So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...

[bacchi]

And the polls said he would never be made the Republican candidate, and if made the candidate would never win the Presidency. So I think there might be an issue with the polling.

He was well within the margin of error for most of the general election.  Pundits may have written him off but the polling didn't.

Also, Trump got fewer votes than Romney. It was Clinton that did poorly, and not Trump that did well.

Those Democrats that didn't vote won't make the same mistake again.

I disagree with that.  After Kennedy gave the rebuttal speech, I saw the same liberals who were Sanders supporters can lashing out at him for not being "liberal" enough.  And saying that if he ran for president, don't support him.

"The same liberals" have nothing to do with the low turnout in Wayne County. Bernie Bros are not a majority of the Democratic Party.

Though you do have a point. Democrats nixed Nixon's UBI plan in the House because it didn't go far enough. Liberals also panned the carbon-tax in Washington state because, again, it didn't go far enough.

[caracarn]

Yes, they have been pointing at China for two decades.  Prior to that they pointed at Japan.  With an intertwined global economic system you'd honestly need to disentangle the US from almost everything for some other country to surpass the situation.  My crystal ball is no better than anyone else's, my point is simply we've been hearing this for my entire 40+ years on this planet and yet here we stand and the US is an ingrained in the global economic success and almost any other major initiative as ever and I'm not seeing how that changes.

[GuitarStv]

Yes, they have been pointing at China for two decades.  Prior to that they pointed at Japan.  With an intertwined global economic system you'd honestly need to disentangle the US from almost everything for some other country to surpass the situation.  My crystal ball is no better than anyone else's, my point is simply we've been hearing this for my entire 40+ years on this planet and yet here we stand and the US is an ingrained in the global economic success and almost any other major initiative as ever and I'm not seeing how that changes.

Well yeah, the US is going to be tightly interwoven with the global economic system for quite a while to come.  It's the biggest economy in the world.  The change isn't going to happen overnight.  It's slowly (sometimes rapidly) losing it's place as a world leader though, in many ways.

To pick a couple examples:

China has already invested heavily (100 bn in the past few years) into green energy.  This is about double US investment.  (http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/01/china-leaving-us-behind-clean-energy-investment)

China's investing an awful lot more than the US into public transit (503 bn by 2020) https://usa.streetsblog.org/2018/01/18/chinas-investment-in-subways-puts-the-u-s-to-shame/ to deal with the problems caused by over-reliance on the car.

China is investing heavily in political influence around the world via the use of soft power (https://www.politico.eu/article/china-soft-power-offensive-confucius-institute-education/).  The US hasn't even bothered to appoint ambassadors to a large number of countries (https://qz.com/944100/more-than-half-the-worlds-population-still-doesnt-have-a-us-ambassador/), has gutted it's diplomats in general (http://www.dw.com/en/rapid-loss-of-us-diplomats-under-trump-administration-prompts-fears-of-weakened-influence/a-41308555), and appears to be heading towards isolationist trade policies (http://time.com/4820160/trump-america-first-global-leadership/).

[caracarn]

Yes, they have been pointing at China for two decades.  Prior to that they pointed at Japan.  With an intertwined global economic system you'd honestly need to disentangle the US from almost everything for some other country to surpass the situation.  My crystal ball is no better than anyone else's, my point is simply we've been hearing this for my entire 40+ years on this planet and yet here we stand and the US is an ingrained in the global economic success and almost any other major initiative as ever and I'm not seeing how that changes.

Well yeah, the US is going to be tightly interwoven with the global economic system for quite a while to come.  It's the biggest economy in the world.  The change isn't going to happen overnight.  It's slowly (sometimes rapidly) losing it's place as a world leader though, in many ways.

To pick a couple examples:

China has already invested heavily (100 bn in the past few years) into green energy.  This is about double US investment.  (http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/01/china-leaving-us-behind-clean-energy-investment)

China's investing an awful lot more than the US into public transit (503 bn by 2020) https://usa.streetsblog.org/2018/01/18/chinas-investment-in-subways-puts-the-u-s-to-shame/ to deal with the problems caused by over-reliance on the car.

