Politikk, religion og samfunn President Donald J. Trump - Quo vadis? (Del 2)
- Trådstarter Høvdingen
- Startdato
Diskusjonstråd Se tråd i gallerivisning
-
Er han sarkastisk?
20% tror på chemtrails. Du finner de fleste av dem blant folk uten utdanning så det er ikke veldig usannsynlig at Barron og JFK er å finne i denne delen av befolkningen. (Selv om Barron vissnok er "veldig god på PC og teknologi generelt" - i følge sin far.)
Det ble gjort en seriøs undersøkelse av dette i 2016 av 77 meterologer i et håpløst forsøk på å få folk til å forstå at dette er flyeksos. (eller rettere sagt kondens på eksospartikler)....
“Chemtrails” not real, say leading atmospheric science experts
Well-understood physical and chemical processes can easily explain the alleged evidence of a secret, large-scale atmospheric spraying program, commonly referred to as “chemtrails” or “covert geoengineering.”carnegiescience.edu
"The research team says they do not hope to sway those already convinced that there is a secret spraying program—as these individuals usually only reject counter-evidence as further proof of their theories—but rather to establish a source of objective science that can inform public discourse."Sist redigert:
Heldigvis er det nærmest 100% overlap med folka som tror på alle mulige andre konspidiot-teorier.
- Ble medlem
- 28.09.2016
- Innlegg
- 12.084
- Antall liker
- 12.673
Jeg ønsker Kennedy- og Trumpklanene all mulig lykke til med å fjerne luftfuktighet i de høye luftlag, slik at vi slipper å se kondens og skyer i de kommende år.
Gudbedre.
- Ble medlem
- 28.09.2016
- Innlegg
- 12.084
- Antall liker
- 12.673
Trumps paranoide toll-tull
Alt blir dyrere med toll. Som biler og TV-streaming. Også for norske bedrifter er dette dårlig nytt.
www.vg.no
Det er en ting jeg lurer litt på, som stadig blir gjentatt, og det er hvorfor Norge plutselig skulle havne på utsiden av EU's eventuelle tollmur? Dette er kaospilotene i USA's idiotiske påfunn, det er ikke noen andre nasjoner i verden som har interesse av å bli med på det tullet de har funnet på. Slik jeg ser det, vil resten av verden ha åpenbare fordeler av å gjøre alt i sin makt for å overta USA's posisjon, fremfor å desperat sloss mot alt og alle for å liksom "vinne krigen". Er det noe resten av verden nå bør gjøre, så er det å jobbe iherdig for å finne fullgode erstatninger for både amerikanske kunder og leverandører andre steder i verden, og la Onkel Sprøe, Nylon Fusk og resten av Zombie-gjengen seile sin egen sjø.
Selvsagt vil ingen gå upåvirket gjennom dette, men å planlegge for å bygge murer mot omverdenen er definitivt feil medisin. USA fortjener utelukkende å få oppleve hva det vil si å stå alene mot en hel verden.
Fort gjort å lese. Hovedessensen: Trumps tall er totalt feil og oangt ute i la-la land. Løgn eller idioti? Noone knows.
Denne er også ganske nådeløs:
Trump introduces his tariff plan with a bizarre and embarrassing history lesson
Irony is dead. Satirists are collecting unemployment. And the mainstream media reporting what Trump says is now indistinguishable from the Onion. America is in the middle of a long national nightmare. And the President of the once "Greatest Country in...www.dailykos.com
Markedene liker det ikke.
Sist redigert:
I utgangspunktet bør vi være beskyttet gjennom EØS-avtalen, men det er en risiko der når vi ikke kan påvirke. Det kan bli tiltak som faller utenfor den og rammer oss som «collateral damage». Enig i at resten av verden bør reagere samlet og samarbeide uten USA. Gærningene får nyte konsekvensene av galskapen sin selv.
Business investment is stalling. The economic policy uncertainty indexmaintained by three of America’s leading business professors is approaching its second-highest level in 40 years. And that’s before voters really encounter the results of Donald Trump’s blowing up of the globalization machine that supports American livelihoods.
Checks and balances aren’t working, except for the stock market. But it’s not because of Mr. Trump’s overwhelming popularity with voters. It’s not because his threat to “primary” Republican apostates carries weight in every district in the land.
It’s not because of strong and stable GOP House and Senate majorities, which Mr. Trump this week was forced to brace up by canceling New York Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik’s appointment to become his United Nations ambassador.
It’s because the public has been overindoctrinated in the corruption and incompetence of the pre-existing institutions and political class that should supply those checks and balances.
Happily a new book from Penguin helps explain why, distilled into a single episode. Coauthored by CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios’s Alex Thompson and scheduled to appear next month, the book will reveal (so says the press release) that “President Biden’s decision to run for reelection [was] shockingly narcissistic, self-delusional, and reckless—a desperate bet that went bust—and part of a larger act of extended public deception that has few precedents.”
