Donald Trump is the 45th President of the United States.

[franklin]

That's the funny thing. Trump's trade policy is leftist populism through and through. And now many of the life-long capitalists are like "you know, maybe the free-market isn't great. Let's give protectionism a chance!".

This is more or less hate speech. You're trying to paint capitalists as Laissez-faire.

Capitalists are against unfair competition practices, no matter whether that comes from monopolies, intentionally operating at a loss to bankrupt competitors, mercantilism, subsidizing your industries, environmental advantages from unregulated industries, currency manipulation, and business lead regulation statutes (Trump has a damn good point on what drives environmental regulation).

 

[Deleted member 848]

That's the funny thing. Trump's trade policy is leftist populism through and through. And now many of the life-long capitalists are like "you know, maybe the free-market isn't great. Let's give protectionism a chance!".

yeah. It's mega rich. Hantlers' line about "well it needs fixing!" is just funny cuz clearly its gonna be fixed in a way that moves realllyyy to the left

 

[Deleted member 848]

This is more or less hate speech. You're trying to paint capitalists as Laissez-faire.

Capitalists are against unfair competition practices, no matter whether that comes from monopolies, intentionally operating at a loss to bankrupt competitors, mercantilism, subsidizing your industries, environmental advantages from unregulated industries, currency manipulation, and business lead regulation statutes (Trump has a damn good point on what drives environmental regulation).

no politicians on either side of the aisle have given two ****s about regulation and monopolies since about the 70s

 

[franklin]

do you deny the existence of environmental refugees already existing?

LMAO your continuous use of buzzwords cracks me up. Hey [MENTION=499]LogGrad98[/MENTION] are you aware of the Irish potato blight environmental refugees of 1845? Deny that, bitch!

no politicians on either side of the aisle have given two ****s about regulation and monopolies since about the 70s

I sort of agree. Depends on what issue we are talking about and in what context. Consolidation is natural and tech advances have been pushing down the price of goods to keep duopolies in check. We are pretty much allowing old tech to consolidate while keeping a tight eye on new tech. As a practical example, we don't really care that washing machines are made cheaply in very few plants and then sold for the same exact price in the two major home improvement stores.

 

[Deleted member 848]

LMAO your continuous use of buzzwords cracks me up. Hey [MENTION=499]LogGrad98[/MENTION] are you aware of the Irish potato blight environmental refugees of 1845? Deny that, bitch!

*yawn*

can you drop the immature shtick already?

 

[Siro]

This is more or less hate speech. You're trying to paint capitalists as Laissez-faire.

Capitalists are against unfair competition practices, no matter whether that comes from monopolies, intentionally operating at a loss to bankrupt competitors, mercantilism, subsidizing your industries, environmental advantages from unregulated industries, currency manipulation, and business lead regulation statutes (Trump has a damn good point on what drives environmental regulation).

I have not stated any position on the issue. I am pointing out the hypocrisy and partisanship in the sudden acceptance of anti-trade rhetoric. I don't recall the same enthusiasm from the capitalists when Sanders was saying the same things.

 

[franklin]

I have not stated any position on the issue. I am pointing out the hypocrisy and partisanship in the sudden acceptance of anti-trade rhetoric. I don't recall the same enthusiasm from the capitalists when Sanders was saying the same things.

I realized. I'm guilty of the same as I've said plenty about the hypocrisy of the left doing the same flip-flopping against Trump. Where I disagree with you is that I see Trump's stance as fair trade and not protectionism. He wants to renegotiate, not repeal.

I also have a soft spot for gameface's stance but I think the right way to go about attacking poverty is exactly how we have been. Change happens over time, not overnight.

 

[Deleted member 848]

today i learned repealing the TPP is *actually* conservative!

 

[LogGrad98]

do you deny the existence of environmental refugees already existing?

So are you referring to the migration that happens when natural disasters strike as has been happening for all of human history? Or the buzzword to drive fear-driven policy changes of "REFUGEE" (imagine that echoing in a deep voice, it's a good effect)? Remember the hubbub when, was it New Zealand(?) offered to take on the entire nation of Tuvalu when the obviously impending flooding of the country occurred, that, oh, didn't happen? But please give us the facts about the refugees from areas that will never be livable again due to climate change. Exactly how many refugees are there that will NEVER be able to go back to their homes due to climate change?


(To be fair in 2015 one island was evacuated due to a cyclone, which is something that has been happening to Tuvalu for as long as people can remember. They are all back home now.)



Also can you please provide that hard scientific timeline for us so we know exactly what to expect? So far pretty much every timeline that has ever been presented has proven wrong.

 

[Siro]

I realized. I'm guilty of the same as I've said plenty about the hypocrisy of the left doing the same flip-flopping against Trump. Where I disagree with you is that I see Trump's stance as fair trade and not protectionism. He wants to renegotiate, not repeal.

I also have a soft spot for gameface's stance but I think the right way to go about attacking poverty is exactly how we have been. Change happens over time, not overnight.

I distinctly recall Trump's campaign talking about imposing 30% tariffs on goods from Mexico. More specifically, it was in response to Ford's plan to build a factory in Mexico. That's protectionism. If all we're trying to do is update NAFTA to make it fairer and more beneficial to all parties, then that's great. But I am worried we'll go farther than that.

