US Politics: Terminal America

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

31 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Not even sure what Trump based his decision on. There are a number of CEOs, ranging from Elon Musk to the company I work for, who all advised him to stay on. Those people clearly represent more workers than all Appalachian coal miners combined.

As I said earlier in the thread, other countries should either symbolically or punitively sanction the US and force companies to move offshore with generous subsidies that offset other benefits of working in the US. That should force Trump's hand.

Isn't it obvious? This is a revenge story, and Trump's main ambition is to undo everything Obama did and erase his legacy from history.

Quote

Trump was so humiliated by the experience, they say, that it triggered some deep, previously hidden yearning for revenge. “That evening of public abasement, rather than sending Mr. Trump away, accelerated his ferocious efforts to gain stature in the political world,” wrote the New York Times last month.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/i-sat-next-to-donald-trump-at-the-infamous-2011-white-house-correspondents-dinner/2016/04/27/5cf46b74-0bea-11e6-8ab8-9ad050f76d7d_story.html?utm_term=.911ee9b39042

 

[aceluby]

What I find most boggling is what purpose this serves?  First off, the agreement is non-binding.  Secondly, he's already taken the political steps to reverse course on what has already been done, so you don't need to make this announcement at all.  Third, it solidifies most of the world against us.  Lastly, it is neutral or net negative politically in the US.  He didn't need to make the announcement at all and still basically pull out without actually doing so.  It's just ridiculously stupid and the cheerleaders for this look even more stupid.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

 I agree with Tywin here. The only reason Trumpy the Clown needs is it has Obama's fingerprints on it. That said, I wonder if Macron embarrassing him on the handshake played into it. You can't rule out the petty shit with this guy. 

[S John]

One of the major critiques conservatives like the throw at Obama is that under his admin. America was 'leading from behind'.  Trump straight up puts the US of A on the bench in the international arena and the same folks lap it up as though we are sticking it to the man.  Bitch, we ARE the man!  (or were anyway)  

I'm generally very non-interventionist when it comes to the use of military force or our many bases around the world, but strongly believe in international cooperation in other areas.  If the US is not at the forefront of trade and environmental deals, engaging with other countries as a reliable partner, how does that elevate or maintain our status in the world?  It's begging for a decline in prestige and leadership.  I don't see how that strengthens US position or policy in any way, shape, or form.  I think people assume that our powerful military is the only diplomatic tool required, but that puts us at about a North Korea level of global partner.  

[Fragile Bird]

I watched many people on CNN being interviewed about whether or not they believed in climate change, and so many of the deniers were relatively young, in their 20s and 30s. I'll likely be dead by the time it happens, but I am fondly imagining them dealing not only with millions of refugees arriving in ships that drop them off on the coast at night, but internal refugees, from low lying coastal areas of the US.

I can see demands that those ships be blown out of the water, but are they going to shoot the people from Florida and Georgia and the Carolinas, all the way up the east coast, the Gulf coast and the Pacific coast? Cause, honey, the north west passage is free of ice all summer, Greenland is green, and vegetation has shown up in the Antarctic. That ice is melting 10 times faster than scientists thought possible.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Very mixed job numbers today:
 

Quote

The U.S. economy added 138,000 jobs last month, less than the 174,000 jobs gained in April and lower than expected. Job gains for March and April were also revised down.

"Disappointing," says Lynn Reaser, an economist at Point Loma Nazarene University in California. "The economy is still growing but the job market has lost some momentum."

But the unemployment rate dropped to 4.3% in May -- its lowest level since May 2001. Shortly after the Great Recession ended in June 2009, unemployment peaked at 10%.

Still, the drop in the unemployment rate in May wasn't for good reasons. More Americans stopped looking for work while the number of people with a job fell too.

There is some good news though. Americans are earning more as well as wages continued to pick up. Hourly earnings rose 2.5% during the past 12 months.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/02/news/economy/may-jobs-report-us-economy/

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 minute ago, Fragile Bird said:

I watched many people on CNN being interviewed about whether or not they believed in climate change, and so many of the deniers were relatively young, in their 20s and 30s. I'll likely be dead by the time it happens, but I am fondly imagining them dealing not only with millions of refugees arriving in ships that drop them off on the coast at night, but internal refugees, from low lying coastal areas of the US.

My generation is dumb and they're trapped in their phones. 

[aceluby]

6 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Very mixed job numbers today:
 

http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/02/news/economy/may-jobs-report-us-economy/

But didn't you hear?  3% growth is just around the corner because of coal.  COAL!!!!

This administration is so fucking stupid.

[Fez]

7 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

My generation is dumb and they're trapped in their phones. 

Could be worse; at least we mostly vote Democratic, when we vote at least. Whereas in France, Le Pen had her best showing among young voters (Macron still got a majority of them, but it wasn't a blowout the way it was among older voters, especially those over 55).

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

14 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 I agree with Tywin here. The only reason Trumpy the Clown needs is it has Obama's fingerprints on it. That said, I wonder if Macron embarrassing him on the handshake played into it. You can't rule out the petty shit with this guy. 

It makes the most sense. Trump hates Obama, is admittedly petty and vengeful and several of his anti-Obama moves make no sense, both politically and/or practically. 

[Isalie]

Yeah, i dont get how people reconcile wanting to fuck over the climate with hating immigrants. Speeding up climate change is basically to beg for the people south of you to come fleeing your way. 

[Altherion]

41 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I can see demands that those ships be blown out of the water, but are they going to shoot the people from Florida and Georgia and the Carolinas, all the way up the east coast, the Gulf coast and the Pacific coast?

If it gets that hot, we can always annex Canada.

56 minutes ago, aceluby said:

What I find most boggling is what purpose this serves?  First off, the agreement is non-binding.  Secondly, he's already taken the political steps to reverse course on what has already been done, so you don't need to make this announcement at all.  Third, it solidifies most of the world against us.  Lastly, it is neutral or net negative politically in the US.  He didn't need to make the announcement at all and still basically pull out without actually doing so.  It's just ridiculously stupid and the cheerleaders for this look even more stupid.

It's a present to the Breitbart crowd to show that he has not forgotten them. Also, "solidifies most of the world against us" is a severe exaggeration -- it annoys some of the leaders, but it is extremely unlikely to change the behavior of most nations.

[IheartIheartTesla]

According to a Pew research poll, the 18-29 demographic in the US is most likely to believe climate change is caused by human activity and this percentage decreases the older you get.

So yes, the younger people in this nation are no dumber and probably smarter on average than the olds (of which I count myself).

[Rippounet]

26 minutes ago, Altherion said:

It's a present to the Breitbart crowd to show that he has not forgotten them. Also, "solidifies most of the world against us" is a severe exaggeration -- it annoys some of the leaders, but it is extremely unlikely to change the behavior of most nations.

Not in the short-term. But as strong as the US is, it still needs a modicum of goodwill from other nations from time to time. And this gets much harder when the public opinion in other countries is turning viscerally anti-American.
For example, when W. invaded Iraq in 2003, France did not participate because with 82% of the population opposed to it, it was difficult for the government to follow the US on that little adventure (and boy, did we pay the price for that!).
Obama had undone a lot of the harm done to the US's image under W. I'm not sure any president will manage to undo the damage wrought under Trump. And next time, I don't think it's going to be just France that doesn't get on board... Were the US to attack North Korea or Iran tomorrow, I'm not convinced Europe would follow meekly.
Isolation on the world stage isn't good, even for the US. Also, the US's military might comes at a price. It's paradoxical to ask the Europeans to spend more for defense while antagonizing them at the same time. In the long-run, there might come a time when this backfires.
Of course, right now we're miles away from that. The fact that Trump got NATO to intervene in Syria is telling. The EU is weak, it can't do much, it can only not do from time to time. Maybe at some point not doing might prove important somehow.
 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, aceluby said:

But didn't you hear?  3% growth is just around the corner because of coal.  COAL!!!!

This administration is so fucking stupid.

Well there is a way to get 3%. It's a crazy idea, but hear me out. We take the money that the super rich are hoarding, and we give it to the poor who spend all the money they have. Shocking idea, I know. I'm surprised no one has thought of this before me. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

10 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Isolation on the world stage isn't good, even for the US. Also, the US's military might comes at a price. It's paradoxical to ask the Europeans to spend more for defense while antagonizing them at the same time. In the long-run, there might come a time when this backfires.
Of course, right now we're miles away from that. The fact that Trump got NATO to intervene in Syria is telling. The EU is weak, it can't do much, it can only not do from time to time. Maybe at some point not doing might prove important somehow.
 

Why is it that isolation (in a military interventionist sense) isn't good on the world stage, when pretty much every other country in the world adopts this policy? That term seems to be almost solely applied to the U.S. 

[Rippounet]

2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Why is it that isolation (in a military interventionist sense) isn't good on the world stage, when pretty much every other country in the world adopts this policy?

Like which one?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 minute ago, Rippounet said:

Like which one?

Outside of Russia presently, what other First World Power is militarily intervening in say the Middle East in any substantial way? The U.S. gets called isolationist when it attempts to pull back from these types of interventions, yet that policy is more or less business as usual in the vast majority of the West. If we're isolationists, the other western democracies are freaking hermits. 

[aceluby]

1 hour ago, Altherion said:

If it gets that hot, we can always annex Canada.

It's a present to the Breitbart crowd to show that he has not forgotten them. Also, "solidifies most of the world against us" is a severe exaggeration -- it annoys some of the leaders, but it is extremely unlikely to change the behavior of most nations.

I'm not talking about leaders.  I'm talking about the people of the world, and it's not an exaggeration.  And you're more naive than I thought you were if you think that a generation of people who have a piss poor view of America won't have an impact here.  9/11 was due to decisions made in the 80's; these types of decisions and American grandstanding by Trump won't show their ugly head for a decade or longer, but it will happen; and all so a bunch of conspiracy theorists think our stupid President is doing something for them.  It's idiotic.

[Rippounet]

2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Outside of Russia presently, what other First World Power is militarily intervening in say the Middle East in any substantial way? The U.S. gets called isolationist when it attempts to pull back from these types of interventions, yet that policy is more or less business as usual in the vast majority of the West. If we're isolationists, the other western democracies are freaking hermits. 

I said "isolation" not "isolationism."