Donal Trump set the message and the tone of his message today in his inaugural address.
Click on the link for the full text.
Key Sound Bites
- What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people.
- For many decades, we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry; One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores, with not even a thought about the millions upon millions of American workers left behind.
- The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed across the entire world.
- From this moment on, it’s going to be America First. Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs, will be made to benefit American workers and American families.
- We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to follow.
- We will reinforce old alliances and form new ones – and unite the civilized world against Radical Islamic Terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the Earth.
- We must think big and dream even bigger.
Together, We Will Make America Strong Again. We Will Make America Wealthy Again. We Will Make America Proud Again. We Will Make America Safe Again.
And, Yes, Together, We Will Make America Great Again. Thank you, God Bless You, And God Bless America.”
Short and to the Point
Trump’s 15-minute inaugural address was more concise than most swearing-in speeches throughout history, but far from the shortest.
George Washington’s second inaugural address was just 135 words. The longest ever address was President William Henry Harrison’s 8,445-word speech on March 4, 1841. He died about a month later from pneumonia, believed to be brought on by exposure on the cool inauguration day.
Click on the preceding link for more details of the shortest and longest speeches.
Protectionism vs. Isolationism
If Trump follows his message, we are certainly going to see a more protectionist, isolationist America.
Isolationism, as in not meddling in the foreign affairs of other countries, would be an excellent thing. Political meddling leads to wars, and only makes more enemies.
On the other hand, protectionism, is not a good thing. Trade is not between nations, trade is between individuals. Lower prices are undoubtedly good for consumers.
If it’s good for consumers, it’s good for the US. Neither NAFTA nor China is responsible for the loss of manufacturing jobs. Automation and productivity improvements are to blame.
We Must All Wish Trump Well
When it comes to trade, Donald Trump is fighting a symptom of a problem and not the problem. Income inequality and secular stagnation are also symptoms of the problem.
For discussion and a clear presentation of the real problem facing not only the US but the globe, please see Secular Stagnation Theory: Challenge to DeLong, Summers, Bernanke, Krugman, Keen, Pettis, Edwards.
Nonetheless, Trump is going to try things his way, so we must all wish him well.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
“We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first. We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example, we will shine for everyone to follow.” – from Trump inaugural speech.
I didn’t participate in the election but that is what I wanted to hear more than anything else.
Bobby Hill said:
It is not the right of nations to put their own interests first. Nations don’t have rights. Individuals do. Our interests are in promoting individual freedom here and abroad, irrespective of borders. Now, intervention almost always is the wrong way to do promote freedom, but the principle that Trump opposes is that individual rights are paramount. America first means individuals second. Trump is a collectivist, pure and simple.
The latter part of the quotation, is, concededly, right on. We should lead by example. I only wish that we will be worth following. I rather doubt that we will be with a collectivist at the helm.
It is the right of individuals to put their own interests first. It is also the right of individuals to form governments and through those governments attempt to advance their own interests. What good is a government that chooses to work *against* the interests of those who formed it?
Well, I’d offer that we’ve seen the results of that over the last fifty years….
At this point, Trump stating that as a leader, he wishes to put the interests of American citizens first doesn’t mean he’s a collectivist. It means he’s trying to put the government back to work for the people themselves – even those who didn’t vote for him.
He has a long row to hoe – and I’m not sure that even with a compliant congress he can fix the problem even if he gets eight years – but I wish him the best.
Stuki Moi said:
“It is also the right of individuals to form governments and through those governments attempt to advance their own interests.”
Not to the extent that those governments do so, by trampling the interests of those who do not agree with those who voluntarily formed it. For example, by shaking down me and Ching Chong as we’re about to swap my buck for his pack of gum.
If Trump and his buddies want to restrict who they can trade with, nothing wrong with that. But once they start running around with guns trying to restrict who others trade with, that’s when the wrong starts.
