Pages: 1 ... 202 203 [204] 205 206 ... 331   Go Down

Author Topic: Trump II  (Read 335633 times)

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1501
    • advantica blog
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4060 on: July 02, 2017, 09:44:05 PM »

How should Trump deal with China's military  buildup of the South China Sea islands that are nearing completion?  How should it effect US Naval build-up?

https://amti.csis.org/chinas-big-three-near-completion/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/02/exclusive-pentagon-sails-destroyer-near-disputed-island-in-south-china-sea-officials-say.html

I'm afraid that battle is already lost, USA missed the opportunity to stop those projects when they started in 2014.
As a matter of fact, China has now already seven such bases. Unless USA drops some MOABs on those bases (however, that could kill a lot of fish), they will continue building and enlarging those islands. 

Farmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4061 on: July 02, 2017, 10:33:14 PM »

I'm afraid that battle is already lost, USA missed the opportunity to stop those projects when they started in 2014.
As a matter of fact, China has now already seven such bases. Unless USA drops some MOABs on those bases (however, that could kill a lot of fish), they will continue building and enlarging those islands.

This is why Trump has pulled out of Paris.  He hopes that rising sea levels will "sink" the Chinese bases.
Logged
Phil Brown

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2544
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4062 on: July 02, 2017, 10:53:20 PM »

I'm afraid that battle is already lost, USA missed the opportunity to stop those projects when they started in 2014.
As a matter of fact, China has now already seven such bases. Unless USA drops some MOABs on those bases (however, that could kill a lot of fish), they will continue building and enlarging those islands. 
How could the USA stop them in 2014?  War?  How do they speak to the issues of American military power?  If not America, who?  Phil, you're Australian and closest to the situation?  What do Australians think about when they see China expand?  People here joke about Trump's "dropping bombs" seemingly disconnected from what's going on in the world.  Making jokes about him but showing no responsible analysis other than mocking him.  That's the point I was making.  We spent 200+ pages knocking and defending Trump without really discussing important issues he is addressing.  I suspect someone is going to respond to my post here with something very derogatory about President Trump.  But I wonder if we could start some reasoned dialogue on what he does rather than going nyah nyah. 

Farmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4063 on: July 03, 2017, 12:40:07 AM »

There are literally dozens upon dozens of discussions within this thread about better ways to handle many of things (and even some that agree with the general line of some of what Trump wants to do).  But every single time it's not as per Trump, the Trumpsters shoot it down or simply don't listen.  When facts and figures are presented showing why Trump's wrong or not doing what he says, it's ignored.

The lack of discussion is simply your blinkers.

What does Australia think about China's expansion?  Most people criticise it.
Logged
Phil Brown

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6195
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4064 on: July 03, 2017, 01:17:07 AM »

I suspect someone is going to respond to my post here with something very derogatory about President Trump.  But I wonder if we could start some reasoned dialogue on what he does rather than going nyah nyah.

Ok...how about this?

The Perfect American Storm: Incivility, Anti-Intellectualism, Tribalism

Quote
By Alex Berezow ó February 7, 2017
Americans don't agree on much these days. But one thing upon which we do agree is that something is deeply broken in our society.

Consider the right track/wrong track poll, as aggregated by RealClearPolitics. This is perhaps the simplest gauge of how Americans feel about their country. The numbers aren't just negative; they are overwhelmingly and embarrassingly negative. And it's been that way for years. Americans, internationally renowned for being an optimistic people, have been uncharacteristically pessimistic for quite some time. Why?

It's difficult to escape the conclusion that our culture has changed, both dramatically and for the worse. I believe three factors are to blame: Incivility, anti-intellectualism, and tribalism. And at the center of that perfect storm is social media.

Incivility. Honorable disagreement appears to be the exception rather than the rule. Depending on the day, I have been called a left-winger, a right-winger, a corporate shill, a "sniveling little demon," and (my personal favorite) "another Jew liar and deceiver [who] writes for Monsatan." These insults are usually directed at me after I write an article supporting GMOs or vaccines. Of course, I'm hardly the only recipient of such vitriol. Just look at how people talk to each other on cable news or on social media.

Anti-Intellectualism. "Alternative facts" may very well be the term-of-the-decade. Expert opinion has been thoroughly rejected as "elitist." Scientific consensus has been mocked. And indisputable facts are undermined with conspiracy theories. It is for these reasons that I believe anti-intellectualism is the single biggest threat to modern society. There is a cure, however. It begins by implementing what I call CRRREST Education.

Tribalism. Tribalism is an "us vs. them" mentality, and it has two primary manifestations: (1) Ideological purity, so that any deviation from orthodoxy is considered heretical; and (2) Hypocrisy, because people will accept/condemn behavior that they otherwise would not if the behavior had been done by a person from the other team.

Social media feeds off of and amplifies all three factors. As the years have gone by, we have become more uncivil, more anti-intellectual, and more tribal.

To be sure, I'm not an alarmist. I refuse to insist that societal conditions are worse now than ever before in American history. After all, we did fight a bloody Civil War. I do not think we are headed in that direction.

But I do believe we are facing a particularly potent set of circumstances that threaten trust, which is the most basic feature of any society, especially of a democracy. Without trust, it is difficult to imagine how America retains its position as the world's leading economic and scientific power.

And at the center of it all is social media. Ironically, a tool meant to unite us has become the primary means to divide us.

Here's the illustration that went with the essay...



I wouldn't be so anti-Trump if he wasn't the embodiment of everything I see wrong with American society right now. If we allow alternative facts (aka fake news) to void our common knowledge and understanding, there's no way to communicate. If the fundamental facts of our society are so tied up with partisan ideology and if both sides refuse accept the underlying framework of our government we'll never see anything accomplish democratically.

Mitch McConnell spent the last 7 years being as much of an obstructionist as he possibly could in a blatant partisan to block anything the democrats and or Obama tried to do initially to try to make Obama a 1 term president and went that failed,to block ANYTHING in the Senate that might possibly be seen as beneficial to the democrats regardless of whether it was a good idea. The term "not invented here" applies as nothing, regardless of the benefits to the American people, could possibly get done. That's why the democrats were forced to employ the nuclear option for Senate confirmation for everything other than Supremes. Then Mitch finished the deal to get Trump's pick confirmed. And don't even mention the GOP House...

The problem is that Mitch and the GOP have no experience in actually governing. They did the GOP Senate healthcare bill in total secrecy od 13 old white guys deciding how much of a tax break people who don't need it get and how many Medicaid people get kicked out.

And now we have Trump, who is clearly way, WAY out of his depth and handling everything poorly. He's under multiple investigations and it's taking a toll on his mental ability to focus on things that are important for the people as apposed to his personal ego.

What was last weeks WH focus? Was it energy? I think I read something about that...

Quote
The Trump administration is designating this week as ďEnergy WeekĒ in an attempt to promote the presidentís energy agenda.

At a handful of events during the week, President Trump and his administration will push their quest for ďenergy dominance,Ē a term officials are using for their goal to become the worldís energy superpower.

ďPresident Trump is committed to utilizing our abundant domestic energy resources both to create jobs and a growing, prosperous economy at home and to strengthen Americaís global influence and leadership abroad,Ē a White House spokeswoman said Monday.

Energy Week is one of numerous designations that the White House has made in recent weeks to try to focus on particular pieces of Trumpís agenda, such as infrastructure and technology.

In each of those weeks, other policy news dominated national headlines, including healthcare reform and the investigations into Russian involvement in last yearís election.

Did Trump even do one tweet about energy all week? I just checked and yes he did 3 weeks about energy...on Thursday..with boiler plate language like:

"Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump  Jun 29
Our new American Energy Policy will unlock MILLIONS of jobs & TRILLIONS in wealth. We are on the cusp of a true energy REVOLUTION.

