Reply With Quote
More importantly the house and senate have him. That's a lot of people to introduce GOP friendly bills.
Trump used an old Chinese saying, one Bruce himself used to say: You use a boat to get across the river, but once you reach the other shore, you don't need to carry the boat with you. All that he said got him elected. That was his goal, to get elected. He won't worry about doing much until he's looking for re-election, and all this hoopla will have been for nothing. He's a billionaire, he's going to build his personal wealth. That's what presidents do now.
It's the house and senate, and the USSC that liberals really need to be focused on. Those people are going to do things.
More importantly the house and senate have him. That's a lot of people to introduce GOP friendly bills.
the real test will come on trade TBH....reforming NAFTA and resisting TPP despite the GOP...
"Some in your Administration reportedly believe passage of TPP should be attempted following November’s election. We respectfully, but strongly, disagree," the letter stated. It was signed by Reps. Candace Miller and Dave Trott of Michigan, Bill Shuster and Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania, Ed Whitfield (Ky.) and Ted Yoho (Fla.).
Very few campaign promises are.
Hillary's bull was even more prominent.
can't you acknowledge both sides are liars?
Yes he can. There is a provision to step out of it, written in the agreement.
I think he will make good on that one.
Considering that this was one of his major selling points with rust belt blue collar workers, I think he has to make good on that one.....trouble is, how far will the GOP congress go?
how does that work, profe?
why do you think it's a good idea to antagonize our three biggest trading partners? (counting China because Trump promised to take them on too)
If the result is I have to spend 50 cents more for a tape measure made in Lansing, Im good with that.
That's obviously way simplistic, but the drift counts.
... not according to Chaffetz
NAFTA was written by BigCorp. They will certainly have plenty to say (plenty to pay to say it) about touching NAFTA.
TTP/TTIP/etic will come back under different acronyms, again written in secret by BigCorp/BigFinance/BigPharma, and Trash + Repugs will approve them. But it looks like some other countries aren't going to cooperate.
If Republicans turn out to be the party of economic nationalism I'll eat my hat. That would be pissing backwards on a lot of powerful interests.
I thought the free-trade orthodoxy was that restraint of trade costs more jobs than it creates.
At any rate, rejiggering NAFTA and poking the Chinese in the eye amounts to shutting the barn door after all the horses have run away. The jobs we lost aren't coming back.
I seriously think we need to teach the concept of false equivalency in our schools. Idiotic and intellectually lazy thinking like that is why we got a President Trump.
continuity, not change?
As Colbert noted, Trumps cabinet picks look like what is left over after you drain the swamp.
I predict the honeymoon will be non-existent, because there is no way he is going to keep any of the magic pony-type promises he made, and that I am sure many actually believed.
Pretty much.
Good. Then all the morons who think it is the worst thing in the world, get to see what the China-dominated replacement will be.
I will add this to the "I told you so" list.
TPP sucks, but it is better than what will likely replace it.
The problem with that is that, overall, free-trade benefitted Americans.
Lose 10,000 manufacturing jobs, but 300,000,000 people get the imported good cheaper. When the math is tallied up, the economics mean that the country is better off. Economics 201.
A tariff on imported Chinese goods will essentially be an instant inflation on all those goods, with absolutely no corresponding increase in wages, meaning purchasing power goes down. Further the COLA increases for all the social safety programs kick in. Higher taxes to sustain benefits or cuts to benefits will result, being a double whammy for those affected, i.e. everybody.
Most of the job losses were to microchips, not mexicans. Those jobs are not coming back, period.
Which is ironic. The party that thinks itself made up of free market champions will basically ignore how free markets work, and make everybody poorer.
I need to find some data on those conclusions. Also wondering how joblessness and the costs incurred are normalized in the above construct before I buy the Economic 201 assertation. Point me in the right direction?
Your response is to post an AM radio pundit's take?
You cannot make it more clear the dynamic going on here and it's not what you think it is.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