China is investing heavily in political influence around the world via the use of soft power (https://www.politico.eu/article/china-soft-power-offensive-confucius-institute-education/).  The US hasn't even bothered to appoint ambassadors to a large number of countries (https://qz.com/944100/more-than-half-the-worlds-population-still-doesnt-have-a-us-ambassador/), has gutted it's diplomats in general (http://www.dw.com/en/rapid-loss-of-us-diplomats-under-trump-administration-prompts-fears-of-weakened-influence/a-41308555), and appears to be heading towards isolationist trade policies (http://time.com/4820160/trump-america-first-global-leadership/).

All things that are happening yes, but not sure how them being better at any of that moves US on the decline as an economic power.

Until we have significant advances in solar cell capability in less than perfect environments it is still marginal in value.  See the MMM article on his recent experience.  Only so much of the US and so much of China has enough sunlight to effectively use solar.  In my area of the north, not enough.  I ran the calculator MMM suggested for my address and the amount of power I'd get is not great.  Search in your area further up north and I'd anticipate that value is even lower.  It's similar to wind power.  If I do not have enough sun or wind in my area to generate enough power not using those technologies does not put me at a disadvantage because they are not usable by anyone there.  It's not a sign of a country in decline.  It's the sign of a country with people intelligent enough to know when a solution to a problem is not a feasible alternative and to not waste tons of money on it.  Spending 100bn on something that only provides your economy 20bn in value is a stupid use of 100bn.  Not saying that's going to be the result of investment there by China, but it would not be unheard of.  This is an example of activity not being an indicator of anything valuable.

Same with public transport.  Public transport is great in cities.  No one is going to run rails or send buses to everyone's house in the western US where cows outnumber people, or the vast reaches of Canada or outside the major metro areas of China.  Public transit has massive value in very small areas.  Just like self driving cars needing to be cleaned by hand because the sensors will be damaged.  A great technology no one will use unless they can figure out how to not make you clean your car every day to function and not have to do it manually. 

Your point on international relations has the more relevance to the possible decline of a country on the world stage.  But only so much damage can be done there in a decade of Trumpiness.  Only if we continue to elect buffoons will this become a problem that has long lasting consequences.  If our whole country suffers a brain drain we're in trouble.  I do not see that happening.

I have spent many years working in China.  The culture is the main barrier to them ever being a real threat to a democracy as far as real influence.  People there are not taught to think independently but instead to work collectively which aligns well with a communist mindset.  As I explained, our Chinese counterparts were terrific at following directions, and experts at learning a task very, very well.  What they struggled with was creative thinking.  The could get from point A to E only by going through B, C and D in that order.  Ask them to find a way from A to E without knowing what B C and D are and having to figure it out?  That's a thought dynamic I've seen Chinese workers struggle with.

[JLee]

Yes, they have been pointing at China for two decades.  Prior to that they pointed at Japan.  With an intertwined global economic system you'd honestly need to disentangle the US from almost everything for some other country to surpass the situation.  My crystal ball is no better than anyone else's, my point is simply we've been hearing this for my entire 40+ years on this planet and yet here we stand and the US is an ingrained in the global economic success and almost any other major initiative as ever and I'm not seeing how that changes.

Well yeah, the US is going to be tightly interwoven with the global economic system for quite a while to come.  It's the biggest economy in the world.  The change isn't going to happen overnight.  It's slowly (sometimes rapidly) losing it's place as a world leader though, in many ways.

To pick a couple examples:

China has already invested heavily (100 bn in the past few years) into green energy.  This is about double US investment.  (http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/01/china-leaving-us-behind-clean-energy-investment)

China's investing an awful lot more than the US into public transit (503 bn by 2020) https://usa.streetsblog.org/2018/01/18/chinas-investment-in-subways-puts-the-u-s-to-shame/ to deal with the problems caused by over-reliance on the car.

China is investing heavily in political influence around the world via the use of soft power (https://www.politico.eu/article/china-soft-power-offensive-confucius-institute-education/).  The US hasn't even bothered to appoint ambassadors to a large number of countries (https://qz.com/944100/more-than-half-the-worlds-population-still-doesnt-have-a-us-ambassador/), has gutted it's diplomats in general (http://www.dw.com/en/rapid-loss-of-us-diplomats-under-trump-administration-prompts-fears-of-weakened-influence/a-41308555), and appears to be heading towards isolationist trade policies (http://time.com/4820160/trump-america-first-global-leadership/).

All things that are happening yes, but not sure how them being better at any of that moves US on the decline as an economic power.

Until we have significant advances in solar cell capability in less than perfect environments it is still marginal in value.  See the MMM article on his recent experience.  Only so much of the US and so much of China has enough sunlight to effectively use solar.  In my area of the north, not enough.  I ran the calculator MMM suggested for my address and the amount of power I'd get is not great.  Search in your area further up north and I'd anticipate that value is even lower.  It's similar to wind power.  If I do not have enough sun or wind in my area to generate enough power not using those technologies does not put me at a disadvantage because they are not usable by anyone there.  It's not a sign of a country in decline.  It's the sign of a country with people intelligent enough to know when a solution to a problem is not a feasible alternative and to not waste tons of money on it.  Spending 100bn on something that only provides your economy 20bn in value is a stupid use of 100bn.  Not saying that's going to be the result of investment there by China, but it would not be unheard of.  This is an example of activity not being an indicator of anything valuable.

Same with public transport.  Public transport is great in cities.  No one is going to run rails or send buses to everyone's house in the western US where cows outnumber people, or the vast reaches of Canada or outside the major metro areas of China.  Public transit has massive value in very small areas.  Just like self driving cars needing to be cleaned by hand because the sensors will be damaged.  A great technology no one will use unless they can figure out how to not make you clean your car every day to function and not have to do it manually. 

Your point on international relations has the more relevance to the possible decline of a country on the world stage.  But only so much damage can be done there in a decade of Trumpiness.  Only if we continue to elect buffoons will this become a problem that has long lasting consequences.  If our whole country suffers a brain drain we're in trouble.  I do not see that happening.

I have spent many years working in China.  The culture is the main barrier to them ever being a real threat to a democracy as far as real influence.  People there are not taught to think independently but instead to work collectively which aligns well with a communist mindset.  As I explained, our Chinese counterparts were terrific at following directions, and experts at learning a task very, very well.  What they struggled with was creative thinking.  The could get from point A to E only by going through B, C and D in that order.  Ask them to find a way from A to E without knowing what B C and D are and having to figure it out?  That's a thought dynamic I've seen Chinese workers struggle with.

Over 80% of people in the US live in urban areas.  Our public transit system is abysmal.

[sol]

l
Only so much of the US and so much of China has enough sunlight to effectively use solar.  In my area of the north, not enough.

Why do you think "the north" gets less sunlight?  I assure you that the world is a sphere, and thus all points get the same amount of sunlight on an annual basis.  Your short winter days are offset by your long summer ones.

There are other obstacles to efficient solar deployment in the north, like snow cover and directionality, but available sunlight isn't one of them.  In fact, PV panels generate more efficiently at colder temperatures.

And what counts as "enough" anyway?  You can always make enough power if you put up enough panels, and as the cost per kW continues to drop even further below that of fossil fuels, it will eventually be silly to NOT put up solar panels.

Hopefully they won't all be made in China.

[DreamFIRE]

Did a quick search on sunlight hours and found this:

[sol]

Did a quick search on sunlight hours and found this:

Looks like a map of cloud cover percentages, doesn't it?  Local weather is way more important than latitude.

[DarkandStormy]

[sequoia]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

[dividendman]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

You're being sarcastic but this idea (making it mandatory by law that everyone is armed) is a serious proposal from the gun folks.

[sol]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

You're being sarcastic but this idea (making it mandatory by law that everyone is armed) is a serious proposal from the gun folks.

Ooh, can you imagine the outcry from the anti-ACA crowd about the government "making people buy something they don't want" if someone tried to pass a law requiring gun purchases?

Yea, me neither.  I'm sure they'd be fine with it.