You cannot over simplify, though the ideal stands. For example what do you do when said foreigner then buys out where you work and employs cheaper labour in your place, and if he cannot he builds his own cheaper outlet and you go out of business. I just don’t see how you square trade deficit across legislative boundaries without either fully allowing a take over that convenes on the lowest denominator or otherwise relying on legislation that protects domestic interests. They do the latter with guns btw, and it is part of what allows a ‘relatively free’ trading area in own nations which we enjoy. I seriously think maintaining and increasing freedom of enterprise and trade within a nation is much more important.
Stuki Moi said:
“For example what do you do when said foreigner then buys out where you work and employs cheaper labour in your place”
You do what he cannot do as efficiently as you. How much freedom you have to do that, depends on how much freedom you have to make choices that minimize all other costs than your own compensation. Countries that follow that path the furthest, as in impose the minimum of costs and the minimum of restrictions on their citizens’ ability to choose and optimize freely, will be the countries with the best paid citizens.
That does mean ruthless elimination of absolutely every non productive drag and leech who lives off of the value add created by others. Meaning 90+% of contemporary finance, law, real estate sans construction, public sector etc., etc. Which is why the 1%ers, largely leeches themselves by now, rather than competent productive people, are so hellbent on providing public “education” aimed at obfuscating this economic inevitability from their captive indoctrinati. While self servingly pretending it is somehow their own “skill” that places them in the 1% instead, and that it is somehow the rest’s lack of “skills” vis-a-vis cheap foreigners than render the remaining 99% less well off.
David A said:
Bobby Hill said:
“It is the right of individuals to put their own interests first.” Well, that’s not Trump.
Trump today demanded (without looking up his words, so no quotation marks), hire American, buy American. Now, that’s quintessential collectivism, of the big trade union, and the nationalist varieties.
My interests are to obtain the best goods and the best employees at the best prices, irrespective of where the goods are made or birthplace of the employees. So, Trump is calling for collectivism, a limitation on the freedom of the individual who would sell labor, and the individual who would hire it, and a limitation on the freedom of the consumer who would buy and the manufacturer who would sell.
Government has been counterproductive but not because officeholders have been fundamentally venal, or indifferent to constituents. Obama did want prosperity and peace for all Americans, but he was horribly mistaken about where widespread peace and prosperity come from. I hope I am wrong, but Trump holds all of Obama’s collectivist tendencies times 10000000 or more.
“It is not the right of nations to put their own interests first. Nations don’t have rights. Individuals do. Our interests are in promoting individual freedom here and abroad, irrespective of borders.”
True, groups of people do not have rights. Nor do they have ‘interests’ as you incorrectly claim. But, in the context of this paragraph, Trump was speaking as the President, and for the country, to the rest of the world. Just substitute ‘individuals’ for ‘nations’ and you’d have a statement the local sheriff could make for his community.
Hey, I’m a former Randian, so I know where you’re coming from. But here’s the thing: Open Borders = White Genocide. Put that in your bong and smoke it, hippie-of-the-right.
There is no ‘free trade’; its is all ‘managed trade’ via government agreements. The US has gotten screwed on the trade deals and reimbursement of the VAT taxes.
Per Desteen said:
Further, “Free trade” also assumes free movement of capital and labor. Those are very destructive forces that are strictly controlled elsewhere. Protectionism also includes protecting your borders and your capital reserves. We’re living with the effects of not protecting all three.
Further, consumers will happily buy low priced crap goods, food, and services because its low priced. They will pay far more in replacing, repairing, sickcare, and lost time because of choices motivated by price!
Price is not the determinant of value! Value is a much bigger concept that is far more than the good or service in question, which is why it is never measured by economists.
In terms of a Nation, with a common culture and ethnicities, there are values that are adopted by all citizens that are required to be part of that nation and culture. They supersede the concept of price and consumer. Trump referenced the blood price paid by US soldiers for the legacy we have. There’s no dollar value on that.
To finish and circle back, “Free trade” is a phantom. America’s interest’s first, not the consumer shopping Wal-mart for the lowest priced Chinese crap.
Stuki Moi said:
“Price is not the determinant of value!”
But, much more importantly: You are not the determiner of value. Nor is some tax feeder. Instead, the only determiner of what value X has for me, is me.