Who knew? Still maybe it will be a beginning. Who also didn’t feel lunch curdling in their tummies when, during his spat with Ukraine’s president, Mr. Trump commiserated with Vladimir Putin over the collusion hoax? But Mr. Trump was right—the hoax happened.
Or the doozy that will never be examined because the implications are potentially unbearable. Mr. Putin knew 51 U.S. intelligence officials were lying about Russia and the Hunter Biden laptop. They knew he knew. What indulgence did Mr. Putin think he was buying when a few days later Mr. Biden squeaked to the presidency by a 44,000-vote difference in three states?
The press simply refuses to “interrogate” these events (its favorite word), just as it refused to interrogate the dossier fraud, the Justice Department’s strange actions in the Hunter Biden case, Joe Biden’s own scarcely figleafed lobbying for Trump prosecutions, etc.
After Mr. Biden’s debate debacle of June 27, New York Times editor Joe Kahnassumed corporeal form to justify himself to the Washington Post’s media reporter. The two papers were locked in a competition to be the nation’s voice of anti-Trumpism. Mr. Kahn sought to exculpate the Times for hiding Mr. Biden’s condition.
That he felt the need speaks volumes. Less than a conspiracy but also something different from telling the truth without fear or favor—such was the media’s treatment of the Biden presidency. Now Mr. Kahn could see (along with everyone else) the project was coming a cropper, likely making Mr. Trump president again.
What a legacy. The Trump era may have been the mainstream media’s last chance to matter and it did—by the stories it botched, by the subjects it lied about.
The Tapper-Thompson book is off to a bad start in one way, arguing that Mr. Biden and aides were “convinced that only he could beat Trump.” Uh huh. Team Biden may have been delusional but it wasn’t this delusional. Every significant Democrat knew the Biden strategy deliberately courted a Trump return because Mr. Trump was the only opponent Mr. Biden might beat.
Imagine a different universe. Under any other Trump arc, even one where he was still elected twice, imagine if his presidency had faced only lawful and responsible pushback, minimally respectful of the voters who put him in office. Imagine if institutions from the press and universities to the FBI, legal profession and Democratic Party hadn’t so discredited themselves that they flounder uselessly now.
Mr. Trump might well have faded away after one term. Mr. Biden certainly wouldn’t have considered a second term even possible if the press had held him to account over Hunter Biden, the laptop hoax, and his demonstrable senility.
Instead President Trump, though a lame duck, now enjoys exceptional scope to maneuver because he lacks a credible opposition. Until now, Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans did more damage to themselves and the very notion of a loyal opposition than they ever did to Mr. Trump. They remain unable today to channel a plethora of American interests and voting blocs to influence Trump policy in action.
Luckily, the basic Newtonianism of American politics still works. Pushback will come (and benefit Mr. Trump himself) to inform his coalition when some of his initiatives are miscalculated. The great centering force of American life will resume its rightful place (i.e., the answer won’t be Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez).
Expect it to happen in record time if the effects of Mr. Trump’s trade theories start to hit home around America’s kitchen tables.
President Trump unveiled his new “liberation day” tariffs on Wednesday, and they are another large step toward a new old era of trade protectionism. Assuming the policy sticks—and we hope it doesn’t—the effort amounts to an attempt to remake the U.S. economy and the world trading system.
All details aren’t clear as we write this, but Mr. Trump’s tariffs look “reciprocal” in name only. First he’s hitting every nation in the world with a 10% “baseline” tariff to sell in the U.S. market. For those he calls “bad actors,” he’s adding up the country’s tariff rate on U.S. goods, plus an arbitrary estimate of the cost of its “currency manipulation” and non-tariff barriers. He then takes that total number and applies half of that in tariffs on the country’s exports to the U.S.
He’s hitting China with a 34% tariff, but our Japanese friends will pay nearly as much at 24%. The European Union gets whacked with 20%, India with 24%. We’ll assess the details further in coming days, but for today let’s consider some of the consequences already emerging in this new protectionist age:
• New economic risks and uncertainty. The overall economic impact of Mr. Trump’s tariff barrage is unknowable—not least because we don’t know how countries will react. If countries try to negotiate with the U.S. to reduce tariffs, the damage could be milder. But if the response is widespread retaliation, the result could be shrinking world trade and slower growth, recession, or worse.
There will certainly be higher costs for American consumers and businesses. Tariffs are taxes, and when you tax something you get less of it. Car prices will rise by thousands of dollars, including those made in America. Mr. Trump is making a deliberate decision to transfer wealth from consumers to businesses and workers protected from competition behind high tariff walls.
