A Futile and Stupid Gesture: The History of the First Trump Presidency & Q-Anon

[Grand Potentate]

Free trade agreements are a way to ultimately equalise conditions between countries. It's already working, Japan is on the same level as the western world, same as Korea, or look at Eastern Europe for example, and China is very close and getting too expensive for "slave labour". It'll take another lifetime but we'll get there. It's a long term thing. We might have to give up a little so that people in other countries can enjoy the luxuries we've had for the past century, but that's only fair, no?

What's more likely is that it's not a zero-sum game, and that we'll all win in the long run, even OfficePants .

No, I don't think that's fair at all. Our job as a country isn't to prop up other countries at the expense of our people. If the Chinese want to get out of slavery then that's their business, not ours, and our fate shouldn't be left up to them. The idea that all Americans should have to work 2 to three jobs and constantly have tens of thousands in debt just so a third world country can give their people's the illusion of progress is laughable.

 

[Monkeyface]

No, I don't think that's fair at all. Our job as a country isn't to prop up other countries at the expense of our people. If the Chinese want to get out of slavery then that's their business, not ours, and our fate shouldn't be left up to them. The idea that all Americans should have to work 2 to three jobs and constantly have tens of thousands in debt just so a third world country can give their people's the illusion of progress is laughable.

So you're of the "fuck you, I've got mine" mentality. Good to know!

 

[Scherensammler]

The lizard aliens? Are we back to this again?

Well, sort of:

 

[fxh]

Value added isn't in question. It's where that value goes that's in play. Right now it all gets funneled to the rich while the lower and middle class get crushed.

Tell me when it was different.

 

[fxh]

Free trade agreements are a way to ultimately equalise conditions between countries. It's already working, Japan is on the same level as the western world, same as Korea, or look at Eastern Europe for example, and China is very close and getting too expensive for "slave labour". It'll take another lifetime but we'll get there. It's a long term thing. We might have to give up a little so that people in other countries can enjoy the luxuries we've had for the past century, but that's only fair, no?

What's more likely is that it's not a zero-sum game, and that we'll all win in the long run, even OfficePants .

I'm old enough to see things it go from Made in Japan to be something to avoid at all costw to Made In Japan being a sign of superior quality and skills.

 

[viaattovannucci]

Well, sort of:

Our dear Leader - the Messianic Billionaire!

 

[Monkeyface]

I'm old enough to see things it go from Made in Japan to be something to avoid at all costw to Made In Japan being a sign of superior quality and skills.

Soon made in china will mean the same thing

 

[Grand Potentate]

So you're of the "fuck you, I've got mine" mentality. Good to know!

no not at all. i'm more of a "we've got a good thing going here. lets not fuck it all up." kind of guy. i don't know why we have to sell our own out to for the abstract ideal of making another country successful.

Tell me when it was different.

well, the early ford factory workers made, adjusted for inflation, roughly $50 an hour. up until the 60's you could work a shit job and still raise a family, send a kid to college, afford some decency in life.

Soon made in china will mean the same thing

ok, now you're just trolling.

 

[Monkeyface]

no not at all. i'm more of a "we've got a good thing going here. lets not fuck it all up." kind of guy. i don't know why we have to sell our own out to for the abstract ideal of making another country successful.


well, the early ford factory workers made, adjusted for inflation, roughly $50 an hour. up until the 60's you could work a shit job and still raise a family, send a kid to college, afford some decency in life.

ok, now you're just trolling.

You're short-sighted, my dear. You can't see the big picture. It's not a zero-sum game. Pointing your finger at globalisation as the root of all of this is such a massive oversimplification.

The main reasons are rising inequality and cost disease. For example, there's no reason why college has to cost $50k/year. Education equality hasn't gone up, so why have the costs risen so much? Part cost disease, part unlimited government funding via undefaultable (is that word?) student loans.

Housing costs have increased for multiple reasons. The quality of the houses are better than they used to be, the square footage is bigger, credit is very cheap at the moment, and demand is bigger than supply because not enough is being built (partly due to nimby/regulations) and demographics are changing (urbanisation), etc.

