On January 29 2017 03:50 Floofy wrote:
I mean Trump being president is a disaster and anyone with any knowledge in politics saw this comming. How did he get elected???
Because Hillary was sponsored by Saudi-Arabia and the general public is tired of Islam
Oh your talking about pre Jan 20 2017 Saudi Arabia
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
Saudi Arabia is the main "sponsor" of US military considering the amount of weapons they've been buying. There s no way the USA will take any measures against them anytime soon, doesn't matter who s the president
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Jan 29 2017 18:45. Posts 2233
enjoying the recent meltdowns of some on the left
"trump issued an executive order blocking people from certain countries, but it either accidentally or stupidly includes catching people who were in the middle of travel, stranding them with no prior warning, and a federal judge issued an emergency stay. how can i help fight back, i know what i'll do, i'll delete the Uber app from my phone because they're not boycotting the airport. that'll show drumpf. viva la revolucion #theresistance"
meanwhile trump hints they will later alter the focus of refugees more towards persecuted minorities (like religious minorities in M.E.) and suddenly protecting minorities isn't what the USA is about if it means Christians
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
On January 29 2017 17:45 Santafairy wrote:
enjoying the recent meltdowns of some on the left
"trump issued an executive order blocking people from certain countries, but it either accidentally or stupidly includes catching people who were in the middle of travel, stranding them with no prior warning, and a federal judge issued an emergency stay. how can i help fight back, i know what i'll do, i'll delete the Uber app from my phone because they're not boycotting the airport. that'll show drumpf. viva la revolucion #theresistance"
meanwhile trump hints they will later alter the focus of refugees more towards persecuted minorities (like religious minorities in M.E.) and suddenly protecting minorities isn't what the USA is about if it means Christians
I hope Trump steps up the saving Assyrian/Chaldeans narrative, just to see how the op-ed's react to a policy explicitly aimed at assisting the most oppressed minorities in Syria. The best part would be it could force the media to directly address why those groups almost uniformly support Assad.
On September 08 2008 10:07 Baal wrote: my head is a gyroscope, your argument is invalid
Would be a great fucking thing if Trump actually decides to ally with Putin in Syria to support Assad, as the so called " rebels" are either ISIS or all of their guns go to ISIS anyway so its the same.
He ll eat a lot of shit in the media with such a decision sadly, cause that will cost the US a lot of $ as they wont be selling as much
Would be perfect timing to strike against ISIS as well considering they lost a third of their territory
Once things go bad the cunt mercenaries will run away and only radical shits will stay, which wont be enough
A trade war would not be good for both country if the trade helps majority but that is not the case with NAFTA. If you look at economics stats, average Americas have been forgotten and trump has said many times they wont be forgotten agani. America trade policy is horrible for most but helps the top which i think a trade war or protectionist view will help get America better deals.
16% of a deficit is not tiny and of course there are bigger trade problem to solve like eu or china but doesn't mean trump can't get a better deal in Mexico.
I can give you an example where protectionist view will help my bottom line with some poker analogy
If i can only play against canadians instead of all the eastern europeans i will be more fucking rich
how does playing with eastern european help my bottom line, ill give you this, they make me play better though
what good is it if i can't beat the rake, rather be rich and bad than broke and good
Your post game me cancer.... This is not the level of discussion I expect to see in TLPoker ffs.
If you look at economics stats, average Americas have been forgotten and trump has said many times they wont be forgotten agani.
american middle class is doing bad therefore fuck NAFTA... and Trump said americans wont be forgotten again... so yeah!..... this is the kind of shit I would expect a guy from rural alabama to say, come on.
16% Trade deficit IS TINY for fucks sake, you even have a greater deficit with Russia -_- clearly you have no clue what you are talking about, and basically you import commodities and basic products and sell us advanced manufacturing, that is the mercantilist wet dream... we literally sell you OIL, you refine it and we buy it back as gasoline, what kind of idiot would oppose such a deal.
Also NAFTA boosted the Mexican economy reducing immigration and we are at a historic low on people crossing the border.. dump NAFTA, see the US economy suffer and Mexico's go into the toilet and now you will have more illegal immigrants you have ever seen, and no stupid wall will stop it.