[sequoia]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

You're being sarcastic but this idea (making it mandatory by law that everyone is armed) is a serious proposal from the gun folks.

Incase it is not clear, yes, I am being sarcastic.

[Metta]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

You're being sarcastic but this idea (making it mandatory by law that everyone is armed) is a serious proposal from the gun folks.

Yes. My neighbor across the street (an otherwise nice person) told me that there should be a law forcing me to carry a gun and that he hoped someone would shoot me since I refused to carry a gun and was therefore leaving the burden to him and his family. He seems to think about guns the way I think of vaccination. You need about ninety percent of people carrying guns everywhere to create herd immunity against random shooters and criminals.

I looked at him and said, "Seriously? You want someone to shoot me?"

He backed down on this and then darkly warned me that the neighborhood was going downhill and that I should stay indoors and not go walking around. He told me that he won't allow his wife to go grocery shopping without carrying a gun.

The only difference in the neighborhood in the last twelve years is that there are a lot more restaurants serving unhealthy food and that programmers from Asia (mostly India and Pakistan) have bought or rented some of the houses.

I'm a lot more wary of him now that he told me of his gun collection and that he thinks I should be shot. He's also succeeded in changing my mind about gun control. I used to be completely neutral on the topic, seeing it as an issue that I didn't have much interest or much of a stake in. Now I have moved in the pro-gun control direction.

I think that it is a tactical mistake on the part of gun rights advocates to try to reduce other people's freedom or to threaten them. They are overplaying their hand.

[sequoia]

Yes. My neighbor across the street (an otherwise nice person) told me that there should be a law forcing me to carry a gun and that he hoped someone would shoot me since I refused to carry a gun and was therefore leaving the burden to him and his family. He seems to think about guns the way I think of vaccination. You need about ninety percent of people carrying guns everywhere to create herd immunity against random shooters and criminals.

I looked at him and said, "Seriously? You want someone to shoot me?"

He backed down on this and then darkly warned me that the neighborhood was going downhill and that I should stay indoors and not go walking around. He told me that he won't allow his wife to go grocery shopping without carrying a gun.

Dang... I thought my neighbors are nuts - saw one of them mowing when raining last season. Another one was mowing a few days ago when the temperature spikes up (who mows in February?), but nothing compare to yours...

[Metta]

Yes. My neighbor across the street (an otherwise nice person) told me that there should be a law forcing me to carry a gun and that he hoped someone would shoot me since I refused to carry a gun and was therefore leaving the burden to him and his family. He seems to think about guns the way I think of vaccination. You need about ninety percent of people carrying guns everywhere to create herd immunity against random shooters and criminals.

I looked at him and said, "Seriously? You want someone to shoot me?"

He backed down on this and then darkly warned me that the neighborhood was going downhill and that I should stay indoors and not go walking around. He told me that he won't allow his wife to go grocery shopping without carrying a gun.

Dang... I thought my neighbors are nuts - saw one of them mowing when raining last season. Another one was mowing a few days ago when the temperature spikes up (who mows in February?), but nothing compare to yours...

He's actually not nuts. He's overall a nice guy and a helpful neighbor, but he has drunk deeply from a poisoned spring of right wing propaganda.  There's a fair amount of that here.

[nick663]

Comparison of Obama and Trump's reactions to school shootings during their presidencies:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHrvODeA8-E

[Roadrunner53]

nick663, that was an awesome link. Obama was caring and did the right things, Trump is uncaring and the shootings just seemed to be a bother and took away from his ranting, blame game time on Twitter.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

+1  Honestly, a President's job in the situation of a tragedy is quite simple.  Obama handled Sandy Hook better than could have been expected.  But even as a baseline, you go to the town straight away and express heartfelt condolences.  The idea that our President took to Twitter and blamed individuals for not reacting better and the FBI is beyond the pale. 

[sequoia]

nick663, that was an awesome link. Obama was caring and did the right things, Trump is uncaring and the shootings just seemed to be a bother and took away from his ranting, blame game time on Twitter.

Took away from golf - the president gotta have his exercise!