There are so many more reasons but I don't have the time to write it all out and I don't have all the answers either, but I know you can do better than your current gross oversimplifications. Don't be a Bernie bro.

http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/09/considerations-on-cost-disease/

 

[Grand Potentate]

You're short-sighted, my dear. You can't see the big picture. It's not a zero-sum game. Pointing your finger at globalisation as the root of all of this is such a massive oversimplification.

i never did any such thing. i said it was a problem. its not the only problem. not by a long shot.

The main reasons are rising inequality and cost disease.

jeez, i wonder what could be a leading cause of these situations in particular???

For example, there's no reason why college has to cost $50k/year. Education equality hasn't gone up, so why have the costs risen so much? Part cost disease, part unlimited government funding via undefaultable (is that word?) student loans.

this is an excellent issue that has nothing to do with globalization. how do you suggest solving it?

Housing costs have increased for multiple reasons. The quality of the houses are better than they used to be, the square footage is bigger, credit is very cheap at the moment, and demand is bigger than supply because not enough is being built (partly due to nimby/regulations) and demographics are changing (urbanisation), etc.

so why should they be more affordable?

There are so many more reasons but I don't have the time to write it all out and I don't have all the answers either, but I know you can do better than your current gross oversimplifications. Don't be a Bernie bro.

i find this confusing. a bernie bro? bernie wanted free education, which you just listed as a major problem of concern. how do you square that circle?

 

[Monkeyface]

i never did any such thing. i said it was a problem. its not the only problem. not by a long shot.

jeez, i wonder what could be a leading cause of these situations in particular???

this is an excellent issue that has nothing to do with globalization. how do you suggest solving it?

so why should they be more affordable?

i find this confusing. a bernie bro? bernie wanted free education, which you just listed as a major problem of concern. how do you square that circle?

A leading cause of rising inequality is the labour vs capital issue we spoke about earlier and low interest rates causing asset prices to increase, which only benefits the owners of those assets. Shareholder value maximisation has only been the holy grail from the ~60s-70s onwards, but people act like it's an unchangeable concept.

Education can be solved quite easily. Just use the European model. Did you read the link I posted?

Housing should be more affordable because it's a basic human need that shouldn't cost 50% of someone's pay.

Bernie-bro as in Bernie is short sighted and oversimplifies issues. According to Bernie everything is the fault of the banks and globalisation, which is just as bad as Trump simplifying complex problems. Of course he has some good policies, but mixed in with a lot of bad reactionary stuff too.

 

[Grand Potentate]

A leading cause of rising inequality is the labour vs capital issue we spoke about earlier and low interest rates causing asset prices to increase, which only benefits the owners of those assets. Shareholder value maximisation has only been the holy grail from the ~60s-70s onwards, but people act like it's an unchangeable concept.

correct! and what happens to be a fantastic method for maximizing profits? offshoring your labor force.

Education can be solved quite easily. Just use the European model. Did you read the link I posted?

no not yet. its too late to dive into something so heavy. i'll get to it.

Housing should be more affordable because it's a basic human need that shouldn't cost 50% of someone's pay.

so you're against rent seeking in all its forms? for banning of air bnb of entire units as well?

Bernie-bro as in Bernie is short sighted and oversimplifies issues. According to Bernie everything is the fault of the banks and globalisation, which is just as bad as Trump simplifying complex problems. Of course he has some good policies, but mixed in with a lot of bad reactionary stuff too.

so you preferred trump then?

 

[Monkeyface]

correct! and what happens to be a fantastic method for maximizing profits? offshoring your labor force.

no not yet. its too late to dive into something so heavy. i'll get to it.

so you're against rent seeking in all its forms? for banning of air bnb of entire units as well?

so you preferred trump then?

Yeah, it's a symptom, but not the cause.

I think necessities such as housing shouldn't be used as investments/offshore bank accounts for regular folks like they are now. Buy gold and store it in an offshore vault if you want to hide your money so bad.

I don't like any of them. Again, using the European model by taking money out of politics would be a nice start.

 

[doghouse]

I appreciate seriousness. This situation requires it. I wish a few others here would show the same respect to how ugly this has become.

The Republicans did indeed decide to obstruct, but this is not new. It's been a historical reality, but right now is more acute than ever, and that's taken a new tone with democrats invoking activist judges to stop what is obviously within presidential power such as the travel ban. And yes, the republicans will probably find a new level to take it to.

I agree this is a failing of a 2 party system. It's too binary, and too limiting of choice. I am quite liberal on many social issues, but I also strongly believe government has grown WAY outside it's boundaries, and that we are taxed to death with so many stupid expenditures that I don't even know where to begin.

The rise of echo chambers are largely because of social media, and before that cable news. We are not listening to each other in the same way people in Latvia are not interested in listening to those in Madagascar. Totally alien worlds. And what was once a historically biased media, it was narrow, and we were forced to at least listen to a common narrative, but now? Fuck it, just make up the most outrageous shit you can and people with click and generate advertising income.

People here are more interested in posting jokes and dumb twitter for the same reason you state. Taking this seriously is sobering. But you said the system is designed to cater to extremes, I don't agree, because nothing technically stops new parties from forming, and challenging the status quo. The country desperate needs at least 2 more parties to start catering to real needs, which is not happening.

I understand why it's depressing. The way Trump is being treated is depressing to me. He didn't need to do this, but a bunch if idiots have decided they are going to dismantle this guy no matter what, and they have emboldened otherwise reasonable people to join in on the fun. They are going to look at this in a few years and realize (or maybe not) that they turned their country into Brazil, and have abandoned all the hard work that went into making it livable, in the face of a lot of real banana republics that overwhelm the world. Or civil war.

You may be having fun taking the mickey out of Trump, but he fundamentally understands what was fucking the country up, and has a genuine desire to solve it. But whatever, keep up the fun and games, and laugh the good laugh when you're a crime ridden shithole like Brazil. Then come whine about how socialism was not allowed to take hold and really (finally, for once) work.

I don't want to be a downer, but there is a greater good here that is being trashed in the face of blind hatred. There are so few well run countries out there, and this stupidity is turning is into one of them, and you only need to look at Venezuela to see how incredibly easy it is. A broker friend of mine has a truth about stocks that also applies to countries... they take the stairs up but the elevator down.

Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Argentina, Greece, Brazil, Cuba. Russia. Myanmar. South Africa. Want to become one? Keep up the bullshit.

Ha.

 

[doghouse]

I'm old enough to see things it go from Made in Japan to be something to avoid at all costw to Made In Japan being a sign of superior quality and skills.

Several of us are.

 

[Monkeyface]

Several of us are.

And one who pretends he is!

 

[Monkeyface]

 

[Dropbear]

I remember my grandmother's collection of Made In Occupied Japan porcelain.

On Trump: people voted for the spectacle, for the showman, for the game show host. This might have played into economic insecurity but I don't think it was a vote on policy: No one believed Mexico was going to pay for a big beautiful wall. Now that Trump is a contestant on White House Survivor they are still enjoying the show.

It's sad to see serious political people crying after they hitched their star to a fool and realise their mistake too late.

The single biggest cause of all this isn't even that sense of economic insecurity. It is a system and culture that led to an electoral race between two candidates void of policies, solutions or any meaningful relationship with their voters.

 

[Monkeyface]

 

[OfficePants]

vague cool? taxes are good. globalization is bad. i've been very consistent on these points. its not my fault if you're getting bogged down in other people's bullshit. if you'd like me to expound on some of these points then feel free to ask, but neither of them have anything to do with president trump at this very moment since, as you've stated, he has yet to do anything about any of these important matters.

On the contrary. In part, he ran his election on these topics.

 

[OfficePants]

On Trump: people voted for the spectacle, for the showman, for the game show host..

That's false.

View attachment 22419

That's dumb.

 

[OfficePants]

We might have to give up a little so that people in other countries can enjoy the luxuries we've had for the past century, but that's only fair, no?

Words of a Pollyanna.

 

[Monkeyface]

That's false.



That's dumb.

It's just a bit of good, wholesome satire. Have you seen arrested development?

 

[OfficePants]

It's just a bit of good, wholesome satire. Have you seen arrested development?

Nope.

 

[Monkeyface]

Nope.

No wonder you think it's dumb! It's best to refrain from opinionating if one isn't familiar with the subject at hand.

 

[OfficePants]

No wonder you think it's dumb! It's best to refrain from opinionating if one isn't familiar with the subject at hand.

It's dumb because it's cliche. Hearing the same joke over and over isn't funny. What makes you so interested in this? You're not American, and you don't even live here. Why is this so important to you?

In other news, Brazil is in turmoil again with a real scandal, in case anyone is interested in real scandals anymore.

 

[doghouse]

In other news, Brazil is in turmoil again with a real scandal, in case anyone is interested in real scandals anymore.

It's the same scandal, just continued.

 

[Monkeyface]

It's dumb because it's cliche. Hearing the same joke over and over isn't funny. What makes you so interested in this? You're not American, and you don't even live here. Why is this so important to you?

In other news, Brazil is in turmoil again with a real scandal, in case anyone is interested in real scandals anymore.

First, I will be shortly. Second, it's also funny. Moreover, whatever happens in the US impacts the whole world, so even if I weren't in the US it would still be relevant. Fourth, people can take interest in other parts of the world purely for intellectual reasons, you should try it sometime.

 

[Kingstonian]

I remember my grandmother's collection of Made In Occupied Japan porcelain.

I had a little plaster leprechaun from the early 60s

On the bottom it said :-
An Tseapain Tir a Dheanta

(Made in Japan)

They have moved on from plaster leprechauns ( the Japanese that is)

 

[OfficePants]

It's the same scandal, just continued.

Brazil is a perpetual scandal, so ya. But its the 2nd president in a row. You'd think the idiots that run that shit hole would pick someone low risk.

 

[OfficePants]

First, I will be shortly. Second, it's also funny. Moreover, whatever happens in the US impacts the whole world, so even if I weren't in the US it would still be relevant. Fourth, people can take interest in other parts of the world purely for intellectual reasons, you should try it sometime.

Several weeks ago you complained it looked pretty hopeless, unless you're planning to overstay a visa.

I take a passing interest in other countries, but nothing like the investment you make in US politics.

 

[Monkeyface]

Several weeks ago you complained it looked pretty hopeless, unless you're planning to overstay a visa.

I take a passing interest in other countries, but nothing like the investment you make in US politics.

Ha, you've missed the glorious news. I beat the odds and got a visa!

I have an interest in global politics. We're all in the same boat, and if there are holes somewhere I'd like to know about it.

 

[InstaHate]

So you're of the "fuck you, I've got mine" mentality. Good to know!

I was just thinking about this (false) dichotomy. I don't think there are many people who believe the American government should care only about Americans and not have any consideration for the rest of the world, just as I doubt there are many who believe that the American government should afford the same consideration to other countries as it does the US. People are really just disagreeing about how to balance those things, but it's easier and maybe more polemically effective to pretend they are taking a ridiculous extreme (you care more about Syrians than Americans!)

As for globalization, it doesn't always help the smaller country. Countries need to have made a certain amount of progress developmentally, chiefly in terms of infrastructure, for involvement in the global economy not to actually stymie their growth in the long term.

That being said, it's a mixed bag for America. The American people have benefitted immensely from the growth of places like Japan and South Korea, both countries which fueled their development via international trade. In addition, we broadly benefit from a richer world. There is a reason that developed countries with deep trade ties with other countries are rarely a threat to American security, while those that are poor, isolated, or weakly developed arevthose most dangerous. That's why Reagan supported it.

I definitely support some degree of economic protectionism on America's part, provided it is handled well. I don't think it is being handled well, but in principle, I support it. Americans buy too many things anyway.

However, it is a temporary solution to a long term "problem" (the exponentially increasing efficiency of capital). There is nothing wrong with a temporary solution as long as a long term solution is being worked on. I get the feeling that Trump and Trumpeteers and Bernie and Bernie Bros don't recognize that (not that others in positions of power do either, but Bern and Don at least recognize that there is broadly a problem).

 

[Monkeyface]

I was just thinking about this (false) dichotomy. I don't think there are many people who believe the American government should care only about Americans and not have any consideration for the rest of the world, just as I doubt there are many who believe that the American government should afford the same consideration to other countries as it does the US. People are really just disagreeing about how to balance those things, but it's easier and maybe more polemically effective to pretend they are taking a ridiculous extreme (you care more about Syrians than Americans!)

As for globalization, it doesn't always help the smaller country. Countries need to have made a certain amount of progress developmentally, chiefly in terms of infrastructure, for involvement in the global economy not to actually stymie their growth in the long term.