Over time this will mean the gradual erosion of U.S. competitiveness. Tariffs that blunt competition invite monopoly profits while reducing the need to innovate. This is the story of the American steel and car industries in the 1950s and 1960s before global competition exposed their deficiencies.
• Harm to American exports. One longtime U.S. trade goal has been to expand markets for American goods and services. Administrations of both parties pursued trade deals, bilateral and multilateral, to do so. Apollo Global Management says 41% of S&P 500 firms’ revenues come from abroad.
Mr. Trump’s unilateral tariffs blow up those arrangements and invite retaliation. U.S. exports will suffer directly from retaliatory tariffs. And they will suffer indirectly as other countries strike trade deals that give preferential treatment to non-U.S. firms. Think of Brazil’s soybean bonanza after Mr. Trump’s China tariffs in his first term.
• A bigger Washington swamp. Tariffs impose costs that businesses will want to avoid. They will thus be a windfall for Beltway lobbyists as companies and countries seek exemptions from this or that border tax.
Mr. Trump is saying there will be no tariff exemptions. But watch that promise vanish as politicians, including Mr. Trump, see exemptions as a way to leverage campaign contributions from business. Liberation Day is Buy Another Yacht Day for the swamp.
• The end of U.S. economic leadership. Britain played this role through World War I, but it was too weakened by war to continue. The U.S. didn’t take up the leadership mantle until after depression and World War II. U.S. leadership and the decision to spread free trade produced seven decades of mostly rising prosperity at home and abroad. The U.S. share of global GDP has been stable at about 25% for decades, even as industries rise and fall.
That era is now ending, as Mr. Trump adopts a more mercantile vision of trade and U.S. self-interest. The result is likely to be every nation for itself, as countries seek to carve up global markets based not on market efficiency but for political advantage. In the worst case, the world trading system could devolve into beggar-thy-neighbor policies as in the 1930s.
The cost in lost American influence will be considerable. Mr. Trump thinks the lure of the U.S. market and American military power are enough to bend countries to his will. But soft power also matters, and that includes being able to trust America’s word as a reliable ally and trading partner. Mr. Trump is shattering that trust as he punishes allies and blows up the USMCA that he negotiated in his first term.
• A major opportunity for China. The great irony of Mr. Trump’s tariffs is that he justifies them in part as a diplomatic tool against China. Yet in his first term Mr. Trump abandoned the Asia-Pacific trade deal that excluded China. Beijing has since struck its own deal with many of those countries.
Mr. Trump’s new tariff onslaught is giving China another opening to use its large market to court American allies. South Korea and Japan are the first targets, but Europe is on China’s list. Closer trade ties with China, amid doubts about access to the U.S. market, will make these countries less likely to join the U.S. to impose export controls on technology to China or to ban the next Huawei.
This is far from a comprehensive list, but we offer them as food for thought as Mr. Trump builds his new protectionist world. Remaking the world economy has large consequences, and they may not all add up to what Mr. Trump advertises as a new “golden age.”For de som er interessert i fakta:
Average tariff rates of U.S. and its top 15 trading partners
Reuters charts, maps and graphicswww.reuters.com
Vi ser på tariffene mot sørøst Asia at.amerikanske arbeidstakere er klare til å overta produksjonen av t-skjorter.Litt spennende hvordan Kina vil reagere. Det at fattige asiatiske land som Kambodsja og Vietnam m flere blir ilagt høye tollsatser er mest for å straffe Kina. Kina har sett tollmurene komme og har begynt å flytte produksjon til nevnte land.
Alvorlig for folket i fattige asiatiske land som allerede sliter med å brødfø familien sin.
Neida, bare indoktrinert.
Og for amerikanere som får dyre MAGA caps og andre Trump produkter.
Trump har gjort et generelt tollunntak på alle produkter merket Trump + Maga
Dette vert interessant.
Dette kaoset som det tross alt er, hvem tjener på det ? Er det Putler ? Liten verdens handel på ham.... kan han ha regissert dette ?
Skremmende!
Trumps tollsatser er kun en måte å straffe land som ikke kjøper nok amerikanske varer. Han sier at EU har en tollsats på 39% på amerikanske varer, mens det reelle tallet er under 3% (i snitt). Han har rett og slett tatt forskjellen mellom hva USA selger til EU og hva USA kjøper fra EU og beregnet prosenten derfra - altså brukt handelsbalansen. En bedre løsning hadde kanskje vært å lage produkter Europa ønsker å kjøpe?
Ham sier bl.a. at amerikanske bilprodusenter blir straffet ved at europeere ikke kjøper amerikanske biler. Kanskje de burde prøve å lage biler som man ønsker å kjøpe, og ikke svære biler som ikke passer på europeiske veier og med motorer som sluker bensin?
