Donald Trump

[Jules Troy]

In Canada after boring us to death for 4-6 weeks of bad ads on tv and radio we vote by vomiting on the dotted line. Dayummmm, American elections feel like the awaiting of the second coming of Christ they take so long.

[merjet]

China's currency manipulation. Not only does Trump have it backwards, China is not part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

5 hours ago, merjet said:

China's currency manipulation. Not only does Trump have it backwards, China is not part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Heh.

That guy basically said the same thing Trump says, only called it by its opposite. If you look at Trump's enterprises the world over, trying to pretend he doesn't know what he's talking about in foreign currencies--when he has traded millions in them for decades every day of the week to build stuff--is just plain laughable. This only happens with a corrupt press during elections. At other times, this same press would call Trump a financial wizard with foreign currencies. (It undoubtedly has. I just don't feel like digging.)

I bet you if we scratch this Forbes dude, we will find he is in cahoots with people who take oodles of rigged profits from this system while he pooh poohs those who get screwed. (Unfortunately for him, most of the screwed folks are voting for Trump. I wonder if he's noticed that there are a hell of a lot of them? )

China currency manipulation is like inflation. It's aimed to look like one thing and do another. That is, it looks like it will benefit everyone, but it only benefits insiders as it screws everyone else. Oh, there are some benefits for all for show, but the trade-off with the screwing neutralizes both inflation and the more modern currency manipulation over time. Like all good Ponzis, they eventually explode when the screwees wake up.

However we spin what China does, the result is always the same, that is China keeps supplying artificially cheap exports to other countries because it manufactures them with an artificial local currency that is not aligned with the currencies of other countries. Thus other countries have a rigged competitor for manufacturing. Manufacturing inputs in China are not all free market inputs. A large component is currency games made by the Chinese government, not by Chinese companies. It's a form of state subsidy without looking like state subsidy.

And some people defend this because they are always looking to get something for nothing. Profit-wise, that sure as hell beats honest negotiation and trade. Rand called it looting, but who's interested in details?

(And puhleaz, just because something is legal, that doesn't make it honest. Read Atlas Shrugged if anyone is in doubt. It showcases a shit-ton of legal stuff that was dishonest. China writes its own laws for international trade, not just submits to the laws of other countries. Are China's own laws legal? Of course. China, a sovereign country, made them and they are called laws. Are they honest? No. They seek to scrape in wealth from other countries they do not create to massively add to the wealth they do create.)

Those who lose their jobs and businesses in America because of a rigged system instead of free trade (real free trade, not this crony capitalism insider thing they call free trade) know exactly what this means on their own hide. And, like I said, they are voting for Trump.

Hell, even some of those who make gobs of money by helping the Chinese government screw Americans (that is, except Americans who are insiders or those who have figured out the con and are running with it) are feeling guilty and voting for Trump.

At least we all can buy shit cheap at Walmart, huh?

And maybe, if we play it right, we can get all Americans--every one of us--on a guaranteed minimum income provided by the government like Charles Murray is now preaching (see here) so non-insider people can buy this cheap stuff, seeing how their jobs are gone and they will have to get legal money from somewhere.

I don't know... If I were running this con and saw the writing on the wall, I, also, might squawk like the Forbes guy. It's a great con as far as cons go.

Ah hell... nah... no cons... I don't want that shit in my life... I saw way too much during my bad druggie days...

For those interested, the article below is a simple explanation I found on the Internet about Chinese currency manipulation. That was in 2014 so things are probably a little more sophisticated now because laws for these kinds of things constantly change, albeit the basic process is the same. Changing the laws all the time is how the insiders keep their advantage. (Crony capitalism at its finest, folks. ) And, from living in a country (Brazil) where all they did was currency manipulation, I have no doubt the process is not just one thing. 

When you see how this modern form of the basic process works, though, you have to admit that the Chinese are clever and creative. Too bad it's predatory, not wealth-creating.

Here's the article: What Is Currency Manipulation? by Dave Johnson (who, apparently, isn't even a Trump supporter).