Then the next morning it was back to:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump  Jun 30
Watched low rated @Morning_Joe for first time in long time. FAKE NEWS. He called me to stop a National Enquirer article. I said no! Bad show

Can nobody in the White House get Trump to quit watching TV and get on with the job of being President?
Logged

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6195
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4065 on: July 03, 2017, 01:26:18 AM »

But then I had to post this:

White House Releases Long-Awaited ďDonald Trump Glossary of TermsĒ


Donald Trump didnít understand what you just said, but in his own mind it was about him. (Credit: Politico)

Quote
Having a full understanding of the presidentís substitute vocabulary may help Americans better grasp his alternate universe
By Allan Ishac

With Donald Trump operating in a world of his own making, The White House thought it would be useful to release a glossary of alternate Trump terms.
This glossary of substitute definitions may help you better comprehend our inscrutable leader. Forty common terms appear on the left with Donald Trumpís alternate definitions on the right:

Necktie: Tape dispenser
Book: Coaster/trivet
Nukes: Toys
Daughter: Mistress/paramour
Illegal: Legal
Defeat (as in popular vote): Victory
Media: Covfefe
Liberals: Leftafefe
Promise: Suggestion
Oath: Suggestion
Pledge: Suggestion
Cats: Furry germs
Dogs: More furry germs
People: Fur-less germs
Charity: Slush fund
Casino: Slush fund
University (as in Trump University): Slush Fund
America: Russia
Coffee: Joefefe
Not Grabbable: Grabbable
Democracy: Dictatorship
Sons: Sacrificial lambs
Advisers: Sacrificial lambs
Vice-President: Sacrificial lamb
Congress: Sacrificial lamb
Chief-of-Staff: Sacrificial lamb
Everyone Else: Sacrificial lambs
Money: Muchofefe
Conversation: Monologue
Negotiation: Command
Paunch: Six-pack
Failure (as a president): Success
Forefathers: Yokels
Philanthropist: Sucker
Cheetos: Spinach
Allies: Enemies
Enemies: Allies
Women: Femifefes
Greet (as with a handshake): Arm wrestle
Hairpiece: Hair
Logged

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1501
    • advantica blog
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4066 on: July 03, 2017, 01:36:54 AM »

How could the USA stop them in 2014?  War?  How do they speak to the issues of American military power?  If not America, who?  Phil, you're Australian and closest to the situation?  What do Australians think about when they see China expand?  People here joke about Trump's "dropping bombs" seemingly disconnected from what's going on in the world.  Making jokes about him but showing no responsible analysis other than mocking him.  That's the point I was making.  We spent 200+ pages knocking and defending Trump without really discussing important issues he is addressing.  I suspect someone is going to respond to my post here with something very derogatory about President Trump.  But I wonder if we could start some reasoned dialogue on what he does rather than going nyah nyah.

Well, short of dropping the bombs, the only other alternative is to talk about it with other countries and impose an international moratorium to build such bases and structures. Unfortunately, because how Trump behaves and treats other countries, he lost in a very short time all respect, trust and cooperation from the previous US partners.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2544
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4067 on: July 03, 2017, 01:59:16 AM »



What does Australia think about China's expansion?  Most people criticise it.
What do they propose to do about it?  How should America be involved if at all?

Farmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4068 on: July 03, 2017, 04:30:25 AM »

We've engaged with them diplomatically and we participate in FONOPs (sea and air), and support US ships in the area (port operations in Australia and land-based aircraft).

The sentiment I see and hear expressed is that a combination of diplomatic, trade, and FONOPs (and similar) are appropriate, along with support for other nations in the area.  One of the key criticisms of the US is that in leaving places like the Philippines (lack of support and engagement), it's provided a window for China to enter, which effectively removed the value of the recent international legal decisions in favour of PI against CN, which wasn't ideal.

No one in Asia/Pacific takes the US seriously, really (or at least not Trump).  People listen to Mattis and general US businesses and people, but not the leadership.  So it's a tough future on that front.
Logged
Phil Brown

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2544
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4069 on: July 03, 2017, 09:09:21 AM »

The Philippines and other Pacific countries made eyes at China during the last administration because of Obama weakness there.   That's one of the reasons China got away with militarizing the islands.   Obama thought the world Court would stop them.   China laughed at him and the court.  Leading from behind is not easy to show strength.   Pacific allies lost faith in us and rightfully so.

Trump and Mattis are trying to reverse that view with more naval presense and exercises and also more arms to our allies there.  We're also re-establishing stronger ties with our friends in the middle east where we also lost credibility during the last administration.

