BeginnersMind Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Rob's House said: President Trump is amazing. After only two years in office he's got liberals defending the constitution, supporting the military, and advocating free trade. The man is a genius. I advocate free trade. The Rs and Ds do not, but the change in the Rs position recently has been unfortunate. At least there used to be some voice for free trade. 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: A - Presidents have some influence on the market, but less than they take credit for or are blamed. B - This chart compares oranges(!) to house shingles. It's absurd to draw any conclusions from. Edited November 13, 2018 by BeginnersMind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 3 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: A - Presidents have some influence on the market, but less than they take credit for or are blamed. B - This chart compares oranges(!) to house shingles. It's absurd to draw any conclusions from. Which is why Trump taking so much credit early on was such a mistake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeginnersMind Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 (edited) 50 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Words have meanings. You don't get to determine isolationism means something new because it better suits your argument, and the word isolationism carries negative connotations. Nothing being proposed is isolationism. Bringing American steel back into the fold was a national security issue. Withdrawing from multi-national treaties which don't work to the benefit of the United States is the job of a responsible Executive. The United States should not be party to any agreements which don't directly benefit us. Withdrawing from multi-national agreements is even more advantageous, because our law doesn't permit us to be party to agreements which are not ratified as treaties. We do need other countries, but they need us more; and the relationship between us should reflect that. Our relationship with Europe is past it's expiration date as written. They attempted to help rig our most recent Presidential election through their Five Eyes involvement, which is an explicit act of war; and shirk their financial responsibility own national defense and UN funding, pinning us with the bill while they spend their own dollars propping up failing welfare states and chastising us at every turn. As for free trade: free trade is a two way street. It is not beneficial for us to participate in free trade agreements with nations who are not reciprocating, because it puts us at a steep disadvantage. Free trade is the most desirable, but there is not benefit to it until other countries tariff structures are broken. Your post makes your side of the case well so I'll leave it but quibble with isolationism. It's not a word that only had meaning in the context of Washington's Farewell Address. It's just that we know its usage in that setting from grammar school. And what is happening now is towards that direction, not the other, which at its extreme is also undesireable. The globalist dream, setting aside all the conspiracy chatter that word engenders at PPP, is as unrealistic and bad for us as isolationism. I look at the isolationist rhetoric and find it troubling because it's not thoughtful. Your post is. 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Which is why Trump taking so much credit early on was such a mistake Trump will Trump. Edited November 13, 2018 by BeginnersMind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 6 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: I advocate free trade. The Rs and Ds do not, but the change in the Rs position recently has been unfortunate. At least there used to be some voice for free trade. A - Presidents have some influence on the market, but less than they take credit for or are blamed. B - This chart compares oranges(!) to house shingles. It's absurd to draw any conclusions from. I'm not sure why you identify with the left. You seem fairly conservative in your positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeginnersMind Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 minute ago, Rob's House said: I'm not sure why you identify with the left. You seem fairly conservative in your positions. You won't find me identify myself with the left. Others here do because I don't care for many of Trump's positions. I believe what I believe and am and have been registered Independent for 20 years. I voted for Daddy Bush and Romney. My ballot is usually split between Rs, Ds, and Ls...with my heart with the Ls and my R and D votes often cast in hopes of defeating the other guy. And no, I did not vote for Hillary. I voted for the goofy f--ker Johnson. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 11 minutes ago, Rob's House said: I'm not sure why you identify with the left. You seem fairly conservative in your positions. How dare you assume their identity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 20 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: How dare you assume their identity. How dare you not use the proper gender-neutral pronoun. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 22 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: How dare you assume their identity. C'mon man. You've been around long enough to know of my bigotry. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 35 minutes ago, Rob's House said: I'm not sure why you identify with the left. You seem fairly conservative in your positions. He's not a real poster, that's why He's back to describing this administration as isolationist when it's not at all true or accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 13, 2018 Author Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 hour ago, BeginnersMind said: Bring manufacturing jobs home. We don't need other countries. Withdraw from multinational treaties and agreements. These are a weak intellectual arguments (not yours, but that come from the Twitter-sphere and meme-logic). Isolationism in the context of what Washington meant is irrelevant in 2018, so my use of the term is not meant to imply any equivalence. Washington, reading Hamilton's pen, was advocating a short-term isolationism in order for the fledgling country to have a chance at survival. It was excellent advice at the end of the 18th beginning of the 19th century but we outgrew it. We don't have to be as linked as Europe because we have a natural isolation in the form of our oceans. But that doesn't mean that we should turn our backs on the benefits of free trade and good relations with other countries. Both sides claim to support free and fair trade, and to boil down the arguments based on just those two words is too simplistic to describe a complicated trade environment. Free trade doesn't mean that US opens up its markets but accepts trade barriers overseas. That's not free trade. US companies shouldn't have to give up critical IP or be forced to take on majority-owned foreign partners in order to enter a market. Nobody should have any illusions that EU is a trading foe vs a trading ally. The entire point of EU's creation was to fight American economic might. Trump is playing a very high stakes game in unsettling global trade, but he doesn't appear to be stupid enough to blow everything up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeginnersMind Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 12 minutes ago, GG said: Both sides claim to support free and fair trade, and to boil down the arguments based on just those two words is too simplistic to describe a complicated trade environment. Free trade doesn't mean that US opens up its markets but accepts trade barriers overseas. That's not free trade. US companies shouldn't have to give up critical IP or be forced to take on majority-owned foreign partners in order to enter a market. Nobody should have any illusions that EU is a trading foe vs a trading ally. The entire point of EU's creation was to fight American economic might. Trump is playing a very high stakes game in unsettling global trade, but he doesn't appear to be stupid enough to blow everything up. Trump is posturing on the global stage. I agree that he's only after better deals, not a pure isolationism. My concern is watching trading blocs galvanizing in response to his tactics. I am not convinced that he couldn't carry the big stick more effectively for future deals and relationships. Our positions with Europe and China are totally different--and it seems that Trump often doesn't discuss that nuance. Queue the "you're naive" posts. I am OK with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 3 hours ago, BeginnersMind said: Bring manufacturing jobs home. We don't need other countries. Withdraw from multinational treaties and agreements. These are a weak intellectual arguments (not yours, but that come from the Twitter-sphere and meme-logic). Isolationism in the context of what Washington meant is irrelevant in 2018, so my use of the term is not meant to imply any equivalence. Washington, reading Hamilton's pen, was advocating a short-term isolationism in order for the fledgling country to have a chance at survival. It was excellent advice at the end of the 18th beginning of the 19th century but we outgrew it. We don't have to be as linked as Europe because we have a natural isolation in the form of our oceans. But that doesn't mean that we should turn our backs on the benefits of free trade and good relations with other countries. When I was a boy, we were pitching pennies in a parking lot with some of the older kids around wanting nothing to do with us. Eventually, as if through divine intervention, I toss a penny and get a leaner. For that brief flicker of time, on one toss, I was Steph Curry. As my other friends tried to knock it down and take the take, the pot became substantial. One of the older kids walked over, saw the pot and asked me if I wanted to go in halfs to win even more. As the game ended, he walked up, took his half and left. I see the French angling to be the older kid wanting to go halfs. I have no issue with renegotiating and/or walking away from trade deals that do not take American interests into account first. Not "only" just "first". And that represents the dilemma of globalism, where over time, American interests can take a back seat to the interests of others. Sometimes it's intentional, others not. If we're not not careful, it takes the basic theory of redistribution of wealth and puts it on steroids. Trumps generally stated philosphy is "Yeah, f that". Some life lessons you learn by studying Washington and Hamilton. Others come from the mean streets of WNY circa 1972. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 2 hours ago, BeginnersMind said: B - This chart compares oranges(!) to house shingles. It's absurd to draw any conclusions from. I read that, then said to myself "Gatorman must have posted that chart." Then looked...and, yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeginnersMind Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 46 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Some life lessons you learn by studying Washington and Hamilton. Others come from the mean streets of WNY circa 1972. I was a kid living near the Buffalo zoo in 1972. My dad would give me a quarter and send me to Parkside Candies on Main and Oakwood...when he needed to get rid old me so he could have sex. It was a smart move but I won’t relate it to the global economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 27 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: I was a kid living near the Buffalo zoo in 1972. My dad would give me a quarter and send me to Parkside Candies on Main and Oakwood...when he needed to get rid old me so he could have sex. It was a smart move but I won’t relate it to the global economy. A. Well, if Macron wanted to have sex with someone near the Buffalo zoo, your story would be relevant. As he apparently does not, I agree, your story would not relate to the global economy. B. Gross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeginnersMind Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 46 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: B. Gross. Have you been a parent wanting to have sex when your kid is in the house? I would think most parents would agree they have a