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

[Kyle Schuant]

China's in a tenuous position, too. Hong Kong is not the deserts of western China, and Cantonese are not Uighurs. If they roll the tanks into Hong Kong it will be livestreamed on Facebook, and then those tariffs may become sanctions. And "one China, two systems" as well as being for HK has historically been PRC's offer to Taiwan. If the tanks show that's bullshit, Taiwan may as well go ahead and declare independence now when PRC is not strong enough to definitely stop them.

On the other hand, if PRC gives in to HK, then other Chinese cities may get ideas. This is especially so since Beijing's deal with the people has been "we keep you getting richer and you don't question us," but with slowing GDP growth one side is not keeping its half of the deal. Add in tariffs or sanctions and there could be trouble.

And of course, the PRC President recently ensured he could become President For Life. It may be there are factions with the Communist Party which won't be happy with whatever solution he chooses, and decide he shouldn't be around for life. This is after all how Gorbachev went out.

The Chinese are living in interesting times.

[MasterStache]

round 3 (?) of the US-China trade war has been put on hold "for Christmas".  So DJT has called for a cease-fire when he's largely the one that keeps ordering the volleys.
I'm guessing China sees this as a win, and evidence that the US's position is tenuous.  After Christmas there's just 11 months until the US elections, and I wonder why the Chinese would agree to a deal before then.

Probably one of the reasons why he is spreading more Clinton conspiracy theories. You know to distract from his utter failure with China. Dude just needs to give up on the tariffs. All they do is screw with the economy and increase prices for your own consumers. I know he won't because his ego is more important.

[former player]

round 3 (?) of the US-China trade war has been put on hold "for Christmas".  So DJT has called for a cease-fire when he's largely the one that keeps ordering the volleys.
I'm guessing China sees this as a win, and evidence that the US's position is tenuous.  After Christmas there's just 11 months until the US elections, and I wonder why the Chinese would agree to a deal before then.

Probably one of the reasons why he is spreading more Clinton conspiracy theories. You know to distract form his utter failure with China. Dude just needs to give up on the tariffs. All they do is screw with the economy and increase prices for your own consumers. I know he won't because his ego is more important.

You elect a malevolent cretin and this is what you get.  Unfortunately the rest of us get the side effects.

[talltexan]

You get all that.

You also get constitutionalist judges.

[partgypsy]

You get all that.

You also get constitutionalist judges.

But they are not constitutionalist judges. They cherry pick what part of the constitution they reference, and what parts they ignore based on party lines, not constitution and bill of rights and amendments (which are all part of the constitution). It is especially evident in how they cherry pick case precedent, which is how our legal system works. Citizen's United is a perfect example.

[GuitarStv]

You get all that.

You also get constitutionalist judges.

But they are not constitutionalist judges. They cherry pick what part of the constitution they reference, and what parts they ignore based on party lines, not constitution and bill of rights and amendments (which are all part of the constitution).  Citizen's United is a perfect example.

Yep. 'Constitutionalist judge' in the modern sense is a proxy for 'Republican', and has nothing to do with adherence to the original intent of the constitution.

[OtherJen]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

[Glenstache]

You get all that.

You also get constitutionalist judges.

But they are not constitutionalist judges. They cherry pick what part of the constitution they reference, and what parts they ignore based on party lines, not constitution and bill of rights and amendments (which are all part of the constitution). It is especially evident in how they cherry pick case precedent, which is how our legal system works. Citizen's United is a perfect example.

See also religious right conservatives being pretty Old Testament, not so much Beatitudes / Sermon on the Mount.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatitudes
(while probably eating shellfish and wearing clothing of too many fiber types)

[Glenstache]

In other news, this should be interesting (and slow). I expect the unredacted versions of the Mueller Report will be interesting reading.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/08/nadler-this-is-formal-impeachment-proceedings-1454360

[EscapeVelocity2020]

Came across this interview with Andrew Yang on a UBI discussion thread (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/mustachian-book-club/'the-war-on-normal-people'-andrew-yang/msg2343714/#msg2343714)

It is jarring the comparison between what Yang thinks must be done to solve the accelerating problems that have given rise to Populism vs. what Trump is trying to do by closing borders and starting trade wars.  It's like watching a mechanic try to fix a Tesla using a Model T trouble shooting guide...  Well, maybe if I just pour gas in the trunk and set it on fire that will work!

