U.S. Politics: If Trump Is In Attendance, The Next Protest Should Be A Roman Salute

[Relic]

25 minutes ago, Horza said:

Anyone who hand-wrings about legitimisation of a brutal regime is admitting they don't want diplomacy at all, and that's crazy. 

That's not true, at all. 

[Horza]

Just now, Relic said:

That's not true, at all. 

I was needlessly provocative there, so let me rephrase: the diplomatic avenues for pressuring North Korea on human rights won't open in the current environment so people who want those issues to be front and centre of these talks are either misguided or disingenuous.

[OldGimletEye]

Today in conservative judicial activism.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/6/8/17441512/obamacare-lawsuit-texas-trump

Quote

The latest conservative challenge to the Affordable Care Act surged back into the news Thursday when the Trump administration argued in a legal brief that it believes the health care law’s protections for preexisting conditions are unconstitutional.

The administration’s position is notable no matter what — Trump lawyers are arguing that Obamacare’s most popular provisions should be totally eliminated — but the case behind them has not received much attention until now. There’s a good reason for that: Legal experts on the left and the right believe the arguments being made by Republican-led states are, on their face, absurd.

 

Quote

There is a certain superficial logic to Texas’s case: Roberts upheld the mandate as a tax in 2012; the mandate “tax” no longer exists after the Republican tax bill was passed; ergo, the mandate can no longer be considered constitutional as a tax.

But I spoke with both a liberal and a libertarian legal scholar on Friday who said that as a matter of law, that argument is “absurd” and “ludicrous.”

The whole case turns on the complicated legal concept of “severability”: If one provision in a law is invalidated by a court, can the rest of it stand without it? Texas is arguing that the individual mandate is so central to Obamacare that if it is unconstitutional, then the rest of the law is too.

I thought conservatives were all about judicial restraint. Guess they were bull shitting. 

...........................................................................................................

More on Globalization done badly.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/10/business/corporate-tax-cut.html

Quote

The new corporate tax cuts are unlikely to stimulate the level of job creation and wage growth that the Trump administration has promised, a trio of prominent economists has concluded, because high tax rates were not pushing much investment out of the United States in the first place.

Instead, the researchers conclude, multinational corporations based in the United States and other advanced economies have sheltered nearly 40 percent of their profits in tax havens like Bermuda, depriving their domestic governments of tax revenues and enriching wealthy shareholders. That number suggests a jarringly large amount of what appears, to policymakers, to be investment pushed abroad by high tax rates is instead an accounting trick — so-called paper profits — which tax cuts will not reverse.

 

Quote

Throughout the debate over the tax bill, Republicans cast the country’s corporate tax rate as uncompetitive when compared with nations such as Ireland and Canada, and said the rate was pushing American multinationals to park their profits in other countries where their tax bills would be lower.

The old 'Murica can't compete story. 

Brought to you by the same people that pushed the "skills gap" meme ie the CEO Business Clowntable.

Of course it bears repeating, that he design of the current corporate tax law's territorial provisions actually does give corporations the incentive to shift capital abroad.

 

Quote

Large corporations like Apple, Google, Nike and Starbucks all take steps to book profits in tax havens such as Bermuda and Ireland. Their strategies have prompted a crackdown by government regulators, particularly in the European Union, where officials have tried to force companies to pay back taxes they believed are owed to their countries. Mr. Zucman said his research suggested that officials should step up those efforts.

Now fixing this problem might not be a "multi stake holder solution" but it is something that should be addressed, particularly if the goal here is legitimize globalization.

Once again, we have a concrete problem (just like the Euro is a concrete problem) that needs a fix and yet the Davos crowd seemingly has no idea about it or what to do about it because they are too busy talking about "paradigm shifts" and "multi stake holder solutions".

Quote

“It’s very striking in the sense that these multinational companies, they are the main winners from globalization. And they are also those who have seen their tax rates fall a lot,” Mr. Zucman said. “This means that other actors in the economy, they have to pay more in order to take up the tax burden.”

Which helps to undermine the legitimacy of free trade and globalization and helps to spur right wing nationalist.

.........................................................................................

Interesting stuff on the FEDs 2% inflation target. Of interest since sane fiscal policy is highly unlikely given the current political environment.

https://www.brookings.edu/product/rethinking-the-feds-2-percent-inflation-target/

Quote

 In 2012, the Federal Reserve publicly and formally declared for the first that it was pursuing an inflation target of 2 percent, a framework that guides and explains its decisions on short-term interest rates and other monetary policy tools. Today, that decision is under scrutiny, both outside and inside the Fed. The minutes of the December 2017 meeting of the policy-making Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) note, “Due to the persistent shortfall of inflation from the Committee’s 2 percent objective or the risk that monetary policy could again become constrained by the zero lower bound, a few participants suggested that future study of potential alternative frameworks for the conduct of monetary policy…could be useful.”

 

[LongRider]

I'm anxiously awaiting 45's rage tweets when he's passed over for the Nobel Peace Prize.  Good times ahead!

[LongRider]

Whoops.

 

[Maithanet]

It seems incredible to me that the same Donald Trump who needed to scuttle the Iran deal because certain clauses were only enforced for the first ten years, is so proud of making real (if modest) concessions to the North Koreans in exchange for the exact same promises that they already made and broke in 1994 and 2005. 

But it looks like the media is swallowing his bullshit whole like this is a great breakthrough.

[Frog Eater]

It's not a great breakthrough but it is a great first step. I want peace on the Korean Peninsula, just like I want peace with Iran and good relations between the US and Cuba. I will root for Trump in this endeavor, just as I supported Obama pursuing peace with Iran and relations with Cuba. 

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

3 minutes ago, Maithanet der Mannschaft said:

It seems incredible to me that the same Donald Trump who needed to scuttle the Iran deal because certain clauses were only enforced for the first ten years, is so proud of making real (if modest) concessions to the North Koreans in exchange for the exact same promises that they already made and broke in 1994 and 2005. 

But it looks like the media is swallowing his bullshit whole like this is a great breakthrough.

The media sets an exceptionally low bar for him, and they only makes him look better when he stumbles over it.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

13 hours ago, Rakib Altinin 1974 said:

A great depends on that next leader though, doesn't it?  

I'd say next three. Other countries won't trust us until we prove ourselves. 

15 hours ago, دبكال said:

Again, this damage is not going to be undone without massive change in the US political system. Which likely means never. 

This feels a bit extreme. While I do agree that structural changes are needed, they aren't the cause of the problem so nor are they the solution. The problem is the citizens, and while it's more likely than not that they won't change, there has to be hope. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Since most of the points I wanted to make about the Trump-Kim summit have already been made, I'll just add this:

Does anyone else see the humor in Trump's bashing of Colin Kaepernick, given that Trump did more today to disgrace the U.S. flag than Kaep ever did? 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, LongRider said:

I'm anxiously awaiting 45's rage tweets when he's passed over for the Nobel Peace Prize.  Good times ahead!

Psh! The Noble Peace Prize goes to The Worm and The Worm alone. And he needs to be wearing that PotCoin.com shirt when he accepts the award!

Dear God we live in F’d up times!

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

31 minutes ago, Maithanet der Mannschaft said:

It seems incredible to me that the same Donald Trump who needed to scuttle the Iran deal because certain clauses were only enforced for the first ten years, is so proud of making real (if modest) concessions to the North Koreans in exchange for the exact same promises that they already made and broke in 1994 and 2005. 

Why? You know damn well and good that Trump doesn’t actually care about the policy outcomes. All that matters is +Trump and/or –Obama. That’s literally the depth of the man’s thinking.  

Quote

But it looks like the media is swallowing his bullshit whole like this is a great breakthrough.

Not really. From what I’ve seen it seems that they’re in their usual camps. Fox is saying how great Trump is. CNN and NBC are pointing how Trump got rolled. And the fluff media is doing it’s typical fluff stuff.

[Ice Queen]

6 hours ago, La Albearceleste said:

Trump, of course, is perfectly happy to do things that are unwise so long as he thinks there's something in it for him: and maybe that, in this instance, will ultimately prove to be a good thing. He has also benefited from the fact that (for reasons entirely unrelated to his policies) the situation in the Korean peninsula has shifted somewhat. 

He DID offer Kim the bestest hotels if NK disarms. 