Michael

[Peter]

Michael wrote: (Unfortunately for him, most of the screwed folks are voting for Trump.  ) end quote

 

Rambling, insider, half joke for the Trumpsters: Little children have a strong sense of personal sovereignty which continues on later in life with grown - up mythical anarchists and ‘wanna be’ Objectivists. But, rebellious little children run away (as a person might run to anarchism.) but I am staying. The little runaway’s stories usually end in futility or disastrously. Anarchists seem to believe in angels, but we ain’t no angels. The intelligent, rational Anarchist wants no fetters on his actions while living in a relatively free America. The anarchist political genre may end its life in futility but Objectivists will not. I will not feel like a failure if I am 75 percent free so I am uneasy with the claim that all governments are founded on coercion rather than *consent* even though most objectivists in America perceive ourselves as losing more freedom every year.

 

What would a valid claim for Rand’s system of a just and proper government be? Proof of a “mostly successful theory of government” could be found in American history and in our practice of restarting governance every political cycle. Go Trump. “The Donald” is a member of the Fraternal Order of Government (FOG) and I will vote for him . . . . with reservations.

Peter Taylor

[BaalChatzaf]

On 6/21/2016 at 1:20 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I have heard Stephen Miller, Trump's Senior policy adviser, speak before and he's been OK. Good at times.

Man, he just got a whole lot better.

A loooooooooooooot better.

He comes off a bit over-rehearsed at times, but whoever his coach is, it's working. This guy Miller is getting the crowd wound up in all the right ways. He might look like an accountant, but he speaks like Tony Robbins.

After he gets even more polish, I believe Stephen Miller is going to be a monster speaker. He might even become a major political figure in his own right over time. I expect to see a whole lot more of him during Trump's campaign.

Michael

That was a nifty speech.  He got the negatives  just right.  Slam bang, right on target.   However he did not convince me one iota that Donald Trump can do anything about it.  I hate to say this,  but if Trump is elected and assuming he does not sell out,  he is almost sure to be assassinated.  The Republican party is worse than useless so if Trump is eliminated we have no one in power left to reverse the betrayals  that Mr. Miller so eloquently spoke of....

[BaalChatzaf]

1 hour ago, Peter said:

Michael wrote: (Unfortunately for him, most of the screwed folks are voting for Trump.  ) end quote

 

Rambling, insider, half joke for the Trumpsters: Little children have a strong sense of personal sovereignty which continues on later in life with grown - up mythical anarchists and ‘wanna be’ Objectivists. But, rebellious little children run away (as a person might run to anarchism.) but I am staying. The little runaway’s stories usually end in futility or disastrously. Anarchists seem to believe in angels, but we ain’t no angels. The intelligent, rational Anarchist wants no fetters on his actions while living in a relatively free America. The anarchist political genre may end its life in futility but Objectivists will not. I will not feel like a failure if I am 75 percent free so I am uneasy with the claim that all governments are founded on coercion rather than *consent* even though most objectivists in America perceive ourselves as losing more freedom every year.

 

What would a valid claim for Rand’s system of a just and proper government be? Proof of a “mostly successful theory of government” could be found in American history and in our practice of restarting governance every political cycle. Go Trump. “The Donald” is a member of the Fraternal Order of Government (FOG) and I will vote for him . . . . with reservations.

Peter Taylor

I will vote for neither.  I will not be a party to electing Hillary, who is a running dog (or bitch?) for the Corporate Cronies  nor will I vote for Trump who is an uncultured dolt who does not exhibit any  understanding of the Constitutional process of limiting power and of checks and balances.  Trump apparently thinks governing is another instance of Let's Make a Deal.   This Republic may be in sad shape (it always has been)  but it is still a Republic governed by Law, however faulty that governance  is.  Trump is a creature of and for the real estate market.  He is unfit to govern a Republic  regulated by Law.

[merjet]

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Heh.

[1.] That guy basically said the same thing Trump says, only called it by its opposite.

[2.] If you look at Trump's enterprises the world over, trying to pretend he doesn't know what he's talking about in foreign currencies--when he has traded millions in them for decades every day of the week to build stuff--is just plain laughable. This only happens with a corrupt press during elections. 

[3.] However we spin what China does, the result is always the same, that is China keeps supplying artificially cheap exports to other countries because it manufactures them with an artificial local currency that is not aligned with the currencies of other countries. Thus other countries have a rigged competitor for manufacturing. Manufacturing inputs in China are not all free market inputs. A large component is currency games made by the Chinese government, not by Chinese companies. It's a form of state subsidy without looking like state subsidy.

1. Heh. Wrong again.

2. Without proof, it's just another of your arbitrary assertions.

3. Wrong again. China provides artificially cheap exports because it subsidizes the manufacturers. The yuan is a red herring (link).

Donald Trump’s hypocrisy on trade.

[KorbenDallas]

1 hour ago, BaalChatzaf said:

I hate to say this,  but if Trump is elected and assuming he does not sell out,  he is almost sure to be assassinated.  The Republican party is worse than useless so if Trump is eliminated we have no one in power left to reverse the betrayals

Many people thought the same about Obama being assassinated, but it didn't happen as security and Secret Service was beefed up for him.  Likely the measures will remain and Trump will stay living.

But, to play with the scenario, if Trump was assassinated somehow, there's always his VP, and if they get him/her too, then there's always Paul Ryan.  I'll take any three of these people over a Dem.

 

[BaalChatzaf]

1 minute ago, KorbenDallas said:

Many people thought the same about Obama being assassinated, but it didn't happen as they beefed up security and Secret Service for him.  Likely these measures will remain and Trump will stay living.

But, to play with the scenario, if Trump was assassinated somehow, there's always his VP, and if they get him/her too, then there's always Paul Ryan.  I'll take any three of these people over a Dem.

 

 I don't like the idea of ending up like  the Late Roman Republic (with the assassination of the brothers Gracci) or the Roman Empire.  Suffering under the burden of a bloodless Oligarchy is probably physically healthier than living in a Blood State.

[KorbenDallas]

38 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

 I don't like the idea of ending up like  the Late Roman Republic (with the assassination of the brothers Gracci) or the Roman Empire.  Suffering under the burden of a bloodless Oligarchy is probably physically healthier than living in a Blood State.

I don't think it will be like an Oligarchy.  Trump will have people loyal to him, but they wouldn't have to sign an oath to the king, either (Henry VIII reference).  I don't think there will be any suffering, Trump idolizes Reagan too much for that to happen.

 

[Jonathan]

What I look forward to in a Trump administration is some justice being done, which wouldn't happen under Jellyfish Republican administrations: Hillary being actively investigated rather than protected, and all the other past abuses which have been brushed under the rug by the Obama administration, and about which the Jellyfish haven't even thought about offering any pushback. Trump's brash and ballsy enough to do it. He'd love the drama of making public all of the records, correspondence, and recovered deleted files about Fast-n-Furious, IRS Tea-Targeting, Benghazi, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

It's gonna be SOOOO much fun watching leftist criminals scream that they're being "politically persecuted" for having politically persecuted others.

J

[Jonathan]

12 minutes ago, Jonathan said:

Trump's brash and ballsy enough to do it. He'd love the drama of making public all of the records, correspondence, and recovered deleted files about Fast-n-Furious...

Weird! I hadn't heard anything about Fast-n-Furious in a long time, so after mentioning above, I searched to see if there was anything new, and this popped up:

BREAKING: PARIS TERROR ATTACK WEAPON LINKED TO FAST & FURIOUS

http://www.infowars.com/breaking-paris-terror-attack-weapon-from-fast-furious/

J

[PDS]

On 6/29/2016 at 1:15 PM, PDS said:

Hmmm.   

Today's Trump sure doesn't sound like he did way back in 2013:

"My concern is that the negligence of a few will adversely affect the majority. I've long been a believer in the "look at the solution, not the problem" theory. In this case, the solution is clear. We will have to leave borders behind and go for global unity when it comes to financial stability.

Is this possible? Is this a new frontier? Yes and no. There is the fait accompli strategy -- stay under the radar -- and the passive aggressive strategy, acts of terror used to paralyze and so on -- so the bottom line must be balance. Rationality must rule. There are philosophical approaches to economics. However, at this point, we don't so much need philosophy as we need action. Which way to proceed is the question."

A cynic might conclude that...ah, never mind.

Hmmm.

Today's Trump sure doesn't sound like he did way back in 2014 either.

I'm sure glad Trump and I never became golfing buddies...

A cynic might conclude that...ah, never mind. 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

4 hours ago, merjet said:

1. Heh. Wrong again.

2. Without proof, it's just another of your arbitrary assertions.

3. Wrong again. China provides artificially cheap exports because it subsidizes the manufacturers. The yuan is a red herring (link).

Donald Trump’s hypocrisy on trade.

Sorry, Merlin.

I stand by what I say. (btw - Of course the Chinese government subsidizes manufacturing, some of it. But it also manipulates the currency to help. It's not either-or. Let the readers read the articles you and I posted and see which makes the most sense to them. My opinion of the ones you posted is this: people in the press just wrote some bad things about Trump. Whoop-dee-do. Where have I seen that before? )

As to the rest, I'm going with the guy who makes billions overseas on the open market actually building stuff, has been doing it for years, and has been doing it in countries that have all kinds of different governments. Trump definitely knows what he is doing. His results prove it. As they say, money talks and bullshit walks.

And as to bullshit walking, as the latest article says, some elite insiders think Trump is a hypocrite on trade--yada yada yada. But then again, this time, some of them have their insider game threatened for real. Why did they stop laughing at Trump? I thought he was a real yuckfest for them.

These eminent eminencies were nowhere near to be found when all those factories and companies closed down throughout middle America over decades of government foreign trade rigging and immigration monkeyshines. I guess they were too busy counting their insider loot. Now they come snarking and crying, but I doubt all those middle Americans (the ones who got squeezed and are now going to elect Trump as president) are going to be shedding many tears over their lost insider profits from the rigged system.

The only good thing that the corrupted foreign trade system did was create some American millionaires out of people who managed to figure the rigging out. I imagine there are many good people among them. I sure hope they are flexible enough to learn how to compete in a free market instead of a rigged one because the rigged one is going to take a hard hit... Brexit was just a harbinger.

(btw - After all the squawking, I don't think the insiders will get hurt all that much. I predict they will adapt just fine to a legitimately free market and start carving out new ways to game the system. )

So we will have to agree to disagree.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here's a worry-wart discussion about Trump and the Chamber of Commerce from Morning Joe.

I'm posting this to show how Trump keeps surprising his harshest critics and they can't help but praise him.

But they made a huuuuuuuuuuuge mistake in that video. One of those dudes at the end offered false-dichotomy thinking: that technology in the government-controlled healthcare market is what steals free-market manufacturing jobs in the USA, not so much foreign trade deals. That's exactly what that dude said. He made it sound like one thing had to do with the other, insinuating that it was the public's fault for wanting to stay stupid and not learn technology. (Talk about elitist bullshit.  )

But they made an even greater mistake. They thought that Trump going after the Chamber of Commerce was a campaign strategy only (for which they said over and over that he's brilliant). What they didn't realize was that Trump is serious. He's going after the Chamber of Commerce for crony capitalism, not because he is manipulating voters. The  Chamber of Commerce folks attacked him, so Trump's giving it right back. And underneath the counterpunching, he really does believe they are making raw deals for Americans. It just so happens that the voters think the same thing he does. 

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Heh.

I love how Trump's people keep making these little ragged-ass videos with a gigantic punch.

Michael

[Jonathan]

30 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Here's a worry-wart discussion about Trump and the Chamber of Commerce from Morning Joe.

I've always thought that Mika should try to work more smirky smugness and eye-rolling into her act. She doesn't do enough of it.

J

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

5 minutes ago, Jonathan said:

I've always thought that Mika should try to work more smirky smugness and eye-rolling into her act. She doesn't do enough of it.

Jonathan,

Have some mercy!

Mika just got divorced--I think it was today.  Seriously...

I wonder when we are going to have any news about her hooking up with J... (er... but I gossip...  ).

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here's Newt talking about Trump and various things on a Facebook livecast.

It looks like he and Chris Christie are being vetted for VP.

I hope he gets it because he would bring an intellectual touch to Trump's overall image without losing his middle-American resonance.

Besides, I have a theory that Trump is going to rehabilitate Sarah Palin's public image from what the media did to her (and continues to do). How will he do this? With a cabinet appointment. It's hard to keep her as the punchline when she is wielding national power.

And don't forget that Newt, who will be too old to run in 8 years, had invited Sarah to be his own VP when he was running. So both The Donald and Newt in power and behind Sarah will be a great thing for her to become the first woman president.

Let's see if that plays out.

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

44 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Here's Newt talking about Trump and various things on a Facebook livecast.

It looks like he and Chris Christie are being vetted for VP.

