fourth, a Blackwater contractor convicted of shooting dozens of unarmed Iraqis.
The blackwater incident lead to the Iraqis revoking US forces' immunity from prosecution operating in their borders, which forced Bush and Obama to withdraw our troops from there prematurely.
Blackwater (they've changed their name but are still around), is owned by Eric Prince, our Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos's brother.
The list of horrors attributable to that guy is endless. Prince is very close with UAE, and Bolton. He makes it no secret he wants to invade Tehran.
He also offered a private police force to Trump.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/05/politics/erik-prince-private-spy-network-trump-administration/index.html
and wants to use mercs to overthrow Maduro
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-erikprince-exclusi/exclusive-blackwater-founders-latest-sales-pitch-mercenaries-for-venezuela-idUSKCN1S608F
Prince arranged and attended the Trump Tower meeting then proceeded to lie to Congress about it.
https://theintercept.com/2019/03/08/erik-prince-trump-mehdi-hasan/
Trump crows endlessly over the 'illegal investigation', but it was Erik Prince who funded a covert effort to investigate Hillary leveraging a foreign entity. https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/in-the-mueller-report-erik-prince-funds-a-covert-effort-to-obtain-clintons-e-mails-from-a-foreign-state
The House has referred Prince to the DOJ for criminal processing, not that Barr is going to do anything.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/erik-prince-house-intelligence-committee-to-make-criminal-referral-to-doj-for-blackwater-founder
If the president follows through on these pardons, he will demonstrate a profound lack of understanding or appreciation for Memorial Day, the military justice system, and the law of armed combat. Rather than honor the military personnel who have and continue to serve our nation, his pardons will do a great disservice to them and to the country for which they have defended and sacrificed so much.
That graph is over 10 years old. It’s from 2007. China buys 1/3rd of the global soyabean stock and other countries also grow and sell the crop and cater to smaller markets like Japan and Iran. Japan isn’t just going to import more soy just because the US has it for sale.
Here are Canada’s Soy exports by country:
https://soycanada.ca/statistics/top-20-export-markets/
China is close to 60%. The U.S. is our next biggest buyer at 9%. If the US has a similar distribution by country, losing 60% of your sales can be devastating.
It's a similar picture for the US - it's not easy in the short term to adjust to such a big shift in demand ...
I've said it a dozen times, Erik Prince is a totally malevolent force without a single redeeming quality. Blackwater were mercenaries and essentially unaccountable butchers in Iraq. They made roughly 5x the amount of money as any actual service member and had no accountability whatsoever. As for these possible pardons, I can't think of anything more egregious. In the case of the one guy, his OWN SQUAD turned him in because he was acting in such a murderous and brutal fashion. For a group of NAVY Seals to turn on their brother, you can just about imagine what kind of savage and murderous behavior he was involved in. And then this comes out 4 hours ago:
Trump Organization lawyer Marc Mukasey started working on the case in recent months, according to sources familiar with the situation. Former NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik, a former business partner of Trump ally and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, also is helping with Gallagher's case. Kerik, who once served three years in federal prison for charges including tax fraud and lying to officials, was nominated as homeland security secretary by President George W. Bush but withdrew from consideration due to potential tax violations. He has regularly appeared on Fox News as a surrogate for the President.
I don't even know what to say about these people anymore. It's so wholly and utterly corrupt that I almost don't feel like there is any point to giving examples anymore. However, although the yellow ribbon on the SUV crowd who thinks displaying one "supports" the troops may lap this up, I'm guessing alot of rank and file military members are going to be absolutely disgusted if these end up going through.
For everyone who’s been worried about Attorney General Bill Barr’s lawless reign at the Department of Justice last night was the big moment. As you’ve likely already seen President Trump gave Barr blanket authority to access and declassify any and all classified information from the country’s dozen and a half intelligence agencies in his quest to “investigate the investigators” of the Russia scandal.There’s hardly any way to overstate just how big a deal this is or how dangerous it is in the hands of a corrupt official like Bill Barr.
First, this power is totally unprecedented. The President is the ultimate arbiter of what is and is not classified. There are processes in place and guidance he’s supposed to listen to to exercise that authority. But he doesn’t have to. Barr is free to disregard those rules, overrule the heads of the intelligence agencies in question in question or not even tell them what he’s doing.
There’s nothing sacrosanct about the judgment of the heads of these different agencies. The issue is that Barr has an agenda to help the President and punish his perceived enemies. Giving someone like that this kind of power is a recipe for disaster.
Barr has a proven record of selectively disclosing information with the aim of deceiving the public. That was what the Barr Letter was all about and he’s demonstrated that proclivity for deception ever since he took over the DOJ. This is the Barr Letter on steroids. Trump has given him the ability to selectively declassify information to create a narrative of events which supports the President. It goes without saying that if you can choose only the facts you want and sheer them of their context you can create almost any story you want. And that’s what Barr is about to do.
If anyone wants to declassify more information that clarifies the meaning of whatever Barr chose to declassify they won’t be able to. Because that’s up to the President or Bill Barr.
There’s a secondary part of this which doesn’t touch directly on propaganda creation. But it may be more important. This level of power basically gives Barr a whip hand over the entire Intelligence Community. And he seems to want to get his hands on the Russia desks especially. As the Times notes, “Mr. Barr wanted to know more about what foreign assets the C.I.A. had in Russia in 2016 and what those informants were telling the agency about how President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia sought to meddle in the 2016 election.” These are likely among the most closely held secrets the US government has. They will all but certainly be communicated directly to the President.
Countries will refuse to host our military because Trump is saying international unsanctioned murder is a-ok with America. Japan, for example, already has enough issues with multiple rapists and 'ugly American' behavior problems from American servicemen but pardoning mass killers could be the last straw. Will Trump pardon those rapist servicemen next? When these servicemen get arrested under host nation agreements they are often turned over to American authorities to face justice. Well Trump has made American justice a joke even if he doesn't follow through since he's apparently considered it enough to get the paperwork prepared already. I can see Germany and Japan easily using this as reasons to remove American forces.
https://www.axios.com/trump-lgbtq-adoption-rules-religious-exemption-85f5fb22-d76d-4536-b275-0b279e904933.html
If a religious organization wants to operate off their own personal folklore as the rules, then STOP ASKING FOR FEDERAL FUNDING!!!! Buried at the end of this article, you see something that is perhaps even more disturbing, which is that they want doctors to be ALLOWED to discriminate against transgender patients.
I wonder how many more of these situations will be created or invented? Trump has normalized conduct and actions that would have seemed impossible in the past. If he is able to normalize this one, such that most people eventually accept they are living in a permanent emergency, that would open the door to all sorts of actions - not holding scheduled elections because of the 'emergency' is for instance a favorite tactic of those trying to strengthen their grip on government.
To me, the Brexit options do now seem a bit clearer than they were in the past, though that's not saying much
1) Agree a deal with the EU. The deal previously agreed will not be accepted by an incoming prime minister. They may try to renegotiate that, but I think such an attempt would be doomed to failure. In the short term therefore I think a deal is off the table.
2) No deal exit. That would probably currently be supported by the majority of conservative MPs, but not by the majority of Parliament. See below for a comment on the possibility of this occurring by default.
3) No Brexit. I don't think this would be the goal of most MPs and, even for those for whom it is the goal, relatively few would be prepared to follow this course without a second referendum.
4) Further extension. There would be considerable resistance in the EU to another extension past October. Macron previously argued an extension could allow the UK to disrupt other EU business - and some of the Tory candidates for prime minister have suggested they would do this. If such a person became prime minister I think an extension would certainly be refused. Even if the prime minister adopted a more conciliatory approach there would need to be a good argument for an extension - for instance to allow time to hold a referendum or have a general election.
5) General election. While it's clear there won't be an immediate election, that would be a possible strategy in the early autumn if the Conservative vote shows signs of recovering. At the moment that seems pretty unlikely though.
6) Second referendum. Those opposing this generally argue that it's undemocratic to require another vote to confirm a clearly expressed opinion. Quite apart from the point that it was far from obvious what Brexit meant at the time and arguments now about that are very different from those during the referendum, this argument is generally getting weaker anyway just due to the passage of time since the 2016 referendum. If Parliament continues to be unable to agree any other option (which seems likely), and the government doesn't want to hold a general election, I think there would be a straight choice between letting the current extension expire (and leaving with no-deal by default), or agreeing a referendum. Even if the government did not support the latter, Parliament has already had a taste of flexing its muscles and I think would force a referendum rather than allowing a no-deal exit.
The results of the EU elections are due out on Sunday evening. The balance between leave and remain parties will potentially have a significant effect on the chances of the various options. For instance, if there were a majority of votes cast for leave parties (which I don't expect) that would substantially increase the possibility of a no deal exit.
The joker in the pack though is Labour. They've tried to avoid stating a clear position on Brexit, although officially they clearly do support leave. However, their desire for a deal including a customs union means that some people may class that as not really leaving, while statements from some individual MPs about supporting a second referendum have muddied the party's position a bit. That will all make it difficult to categorize what a vote for Labour means in relation to support for Brexit.
For YEARS I've been listening to people on both sides of the aisle talk about how Congress needs to reassert it's power in these situations. And finally, this year, they did so in some small fashion. Both the Senate and the House said we're not going to continue helping Saudi Arabia perpetrate this disaster in Yemen. And what do Trump, Bolton and Pompeo do?? Sell the weapons anyway. We are also, as of this moment, sending thousands of more troops to the region to deliberately provoke Iran. This idea that Trump was some kind of "dove" on these matters and an isolationist was always a complete and utter sham.
He has no position. He has Bolton and other chickenhawks in charge of foreign policy who are the same people who lied about Iraq and got us into the war there.
Trump is weak and easily fooled too of course. Bolton just has to say "Iran thinks you're weak" and Trump will overreact. You appeal to his pocketbook or ego. And Bolton and Trump are on the pocket of the military industrial complex.
Was the tweet deleted? What did it say?
Ha!!!! He did delete it (because he didn't spell Biden's name right). Been updated with Trump's new tweet. Most telling part of that is that he spelled his name correct, but kept all the other insane parts of it verbatim as they were. Point being, I totally trust murderous totalitarian dictators, and if they say something disparaging about my potential opponent, I'll be their BFF. Just imagine any other President saying something like this.