The Frankish Reich

OK, this is just nonsense. I just explained to you - seriously, because I generally respect you as a poster here - that the structure of the constitution itself makes it clear that some provisions of the Bill of Rights apply to illegal aliens and some do not. You either didn't read or comprehend that. I don't know what else to say when someone repeats a jingoistic "the constitution is not an ala carte menu" without trying to understand.

Reading the Trumpistas here and on other threads, I see that they are glad that we have finally installed the Nancy Pelosi 1980s/Chuck Schumer early 1990s trade policy. Winning by re-doing the 1988 election! That's what Trump policy is now: the 1980s Democrats. Goodbye Reagan Revolution, Hello Dick Gephardt.

Somehow I missed this guy's nomination. I can't disagree with the OP's characterization. Stunningly unqualified.

Bring back Trump's glory days of the mid-80s! I want that 5 pound brick Motorola cell phone!!

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. But yes, people here illegally do get "some" constitutional rights because of the way the Bill of Rights was written. First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law (restricting freedom of speech)" - it's about what government is allowed/forbidden to do. No law, no hidden law, etc. The Supreme Court has allowed for certain exceptions (you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, etc), but the way it's written it applies to everyone in the U.S.: citizen, legal visitor, illegal immigrant. Second Amendment: "The right of the people (to bear arms)" - it's about what the people have the right to do. In general, the Supreme Court has said "the (American) people" are our citizens and lawful permanent residents only. Not students, not visitors, not illegal entrants. So illegal aliens (as well as student visa holders, etc) have no right to own guns, and there are hundreds of federal prosecutions every year of aliens for unlawfully possessing a firearm. So yes, certain constitutional protections don't apply to illegal aliens. But certain ones do. The due process clause of the Fifth Amendment is phrased like the First Amendment, so it applies to everyone, legal or illegal.

It's not about what I believe. Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton - it's about what those guys believed.

The mill ain't comin back dad. Don't ruin my European vacation for nothing.

Ooooh. But don't forget: the Deep State always has a second gunman.

from economist Tyler Cowen (marginalrevolution.com): This is perhaps the worst economic own goal I have seen in my lifetime. I cannot think of any credentialed economist colleague—Democrat, Republican, or independent—who would endorse it. And I haven’t even mentioned the risk that some foreign nations will retaliate against American exporters, damaging our economy all the more. You might think there is something to be said for a reciprocal approach to tariffs. Usually it consists of cutting off your nose to spite your face, but if it can sometimes work it requires a president (and Congress) who is predictable and trustworthy. That is not how foreign nations view the current administration.

There we go again. The Deep State Boogeyman returns. Along with Trumperotic illustration.

Umm, it was a joke.

Yep, now is the time to buy all right! https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-tariffs-on-canadian-lumber-could-result-in-toilet-paper-shortages-in-the-us-200334726.html https://www.sfchronicle.com/food/wine/article/champagne-wine-tariff-business-20220503.php Can't talk now ... gotta run to Costco and Total Wine.

I'm free! To pay more for a car! To hoard toilet paper again (all that Canadian wood pulp)!! To pull that old plasma TV out of the storage space to replace my dead LED!!!

Tell me you don't have investments without telling me you don't have investments.

Or as I prefer, the less creepy John Wooden: "Never confuse activity with achievement."

The 5th Amendment.

Did he die or something?

Scott Bessent sounds like a stuttering fool on CNN trying to justify the idiot tariffs.

See above for how they just make up numbers. I think outlawing gas stoves is stupid. But they just pulled that $30,000 number out of their asses. I just considered updating our range. The very best induction range out there is maybe $12,000. (Before tariffs!). And most apartments and homes would go electric, which is more like $2-5,000.

Summers is obviously correct. These things are dynamic. Raise tariffs. That will suppress spending. Suppress spending, retail jobs will drop. Retail jobs drop, commercial real estate drops. Spending goes down, state sales tax revenue goes down. GDP drops, or rises a percent or two or five lower than it otherwise would. The federal tax base falls, deficits rise. These clowns have no idea what they're doing.

And you didn't even give me a chance to complain about how Bordeaux futures prices will skyrocket.

Wow. I suspect Surowiecki is right. This was slapdash DOGE-style made up numbers thing.

It's not about "want." Every judge takes an oath to be faithful to the constitution and laws of the United States. Sometimes the law compels a result.

Random thoughts. I like cheap imported stuff. I have a couple new LG TVs. Really awesome, particularly the OLED one. Made in South Korea. It'll be something like 34% more expensive next week. I don't want to pay that. Should I buy an American made TV? Hah. Show me one. I don't care where a T shirt is made. No investor is ever going to start up a T shirt factory in America. I would not feel any pride if America suddenly became the world's leading T shirt producer. In fact I would assume that it means America is seriously in decline if we've got tens of thousands of people on working in a T shirt sweat shop. I bought a German-made EV. Really pleased. Got a federal and state EV credit. Made it super affordable. It will cost 20% more next week. Why? Last I checked that German worker seems to have better working conditions than some schmuck on the GM assembly line in Michigan

That's the world to the Trumpies. The mainstream media is actually inferior to some rando named George. And some rando named George is superior to the poster here. Otherwise they'd just say it themselves instead of parroting every "George" who pops up on their Twitter feed.