Also Trump is not trying to get a better deal, he cancelled a meeting with the Mexican president because he wants him to pay the wall, (an obvious political move for rednecks to cheer on), and now Mexicans are pissed off and the president is in the position that he will either eat his pride, be smart and negotiate or pander to the people and give the finger to Trump.
You dont get good deals when you spit in the face of your partner just before the negotiations.
educate yourself and you will see how clueless you are, you are a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect
Baal I don't think trading is bad if majority of both country benefit. That is not the case right now with America trade policy, big corporations benefit the most. Trump I think or hope is trying to help the majority instead of just the top.
I agreed trump can be more diplomatic and more respectful to other country. He is definitely not prefect and I don't agreed with all his policy but I get a feeling he is trying to help more than hurt. Which remains to be see, but I'll give him a chance. I might wrong here though
It's okay if Americans lose their jobs to Mexicans but with trumps new policy of trying to get jobs back from Mexicans that's not okay? Like I said I believe in trade if a lot of people benefit but is that the case for Americans right now? I have no problem with Mexicans prospering as long as it is not at the expense of the average Americans and only benefitting the elites or huge corporations.
16% deficit is not tiny in my view. If I lost 16% of anything it will hurt a bit. It might not be huge or game changer but I can't call it tiny though.
Just my 2 cents Baal and if I'm wrong or mistaken in any part, I'm always open to listening and learning. Thanks
Trade deficits are something SUPER standard in developed economies where the standard is high.
[quiote]16% deficit is not tiny in my view. If I lost 16% of anything it will hurt a bit. It might not be huge or game changer but I can't call it tiny though. [/quote]
this makes me believe you have no clue what a trade deficit is to begin with
read the last sentence of Baal's post and follow it, it will only be beneficial to you and I'm not saying this out of an ego war
Before forming an opinion about something educate yourself on the topic first, otherwise you are just throwing random words out.
That being said I want someone that believes Trump's bullshit explain to me how import tariffs will help the US In any way retrieve enough jobs to make it worth it, considering NAFTA came into force in 1994, according to wikipedia, meaning any working force that was qualified to do that works is already gone, also I'm ignoring the fact that the USA does not even have a problem with unemployment rate to begin with. So theoretically he s gonna do what? Get jobs back, which might not be even worth it and force people to requalify into a job with less value so he can achieve his populist promises? Exactly like the idiotic wall? How exactly is "losing" those jobs a bad thing when unemployment rates are still in fine ? Or you simply assume a loss of a job instantly means something bad? Do you know how structural unemployment works too? ( Tbh not too sure its called structural in english but it should be )
Sure I wanna see how Trump plays out his cards too, but so far 90% of his decision are simply idiotic. It's not hard to manipulate idiots to follow him however when they see a word like "deficit" and go with their primal beliefs for this being something terrible for everyone. Its painful to even read such opinions. Trump is aware of all of these things and he still uses it to his advantage
If he continues with this stupidity impeachement might actually sound reasonable.
Trade deficit is importing too much and not exporting enough of course so you have a negative trade balance.
I know having a deficit is not the end of the world but a balance is better.
I don't know 100% what the true unemployment rate is in America cause I don't believe a lot of the main stream medias statistic but I think I recall trump saying the true data is higher than what is reported. Like I said trump isn't prefect and he might just be the lesser of the 2 evils
On January 30 2017 20:01 lostaccount wrote:
Trade deficit is importing too much and not exporting enough of course so you have a negative trade balance.
I know having a deficit is not the end of the world but a balance is better.
I don't know 100% what the true unemployment rate is in America cause I don't believe a lot of the main stream medias statistic but I think I recall trump saying the true data is higher than what is reported. Like I said trump isn't prefect and he might just be the lesser of the 2 evils
Why is balance better?
Would you say renting vs buying is better , because you have no debt (mortgage) to pay, thus live in "balance" ?
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
On January 30 2017 19:47 Spitfiree wrote:
read the last sentence of Baal's post and follow it, it will only be beneficial to you and I'm not saying this out of an ego war
Before forming an opinion about something educate yourself on the topic first, otherwise you are just throwing random words out.
I sort of like the neural network, argument approach to learning. Start by making random arguments with people who know what they're talking about, then you not only have incentive to learn more to not feel clueless, but you know where to start learning.
NewbSaibot: 18 TIMES THE SPEED OF LIGHT. Because FUCK YOU, Daut
Sure, Daut, except if we are going to use the Socratic method here, it would be in a discussion of the negatives and positives in the various scenarios of trade balance. Neither of them is bad by definition as those are means of measure, not a conclusion to a result. However I cannot have such a discussion with people that think a deficit is a loss and that a balance is better.
Anyways, lostaccount understandably you shouldnt trust medias, thats why there is a government institution whose worked is focus only on various statistics including the unemployment rate.Here : https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
Now I'm guessing US is just like any other country when it comes to government institutions so that data is most likely not perfectly accurate, but the standard deviation isn't going to be high either.
That being said, there is absolutely no reason to trust Trump more than the mainstream media at this point. Equally bad. On the first side you have people who want to demolish Trump due to different interests. On the other you have a political imbecile
On January 31 2017 07:52 Spitfiree wrote:
Sure, Daut, except if we are going to use the Socratic method here, it would be in a discussion of the negatives and positives in the various scenarios of trade balance. Neither of them is bad by definition as those are means of measure, not a conclusion to a result. However I cannot have such a discussion with people that think a deficit is a loss and that a balance is better.
Anyways, lostaccount understandably you shouldnt trust medias, thats why there is a government institution whose worked is focus only on various statistics including the unemployment rate.Here : https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
Now I'm guessing US is just like any other country when it comes to government institutions so that data is most likely not perfectly accurate, but the standard deviation isn't going to be high either.
That being said, there is absolutely no reason to trust Trump more than the mainstream media at this point. Equally bad. On the first side you have people who want to demolish Trump due to different interests. On the other you have a political imbecile
Trust me i know i don't have as much knowledge or wisdom as some of the educated lpers, thats why if i am wrong, likely in some or many scenario i can improve and update my knowledge. I might not understand a lot but i am trying to work at improving my life leaks and i don't mean to offend anyone if i said anything thing bad or stupid. excuse me for my inexperience.
Also i don't think a trade surplus is always good or i don't think a trade deficit is always bad, it depends on other things too.
what i am saying is I just don't think having a deficit every year is good. Have to have some balance in a way. This is just my opinion and i might be wrong.
Like in poker you don't always play AA the same way, it depends on other stuff variables too. Have to find a balance or different optimal ways to get max value. if someone always calls river its never a good idea to bluff. if someone folds river sometimes than you can bluff sometimes, if someone never calls river than betting river will always be the right play.
In short i don't think always having a deficit can be good.
On January 30 2017 20:01 lostaccount wrote:
Trade deficit is importing too much and not exporting enough of course so you have a negative trade balance.
I know having a deficit is not the end of the world but a balance is better.
I don't know 100% what the true unemployment rate is in America cause I don't believe a lot of the main stream medias statistic but I think I recall trump saying the true data is higher than what is reported. Like I said trump isn't prefect and he might just be the lesser of the 2 evils
Why is balance better?
Would you say renting vs buying is better , because you have no debt (mortgage) to pay, thus live in "balance" ?
Renting has pro and cons, same with buying. Its preference and goals etc. Both can be right for different people with different life goals.
its more balance than everyone buying or everyone renting. we need both, more balance
You cannot do the poker comparison here. In poker the factors change more occasionally, while the USA would still want to import the same goods out of the same area unless something drastic changes. The deficit is due to the USA not willing to produce those goods, cause its not worth their time, which frees time to focus on goods of higher value. Corporations having the most benefits out of a trading deficit isn't necessarily bad either as they might not be paying taxes in the USA, but the cash flow of its investors is being spent there, which supports the economy.
Meanwhile Trump fires the attorney general, which was gonna happen anyway, except he fucked himself using that reason.
Contact Users: 933 Active, 1 Logged in - Time: 02:13
United States. Jan 31 2017 01:01. Posts 8955
<3 LP.