I hope he gets it because he would bring an intellectual touch to Trump's overall image without losing his middle-American resonance.

Besides, I have a theory that Trump is going to rehabilitate Sarah Palin's public image from what the media did to her (and continues to do). How will he do this? With a cabinet appointment. It's hard to keep her as the punchline when she is wielding national power.

And don't forget that Newt, who will be too old to run in 8 years, had invited Sarah to be his own VP when he was running. So both The Donald and Newt in power and behind Sarah will be a great thing for her to become the first woman president.

Let's see if that plays out.

Michael

Christie would add some weigh t to the ticket...

[KorbenDallas]

6 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Christie would add some weigh t to the ticket...

haha, Christie liked it too

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Just one more point on Trump supposedly being a foreign trade dufus.

Here are a few of the men on Trump's team so far (a couple informally):

Paul Manafort
Larry Kudlow (Heritage Foundation)
Stephen Moore (Heritage Foundation
Steven Mnuchin, (Dune Capital Management)
Carl Icahn
Jeff Sessions
Newt Gingrich
Chris Christie
Rudy Giuliani

There's a much larger list, but that's good for starters.

Does anyone seriously think these folks don't know what foreign currency manipulation is or does? And does anyone think they would work for a man (or beside him in front of the entire world) who was an ignoramus about it?

Dayaamm!

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

9 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Just one more point on Trump supposedly being a foreign trade dufus.

Here are a few of the men on Trump's team so far (a couple informally):

Paul Manafort
Larry Kudlow (Heritage Foundation)
Stephen Moore (Heritage Foundation
Steven Mnuchin, (Dune Capital Management)
Carl Icahn
Jeff Sessions
Newt Gingrich
Chris Christie
Rudy Giuliani

There's a much larger list, but that's good for starters.

Does anyone seriously think these folks don't know what foreign currency manipulation is or does? And does anyone think they would work for a man (or beside him in front of the entire world) who was an ignoramus about it?

Dayaamm!

Michael

And Trump  himself who can always say:  "You're fired!"

[merjet]

10 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Just one more point on Trump supposedly being a foreign trade dufus.

Here are a few of the men on Trump's team so far (a couple informally):

Paul Manafort
Larry Kudlow (Heritage Foundation)
Stephen Moore (Heritage Foundation
Steven Mnuchin, (Dune Capital Management)
Carl Icahn
Jeff Sessions
Newt Gingrich
Chris Christie
Rudy Giuliani

There's a much larger list, but that's good for starters.

Does anyone seriously think these folks don't know what foreign currency manipulation is or does? And does anyone think they would work for a man (or beside him in front of the entire world) who was an ignoramus about it?

Dayaamm!

Michael

Name-dropping proves nothing. Yes, I'm confident the political players among them are skilled at demagoguery.

Just like Republican Senator Rob Portman, who is running for re-election in Ohio. One of his tv ads starts with a steel worker saying China's "dumping" steel has taken jobs from American steelworkers. True enough. Then it shows Portman speaking on the Senate floor, along with another voice and text proclaiming Portman has introduced a bill to investigate currency manipulation. Whoopee!! Sorry, Portman, you have no jurisdiction over China, and you are chasing a red herring. While MSK might cheer, I see Portman's fallacies of misplaced cause and trying to create a false impression that he can alter the situation.

Here is a graph of the yuan-USD exchange rate. I picked a 2-yr span to show how little and slowly the exchange rate has changed -- a meager 7% over two years. Whoop-de-do!! Yes, there is a blip in Aug 2015 when China officially devalued the exchange rate by 2%. Oh my, that's a ton of manipulation going on. More seriously, the Chinese central bank has far less control over the exchange rate than MSK wants you to believe. There are many, many players in the international currencies market and they don't have to play by rules dictated by China. 

Yes, the yuan has been weakening versus the US dollar since about last December. But that is much more the strengthening of the dollar than China's "currency manipulation." The dollar is a far big player on the international monetary stage than the yuan. Also, "currency manipulation" is a two-edged sword. If China were to try weakening the yuan, say, to boost exports, that makes China's imports more expensive, e.g. crude oil and iron ore. Demagogues can and do ignore that, but reality doesn't go away. 

[merjet]

MSK, I suggest you give Trump a call and inform him that Larry Kudlow and Stephen Moore oppose him on trade protection and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (link).