1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Nov 12, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 1098 of 18258
  1. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    What is it that you didn't agree with? Balances of trade are a simple concept. Investment minus savings. That is it.

    And if you don't understand why our reserve currency status will always result in a trade deficits, google "Robert Triffin" or the "Triffin dilemma."

    It's not like what Triffin pinpointed isn't simple common sense -- it's just that we had been on some form of a gold standard for centuries, so the practical experience of ditching it for floating currencies with the U.S. as the main "reserve" was something we had never experienced until pretty recently in the grand scheme of things. That started to change during the Bretton Woods era. Not coincidentally, all of that coincides with the advent of modern central banking -- and a series of recurring financial crises (again, the WHY of that is common sense).

    Ever since the U.S. led the world off the gold standard for good in the early 1970s, it has been trade deficits every single year for the U.S. (and it is BECAUSE of its reserve currency status -- dollars go out, but there is less incentive to send them back in when your own central bank needs to horde them). The reasons for that, again, are kind of common sense. But it's not like Donald Trump has to discover the wheel to know what he can REALLY do to balance our trade if that is some grand goal (and if he actually understood what it would entail, it wouldn't make very good populist bullshit; Americans will never sign up willingly for the pain it will entail).

    But seriously, David Hume had very well figured out what I am talking about in the 1700s when he described the price-specie flow mechanism. Fundamentally, nothing has changed -- well, except for the fiat currencies with the U.S. given reserve status.
     
    The Big Ragu, Jan 31, 2017
    #13165
  2. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    1. No, you don't.

    2. Go talk to the owner or chef at your favorite foreign restaurant. If they immigrated to the USA, they likely started at the bottom. But through hard work and diligence, they rose through the ranks and are now entrepreneurs. Why deprive them of being living, breathing examples of the American dream just because they needed a tiny bit of help along the way?

    3. I'd wager more Federal assistance goes to Trump's base than immigrants.
     
    Inky_Wretch, Jan 31, 2017
    #13166
    RickStain likes this.
  3. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    I don't know. It's like we think we are a Christian nation or something.
     
    Ace, Jan 31, 2017
    #13167
  4. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Again, we don't have to cut off immigration.

    If we control our borders, and expel those who overstay their visas, we can increase legal immigration, and retain all the benefits of immigration, while also knowing who is in our country, and ensure we don't have a permanent underclass of illegal residents.
     
    YankeeFan, Jan 31, 2017
    #13168
  5. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    I guess #BachelorSCOTUS could be worse. Trump could have caps with the names of the potential nominees on caps on his desk and do it Signing Day press conference style.
     
    Inky_Wretch, Jan 31, 2017
    #13169
    HanSenSE and Ace like this.
  6. QYFW

    QYFW Well-Known Member

    Legal. Illegal. What's the difference?
     
    QYFW, Jan 31, 2017
    #13170
  7. Riptide

    Riptide Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]
     
    Riptide, Jan 31, 2017
    #13171
    HanSenSE likes this.
  8. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    If you don't know, better go ask somebody.

    It's because businesses can - and sure as hell do - exploit the shit out of them as laborers. Been going on for, I dunno, 30 fucking years now?

    Same reason jobs get offshored.

    If you've been voting GOP all these years and didn't, ya know, put 2 and 2 together, that's a you thing.
     
    Alma, Jan 31, 2017
    #13172
  9. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Of course many of them started at the bottom. But, they lived with family, or in crowded situations, while they saved their money.

    They didn't rely on government assistance.

    As much as restaurant and hotel owners who want cheap labor, and folks who want cheap household help, might like it, we shouldn't limit new immigrants to folks whose job skills are limited to cooking, cleaning, and changing diapers.

    And there is no reason why we should have these people in the country illegally, where they are subject to exploitation.
     
    YankeeFan, Jan 31, 2017
    #13173
  10. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    I would say that in general immigrants and refugees tend to bust their ass, work hard and contribute greatly to this country. Their kids tend to do even better.

    I bet a program designed to send the freeloaders back would be a net loss, like the popular laws to force those on government assistance to pass drug tests.
     
    Ace, Jan 31, 2017
    #13174
  11. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    OK. So, how does it work? Let in anyone who can get here? Give them all assistance if they need it?

    Obviously there's some line to be drawn, right? Are we arguing about whether there should be a line, or where to draw it?

    Where does your opinion square with President Obama's decision in his waning days of office to not allow Cubans, fleeing a murderous, communist dictator, who reach our shores, to be able to stay in the county legally? Was that un-Christian?
     
    YankeeFan, Jan 31, 2017
    #13175
  12. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    We're awfully picky and choosy about that. Jesus was a liberal but you sure wouldn't know it listening to the religious right.
     
    RickStain, Jan 31, 2017
    #13176
    service_gamer, HanSenSE and Ace like this.
Page 1098 of 18258
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page