USA Politics

True story.

Oh dear, and there was me thinking golf was sacred to her disciples ... :facepalm:

After reading his proud boast that he's "worth $13 billion" right at the end, I wondered if the following might be of interest to anyone. It appeared in the November/December 2016 issue of Accounting Technician magazine:
 

Attachments

That being said, now that Donald Trump is on the way out, I can look back at his presidency and find at least one thing he did that was somewhat good, and one thing he did that was at least net neutral. So there you go. It was only 99.99% complete shit.
And he got rid of the Obamacare mandate. Biden did say something about bringing Obamacare which I'm not sure what he means by that since it was never completely gotten rid of. Again, just the mandate. He also wants to bring back net neutrality which could give companies such as big ISP's too much power.

Maybe the real lesson learned is that someone such as a business man shouldn't try to run for president
 
This is the problem with conservatives, they assume it's not about the reality of the situation
I think a good example of this is when I talk to my dad about how things like there is strong evidence that pollution and global warming could destroy our world within 50 years, he kind of blows it off and says they don't have any real evidence that anything really bad could happen.
 
And he got rid of the Obamacare mandate. Biden did say something about bringing Obamacare which I'm not sure what he means by that since it was never completely gotten rid of. Again, just the mandate.
The Obamacare mandate is still there, it's just that the penalty is 0, if I recall correctly. I believe Biden has talked about strengthening Obamacare rather than anything else.

Remember, the mandate was only put in to place because of the insurance companies. They wanted to make sure that if they had to cover sick people that there would be an influx of healthy people who normally wouldn't use much insurance.

He also wants to bring back net neutrality which could give companies such as big ISP's too much power.
I don't think you understand how net neutrality works. The lack of it is what gives ISPs power (they can create two-tier internet). With net neutrality, they aren't allowed to create biased connections. IE, AT&T owns HBO and a bunch of tv networks. Without net neutrality, they could throttle your connection to ESPN+, Disney+, Hulu, because they want you to use HBOMax instead. With net neutrality, that sort of preferential behaviour would be illegal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jer
The Obamacare mandate is still there, it's just that the penalty is 0, if I recall correctly. I believe Biden has talked about strengthening Obamacare rather than anything else.

Remember, the mandate was only put in to place because of the insurance companies. They wanted to make sure that if they had to cover sick people that there would be an influx of healthy people who normally wouldn't use much insurance.


I don't think you understand how net neutrality works. The lack of it is what gives ISPs power (they can create two-tier internet). With net neutrality, they aren't allowed to create biased connections. IE, AT&T owns HBO and a bunch of tv networks. Without net neutrality, they could throttle your connection to ESPN+, Disney+, Hulu, because they want you to use HBOMax instead. With net neutrality, that sort of preferential behaviour would be illegal.
Ah yes, I see now. What do you think about how my dad, who is more on the right, feels when I talk to him about pollution? Is that an example of people on the right not accepting reality? To me it is.
 

Stopping the rampant hate running through America​

During Trump's presidency and this election, hatred has reached fever pitch. But it has to end since hatred won't move us forward as a nation and people.
 
Ah yes, I see now. What do you think about how my dad, who is more on the right, feels when I talk to him about pollution? Is that an example of people on the right not accepting reality? To me it is.
I mean, if he isn't swayed by the evidence that's out there, what is going to sway him? Probably nothing. People have to choose to be and remain ignorant, and once they make a choice, they dig into it. It's hard to dissuade people from something they choose to invest in emotionally.
 
Today the states are appointing their electors, who will then cast their votes.

What will be the Trump campaign's next spin now to keep luring money from their fans? That there's hope of Congress not approving the votes from some of the states come January 6th? (The date when Congress is set to certify the vote of the EC).
 
What will be the Trump campaign's next spin now to keep luring money from their fans? That there's hope of Congress not approving the votes from some of the states come January 6th? (The date when Congress is set to certify the vote of the EC).
As the Democrats will control the House and be very close in the Senate (48-50) they only need two Republican Senate votes to approve the election. Mitt Romney and Lisa Murkowski will vote to confirm, at bare minimum.
 
