CSNbbs

(08-24-2018 11:01 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-24-2018 10:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-24-2018 10:26 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]OO, I called something you said Trump-esque because you literally said:

"The people you want to allow to enter unimpeded and unknown to us are the dregs of Mexico."

That's pretty darn similar to Trump saying Mexico is not sending its best, which is why I called it Trump-esque. Do you disagree with that?

I agree agree with Trump that Mexico is not sending its best, because Mexico is not sending anybody at all. Is there some government program I have missed of them exporting people? The best educated and prepared have good jobs and family money and status there. Why leave? I cannot begin to tell you number of business executives i met who had degrees from Michigan, Harvard, Texas, and so forth. Those people go back to Mexico to work in the family business, armed with a degree and working English. I never met a plant owner who did not speak English, and all of them had learned in the States.

The next level, the mangers or professionals, such a pharmacists, have no reason to leave. Who wants to quite working in a pharmacy to go someplace where they can work as a roofer?

The next level, non professionals with some skills and education, are the ones who wait in line for legal immigration, if they cannot get a job with a factory. If they can, they stay.

The ones crossing illegally are from the rest, the bottom of the barrel, thus the dregs. They are the ones who do not have the connections, the education, the skills of the others. They come here because they can get a good price, relatively speaking, for their labor. But don't believe the myth that they are noble and honest. "They" are a wide spectrum, and the lower ends of the spectrum are not people we want or need. They are not people you would be comfortable around.

Quote:And I didn't call you a racist, and sorry you felt that I implied that. I just pointed out that you pretty much parroted a talking point that Trump has when discussing illegal immigrants from Mexico.

So now it has to be "parroted"? No leeway for me coming to similar conclusions based on my experiences and my intelligence? The only way I can say those things is to mindless parrot them?

I think you are the one parroting positions, much more than I am.

Quote:


But your bolded paragraph is where I think we've come to an impasse. You seem to be arguing with "the left" and not with me. Interpreting the points I'm raising through a lens that turns me into a caricature of the left that you hold. So said that "enforcement is what many of the left have a problem with," yet I did not argue for less enforcement. I argued for a revision to our current worker visa program to make the application easier to navigate. For starters, you could change it so that the employer does not have to be the one sponsoring an individual, but allow migrants to do so. Then put them through a screening process like you mention. I've never suggested otherwise, yet you act like I have.

I never said it had to be employer sponsored. It's enough for me that they can say "My cousin Julio works in Dallas as a roofer, and he will get me on his crew and show me the ropes." it's also enough for me if they demonstrate a skill, such a welding, that suggests they can find a job quickly. It's the guys wading the river with no plan, no tools, and no prospects that worry me.

But I would still let in the high school grads before the third grade dropouts.

And like it or not, Lad, on this board you represent the "left', as you defend many things from a left wing viewpoint. You may be center left, and certainly more open minded than many of your colleagues, but would you say you are on the right? If not, you are on the left.

What a crock that last bit is.

You're seriously trying to justify that you've been intentionally ignoring my own words because you think I represent the left as a whole? My goodness.

Well with JAAO off hiding from the monsters, you pretty much have been the sole opposition to the right wingers. Although I see you have some aid showing up.

(08-24-2018 12:37 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-24-2018 11:01 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-24-2018 10:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-24-2018 10:26 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]OO, I called something you said Trump-esque because you literally said:

"The people you want to allow to enter unimpeded and unknown to us are the dregs of Mexico."

That's pretty darn similar to Trump saying Mexico is not sending its best, which is why I called it Trump-esque. Do you disagree with that?

I agree agree with Trump that Mexico is not sending its best, because Mexico is not sending anybody at all. Is there some government program I have missed of them exporting people? The best educated and prepared have good jobs and family money and status there. Why leave? I cannot begin to tell you number of business executives i met who had degrees from Michigan, Harvard, Texas, and so forth. Those people go back to Mexico to work in the family business, armed with a degree and working English. I never met a plant owner who did not speak English, and all of them had learned in the States.

The next level, the mangers or professionals, such a pharmacists, have no reason to leave. Who wants to quite working in a pharmacy to go someplace where they can work as a roofer?

The next level, non professionals with some skills and education, are the ones who wait in line for legal immigration, if they cannot get a job with a factory. If they can, they stay.

The ones crossing illegally are from the rest, the bottom of the barrel, thus the dregs. They are the ones who do not have the connections, the education, the skills of the others. They come here because they can get a good price, relatively speaking, for their labor. But don't believe the myth that they are noble and honest. "They" are a wide spectrum, and the lower ends of the spectrum are not people we want or need. They are not people you would be comfortable around.

Quote:And I didn't call you a racist, and sorry you felt that I implied that. I just pointed out that you pretty much parroted a talking point that Trump has when discussing illegal immigrants from Mexico.

So now it has to be "parroted"? No leeway for me coming to similar conclusions based on my experiences and my intelligence? The only way I can say those things is to mindless parrot them?

I think you are the one parroting positions, much more than I am.

Quote:


But your bolded paragraph is where I think we've come to an impasse. You seem to be arguing with "the left" and not with me. Interpreting the points I'm raising through a lens that turns me into a caricature of the left that you hold. So said that "enforcement is what many of the left have a problem with," yet I did not argue for less enforcement. I argued for a revision to our current worker visa program to make the application easier to navigate. For starters, you could change it so that the employer does not have to be the one sponsoring an individual, but allow migrants to do so. Then put them through a screening process like you mention. I've never suggested otherwise, yet you act like I have.