[Mexal]

 

11 hours ago, JEORDHl said:

Though not included in the *original NAFTA negotiations, from what I understand the Canadian milk tariffs were to be addressed in the TPP, which Trump nixed. The Security Threat bullshit is just a way for Trump to end run congress, and the GOP will only pretend to care if all tariffs [back and forth] start seriously impacting trade before November. Otherwise... [spreads hands]

Kudlow just had a heart attack though, so it's only a matter of time before Trump starts suffering paranoid night sweats about Canadian sleeper agents.

The President of the United States... is a fucking goof.  Unreal.  

 

ETA: *

You're right, dairy tariffs were going to be addressed in TPP. But here's the thing. The US doesn't import dairy either. We have a big time supply management process and we subsidize our farmers. So focusing on dairy tariffs when the overall tariff towards the US of the entire Canadian economy is 1.6%, the same we put on other economies, is just fucking stupid, especially when we do the exact same thing as Canada, just in a different way.

4 hours ago, Relic said:

Orrrrrr...

While it's great to have some potentially productive dialogue with an adversary, it it quite disconcerting to see Trump disparage and alienate allies while lauding authoritarians. You can argue that now isn't the greatest time to bring up the millions of North Koreans killed in labor camps over the last few decades, or the beyond brutal oppression of the regime in general, but these are facts that need to be addressed, immediately. However POTUS is up on stage with a murderous lunatic while smiling like the cat who ate the canary. It's....unsettling. 

It's even worse than that. Trump proclaimed that the people love Kim (they do because they have to), that he's a great leader and many other superlatives. This is less than a year after they sent an American POW back to us in a coma. Ignoring the human rights issue is a massive understatement of what actually happened.

4 hours ago, Don Inigima said:

The US will cease military drills with South Korea. It's unclear what North Korea will do in return or whether they will hold to any agreement; theoretically they will commit to denuclearization, but there are no terms or timetable.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-kim-summit-trump-says-we-have-developed-a-very-special-bond-at-end-of-historic-meeting/2018/06/12/ff43465a-6dba-11e8-bf86-a2351b5ece99_story.html?utm_term=.fb54bfd848a0

If this works it will be a great thing, but nothing about this makes me super confident at this juncture.

It seems the commanders in South Korea didn't know this as well as the South Koreans. I'm sure they're thrilled. This seems like another show of good faith, rather than as a way to extract any commitments and given Trump called the military exercises and existence provocative, it'll be really interesting to see what Russia and China say about our presence in their areas of the world.

35 minutes ago, Frog Eater said:

It's not a great breakthrough but it is a great first step. I want peace on the Korean Peninsula, just like I want peace with Iran and good relations between the US and Cuba. I will root for Trump in this endeavor, just as I supported Obama pursuing peace with Iran and relations with Cuba. 

Sure, I guess. But if you read the statement, nothing actually happened and it's almost exactly the same as the 1993 summit. Trump praised Kim, created amazing propaganda videos and agreed to meet again while lauding the beach front real estate. At the same time, Trump has torn up the Iran deal and is trying to roll back relations with Cuba. 

So while I agree with you that peace would be great for that area of the world, I have yet to see any expert on the Korean Peninsula think this has been a success.

[JGP]

South Korea seems more than a little surprised at the intention to cease joint military drills, so if this leads to US forces withdrawal without DPRK likewise ponying up [something substantial] it's pretty much a complete loss excepting to Conservative pundits, the DPRK, China, and Russia. 

i. economic destabilization with Western allies

ii. which will spill over in NATO eventually

It's getting hard for me to believe Trump is a useful idiot rather than an outright traitor. To the US specifically, but the West as well.  

[JGP]

1 minute ago, Los Ticos Mexal said:

 

You're right, dairy tariffs were going to be addressed in TPP. But here's the thing. The US doesn't import dairy either. We have a big time supply management process and we subsidize our farmers. So focusing on dairy tariffs when the overall tariff towards the US of the entire Canadian economy is 1.6%, the same we put on other economies, is just fucking stupid, especially when we do the exact same thing as Canada, just in a different way.

Totally. Lots of soft trade barriers, and US isn't solely guilty of subsidizing either. Still though, man. What the fuck. 

[Holy Sith!]

Donald’s assertions that he is the only president tough enough to meet with a North Korean leader emphasizes his complete incompetence in international politics. In fact, he is the only president dumb enough to lend the appearance of legitimacy the regime of a brutal dictator.