Peter McLennan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2586
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4070 on: July 03, 2017, 09:31:38 AM »


Obama was dealt a virtually unplayable hand. It's nothing short of amazing that he was able to remain in the game at all.

Consistent myopic blaming of Obama for all of America's ills does nothing to advance the conversation.

Schewe's mention of McConnell's obstructionist tactics is particularly germane.  It will, I predict, be ignored.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2544
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4071 on: July 03, 2017, 10:56:52 AM »

Obama was dealt a virtually unplayable hand. It's nothing short of amazing that he was able to remain in the game at all.

Consistent myopic blaming of Obama for all of America's ills does nothing to advance the conversation.

Schewe's mention of McConnell's obstructionist tactics is particularly germane.  It will, I predict, be ignored.
Joe mentioned the economic issues above.  But Obama really created a lot of problems on the international scene as well.  When he pulled out of Iraq in 2011, he created a vacuum for ISIS.  He lost all respect when he erased the red line he drew in Syria.  That created a massive problem there and the refugee problems in Europe.  His reducing American naval forces in the Pacific in addition to the red line debacle gave the Chinese the green light to militarize the islands and for North Korea to double down on nuclear tests and missile research. 

Trump has done a lot to reverse that image of America in the few months he's been president.  The calculations out of Peking, Moscow, Tehran etc. have taken a turn.  The leaders there know they won't have a free hand any longer.  Our allies in Israel, Saudi Arabia, Japan and other Pacific nations feel America has their back again.  Europeans might have their doubts because of NATO and Paris Accord.  But Trump has actually added troops and missiles there annoying the Russians even more.  His missiles in Syria hasn't made them feel warm either. 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2544
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4072 on: July 03, 2017, 01:02:10 PM »

The whole Benghazi debacle I attribute to Obama too; I never thought it was Hillary's fault.  More then likely Obama's fecklessness kept HRC, and the rest of the administration, from sending in reinforcements.  This is why I believe HRC left as secretary of State soon afterwards.  Of course, since she wanted to run for president herself, she needed Obama's support and just could not throw him under the bus. 

With that being said, I really wish we would decrease our roll military world wide.  It's bankrupting us, and I could care less what happens across either ocean so long as Americans are not targeted. 
Benghazi happened because it occurred right before the 2012 presidential elections.  Obama didn't want it to seem like the terrorists were on the move again because he was running on how he pulled out of Iraq and stopped terrorism.  All part of his never acknowledging Islamist terrorists.  They're just criminals. 

I agree with you and would like to decrease our military roll. We can't afford it any more.  That's why Trump wants our allies to pay more.  He understand we can't afford it anymore either in money or blood.   But then all the crazies will use the vacuum for more adventurism.  We tried that after WWI and got WWII as the result.  It's a real predicament.  Damned if we do and damned of we don't.  On the other hand, Europe is rich.  They could finance their own defense without us.  After all they are the European Union.   France and England have nukes too.  In the Pacific, we could ignore North Korea.  They aren't really going to do anything.  Let them be happy in their middle kingdom.  But if we reduce our presence, China will move out which may encourage Japan to nuke up, others too.  Do we save in money and blood by up-fronting some rather than waiting for the whole thing to blow up again?  For now, Trump's made the decision to show some muscle and keep the status quo.  That might change after the next recession. 

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 993
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4073 on: July 03, 2017, 02:48:21 PM »

I saw a great article on CNBC a couple of days ago.  Turns out nearly directly after Seattle's minimum wage went from $11 to $13 per hour, the average family income of low wage workers went down about $125 per month due to a decease in hours and layoffs.  Turn's out raises in minimum wage really does hurt low income workers. 

Seattle Wage Study

Of course the author can not say for sure, since there is no control group, as is the case in all economic studies, but the correlation is pretty high.  It's policies like these, that Obama supported, that stagnated the economy.

In that case, maybe they should re-introduce feudalism or slavery, thus dropping the minimum wage to zero.  :)

Be wary of statistical correlations.

