President Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
Depends on where you live. A gallon of gasoline in Washington State has a Federal tax of 18 cents and 44 cents goes to the State for a total of 62 cents a gallon. Revenue from the state tax goes to Highway programs including:
Constructing and maintaining state, city, and county roads, bridges, and ferries.
Purchasing right of ways.
Installing, maintaining, and operating traffic and signal lights.
Policing state public highways.
Operating movable span bridges.

But other governments around the world use it for basic services including health care and welfare as well.

My bold. Despite having been a moderately heavy ferry user for about the past 20 years, I've long thought it rather unfair for folks on the other side of the mountains to pay extra for their gas so wealthy lawyers living on Bainbridge can get to their offices in Seattle. The generally incompetent management of the ferry system doesn't help.

ETA: Remember the Republican candidate fior governor a few years back whose campaign was based almost entirely on A) blaming the sitting Democrat for a gas tax increase, which had actually been passed by the voters specifically for repairing the highways; and B) complaining about the poor state of the highways? He lost.
 
Last edited:
I doubt Trump rides NY City Transit very often, though as a developer he knows the value. In Manhattan, given the extreme population density, you can't develop an office or condo tower without having convenient transit access. He said during his campaign he wanted to invest a lot more money both in mass transit and high-speed passenger trains. But again here's the problem.

He expressed a desire but without outlining a program or specifics. I've seen transit professionals lament that, as with most of Trump's rhetoric, that was probably because he has no concrete plans, just talking points.

Worse, at this stage it's impossible to predict what will happen because, despite Trump stating support for transit and high-speed rail, the Republican platform did not. The Republican platform advocated an end to federal support for mass transit and to kill Amtrak once and for all. Where high-speed rail seems practical or viable it should be turned over to private interests. (President Bush tried that with Amtrak's Northeast Corridor and found no takers despite the fact the Amtrak's Northeast Corridor puts up pretty decent numbers.)

As with much of what Trump campaigned on doing, a lot will depend on his relationship with Congress and that is a huge unknown at this point. His total lack of government and political experience is not going to be much help. His verbal nonsense that some of the electorate found so compelling is probably not going to work too well with Congress.

I agree 100 percent Trump talks more like a Democrat on infrastructure but he hasn't a clue on specifics. And Republicans have been opposing infrastructure investment for decades.

It is this area that I have actual hope. It's been said that only Nixon could go to China. Reagan despite his rhetoric also did a lot to normalize relations with China. A political theory is that a Democrat couldn't have done those things because he would have been portrayed as soft on Communism. Perhaps this could be similar Trump is such a wild card, there is no way to know.
 
My bold. Despite having been a moderately heavy ferry user for about the past 20 years, I've long thought it rather unfair for folks on the other side of the mountains to pay extra for their gas so wealthy lawyers living on Bainbridge can get to their offices in Seattle. The generally incompetent management of the ferry system doesn't help.

ETA: Remember the Republican candidate fior governor a few years back whose campaign was based almost entirely on A) blaming the sitting Democrat for a gas tax increase, which had actually been passed by the voters specifically for repairing the highways; and B) complaining about the poor state of the highways? He lost.

I think they should have built a bridge years ago through or around Magnolia and across to the Islands and peninsula. Seattle is boxed in and needs affordable housing desperately. But transportation costs with the ferries are prohibitive.it may be unfair, but you could say that about all the blacktop required to service a small minority in the desert.

My issue are the wealthy obstructionists who prevent those highways because it spoils their million dollar views.
 
It is this area that I have actual hope. It's been said that only Nixon could go to China. Reagan despite his rhetoric also did a lot to normalize relations with China. A political theory is that a Democrat couldn't have done those things because he would have been portrayed as soft on Communism. Perhaps this could be similar Trump is such a wild card, there is no way to know.

That is because Nixon was a socialist. I mean he started the EPA how conservative can someone actually be who destroyed american jobs in that way?
 
My bold. Despite having been a moderately heavy ferry user for about the past 20 years, I've long thought it rather unfair for folks on the other side of the mountains to pay extra for their gas so wealthy lawyers living on Bainbridge can get to their offices in Seattle. The generally incompetent management of the ferry system doesn't help.
Meanwhile, western WA pays to keep highways in eastern WA clear of snow. The ferries are part of the state highway system after all. And they're the #1 tourist activity to boot, or so they say. All things considered, I suspect it balances out.
 
The space they want is a country where the president sets an example of human decency. Like Obama. Trump has not done that. His explicit approach is revenge and denigration, and it's interesting that people who think of themselves as christians find that appealing. many a veil being pierced.

