The Trump Economy

[BullBuchanan]

32 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

I am not so sure about this. If you are an out of work programmer, you are a not a programmer, you are a hack.

Generally speaking I agree with that, for now at least. The problem is that short-term job loss can effect people in this country in a  pretty extreme fashion over a short period of time. Our general "yay for me, **** everybody else" approach tends to hit most people at least once or twice in their life whether it's medical, housing or employment related.

Over my career in tech I've seen it go from a highly niche "nerds required" field to more of broad industry where maybe a bootcamp can get you by to be a low-tier programmer, sysadmin, devops etc. My only point there was just that jobs that are currently considered to be high skill are probably going to become more and more low-skilled over time, and we should all be preparing for the 10,20,30 year evolutions of those fields.

When mobile programming was brand new it was a nightmare and required a ton of knowledge and competence. A short 10 or so years later, children can do it.

[plenzmd1]

7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Added a paragraph. 

Thank you..while i disagree with you on lots of stuff(most), i do learn a lot from you! Thanks for the info, now i will be hiding  under the covers..as i like you despise the erosion of personal privacy and liberty..and The Patriot Act  dont get me started..you may send me off on how reviewing PI is going to ruin the world order as we know it

Edited June 7, 2019 by plenzmd1

[Hedge]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

It stems from a genuine desire to understand another's point of view through conversation. 

 

 

 

It's an admirable quality and serves you well. After the first or second warning, I am much more content in watching someone walk over a cliff, than to warn them again. But perhaps I am just not a very nice person.

 

[Deranged Rhino]

17 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

Thank you..while i disagree with you on lots of stuff(most), i do learn a lot from you! Thanks for the info, now i will be hiding  under the covers..as i like you despise the erosion of personal privacy and liberty..and The Patriot Act  dont get me started..you may send me off on how reviewing PI is going to ruin the world order as we know it

 

Just remember what the mass surveillance state is used most for -- it's not used to monitor and track terrorists as often as it's deployed (by multiple actors) as a tool in economic espionage/warfare. Spying on trade deals, using blackmail to coerce unwilling parties into deals, et al. That's rampant in the EU/5 Eye nations, including here. 

22 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

My only point there was just that jobs that are currently considered to be high skill are probably going to become more and more low-skilled over time, and we should all be preparing for the 10,20,30 year evolutions of those fields.

 

So ***** those jobs and the people who are employed in those fields -- don't fight to keep them, don't fight for the working people of the country. Let them die off and get shipped off to other countries to help their poor and working class while you bow at the alter of globalism as if it's an altruistic agenda. 

[BullBuchanan]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Just remember what the mass surveillance state is used most for -- it's not used to monitor and track terrorists as often as it's deployed (by multiple actors) as a tool in economic espionage/warfare. Spying on trade deals, using blackmail to coerce unwilling parties into deals, et al. That's rampant in the EU/5 Eye nations, including here. 

 

So ***** those jobs and the people who are employed in those fields -- don't fight to keep them, don't fight for the working people of the country. Let them die off and get shipped off to other countries to help their poor and working class while you bow at the alter of globalism as if it's an altruistic agenda. 

#deepstate confirmed.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, BullBuchanan said:

#deepstate confirmed.

 

You've yet to offer any other alternative other than: globalism good, individual sovereignty bad. 

 

At least have the balls to identify yourself as to what you truly are, or admit you're ignorant of what words like liberty and globalism actually mean in reality and practice.

[BullBuchanan]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

You've yet to offer any other alternative other than: globalism good, individual sovereignty bad. 

 

At least have the balls to identify yourself as to what you truly are, or admit you're ignorant of what words like liberty and globalism actually mean in reality and practice.

2 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

Not sure I'm following your fictional scenario. I believe in countries whole-heartedly in that the country we live in should act in the best interests of the people within it. I view countries as nothing more than the government equivalent of a team. As part of that team, everyone should share in the highs and the lows, and the manager is responsible for making sure we're on the correct trajectory. However, I believe that ultimately it should be far easier to go to a country that has ideals you support and play for that team. 

 

What I get from most on the right is that they don't really believe in the concept of countries, because they don't have any interest in supporting their teammates.  

I also don't view other teams as the enemy, because our ability to win doesn't depend on their ability to lose. As long as they let me have my liberty, they can have theirs. I have no interest in assassinating foreign leaders and installing fascist dictators in their place.
 

 

Here ya go. Seems you missed it the first time except you replied to it, so i can't help you much beyond that.

I'm probably most closely aligned with being a socialist, but it's more nuanced than that.

[KRC]

42 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

I believe the privacy laws are much , much more than a simple pop up..requirements for anonymized data etc. Also, the Patriot Act leaves so much open to the US Government..so much so that running any SaaS company really requires you to have an EU data center if you want any international customers..yes even Canadian firms. as the privacy laws are much stricter outside the US. 

 

 

 

GDPR is one thing that the EU has implemented for data privacy. 

[SoCal Deek]

7 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

 

Here ya go. Seems you missed it the first time except you replied to it, so i can't help you much beyond that.

I'm probably most closely aligned with being a socialist, but it's more nuanced than that.

You’ll get over it by the time you get to ninth grade. It’s a lot like acne.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, BullBuchanan said:

 

Here ya go. Seems you missed it the first time except you replied to it, so i can't help you much beyond that.

I'm probably most closely aligned with being a socialist, but it's more nuanced than that.

 

I read it -- it's gobblygook. You laud national sovereignty while deferring to "the people of the world". You don't like the term global order, but it's cleaner and more honest than "people of the world." You propose that countries are teams and humanity is the league -- making countries subservient to "humanity" (aka a global order of some kind). All the while laying out how you don't really believe in borders or nations being able to control who comes and goes. Then you cap it off by saying "as long as they let me have my liberty" you're cool with it. 

 

Then you hold up the EU as the prime example of something to strive for. Literally the embodiment of globalism. 

 

I don't say any of that as an insult. I am trying to understand your position and get you to elucidate it as clearly as possible so there's no misunderstanding. You've claimed to know my opinions without ever discussing them with me or asking me about them -- I don't like to do the same. I like to get to know who I'm conversing with to have a better conversation. The tone is not hostile -- I treat this place like my local bar, happy to drink and shoot the bull about anything/everything without it getting personal. And as an adult I'm more than able to have friendships/relationships with people whom hold different opinions than myself, even on controversial subjects. 

 

From your words and comments it's impossible not to conclude that yes, you're a globalist. Yes, you're a socialist -- though I'd love to hear more about what makes that nuanced. I'd even love to hear more how socialism is in any way compatible with your individual liberty. Socialism crushes individual liberty for the greater good. It's fundamentally incompatible with liberty... so that leaves me to draw one of two conclusions: 

 

1) You don't understand what socialism actually is -- 

or,

2) You don't really value liberty as highly as you claim -- 

 

Again, not insults. I'm not trying to put you down by stating that. I'm pointing out the inconsistency in your stated principles. If I'm mistaken, please expound/explain how. Add some context.  

[BullBuchanan]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

You’ll get over it by the time you get to ninth grade. It’s a lot like acne.

I figured religion was like that for most people.

[row_33]

12 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

I figured religion was like that for most people.

 

you have so much to learn, hope you are ready for it and accept it before it's toooooooooooo late....

 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, BullBuchanan said:

I figured religion was like that for most people.

I’m not sure what that means but you’re welcome to believe in whatever faith floats your boat as long as it has nothing to do with redistributing other peoples money.

[BullBuchanan]

58 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I read it -- it's gobblygook. You laud national sovereignty while deferring to "the people of the world". You don't like the term global order, but it's cleaner and more honest than "people of the world." You propose that countries are teams and humanity is the league -- making countries subservient to "humanity" (aka a global order of some kind). All the while laying out how you don't really believe in borders or nations being able to control who comes and goes. Then you cap it off by saying "as long as they let me have my liberty" you're cool with it. 

 

Then you hold up the EU as the prime example of something to strive for. Literally the embodiment of globalism. 

 

I don't say any of that as an insult. I am trying to understand your position and get you to elucidate it as clearly as possible so there's no misunderstanding. You've claimed to know my opinions without ever discussing them with me or asking me about them -- I don't like to do the same. I like to get to know who I'm conversing with to have a better conversation. The tone is not hostile -- I treat this place like my local bar, happy to drink and shoot the bull about anything/everything without it getting personal. And as an adult I'm more than able to have friendships/relationships with people whom hold different opinions than myself, even on controversial subjects. 

 

From your words and comments it's impossible not to conclude that yes, you're a globalist. Yes, you're a socialist -- though I'd love to hear more about what makes that nuanced. I'd even love to hear more how socialism is in any way compatible with your individual liberty. Socialism crushes individual liberty for the greater good. It's fundamentally incompatible with liberty... so that leaves me to draw one of two conclusions: 

 

1) You don't understand what socialism actually is -- 

or,

2) You don't really value liberty as highly as you claim -- 

 

Again, not insults. I'm not trying to put you down by stating that. I'm pointing out the inconsistency in your stated principles. If I'm mistaken, please expound/explain how. Add some context.  

I just don't know how far I have to reduce it. Look: you clearly have a lot of information, but I'm concerned you aren't really processing that information. You've got some weird hangup and fascination with "globalism". If I had to bet, I'd put money down that you'd have a nice long take on George Soros and the Trilateral Commission too. 