Logged
--
Robert robertroaldi.zenfolio.com

pegelli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1600
    • http://pegelli.smugmug.com/
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4074 on: July 03, 2017, 02:49:13 PM »

I agree with you and would like to decrease our military roll. We can't afford it any more. 
If you can't afford it the first thing is to reduce spending, but Trump is doing the contrary (big time). You're currently spending enough without the need for increase vs. any other block. The US needs to look at efficiency, not increasing the military budget. That will still allow you the muscle you would like to have while at the same time reduce filling the coffers of the military industry. It's the latter point that disturbs me most, I think Trump wants to increase spending to help his "friends", but he should know that what is being spent today is more then enough to do anything he needs/wants and then some.
Logged
pieter, aka pegelli

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 993
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4075 on: July 03, 2017, 03:14:58 PM »

The US military is bigger than the next x-number of countries combined. It has over 700 military bases in over 120 countries. If Trump is telling you that you need to increase your military spending, you're being sold swampland. If, even with all that firepower, you still feel existentially threatened, you need to do a re-think, imo.

How much bigger does your military need to be before you will feel safe? What will the larger military be able to do that the existing one cannot? What is lacking? If you cannot obtain an answer to those questions, why would you spend more?

Why is government bad but military spending (when yours is already orders of magnitudes larger than other countries) is good? It's your tax money, you need answers to these questions.
Logged
--
Robert robertroaldi.zenfolio.com

Peter McLennan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2586
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4076 on: July 03, 2017, 03:41:13 PM »

Clinton faced nothing like what Obama faced.  Namely an imminent complete economic collapse following the theft of about $2T from the global economy.  Mostly due to financial sector deregulation by previous administrations.

The Iraq power vacuum mentioned was generated by a previous administration, not by Obama. It was well established when he took office. Things were quite stable in Iraq before 2003.  Not pleasant, possibly.  Maybe indefensible in the light of western democracy, but stable. Just ask the Iraqis.

That wages haven't kept pace with inflation is an old, old story.  This is a capitalism and regulation issue, not an Obama issue. It predates him by decades.

I do sympathize, however.  It's incorrigible corporations that have done this to the American worker.  Again, permitted by deregulation.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/opinion/trump-hijacked-american-presidency.html?ref=opinion



Logged

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • me
    • working
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4077 on: July 03, 2017, 05:38:33 PM »

I have to start any reply on this thread with a disclaimer:

For the second  time in my life I didnít vote for any major candidate, Not DT, not HRC, so I donít want to talk about impeachment, tweets, Russia, obstructionism etc. so other than loving my country, I donít have a dog in this hunt.

What I really donít get about the government on all levels is how quickly dangerous and important issues get tossed out and signed without anyone thinking of the consequences.

Look at Iraq.  Yea Bush had a lot to do with it, but 82 dems signed on so nobody has really clean hands.

Man, before i signed a piece of paper to send anyone in front of a bullet, especially in that part of the world I would have to see live, proven, undoctored footage of Saddam loading real WMD's into the trunk of his Gold S class.

I understand going after Bin Laden, of course he turned up in a country we wrote huge checks to, so we weíre looking in the wrong place for a long time and being lied to by the minute.

Think about it . . . nearly 7,000 U.S. soldiers died in Iraq and Afghanistan, 1 million wounded at a cost to date of 6 trillion dollars.

We could have saved most of those lives,  rebuilt Detroit, put police on the South Side of Chicago, raised the quality of our public or charter schools, and maybe had some money left over to pay down the debt.

As far as healthcare, all I know is my coverage goes down, but my rates go up (a lot) without any claims whatsoever.   I just doesnít go up on healthcare it goes up on personal liability, housing, cars, all because they have a rider attached to health liability and I have zero confidence it wonít continue, no matter who comes out on top.

Now the last thing I donít get is congress.     These guys take an oath to serve the country, not call names, not obstruct each other, not get in front of a camera, not fake it like they care, cause if they did, theyíd compromise, walk across the isle pour each other a drink (they do it at night anyway) and start working.

Not take the summer off and do the blame thing.   Thatís my biggest gripe.   Live to their promise.

As far as the public if we would stop fighting each other and turn our attention to all of congress, these guys would wake up and get to work, but they donít have to because most are in districts or states that give them a lock on another term and most people don't vote.

This hate that is tearing the country apart has to stop. I know it burns with the public, but the fuel comes from our government and the press, from both sides.

I donít blame the public, at least not 100% because most of us work our arses off trying to keep the wheels running and donít have a lot of time for in depth study.

We need to turn off the the tv or the I pad, send an e-mail to congress and say Iím not fighting with my neighbors, friends, or people online.  Iím just going to vote you out of office unless you get to work.  If 35% of the populace did that not everything would get fixed, but it would be a hell of a lot better.

I donít expect much from the feds but they are suppose to protect us and that includes our jobs.

Iíll end this with a story (and donít take this as I politically lean one way or the other because I donít).

We landed late in Detroit one night and I jumped on an Avis bus.  The driver, a very nice, polite, gentleman was driving and it was just us the two pf is on the bus.  I said Iíve heard Detroit is doing better.  In a non confrontational  tone he said, ďnot for me, I use to work for one of the auto companies for 15 years and one day they came in and said theyíre moving the plant out of country.  We asked would there be other jobs and they said not on the asembly line.  So now I drive this bus at night, work in a big box store during the day and make less than 1/2 I made prior.Ē  ďHe said last month I finally gave up and sold my house for $9,000, 1/3 of what I paid for itĒ.  He said he had always voted one party without fail and now he doesnít know what to do.  He doesnít think the other side is any better but heíll give it a try.Ē   

Those stories are in the center of the country by the millions.    I have no anger, just disappointment.

I havenít read every word of this thread, (who could?) but all I have to do is see the name of the respondent and I know whatís coming, or at least the tone.  I think theyíre are only two or three people here who have open minds and are willing to listen.    Bummer.

So letís show some compassion to each other, open our minds to different ways of thinking and peacefully write your congressperson and senators and tell them the next vote goes the other way, unless things get better FAST.   

Itís the only thing that gets their attention, unless your carrying a bag of gold.

Peace out.

IMO

BC





Clinton faced nothing like what Obama faced.  Namely an imminent complete economic collapse following the theft of about $2T from the global economy.  . . . snip . . .
I do sympathize, however.  It's incorrigible corporations that have done this to the American worker.  Again, permitted by deregulation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/opinion/trump-hijacked-american-presidency.html?ref=opinion

I agree, but Clinton singed in the repeal of Glass-Steagall, which would have protected us from a lot of what happened in the end of 2007.
He did so in 1999 because of the trouble he faced in 1998  and both sides we're guilty cause the repubs, wanted it ended also.

From NPR so Iím not cherry picking information.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/10/14/448685233/fact-check-did-glass-steagall-cause-the-2008-financial-crisis

And this cause it came up on google first when I type in "who owns congress?".

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/10/congress-corporate-sponsors/

__________________________________________
« Last Edit: July 03, 2017, 06:01:52 PM by bcooter »
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2544
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4078 on: July 03, 2017, 08:56:13 PM »

...Now the last thing I donít get is congress.     These guys take an oath to serve the country, not call names, not obstruct each other, not get in front of a camera, not fake it like they care, cause if they did, theyíd compromise, walk across the isle pour each other a drink (they do it at night anyway) and start working.

Not take the summer off and do the blame thing.   Thatís my biggest gripe.   Live to their promise.

As far as the public if we would stop fighting each other and turn our attention to all of congress, these guys would wake up and get to work, but they donít have to because most are in districts or states that give them a lock on another term and most people don't vote.

This hate that is tearing the country apart has to stop. I know it burns with the public, but the fuel comes from our government and the press, from both sides.

I donít blame the public, at least not 100% because most of us work our arses off trying to keep the wheels running and donít have a lot of time for in depth study.

We need to turn off the the tv or the I pad, send an e-mail to congress and say Iím not fighting with my neighbors, friends, or people online.  Iím just going to vote you out of office unless you get to work.  If 35% of the populace did that not everything would get fixed, but it would be a hell of a lot better.

I donít expect much from the feds but they are suppose to protect us and that includes our jobs.

Iíll end this with a story (and donít take this as I politically lean one way or the other because I donít).

We landed late in Detroit one night and I jumped on an Avis bus.  The driver, a very nice, polite, gentleman was driving and it was just us the two pf is on the bus.  I said Iíve heard Detroit is doing better.  In a non confrontational  tone he said, ďnot for me, I use to work for one of the auto companies for 15 years and one day they came in and said theyíre moving the plant out of country.  We asked would there be other jobs and they said not on the asembly line.  So now I drive this bus at night, work in a big box store during the day and make less than 1/2 I made prior.Ē  ďHe said last month I finally gave up and sold my house for $9,000, 1/3 of what I paid for itĒ.  He said he had always voted one party without fail and now he doesnít know what to do.  He doesnít think the other side is any better but heíll give it a try.Ē   

Those stories are in the center of the country by the millions.    I have no anger, just disappointment.

I havenít read every word of this thread, (who could?) but all I have to do is see the name of the respondent and I know whatís coming, or at least the tone.  I think theyíre are only two or three people here who have open minds and are willing to listen.    Bummer.

So letís show some compassion to each other, open our minds to different ways of thinking and peacefully write your congressperson and senators and tell them the next vote goes the other way, unless things get better FAST.   

Itís the only thing that gets their attention, unless your carrying a bag of gold...

__________________________________________
You said a lot of good things from the heart.  Unfortunately we the American citizens are to blame for our Congress.  They do what we tell them to do.  When Ryan brought up a few years ago to reduce Social Security, Medicare, etc to balance the budget and reduce the debt, he was castigated by his own republicans.  The third rail of politics, they called it.  While the Republicans claimed for 7 years they were gong to eliminate Obamacare, they found out they couldn't.  Why?  because the people want free stuff and won't take reductions in health care or any other government program for that matter.  Republicans would lose their seats.  Democrats support welfare for the poor for votes.  They don't want to lose their seats either.   It goes on and on.  So when the money isn't there, they borrow or the Fed prints and we go into more and more debt.  Inflation takes it's toll in reduced dollar value of pay checks and savings so we become poorer. 

I told my wife (we're both retired collecting Social Security and Medicare) that I would take a 10% cut in those benefits if we could get a guarantee that Congress would balance its budget and start reducing the debt. When I mention my plan to some of my retired friends, they laugh at me.   It'll never happen.

There was a cartoon strip in the newspapers for many years called "Pogo" about an opossum in the Okefenokee Swamp and his animal friends.  Political in nature.  His most famous line was, "We have met the enemy and he is us."

James Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 855
Re: Trump II
« Reply #4079 on: July 03, 2017, 10:00:33 PM »

You said a lot of good things from the heart.  Unfortunately we the American citizens are to blame for our Congress.  They do what we tell them to do.  When Ryan brought up a few years ago to reduce Social Security, Medicare, etc to balance the budget and reduce the debt, he was castigated by his own republicans.  The third rail of politics, they called it.  While the Republicans claimed for 7 years they were gong to eliminate Obamacare, they found out they couldn't.  Why?  because the people want free stuff and won't take reductions in health care or any other government program for that matter.  Republicans would lose their seats.  Democrats support welfare for the poor for votes.  They don't want to lose their seats either.   It goes on and on.  So when the money isn't there, they borrow or the Fed prints and we go into more and more debt.  Inflation takes it's toll in reduced dollar value of pay checks and savings so we become poorer. 

I told my wife (we're both retired collecting Social Security and Medicare) that I would take a 10% cut in those benefits if we could get a guarantee that Congress would balance its budget and start reducing the debt. When I mention my plan to some of my retired friends, they laugh at me.   It'll never happen.

There was a cartoon strip in the newspapers for many years called "Pogo" about an opossum in the Okefenokee Swamp and his animal friends.  Political in nature.  His most famous line was, "We have met the enemy and he is us."

Alan, I think you truly advocate for what you think is best not just for you, but for the country, and I absolutely believe you'd do what you said above.   We definitely don't agree with a lot of what those best practices are, but I can tell you come to your conclusions from an honest place.   That's ok by me :)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 202 203 [204] 205 206 ... 331   Go Up