+1  Honestly, a President's job in the situation of a tragedy is quite simple.  Obama handled Sandy Hook better than could have been expected.  But even as a baseline, you go to the town straight away and express heartfelt condolences.  The idea that our President took to Twitter and blamed individuals for not reacting better and the FBI is beyond the pale.

I am kinda surprised he has not blame the victims yet...

 

[marty998]

Yes. My neighbor across the street (an otherwise nice person) told me that there should be a law forcing me to carry a gun and that he hoped someone would shoot me since I refused to carry a gun and was therefore leaving the burden to him and his family. He seems to think about guns the way I think of vaccination. You need about ninety percent of people carrying guns everywhere to create herd immunity against random shooters and criminals.

I looked at him and said, "Seriously? You want someone to shoot me?"

He backed down on this and then darkly warned me that the neighborhood was going downhill and that I should stay indoors and not go walking around. He told me that he won't allow his wife to go grocery shopping without carrying a gun.

I'll bet your neighbour has never seen the blood and guts pouring out of someone who has actually been shot. I wonder if after seeing how horrific that is he would change his mind.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

I am kinda surprised he has not blame the victims yet...

The internet seems to be taking care of that part for him - re. crisis actors.  Yet another good reason not to spend too much time on social media.

[ncornilsen]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

You're being sarcastic but this idea (making it mandatory by law that everyone is armed) is a serious proposal from the gun folks.

No, it is not. It might be from trump, but... well, he's trump.

The position advocated for a LONG time has been to allow teachers, who WANT to be trained to carry concealed, to do so. All the restrictions on brandishing, what is justifiable use of force, etc would all continue to stand... so announcing that you have a gun=brandishing and is not allowed... Most of the time, nobody would even know a teacher was carrying.

That is quite different than forcing all teachers to carry, which is a really, really dumb idea. The only thing more unsafe than a disarmed soft target like a school, is one full of people who are armed but don't want to be or aren't comfortable with it.

[Roadrunner53]

The answer to school shootings is MORE guns? Why don't we give the kids guns, the janitors, the bus drivers and the lunch ladies too.

Let's get real here...maybe mental competency testing and gun classes/training, plus upping the age to get guns and no machine guns for anyone that isn't in the military.

[Davnasty]

Two active gun threads right now, let's not start a third to rehash the same arguments again. The theoretical pros and cons of allowing teachers to carry have been discussed at length if you're interested.

[Just Joe]

I'm curious HOW a teacher carries a pistol that is concealed year 'round. I saw an interview where a teacher was carrying and he had the pistol stuck in a cowboy boot. Where I live it is hot enough (even inside) that a jacket won't be comfortable much of the year.

Carrying it in a holster on the belt is better in some ways but then the owner must protect it - make sure they aren't jumped somewhere and their gun isn't taken from the owner and used against the owner.

In some parts of the country it might look like Miami Vice teaching school. Loose clothes, light fabrics and shoulder holsters.

[A Definite Beta Guy]

Yes, they have been pointing at China for two decades.  Prior to that they pointed at Japan.  With an intertwined global economic system you'd honestly need to disentangle the US from almost everything for some other country to surpass the situation.  My crystal ball is no better than anyone else's, my point is simply we've been hearing this for my entire 40+ years on this planet and yet here we stand and the US is an ingrained in the global economic success and almost any other major initiative as ever and I'm not seeing how that changes.

Well yeah, the US is going to be tightly interwoven with the global economic system for quite a while to come.  It's the biggest economy in the world.  The change isn't going to happen overnight.  It's slowly (sometimes rapidly) losing it's place as a world leader though, in many ways.

To pick a couple examples:

China has already invested heavily (100 bn in the past few years) into green energy.  This is about double US investment.  (http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/01/china-leaving-us-behind-clean-energy-investment)

China's investing an awful lot more than the US into public transit (503 bn by 2020) https://usa.streetsblog.org/2018/01/18/chinas-investment-in-subways-puts-the-u-s-to-shame/ to deal with the problems caused by over-reliance on the car.

China is investing heavily in political influence around the world via the use of soft power (https://www.politico.eu/article/china-soft-power-offensive-confucius-institute-education/).  The US hasn't even bothered to appoint ambassadors to a large number of countries (https://qz.com/944100/more-than-half-the-worlds-population-still-doesnt-have-a-us-ambassador/), has gutted it's diplomats in general (http://www.dw.com/en/rapid-loss-of-us-diplomats-under-trump-administration-prompts-fears-of-weakened-influence/a-41308555), and appears to be heading towards isolationist trade policies (http://time.com/4820160/trump-america-first-global-leadership/).

I'm not really a China optimist. Their sheer size and competent enough government makes them a possible peer competitor, but they are going to have major demographic short-comings in the not so distant future. The US will hold up substantially better than China's coming graying.

China also has a shit geopolitical situation around its borders. They are going to permanently have a huge US presence in the area, which is just going to scale up as China becomes more powerful. They simply can't compete with high-end US tech and it's probably going to be a few decades before they can. Even then, practically everyone around China has spent a LOT of money trying to kill Chinese people, and most of them have defense budgets that definitely account for the whole "rising China" meme.

Russia in particular is not China's friend and is just as likely to turn against China as it is against the US.

China is expending some soft power, but meh. Soft power has limits, especially when you don't have hard power to back it up. If I am a third world nation, I am still very concerned about what Europe and the US think, because they have a LOT more influence, AND a lot of guns to back it up. Like Iran? Yeah, I think if it just came down to China exerting some influence, Iran wouldn't care, but those Western sanctions bite, and the threat of war with the US is really intimidating. Unless you are a superpower like Russia or China, your military is basically a speed-bump and will be dismantled very quickly if you piss off Congress badly enough.

[scottish]

I'm not really a China optimist. Their sheer size and competent enough government makes them a possible peer competitor, but they are going to have major demographic short-comings in the not so distant future. The US will hold up substantially better than China's coming graying.

China also has a shit geopolitical situation around its borders. They are going to permanently have a huge US presence in the area, which is just going to scale up as China becomes more powerful. They simply can't compete with high-end US tech and it's probably going to be a few decades before they can. Even then, practically everyone around China has spent a LOT of money trying to kill Chinese people, and most of them have defense budgets that definitely account for the whole "rising China" meme.

Russia in particular is not China's friend and is just as likely to turn against China as it is against the US.

China is expending some soft power, but meh. Soft power has limits, especially when you don't have hard power to back it up. If I am a third world nation, I am still very concerned about what Europe and the US think, because they have a LOT more influence, AND a lot of guns to back it up. Like Iran? Yeah, I think if it just came down to China exerting some influence, Iran wouldn't care, but those Western sanctions bite, and the threat of war with the US is really intimidating. Unless you are a superpower like Russia or China, your military is basically a speed-bump and will be dismantled very quickly if you piss off Congress badly enough.

Bunch of nonsense.   Here's a rebuttal.

Their sheer size and competent enough government makes them a possible peer competitor,

China isn't a possible peer competitor, it's already a peer competitor.   China has more international trade than the US and the Chinese GDP will exceed that of the US within the next decade.

They are going to permanently have a huge US presence in the area,

Well they might if you guys could get your national debt under control.   The way Merica is going you won't be able to fund the once vaunted US military.

They simply can't compete with high-end US tech

BS.  China doesn't innovate as well as the US, but they make up for it by copying US ideas and technology at an incredible rate.

it's probably going to be a few decades before they can.

That was twenty years ago.   Guess what?   It's been  a few decades.

Soft power has limits, especially when you don't have hard power to back it up.

Especially when the national leader of your opposition is a artist of the deal.   Trump's doing a great job of out-soft powering China don't you think?

If I am a third world nation, I am still very concerned about what Europe and the US think, because they have a LOT more influence, AND a lot of guns to back it up.

Ooo, scary.   How's that working with the Iran and the Norks so far?

The sooner Mericans wake up and stop screwing around with internecine politics the better.

[sequoia]

" I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon " coming out of the same person who avoided military by coming up with some lame excuse, and now he thinks he can be the selfless hero lmao

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-would-have-run-florida-school-n851266

[Just Joe]

We've taught China to build anything and everything for us. Should they be inclined they'll quickly have whatever they think they need.

Its fun to imagine China going to war with Harbor Freight quality gear but they are capable of far better products, we all own examples of nice things manufactured in China.

[Just Joe]

" I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon " coming out of the same person who avoided military by coming up with some lame excuse, and now he thinks he can be the selfless hero lmao

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-would-have-run-florida-school-n851266

Donald just confirming that he's a dangerous nitwit again. Dangerous b/c he influences thousands of people (his STUPID speeches and Twitter messages) and controls hundreds of thousands more (presidential control). 

[GuitarStv]

" I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon " coming out of the same person who avoided military by coming up with some lame excuse, and now he thinks he can be the selfless hero lmao

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-would-have-run-florida-school-n851266

Donald just confirming that he's a dangerous nitwit again. Dangerous b/c he influences thousands of people (his STUPID speeches and Twitter messages) and controls hundreds of thousands more (presidential control).

Trump has a remarkable, well document history of lying.  It's something he does every day . . . nearly every time that he speaks.  Can anyone (even for a moment) entertain the thought of Donald Trump running into a firefight without a weapon in an attempt to selflessly sacrifice himself for others?

 . . . I'll wait for the laughter to stop.

[Luke Warm]

" I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon " coming out of the same person who avoided military by coming up with some lame excuse, and now he thinks he can be the selfless hero lmao

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-would-have-run-florida-school-n851266

Donald just confirming that he's a dangerous nitwit again. Dangerous b/c he influences thousands of people (his STUPID speeches and Twitter messages) and controls hundreds of thousands more (presidential control).

Trump has a remarkable, well document history of lying.  It's something he does every day . . . nearly every time that he speaks.  Can anyone (even for a moment) entertain the thought of Donald Trump running into a firefight without a weapon in an attempt to selflessly sacrifice himself for others?

 . . . I'll wait for the laughter to stop.

it's stupid shit like this that seriously freaks me out.

[Roadrunner53]

" I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon " coming out of the same person who avoided military by coming up with some lame excuse, and now he thinks he can be the selfless hero lmao

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-would-have-run-florida-school-n851266

Donald just confirming that he's a dangerous nitwit again. Dangerous b/c he influences thousands of people (his STUPID speeches and Twitter messages) and controls hundreds of thousands more (presidential control).

Trump has a remarkable, well document history of lying.  It's something he does every day . . . nearly every time that he speaks.  Can anyone (even for a moment) entertain the thought of Donald Trump running into a firefight without a weapon in an attempt to selflessly sacrifice himself for others?

 . . . I'll wait for the laughter to stop.

Yes, quite hilarious! The only running I can see him doing is for his plane on a Friday so he can head to Mara Lago for the weekend at the taxpayers expense.

[Davnasty]

" I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon " coming out of the same person who avoided military by coming up with some lame excuse, and now he thinks he can be the selfless hero lmao

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-he-would-have-run-florida-school-n851266

No one really knows how they would react in an emergency situation until it happens but I think we have plenty of evidence to suggest he would do no such thing. Anyone remember George Costanza running out of a building after he saw smoke, pushing women and children out of his way to get to safety? This seems a much more likely scenario with Trump.

Not only that, this takes away from the heroism of the people who just gave their lives to save others including a 15 year old shot while holding the door for other students to get away. To those who claim people get too worked up about the things Trump says (which is sometimes true) can I be offended about this one?

[DarkandStormy]

He held on a meeting on the Florida shooting - a "setback" as he says, to all the great news - and this is how he concluded it.

[DarkandStormy]

^This man would run unarmed into a building with an active shooter? LOL

[GuitarStv]

Is anyone even able to confirm that Donald Trump is capable of running?

[Kris]

Is anyone even able to confirm that Donald Trump is capable of running?

Dude, he is the healthiest president we have ever had!!!!

[NoStacheOhio]

Is anyone even able to confirm that Donald Trump is capable of running?

Dude, he is the healthiest president we have ever had!!!!

Didn't he win the NYC Marathon a few years back?

[Davnasty]

Is anyone even able to confirm that Donald Trump is capable of running?

Dude, he is the healthiest president we have ever had!!!!

Didn't he win the NYC Marathon a few years back?

Well, he finished first but he was driving a golf cart and running over the other racers so I think there's an asterisk by his name.

[dividendman]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

You're being sarcastic but this idea (making it mandatory by law that everyone is armed) is a serious proposal from the gun folks.

No, it is not. It might be from trump, but... well, he's trump.

Yes, it is. There are at least five municipalities in the US that have passed mandatory gun ownership ordinances. i.e. You must own a gun and ammunition (usually per household). How is that not a serious proposal when the gun folks have actually enacted the legislation?

[former player]

Is anyone even able to confirm that Donald Trump is capable of running?

Dude, he is the healthiest president we have ever had!!!!

Didn't he win the NYC Marathon a few years back?

Well, he finished first but he was driving a golf cart and running over the other racers so I think there's an asterisk by his name.

No, it's entirely legit because he has accommodations for the disability caused by his bone spurs.

[NoStacheOhio]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

You're being sarcastic but this idea (making it mandatory by law that everyone is armed) is a serious proposal from the gun folks.

No, it is not. It might be from trump, but... well, he's trump.

Yes, it is. There are at least five municipalities in the US that have passed mandatory gun ownership ordinances. i.e. You must own a gun and ammunition (usually per household). How is that not a serious proposal when the gun folks have actually enacted the legislation?

Citation please?

[GuitarStv]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

You're being sarcastic but this idea (making it mandatory by law that everyone is armed) is a serious proposal from the gun folks.

No, it is not. It might be from trump, but... well, he's trump.

Yes, it is. There are at least five municipalities in the US that have passed mandatory gun ownership ordinances. i.e. You must own a gun and ammunition (usually per household). How is that not a serious proposal when the gun folks have actually enacted the legislation?

Citation please?

I found this for example:

https://library.municode.com/ga/kennesaw/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH34CIEM_ARTIIFI#PTIICOOR_CH34CIEM_ARTIIFI_S34-21HEHOMAFI

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.

[Just Joe]

Lets arm our teachers! And give them bonus if they carry their weapons to school. 

Heck, we should just make it a law that everyone is required to carry weapons everywhere so we can take care of ourselves when there is mass shooting <facepalm>


This story is pretty sad for lack of better words to describe it. I wonder if he is human or robot...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/us/politics/trump-talking-points.html

You're being sarcastic but this idea (making it mandatory by law that everyone is armed) is a serious proposal from the gun folks.

No, it is not. It might be from trump, but... well, he's trump.

Yes, it is. There are at least five municipalities in the US that have passed mandatory gun ownership ordinances. i.e. You must own a gun and ammunition (usually per household). How is that not a serious proposal when the gun folks have actually enacted the legislation?

I guess some of us would be going to jail. What are they going to do - shoot me 'cause I don't have a gun?

https://www.aol.com/article/2016/07/28/5-american-cities-that-require-you-to-own-a-gun/21439364/

[NoStacheOhio]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.

So if I object to gun ownership on moral grounds I'm exempt?

I'd be interested to compare statistics between those cities and similar cities without the requirement (certainly gun-related measures, but broader stuff too).

[GuitarStv]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.

So if I object to gun ownership on moral grounds I'm exempt?

I'd be interested to compare statistics between those cities and similar cities without the requirement (certainly gun-related measures, but broader stuff too).

What if you don't object to maintaining firearms on the basis of belief or religious doctrine though, but just don't want to spend your money on one?

[Inaya]

The gubmint can't tell me how to spend my money! Unless it's to tell me to buy a gun.

[Luke Warm]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.

So if I object to gun ownership on moral grounds I'm exempt?

I'd be interested to compare statistics between those cities and similar cities without the requirement (certainly gun-related measures, but broader stuff too).

What if you don't object to maintaining firearms on the basis of belief or religious doctrine though, but just don't want to spend your money on one?

what if someone shoots me with their government mandated firearm? can i sue the government?