Like Obama? That is hilarious!
The world hates us because of him and hillary. And the safe space is wanted because the left are pussies, proven over and over.

Yes Trump is ready to kick some ass, because many elites need an ass kicking and Jesus didn't come to unite, he came to call the faithful and to strike down his enemies with his two edged sword. ;)
 
Just so you know, your kind is outnumbered.

This election should be your first clue.
Your second might be your side having zero, zilch and nada in the power category. You've been so defeated you can see the smoke in Washington from the front range. ;)
 
Hasn't Trump picked only the elite for his cabinet, at this point?

Well, there are many who understand the constitution and want to restore it.

Please argumemnon, please don't make me explain the ruling elite to you again. An intellectual should not need so much explained to them.
 
Well, there are many who understand the constitution and want to restore it.

Please argumemnon, please don't make me explain the ruling elite to you again. An intellectual should not need so much explained to them.

Oh, no. By all means, explains how the team Trump is picking not "the elite" or "the establishment".
 
There's nothing emotional about it. You're drunk with power right now, but you don't seem to realise, don't care, or agree with the fact that the right in the US have historically curtailed the rights of women and minorities and have resisted much-needed change.
First of all, you and everyone else on here insinuate that republicans are racist by birth, when the whole history of democrats and republicans is easy for anyone to study. I respond with how ridiculous it is that you label me that and you respond with I'm emotional? Its incredible.

Your racist remark was what was emotional!


When do you evern have a reasonable argument? Whenever I try to get you to participate in one all you have to say is that people on the left don't listen to reason and thus aren't worth the effort.
I've been telling you this since you were Belz dot dot dot.
You do not comprehend the most simple conversation and I'm tired of explaining things to you.


Stop playing the victim. No one believes it for a second.
Do you think I give a **** what people on here believe, its happened to me.


See? You did it right there! You're building up a reason for why you'll never engage your opponents in a reasonable discussion. You don't _want_ a reasonable discussion.
I have plenty of reasonable discussions with reasonable people. ;)

Anyway, the coons and queers are about to get it, right?
Yeah sure, whatever helps your narrative.
 
Oh, no. By all means, explains how the team Trump is picking not "the elite" or "the establishment".
I'm going to watch you stumble through it instead. Its has to do with people who actually believe in our constitution, and as an aside. Did you see how he kicked out all the lobbyists? Of course you didn't. :rolleyes:
 
I'm going to watch you stumble through it instead. Its has to do with people who actually believe in our constitution, and as an aside. Did you see how he kicked out all the lobbyists? Of course you didn't. :rolleyes:

But he's keeping the guys that hired the lobbyists.
 
I'm going to watch you stumble through it instead.

In other words no, you can't explain it. It was all chest-thumping by you.

Its has to do with people who actually believe in our constitution, and as an aside.

Believe is one thing. Do they understand it profoundly? Because it kind of takes a bit of expertise for that. Damn! Those are elites, again!

Did you see how he kicked out all the lobbyists?

The ones he put there himself? Yeah I saw that.

Of course you didn't.

Oops. You should've waited for the answer.
 
First of all, you and everyone else on here insinuate that republicans are racist by birth

That is a lie. I have never said or implied anything of the sort. In accusing your opponents of painting with a wide brush you have done the same thing yourself. How does it feel to be a hypocrite?

What I said is that the right, as a general political force, has done these things. This does not in any way translate to what you accused me of saying. There are plenty of conservatives who aren't racists.

I respond with how ridiculous it is that you label me that and you respond with I'm emotional?

...no, YOU're the one who called me emotional, remember?

Your racist remark was what was emotional!

I'm pointing out the consequences of your choice.

I've been telling you this since you were Belz dot dot dot.

The amount of time you've been doing something wrong doesn't magically make it right.

You do not comprehend the most simple conversation and I'm tired of explaining things to you.

I comprehend things fine, but you might have more success with reasoned arguments rather than telling me that having said argument would be pointless.

Do you think I give a **** what people on here believe, its happened to me.

No it hasn't. You broke the membership agreement you signed. That is entirely on you.
 
In other news, where the writing isn't mine:
Retiring Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper...
... has said that in over 50 years of military and intelligence work, he has never seen the breadth of challenges facing the US as he does today. "Our nation is facing the most diverse array of threats that I've seen," he told the committee Thursday. At the hearing, Clapper was asked which threats will be of most concern to the US in the next 5-10 years. "I'm hesitant to pick one," he said. Clapper listed the challenges posed by nation states like Russia, China, North Korea and Iran, as well as transnational threats like terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, "which is personally a growing concern for me," he said, and "the challenges posed in the cyber dimension."