I’m not too worried about the senate since none of them tried to back that ridiculous lawsuit.
 
I’m not too worried about the senate since none of them tried to back that ridiculous lawsuit.
Tom "Little Mussolini" Cotton will definitely vote not to confirm the election results. I'd bet on a few other deep red senators doing the same.
 
Also worth noting that the Georgia runoff happens the night before. However that plays out could make a difference.
 
I read that in fact, it is not required for both chambers of Congress to approve the vote of the Electoral College. On the contrary, overturning any vote needs approval from both. In other words, it is sufficient that the House of Representatives approves.

 

The United States is mired in a succession crisis. There is much loose talk about another civil war erupting between supporters of President-elect Joe Biden and President Donald Trump. As this occurs, America’s enemies act boldly against U.S. interests. Each precious moment wasted on deciding which septuagenarian won the White House in November is another moment that the Chinese Communist Party continues its long march to global dominance.


China’s dominance will not come at first in the form of military conquest. Beijing is very much a 21st century power, and its program for displacing the United States will look far different from what the Soviet Union tried during the Cold War. Chinese dominance will be brought on by superior trade, industrial, and technological development practices.


Beijing recently signed a revolutionary free trade alliance with several Asian powers—including Australia—meant to increase China’s influence over the Indo-Pacific and diminish Washington’s hard-won influence there. China announced it had achieved quantum supremacy—a lodestar for whichever country or company seeks to pioneer quantum computing. Many technologists, like Scott Amyx, have previously argued that quantum computing could be as disruptive to the world economy as the cotton gin or automobile were. Whoever dominates this new industry will write humanity’s future.


And then there’s the new space race between the United States and China. Private launch companies, including SpaceX, have revolutionized America’s overall space sector. But the lack of political vision or leadership means that real gains for America in space will be slowly realized, if ever. President Trump was the only American leader in decades who seemed to understand the promises and challenges of space. Yet, the rest of the government never fully embraced Trump’s robust space program. Now, it may be too late.


NASA’s Artemis Program, which is supposed to return Americans to the moon, is adrift, stuck in what Hollywood types might call “development hell.” Petty politics, budgetary constraints, and bureaucratic inertia have prevented this essential program from lifting off in a timely way. Judging from the profile of the individuals that President-elect Biden chose for his NASA transition team, it looks as though the Artemis program will be reduced even more in importance.


Meanwhile, the Chinese have not only landed a rover on the dark side of the moon, but they have now successfully retrieved lunar rocks—the first time in decades that this has been done. China’s leadership does not intend to stop with unmanned missions to the moon. The recent Chang’e-5 mission (launch rocket pictured above) was merely the proof that China has achieved the same capabilities as the Americans.


Now, China will outpace America. Two years ago, Ye Peijian, the head of China’s lunar mission, declared that China’s leaders viewed the moon as they do the South China Sea, with Mars being analogous to Huangyan Island. Meanwhile, NASA is reduced to begging for money to create new spacesuits for its lunar mission.


Compare these events today to the Cold War. In the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, the competition between the two superpowers was visceral and the stakes were existential. There was no area of human life where the conflict did not play out … and where the combatants did not fight with everything they had to win.


When the Soviet Union beat the Americans by getting humanity’s first satellite in orbit—Sputnikmost Americans and their leaders rightly panicked. By the time the USSR placed the first human in orbit, America’s leaders knew that they could not simply shrug and lazily say, “We’ll get there eventually, too.”


This lackadaisical attitude that yesteryear’s Americans quickly overcame, however, is precisely how the Americans have responded to China’s impressive gains over the last few years. Denialism will not preserve America’s superpower status. Decisive political action will. America’s leaders, however, are still bickering with each other over petty partisan politics. Xi Jinping and China’s leaders laugh and march on.


Had it not been for the virile leadership of John F. Kennedy and his declaration at Rice University in 1962 that the United States would send the first humans to the moon by the end of that decade, the Soviets would have defeated the Americans in the moon race as well. Had that occurred, history for the rest of the Cold War would have played out differently. The spin-off technology that the Apollo program provided the United States might never have been realized in America. Instead, those impressive gains would gone to the USSR … and the inevitable implosion of the Soviet Union might have not happened.


Between China’s breakthrough in quantum supremacy and its successful lunar missions—as well as its clearly defined strategy for achieving dominance in both the high-tech sector and in space—the American leaders have ignored multiple Sputnik moments. China now has momentum in this new cold war. America’s political instability is only exacerbating these frightening trends.


What’s needed now is a bipartisan commitment to investing in the technology and capabilities that will allow for the United States to leapfrog the Chinese in critical areas, including quantum computing. American leaders must also ensure that the United States remains the dominant space power by permanently placing astronauts on the moon and Mars, and by deploying defensive space weapons above the Earth.


As an investor from China once told me, “When the donkey and elephant make war upon each other, few in your country benefit.” The bitter partisan divide in America today is a strategic liability. This division will affect the trade, economic, technology, and space policies of this country—at a time when consistency and bipartisan leadership is needed in all these areas. Until we recognize China’s threat and rally as one nation, America’s surrender to China in the new cold war is assured.
 
I don’t think people wholly appreciate the threat that China represents to the West and to western values; and one of the key differences between this cold war and the one with Russia is that China’s domestic market is huge, and western companies all want a piece of that pie, no matter what ethical compromises it requires to get it.

We’ve already seen China’s chilling effect on Hollywood, achieved through their monetary influence. The institutionalization of stealing IP and repurposing it to benefit China. Total surveillance. Intelligence campaigns to coerce Chinese living in America to steal information and technology for China. Manipulation of their own currency, having it function differently inside the country than outside the country. The Great Firewall. The push to own a majority of Bitcoin mining nodes so they can fork the blockchain at will. Rampant human rights abuses. The list goes on and on.

One thing I give Trump credit for is standing up to China economically. He utterly failed to stand up to them on human rights issues, but his willingness to punch them in the face a few times on trade was probably a step in the right direction. Engagement with China is not doing anything to bring greater freedom to their society or relax their attitudes toward other countries, it’s just giving them more leverage to expand their influence around the world.

The U.S. needs an exit plan for the manufacturing base that’s currently dependent upon China. Maybe we could kill two birds with one stone and cut a deal with Mexico to migrate all of our China-based production to Mexico over the next 10 years in exchange for some anti-corruption guarantees with regular auditing. Boosting Mexico’s economy will raise their standard of living and reduce illegal immigration into the U.S. Shipping costs go down, no time zone bullshit, China loses leverage. Get the western powers together to put human rights and economic ethics requirements on any trade deals with China. Get involved in Africa and south Asia to counter the investment tactics China is using there to expand their influence. We need to get serious about this before it gets out of control.
 
The US had the opportunity to get ahead of China. That was the TPP and Trump threw it in the trash. His China policy was bark without bite. Idk how you can give him much credit beyond rhetoric. Not to mention he gives China more money in taxes than America.
 
The US had the opportunity to get ahead of China. That was the TPP and Trump threw it in the trash.
I agree that was a bad call, one among tons of others the orangutan has made.

His China policy was bark without bite. Idk how you can give him much credit beyond rhetoric.
Because the tariffs, while being paid by Americans, did drive down demand for Chinese-produced goods and hit China in the pocketbook indirectly. And because Trump was willing to stick with tariffs for an extended period of time, a number of major companies pulled significant parts of their manufacturing base out of China in order to get relief from the extra fees. I directly witnessed this happening as part of my job, though I can’t discuss the details.

It didn’t work in the way that Trump claimed it did (China paying the tariff costs, which they obviously didn’t), but it did have an effect. And it wouldn’t have if he’d only done the tariffs for 6 months.

Not to mention he gives China more money in taxes than America.
Yep. He’s a sleazeball. But no one gets everything 100% wrong.
 
I would say the idea of standing up to China economically was a good one, but literally every manifestation of the execution of standing up to China was done poorly.
 
At least the idea was there. Our president and government are so subservient and sycophantic towards China it really reminds you of a movie satire of sorts more than anything.
 
Back
Top