Reply With Quote
Not necessarily, I would not be surprised if he turned two of those on the left. He's got a case.
Gotta wait for Gorsuch
Not necessarily, I would not be surprised if he turned two of those on the left. He's got a case.
Haven't reviewed every state's law, but I'm willing to bet all of them have the "one overt act" requirement for criminal conspiracy.
Ginsberg wouldn't budge. Too much of an idealogue like scalia
Kagan/Sotomayor are bought and paid for shills that offer nothing of substance, much like Thomas and Alito. They'll toe the line
You've gotta turn Breyer
Yes, Ginsberg is inert. But, Kagan and Sotomayer are not set in stone for this momentous decision. This is big time. That's why (they) are trying to talk them/SC out of it. "Be mad because Trump called ass on that Washington judge."
Yes, Breyer has to see the light and he will. It's right there.
Trump will probably lose to the SCOTUS through a technicality. On his side is executive power, but against him is letter of the law and he's not real versed on it. Either way, the law and cons ution needs to be upheld.
Well, they're going to have to put their name on it. He ain't going to let them offin' the hook like everybody wants.
I like that, a lot.
as if Trump would write the brief for SCOTUS
the TRO bases itself on a 5th Circuit ruling on Obama's failed attempt to defer deporting DACA eligible via EO. States had standing in that case. They might win here too.
so, there is the recent precedent of a conservative circuit in play.
Humorous that you would hang your hat on a ruling that a president couldn't defy existing immigration law instead of enforcing it as was his responsibility as the executive. Trumps regulations are refining existing law which is the role of the executive.
Uh? Globalism is free-market taken to the extreme. Buy cheap, sell expensive. That's a tenet of free-market. You make and pay in China, you sell in the US. Capitalism 101.
Socialism is the government taking over Nike or putting up tariffs (that, as every free-market purist will tell you, are "market distorting"). This is basic economics. Soros/Shillary/Barry being in on the scam doesn't make it a 'left' thing, it's more like they're fake left (which we already knew).
Globalism is that there's effectively no borders for trade, ideas, financials or even people. Everything is fungible. Product, worker, consumer, everything. You build at the cheapeast and sell at the highest, without considering any secondary impact (social, education, economic, etc). The advances in transportation and telecommunications basically have extended this to the extreme. IE: you pay telemarketers in India wages at India's standard of living, while serving and getting your earnings in US dollars.
In broad terms, if you follow pure free-market capitalism by the book (which means money is above everything else, including any notion of nation), this is pretty close to nirvana.
(In not so broad terms, there's market distortions of all sorts, but the endgame is always the same: make more money, which isn't inherently wrong, but has sometimes certain side effects)
They'll have a Congress with full control soon to pass this as a law, if required. They'll even probably force it through reconciliation if necessary, with a few tweaks and Trump still hailing victory.
After that, there's new law, the EO can be rescinded, and there's no longer a case.
Also, that Trump thinks of imposing tariffs and breaking 'Globalization', I suspect is what he means when he says putting America first. That's not a terrible thing in certain specific cir stances, IMO. But also that makes him stray pretty far from your average free-market, capitalist conservative.
In a way, that 'con' has been going on for a long time. When the US lost manufacturing, the 'only' screwed was the factory worker. The companies made more money (cheaper labor + about same sell price), consumer received cheaper goods in the few areas where compe ion still works. That's when the fairy tale was that we needed to 're-train' and move to a 'services' economy. But then the 'services' became cheaper overseas again. And there's nowhere else to go but to lower our own standard of living to compete.
I've been saying for a long time that one of the major issues is that a lot of these companies have stopped even considering 'nation'. It's about their pockets and nothing else. It's a serious issue that has been going on for decades, and only become more and more exacerbated as technology enabled it even more. So I don't have a beef with some experimentation of reintegrating 'nation' into the whole concept. There will be winners and losers, as usual, but hopefully a little more balance and consideration of the secondary issues this free-wheeling economic policy has caused for a long time now. Obviously, I'll believe it when I see it.
these companies have stopped even considering 'nation'
Where in any BigCorp's articles of incorporation is it written that "USA" or any country is to be preferred beneficiary of corporate activity, in preference to "profit" ?