First priority: Make America Great Again!
Stuki Moi said:
First Reality: Politicians “Making”, and “Great”, are logically strictly disjoint.
America is already great, as that is how God made her. The reason that is not obvious, is that her greatness has for too long been obscured by an ever growing tumor mass of politicians, tax feeders and other useless rats doing nothing more than dedicating themselves to meddling in the lives of others.
The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a corporation and should be operated as one. What business owner wants their business to fail unless they work for another purpose. Almost every, if not every, politician has NO capable business knowledge. Thank God President Trump does.
when can I sell my equity ?
what’s the dividend payout ratio ?
The United States is nothing like a corporation and should absolutely not be operated like one.
Municipalities are mostly incorporated, and if you look at their Comprehensive Anual Financial Reports (CAFR’s) you will find they that, when combined, they are the largest holder of assets (stocks, bonds, RE, etc.) on the planet. Claiming they are bankrupt, by ignoring their balance sheet (CAFR), and focusing the publics eyes on manipulated budgets / income statements, is further proof they are run like big bureaucratic corporations – fraudulently.
You are right, the US should not be run like big corporations that try to eliminate their competition by bribing politicians. It should be run with free market principles where competition reduces prices and improves quality, and dead wood is cleared so new growth can flourish.
Trump is going to have a lot of trouble getting anything done. Not only will the democrats be opposed to him, but many republicans too. I consider him to be an independent. I view it as a good thing. Not much will get done unless all parties agree.
Tony Bennett said:
Pretty much agree. He can certainly do some things such as enforce existing (immigration) laws and conduct foreign policy … but in matters that require Congressional legislation … look for a tar pit. Sure, he can get a vote to repeal ACA …. but, er, what will it be its replacement? (DJT has said SOMETHING will be in its place)
It is said of every incoming President, “he won’t be able to get anything done. He will be opposed by the opposition. He’s going to come face to face with reality. etc. etc., blah, blah, blah.
If no President can “get anything done” why in the hell are we in the fix we’re in? Thousands of pages of tax law, thousands of pages of regulations, dozens (hundreds?) of useless Federal programs and even more useless and expensive Federal employees. Where did they come from? Who authorized them?
Every President and his administration, that’s who. Yes, seems like a lot got done.
Tony Bennett said:
“Neither NAFTA nor China is responsible for the loss of manufacturing jobs. Automation and productivity improvements are to blame.”
Perot was damn right about that giant sucking sound. Now in recent years (and going forward) your point has (some) merit. But 15 years ago? 20 years? 30 years? … no manufacturing jobs offshored????
You have a beautiful and diverse country, full of natural resources, it is one of the, if not the, largest inhabitable geography in the world, with three hundred million people who speak the same language and live under the same laws, and with the same currency.
If that is not large enough and wealthy enough and organised enough for individuals to be able to trade… well how many other countries and trade agreements do you need for it to ‘work’?
God bless America.
Tony Bennett said:
Agree. If protectionism sweeps the world there will inevitably be countries that “win” and “lose” … no way the US (worker) “loses” … now US owners of capital (“the rich”) might take it in the shorts as the large wealth gains made by offshoring go “poof”. Good.
Have to have your own house in order first, always, just as a person has to be in charge of himself, so a nation has to know what it is about so as to own where it resides.
It is not a great pinnacle of achievement, it is a continuous, often mundane, labour, but it is immensely rewarding and an adventure in itself.
The hardest part of being successful is not reaching the summit, but staying there, we find out eventually how much of the success we claim is actually illusion. A lot of people who write here know this, but it is very illusive to translate into words, and in fact is best demonstrated by attitude and actions, than by speech alone.
Stuki Moi said:
Noone benefits from being restricted to a strict subset of the choices previously available to them. It is flat out impossible for that to be true.
Theory and reality Stuki… I could say no one benefits from not having all the choices imaginable, but at the end of the day there are trade offs, and once you make one choice the rest don’t count. Who are you going to rely on to provide you with the choices, and how are you going to be certain that some were not available, or that newer, maybe even better, ones might appear simply because choice was restricted. We work by principles, and I like open trade, but you have to realize that shifting to one trade reality necessarily stops another from taking shape. Example, imagine no developing world production, do you not think it possible that the US would have perfected its own industry by now to a level of providence both acceptable and independent? We could argue in circles like this, as there is no absolute answer.
Tony Bennett said:
Stuki – disagree … but feel free to flesh out your point (if I’m to be a convert)
In the meantime jobs will be created in the US. The US in a unique situation … outside of some rare earth minerals there is not a damn thing we can’t produce to survive.
American as apple pie … don’t you know 🙂
Stuki Moi said:
I’m not really sure what there is to flesh out. For any given American attempting to optimize his own utility, a strict superset of current choices from which to choose from cannot possibly leave him worse off, while quite possibly enabling him to better off.
As for “se can survive without them” and “no developing world production”, of course most Americans could survive even with less access to trade than they have today. They’d just have to make do with less, as everything would be more expensive, so they could afford fewer things.
In the short, immediate, term, the hamsterwheeling encouraged/mandated by having to put up with government enforced inefficiency, could even possibly give those shallow and indoctrinated enough to equate measured “activity” (GDP) with economic well being some reason to believe things are improving.
But in the long run, all economic growth stem from increased efficiency. Barring US actors from making the choices that is the most globally efficient for them, just ensures that foreigners not so restricted will get a competitive leg up. Slowly but surely shifting the centers of new innovation away from America, and towards those places where less resources are wasted on politically mandated, inefficient make work.
Economic growth depends on innovation. Which means taking existing, available to one, resources and combining them in novel ways. By across the board increasing the costs of all things currently available, potential innovators will be stuck with a shallower pool of resources from which to do their innovating. That is never a good thing, no matter if banning clothing imports from Asia could possibly “create jobs” for a million or two women in the US to sit around and mindlessly sow simple clothes for 10x the cost that Asians with no other options would be happy to sow them for.
The wealth of a population is really just a measure on it’s efficiency. The most value generated for least amount of work, is the only name of the game. As all the work not needed to be done to create X amount of value, represents the potential to create more value. Either by way of added production, or even by simply enjoying leisure. None of which options are available to those stuck trying their darnedest to “create work” for work’s own sake.
Next time you visit, fly into Miami airport. Last time I cleared customs there, the TSA agent said. “This line is for all people con el passaporte.” Then when I went to get something to eat before my transfer flight the person behind the counter didn’t even know the word plate in English. Fortunately I speak Spanish, and as an added bonus always get bigger portions for using it.
But overall I agree, never understood the logic of saying a country with 300 million or a billion people need trading partners, seems like no shortage of customers the way I do the math. Although I do prefer free trade myself, and couldn’t imagine having to eat American produced Parmesan cheese.
Stuki Moi said:
People need trading partners. They don’t need countries.
Many Americans prefer to be able to buy bananas, to being barred from doing so, even if bananas are not easily grown in the US proper. Exactly how many hundreds of millions of other Americans who are also not in a position to efficiently grow bananas, isn’t really all that relevant.
Heck, some Americans have even been known to enjoy buying wives from Slovenia, despite half of those 300 million Americans being women….
I bought one for myself as well, best thing I ever did. A women who actually says things like, “I don’t know why all these American women want to be men, woman is woman, and man is man”
Then she takes my credit card and goes shopping.
Stuki, I don’t think anyone is suggesting stopping trade in items that are rare or unavailable in the US, the idea seems to be to ground US consumption in domestic production where it makes some kind of sense to.
Stuki Moi said:
Bananas are only rare in the US because they can be made more efficiently in other parts of the world. Ditto for LCD panels, many forms of semi conductors, and beautiful women willing to marry Americans twice their age.
Next time you visit, fly into Miami. Last time I cleared customs there, I’m standing in line and the TSA agent announces, “All people con el passaporte, por favor use the line on the left. Priceless.
Great comments both of you guys. Not a single great civilization/empire–Egypt, Rome, Genghis Khan, Britain, the US–got that way by voluntarily giving up their production wealth to help make their conquered territories/colonies/trading partners wealthier too. They became great by taking or buying the basic resources of others (and shepherding their own) while keeping the high value-added products for themselves and for export. Britain bought the wool from others, but exclusively sold the woolens back to them, on ships of their own fleet. It would have been insane, for the prosperity of the British working class, to plop the woolen factories in New Zealand to sell back to Britain, even if the labor cost there was less. It might have been great for a certain “1%” group, but not for the country. Unfortunately, that’s what we’ve been doing since the 80’s.
Neoliberal policies, like those espoused by the Clinton Global Initiative, gutted this country’s middle class and sent us on a global race-to-the-bottom (common denominator). Bye, bye, Clintons.
A great book to read in this regard is Clyde Prestowitz, The Betrayal of American Prosperity.
Ed Bear said:
The Deep State is going to be looking for Trump’s ass.
Ed Bear – and Trump will be looking for their asses too.
And he’s just the kind of ALPHA GORILLA who will grab them by the balls and make them scream.
“The Deep State is going to be looking for Trump’s ass.”
Which brings us back to the Alex Jones discussion of yesterday. If I thought the deep state had a target on my back, I’d act like I was crazy in order to avoid being worth assassinating. Since there do seem to be assassinations. Acting like a loon has been the modus of court jesters for a very long time, in order to tell truth to power.
And, if I were the deep state, I would drug and laser and otherwise disorient people whom I wanted to discredit, in order to make them behave in a discreditable way.
I’m not saying that that is what is going on with Jones, or what will go on with Trump. Info wars is not one of my news sources. However, it has gotten to the point where odd behavior in the media makes me don tinfoil.
Fred Rogers said:
Trump plans to visit CIA headquarters and the “deep state” weenies early tomorrow.
CIA needs a serious downsizing of staff… in terms of egos at least, maybe head count. Certainly all the wanna-be politicians and unelected emperors can go f#ck themselves.
Trump has the authority and should require every single one of them to obey or pack their stuff for Leavenworth prison. No ifs, ands or buts. Bureaucrats obey. End of discussion.
Make an example out of John Brennan and lets see if the rest of them still mouth off. Treason is not acceptable. We elected Trump (and Obama before that, even if we didn’t like him), we never elected Brennan.
Hillary, who was also not elected as Secretary of State, should be the first example. Selling access to foreign entities is treason, period!
“No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”
ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 8
The ones who consume create, and ultimately can control, the market. We are still the worlds most voracious consumer. Trump knows this That is his leverage.
Consumption is a lever, pissing off you customer is seldom a good idea.
Stuki Moi said:
Those capable of producing something of value, will always be able to trade their output for something to consume, should they so desire. But the converse only holds true temporarily; for as long as the producer is willing to accept empty IOUs.
Americans grew to become voracious consumers, on the back of being efficient producers. Then, Nixon opened up for simple, crass, unbacked printing, instead of producing, as a means to fund consumption. Until we ended up in a dump where all purchasing power/wealth is printed up by the Fed then arbitrarily distributed by ambulance chasers, and none is earned.
“The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes”… The money trail leads to our own Multi-National Corps,Government and their Foreign cronies.
The poverty, rape and pillaging is global in nature and extends from our own working class to the enslaved production workers of all third world nations.
The 8 richest individuals own more wealth than 45% of the world’s population. Just let that sink in for a minute!
Not to create argument but the primary cause has been the demand to drive down finished product prices in order to increase the available market size.
The consumer has benefitted by being able to fill their houses with cheaper shit.
Granted, automation will make that possible closer to the source of demand in future but that doesn’t necessarily mean a big increase in employment.
I wish the USA well. It won’t be an easy ride. The easy stuff has already been done.
Did you analyze those 8 rich people and where their wealth came from? You talked about “enslaved production workers of all third world nations”. Of the 8, 6 are American. Every one of them, with the exception of Buffett, made his money from starting a company in the information processing business. None of them requires much “third world production”. Theirs is all based on the computer chip and the internet.
Gates (software), Ellison (software), Zuckerberg (software, social information sharing), Bezos (software, marketing), Bloomberg (information distribution).
Now, you may say that with respect to Zuckerberg and Bezos, their revenues depend on advertising to sell cheap stuff. And cheap stuff tends to be made overseas.
Their total net worth far exceeds the wealth produced from their businesses. These folks have immense portfolios; Stock, Bonds, Real Estate and other private companies. All facilitated by a system that benefits the few to the absolute detriment of the many. Think Federal Reserve (fractional reserve banking/QE) and bought and paid for politicians and lobbyist (Bills written by industry).
Stuki Moi said:
“The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes”
If Trump’s speech writer managed to somehow not be an economic ignoramus, the line would have read “The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from the middle class by way of asset pumping preventing them from buying a proper home in the first place. Then handed, not to some equally destitute, as always imaginary, hobgoblin in a faraway land; but rather to other Americans. Specifically, those Americans wealthy and connected enough to, relative to the middle class, have benefited from the asset pumping and attendant theft-by debasement. As in, those Americans who Happen to have inherited chunks of New York real estate right about the time Nixon removed the last protection the middle class had against that kind of theft.”
But of course, after 100 plus years of pervasive, publicly funded indoctrination, political speechwriters get to decide between economically literate, and employed. Can’t have both, as that would violate a fundamental tenet of progressive dystopias.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
Stuki Moi said:
…But, as the Encyclopedia Britannica attests to, not necessarily of much accumulated knowledge and understanding.
Ensign Nemo said:
“The 8 richest individuals own more wealth than 45% of the world’s population. Just let that sink in for a minute!”
That’s somewhat misleading.
Quite a few people have negative net worth – think about how many Americans have mortgages, car loans, student loans, etc. and can just barely afford to stay above water.
One estimate is that the poorest 30% of the world’s population has a negative net worth of about $500 billion.
So, if you add in the next 10% or so of the world’s population and estimate that it has a positive net worth of about $500 billion, then the net worth of the bottom 40% or so is … zero.
“A kid with a ten dollar bill owns more wealth than 40% of the world’s population” somehow isn’t as good a headline as “The 8 richest individuals own more wealth than 45% of the world’s population”, but it’s just as true.
“A kid with a ten dollar bill owns more wealth than 40% of the world’s population”
You make my point even pointier! Think of the abject poverty of the bottom 40%. These are human beings, many of whom work themselves to death just to survive. Satan himself could not have devised a better system.
“When it comes to trade, Donald Trump is fighting a symptom of a problem and not the problem. Income inequality and secular stagnation are also symptoms of the problem.
For discussion and a clear presentation of the real problem facing not only the US but the glob, please see Secular Stagnation Theory: Challenge to DeLong, Summers, Bernanke, Krugman, Keen, Pettis, Edwards.”
The GAME is MONOPOLY. And anyone who has played the board game knows how it ends.
You can blab on and on and on about “FREE” Trade. You are blind and will never see, deaf and will never hear. Or you know and understand, and continue to mislead. Either way, the wheel is turning. Thank God.
Trump wants to STOP being the world’s policeman, wants to STOP illegal indigent and illiterate foreigners from crashing our borders and turning America into an uncivilized 3rd world banana republic and he want to STOP unfair global trade that is sucking this country dry!
All good things.
Finally, we have a nation’s leader who is not afraid to step on toes and offend all the corrupted and anti-American empty suits who fill the Capital Building!
Power on, President Trump! God speed!!!
Fred Rogers said:
I do not understand Mish’s mis-use of the “protectionist” label. Right now, US business is the victim of foreign protectionism … and forcing foreign governments to give the US a level playing field is not protectionism (not “fair” whatever that is, not necessarily “equal outcomes”).
Supporting free trade is a good thing. Being a sissy push-over and letting everyone walk on our faces is not being a “free trade” supporter, its being a sissy push-over.
Time to make that distinction and live by it. Free trade is a two way street.
“Nonetheless, Trump is going to try things his way, so we must all wish him well.”
NO. I wish us well, but Trump (or any POTUS) I wish absolutely nothing.
I certainly do NOT wish protectionism well. But I don’t have to wish it anything, it is a failure everywhere it is tried, and the laws of economics cannot be trumped.
Fred Rogers said:
standing up for yourself is not protectionism
What we have now is submissiveness, and it is very unhealthy
Ron J said:
“We Must All Wish Trump Well”
Some MainStreamMedia personalities are not cooperating.
Terry Moran of ABC News said Trump’s speech had anti-Semic tones in it. Mr “Hardball” of NBC, considered it to be Hitlerian.
In a tweet, Nancy Sinatra slammed CNN for falsely claiming she was unhappy that Trump used her father’s song.
So much for Zucker claiming CNN was more credible than ever.
Fred Rogers said:
Clinton news network were the ones gleefully speculating on which Obama cabinet member would be named acting president if there was a mass casualty at Trump’s inauguration.
At best that was speculation (not news), and at worst it was an attempt to subvert the lawful transition of power (aka an act of treason).
Hopefully that crap media outlet will lose its “press” credentials and be blocked from all federal government buildings until they discipline the parties (producers, on-air talking heads, writers, comedians, clowns, etc) that were part of the show
CNN was wrong. The President Pro Tem of the Senate was also in the secluded location. He gets the Job before the Clinton Cabinet Secretary does, no matter who the President was at the time.
Fred Rogers said:
Opposition media should not be encouraging political violence — regardless of who might take over if their fantasy actually happened
WTOP.com, which is a middle of the road radio news station in DC, and a good one, broadcast an interview this morning with some young lady who said, as near as I can recall it “I’m here today with my brown face to show ‘those people’ that Donald Trump is not my president”.
Put in ‘white’ for ‘brown’ and ‘Obama’ for Trump and you’d be crucified, justly I’d say, as a racist. I’m really surprise WTOP broadcast it. I think they pulled it after a short time, no doubt they got calls about it.
For the first time, I’m genuinely concerned about the future of America as a democratic republic. Things are just too polarized, based on false news, manipulation of real news by the main stream infotainment media, and general stupidity/moral high ground on all sides. A dismal state of affairs, similar to the late Roman Republic where the Senate was unable to find any middle ground. Fortunately, unlike Rome, no one in the US is wealthy enough to fund private armies.
What state will America be in if this goes on for a generation?
Trump is not a Republican, at least as the party is now, nor is he indebted to anyone, he’s his own man, we haven’t had that since Eisenhower or Truman. Probably Reagan, too. He has serious faults but he might just grow into the job and straighten things out.
Ted Fiolek said:
Retaliatory policies against mercantile nation isn’t protectionism, it is self defense.
Stuki Moi said:
A+ in Newspeak, F in economics. Sounds like the indoctrination system is working as intended.
Ted Fiolek said:
Stuki Moi said:
I apologize. Wasn’t intending to be an asshole.
Allowing a few well connected 1%ers to determine who is “mercantile nations”, then write laws that others have to abide by/suffer under on that basis, does allow them virtually unlimited leeway to use that power for no other reason than self enrichment. Which is how they got to be 1%ers in the first place.
Just like America, other nations consist of 99% of people who are just regular Joes trying to get by. Not some undifferentiated mass of “mercantilists,” bent on destroying random people in the US. But also like the US, there are a small, privileged caste of 1%ers, who fight tooth and nail to set their own captive 99% up against the ones in the US. All for the simple reason of enriching themselves.
People talk about ‘FREE TRADE’ but no one really defines it, Mish.
Example: in Paul Ryan’s home district in Janesville, Wisconsin, they made pens for a century. I think Scripto. I should recall the make since when this happened in 2004 I lived in Madison 30 miles away but it didn’t show up on the radar until the professor I worked for realized he couldn’t buy his favorite type of mechanical pencil and looked into what happened.
A Japanese company bought Scripto and closed the factory the next day. More market for them, less competition. A couple hundred regular joes lost their jobs, no other real jobs available, the story of the entire upper Midwest for a generation. God knows what happened to them.
“FREE TRADE”? I suppose so… It all depends on how you define it. Sure as sh*t American jobs went overseas, someone had to make the pens. I’d imagine that if one looked closely you’d fine this has happened thousands, perhaps a million, times. Automation had nothing to do with it and the consumer sure didn’t see lower costs. No one won but the overseas competition and the upper management of Scripto.
What’s really a hoot is that its almost impossible to buy farm land in this country, the idea being that the Kaiser could buy up all the land and not plant crops and starve the US, basically. Are there any similar safeguards on American industry? No. Obama asked Steve Jobs about bringing jobs back to the US. He said no can do, no one in America makes the stainless steel screws that Macs require.
This should tell you that there are much deeper and much more serious issues than “Free TRADE” per se that need to be looked into.
I should say, this is just a story, my two cents worth. But, I gotta say it doesn’t give me a warm fuzzy feeling. True, automation has killed a lot of manufacturing jobs, which in the long run, if history is a valid guide, should benefit society: the case can be made that in the long run technology has benefited humanity, although in the short run being out of work and starving is certainly a negative for the individuals concerned. Perhaps some element of morality enters into all this.
My point is that to the best of my knowledge the government has done extremely little to guard US industry from predatory practices. My hunch is that this has done much more damage than automation, etc.
Bill Jones said:
You are entitled to your own opinion about outsourcing but not your own facts.
for example, I can give you scores more.
Was there a secret message in Trump’s speech ??
” Trump speech has uncanny echo of Batman villain ”
John B. Goodrich said:
As a tech industry corporate lawyer for 35 years I can promise you that in the mid ’80’s the exit of electronics manufacturing, much of our auto industry and our semiconductor industry was the direct result of the Japanese manipulation of the Yen/Dollar currency exchange rate (285 to the Dollar); it has been followed since the mid ’90’s by the general exit of most of our other manufacturing by the artificial peg of the Chinese Yuan to the Dollar at an unreasonable low rate; that had the effect of an aggregate of a US $4.3 trillion trade deficit between our two countries since it started. That is, in fact, the cause of loss of our manufacturing jobs; Not automation; Not new technologies. Those jobs still exist and are expanding in China.
If you sat in the board rooms of modern US tech companies you would still see the massive cost differential provided by the Chinese using its Yuan/Dollar “peg,” now disguised as a (controlled) trading “range,” which has been mechanically adjusted by the Chinese at will.
The idea that you can benefit by losing your manufacturing sector in exchange for cheap imports is mistaken. Manufacturing creates further manufacturing, increases capital, increases trade skills, increases technical innovation and has the only real economic multiplier.
Phil the other Phil said:
There it is–a winner. Common sense, evidence from a multi-generational time span, insight, conjoining of sophisticated ideas, based on the adduction of incontrovertible principles. Thanks for giving me even a scintilla of hope, Mr Goodrich, to start the day.
“If it’s good for consumers, it’s good for the US. Neither NAFTA nor China is responsible for the loss of manufacturing jobs. Automation and productivity improvements are to blame….”
Actually, the biggest factor by far is the minimum wage. It is an artificial floor for the cost of unskilled labor. The US may think the cost of unskilled labor is $7.25/hr but the rest of the world thinks it is much less. That is why jobs are leaving in hoards. Productivity and automation are responsible for the loss of domestic service jobs (retail, fast food) but the minimum wage is responsible for lost manufacturing jobs.
Trump is wasting no time stirring up a hornet’s nest.
” Donald Trump ‘to announce US embassy will move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem on Monday’
Relocating America’s diplomatic HQ to Jerusalem would represent a major break with policy
Sunday 22 January 2017
The White House will on Monday announce that the US embassy in Israel is to move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, according to an unconfirmed report by an Israeli news outlet.
Channel 2 cited an anonymous source as saying a member of the Trump administration would announce the highly controversial move on the President’s first full working day in office.
The news channel said it had received no confirmation of the claim and there has been no public statement on the move since Friday’s inauguration of the new US President. ”