That being said, it's a mixed bag for America. The American people have benefitted immensely from the growth of places like Japan and South Korea, both countries which fueled their development via international trade. In addition, we broadly benefit from a richer world. There is a reason that developed countries with deep trade ties with other countries are rarely a threat to American security, while those that are poor, isolated, or weakly developed arevthose most dangerous. That's why Reagan supported it.

I definitely support some degree of economic protectionism on America's part, provided it is handled well. I don't think it is being handled well, but in principle, I support it. Americans buy too many things anyway.

However, it is a temporary solution to a long term "problem" (the exponentially increasing efficiency of capital). There is nothing wrong with a temporary solution as long as a long term solution is being worked on. I get the feeling that Trump and Trumpeteers and Bernie and Bernie Bros don't recognize that (not that others in positions of power do either, but Bern and Don at least recognize that there is broadly a problem).

All very sensible and agreeable. Top top nuance! Please try to include a funny picture as well next time.

 

[OfficePants]

Alan Dershowitz is exactly correct.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017...purpose-of-special-counsel-what-is-the-crime/

 

[OfficePants]

There is a reason that developed countries with deep trade ties with other countries are rarely a threat to American security, while those that are poor, isolated, or weakly developed arevthose most dangerous. That's why Reagan supported it.

Agreed until this part. There are lots of developed countries that pose a threat, chief of them China. Developing deep trade ties does lessen the threat level because there is more to lose. But in terms of China, out stupid leaders have let them rape our middle class, and we will quickly become Brazil if it doesn't stop.

 

[InstaHate]

Agreed until this part. There are lots of developed countries that pose a threat, chief of them China. Developing deep trade ties does lessen the threat level because there is more to lose. But in terms of China, out stupid leaders have let them rape our middle class, and we will quickly become Brazil if it doesn't stop.

Again, protectionism, which I may favor when done correctly, is a short term solution, but it doesn't address the fact that 80% of the job loss in manufacturing (on the low end) has occurred as a result of increased productivity of capital and not jobs going overseas. This isn't to say that protectionism won't lessen the sting or provide us time to figure out how to adjust as this trend continues, but that this is regularly ignored by Trump in favor of the much easier target of overseas job loss is yet another reason why I think Trump is a self-aggrandizing, populist politician no different than most others. You could argue that the overseas job loss is something which can be addressed in the short term, and thus is his focus. That makes sense to me, but it doesn't explain why a politician concerned with job loss in the manufacturing sector doesn't even attempt to address the larger problem.

 

[Grand Potentate]

Again, protectionism, which I may favor when done correctly, is a short term solution, but it doesn't address the fact that 80% of the job loss in manufacturing (on the low end) has occurred as a result of increased productivity of capital and not jobs going overseas.

i'm not up to date on the current statistics but i do not believe it was quite that high. regardless, proper labor laws and rights would put a big dent in this. if we enforced a 36 hour work week and got rid of overtime (or at least made it less profitable for employers) people would have to have living wages instead of being worked like dogs.

This isn't to say that protectionism won't lessen the sting or provide us time to figure out how to adjust as this trend continues, but that this is regularly ignored by Trump in favor of the much easier target of overseas job loss is yet another reason why I think Trump is a self-aggrandizing, populist politician no different than most others. You could argue that the overseas job loss is something which can be addressed in the short term, and thus is his focus. That makes sense to me, but it doesn't explain why a politician concerned with job loss in the manufacturing sector doesn't even attempt to address the larger problem.

another excellent point. Monkeyface OfficePants how would you two attempt to solve this?

 

[doghouse]

if we enforced a 36 hour work week and got rid of overtime (or at least made it less profitable for employers) people would have to have living wages instead of being worked like dogs.

Americans buy too many things anyway.

InstaHate has officially given the most accurate statement in DW history.

 

[Monkeyface]

i'm not up to date on the current statistics but i do not believe it was quite that high. regardless, proper labor laws and rights would put a big dent in this. if we enforced a 36 hour work week and got rid of overtime (or at least made it less profitable for employers) people would have to have living wages instead of being worked like dogs.


another excellent point. Monkeyface OfficePants how would you two attempt to solve this?

With funny twitter posts of course.


In all seriousness, I like InstaHate posts, but it's Friday night and I can't be bothered now. Check back on Monday.