[Al_U_Card]

Winstonm, on 2018-January-28, 15:46, said:

On the length of time for a recovery, Japan's lost decade is a better gauge of how long it takes to overcome such a vast collapse.

And they used QE to re-inflate the Nikkei (from 30k+ it fell to less than 15k and is now finally back over 20k) A template for current US fiscal policy.

[y66]

From Take Trump's Immigration Plan Seriously. His proposal is flawed but could be a step in the right direction. by the editors at Bloomberg:

Quote

President Donald Trump has done something that has eluded the Republican Party for nearly a decade: He has outlined the possibility of broad immigration reform.

Trump's immigration framework is far from perfect. But the fact that it is being criticized by the extreme wing of his party should be taken as a sign of hope that we may just have a basis for bipartisan discussion. For this reason, Democrats should treat the proposal with more seriousness (and less derision) than they have to date.

To be sure, there's plenty wrong with Trump's framework -- his insistence on wasting $25 billion for a wall system, in particular, and the veiled curbs on asylum. But in other ways the plan is an advance. For the Dreamers, anything less than a path to citizenship would be deeply unfair. And, in principle, it makes good economic sense, as Trump proposes, to replace the U.S. emphasis on family reunification with rules addressed to shortages of labor.

I hope Mr. Trump reads this.

[kenberg]

y66, on 2018-January-29, 04:20, said:

From Take Trump's Immigration Plan Seriously. His proposal is flawed but could be a step in the right direction. by the editors at Bloomberg:


I hope Mr. Trump reads this.

I hope so too, and there have been other expressions of support for a constructive discussion. Donald Trump has trouble with subtle discussion. Everything is either bigly great or the worst deal ever. Even in our polarized times he stands out, and he has advisers that have little interest in working together with anyone. But they don't control everything so maybe there is hope.

I offer a couple of basic thoughts.

Legal immigration and illegal immigration should be treated differently. This doesn't mean we have to go on a round-em-up rampage, but it should not be a surprise that those who come here illegally are less secure than those who came here legally.

On balance, immigration is good and in fact probably necessary.

Sometimes we allow immigrants in because they need a place of refuge, sometimes we allow immigrants in because they have skills that we need. Both are legitimate, but we should be clear about when we are doing what. Of course often they need a place of refuge and after achieving this, they contribute to society and sometimes, definitely more than just occasionally, they make major contributions.

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” has always been a romanticized version of what we were doing. My father came as a ten year old with his 16 year old brother in 1910. I don't know that they were a huddled mass yearning to be free but they certainly were looking for a better life. Let's just try to keep our idealistic sentiments under control when designing policy. "A nation of immigrants"? Well, I was born here. I understand what is meant, but still it is idealism instead of realism. How about simply acknowledging that immigration has played a strong positive role in the development of the country? That's pretty hard to disagree with.

Oh. Another thought. I don't think most Norwegians are particularly interested in coming here. Many did, but times change. If I am wrong about this, fine, I have Norwegian genes and I welcome them. But I am not expecting a flood.

[barmar]

ldrews, on 2018-January-27, 17:14, said:

I do not know all of the details of the referenced case. We have laws to enforce contracts. If the contract was valid, the individual has recourse through the courts. Did he avail himself of the rememdy?

I don't know. Possibly not, since the legal system is expensive, and Trump undoubtedly could afford better lawyers than he could.

But from what I've read, this was not an isolated example. It's just the only one I remember the specifics of. But read the history of how he ran his Atlantic City casino businesses, it was full of shenanigans (yet he still managed to be one of the few moguls who couldn't make money from a casino).

[jjbrr]

"Very few US adults report receiving bonuses or raises from the Republican tax law" seems one of the most predictable headlines in human journalism history.

[Winstonm]

Oh, what a tangled web

Quote

Trump Tower Russian Lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, Exposed in Swiss Corruption Case

[rmnka447]

jjbrr, on 2018-January-29, 10:38, said:

"Very few US adults report receiving bonuses or raises from the Republican tax law" seems one of the most predictable headlines in human journalism history.

Isn't it something like 200+ companies and approximately 3 M+ plus people who are getting "bonuses"? But I guess from some people's filters of reality that qualifies as very few people. Most of these announcements are from fairly large companies. There may be smaller companies taking similar actions that aren't receiving any publicity at all.

Just remember that these payments are being made just as the new tax laws are kicking in. That doesn't preclude any of these companies from taking further actions to improve employees compensation and/or benefits as the full effect of the tax laws are felt.

So tell me how many progressives voted for any tax cuts at all for everyday people?

[jjbrr]

If the workforce is 160M people, that's 2%. Much better than the 1% the bill was designed to benefit, I suppose.

[Winstonm]

Bloomberg reports:

Quote

Kelly held separate meetings or phone calls with senior Justice Department officials last Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday to convey Trump’s displeasure and lecture them on the White House’s expectations, according to the people. Kelly has taken to ending such conversations with a disclaimer that the White House isn’t expecting officials to do anything illegal or unethical.

After Trump’s strong reaction on Air Force One over the Boyd letter, White House officials, including Kelly, sprang into action again, lashing Justice Department officials Thursday over the decision to send the letter, according to the people. Sarah Isgur Flores, director of public affairs at the Department of Justice, declined to comment.

Isn't this classic obstruction of justice - trying to influence an ongoing investigation?