I never said it had to be employer sponsored. It's enough for me that they can say "My cousin Julio works in Dallas as a roofer, and he will get me on his crew and show me the ropes." it's also enough for me if they demonstrate a skill, such a welding, that suggests they can find a job quickly. It's the guys wading the river with no plan, no tools, and no prospects that worry me.

But I would still let in the high school grads before the third grade dropouts.

And like it or not, Lad, on this board you represent the "left', as you defend many things from a left wing viewpoint. You may be center left, and certainly more open minded than many of your colleagues, but would you say you are on the right? If not, you are on the left.

What a crock that last bit is.

You're seriously trying to justify that you've been intentionally ignoring my own words because you think I represent the left as a whole? My goodness.

Well with JAAO off hiding from the monsters, you pretty much have been the sole opposition to the right wingers. Although I see you have some aid showing up.

I may be on the left, but I am anything but a monolith of the left. I would doubt that even JAAO and I agree on every issue. So it's quite shocking that you've seemingly ignored very specific parts of my posts and painted me as the left-wing token poster in your mind.

(08-24-2018 01:03 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-24-2018 12:37 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-24-2018 11:01 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-24-2018 10:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-24-2018 10:26 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]OO, I called something you said Trump-esque because you literally said:

"The people you want to allow to enter unimpeded and unknown to us are the dregs of Mexico."

That's pretty darn similar to Trump saying Mexico is not sending its best, which is why I called it Trump-esque. Do you disagree with that?

I agree agree with Trump that Mexico is not sending its best, because Mexico is not sending anybody at all. Is there some government program I have missed of them exporting people? The best educated and prepared have good jobs and family money and status there. Why leave? I cannot begin to tell you number of business executives i met who had degrees from Michigan, Harvard, Texas, and so forth. Those people go back to Mexico to work in the family business, armed with a degree and working English. I never met a plant owner who did not speak English, and all of them had learned in the States.

The next level, the mangers or professionals, such a pharmacists, have no reason to leave. Who wants to quite working in a pharmacy to go someplace where they can work as a roofer?

The next level, non professionals with some skills and education, are the ones who wait in line for legal immigration, if they cannot get a job with a factory. If they can, they stay.

The ones crossing illegally are from the rest, the bottom of the barrel, thus the dregs. They are the ones who do not have the connections, the education, the skills of the others. They come here because they can get a good price, relatively speaking, for their labor. But don't believe the myth that they are noble and honest. "They" are a wide spectrum, and the lower ends of the spectrum are not people we want or need. They are not people you would be comfortable around.

Quote:And I didn't call you a racist, and sorry you felt that I implied that. I just pointed out that you pretty much parroted a talking point that Trump has when discussing illegal immigrants from Mexico.

So now it has to be "parroted"? No leeway for me coming to similar conclusions based on my experiences and my intelligence? The only way I can say those things is to mindless parrot them?

I think you are the one parroting positions, much more than I am.

Quote:


But your bolded paragraph is where I think we've come to an impasse. You seem to be arguing with "the left" and not with me. Interpreting the points I'm raising through a lens that turns me into a caricature of the left that you hold. So said that "enforcement is what many of the left have a problem with," yet I did not argue for less enforcement. I argued for a revision to our current worker visa program to make the application easier to navigate. For starters, you could change it so that the employer does not have to be the one sponsoring an individual, but allow migrants to do so. Then put them through a screening process like you mention. I've never suggested otherwise, yet you act like I have.

I never said it had to be employer sponsored. It's enough for me that they can say "My cousin Julio works in Dallas as a roofer, and he will get me on his crew and show me the ropes." it's also enough for me if they demonstrate a skill, such a welding, that suggests they can find a job quickly. It's the guys wading the river with no plan, no tools, and no prospects that worry me.

But I would still let in the high school grads before the third grade dropouts.

And like it or not, Lad, on this board you represent the "left', as you defend many things from a left wing viewpoint. You may be center left, and certainly more open minded than many of your colleagues, but would you say you are on the right? If not, you are on the left.

What a crock that last bit is.

You're seriously trying to justify that you've been intentionally ignoring my own words because you think I represent the left as a whole? My goodness.

Well with JAAO off hiding from the monsters, you pretty much have been the sole opposition to the right wingers. Although I see you have some aid showing up.

I may be on the left, but I am anything but a monolith of the left. I would doubt that even JAAO and I agree on every issue. So it's quite shocking that you've seemingly ignored very specific parts of my posts and painted me as the left-wing token poster in your mind.

Certainly not a monolith, and neither the left nor the right is a monolith. There is a wide wide range, I call it a spectrum, and I think of you as left of center, maybe center left. I consider myself center right. I also think you are the only left winger I know who is willing to discuss and consider other viewpoints. You are unique in that (and I do mean unique). But my painting of you as representing the left is no worse than you saying I was "parroting" someone else's views about "those people". Largely it is because you are the only leftist here defending leftist viewpoints. It is like having the left guard explain the offensive production - if nobody else from the offense is on stage, you are the offense. You can explain the blocking schemes for the left guard all you want, but you are representing the entire offense.