Så Norge får 15% tollsats, og ubebodde (norske) Jan Mayen 10%. 
Russland går klar da, ingen tollsats der nei. Surprise surprise.
Jeg hørte et utsnitt av Trumps pressekonferanse, slik jeg oppfattet det tok han 20 % Mva med i beregningen på tollsatsen til EU, han unnlot å si at Mva betales på alle varer uansett hvor de er produsert. Det virker fremdeles som om han tror at toll er noe eksportøren betaler, ikke importøren.
Husk at handelsunderskudd for USA betyr at de får varer som de har bruk for i bytte mot små grønne papirlapper som de kan trykke så.mange som de vil av.
Eg trur eit problem (for USA) er at desse tollsatsane skal gjera så mange ting. Dei skal vera vernetoll (støtta reindustrialisering), straffetoll (oppmoda til frihandel) og fiskaltoll (erstatta skatt) på ein gong.
Det minner meg om ein artikkel eg nyleg las:
Når forskningsetikken nedprioriteres
Det som er faglig og teknisk godt, er ikke moralsk godt selv om det ser fortreffelig ut på papiret.
www.psykologtidsskriftet.no
Tema var psykologi og forsking på patenterte «behandlingsopplegg», og såleis heilt OT i denne tråden, men det han nemner om HARK, «hypothesizing after the results are known» har litt relevans. Eg er hermeneutisk orientert humanist, så dette er det litt framand land for meg: vi reviderer jo heile tida hypotesane etter kvart som vi forstår forskingsobjektet betre. Men det er litt relevant når ein skal setja i verk politiske tiltak for å løysa ei rekkje motstridande problem.
Sjå også
HARKing - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Men seriøst: hvordan er det mulig å ha et system der presidenten har så vide fullmakter via presidentordre? Det oppleves merkelig at slike typer virkemidler kan iverksettes av en persons mer eller mindre vellbegrunnede innfall.
Har tenkt samme tanken. Hvordan kan det være slik?
Diktator-wannabe som tester grensene, og ikke minst sjekker hvilke faktiske sanksjonsmuligheter som finnes.
Han har erklært national emergency. Kan bare overprøves av senatet
I arbeid som leverandør av IT-tjenester til profejonelle brukere/firmaer så har jeg hatt diverse kunder med sønner som i følge respektive fedre og mødre skulle være «veldig gode med IT og PC og slikt».
Noen av dem så gode at bedriften faktisk stoppet. Andre bestilte ny server fordi de faktisk ikke forstod at de hadde slått av serveren (som da selvsagt ikke fungerte…).
«PC-en er jo på!!!»
Så det virker betryggende at mannen med atomknappen tilhører den navlebeskuende myrsnipe-familien.
Men det visste vi jo.
Sist redigert:
- Ble medlem
- 04.04.2011
- Innlegg
- 1.190
- Antall liker
- 503
Neil Young frykter å bli nektet innreise til USA
Den kanadisk-amerikanske rockelegenden er redd for at kritikk av Donald Trump kan føre til at han blir utestengt fra landet etter Europa-turné.
www.vg.no
Loudon Wainwright skrev denne sangen i 2016:
Men da er man jo like lang. Om en person kan erklære en tilstand som innebærer at samme person får nærmest diktatorisk makt. Noe sier meg at systemet ble designet under forutsetning om at presidenten var en rasjonell person.Sist redigert:
Systemet er designet med utgangspunkt i en rasjonell, idealistisk person som ikke vil utnytte systemet.
Så som mange av oss lenge har vært redd for; «check and balances» mangler.
Vi var redde for Sovjet/Russland, men faren er like stor andre veien.
Noe han vel strengt tatt kun kan gjøre hvis landet er i krig, noe det ikke er.
Eller finnes det en mulighet i lovverket for å erklære det uten noe trussel? I såfall kan han jo bare ha det kontinuerlig og dermed være diktator for godt.
Vet ikke om dette er nevnt før men vi må ta med de få dryppene med gode ting som dukker opp..
Liberal dommer vant i Wisconsin – slag i ansiktet for Trump og Musk
Elon Musk brukte millioner av dollar for å påvirke valget av høyesterettsdommer i Wisconsin, men tapte. Nå beholder liberale krefter flertallet i delstatens øverste domstol.
www.vg.no
- Ble medlem
- 28.09.2016
- Innlegg
- 12.084
- Antall liker
- 12.673
Det stedet Det Hvite Hus pleide å stå, er det nå kun et føkkings gjøkerede.
- Det hvite hus forbereder seg
Det hvite hus har startet å beregne hva det vil koste USA å gjøre Grønland til amerikansk territorium, ifølge kilder til Washington Post.
www.dagbladet.no
-
Laster inn…
Diskusjonstråd Se tråd i gallerivisning
-
Laster inn…