The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: Harm to Ongoing Matter - Page 184 - Politics and Economics

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Politics

The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: Harm to Ongoing Matter

...

Page 184 of 598

First

84 134 164 174 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 194 204 234 284 384

Last

Page 184 of 598

First

84 134 164 174 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 194 204 234 284 384

Last

01-23-2019 , 09:02 AM

#4576

Clovis8

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 16,503

Quote:

Originally Posted by realDonaldTrump

( twitter | raw text )

More than one million was paid to some PR firm to come up with this one.

01-23-2019 , 09:05 AM

#4577

ChrisV

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 40,336

Completely disagree, Trump came up with that himself.

01-23-2019 , 09:06 AM

#4578

DTD

veteran

Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 2,326

Wouldn't "the" wall make more sense? Unless he's just big on walls in general I guess.

I suspect that Trump came up with this all by himself - it's a crappy line but he seems very pleased with it.

01-23-2019 , 09:07 AM

#4579

SuperUberBob

Not interesting enough

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 48,217

How can anybody make any deal with Trump? The guy routinely ****s people over and never holds his end of the bargain unless it's to his benefit. Any deal made for the wall is gonna be completely ignored once he gets funding for it.

Of course the reality is that this shutdown has nothing to do with the wall. This shutdown is about preventing the House from subpoenaing things that would embarrass Trump such as his tax returns. IMO, this shutdown will run as long as Trump is POTUS.

01-23-2019 , 09:09 AM

#4580

gregorio

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 39,313

Humpty Trumpy pushed for a wall.
Humpty Trumpy primed for a fall.
All of Trump's lawyers,
Whatever they preached,
Couldn't stop Trumpy from getting impeached.

01-23-2019 , 09:12 AM

#4581

smacc25

veteran

Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 2,969

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperUberBob

Imo your not far off Sub, he's realised that the FBI ain't getting paid and therefore he can ride this out till 2020, he don't care for his base 1 little bit & there starting to wake up to him..... The further his base falls the longer this shutdown goes on.

01-23-2019 , 09:18 AM

#4582

smacc25

veteran

Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 2,969

When you don't get paid UK style.....

https://youtu.be/XBbDlzAcExI
Longer clip......

https://youtu.be/yAL21gFSFcw

Im sure I was doing it correctly too

01-23-2019 , 09:49 AM

#4583

weeeez

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 3,727

I've got a few questions about the shutdown as I'm not familiar with it.
1-was the shutdown voted or the president alone declared it?
2-does it need to be a special set of reasons/circumstances to declare a shutdown? (i.e or can you declare a shutdown whenever opposition vote no?)
3-if no reasons for shutdown needed why have votes at all?
4-who decides when the shutdown ends?
5-why this shutdown law exists?seems really weird.

01-23-2019 , 09:52 AM

#4584

master3004

Revisionist Historian

Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 56,419

Its not like somebody declared shutdown Michael Scott style. Its that the government did not come to an agreement on a budget/funding and therefore have no way to allocate funds to federal workers.

01-23-2019 , 09:54 AM

#4585

ligastar

ToP 100 pAsS cAtChErS

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 30,915

most recent 538 figures (updated 23 minutes ago):

01-23-2019 , 10:00 AM

#4586

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,698

Quote:

Originally Posted by weeeez

Answer to #4 is basically Mitch McConnell.

01-23-2019 , 11:12 AM

#4587

Coasterbrad

veteran

Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 2,712

Trump is so proud of that complex A-A rhyme scheme he came up with. Probably asked Pence for a gold star sticker for being such a good boy.

01-23-2019 , 11:21 AM

#4588

otatop

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,721

Quote:

Originally Posted by realDonaldTrump

( twitter | raw text )

It's too bad this great Republican leader didn't come up with this brilliant strategy back when he could easily have gotten anything he wanted passed.

01-23-2019 , 11:24 AM

#4589

ScreaminAsian

For President

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 33,333

Quote:

Originally Posted by realDonaldTrump

( twitter | raw text )

He just let it slip that it's been his plan all along to shut down the government for the entire 116th congress

01-23-2019 , 11:31 AM

#4590

NhlNut

KANGZ

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 18,185

Percentage of Rs who consider shutdown a good way to privatize govt services?
(corollary to the Reagan "Fire them all" method of collective bargaining)

01-23-2019 , 11:34 AM

#4591

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,698

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

Answer to #4 is basically Mitch McConnell.

To flesh this out, only way this ends is either

1. Trump caves, gives up the wall.

2. Dems cave, they give trump his $5bn for the wall.

3. McConnell defies Trump and the Senate comes together to pass a veto-proof funding bill.

4. Pelosi and Trump agree on some kind of comporimise ($2bn in exchange for DACA or whatever).

You could make a credible argument for why any/all parties are responsible for the shutdown, which is why it was nice for Trump to publicly accept the blame for it.

01-23-2019 , 11:41 AM

#4592

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by NhlNut

Percentage of Rs who consider shutdown a good way to privatize govt services?
(corollary to the Reagan "Fire them all" method of collective bargaining)

I'm not sure they care about **** like that anymore, unless the really ramp up the propaganda about these 800000 people all being black people and/or Democrats. We're way past "principled" Republican policy stances. The only thing they could agree on in the last two years while holding total control was borrowing more money to give to rich people.

01-23-2019 , 11:44 AM

#4593

microbet

Solar Powered

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 56,446

Quote:

Originally Posted by aarono2690

I commonly see people propose an increase to legal immigration as part of a compromise for the wall. Why is this considered a good trade off?

Doesn’t seem to gain political advantage for the Democratic Party. HR-1 would atleast help ensure voting rights and fight corruption.

I assume it has a negative impact on low wage/skill workers who will now face even lower demand for their labor. A lot of the Democratic party support comes from low income voters so this seems odd to me.

A lot of first generation immigrants have been very conservative in the past, I assume this to hold especially if they’re fleeing Venezuela, drug violence, or are strong Catholic as they’ll probably fall for Conservative rhetoric.

As far as I'm concerned there is no less welcome sentiment in the Democratic party than this. I'd take Bloomberg over such nationalism any day.

01-23-2019 , 11:53 AM

#4594

Namath12

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 55,849

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWookie

The Koch STARVE THE BEAST wing of the party absolutely loves it.

01-23-2019 , 12:01 PM

#4595

well named

poorly undertitled

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 78,077

Quote:

Originally Posted by aarono2690

This is an area of at least some dispute between different economists but the effect is almost certainly smaller than you might think. See for example Peri (2007):

Quote:

"If U.S. States were independent countries, California would be the second largest receiving country for international migrants in the whole world (after Russia) with its 8.5 million foreign-born as of 2004. Moreover, its proximity to Mexico and a porous border generated extremely large flows of uneducated Mexican workers (documented and undocumented), at a growing rate, during the last three decades. With one third of its total labor force made up by immigrants, two thirds of its uneducated workers coming from abroad and a rapidly rising foreign-born population, that grew by 40% in the last 14 years, surely native Californians (particularly the unskilled ones) must have suffered the most from the negative effects of this ”immigration crisis” on their employment opportunities and wages.

The present study, that analyzes employment and wage data in California over the 1960-2004 period, seems to say otherwise. On one hand, immigrants do not seem to increase the tendency of natives with similar skills (education and experience) to migrate, or to otherwise change their likelihood of losing their jobs and dropping out of employment. On the other hand, the impact of immigration over the 1990-2004 period has been negative on the wages of previous immigrants and positive on the wages of U.S. natives, revealing a good degree of complementarity between U.S. and foreign-born workers that benefits (rather then harms) native workers’ productivity."

What they found instead was that new waves of immigration had a larger negative impact on wages of prior immigrants rather than on the native born. In other words, the effect you're worried about can happen but the ship has already sailed and the economy has already adjusted such that native workers are not really competing for those jobs. They do get the other benefits associated with immigrant labor though, i.e. cheaper goods.

01-23-2019 , 12:09 PM

#4596

aarono2690

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 3,870

Quote:

Originally Posted by microbet

As far as I'm concerned there is no less welcome sentiment in the Democratic party than this. I'd take Bloomberg over such nationalism any day.

Neat.

01-23-2019 , 12:12 PM

#4597

aarono2690

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 3,870

Quote:

Originally Posted by well named

This is an area of at least some dispute between different economists but the effect is almost certainly smaller than you might think. See for example Peri (2007):

What they found instead was that new waves of immigration had a larger negative impact on wages of prior immigrants rather than on the native born. In other words, the effect you're worried about can happen but the ship has already sailed and the economy has already adjusted such that native workers are not really competing for those jobs. They do get the other benefits associated with immigrant labor though, i.e. cheaper goods.

Thanks for addressing my questions. I’ll look at this more when I get home.

01-23-2019 , 12:13 PM

#4598

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Namath12

The Koch STARVE THE BEAST wing of the party absolutely loves it.

Yeah but that wing is like 2 people, Joe and Blow Koch.

01-23-2019 , 12:14 PM

#4599

dinopoker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 9,437

Quote:

Originally Posted by markksman

I would like to ask them if they would forego being paid for their job in the name of this security? Because they could donate their pay to federal workers to put their money where their mouth is.

Except they'll say yes and then not do it.

The reality is that the ultra right is a-ok with the government being shut down, because they hate it. Many also probably think that without all those leechy government employees out there not getting paid eventually their taxes will go down.

Last edited by dinopoker; 01-23-2019 at 12:28 PM.