Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, william.scherk said:

I love these accounts:

Just lock them all up, all of them, on trumped-up charges if necessary. Or, just send them to Gitmo. Laws, schmozz.

You're in favor of laws and their consistent enforcement?

16 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Is Harley-Davidson capitalism or not?  Asking for a fiend.

Tough question to answer. Harley was already planning layoffs and closing plants here, as well as opening them elsewhere. Those wheels have long been in motion. So, there's at least some validity to the Trump admin's assertions that the company is using the tariff issue as an excuse and as face-saving optics while already having planned to abandon its proud made-in-America image. They lost 12 percent this year from last year. Picking a fight with Trump might not be the best way to turn that around. Expecting loyalty from their customers while trashing their president and building bikes overseas is a good way to become uncool very quickly. Bikers can react quite strongly to what they perceive as betrayal. 

That being said, tariffs suck, as do all other intrusions into the market. Trump is taking a dangerous course, with little chance of success, and currently he doesn't seem to be in the game. He chose a path that will require certain acts of reinforcement at certain specific times, like upping the ante and retaliating against retaliation. Right now, I would think that should be throttling up in high gear, but he's idling on the sidelines. We'll see what happens.

J

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 14.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Michael Stuart Kelly

    4618

  • Peter

    1435

  • Jon Letendre

    1316

  • Brant Gaede

    884

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That's what it says at the top of the page.  Your point?  It's not like this thread has devolved into a medley of cat videos.  Yet.  

It is intriguing.  I've been fairly obsessed for about a year with thinking about details.  I find microbiology fascinating. I wouldn't be wise, however, to talk about details.  The schemers are

They see suave, debonair Frisco giving a philosophically deep money speech, or John Galt taking over a radio presentation and addressing the audience in the manner of a professor. If they don't see th

Posted Images

On 2/10/2017 at 4:50 PM, william.scherk said:

His Executive Orders Don't Fall Down!

travelbanJune26.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

travelbanJune26.png

 

CNBC:

"The [order] is expressly premised on legitimate purposes: preventing entry of nationals who cannot be adequately vetted and inducing other nations to improve their practices," Roberts wrote. "The text says nothing about religion."

So, criticism of adherence to a religion which advocates violence is unacceptable as a reason for denying entry into the country. Is the same true of any ideology or philosophy? If person X states that he supports philosophy Y which professes the morality and virtue of killing people who do not support philosophy Y, is it inappropriate to ban supporters of that philosophy? If so, why? Is there something different about labeling the set of ideas a "religion" versus a "philosophy"? Are threats of murder somehow kind of okay when issued under the category of "religion," but not kind of okay when inspired by something other than religion?

J

 

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

That being said, tariffs suck, as do all other intrusions into the market. Trump is taking a dangerous course, with little chance of success, and currently he doesn't seem to be in the game.

Jonathan,

There is a concept I've noticed that goes by almost everyone in O-Land. It's the difference between strategy and tactics.

The strategy is the long game and the tactics are the immediate maneuvers.

A good strategy, for example, is to establish foreign relations with a hostile country so both can live in peace. A good tactic, even within this strategy, is to kill their people when those people attack you. If you don't kill them, they will kill you.

I learned this in chess. Sometimes you sacrifice a pawn as a tactic because that's the only way to win according to a specific strategy.

I once wrote about this on the old SoloHQ: To Turn or Not to Turn - A Question of Cheek. That's the article that caused the major shitstorm over there at the time. The thing that shocked me the most back then was that people not only didn't understand the difference between strategy and tactic, they actively resisted learning it.

They equated it with "the ends justify the means" and turned off their brains. They did what I call deducing reality from a principle rather than deriving the principle from reality.

To illustrate, in my example above, one may loathe killing humans and one may love peaceful coexistence. When one is attacked, though, one kills. Killing is not a justification for peace, not even in this context. Killing is not blanket hypocrisy for the peace-lover. It's a requirement of reality if you want to live, someone is hell bent on killing you, and that person is physically attacking you. (Later, if you can organize an armed group, you can think about niceties like jailing the asshole who is attacking you.)

