• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

President Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nothing to be concerned about here. Just the least prepared President-Elect in history getting fewer intel briefings for no reason.

President-elect Donald Trump has received two classified intelligence briefings since his surprise election victory earlier this month, a frequency that is notably lower — at least so far — than that of his predecessors, current and former U.S. officials said.

A team of intelligence analysts has been prepared to deliver daily briefings on global developments and security threats to Trump in the two weeks since he won. Vice President-elect Mike Pence, by contrast, has set aside time for intelligence briefings almost every day since the election, officials said.
Click to expand...

A President enamoured with cronyism and too arrogant to know what he doesn't know combined with a disinterest in learning is a reassuring combination.
 
Last edited:
Why do people make the mistake of assuming that what's good for Wall Street is good for the ordinary people? Okay it may raise the value of your pension pot a little, but Wall Street usually gets excited by things that are bad for workers; like mergers, takeovers, deregulation and outsourcing labour to cut costs and boost the bottom line. They are happy because they see themselves being allowed to throw off any semblance of restraint they had to impose after the last crash they caused. They are looking forward to seeing Blue Collar workers taking pay cuts, losing benefits, or just being out and fired as they are replaced by foreign worker or automation.
 
Garrison said:
Why do people make the mistake of assuming that what's good for Wall Street is good for the ordinary people?
Click to expand...

There's a lot of middle and upper middle class wealth invested in the stock market.

When it's up, those folks are more likely to sell some investments and take a profit, and use those profits to buy a new car, a motorcycle, an RV, a tractor, a second home, whatever. That spending benefits businesses and employees at all levels, from business owners to mechanics to factory workers to salesmen and so on.

The left likes to disparage "trickle down", but it seems obvious on the face of it that people having extra money to buy stuff does, in fact, trickle down into the economy. Inversely, increasing something like the capital gains tax or overall tax rates gives people less to spend, with obvious negative effects on "ordinary people".
 
Aarrrgh. Another reason for me to bitch about the press. From the Washington Post:

President-elect Donald Trump has received two classified intelligence briefings since his surprise election victory earlier this month, a frequency that is notably lower — at least so far — than that of his predecessors, current and former U.S. officials said.
Click to expand...

Why does anyone feel the need to add "at least so far"? And the "lede" of the story is stupid. The headline makes it clear that Donald is turning down briefings. That is a far more salient point than the fact that he hasn't received them. Maybe these days it's OK to not lead with the most important information if it's covered by the headline. That's not how it used to work.

Donald knows he'd forget anyway, so have Pence do it.
 
I'm going to my brother-in-law's mother's house tomorrow for Thanksgiving dinner. She is a yuge Trump supporter. She asked me to bring a bottle of wine. I have just the thing.
picture.php
 
Fast Eddie B said:
The left likes to disparage "trickle down", but it seems obvious on the face of it that people having extra money to buy stuff does, in fact, trickle down into the economy. Inversely, increasing something like the capital gains tax or overall tax rates gives people less to spend, with obvious negative effects on "ordinary people".
Click to expand...

Whether it trickles down from rich people or trickles down from the government, the money still circulates, right? What's the difference between Bill Gates spending it and the government spending it?

Scenario A: Cut taxes on the rich, and they spend that money.
Scenario B: Raise taxes on the rich, give it to the poor, and they spend the money.

I know there's an argument that Bill will somehow spend that money better, whereas if the government takes it, it will disappear into a black hole. I'm not seeing it though. And while I'm thinking of it, you know how people fret about rising health-care costs? That money is also being circulated throughout the health-care system, creating jobs directly, or helping doctors buy vacation homes, etc. Some of it is trapped by the insurance companies, which are tasked with denying care in order to keep themselves profitable.

Sorry, this is an economics rant. [/derail]
 
Last edited:
We're back to bad picks for the cabinet. Betsy DeVos to be secretary of education.

DeVos is a strong advocate of charter schools and allowing parents to use vouchers for private and religious schools in the name of “choice”. Teachers’ unions condemned her appointment as a blow to equality of opportunity.

Lily Eskelsen García, president of the National Education Association, said: “Her efforts over the years have done more to undermine public education than support students. She has lobbied for failed schemes, like vouchers – which take away funding and local control from our public schools – to fund private schools at taxpayers’ expense. These schemes do nothing to help our most vulnerable students while they ignore or exacerbate glaring opportunity gaps.

“She has consistently pushed a corporate agenda to privatize, de-professionalize and impose cookie-cutter solutions to public education. By nominating Betsy DeVos, the Trump administration has demonstrated just how out of touch it is with what works best for students, parents, educators and communities.”
Click to expand...

Looks like the donor class isn't going anywhere despite campaign promises.
 
Minoosh said:
Whether it trickles down from rich people or trickles down from the government, the money still circulates, right? What's the difference between Bill Gates spending it and the government spending it?

Scenario A: Cut taxes on the rich, and they spend that money.
Scenario B: Raise taxes on the rich, give it to the poor, and they spend the money.

I know there's an argument that Bill will somehow spend that money better, whereas if the government takes it, it will disappear into a black hole. I'm not seeing it though. And while I'm thinking of it, you know how people fret about rising health-care costs? That money is also being circulated throughout the health-care system, creating jobs directly, or helping doctors buy vacation homes, etc. Some of it is trapped by the insurance companies, which are tasked with denying care in order to keep themselves profitable.

Sorry, this is an economics rant. [/derail]
Click to expand...

Really very good points, and ones I've made myself.

I think you anticipated my counter with your "Bill" argument. The free market may do a more efficient job of distributing those dollars. Or may not. But that's the idea, anyway.
 
Stacko said:
Looks like the donor class isn't going anywhere despite campaign promises.
Click to expand...

Is that a reference to her lobbying?

I'm conflicted on the subject of charter schools. In my state they are not connected to vouchers. They are just regular public schools. They are allowed to bend the rules when it comes to hiring - you can get a teaching job without being a certified teacher. Most end up wanting certified teachers anyway, though.
 
Minoosh said:
Is that a reference to her lobbying?

I'm conflicted on the subject of charter schools. In my state they are not connected to vouchers. They are just regular public schools. They are allowed to bend the rules when it comes to hiring - you can get a teaching job without being a certified teacher. Most end up wanting certified teachers anyway, though.
Click to expand...

Recruiting from Michigan is not a good source to bring someone in to push charter schools for the country.

Detroit now has a bigger share of students in charters than any American city except New Orleans, which turned almost all its schools into charters after Hurricane Katrina. But half the charters perform only as well, or worse than, Detroit’s traditional public schools.

“The point was to raise all schools,” said Scott Romney, a lawyer and board member of New Detroit, a civic group formed after the 1967 race riots here. “Instead, we’ve had a total and complete collapse of education in this city.”

...

But the city’s residents — many of them stranded here after whites and middle-class blacks fled in waves — will not share in any renaissance as long as only 10 percent of rising high school seniors score “college ready” on reading tests.
Click to expand...
 
Argumemnon said:
Trump's already having an impact on the rest of the world. Muad'dib help us.
Click to expand...
I didn't realize that you are a theist. WTF? :confused:
Captain_Swoop said:
Mexican Ambassador on CNN says Mexico isn't paying for any walls.
Click to expand...
The Mexican Government hasn't been able to pay for much of anything for about six decades. What's new?
Argumemnon said:
Gee, thanks. Now I have a mental picture of Trump as the snake in Genesis (with toupee, of course).
Click to expand...
That got a RL LOL, thanks. :thumbsup:
Captain_Swoop said:
In his NYT interview he says son-in-law Jared Kushner could help forge peace between Israel and Palestinians.
Does that mean he is going to appoint him to a diplomatic role?
Click to expand...
Nobody can do that, and some very good ones have tried. It's a gordian knot made from unobtanium. Jared ought to stick to real estate.
Craig4 said:
So Trump asked a British delegation to lobby against a wind farm that impacts one of his properties. He hasn't even been inaugurated and he's already debased the office. Donald Trump, our whore in chief.
Click to expand...
Trump's been fighting the wind farms regarding that golf course for two or three years. His being the Pres Elect has Fork All to do with it. It's been covered in golf magazines for a few years, FFS.

A note to you all: Inauguration is 20 January 2017. He ain't POTUS yet. Unbunch your panties.
 
Darth Rotor said:
A note to you all: Inauguration is 20 January 2017. He ain't POTUS yet. Unbunch your panties.
Click to expand...

While I do agree that there's been a lot of idiocy running around since the election results came in (on all sides, mark you), this has never been a particularly compelling bit of argumentation.

Trump is now the President-Elect. His actions matter. They effect United States politics both domestically and abroad. They absolutely can, will, and should be scrutinized and criticized where appropriate.

For the record, I would have said this no matter who the elect had turned out to be. It just happens that Trump has a hell of a lot more "where appropriate" going on than pretty much any other candidate in the past eternity.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I think you anticipated my counter with your "Bill" argument. The free market may do a more efficient job of distributing those dollars. Or may not. But that's the idea, anyway.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty literal-minded so I have to put it in concrete terms. Bill's taxes are lower, maybe he builds a factory in Mississippi that employs 1,000 people, revitalizing a depressed area with a hand up, not a handout. But to switch gizmo makers, Apple is reportedly sitting on hundreds of billions of dollars, and if it were creating jobs they could well be in Malaysia.

If Trump has real economic ideas, great. But he specializes in luxury properties that house people who are willing and able to pay for pampering, in some cases happily surrendering cash to lose on the floor of a glitzy casino. So, OK, he is (probably) fairly successful in that area. Driving a hard bargain, that sounded good. But it seemed that really meant he screwed people after the fact.

There are people I would probably trust with growing a complex economy. Not sure Trump is the guy, though. A Japanese car could be built entirely in America, and more or less vice versa, and delicate issues are in play. It's probably more complicated than building casinos and hotels.
 
Stacko said:
Recruiting from Michigan is not a good source to bring someone in to push charter schools for the country.
Click to expand...

Interesting. One charter company I work for originated in Michigan. (Not the one in the article). I've had the opportunity to work in dozens of charters. I think they have a place, but as the article states services tend to become very fragmented, and ultimately charters do tend to undermine traditional schools. At first they were a niche market but that has changed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom