Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Think the headline “market sinks as trade war looms” is a very accurate description of what has been happening the past couple of weeks. We aren’t in an active trade war yet but it is certainly looming and will happen if the tariffs that both sides have floated are enacted. Trump himself seems to have no worries if a trade war does happen.


We all know Trump loves playing the media game. It's the hype he loves. Must be a massive ego boost to regularly see the world's newspapers fall over themselves to report on him, and for their readers to froth at the mouth in their millions. Donald Trump must be the most front-page-reported person in world history, and he's only been in the job 15 months. It's incredible that we're all playing his game. He even gets to say "you're fired!" every month. He must be loving it!

Personally I looked into what was happening here and "trade war" is hyping the situation somewhat, tho' technically if China react with same then you could call it a "trade war". Just a tad dramatic seen as such a policy has been talked about for years, not just by politicans but by normal traders on the open market who have been getting priced out by Chinese sellers with their US/EU phantom-HQ's for years.


I don’t know the relevant deportation figures but am sure you can look them up in google yourself is you are interested. However here in California that have been several large scale ICE raids of businesses/regions, such targetting hasn’t happened since Bush/very early Obama years.

I'd say the Economist is a decent source:

Donald Trump is deporting fewer people than Barack Obama did (lowest level since 2006)
 
We all know Trump loves playing the media game. It's the hype he loves. Must be a massive ego boost to regularly see the world's newspapers fall over themselves to report on him, and for their readers to froth at the mouth in their millions. Donald Trump must be the most front-page-reported person in world history, and he's only been in the job 15 months. It's incredible that we're all playing his game. He even gets to say "you're fired!" every month. He must be loving it!

Personally I looked into what was happening here and "trade war" is hyping the situation somewhat, tho' technically if China react with same then you could call it a "trade war". Just a tad dramatic seen as such a policy has been talked about for years, not just by politicans but by normal traders on the open market who have been getting priced out by Chinese sellers with their US/EU phantom-HQ's for years.




I'd say the Economist is a decent source:

Donald Trump is deporting fewer people than Baryack Obama did (lowest level since 2006)
Since I paid $50 more for a new washing machine a couple of months ago because of the first set of tariffs Trump put on (despite buying a US made machine) I can unfortunately say that there are real world effects of these trade moves even if you think they are just media hype.

There has been discussions abouve various aspects of China trade/ currency/IP policy and even some actions taken to address them - eg some on Chinese steel dumping which iirc were reasonably successful as they met WTO rules https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-imposes-266-duty-on-some-chinese-steel-imports-1456878180 and also on tires which was less so http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/03/news/economy/obama-china-tire-tariff/index.html

Trump’s proposed actions are very broad so I don’t think trade war is hyping it, after all Trump is talking about $150 billion in tariffs on China alone plus the ones he wants on steel/aluminum and those already in place on washing machines and solar.

I can’t read the Economist article, perhaps you can excerpt it. But my understanding is that the physical deportation of people who were already in the US are being slowed by a backlog in the courts however that arrests/those in detention are up considerably as are raids on businesess. Certainly the rules for who can be deported have been expanded from Obama’s later years where there was a focus on those with serious criminial convictions rather than say a fruit picker here illegally.

You also have to be careful when comparing deportation figures to see if you are comparing apples to oranges - for most of us deportation means the removal of those already in country but iirc during the later Bush years the US Immigrations & Customs department changed their definition to include those arrested either at or a few miles from the border mid crossing. So for example Trump could have much reduced “border” deportations as new migrants are put off by the rhetoric yet increased “in country” deportations of people who have lived here peacefully for years and still maintain lower overall deportation figures.
 

If he did spend this amount on security hard to see how that figure or number of personnel can be justified, doubt even the Trump kids have that level of protection. Need more info on how long a period that 30+ detail covered as with 8 or 12hour shift rotation you could get through quite a few people even if only had one person assigned at a time.
 
Since I paid $50 more for a new washing machine a couple of months ago because of the first set of tariffs Trump put on (despite buying a US made machine) I can unfortunately say that there are real world effects of these trade moves even if you think they are just media hype.

There has been discussions abouve various aspects of China trade/ currency/IP policy and even some actions taken to address them - eg some on Chinese steel dumping which iirc were reasonably successful as they met WTO rules https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-imposes-266-duty-on-some-chinese-steel-imports-1456878180 and also on tires which was less so http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/03/news/economy/obama-china-tire-tariff/index.html

Trump’s proposed actions are very broad so I don’t think trade war is hyping it, after all Trump is talking about $150 billion in tariffs on China alone plus the ones he wants on steel/aluminum and those already in place on washing machines and solar.

I can’t read the Economist article, perhaps you can excerpt it. But my understanding is that the physical deportation of people who were already in the US are being slowed by a backlog in the courts however that arrests/those in detention are up considerably as are raids on businesess. Certainly the rules for who can be deported have been expanded from Obama’s later years where there was a focus on those with serious criminial convictions rather than say a fruit picker here illegally.

You also have to be careful when comparing deportation figures to see if you are comparing apples to oranges - for most of us deportation means the removal of those already in country but iirc during the later Bush years the US Immigrations & Customs department changed their definition to include those arrested either at or a few miles from the border mid crossing. So for example Trump could have much reduced “border” deportations as new migrants are put off by the rhetoric yet increased “in country” deportations of people who have lived here peacefully for years and still maintain lower overall deportation figures.

I like your replies Legs, as you go in detail and do try to see a bigger picture, tho' I think you do find it very hard to see any slight optimism to anything the government does while Trump is President.

As a EU citizen, I'd like something akin to this 'trade war'. Why and how did your washing machine end up costing $50 more?

Not sure why you can't view the Economist piece, if you're interested below is the main beef, it does touch upon some of the nuances you mentioned and you could say supports your above argument, but I'd still stand by my main point that the satirical news headlines are a little unfairly skewed against Trump, as it seeks to paint him a monster which, by associative suggestion, depicts his predecessor as a Saint, when the one true difference between the two Presidents is that Trump loudly & proudly says he will do the unpleasant things whereas Obama merely quietly enacted them.

Another interesting thing is if Trump's harsh rhetoric, while not finding influence in the removal statistics (yet, let's say), is making some border crossing attempters reconsider.

In light of the EU's troubles with masses (millions) of illegal border crossings (and the considerable strife this is causing society within), this ability of Trump to bluster is not universally criticised. Hence why also Orban of Hungary is sometimes supported by traditional liberals (like myself & my hungarian partner) who would otherwise oppose his local illiberal policies.

Orban, if you read European mainstream media, is pretty much as villified as Trump.


...figures released by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on December 5th show that the total number of deportations has declined over the past fiscal year—from October 1st 2016 to September 30th 2017—to the lowest level seen since 2006. The data also show that deportation has become less selective in the Trump era, increasing the risk of removal for people who have led long and quiet lives in America.

The decrease in total deportations is largely explained by a 17% drop in the number of immigrants arrested and removed at the border over the past fiscal year. Recent border crossers are the easiest to deport; those found within 100 miles (161km) of the frontier who have been in America 14 days or fewer are not entitled to make their case before an immigration judge, a process that can take months, if not years, in the backlogged courts. DHS officials credit tighter border security and more stringent interior enforcement with dissuading migrants from making the risky trek across America’s southern frontier. Mr Trump’s harsh rhetoric probably served as a deterrent, but border apprehensions, which are often used as a proxy for illegal immigration, began declining before he moved into the Oval Office.

While border removals have dipped, deportations of immigrants arrested in the interior of the country have increased by a quarter over the past fiscal year, due to Mr Trump’s expansion of who is considered eligible for removal. In February the DHS issued new immigration enforcement guidelines that are far broader than those implemented under Barack Obama.

During the second half of Mr Obama’s second term, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers were asked to focus on arresting newly arrived immigrants and undocumented immigrants with felony convictions. Mr Barrios Mendoza, whose only scrape with the law was a ticket for driving without a licence (which his migration status prevented him getting), may not have been entirely safe from deportation, but he would not have been an active target. “Felons, not families,” Mr Obama summarised when announcing the priorities. Statistics presented by ICE in 2016, Mr Obama’s final year in office, suggested that 83.7% of immigrants deported that year constituted threats to public safety, or had been apprehended at the border when trying to cross illegally.

The Trump administration’s guidelines are far more sweeping. ICE officers are to focus not just on immigrants with criminal convictions, but even on those with unsettled criminal charges. The instructions do not distinguish between violent crimes and more minor infractions, such as traffic offences or immigration crimes, which include crossing into America without permission. “The Department no longer will exempt classes or categories of removable aliens from potential enforcement,” read the DHS memo of February. At a recent press conference Thomas Homan, the acting director of ICE, put it more bluntly: “There is no prerequisite that you commit yet another crime to enforce immigration law. You know the IRS enforces tax law, we enforce immigration law. That’s our job.”

Despite casting a wider net, Randy Capps of the Migration Policy Institute, a think-tank, does not expect DHS to increase deportation numbers unless it can quickly add more ICE officers. The number of undocumented people arrested each week in the interior of the country has not increased much since February, suggesting that the agency may be at capacity. Detention centres, where populations are overflowing, present another limiting factor. In October DHS began exploring the possibility of opening five new detention centres, but such facilities would take time to find or build and congressionally appropriated dollars to run.
 
I like your replies Legs, as you go in detail and do try to see a bigger picture, tho' I think you do find it very hard to see any slight optimism to anything the government does while Trump is President.

As a EU citizen, I'd like something akin to this 'trade war'. Why and how did your washing machine end up costing $50 more?

Not sure why you can't view the Economist piece, if you're interested below is the main beef, it does touch upon some of the nuances you mentioned and you could say supports your above argument, but I'd still stand by my main point that the satirical news headlines are a little unfairly skewed against Trump, as it seeks to paint him a monster which, by associative suggestion, depicts his predecessor as a Saint, when the one true difference between the two Presidents is that Trump loudly & proudly says he will do the unpleasant things whereas Obama merely quietly enacted them.

Another interesting thing is if Trump's harsh rhetoric, while not finding influence in the removal statistics (yet, let's say), is making some border crossing attempters reconsider.

In light of the EU's troubles with masses (millions) of illegal border crossings (and the considerable strife this is causing society within), this ability of Trump to bluster is not universally criticised. Hence why also Orban of Hungary is sometimes supported by traditional liberals (like myself & my hungarian partner) who would otherwise oppose his local illiberal policies.

Orban, if you read European mainstream media, is pretty much as villified as Trump.

Which is one of the reasons America got Trump.
 
tho' I think you do find it very hard to see any slight optimism to anything the government does while Trump is President.

Not sure why you can't view the Economist piece, if you're interested below is the main beef, it does touch upon some of the nuances you mentioned and you could say supports your above argument, but I'd still stand by my main point that the satirical news headlines are a little unfairly skewed against Trump, as it seeks to paint him a monster which, by associative suggestion, depicts his predecessor as a Saint, when the one true difference between the two Presidents is that Trump loudly & proudly says he will do the unpleasant things whereas Obama merely quietly enacted them .
I do find it extremely difficult to see any good in what the Trump administration does - his morals, tactics and policies are almost always the antithesis of what I believe in and that does probably cloud my judgement at times.

However I don’t think these particular headlines are unfairly skewed against Trump as unlike you I am in a region that far from regarding Obama as a saint strongly criticized him when he enacted the same raids which is why in my original reply I said “such targetting hasn’t happened since Bush/very early Obama years.” Desire to cross the border is influenced by many factors, imo the largest of which is the economy, but Trump’s rhetoric likely has reduced attempted illegal crossings - I just don’t think that benefit is worth the price of the demagoguery that has come with it.

I think we both agree that a decrease in illegal immigration is good, not least for the immigrants themselves who can die in the crossing and are generally exploited by smugglers and employers. Where we probably disagree (and I certainly do with Trump) is how that reduction is best handled and views on overall immigration levels.

As for the washing machine that was the figure my appliance sales guy gave me when he spent about 10 minutes bitching about the tariffs and worrying about the one that were being suggested on steel/aluminum. Fwiw Goldman is forecasting a rise of between 8% and 20% on prices
https://www.consumerreports.org/was...riff-on-washing-machines-means-for-consumers/
 
Drain the swamp going swimmingly
https://theintercept.com/2017/12/28/scott-pruitt-failed-banker-running-epa-superfund-program/
In May, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation fined Oklahoma banker Albert Kelly $125,000. According to a consent order, which The Intercept obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, the FDIC had “reason to believe that [Kelly] violated a law or regulation, by entering into an agreement pertaining to a loan by the Bank without FDIC approval.” Two weeks later, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt appointed Kelly to lead an effort to streamline the Superfund program. In July, the FDIC went further, banning Kelly from banking for life. The “order of prohibition from further participation” explained that the FDIC had determined Kelly’s “unfitness to serve as a director, officer, person participating in the conduct of the affairs or as an institution-affiliated party of the Bank, any other insured depository institution.”

But Pruitt, who had received loans from Kelly’s bank, apparently didn’t find Kelly’s unfitness to serve in the financial industry as disqualifying his longtime friend from serving as a top official at the EPA. Since May, Kelly, or Kell as he was known in Oklahoma, has led the effort to streamline the Superfund program — which oversees remediation of some of the country’s most toxic sites. Kelly would become a senior adviser in the federal environmental agency despite having no previous experience with environmental issues.

Pruitt earned only $38,400 as an Oklahoma state senator. Even with a $35,000 profit from selling his previous home, that was not enough on its own to buy a house in the Lakes at Indian Springs community in Broken Arrow, the suburb of Tulsa that Pruitt represented in the legislature. Yet in 2004, Pruitt purchased a sprawling ranch house in the upscale gated community for $605,000. Located on a half-acre corner lot in the Lakes, his stately Tudor looked out on a manmade lake and had a stone fireplace, parking for five cars, and a storm-safe room.

To help pay for it, Pruitt turned to SpiritBank — a community bank that Kelly’s family had run since the 1930s. SpiritBank gave Pruitt and his wife three mortgage loans: one for $81,000, another for $359,000, and a third for $533,000. His wife, Marlyn Pruitt, has reported no assets or income.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top