The potential real-world consequences of all the party-over-country attacks on the FBI and the ongoing investigations.

Anybody want to talk about the Mexico trade agreement?

I realize that any agreement that will help the US and Mexico and their workers is a bad thing for the Resistance, but hey, live with it. Maybe people with jobs will vote for you anyway.

(08-28-2018 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Anybody want to talk about the Mexico trade agreement?

I realize that any agreement that will help the US and Mexico and their workers is a bad thing for the Resistance, but hey, live with it. Maybe people with jobs will vote for you anyway.

Just like with NK, let's wait to congratulate Trump until something is signed and actual progress is made. We all know how well things have turned out there, after you and Tanq tried furiously to pat Trump on the back for "progress" that was made.

Right now, Canada is not involved with the current agreement, which is a big deal. It seems to currently be a good deal for auto manufacturers and workers in both the US and Mexico, but I haven't seen specifics of the other trade-issues mentioned (it seems like the auto-angle is what the news orgs are focusing on). That could be because this was a sticking point in the original TPP negotiations.

I'd like to learn more about what's in the deal, how it's changing NAFTA, and the likelihood of it being agreed to by both Mexico and Canada before I go jumping for joy. But just like with NK, it's good that we're at least going through the process.

(08-28-2018 09:33 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Anybody want to talk about the Mexico trade agreement?

I realize that any agreement that will help the US and Mexico and their workers is a bad thing for the Resistance, but hey, live with it. Maybe people with jobs will vote for you anyway.

Just like with NK, let's wait to congratulate Trump until something is signed and actual progress is made. We all know how well things have turned out there, after you and Tanq tried furiously to pat Trump on the back for "progress" that was made.

Right now, Canada is not involved with the current agreement, which is a big deal. It seems to currently be a good deal for auto manufacturers and workers in both the US and Mexico, but I haven't seen specifics of the other trade-issues mentioned (it seems like the auto-angle is what the news orgs are focusing on). That could be because this was a sticking point in the original TPP negotiations.

I'd like to learn more about what's in the deal, how it's changing NAFTA, and the likelihood of it being agreed to by both Mexico and Canada before I go jumping for joy. But just like with NK, it's good that we're at least going through the process.

I will still state categorically that more has been done re: NK under Trump than *any* other administration in my lifetime. is there more to do? Yeppers. Lots.

I will give kudos to Trump for that. If you want to categorize that as 'furiously pat Trump on the back' so be it. Just kind of odd that you categorize an obvious positive step and the act of noting that obvious positive step with such a note of disdain. Actually, come to think of it, let me correct; its not odd at all that you do so....

Edited to add: perhaps I should note that more *positive* things under Trump; Obama arguably did and allowed *more* with sticking his head and big ears in the the sand re: nuclear and missile development, but hiding your head in the sand is not *positive* in the sense that I look at it for that matter, mind you.

Did any of you catch the reporting from the Daily Caller today?

I am really loath to link to the site, but they are reporting two somewhat big stories today. First:

Quote:FBI Special Agent Jonathan Moffa told Congress on Friday that the FBI has used leaked stories to obtain FISA warrants

The gist is that the FBI leaked the Steele memo to the press, then turned around and used the press stories as 'corroborating' evidence. This had been speculated about, but truly astounding that an FBI agent actually testified to this before Congress.

Quote:SOURCES: CHINA HACKED HILLARY CLINTON’S PRIVATE EMAIL SERVER

Quote:A Chinese-owned company penetrated former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private server, according to sources briefed on the matter.

Quote:The company inserted code that forwarded copies of Clinton’s emails to the Chinese company in real time.

I guess there is a real good reason not to employ a fing 'do it yourself' email server as SoS ----

(08-28-2018 12:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 09:33 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Anybody want to talk about the Mexico trade agreement?

I realize that any agreement that will help the US and Mexico and their workers is a bad thing for the Resistance, but hey, live with it. Maybe people with jobs will vote for you anyway.

Just like with NK, let's wait to congratulate Trump until something is signed and actual progress is made. We all know how well things have turned out there, after you and Tanq tried furiously to pat Trump on the back for "progress" that was made.

Right now, Canada is not involved with the current agreement, which is a big deal. It seems to currently be a good deal for auto manufacturers and workers in both the US and Mexico, but I haven't seen specifics of the other trade-issues mentioned (it seems like the auto-angle is what the news orgs are focusing on). That could be because this was a sticking point in the original TPP negotiations.

I'd like to learn more about what's in the deal, how it's changing NAFTA, and the likelihood of it being agreed to by both Mexico and Canada before I go jumping for joy. But just like with NK, it's good that we're at least going through the process.

I will still state categorically that more has been done re: NK under Trump than *any* other administration in my lifetime. is there more to do? Yeppers. Lots.

I will give kudos to Trump for that. If you want to categorize that as 'furiously pat Trump on the back' so be it. Just kind of odd that you categorize an obvious positive step and the act of noting that obvious positive step with such a note of disdain. Actually, come to think of it, let me correct; its not odd at all that you do so....

There has been no positive step - that's the issue. Look at where we are now, back at a stalemate with frayed relations. This is why I waited to pat him on the back for accomplishing anything, because it is impossibly difficult to make any progress with the North Koreans.

Recent reports indicate that NK is back at it. They're building new ballistic missiles, they haven't stopped their nuclear program, etc. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-45067681)

There's also intelligence that says that the detonation of the nuclear test tunnels NK televised was likely nothing more than propaganda, and did not actually stop NK from using the nuclear facilities (https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/01/politics/...dex.html).

I said before, and I'll say it again, it was good that Trump reached out and was trying to have a discourse with NK. Props to him there. But nothing came of it, yet you and others tried to prematurely celebrate these so called "positive steps."

But maybe I'm missing something. What tangible steps (you know, progress) have been made, that remain in place?

Contrasted with the free reign that Obama the Great employed with respect to NK, yep, still a huge positive move. A lot more to do here, undoubtedly.

As noted before, the steps in NK are very positive especially when contrasted with the Obama "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I say nothing, I do nothing" style of 'leading from behind'.

Or, if you are stating that there is not a net positive, I take it you liked that 'see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing, do nothing' policy?

If you are thinking 'absolute terms' you might have a point. When you are looking at it relativistically, I dont think anyone (aside from Un) can state that it is 'the same' or 'worse'. Somehow you seemingly imply that. What a surprise.

(08-28-2018 12:39 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 12:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 09:33 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Anybody want to talk about the Mexico trade agreement?

I realize that any agreement that will help the US and Mexico and their workers is a bad thing for the Resistance, but hey, live with it. Maybe people with jobs will vote for you anyway.

Just like with NK, let's wait to congratulate Trump until something is signed and actual progress is made. We all know how well things have turned out there, after you and Tanq tried furiously to pat Trump on the back for "progress" that was made.

Right now, Canada is not involved with the current agreement, which is a big deal. It seems to currently be a good deal for auto manufacturers and workers in both the US and Mexico, but I haven't seen specifics of the other trade-issues mentioned (it seems like the auto-angle is what the news orgs are focusing on). That could be because this was a sticking point in the original TPP negotiations.

I'd like to learn more about what's in the deal, how it's changing NAFTA, and the likelihood of it being agreed to by both Mexico and Canada before I go jumping for joy. But just like with NK, it's good that we're at least going through the process.

I will still state categorically that more has been done re: NK under Trump than *any* other administration in my lifetime. is there more to do? Yeppers. Lots.

I will give kudos to Trump for that. If you want to categorize that as 'furiously pat Trump on the back' so be it. Just kind of odd that you categorize an obvious positive step and the act of noting that obvious positive step with such a note of disdain. Actually, come to think of it, let me correct; its not odd at all that you do so....

There has been no positive step - that's the issue. Look at where we are now, back at a stalemate with frayed relations. This is why I waited to pat him on the back for accomplishing anything, because it is impossibly difficult to make any progress with the North Koreans.

Recent reports indicate that NK is back at it. They're building new ballistic missiles, they haven't stopped their nuclear program, etc. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-45067681)

There's also intelligence that says that the detonation of the nuclear test tunnels NK televised was likely nothing more than propaganda, and did not actually stop NK from using the nuclear facilities (https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/01/politics/...dex.html).

I said before, and I'll say it again, it was good that Trump reached out and was trying to have a discourse with NK. Props to him there. But nothing came of it, yet you and others tried to prematurely celebrate these so called "positive steps."

But maybe I'm missing something. What tangible steps (you know, progress) have been made, that remain in place?

Progress -- for starters, what is the rate of missile lobs since the summit?

Funny thing that you dont think that Kim Jong Un being off the overtly provocative track is 'progress', or 'positive', or a 'good thing'. Color me shocked.

(08-28-2018 12:57 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 12:39 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 12:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 09:33 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Anybody want to talk about the Mexico trade agreement?

I realize that any agreement that will help the US and Mexico and their workers is a bad thing for the Resistance, but hey, live with it. Maybe people with jobs will vote for you anyway.

Just like with NK, let's wait to congratulate Trump until something is signed and actual progress is made. We all know how well things have turned out there, after you and Tanq tried furiously to pat Trump on the back for "progress" that was made.

Right now, Canada is not involved with the current agreement, which is a big deal. It seems to currently be a good deal for auto manufacturers and workers in both the US and Mexico, but I haven't seen specifics of the other trade-issues mentioned (it seems like the auto-angle is what the news orgs are focusing on). That could be because this was a sticking point in the original TPP negotiations.

I'd like to learn more about what's in the deal, how it's changing NAFTA, and the likelihood of it being agreed to by both Mexico and Canada before I go jumping for joy. But just like with NK, it's good that we're at least going through the process.

I will still state categorically that more has been done re: NK under Trump than *any* other administration in my lifetime. is there more to do? Yeppers. Lots.

I will give kudos to Trump for that. If you want to categorize that as 'furiously pat Trump on the back' so be it. Just kind of odd that you categorize an obvious positive step and the act of noting that obvious positive step with such a note of disdain. Actually, come to think of it, let me correct; its not odd at all that you do so....

There has been no positive step - that's the issue. Look at where we are now, back at a stalemate with frayed relations. This is why I waited to pat him on the back for accomplishing anything, because it is impossibly difficult to make any progress with the North Koreans.

Recent reports indicate that NK is back at it. They're building new ballistic missiles, they haven't stopped their nuclear program, etc. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-45067681)

There's also intelligence that says that the detonation of the nuclear test tunnels NK televised was likely nothing more than propaganda, and did not actually stop NK from using the nuclear facilities (https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/01/politics/...dex.html).

I said before, and I'll say it again, it was good that Trump reached out and was trying to have a discourse with NK. Props to him there. But nothing came of it, yet you and others tried to prematurely celebrate these so called "positive steps."

But maybe I'm missing something. What tangible steps (you know, progress) have been made, that remain in place?

Progress -- for starters, what is the rate of missile lobs since the summit?

Funny thing that you dont think that Kim Jong Un being off the overtly provocative track is 'progress', or 'positive', or a 'good thing'. Color me shocked.

His lack of missile testing has been good, I've never stated that. Please let me know where I did.

I don't view that as a TANGIBLE change. There is no agreement binding him to the reduction in tests, nothing to hold the regime to that. And that was my lone criticism during the talks between us and NK, when people were trying to give credit for things that hadn't been solidified yet.

Of course NK being less provocative is good, but there's nothing in place to keep them from starting to be provocative tomorrow, and no agreement from them saying they won't. So, nothing tangible. But nice attempt at projecting there, too bad you had to use a strawman to do it.

(08-28-2018 12:50 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Contrasted with the free reign that Obama the Great employed with respect to NK, yep, still a huge positive move. A lot more to do here, undoubtedly.

As noted before, the steps in NK are very positive especially when contrasted with the Obama "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I say nothing, I do nothing" style of 'leading from behind'.

Or, if you are stating that there is not a net positive, I take it you liked that 'see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing, do nothing' policy?

If you are thinking 'absolute terms' you might have a point. When you are looking at it relativistically, I dont think anyone (aside from Un) can state that it is 'the same' or 'worse'. Somehow you seemingly imply that. What a surprise.

I'm saying that nothing tangible came from anything Trump has done. No agreements, no treaties, not hard progress that can be used to hold NK accountable and affect change. And that falls almost squarely on NK. Like I said, it's good that Trump was trying to shoot for the moon, but there was a reason many were cautious to heap praise on him for landing on the moon.

Now we don't even have a friendly relationship with them - the North Koreans have basically ghosted us after all of the hoopla around the summit died down and they're back to being a bunch of diplomatic turds.

Again, great that the Trump admin tried, but we're back to square one with nothing concrete in place to deal with the NK issue.

I wonder how, but not why, this has been deflected from economic news to NK.

But first NK.:

The US-NK will be a very intricate and long term dance before we reach a major solution to NK nuclear threats. It does not surprise me that Trump did not accomplish "mission accomplished" in a matter of weeks. What does surprise me is that Lad thought it would be that easy. Trump deserves a "pat on the back" for being open to trying something new, rather than the studied indifference of his predecessors. It may be years before this comes to a successful conclusion. Of course, if the Resistance is successful at getting rid of Trump, maybe we can get back on the path to nuclear war. Who cares as long as Trump is got.


Re: the economy.

Famously, a democratic slogan was "It's the economy, stupid". Well, it is again. Trump keeps doing these things that help the economy. The US-Mexico agreement is one of those things. Now that two of the three are on board, Canada will not be far behind. among other things the agreement tightens requirements for the source of auto parts for cars made in the US and Mexico, and sources them more regionally, strengthening the markets for local suppliers of raw materials. It requires at least 45% of the parts to be made by workers making at least $16/hr, making a lot of Mexicans happy. Zero tariffs. Winner: U.S. Winner: Mexico. Loser: China. I don't know what the bad things are about it yet, as I haven't had a chance to catch CNN.

The Dow and other markers jumped yesterday. I wonder why? They are continuing today. Economy is growing, people are getting jobs, people with are jobs taking home more of their pay. Who cares about Trump's affairs or the witch hunt? people will vote their pocket books. Democrats want to kill the goose that is laying golden eggs, so that impoverished people will turn to their glittering promises. Democrat's best hope is a crash in late October. American misery is always a boon for the DNC.

(08-28-2018 01:35 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 12:50 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Contrasted with the free reign that Obama the Great employed with respect to NK, yep, still a huge positive move. A lot more to do here, undoubtedly.

As noted before, the steps in NK are very positive especially when contrasted with the Obama "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I say nothing, I do nothing" style of 'leading from behind'.

Or, if you are stating that there is not a net positive, I take it you liked that 'see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing, do nothing' policy?

If you are thinking 'absolute terms' you might have a point. When you are looking at it relativistically, I dont think anyone (aside from Un) can state that it is 'the same' or 'worse'. Somehow you seemingly imply that. What a surprise.

I'm saying that nothing tangible came from anything Trump has done. No agreements, no treaties, not hard progress that can be used to hold NK accountable and affect change. And that falls almost squarely on NK. Like I said, it's good that Trump was trying to shoot for the moon, but there was a reason many were cautious to heap praise on him for landing on the moon.

Now we don't even have a friendly relationship with them - the North Koreans have basically ghosted us after all of the hoopla around the summit died down and they're back to being a bunch of diplomatic turds.

Again, great that the Trump admin tried, but we're back to square one with nothing concrete in place to deal with the NK issue.

Square one is the beginning of the Trump administration -- that is Jon Un the aggessive AD/HD panda bear popping off one of his 1.4x GDP firecrackers every year or so, and the same bellicose panda lobbing missiles over Japan at every chance he gets, and the same bellicose panda threatening to nuke Guam.

*That* is square one my young friend.

Funny you dont see that.

As I said before, long road in front of everyone. But where we are *now* is in a different and calmer place prior to the events. Sorry that your sensibilities are so offended that "No agreements, no treaties" are there; but the dynamic is way, way different. Amazingly so.

I guess the reality of that different place is not 'tangible' enough for you to be 'tangible'. I guess what is expected from you is a great big piece of parchment with letters in Gothic font and waxed signings in it. Me, I'll take the 'real world' effect of the de-bellicosed panda-with-nukes as the sort of 'tangible' I can live with. But I guess you need that shiny embossed piece of paper to count as 'tangible'....

(08-28-2018 03:33 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder how, but not why, this has been deflected from economic news to NK.

But first NK.:

The US-NK will be a very intricate and long term dance before we reach a major solution to NK nuclear threats. It does not surprise me that Trump did not accomplish "mission accomplished" in a matter of weeks. What does surprise me is that Lad thought it would be that easy. Trump deserves a "pat on the back" for being open to trying something new, rather than the studied indifference of his predecessors. It may be years before this comes to a successful conclusion. Of course, if the Resistance is successful at getting rid of Trump, maybe we can get back on the path to nuclear war. Who cares as long as Trump is got.


Re: the economy.

Famously, a democratic slogan was "It's the economy, stupid". Well, it is again. Trump keeps doing these things that help the economy. The US-Mexico agreement is one of those things. Now that two of the three are on board, Canada will not be far behind. among other things the agreement tightens requirements for the source of auto parts for cars made in the US and Mexico, and sources them more regionally, strengthening the markets for local suppliers of raw materials. It requires at least 45% of the parts to be made by workers making at least $16/hr, making a lot of Mexicans happy. Zero tariffs. Winner: U.S. Winner: Mexico. Loser: China. I don't know what the bad things are about it yet, as I haven't had a chance to catch CNN.

The Dow and other markers jumped yesterday. I wonder why? They are continuing today. Economy is growing, people are getting jobs, people with are jobs taking home more of their pay. Who cares about Trump's affairs or the witch hunt? people will vote their pocket books. Democrats want to kill the goose that is laying golden eggs, so that impoverished people will turn to their glittering promises. Democrat's best hope is a crash in late October. American misery is always a boon for the DNC.

I expressly stated why I brought up NK - the news regarding the trade "deal" with Mexico isn't concrete yet. Let's not get premature in celebrating things that haven't happened yet. This isn't a deal yet.

But the movement on this deal with Mexico appears to be good, and hopefully Canada will join in the fold if NAFTA gets renegotiated. I'm not sure this does more to subvert China's influence than the TPP would have, but the proposed changes for the auto-industry are more favorable to the US than what would have been in the TPP, per my reading today.

(08-28-2018 03:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 01:35 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 12:50 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Contrasted with the free reign that Obama the Great employed with respect to NK, yep, still a huge positive move. A lot more to do here, undoubtedly.

As noted before, the steps in NK are very positive especially when contrasted with the Obama "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I say nothing, I do nothing" style of 'leading from behind'.

Or, if you are stating that there is not a net positive, I take it you liked that 'see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing, do nothing' policy?

If you are thinking 'absolute terms' you might have a point. When you are looking at it relativistically, I dont think anyone (aside from Un) can state that it is 'the same' or 'worse'. Somehow you seemingly imply that. What a surprise.

I'm saying that nothing tangible came from anything Trump has done. No agreements, no treaties, not hard progress that can be used to hold NK accountable and affect change. And that falls almost squarely on NK. Like I said, it's good that Trump was trying to shoot for the moon, but there was a reason many were cautious to heap praise on him for landing on the moon.

Now we don't even have a friendly relationship with them - the North Koreans have basically ghosted us after all of the hoopla around the summit died down and they're back to being a bunch of diplomatic turds.

Again, great that the Trump admin tried, but we're back to square one with nothing concrete in place to deal with the NK issue.

Square one is the beginning of the Trump administration -- that is Jon Un the aggessive AD/HD panda bear popping off one of his 1.4x GDP firecrackers every year or so, and the same bellicose panda lobbing missiles over Japan at every chance he gets, and the same bellicose panda threatening to nuke Guam.

*That* is square one my young friend.

Funny you dont see that.

As I said before, long road in front of everyone. But where we are *now* is in a different and calmer place prior to the events. Sorry that your sensibilities are so offended that "No agreements, no treaties" are there; but the dynamic is way, way different. Amazingly so.

I guess the reality of that different place is not 'tangible' enough for you to be 'tangible'. I guess what is expected from you is a great big piece of parchment with letters in Gothic font and waxed signings in it. Me, I'll take the 'real world' effect of the de-bellicosed panda-with-nukes as the sort of 'tangible' I can live with. But I guess you need that shiny embossed piece of paper to count as 'tangible'....

I do see where square one is, but we aren't really that far from it, and certainly not in any tangible sense. There is no agreement - not written, not verbalized to the world, and certainly not spoken between private parties (since Pompeo's recent trip to NK was canceled).

Yes, absolutely shocking that someone would want something tangible from the North Koreans in the form of a diplomatic agreement, before one started praising a leader from the US for making headway with a notoriously fickle and unreliable regime.

I mean, where would I get the idea that having signed contracts that outline roles and responsibilities, matched with third-party verification, would ever be a way to evaluate how despotic regimes have actually changed their ways? Such a shocking and unexpected thing to want.

For a lawyer, it's interesting that you seem to dismiss the idea of a binding contract so quickly. Do you view the contracts your client's sign with you with the same sort of flippancy?

(08-28-2018 03:53 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 03:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 01:35 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 12:50 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Contrasted with the free reign that Obama the Great employed with respect to NK, yep, still a huge positive move. A lot more to do here, undoubtedly.

As noted before, the steps in NK are very positive especially when contrasted with the Obama "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I say nothing, I do nothing" style of 'leading from behind'.

Or, if you are stating that there is not a net positive, I take it you liked that 'see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing, do nothing' policy?

If you are thinking 'absolute terms' you might have a point. When you are looking at it relativistically, I dont think anyone (aside from Un) can state that it is 'the same' or 'worse'. Somehow you seemingly imply that. What a surprise.

I'm saying that nothing tangible came from anything Trump has done. No agreements, no treaties, not hard progress that can be used to hold NK accountable and affect change. And that falls almost squarely on NK. Like I said, it's good that Trump was trying to shoot for the moon, but there was a reason many were cautious to heap praise on him for landing on the moon.

Now we don't even have a friendly relationship with them - the North Koreans have basically ghosted us after all of the hoopla around the summit died down and they're back to being a bunch of diplomatic turds.

Again, great that the Trump admin tried, but we're back to square one with nothing concrete in place to deal with the NK issue.

Square one is the beginning of the Trump administration -- that is Jon Un the aggessive AD/HD panda bear popping off one of his 1.4x GDP firecrackers every year or so, and the same bellicose panda lobbing missiles over Japan at every chance he gets, and the same bellicose panda threatening to nuke Guam.

*That* is square one my young friend.

Funny you dont see that.

As I said before, long road in front of everyone. But where we are *now* is in a different and calmer place prior to the events. Sorry that your sensibilities are so offended that "No agreements, no treaties" are there; but the dynamic is way, way different. Amazingly so.

I guess the reality of that different place is not 'tangible' enough for you to be 'tangible'. I guess what is expected from you is a great big piece of parchment with letters in Gothic font and waxed signings in it. Me, I'll take the 'real world' effect of the de-bellicosed panda-with-nukes as the sort of 'tangible' I can live with. But I guess you need that shiny embossed piece of paper to count as 'tangible'....

I do see where square one is, but we aren't really that far from it, and certainly not in any tangible sense. There is no agreement - not written, not verbalized to the world, and certainly not spoken between private parties (since Pompeo's recent trip to NK was canceled).

Yes, absolutely shocking that someone would want something tangible from the North Koreans in the form of a diplomatic agreement, before one started praising a leader from the US for making headway with a notoriously fickle and unreliable regime.

I mean, where would I get the idea that having signed contracts that outline roles and responsibilities, matched with third-party verification, would ever be a way to evaluate how despotic regimes have actually changed their ways? Such a shocking and unexpected thing to want.

For a lawyer, it's interesting that you seem to dismiss the idea of a binding contract so quickly. Do you view the contracts your client's sign with you with the same sort of flippancy?

No I dont 'dismiss the idea of a binding contract .... with flippancy'. I am old enough *and* experienced enough to counsel certain clients that sometimes the status quo without a 'binding contract' may be good enough to start a relationship. Sometimes it may be advantageous to continue without one. Sometimes not so advantageous.

You'll learn as you age, lad.

And you've obviously never heard the statement (that almost everyone else I know knows of) that sometimes there are no good contracts with bad people.

You'll learn as you age, lad.

And Lord forbid, I actually rent some stuff out month to month as well, how in the fing world *do I* overlook those thingys....

I guess if I was 'embossed seal crazy' (like some posters are seemingly today) I might have a different outlook.

Contracts may be the right vehicle for the right situation. I dont magically shoehorn everything in the life, universe, and everything into a contract like you seemingly have an overriding urge for today. (Except that is, when the contract contains the number 42 in it somewhere.... then Im all over your 'must have a contract for this' urge-thingy.....)

lad, I dont dismiss getting a treaty or some other magic-wax, magic embossed parchment like you seemingly want as a the sine qua non of the life, universe, and everything. But your characterization as 'we are back to square one' is just stupid, as is your idea that the *only* tangible result is that elven manuscript form.

The tangible result is that some obese, bespeckled, jacktard AD/HD panda-bear isnt threatening to nuke Guam, isnt lobbing missiles every other week, and isnt popping off his own nukes every year. While that passes my 'tangible' test, your expectations for 4 months are some fing version of SALT II or the Brest-Livotsk Treaty as being the *only* tangible result.

When I make a comment that that result seems kind of 'large expectation-ish' you respond with a fairly asinine comment about my supposed flippancy on contracts. Bad hair day there, lad?

For the 4 mos, I think it is fairly significant, and a good start. You dont.

*That* seems to be the major and overriding difference here. But, I am not surprised.

(08-28-2018 04:19 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 03:53 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 03:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 01:35 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-28-2018 12:50 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]Contrasted with the free reign that Obama the Great employed with respect to NK, yep, still a huge positive move. A lot more to do here, undoubtedly.

As noted before, the steps in NK are very positive especially when contrasted with the Obama "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I say nothing, I do nothing" style of 'leading from behind'.

Or, if you are stating that there is not a net positive, I take it you liked that 'see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing, do nothing' policy?

If you are thinking 'absolute terms' you might have a point. When you are looking at it relativistically, I dont think anyone (aside from Un) can state that it is 'the same' or 'worse'. Somehow you seemingly imply that. What a surprise.

I'm saying that nothing tangible came from anything Trump has done. No agreements, no treaties, not hard progress that can be used to hold NK accountable and affect change. And that falls almost squarely on NK. Like I said, it's good that Trump was trying to shoot for the moon, but there was a reason many were cautious to heap praise on him for landing on the moon.

Now we don't even have a friendly relationship with them - the North Koreans have basically ghosted us after all of the hoopla around the summit died down and they're back to being a bunch of diplomatic turds.

Again, great that the Trump admin tried, but we're back to square one with nothing concrete in place to deal with the NK issue.

Square one is the beginning of the Trump administration -- that is Jon Un the aggessive AD/HD panda bear popping off one of his 1.4x GDP firecrackers every year or so, and the same bellicose panda lobbing missiles over Japan at every chance he gets, and the same bellicose panda threatening to nuke Guam.

*That* is square one my young friend.

Funny you dont see that.

As I said before, long road in front of everyone. But where we are *now* is in a different and calmer place prior to the events. Sorry that your sensibilities are so offended that "No agreements, no treaties" are there; but the dynamic is way, way different. Amazingly so.

I guess the reality of that different place is not 'tangible' enough for you to be 'tangible'. I guess what is expected from you is a great big piece of parchment with letters in Gothic font and waxed signings in it. Me, I'll take the 'real world' effect of the de-bellicosed panda-with-nukes as the sort of 'tangible' I can live with. But I guess you need that shiny embossed piece of paper to count as 'tangible'....

I do see where square one is, but we aren't really that far from it, and certainly not in any tangible sense. There is no agreement - not written, not verbalized to the world, and certainly not spoken between private parties (since Pompeo's recent trip to NK was canceled).

Yes, absolutely shocking that someone would want something tangible from the North Koreans in the form of a diplomatic agreement, before one started praising a leader from the US for making headway with a notoriously fickle and unreliable regime.

I mean, where would I get the idea that having signed contracts that outline roles and responsibilities, matched with third-party verification, would ever be a way to evaluate how despotic regimes have actually changed their ways? Such a shocking and unexpected thing to want.

For a lawyer, it's interesting that you seem to dismiss the idea of a binding contract so quickly. Do you view the contracts your client's sign with you with the same sort of flippancy?

No I dont 'dismiss the idea of a binding contract .... with flippancy'. I am old enough *and* experienced enough to counsel certain clients that sometimes the status quo without a 'binding contract' may be good enough to start a relationship. Sometimes it may be advantageous to continue without one. Sometimes not so advantageous.

You'll learn as you age, lad.

And you've obviously never heard the statement (that almost everyone else I know knows of) that sometimes there are no good contracts with bad people.

You'll learn as you age, lad.

And Lord forbid, I actually rent some stuff out month to month as well, how in the fing world *do I* overlook those thingys....

I guess if I was 'embossed seal crazy' (like some posters are seemingly today) I might have a different outlook.

Contracts may be the right vehicle for the right situation. I dont magically shoehorn everything in the life, universe, and everything into a contract like you seemingly have an overriding urge for today. (Except that is, when the contract contains the number 42 in it somewhere.... then Im all over your 'must have a contract for this' urge-thingy.....)

lad, I dont dismiss getting a treaty or some other magic-wax, magic embossed parchment like you seemingly want as a the sine qua non of the life, universe, and everything. But your characterization as 'we are back to square one' is just stupid, as is your idea that the *only* tangible result is that elven manuscript form.

The tangible result is that some obese, bespeckled, jacktard AD/HD panda-bear isnt threatening to nuke Guam, isnt lobbing missiles every other week, and isnt popping off his own nukes every year. While that passes my 'tangible' test, your expectations for 4 months are some fing version of SALT II or the Brest-Livotsk Treaty as being the *only* tangible result.

When I make a comment that that result seems kind of 'large expectation-ish' you respond with a fairly asinine comment about my supposed flippancy on contracts. Bad hair day there, lad?

For the 4 mos, I think it is fairly significant, and a good start. You dont.

*That* seems to be the major and overriding difference here. But, I am not surprised.

But there is no reason to expect this continues, so that's why I don't actually think it's a good start. I don't think it's a start at all.

We've already seen regression from the North Koreans in how they talk, and we have seen regression in the fact that they're working on building new ballistic missiles (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-45067681).

I guess you're very optimistic with how North Korea will act and don't believe they'll revert back to their old selves. What makes you think this is an actual step forward, and not just a temporary change?

Lad, this is the 10,000 meter run, not the 60 meter sprint. There will be changes in pace, in who is leading, in everything, before we reach the finish line. But we can cheer a good start. In fact, we can cheer that we have even made a start. The final outcome is a long way off, and may or may not be as we wish. But it is a damn good start that we are even trying to get to that finish line. Don't dismiss the race because we are not yet at the finish line.