The only objective is ac ulation of capital (revenue exceeding costs), no matter who or what gets screwed (like injured, dead employees and polluted streams, etc, etc).
Big govt and high taxes from 1945 to 1975 floated everybody's boat, a historical anomaly that the oligarchy organized to "correct", in their favor, of course. The American Dream had some credibility in reality.
Low taxes (trickle down LIE) and defunded govt resulted in the richest rising and everybody else sinking, or at least stagnant in a backwater.
It appears that "tax reform" is dead for this and maybe next year, but tax cuts for BigCorp and wealthy will be voted ASAP.
Of course, the Repugs will somehow screw Trash's racist "white working class" the most, along with the rest of working, and want-to-work more, class.
I think some of them can't wait to put their name on it
I didn't hang my hat on it, the Seattle judge did. So did Washington and Minnesota.
Trump’s loose talk about Muslims gets weaponized in court against travel ban
he was being taken too “literally.” Some, like Vice President Pence, wrote it off to his “colorful style.” Trump himself recently explained that his rhetoric about Muslims is popular, winning him “standing ovations.”
No one apparently gave him anything like a Miranda warning: Anything he says can and will be used against him in a court of law.
The states of Washington and Minnesota, which sued to block Trump’s order, are citing the president’s inflammatory rhetoric as evidence that the government’s claims — it’s not a ban and not aimed at Muslims — are shams.
In court papers, Washington and Minnesota’s attorneys general have pulled out quotes from speeches, news conferences and interviews as evidence that an executive order the administration argues is neutral was really
motivated by animus toward Muslims and a “desire to harm a particular group.”
His words, the two states say in their brief, show “that the President acted in bad faith in an effort to target Muslims.” The courts, they say, “have both the right and duty to examine” Trump’s “true motives.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...t-draw7&wpmm=1
GOP bill to limit legal immigration will wreak havoc on Africans, Asians, and Latinos
This bill would hurt legal immigrants waiting “in line.”
Two Republican senators plan to release a bill Tuesday to aggressively go after the immigration system, slashing green cards and other visas to prevent immigrants from entering the United States through channels that are currently legal,
The Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment (RAISE) Act, cosponsored by
Sens. Tom Cotton (R-AR) and David Perdue (R-GA), backward, rural SLAVE states, of course
would ultimately reduce the number of people who can legally enter the country.
The measure would accomplish that by eliminating the diversity visa lottery — an annual lottery system that allocates 50,000 green cards to foreigners living in countries that have sent relatively few citizens to to the United States over the past five years — and limiting the ways through which U.S. citizens can sponsor their relatives for green cards.
The bill would also draw down the number of refugee admission from the 110,000 ceiling set for the 2017 fiscal year to 50,000, just like Trump’s executive order.
https://thinkprogress.org/legal-immigration-bill-cotton-perdue-62681972dd49#.50tr3h223
Unfortunately, businesses don't take it upon themselves to consider "nation" on their own which prompts intervention from the Feds. Donald's tariff and nationalistic approach as compared to Obama's tax and redistributive approach both attempt to address the same problem. If companies would willfully distribute there earnings more equitably, federally induced market distortions wouldn't be as necessary.
I'll add this is largely a byproduct of public companies chasing the next quarter's earnings while creating an inflated market by overcompensating the few people who can move the needle on the financial KPIs the stock market values.
Now the question is....is this bad?
We already have 50 million unemployed or underemployed people. Minority youth unemployment is 50%+ in many areas.
Do we really need to be importing more unskilled labor compe ion?
Boo wants a $15 minimum wage. Less compe ion for jobs could do that naturally without importing more unskilled labor to compete with them.
It's definitely part of a much larger discussion. You certainly brought up something I've talked about before, on how the stock market role has changed dramatically from what it used to be (long term funding for expanding companies), to the next quarter quick buck. There's many reasons for that (chief among them is certainly stock options and golden parachutes for management), that I think are worthwhile exploring for somebody tackling economic policy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