strategy for that moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 31 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: Have you been a parent wanting to have sex when your kid is in the house? I would think most parents would agree they have a strategy for that moment. I come from a rather large family. And yes. I am a parent and understand that math as well. It was more the thought of your father sliding you a quarter and a wink and you knowing he was 'bout ta tap dat a$$ that I found unsettling. But I concede that point, it is what it is, and I guess I just prefer blissful ignorance as a general rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeginnersMind Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 (edited) 24 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I come from a rather large family. And yes. I am a parent and understand that math as well. It was more the thought of your father sliding you a quarter and a wink and you knowing he was 'bout ta tap dat a$$ that I found unsettling. But I concede that point, it is what it is, and I guess I just prefer blissful ignorance as a general rule. He didn't give me a quarter and a wink. That would be creepy--agreed. He gave me a quarter to go to the store and I was ignorant of the intent until years later. Edited November 13, 2018 by BeginnersMind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 Reminds me of the Sopranos when Tony realizes his father only got laid when he brought home the meat to Livia. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 8 hours ago, BeginnersMind said: Have you been a parent wanting to have sex when your kid is in the house? I would think most parents would agree they have a strategy for that moment. No never had the displeasure. Another of the many pluses not having kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeginnersMind Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, Chef Jim said: No never had the displeasure. Another of the many pluses not having kids. Not a displeasure. Just a relationship strategy you acquire based on a life choice. Edited November 14, 2018 by BeginnersMind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 3 hours ago, BeginnersMind said: Not a displeasure. Just a relationship strategy you acquire based on a life choice. One man’s life choice is another man’s swinging from the chandlier whenever he pleases. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 14, 2018 Share Posted November 14, 2018 1 hour ago, Chef Jim said: One man’s life choice is another man’s swinging from the chandlier whenever he pleases. ? Even when cross dressing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 Tired of winning yet? Dow tumbles more than 550 points in early trading, wiping out all gains this year Markets fell across the globe as a weeks-long swoon in tech stocks deepened and dragged down the retail sector. By Thomas Heath 1 hour ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 7 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Tired of winning yet? Dow tumbles more than 550 points in early trading, wiping out all gains this year Markets fell across the globe as a weeks-long swoon in tech stocks deepened and dragged down the retail sector. By Thomas Heath 1 hour ago It'll get worse... because the Fed is the next target. By mid 2019 we should be in the sweet spot. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: It'll get worse... because the Fed is the next target. By mid 2019 we should be in the sweet spot. Next target? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Next target? Yessir. The power behind the central banking system won't surrender its power. Ever. Just look at Brexit. If we are going to dismantle the global control system, destroying the central banking system is a necessary requirement. Draining the swamp isn't just about cleaning up the DOJ and IC. The plan is much bigger. The Fed knows the economy will collapse. They want it to do precisely that. They were banking on being able to blame a war for its implosion when they got HRC into the Oval. Now that plan is impossible - but the economy will still implode because the whole system is a mirage. Though now when it collapses it will rightfully be blamed on the Fed and central banking system. Trump is already laying the ground work, and getting people to focus on the Fed - who will continue to raise rates as we head into 2019. He needs people to be focused on the Fed because he needs people to understand who is really responsible for much of the world's horrors. Want to wake people up fast? Take their money. Edited November 20, 2018 by Deranged Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 20, 2018 Author Share Posted November 20, 2018 11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Yessir. The power behind the central banking system won't surrender its power. Ever. Just look at Brexit. If we are going to dismantle the global control system, destroying the central banking system is a necessary requirement. Draining the swamp isn't just about cleaning up the DOJ and IC. The plan is much bigger. The Fed knows the economy will collapse. They want it to do precisely that. They were banking on being able to blame a war for its implosion when they got HRC into the Oval. Now that plan is impossible - but the economy will still implode because the whole system is a mirage. Though now when it collapses it will rightfully be blamed on the Fed and central banking system. Trump is already laying the ground work, and getting people to focus on the Fed - who will continue to raise rates as we head into 2019. He needs people to be focused on the Fed because he needs people to understand who is really responsible for much of the world's horrors. Want to wake people up fast? Take their money. If only there was a major event in the last decade or so where central banks could just stand on the sidelines and watch the world implode. A perfect storm of sorts where the entire global financial order was on the verge of collapse, and all that was needed was for any major central bank to hold back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 1 minute ago, GG said: If only there was a major event in the last decade or so where central banks could just stand on the sidelines and watch the world implode. A perfect storm of sorts where the entire global financial order was on the verge of collapse, and all that was needed was for any major central bank to hold back. They made out like bandits, increased their control over multiple nation states, and stripped the wealth and land from huge swaths of middle class folk across the globe. The goal isn't to destroy everything to the point of being rubble, it's to consolidate control by destroying the people's ability to fight back. The US, and the constitutional protections given to its people, are the last remaining threat to their power and was targeted for destruction (from the inside out). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 20, 2018 Author Share Posted November 20, 2018 6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: They made out like bandits, increased their control over multiple nation states, and stripped the wealth and land from huge swaths of middle class folk across the globe. The goal isn't to destroy everything to the point of being rubble, it's to consolidate control by destroying the people's ability to fight back. The US, and the constitutional protections given to its people, are the last remaining threat to their power and was targeted for destruction (from the inside out). Who exactly is "they" that made out like bandits? Greenspan whose legacy is in tatters? All the heads of banks who lost jobs & fortunes? The dirty secret of the financial crisis is that people largely responsible for it were not at the upper levels. and it was most certainly not a coordinated effort to control the public. Financial mania and panics are common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 19 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: They made out like bandits, increased their control over multiple nation states, and stripped the wealth and land from huge swaths of middle class folk across the globe. The goal isn't to destroy everything to the point of being rubble, it's to consolidate control by destroying the people's ability to fight back. The US, and the constitutional protections given to its people, are the last remaining threat to their power and was targeted for destruction (from the inside out). That's giving 'them' a lot more credit than they deserve imo. They may have laid out the policies that allowed for the financial crisis, but afterwards it was apparent (imo) that it was very much the product of short term thinking, not some grand strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 11 minutes ago, GG said: Who exactly is "they" that made out like bandits? You'll hate this answer - and I understand why. When you can poke royalty in the chest - chances are you outrank them. 10 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: That's giving 'them' a lot more credit than they deserve imo. They may have laid out the policies that allowed for the financial crisis, but afterwards it was apparent (imo) that it was very much the product of short term thinking, not some grand strategy. I hear you. And understand that POV, as I do GG's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 20, 2018 Author Share Posted November 20, 2018 7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: You'll hate this answer - and I understand why. When you can poke royalty in the chest - chances are you outrank them. I hear you. And understand that POV, as I do GG's. oh please, according to your logic, there would be more people in the occult than outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 37 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: When you can poke royalty in the chest - chances are you outrank them. But...Prince Charles? He's barely royalty since he was caught saying he wanted to be Camilla's tampon. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: But...Prince Charles? He's barely royalty since he was caught saying he wanted to be Camilla's tampon. You and your bloody English jokes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 Just now, 3rdnlng said: You and your bloody English jokes. Joke? He actually said that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: Joke? He actually said that. I hope he absorbed his mistake well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: I hear you. And understand that POV, as I do GG's. It's not that market manipulation for political gain doesn't exist. I believe it does, with both short- and long-term outcomes in mind. It's more my contention that coordinated efforts between the powers that be is less likely an explanation than simple human error, greed, and/or poor planning in response to certain economic conditions. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 20, 2018 Share Posted November 20, 2018 8 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: It's not that market manipulation for political gain doesn't exist. I believe it does, with both short- and long-term outcomes in mind. It's more my contention that coordinated efforts between the powers that be is less likely an explanation than simple human error, greed, and/or poor planning in response to certain economic conditions. When you control the money supply and wealth of a nation, you control that nation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 20, 2018 Author Share Posted November 20, 2018 8 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: It's not that market manipulation for political gain doesn't exist. I believe it does, with both short- and long-term outcomes in mind. It's more my contention that coordinated efforts between the powers that be is less likely an explanation than simple human error, greed, and/or poor planning in response to certain economic conditions. It also presumes that everyone's interests are aligned, which couldn't be further from the truth, as demonstrated in the post about Britain's troubled exit from the EU Just now, TakeYouToTasker said: When you control the money supply and wealth of a nation, you control that nation. How does one control the global money supply and wealth of many nations with divergent interests? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts