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.
  1. Justin_Rice

    Justin_Rice Well-Known Member



    So you'd vote for the Democrat, right?
     
  2. DanielSimpsonDay

    DanielSimpsonDay Well-Known Member

  3. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

  4. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    “Welcome back,” YF.

    [​IMG]
     
  5. melock

    melock Well-Known Member

    He's already said no
     
  6. melock

    melock Well-Known Member

    Too bad he wasn't drummed out for being thrown out of the judiciary twice. Or for saying homosexuality should be illegal. Or that a Muslim has no place in congress. Yes. Too bad
     
    BadgerBeer and heyabbott like this.
  7. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    Few things make me shake my head the way the "China is ripping us off" nonsense does. And the talk about the trade imbalance, etc. and how it is because they are somehow doing us wrong. It's pure ignorance.

    A trade imbalance, in and of itself, isn't a bad thing. But let's say you don't want a trade deficit. ... the way isn't to make "deals," (this is so dumb) or institute tariffs or do other things to start a trade war.

    You'd have to change American's behaviors, and get them to SAVE instead of consume. But that is a message no one wants to hear -- it's easier to say, "Economically, I have found it tougher over the last few decades, so let's find a scapegoat."

    Americans want iphones and big screen TVs and stuff, in general -- stuff they can't really afford. To the extent they aren't financing them on credit, China provides those things cheaper than we are willing to. That is why there is a trade imbalance.

    If you want to insist that a trade imbalance is a bad thing, then Americans need to start forgoing their $1,000 iphones and start saving. It's that simple. Saving (not faux government "stimulus") is what creates investment. And that real kind of investment (not debt and monetization of that debt) is what grows an economy in a non-phony way -- it provides the resources to build factories and plants and to provide equipment, etc.

    Also, when we convinced the rest of the world to sign onto the dollar as a reserve currency (in lieu of sound money), in the 1970s, we received a lot of benefits -- giving us a pass on a lot of reckless behavior. The tradeoff has always been that it insures trade deficits. The rest of the world needs to own dollars in that world order. So we export those dollars to them in exchange for cheap goods. That is coming to an end for organic reasons. But it's just a reality that all the nonsensical bluster and scapegoating in the world can't obscure.
     
  8. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

  9. DanielSimpsonDay

    DanielSimpsonDay Well-Known Member

    He went too far in the beginning, but then he was good.
     
    cranberry likes this.
  10. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Dick’s initial post had me preparing to ask if he was putting it ahead of the Times.

    I agree with @Michael_ Gee that the Post has a bit of a natural advantage when politics is dominating the news cycle, but you make a good case for your argument.

    The Times does cover a wider variety of topics, including many the Post doesn't even try to cover though.
     
  11. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    The Times also has the Lena Dunham beat ...
     
    YankeeFan likes this.
  12. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    The Post used to have wonderful foreign coverage, but that was a budget cut casualty of the pre-Bezos era. Papers' approach to sports is really too different to compare. Times is like the New York Review of Sports, and it gets on hobbyhorses like women members at Augusta nobody gives a shit about. But it also does in-depth investigations and long features that're excellent. Post sports is more conventional, lots about the home teams, and extensive coverage of high schools, which the Times doesn't bother with. Times' arts coverage is of course more in depth because NYC is a world capital of the performing arts and the fine arts and DC well, isn't.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page