The EU acts as a federation that protects the interests of a strong Europe as a whole. It doesn't have an army, or a government. It just manages things that become untenable when you have so many countries in such a small geographic location like civil liberties, corporate operation regulations, sanctions, work visas, border policy within the EU, and helps with trade agreements. Most of the people that don't like it in the EU tend to be pretty similar to American republicans and fit the same socio-economic profiles, and so that makes sense to me. It's helped stabilize regional economies and ensures that people can work where the opportunity is while still calling their country home.

It would be really hard for Luxembourg to reign in Facebook and Google, but when they have the backing of the EU behind them they can bring them to task. That's a net good. A universal currency is highly convenient. The positive impact they've had on maintaining the Good Friday agreements is massive (Which Brexit under the current non-plan puts at risk).

It's not "globalist" in some sense that some mysterious and spooky New World order secret government is waving a shadowed hand over its puppet states across the globe. It's shared cost and shared benefit for shared objectives, goals, and principles.

If you want to define it as multi-national corporations ruling the world and racing employment to the bottom, that's a completely separate and unrelated discussion. I'm generally not a fan of corporations as they exist today at any level.

If you want to define it as globally open borders, i would say that I'm in favor of knowing who's coming and going on a visit, or the immigration process needs to be anywhere near the laborious process it is today. In the US, green-card applications are backed up to 2008. That helps no-one, citizens, immigrants or otherwise.

If you want to define it as a homogeneous set of values or political processes, well that's a whole thing.

What do you want?

Edit: I'm now wondering if by my references to liberty you think I'm referencing a Libertarian point of view. I'm not. Not at all. I pretty seriously disagree with most of that. However, I believe very strongly in social liberty. I'm not a big social justice advocate, because my general approach is "you do you" I think that as a country we have a duty to ensure that people within our population are not oppressed, but we don't have a duty to enforce that everyone likes everyone else or what they stand for. The more litigation/law side of it comes in with: freedom for and freedom of religion, no permits for you to put a garage on your own property, the destruction or the military industrial complex and the corporate prison system, etc.

If you want to do something that only affects you, or the repercussion to someone else are exceedingly rare or a mild nuisance, I don't think there needs to be a law to stop it. Laws should be built around core-shared values and a lot less ticky-tack bs. 
 

55 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’m not sure what that means but you’re welcome to believe in whatever faith floats your boat as long as it has nothing to do with redistributing other peoples money.

like taxes?

Edited June 7, 2019 by BullBuchanan

[Deranged Rhino]

16 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

 

Will read/respond in a bit - apologies, had to run to an unexpected meeting...(didn't want to vanish)

[Nanker]

6 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

There's no problem with Indians being in the country. Outsourcing is always going to happen, and it's going to become more prominent than ever. We can't stop it and we shouldn't try. instead we need to be investing in ourselves to be able to compete in that market.

I don't need a lecture from you about this subject. Thank you.

 

5 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

The EU has found a largely successful solution that still needs work, but has kept their economies heavily viable in a way they otherwise would not be.

It was a construct to build a viable competitor to the United States Of America... to whit The "United 'States' of Europe." 

A lot of it was focused around making AirBus viable and a competitor to Boeing. 

 

The Brits never bought into it wholesale as they shunned the Euro and kept the Pound Sterling in (its rightful place). 

5 hours ago, McGee Return TD said:

 

Just curious - I have noticed in your conversations about sovereignty the only reason you ever bring up is keeping people in and out of the country.

 

Just curious -- have you ever tried to go to France, England, Germany, Russia, China, India, or any other country in the world (save perhaps Canada) without a passport and perhaps a visa? 

[McGee Return TD]

3 minutes ago, Nanker said:

The Brits never bought into it wholesale as they shunned the Euro and kept the Pound Sterling in (its rightful place). 

Just curious -- have you ever tried to go to France, England, Germany, Russia, China, India, or any other country in the world (save perhaps Canada) without a passport and perhaps a visa? 

 

I've never had a reason or the want to go to another country without the proper identification. Have you?

Edited June 7, 2019 by McGee Return TD

[bbb]

I like Buck Buchanan better

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

2 hours ago, Nanker said:

I don't need a lecture from you about this subject. Thank you.

 

It was a construct to build a viable competitor to the United States Of America... to whit The "United 'States' of Europe." 

A lot of it was focused around making AirBus viable and a competitor to Boeing. 

 

The Brits never bought into it wholesale as they shunned the Euro and kept the Pound Sterling in (its rightful place). 

Just curious -- have you ever tried to go to France, England, Germany, Russia, China, India, or any other country in the world (save perhaps Canada) without a passport and perhaps a visa? 

I've done it--I went to Austria, told the stern-looking fellow who asked me for my papers "I'm a citizen of the world, step aside so I may be on my way.".  It was awesome--he apologized, said he had forgotten "we" are literally the world, and thanked me for just being.  Everyone cheered, it felt like...family.  

56 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Are we still paying more for the grapes though?    That's the real question, because Americans can't pay more for the grapes--it will rob us of our will to live.