Not necessarily meant by him as a rebuke or editorial comment. However, it does serve as ballast for making certain arguments on ISF, oh, such as the informed and sober nature of recognizing the very real, very present dangers of being flippant about thermonuclear warfare.

Then:
[In the US today] More people use prescription opioids than use tobacco. There are more people with substance abuse disorders than people with cancer. One in five Americans binge drink. And substance abuse disorders cost the U.S. more than $420 billion a year.
So, maybe getting stoned in the sticks and warming to Putin is just what the country needs.... to make it swift and merciless.

However, this comment from a Western resident in China is quite more educational. The author, like anyone, has his faults, such as not filtering Chomsky, but regardless, insightful and apropos to my consistent arguments about dropping civilizational trouser:
China’s intellectuals are often “Party” thinkers, but as Mark Leonard noted in Prospect Magazine as long ago as 2008, despite the global interest in the rise of China, no one is paying much attention to its ideas and who produces them. “China,” Leonard says, “has a surprisingly lively intellectual class whose ideas may prove a serious challenge to western liberal hegemony.” One thing that became clear after the false start of the 1000 Flowers Campaign in 1957 and especially since Deng Xiaoping’s reforms in 1986, China has begun the debate of the role of the intellectual in society. It is not strong enough or thorough enough just yet, but compared to America where the intellectual is a leper, and science is regarded, like the arts, as an extravagance, intellectualism is respected and taken seriously. China cannot yet love its critical intellectuals as they deserve to be loved, but it would like to. America by contrast has no real use for the life of the mind: it is to America what political dissidence is to China, the punishment being irrelevance rather than imprisonment or silencing. In the long run, however, it is the voice of Emerson and Thoreau, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Howard Zinn that changed our perception of America, in ways that will not let smart women and men go back to pre-reflective times.

China knows that a coherent vision of the state is necessary for a sustainable patriotism. It is simply no longer possible for Americans to feel the patriotism they once felt during the early twentieth century; it has been unrevivable—impossible– since Viet Nam, and even discussions of it seem nostalgic and stale. Except for the solitary exception of 9-11, Americans no longer are able to evoke patriotic emotions evoked by a single source or threat. In its place they have put a contrived interest in the security of the “homeland” (mark the phrase). They have learned to fear Syrians, Mexican immigrants, undocumented “aliens.” And they have learned to “foreignize” political correctness, gay marriage, abortion rights, Obamacare, and sensible limits to second amendment “rights” as a composite European bogeyman whose slaying would make America the awesome country—safe, secure, unequivocally self-confident– it once was.

But it was never that country.

Getting smart about getting smart and staying smart is the best long term geostrategic play in the ever-increasingly knowledge-driven economy. But then, Labor Secretary Robert Reich, under Bill Clinton, already told everyone that, oh, two decades ago.:eye-poppi
 
Like Obama? That is hilarious!
The world hates us because of him and hillary. And the safe space is wanted because the left are pussies, proven over and over.

Yes Trump is ready to kick some ass, because many elites need an ass kicking and Jesus didn't come to unite, he came to call the faithful and to strike down his enemies with his two edged sword. ;)

What the hell are you talking about? The world hates us because of Obama and Hillary? Such a moronic statement. Are there factions in the world that are unhappy because of some of OBAMA'S policies? I'm sure of it. But I'm also sure there are many nations with the opposite perspective. This was true about George W. and every president and it will be about Trump.

Why don't you discuss some specific criticisms instead of sweeping generalizations? Otherwise, you're just spouting partisan nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Hasn't Trump picked only the elite for his cabinet, at this point?

He had not officially announced ANybody for his Cabinent. The only ones he has officially announced is his WHite House staff, and he seems to be trying to fix Establishment figures with Trump Loyalist.
But I agree that Trump selling himself as a anti Elitist might be the biggest Con Job in the history of Con Jobs.
 
What the hell are you talking about? The world hates us because of Obama and Hillary? Such a moronic statement. Are there factions in the world that are unhappy because of some of OBAMA'S policies? I'm sure of it. But I'm also sure there are many nations with the opposite perspective. This was true about George W. and every president and it will be about Trump.

Why don't you discuss some specific criticisms instead of sweeping generalizations? Otherwise, you're just spouting partisan nonsense.

Gee ,logger, has forgotten how much Dubya was hated.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom