Martell Spy

US Politics: Papers, Please

396 posts in this topic

8 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

The GDP figure takes population into account, obviously.

You're talking about GDP per capita then, I assume.
But yes, we're not actually disagreeing anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rippounet said:

You're talking about GDP per capita then, I assume.
But yes, we're not actually disagreeing anyway.

No. The total value of goods and services produced is going to depend on the size of population, among other things. So GDP reflects the overall size of the population as well as the level of economic development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Whatever their numbers, their overall political significance is considerable.

Yup.  White Nationalist, white supremacists and nazis are in the highest levels of office.  Fox News is becoming a talking head for those ideologies.  Breitbart is the platform for the white nationalists and has enjoyed increased prominence now that their leaders are occupying the white house and soon the justice department.  

For someone to suggest that nazis, white nationalist and white supremacists are irrelevant in today's climate is outrageous and merely serves to further legitimize their ideology.  It's disgusting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Whatever their numbers, their overall political significance is considerable.

How?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Samantha Stark said:

Milo is a terrible white nationalist considering he dates black men almost exclusively.

I have never heard a Milo speech, but whenever I hear him described, he's rarely quoted. As if the unkind characterizations of him are supposed to be self-evident. 

Here is his response after the Berkeley incident. I tend to agree the police didn't do enough to stop the violence. 

 

Edited by Commodore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Commodore said:

I have never heard a Milo speech, but whenever I hear him described, he's rarely quoted. As if the unkind characterizations of him are supposed to be self-evident. 

Here is his response after the Berkeley incident. I tend to agree the police didn't do enough to stop the violence. 

 

Oh, he certainly espouses a lot of noxious viewpoints.  Whether he actually believes them or not is I guess open to debate, though he essentially openly says that he does not and that he is simply trolling the left in the most extreme way he can think of.

Edited by Swordfish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Commodore said:

I have never heard a Milo speech, but whenever I hear him described, he's rarely quoted. As if the unkind characterizations of him are supposed to be self-evident. 

Here is his response after the Berkeley incident. I tend to agree the police didn't do enough to stop the violence. 

 

No embedded videos was the policy I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

No. The total value of goods and services produced is going to depend on the size of population, among other things. So GDP reflects the overall size of the population as well as the level of economic development.

Uh. Sorry to nitpick, but I believe this is incorrect. If you take GDP alone, Bangladesh for example is -about- 46th with a population of 156,6 million while Switzerland is -about- 19th with a population of 8,4 million. That's why we use GDP per capita as a more accurate indicator of economic development. If you use GDP alone you may get some funy findings like Bangladesh and Portugal being very close although they are very different in terms of the size of their populations and their economic development.
 

Edited by Rippounet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rippounet said:

Uh. Sorry to nitpick, but I believe this is incorrect. If you take GDP alone, Bangladesh for example is -about- 46th with a population of 156,6 millions while Switzerland is -about- 19th with a population of 8,4 millions. That's why we use GDP per capita as a more accurate indicator of economic development. If you use GDP alone you may get some funy findings like Bangladesh and Portugal being very close although they are very different in terms of the size of their populations and their economic development.
 

Is Bangladesh a bigger market than, say, France, because it has 100,000 more people, or is France a bigger market because it has a much bigger GDP?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very rapid response from the DoJ for a FOIA request regarding the OLC's review of the travel ban EO. USA Today reporter shared its legal analysis, in full, for those wanting a glimpse behind the complexities of weighing the form and legality of such a consequential executive order:

For the full memo (which basically simply repeats what the EO is supposed to do without commenting at all on the legalities):

 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/zoetillman/heres-the-justice-department-memo-on-trumps-refugee-and-trav?utm_term=.ewGbWYZP8#.dd2LlD0A2

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Samantha Stark said:

Milo is a terrible white nationalist considering he dates black men almost exclusively.

By that logic, it would be impossible for heterosexual men to be misogynists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Uh. Sorry to nitpick, but I believe this is incorrect. If you take GDP alone, Bangladesh for example is -about- 46th with a population of 156,6 millions while Switzerland is -about- 19th with a population of 8,4 millions. That's why we use GDP per capita as a more accurate indicator of economic development. If you use GDP alone you may get some funy findings like Bangladesh and Portugal being very close although they are very different in terms of the size of their populations and their economic development.
 

It depends on what you want to measure. If it is economic power (which seems like what you two were discussing) then the total GDP number is the one to go for. If it on the other hand is how well run and economically developed a society is, then GDP per capita should be used instead. Or GNI (Gross National Income) per capita in case of a country where a substantial part of the produce ends up being spent by foreigners outside of it, as is the case with corporate tax havens like Ireland and Luxembourg, where using GDP per capita gives you inflated numbers and portray those countries as wealthier than they actually are. 

Edited by Khaleesi did nothing wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Is Bangladesh a bigger market than, say, France, because it has 100,000 more people, or is France a bigger market because it has a much bigger GDP?

It depends what you're trying to sell.
I know I'm being a smartass here, but GDP, population size and GDP per capita all tell very different stories. If you're looking at potential markets, GDP is definitely not the only thing you should be looking at.
I actually brought Bangladesh in the conversation on purpose because I have a friend who's selling tons of high-tech equipement there... Much more than he's selling in France. A much bigger population does often offer bigger markets.
Of course, again, I'm nitpicking. The EU's population is not large enough to say it's necessarily a bigger market than the US. But... It depends what you're trying to sell. And we are talking about a difference of about 128 million people here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Trump promises to repeal the Johnson Amendment which prevents religious organizations from donating to campaigns...

 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-pledges-destroy-johnson-amendment-blocking-political/story?id=45221858

 

"I think it's very unfair, and one of the things I will do very early in my administration is to get rid of the Johnson Amendment so that our great pastors and ministers, rabbis and everybody and priests and everybody can go and tell and can participate in the process," Trump said at a campaign event in Virginia in October.

 

/and everybody?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rippounet said:

It depends what you're trying to sell.
I know I'm being a smartass here, but GDP, population size and GDP per capita all tell very different stories. If you're looking at potential markets, GDP is definitely not the only thing you should be looking at.
I actually brought Bangladesh in the conversation on purpose because I have a friend who's selling tons of high-tech equipement there... Much more than he's selling in France. A much bigger population does often offer bigger markets.
Of course, again, I'm nitpicking. The EU's population is not large enough to say it's necessarily a bigger market than the US. But... It depends what you're trying to sell. And we are talking about a difference of about 128 million people here.

Tbh you're not, you're making a very basic point. Generally, the way to measure the size of the market is to use GDP (usually in dollar terms, not PPP). You're talking about the size of a market for a specific good or type of good, which is a little different.

The EU loses to the USA wrt both GDP and GDP per capita (measured both ways). And the US has faster growth.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Swordfish said:

Dude, it's not a technicality.  

I should have been more clear, this was a reference to what you were disputing with Mex. You were disputing that the number of bomb threats might not be an increase without actually having any information to back it up. I can't find any numbers for 2016, but I was able to find some for 2015:

http://www.adl.org/press-center/press-releases/anti-semitism-usa/2015-audit-anti-semitic-incidents.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/#.WJOzxFMrJpg

I would categorize a bomb threat as being included in the "Harassment, Threats and Events" section. The average incidents per month in 2015 were 42, and that includes a lot more then just bomb threats. It's far from definitive, but it does paint a picture that it's quite likely that there has been an increase in antisemitism, and that that rise occurred during a period in which a major political figure was espousing white nationalism. 

2 hours ago, Swordfish said:

We don't know what the cause of the fires was.  That's a fact.

I didn't say that we did, but it's not an unfair assumption. Anti-Muslim sentiment is on the rise, a mosque burns down, the police say they know the cause, but decide they're not ready to release it. Common sense would indicate that if wasn't believed to be arson, they would release the cause to relax people's fears. 

2 hours ago, Swordfish said:

You cannot point to those fires as examples of white nationalist activities before we even know the cause, much less any possible perpetrators.

You can point to a trend and draw a possible conclusion without saying emphatically that the fire was started by someone who has anti-Muslim sentiments. 

2 hours ago, Swordfish said:

You know what they say about what happens when you assume?  You make an ass out of Uma Thurman.

What? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

They were protecting the people who were inside, including Milo. It probably wasn't adequate security given that force, but it certainly was adequate given the previous protest. 

You have to understand that this group is really, really good at doing precisely this. They've been able to do this in Seattle, Portland, Eugene, SF, LA and understand tactics and how to get away fairly well. They engage from a distance, tend to focus on property damage, and don't stay for very long. They come in after lines are set up and plans are made and engage at that point. 

It was adequate security for the person doing the talk - it was better than Seattle, for instance, where police could not get control of the situation for a couple hours. They chose not to engage and escalate things, too. That was another calculated action. It sounds like you'd rather that the police got violent with them?

If this has happened before, the police should be aware of such tactics and have countermeasures for them. I don't know what exactly they should have done in this situation, but if there is substantial police presence and the criminals still manage to do a significant amount of vandalism and get the event canceled without a single one of them being detained, it's clear that the security was inadequate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Tbh you're not, you're making a very basic point. Generally, the way to measure the size of the market is to use GDP (usually in dollar terms, not PPP). You're talking about the size of a market for a specific good or type of good, which is a little different.

The EU loses to the USA wrt both GDP and GDP per capita (measured both ways). And the US has faster growth.

Yeah, honestly I don't think it's possible to say which is the biggest market without knowing what good or type of good we're talking about.
The original point I was trying to make (without actually writing it, that's my bad) was that a significantly larger population may offset the effects of a slightly lower GDP in terms of which is the biggest market. But in truth, I really don't know whether that's the case here. To figure that out we'd have to look at a lot of annoying details like the detailed content of potential exports and what the market saturations look like -among many other things.
What we can definitely agree on is that the EU and the US form the largest trade and investment relationship in the world. So any trade war is certain to be a lose-lose situation. Of course, that's no doubt why Trump sees dividing the EU (and Brexit specifically) as a juicy opportunity.

Edited by Rippounet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Altherion said:

If this has happened before, the police should be aware of such tactics and have countermeasures for them. I don't know what exactly they should have done in this situation, but if there is substantial police presence and the criminals still manage to do a significant amount of vandalism and get the event canceled without a single one of them being detained, it's clear that the security was inadequate.

Out of curiosity, who do you think should pay for the additional security?  That is, I think that Universities should provide space for all view points, but at some point, if the University is aware that it cannot provide adequate security without significant cost or expense, does it then become incumbent upon the club issuing the invitation to pay out of pocket for the security or tell the person that they cannot attend?  That is, I cherish our ability to express our view points, however, I don't think that a University needs to pay millions of dollars for security and think that they should be well within their rights to ask the club to find an alternative (e.g., video conference) that doesn't require a small armed force to make it happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Notone said:

As far as I know, every country has a veto right during the brexit negotiations. Your country couldn't even agree on a goverment for almost two years back in 2010 (?). I don't mean to pick on Belgium, but the Vallon Flanders conflict is not particularly new. Generally speaking, I tend to be more optimistic about the future of Europe. And especially in the deal with Britain the EU has way more bargaining power (financial passport). 

And we are still the record holder I think!  How awesome are we! And we celebrated it with french fries. 

The Walloon-Flanders conflict is actually a big danger to the brexit negotiations. Some time ago we gave our regions (like Flanders, Wallonia) the competence to make treaties with (other) countries so long they also are (internal) competent for the subject matter of the treaty. The regions are competent for trade so both Wallonia and Flanders are actually the ones deciding if they do or doesn't agree with a treaty (and gains in this way a veto).

While Flanders does have a huge interest in a good trade with the UK, Wallonia has a lot of less interests in a good trade agreement with UK. +/- 85 of the import/export with the UK-Belgium happens with the Flanders. I believe it is not unlikely Wallonia would believe some other things are more important than supporting the trade between UK and Belgium just like they did with CETA. Wallonia has a large number of people voting for socialists, ... but those people are more and more looking in the direction of the marxist party. It is said in the Flemish media the French-speaking socialists were actually being difficult during the CETA negotiations only for the reason to regain their voters (yeah, annoying 27 countries solely for national politics :rolleyes:). But sadly for them the French-speaking socialists lost those bonus points because of a huge scandal and are losing again their voters to the marxist party. 

So yeah, I believe they will be very difficult during the next trade agreement negotiations. The Walloon MP actually made last time even the Canadian Minister of Trade cry ... It would probably hoping for too much to see Trump cry after a meeting with the Walloons ;)

34 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Speaking of the EU, Guy Verhofstadt has tweeted a letter signed by the chairman of the EPP, on behalf of the group, asking Tusk and Juncker to refuse to accept Ted Malloch as US ambassador to the EU, on the basis that he has said he want the EU to collapse.

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/827199163305705473

Who cares what Verhofstadt says? :dunno: http://www.socialistsanddemocrats.eu/newsroom/sd-group-verhofstadt-s-new-political-somersault-grillo-berlusconi-one-week Wondering he actually asked his group if they do agree with that standpoint? Likely not.

Haha, I just saw he was named the head-negotiator in the name of the European Parliament during the Brexit Negotiations. O my god. We are doomed... Why do the EU always have the tendency to give all those Belgian premiers who used to mean something but not any longer in Belgian politics some high post? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.