[jjbrr]

Doesn't matter, that magic Я

[RedSpawn]

ldrews, on 2018-January-27, 13:30, said:

Did you think Mexico was going to write a check? Given the trade flows and money flows between the US and Mexico I would imagine there are a number of ways that Mexico might eventually pay for the wall. Perhaps as a concession to keep NAFTA in place? Perhaps by imposing tariffs on Mexican imports. Perhaps by providing incentives for more companies to return from Mexico to the US, causing a $25 billion swing in the trade deficit with Mexico? Lots of possibilities if you don't insist on Mexico writing a check before construction begins.

This sounds like a John Q. Taxpayer-financed wall UNLESS and UNTIL we find a way to get Mexico to pay for it (indirectly).

Brand marketing matters, but this is not how it was presented during the Presidential campaign.

[RedSpawn]

kenberg, on 2018-January-29, 08:55, said:

I hope so too, and there have been other expressions of support for a constructive discussion. Donald Trump has trouble with subtle discussion. Everything is either bigly great or the worst deal ever. Even in our polarized times he stands out, and he has advisers that have little interest in working together with anyone. But they don't control everything so maybe there is hope.

I offer a couple of basic thoughts.

Legal immigration and illegal immigration should be treated differently. This doesn't mean we have to go on a round-em-up rampage, but it should not be a surprise that those who come here illegally are less secure than those who came here legally.

On balance, immigration is good and in fact probably necessary.

Sometimes we allow immigrants in because they need a place of refuge, sometimes we allow immigrants in because they have skills that we need. Both are legitimate, but we should be clear about when we are doing what. Of course often they need a place of refuge and after achieving this, they contribute to society and sometimes, definitely more than just occasionally, they make major contributions.

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” has always been a romanticized version of what we were doing. My father came as a ten year old with his 16 year old brother in 1910. I don't know that they were a huddled mass yearning to be free but they certainly were looking for a better life. Let's just try to keep our idealistic sentiments under control when designing policy. "A nation of immigrants"? Well, I was born here. I understand what is meant, but still it is idealism instead of realism. How about simply acknowledging that immigration has played a strong positive role in the development of the country? That's pretty hard to disagree with.

Oh. Another thought. I don't think most Norwegians are particularly interested in coming here. Many did, but times change. If I am wrong about this, fine, I have Norwegian genes and I welcome them. But I am not expecting a flood.

The United States is built on a growth economy such that we would like each generation to be slightly larger than the last. If you look at the mortality issues in America, we are not birthing enough babies.

So it just so happens that we have immigration of people with higher fertility rates such as Hispanics to help counter this problem.

[Al_U_Card]

RedSpawn, on 2018-January-29, 16:42, said:

This sounds like a John Q. Taxpayer-financed wall UNLESS and UNTIL we find a way to get Mexico to pay for it (indirectly).

Brand marketing matters, but this is not how it was presented during the Presidential campaign.

Could it qualify as an infrastructure project? Financing grandiose projects is a Trump specialty, no? Trump National Border?

[PassedOut]

rmnka447, on 2018-January-29, 14:41, said:

So tell me how many progressives voted for any tax cuts at all for everyday people?

With a debt of $20 trillion and full employment, only irresponsible people imagine that the new tax cut is a good idea. In contrast, the Obama tax cuts put money into the hands of working people after the 2008 crash, and were a temporary measure.

[Winstonm]

Krompromat, anyone?

Quote

“Today, we have informed Congress that this legislation and its implementation are deterring Russian defense sales,” State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said. “Since the enactment of the ... legislation, we estimate that foreign governments have abandoned planned or announced purchases of several billion dollars in Russian defense acquisitions.”

With the statement, President Donald Trump’s administration signaled it was not imposing new sanctions under a bill he reluctantly signed into law in August, just six months into his presidency.

[hrothgar]

Al_U_Card, on 2018-January-29, 17:21, said:

Could it qualify as an infrastructure project? Financing grandiose projects is a Trump specialty, no? Trump National Border?

Trump doesn't build anything nor does he provide financing.

He makes his money through

1. Licensing his name
2. Money laundering
3. Managing a small number of projects

Once upon a time, the Trump organization did build things. However, you can only screw over your investors so many times before you're cut off from all reputable sources of $$$

(Hence Trump's dependency on Russian oligarchy and Deutsche Bank's Russian desk for funding)

[Al_U_Card]

Al_U_Card, on 2018-January-29, 17:21, said:

Could it qualify as an infrastructure project? Fronting the financing of grandiose projects is a Trump specialty, no? Trump National Border?

FMP

[kenberg]

Al_U_Card, on 2018-January-29, 17:21, said:

Could it qualify as an infrastructure project? Financing grandiose projects is a Trump specialty, no? Trump National Border?

I'm thinking we could get it to pay for itself by installing slot machines from one end to the other. Roulette wheels at the top, crap games in little inlets along the base. I am still working on plans for entertainment, but maybe Russian Folk Dancing would work.

[ggwhiz]

kenberg, on 2018-January-29, 21:29, said:

I'm thinking we could get it to pay for itself by installing slot machines from one end to the other. Roulette wheels at the top, crap games in little inlets along the base. I am still working on plans for entertainment, but maybe Russian Folk Dancing would work.

I think it was Jimmy Kimmel that touted a 2,000 mile long outlet mall.

How to staff it though? Ahhh Mexicans with lower wages and no benefits so THEY end up paying for it.

[barmar]

rmnka447, on 2018-January-29, 14:41, said:

Isn't it something like 200+ companies and approximately 3 M+ plus people who are getting "bonuses"? But I guess from some people's filters of reality that qualifies as very few people. Most of these announcements are from fairly large companies. There may be smaller companies taking similar actions that aren't receiving any publicity at all.

Aren't some of these same companies also doing big layoffs at the same time? I think AT&T, for instance.

So some employees are getting bonuses, others are getting pink slips.