Now I don't actually think international trade agreements have helped the US that much. But it is hard to argue that they haven't helped developing countries. I am afraid that the shift in American sentiment will hurt those countries, as I prefer to continue down the path of increased globalization and mutual development.

This is emphasized when climate change is taken into account. I am of the opinion that climate change will create new economic opportunities in the developed world and drive technological innovation. But developing countries are vulnerable, and I prefer an outlook that focuses on maximizing their development over the next few decades.

 

[Deleted member 848]

So are you referring to the migration that happens when natural disasters strike as has been happening for all of human history?

nope

Or the buzzword to drive fear-driven policy changes of "REFUGEE" (imagine that echoing in a deep voice, it's a good effect)?

I'm not sure you realize how childish some of your posts come across. This is one of those times.

Remember the hubbub when, was it New Zealand(?) offered to take on the entire nation of Tuvalu when the obviously impending flooding of the country occurred, that, oh, didn't happen? But please give us the facts about the refugees from areas that will never be livable again due to climate change. Exactly how many refugees are there that will NEVER be able to go back to their homes due to climate change?

I asked you a question first. I am getting a lot of ranting, and not a lot of answering I am afraid.

(To be fair in 2015 one island was evacuated due to a cyclone, which is something that has been happening to Tuvalu for as long as people can remember. They are all back home now.)

not the example i am referring to

Also can you please provide that hard scientific timeline for us so we know exactly what to expect? So far pretty much every timeline that has ever been presented has proven wrong.

i am not quite sure what you are referring to. A hard scientific timeline for what exactly. And define hard. And if you dont answer my questions why should i answer yours...

 

[Deleted member 848]

I distinctly recall Trump's campaign talking about imposing 30% tariffs on goods from Mexico. More specifically, it was in response to Ford's plan to build a factory in Mexico. That's protectionism. If all we're trying to do is update NAFTA to make it fairer and more beneficial to all parties, then that's great. But I am worried we'll go farther than that.

Now I don't actually think international trade agreements have helped the US that much. But it is hard to argue that they haven't helped developing countries. I am afraid that the shift in American sentiment will hurt those countries, as I prefer to continue down the path of increased globalization and mutual development.

This is emphasized when climate change is taken into account. I am of the opinion that climate change will create new economic opportunities in the developed world and drive technological innovation. But developing countries are vulnerable, and I prefer an outlook that focuses on maximizing their development over the next few decades.

this notion of re-considering trade deals as anything other than socialism is just hilarious to me. Ya yellow-bellied suckers duped into being commies by some **** with orange hair

 

[Deleted member 848]

Leftists tried for an entire campaign to put anti-TPP legislation on the platform, and failed.

That stance was too liberal for the Democrats.

And in walks Trump saying he will do it within the first 100 days. Lmfao.

 

[UGLI baby]

Leftists tried for an entire campaign to put anti-TPP legislation on the platform, and failed.

That stance was too liberal for the Democrats.

And in walks Trump saying he will do it within the first 100 days. Lmfao.

What makes you say this about the TPP?

I ask this with next to no knowledge about any of it, so I ask with genuine curiosity because I haven't seen anyone saying what you are saying.

 

[UGLI baby]

I didn't quote it Dala, but my question is in reference to your previous post too.

 

[Deleted member 848]

What makes you say this about the TPP?

I ask this with next to no knowledge about any of it, so I ask with genuine curiosity because I haven't seen anyone saying what you are saying.

which part-- that it is getting repealed.... cuz i pulled that from the Trump in his first 100 days link that Hantlers shared.

The anti-TPP Democrat stuff is all over the net. I could list 100 links that talk about frustrated Berniecrats who fumed about Hillary saying she was not completely pro TPP (during a debate) but then did not alter the platform after the nomination

 

[UGLI baby]

which part-- that it is getting repealed.... cuz i pulled that from the Trump in his first 100 days link that Hantlers shared.

The anti-TPP Democrat stuff is all over the net. I could list 100 links that talk about frustrated Berniecrats who fumed about Hillary saying she was not completely pro TPP (during a debate) but then did not alter the platform after the nomination

Haha, maybe you'll grow to love Trump

Why specifically is renegotiating trade deals socialist??

 

[Deleted member 848]

Haha, maybe you'll grow to love Trump

There are a hundred things Trump does (and 100 people that Trump surrounds himself with) that disqualify this notion. I am allowed to agree with any politician on any given issue-- and repealing the TPP happens to be one of them

Why specifically is renegotiating trade deals socialist??

I said repealing the TPP is socialist. I am curious to here why that is not the case

 

[UGLI baby]

There are a hundred things Trump does (and 100 people that Trump surrounds himself with) that disqualify this notion. I am allowed to agree with any politician on any given issue-- and repealing the TPP happens to be one of them



I said repealing the TPP is socialist. I am curious to here why that is not the case

Bro, I don't know what the TPP is besides the name, and what I can infer from the name, and I don't know what about it is or isn't socialist. I'm not arguing with you, I'm asking you to edumacate me on your views/making conversation with one of the only interesting people that posts a lot about politics.

 

[UGLI baby]

Also I think I read what you said wrong maybe. I thought you were saying Trump was doing something Bernie wanted to do that was blocked. That's why I jokingly said you might grow to love Trump. I'm not an actual retard and know you'll never like him.