I see a lot of people make this mistake with President Trump all the time. 

They think his tactic is his strategy.

He even says openly how much he dislikes some of his tactics. For example, when he called Kim Jong-un "little rocket man," he said in an interview he felt silly. But he had to do it. He decided to run a strategy to avoid being in the "kill or be killed" situation.

According to that strategy, he evaluated reality and came up with his tactics. Notice, he didn't say taunting bloody dictators is justified by the ends. He didn't even think in those terms. He looked at the reality of Kim Jong-un and saw that taunting him was one of the effective ways to get him to pay attention and realize this time it was serious. Once he got the bloody dictator's focused attention, the taunting stopped. The taunting was a peaceful tactic to get rid of an obstacle.

Oh, there was another way to get Kim Jong-un to pay attention and realize this time it was serious. President Trump could have bombed the shit out of North Korea. Would that have been a "principled" way of acting on as compared to the taunting?

Something to think about when thinking about principles...

Now look at tariffs (and, by extension, government subsidies for free-market companies). President Trump does not like them at all--on principle, in fact. But his problem is the US constantly trades with (1) countries that do like them and practice them against the US, (2) countries that freeload off of America,  and (3) insider cronies--both foreign and domestic--who make a killing off of major tariff and subsidy imbalances while screwing the rest of humanity.

How does he get their attention and make them realize this time it's serious?

He does to them--in a manner that can be undone--what they do to others. He creates leverage.

If you read between the lines on his first tweet about Harley-Davidson, you see he is not happy about having to institute tariffs. He told HD to be patient. What does that mean, be patient? That means his strategy has not had time to win the long game. He's still in the trenches with tactics.

This is neither "ends justify the means" stuff, nor is it President Trump working toward a world of high tariffs and insider crony deals, nor is it moral failing, nor is it President Trump being a doofus and/or being fooled by some manipulative eggheads around him.

Just take a look at what's going on in the world right now. Has the world turned into a dictatorship run on tariffs and subsidies (actually, it was already that if you wanted to get into certain industries) or is there suddenly a hell of a lot of people sitting up and paying attention? You know who I'm talking about---the ones toward whom the money alway flows, the ones who are always patting you on the head while saying one thing and doing another. I can just imagine them thinking, as if coming up with this thought all on their own, Damn, this is serious!

President Trump just got their attention big-time.

:) 

What comes next--negotiating, implementing and building--is the major component of President Trump's strategy, not this initial part. What happens in this phase is merely framing, clarifying rules and boundaries and demonstrating consequences. After negotiations get underway with people who are finally paying attention for a change, I expect to see many, if not all, of these tariffs fall.

So, as a rare exception, I disagree with your evaluation. I am certain President Trump is fully in the game--and winning.

To repeat, strategy and tactics...

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"They think his tactic is his strategy". Good one, Michael. "They" can only see a lesser, intermediate 'sacrifice' (towards ultimate gain) to be the greater - or only one that matters. Short-term thinking? "Concrete bound"? (Altruists, accustomed to sacrifice?)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Jonathan,

There is a concept I've noticed that goes by almost everyone in O-Land. It's the difference between strategy and tactics...So, as a rare exception, I disagree with your evaluation. I am certain President Trump is fully in the game--and winning.

To repeat, strategy and tactics...

Michael

I hope you're right. I'm hoping that my sense of which strategic moves should be made, and when, is a bit off, and that Trump's is on.

J

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jonathan said:

I hope you're right. I'm hoping that my sense of which strategic moves should be made, and when, is a bit off, and that Trump's is on.

Jonathan,

When I get feeling like that, meaning that President Trump might be going off the rails and is losing his sense of direction, that he will betray his constituency, etc., I reboot my perspective using the MSK Trump Context-Resetter.

Starting alone from scratch, Donald Trump went on to beat hordes of vicious enemies and became President of the United States against a universe of odds and a rigged election. I did not.

Then I consider once again my complaint about his abilities.

:) 

I'm not saying it is impossible for President Trump to let everyone down. But when I get into that perspective above, I totally stop worrying.

:) 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

President Trump is playing chess , and his enemies are playing checkers . 

As much as I love Trump , it almost bothers me to see how ridiculously idiotic his enemies are . It literally hurts my soul because it’s like watching Charlie Brown keep getting the ball pulled away at the last second, over and over .

President Trump is a genius .

Please God , Trudeau will learn from him . 

MCGA 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Jonathan,

When I get feeling like that, meaning that President Trump might be going off the rails and is losing his sense of direction, that he will betray his constituency, etc., I reboot my perspective using the MSK Trump Context-Resetter.

Starting alone from scratch, Donald Trump went on to beat hordes of vicious enemies and became President of the United States against a universe of odds and a rigged election. I did not.

Then I consider once again my complaint about his abilities.

:) 

I'm not saying it is impossible for President Trump to let everyone down. But when I get into that perspective above, I totally stop worrying.

:) 

Michael

Just one quibble - "scratch" does not really describe his overwhelming financial support from fellow billionaires.  The playing field of the super-rich was pretty level. Of course that includes Obama and Clinton supporters, before you leap on me to remind me that the left is always worse; but it isn't always richer, all I'm saying. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure Ms. Carol that back then no one was talking about that . I remember myself stating numerous tines that my buddy , Sheldon Adelson would never support Trump financially . I ate crow there .

Back to the point though , everyone was against him , no one was supporting him , now we’re gonna say he was supported overwhelmingly by so and so fellow millionaires 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Marc said:

Pretty sure Ms. Carol that back then no one was talking about that . I remember myself stating numerous tines that my buddy , Sheldon Adelson would never support Trump financially . I ate crow there .

Back to the point though , everyone was against him , no one was supporting him , now we’re gonna say he was supported overwhelmingly by so and so fellow millionaires 

Respectfully, before he ever started his campaign, he was encouraged in his Birther campaign and other PR efforts by influential backers, Koch brothers etc.We all know he is too close with a buck to pony up his own money on less than a sure thing, and as we all know it wasn't sure.

OMG, you are a buddy of Sheldon Adelson? Am I too poor to know you? Will you still hide me in your sauna when the Apocalypse comes? (I mean only when the Koreans want to play squash). I may be poor but I am still Respectable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Jonathan,

When I get feeling like that, meaning that President Trump might be going off the rails and is losing his sense of direction, that he will betray his constituency, etc., I reboot my perspective using the MSK Trump Context-Resetter.

Starting alone from scratch, Donald Trump went on to beat hordes of vicious enemies and became President of the United States against a universe of odds and a rigged election. I did not.

Then I consider once again my complaint about his abilities.

:) 

I'm not saying it is impossible for President Trump to let everyone down. But when I get into that perspective above, I totally stop worrying.

:) 

Michael

I'm not getting that twitchy yet. My assumption is that there's yet another shoe to drop, or a few more. I've just expected the timing to be a little faster.

J

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, caroljane said:

Just one quibble - "scratch" does not really describe his overwhelming financial support from fellow billionaires.

Carol,

Compared to Clinton's cool billion, Trump played with chump change.

Even during the primaries, JEB! blew $180 million on nothing while Trump spent peanuts.

But my post was not in the context of how much money the American Presidency costs, as if there were a price tag on it.

It was within the context of all those rich and powerful insiders who, over decades, put an almost impenetrable crony-corporatist system in place--and often cemented loyalty with pedophilia and/or other forms of misbehavior that can be blackmailed.

If you don't believe me, ask Bernie Sanders if money and popular support helped him against that corrupt machine. They not only rigged the primaries against him, they kept the results of the rigging and laughed in his face about it.

Your seem to think that President Trump is popular among billionaires. He has some billionaire friends, but in general, he's not well-liked. He doesn't do it the crony way while they do. So he's a threat to their money and power (and inflated opinions of themselves) and he always was. Any cordiality he got from them came from supplying them with great golf courses and maybe quality high-end hotels. In other words, to them, he was the help, only the help, and was never one of them.