Was Donald looking for authoritarian tips from one of his role models? Putin must be jealous.

This “summit” was nothing more than a photo op for two members of the Asshole Mutual Admiration Society.

[DMC]

1 hour ago, JEORDHl said:

South Korea seems more than a little surprised at the intention to cease joint military drills, so if this leads to US forces withdrawal without DPRK likewise ponying up [something substantial] it's pretty much a complete loss excepting to Conservative pundits, the DPRK, China, and Russia. 

Yeah Trump apparently halting joint military exercises is actually the stupidest aspect of this farce, along with his rhetoric on it and withdrawing troops completely sabotaging his own negotiating position:

Quote

“We will be stopping the war games which will save us a tremendous amount of money. Unless and until we see the future negotiation is not going along like it should. But we'll be saving a tremendous amount of money. Plus, I think it's very provocative,” Trump told reporters.

Trump also said he wants to eventually remove the thousands of American service members stationed on the Korean peninsula, another point of contention for North Korea. "I want to get our soldiers out," he said, but noted "that’s not part of the equation right now." [...]

Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, voiced concern about Trump’s “troubling” statements. “Unfortunate @realDonaldTrump spoke of US-RoK exercises as provocative war games. Also troubling he spoke of removing US troops w/o reference to reducing NK conventional mil threat,” Haass tweeted. “And suggestions he did not inform RoK govt in advance, if true, would be latest blow to an ally.”

So, to recap, the US had four main cards to play with North Korea:  a sitdown with the president, the joint ROK military exercises, withdrawing the troops, and sanctions.  Trump has given away two and undermined the third in exchange for what?  Apparently a pledge to destroy a single testing site.  Trump's art of the deal looks a lot like Pollock throwing shit at the wall. 

Although probably the most funny-sad part of this is Trump actually admitting there's a good chance he's wrong - and admitting that if he is he'll just lie about it:

 

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'd say next three. Other countries won't trust us until we prove ourselves. 

Again, relations with our allies will in all likelihood almost immediately normalize post-Trump.  Unless Trump somehow gets Congress on board (lol), his successor can overturn any and all actions in that regard on Day 1.  Actually, re: Trump's Lasting Damage, Robert Kuttner had an op-ed a couple days ago that sums it up well:

Quote

How much irreversible damage is Trump doing, and how long will it take for Republicans to rein him in or push him out?

The damage with our European and North American allies is likely temporary. Basically, Europe has decided to quarantine Trump for the duration. There will be some economic harm from these trade skirmishes, but the deeper amity and sense of common interest among the nations of the West runs strong, and relations will be put back on track once Trump is gone. [..]

Trump has managed to unite the rest of the West against the United States and himself. More serious is his amateurish diplomacy with Russia, North Korea and China.

 

[Week]

3 minutes ago, DMBouazizi said:

Although probably the most funny-sad part of this is Trump actually admitting there's a good chance he's wrong - and admitting that if he is he'll just lie about it:

 

His non-PC honesty about lying is so refreshing! #MAGA

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

27 minutes ago, DMBouazizi said:

Again, relations with our allies will in all likelihood almost immediately normalize post-Trump.  Unless Trump somehow gets Congress on board (lol), his successor can overturn any and all actions in that regard on Day 1.  Actually, re: Trump's Lasting Damage, Robert Kuttner had an op-ed a couple days ago that sums it up well:

 

I’m deeply skeptical of that. Yes, the next president can undo some of what Trump’s done, but what about the president after that?  The Republican party is now the party of Trump, not Reagan or Eisenhower or whoever you want to cite. Our allies will not trust us until they can prove that they’ve shed themselves of this phase, so unless you think the next few presidents will be Democrats, it will take time to earn their trust again. What Trump has done, more than anything else, is shown that a president’s word only matters as long as they’re still in office. Other presidents have gone back on prior president’s agreements, but it’s never been as stark as this, and the rest of the world will not forget that quickly.

Aldo, to another part of your post, I read an article the other day about Trump’s deal making abilities, and they spoke to several people he’s worked with and they all said he was a joke who basically accepted the first thing you offered so long as you flattered him and gave him something that he felt was a win even if he was getting totally ripped off. For example, his ghost writer on The Art of the Deal said he basically got a 50/50 split with Trump on the profits of the book, which he said was unheard of.