Obama was Wall Street's dude. Clinton was their dudess. Totally bought and paid for. Trump was simply their light entertainment until he wasn't. I wonder how he got their attention :) . But he only did that after he got elected. Not before.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, caroljane said:

Respectfully, before he ever started his campaign, he was encouraged in his Birther campaign and other PR efforts by influential backers, Koch brothers etc.We all know he is too close with a buck to pony up his own money on less than a sure thing, and as we all know it wasn't sure.

OMG, you are a buddy of Sheldon Adelson? Am I too poor to know you? Will you still hide me in your sauna when the Apocalypse comes? (I mean only when the Koreans want to play squash). I may be poor but I am still Respectable.

You can come to my sauna anytime , any day , just bring Dagny ! 

You’re not poor , you’re wealthy of incredible knowledge and great insight . 

You can’t call an election , nor admit that Trump is John Galt but you and I are sauna buddies and real Canadians , through and through ! 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, caroljane said:

Koch brothers etc.

Carol,

Seriously?

Koch brothers and Trump?

You mean you don't know they've always hated each other?

Good Lord!

I recommend you stay in your bubble. Until you stop taking propaganda for fact, it's safer there...

I say that in a protective mood...

:) 

(btw - You can hang with Marc. He's as protective as all get out... :) )

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

The left is still fighting the last battle. They're pretending that they didn't get what they demanded. They're organizing upcoming rallies to support "keeping families together." Like, dude, um, families belong together, bro. Trump ripped babies out of their parents' arms, and we have to stop him from doing that! Like, whoa! Trump's executive order has made things worse, because, like, dude, when we were saying that we didn't want children separated from their parents, what we really meant was that we don't want the parents detained, and that we don't want there to be any consequences for disobeying any laws, or even for disobeying reality, but we can't say that because no one would support us, so we have to continue to pretend to fight against something which is no longer happening.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Carol,

Seriously?

Koch brothers and Trump?

You mean you don't know they've always hated each other?

Good Lord!

I recommend you stay in your bubble. Until you stop taking propaganda for fact, it's safer there...

I say that in a protective mood...

:) 

(btw - You can hang with Marc. He's as protective as all get out... :) )

Michael

No,I didn't but know,I thought they had supported him in the past but I should have looked it up.. I sincerely apologize for my mistake.

Justl ooked up quickly - one of the brothers did get on the Trump Train in the general election (David?) that must be where I got my wrong impression, the other 2 are con -God I did not even know there were three of them!  Again sorry for my mistake.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I called for Marc Rubio to win the nomination and POTUS  . 

Then I saw that his name was actually Marco . 

Never met Sheldon but would most definetly love to have a sauna with him , shoot the shit , and talk about Trump moving the embassy to Jerusalem . 

Pretty sure that every self respecting Jew in the US will vote Trunp in 2020 , even the wacko ones who still claim to not love him . 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Jonathan said:

The left is still fighting the last battle. They're pretending that they didn't get what they demanded. They're organizing upcoming rallies to support "keeping families together." Like, dude, um, families belong together, bro. Trump ripped babies out of their parents' arms, and we have to stop him from doing that! Like, whoa! Trump's executive order has made things worse, because, like, dude, when we were saying that we didn't want children separated from their parents, what we really meant was that we don't want the parents detained, and that we don't want there to be any consequences for disobeying any laws, or even for disobeying reality, but we can't say that because no one would support us, so we have to continue to pretend to fight against something which is no longer happening.

 

I don’t call the left , left anymore . 

I consider them zealots . 

They have inconsistent beliefs , they’re liars , and the worst thing is is that they lie to themselves 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Carol,

Compared to Clinton's cool billion, Trump played with chump change.

Even during the primaries, JEB! blew $180 million on nothing while Trump spent peanuts.

But my post was not in the context of how much money the American Presidency costs, as if there were a price tag on it.

It was within the context of all those rich and powerful insiders who, over decades, put an almost impenetrable crony-corporatist system in place--and often cemented loyalty with pedophilia and/or other forms of misbehavior that can be blackmailed.

If you don't believe me, ask Bernie Sanders if money and popular support helped him against that corrupt machine. They not only rigged the primaries against him, they kept the results of the rigging and laughed in his face about it.

Your seem to think that President Trump is popular among billionaires. He has some billionaire friends, but in general, he's not well-liked. He doesn't do it the crony way while they do. So he's a threat to their money and power (and inflated opinions of themselves) and he always was. Any cordiality he got from them came from supplying them with great golf courses and maybe quality high-end hotels. In other words, to them, he was the help, only the help, and was never one of them.

Obama was Wall Street's dude. Clinton was their dudess. Totally bought and paid for. Trump was simply their light entertainment until he wasn't. I wonder how he got their attention :) . But he only did that after he got elected. Not before.

Michael

Yes, I understand that Trump  did not risk much of his own money, which we will never be able to estimate since he will never release the extent and sources of his wealth to public scrutiny.

I do not understand the pedophilia fascination  of Trump supporters and pray that it does not mean they were victims themselves of this horrible crime. There is no evidence I can see but plenty of evidence of hysteria and unreason.

Wall Street I understand is part of the Swamp and will soon go under, finally.It had a good run.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Marc said:

I don’t call the left , left anymore . 

I consider them zealots . 

They have inconsistent beliefs , they’re liars , and the worst thing is is that they lie to themselves 

We are zealous in our belief in what is ethical and rational and especially, humane.

My beliefs change when facts show me that the foundations of my beliefs were wrong. (Unlike those who ignore facts and double down on beliefs).

I am absolutely not a liar and ( cannot believe you consider me one.

How could you ever know when another human being lies to themselves?n I do not believe I can do that, it seems impossible. So I do you the honour of believing the things you say, as you should do me.

Your universalizing of "the left" is grossly offensive and demeans you.

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

Respectfully, before he ever started his campaign, he was encouraged in his Birther campaign and other PR efforts by influential backers, Koch brothers etc.We all know he is too close with a buck to pony up his own money on less than a sure thing, and as we all know it wasn't sure.

OMG, you are a buddy of Sheldon Adelson? Am I too poor to know you? Will you still hide me in your sauna when the Apocalypse comes? (I mean only when the Koreans want to play squash). I may be poor but I am still Respectable.

After he was nominated, it was a sure thing.

We are living in a counter-coup orchestrated by US military intelligence.

Hillary could not have won.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jon Letendre said:

After he was nominated, it was a sure thing.

We are living in a counter-coup orchestrated by US military intelligence.

Hillary could not have won.

Don't faint away, Jon, but to me that sounds as likely as anything these days, and it might well be true.

Trump the reluctant soldier plays General MacArthhur in the ultimate video alt-history game - who knows, he might win.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, caroljane said:

There is no evidence I can see but plenty of evidence of hysteria and unreason.

Carol,

There is plenty of evidence and it is sickening.

The mainstream media plays it down. In the places you inhabit (except here on OL, from what I gather), they not only don't talk about pedophilia, they openly mock those who do as kooks, hysterical conspiracy theorists, etc..

Without talking about the media, since there is so much fake news going on, let's go straight to the DOJ site--from June 12:

More Than 2,300 Suspected Online Child Sex Offenders Arrested During Operation “Broken Heart”

That's just the tip of the iceberg.

Michael

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, caroljane said:

Don't faint away, Jon, but to me that sounds as likely as anything these days, and it might well be true.

Trump the reluctant soldier plays General MacArthhur in the ultimate video alt-history game - who knows, he might win.

You mean they. They might win. Trump is a very small part of a very large international team.

That Alliance prevented the Democrats from pulling off most of their usual cheating that they commit in every election. That’s all they had to do to ensure Hillary’s contender would win.

Watch in four months how everyone scratches their heads for weeks and end up accepting absurd explanations for how badly the Democrats do in Nov. The simple, true and correct explanation is that even more (all the rest) of their cheating will be prevented.

The healing will begin in 2019.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now