[nereo]

It is jarring the comparison between what Yang thinks must be done to solve the accelerating problems that have given rise to Populism vs. what Trump is trying to do by closing borders and starting trade wars.  It's like watching a mechanic try to fix a Tesla using a Model T trouble shooting guide...  Well, maybe if I just pour gas in the trunk and set it on fire that will work!

Most of Trump's current policies and policy goals have, in the past, been judged to have been really bad ideas.  Trade (and tariff) wars, limiting legal immigration, propping up industries already dying from market forces (i.e. coal), removing worker and environmental protections, etc.
The thinking within supporters seems to be "...but this time it will be different!"

[Glenstache]

It is jarring the comparison between what Yang thinks must be done to solve the accelerating problems that have given rise to Populism vs. what Trump is trying to do by closing borders and starting trade wars.  It's like watching a mechanic try to fix a Tesla using a Model T trouble shooting guide...  Well, maybe if I just pour gas in the trunk and set it on fire that will work!

Most of Trump's current policies and policy goals have, in the past, been judged to have been really bad ideas.  Trade (and tariff) wars, limiting legal immigration, propping up industries already dying from market forces (i.e. coal), removing worker and environmental protections, etc.
The thinking within supporters seems to be "...but this time it will be different!"

No, the thinking is that finally someone is talking to and about them and telling them what they want to hear. A detailed analysis of historical precedent is not part of it.

[Roland of Gilead]

So who had Epstein off'd in prison?  Trump or Hillary?

[nereo]

So who had Epstein off'd in prison?  Trump or Hillary?

Dude, are you trying to troll everybody?

[Davnasty]

So who had Epstein off'd in prison?  Trump or Hillary?

The idea that either of them would even have a motive to want him silenced is speculative (although there's more evidence suggesting Trump was involved with Epstein's misdeeds than Bill Clinton (why the jump to Hillary?)) and there are numerous other powerful people who could have been involved. So while I don't think it's that crazy of idea that there was foul play, I do think a conversation about it would be a distraction and a waste of time.

The fact that Trump has made such an accusation however, is relevant and will likely go down in history as one of the more important black marks against his presidency. That kind of behavior from the president is wading into truly dangerous territory.

Dude, are you trying to troll everybody?

Ya, we should probably ignore this and move on

[gaja]

It is jarring the comparison between what Yang thinks must be done to solve the accelerating problems that have given rise to Populism vs. what Trump is trying to do by closing borders and starting trade wars.  It's like watching a mechanic try to fix a Tesla using a Model T trouble shooting guide...  Well, maybe if I just pour gas in the trunk and set it on fire that will work!

Most of Trump's current policies and policy goals have, in the past, been judged to have been really bad ideas.  Trade (and tariff) wars, limiting legal immigration, propping up industries already dying from market forces (i.e. coal), removing worker and environmental protections, etc.
The thinking within supporters seems to be "...but this time it will be different!"

No, the thinking is that finally someone is talking to and about them and telling them what they want to hear. A detailed analysis of historical precedent is not part of it.

In Norway, we are currently waiting for a mountain to fall down. The cracks get larger every year, there are small rock slides every time it rains, and the people living in the area get evacuated time after time. And every time it is in the media, some people start yelling about blowing it up. “Why don’t they put some sticks of dynamite in it”, “let the military fire some rounds”, etc. Any geologist knows this is a terrible and unrealistic idea, and the national geological survey has explained why in great details many times. But the only reaction from the yellers has been to yell louder about incompetent public employees. If the prime minister had ordered someone to blow up the mountain, the yellers would be happy about “finally someone is doing something”, and “this is what i’ve been saying all the time, finally someone has listened”. Luckily, we have a prime minister who listens to scientists rather than the men yelling at the tv.

Btw: If you like slow TV, you can wait for the mountain to fall via live stream: https://www.nrk.no/mr/sja-direkte-fra-mannen-1.12012651

[Roland of Gilead]

The idea that either of them would even have a motive to want him silenced is speculative (although there's more evidence suggesting Trump was involved with Epstein's misdeeds than Bill Clinton (why the jump to Hillary?)) and there are numerous other powerful people who could have been involved. So while I don't think it's that crazy of idea that there was foul play, I do think a conversation about it would be a distraction and a waste of time.

Hillary was always the brains behind the Clinton political machine. 

It was really just a tongue in cheek comment loosely based on the current conspiracy theories.   It is strange that there were so many "coincidental" things about the guarding of Epstein or lack thereof.

[former player]

The idea that either of them would even have a motive to want him silenced is speculative (although there's more evidence suggesting Trump was involved with Epstein's misdeeds than Bill Clinton (why the jump to Hillary?)) and there are numerous other powerful people who could have been involved. So while I don't think it's that crazy of idea that there was foul play, I do think a conversation about it would be a distraction and a waste of time.

Hillary was always the brains behind the Clinton political machine. 

It was really just a tongue in cheek comment loosely based on the current conspiracy theories.   It is strange that there were so many "coincidental" things about the guarding of Epstein or lack thereof.

The way Epstein was guarded was pretty much the inevitable result of long-term underfunding, political neglect, and a culture of treating public service as parasitic on more worthy market based parts of society.  In other words, the Republicans have been saying for decades that government is expensive and useless, and having said that often enough and set the parameters for government accordingly then it provides the results you are now seeing in the Epstein case.   The only "conspiracy" is the conspiracy of the Republicans, aided by the craven spinelessness of the Democrats, to destroy decent honest government in the USA.

[Laserjet3051]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

"The 2016 rule states: “To guard against adverse impacts on U.S. workers,........"

Speaking as an impacted US STEM worker, I'd say "Excellent. Time to stem the flood."

[partgypsy]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

"The 2016 rule states: “To guard against adverse impacts on U.S. workers,........"

Speaking as an impacted US STEM worker, I'd say "Excellent. Time to stem the flood."

You may not like it but it's against the law for companies to discriminate based on citizenship.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/employee-rights-book/chapter16-4.html

[Laserjet3051]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

"The 2016 rule states: “To guard against adverse impacts on U.S. workers,........"

Speaking as an impacted US STEM worker, I'd say "Excellent. Time to stem the flood."

You may not like it but it's against the law for companies to discriminate based on citizenship.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/employee-rights-book/chapter16-4.html

That law has absolutely ZERO teeth. Any employer can "navigate" around it as they see fit. Case in point:

"If two applicants are equally qualified for a position, an employer may give preference to a citizen or national of the United States."

[partgypsy]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

"The 2016 rule states: “To guard against adverse impacts on U.S. workers,........"

Speaking as an impacted US STEM worker, I'd say "Excellent. Time to stem the flood."

You may not like it but it's against the law for companies to discriminate based on citizenship.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/employee-rights-book/chapter16-4.html

That law has absolutely ZERO teeth. Any employer can "navigate" around it as they see fit. Case in point:

"If two applicants are equally qualified for a position, an employer may give preference to a citizen or national of the United States."

I'm just telling you what the law is, since there seems to be a misunderstanding. One thing is true, is that a certain job or job type should be transparent in how much money people are being paid. So there is not an incentive to hire workers who are willing to be paid below market rate compared to hiring at market rate. I'm not sure what the applicable laws are though. 

[MDM]

So there is not an incentive to hire workers who are willing to be paid below market rate compared to hiring at market rate. I'm not sure what the applicable laws are though.

A company will always have an economic incentive to hire people who are willing to be paid less than other equally competent people.

Thus a prospective hire should not necessarily accept a company's first offer.  There may be room to negotiate.

[nereo]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

"The 2016 rule states: “To guard against adverse impacts on U.S. workers,........"

Speaking as an impacted US STEM worker, I'd say "Excellent. Time to stem the flood."

I'll give a different opinion:  as someone in a STEM field who's frequently fielding candidates, I would like to make the process for bringing other talented STEM candidates into our field much easier and straightforward.  We desperately need more candidates, and increasingly we're spending a great deal of time and energy educating and training foreigners, only to have them leave with all that knowledge and experience because the immigration process has gotten too cumbersome and expensive.
The US isn't competing with other US companies with exclusively US workers.  Our real competition is global.

(edited for clarity)

[partgypsy]

That's true. We want the US and US companies which are often global to be competitive and be able to hire the best workers, wherever they come from. And if a US company trains, develops talent, then they should be able to try to retain them. It seems immigrants are filling the holes where either a) there are not enough qualified candidates, or b) no American is willing to work for $4 an hour doing that job. So they are not really taking jobs away. This is of course for people who are legally here.

I do feel there needs to be clear understandable immigration rules, and the way they are enforced. The way things are being done now, both the rules and the way they are enforced, are often arbitrary, changing, and what is happening on the border, just plain cruel. It means that no one knows what's going on, and puts people in limbo, versus having enough information to make decisions to leave or stay. Certainly doesn't help the economy which affects all of us. I feel like the more Trump mucks with things, the worse it gets. The stupid thing is, if they really wanted to reduce illegal immigration they would crack down on the availability of jobs using undocumented workers. But that's not happening. 

"An analysis by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University found that during April 2018 and March 2019, only 11 employers — individuals, not companies — were prosecuted for hiring immigrants without proper documentation. During that same period, 120,344 people were prosecuted for illegal entry or illegal reentry."

[scottish]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

"The 2016 rule states: “To guard against adverse impacts on U.S. workers,........"

Speaking as an impacted US STEM worker, I'd say "Excellent. Time to stem the flood."

I'll give a different opinion:  as someone in a STEM field who's frequently fielding candidates, I would like to make the process for bringing other talented STEM candidates into our field much easier and straightforward.  We desperately need more candidates, and increasingly we're spending a great deal of time and energy educating and training foreigners, only to have them leave with all that knowledge and experience because the immigration process has gotten too cumbersome and expensive.
The US isn't competing with other US companies with exclusively US workers.  Our real competition is global.

(edited for clarity)

I'm curious, are you hiring foreigners because you cannot pay competitively with the big tech companies?    Or are you finding that even with competitive pay you can't find any local candidates?

[Lews Therin]

STEM qualified personnel are missing in large numbers. There's not enough to fill all empty positions. Canada and US both have this problem.

[nereo]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

"The 2016 rule states: “To guard against adverse impacts on U.S. workers,........"

Speaking as an impacted US STEM worker, I'd say "Excellent. Time to stem the flood."

I'll give a different opinion:  as someone in a STEM field who's frequently fielding candidates, I would like to make the process for bringing other talented STEM candidates into our field much easier and straightforward.  We desperately need more candidates, and increasingly we're spending a great deal of time and energy educating and training foreigners, only to have them leave with all that knowledge and experience because the immigration process has gotten too cumbersome and expensive.
The US isn't competing with other US companies with exclusively US workers.  Our real competition is global.

(edited for clarity)

I'm curious, are you hiring foreigners because you cannot pay competitively with the big tech companies?    Or are you finding that even with competitive pay you can't find any local candidates?

In the public sphere our salaries are largely dictated by the state nad federal government directly (i.e. strict paybands with little room to manuveur) or by merit-based grants which also have stipend and salary caps.  But lately there's just been a lack of qualified candidates for scientific technician positions.  Our best strategy is to actually train them up as graduate students, and the majority of those students are foreign born. In the last few years more of them have found it too difficult to stay in the US once they finish their degree, which is precisely when they become valuable to us.
In my field our main private-sector competition is with biotech, environmental monitoring firms, etc.  From talking to them they're having a hard time fielding candidates as well.  Bottom line, in some areas of STEM we simply lack enough qualified and competent US candidates.  Which isn't really surprising with national unemployment at 3.7% and many tech-heavy cities at 2.x%. 

[scottish]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

"The 2016 rule states: “To guard against adverse impacts on U.S. workers,........"

Speaking as an impacted US STEM worker, I'd say "Excellent. Time to stem the flood."

I'll give a different opinion:  as someone in a STEM field who's frequently fielding candidates, I would like to make the process for bringing other talented STEM candidates into our field much easier and straightforward.  We desperately need more candidates, and increasingly we're spending a great deal of time and energy educating and training foreigners, only to have them leave with all that knowledge and experience because the immigration process has gotten too cumbersome and expensive.
The US isn't competing with other US companies with exclusively US workers.  Our real competition is global.

(edited for clarity)

I'm curious, are you hiring foreigners because you cannot pay competitively with the big tech companies?    Or are you finding that even with competitive pay you can't find any local candidates?

In the public sphere our salaries are largely dictated by the state nad federal government directly (i.e. strict paybands with little room to manuveur) or by merit-based grants which also have stipend and salary caps.  But lately there's just been a lack of qualified candidates for scientific technician positions.  Our best strategy is to actually train them up as graduate students, and the majority of those students are foreign born. In the last few years more of them have found it too difficult to stay in the US once they finish their degree, which is precisely when they become valuable to us.
In my field our main private-sector competition is with biotech, environmental monitoring firms, etc.  From talking to them they're having a hard time fielding candidates as well.  Bottom line, in some areas of STEM we simply lack enough qualified and competent US candidates.  Which isn't really surprising with national unemployment at 3.7% and many tech-heavy cities at 2.x%.

Do you mean to say that you guys get them trained and productive and then US immigration makes them leave the country?

[nereo]

From Forbes: ICE Starts Immigration Site Visits For Students On STEM OPT

"The 2016 rule states: “To guard against adverse impacts on U.S. workers,........"

Speaking as an impacted US STEM worker, I'd say "Excellent. Time to stem the flood."

I'll give a different opinion:  as someone in a STEM field who's frequently fielding candidates, I would like to make the process for bringing other talented STEM candidates into our field much easier and straightforward.  We desperately need more candidates, and increasingly we're spending a great deal of time and energy educating and training foreigners, only to have them leave with all that knowledge and experience because the immigration process has gotten too cumbersome and expensive.
The US isn't competing with other US companies with exclusively US workers.  Our real competition is global.

(edited for clarity)

I'm curious, are you hiring foreigners because you cannot pay competitively with the big tech companies?    Or are you finding that even with competitive pay you can't find any local candidates?

In the public sphere our salaries are largely dictated by the state nad federal government directly (i.e. strict paybands with little room to manuveur) or by merit-based grants which also have stipend and salary caps.  But lately there's just been a lack of qualified candidates for scientific technician positions.  Our best strategy is to actually train them up as graduate students, and the majority of those students are foreign born. In the last few years more of them have found it too difficult to stay in the US once they finish their degree, which is precisely when they become valuable to us.
In my field our main private-sector competition is with biotech, environmental monitoring firms, etc.  From talking to them they're having a hard time fielding candidates as well.  Bottom line, in some areas of STEM we simply lack enough qualified and competent US candidates.  Which isn't really surprising with national unemployment at 3.7% and many tech-heavy cities at 2.x%.

Do you mean to say that you guys get them trained and productive and then US immigration makes them leave the country?

Pretty much.  They are here on student visas, but once they graduate they have to transition to a work visa, which often isn't straightforward (doubly so if they have a spouse or significant other).  Some of these people might have spent 2-4 years working in the lab learning skills.  Literally thousands of hours of training and experience gone back to their home country.

[Gin1984]

So who had Epstein off'd in prison?  Trump or Hillary?

I prefer the meme that Queen Elizabeth had him off'd.

[partgypsy]

So who had Epstein off'd in prison?  Trump or Hillary?

I prefer the meme that Queen Elizabeth had him off'd.

It was Bond, James Bond.

[Gin1984]

So who had Epstein off'd in prison?  Trump or Hillary?

I prefer the meme that Queen Elizabeth had him off'd.

It was Bond, James Bond.

I see someone else has seen that meme. :D

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

[talltexan]

The problem was that I was sure the Clintons did it.

But then Trump basically said, yeah, it was Hillary Clinton, and--knowing his record for making factual statements--that pretty much made me think it was anything other than that.

[Zamboni]

Look, hey look! Over here! Let's buy Greenland! Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket!

Smoke and mirrors, people. Smoke and mirrors. We are being fleeced by a con.

[runbikerun]

The idea that the Clintons - perhaps the most obsessively observed people in the world outside the White House - are orchestrating the execution of people with troublesome data about them is a pretty crazy starting point.

The idea they they're doing it, but have not gotten rid of Anthony Wiener, pushes it squarely into cloud-cuckoo-land.

[MasterStache]

The idea that the Clintons - perhaps the most obsessively observed people in the world outside the White House - are orchestrating the execution of people with troublesome data about them is a pretty crazy starting point.

The idea they they're doing it, but have not gotten rid of Anthony Wiener, pushes it squarely into cloud-cuckoo-land.

It's just red meat for the base. They will literally believe anything Trump says. 

[bacchi]

The idea that the Clintons - perhaps the most obsessively observed people in the world outside the White House - are orchestrating the execution of people with troublesome data about them is a pretty crazy starting point.

The idea they they're doing it, but have not gotten rid of Anthony Wiener, pushes it squarely into cloud-cuckoo-land.

It's just red meat for the base. They will literally believe anything Trump says.

Can confirm. r/The_Donald is full of the unhinged.

As an example, they seriously discussed how a professional football player was injured because of pizzagate. That sub is a whole 'nother level.

[LennStar]

The idea that the Clintons - perhaps the most obsessively observed people in the world outside the White House - are orchestrating the execution of people with troublesome data about them is a pretty crazy starting point.

The idea they they're doing it, but have not gotten rid of Anthony Wiener, pushes it squarely into cloud-cuckoo-land.

It's just red meat for the base. They will literally believe anything Trump says.

Can confirm. r/The_Donald is full of the unhinged.

As an example, they seriously discussed how a professional football player was injured because of pizzagate. That sub is a whole 'nother level.

Because that player knew something? Had seen Hillary going to a certain pizzeria?
Which means he must be an insider, doing this ($insert your favorite Clinton denounce)?
Ah no, he spoke for Trump, so he cannot be a bad guy, he has nothing to do with it but still knows about that!

How close am I with my wild guessing?

[jim555]

Why do the wingnuts keep worrying about Clintons?  They do know that they are out of power, right?

[bacchi]

Because that player knew something? Had seen Hillary going to a certain pizzeria?
Which means he must be an insider, doing this ($insert your favorite Clinton denounce)?
Ah no, he spoke for Trump, so he cannot be a bad guy, he has nothing to do with it but still knows about that!

How close am I with my wild guessing?

Got it in 3.

He tweeted about Hillary and pizzagate and this scared the Hillary team and they had to make an example of him. Team Hillary hired players from the other team -- NFL players take bribes because they don't make enough money -- to injure him in a game.

Why do the wingnuts keep worrying about Clintons?  They do know that they are out of power, right?

Because the Clintons have tendrils everywhere! And powerful women are scary.

[Kyle Schuant]

Irrelevant nonsense. Don't let Epstein, Russian agents and all the other paranoid nonsense of left and right distract you.

Winter is coming. Trump could nominate some lefty darling of the day as his VP, resign and hand the country over to them, and you'd still be in trouble. We all are.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-18/a-third-of-global-bonds-17-trillion-dollars-have-negative-yields/11420860

[nereo]

...meanwhile - US consumer debt hit $13.9T, eclipsing debt loads seen just before the 'great recession'.

[arebelspy]

Irrelevant nonsense. Don't let Epstein, Russian agents and all the other paranoid nonsense of left and right distract you.

Winter is coming. Trump could nominate some lefty darling of the day as his VP, resign and hand the country over to them, and you'd still be in trouble. We all are.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-18/a-third-of-global-bonds-17-trillion-dollars-have-negative-yields/11420860

That's the thing you're worried about? In this thread?

In the big picture/long run, a global recession that's somewhat overdue (IMO) is a lot less worrying to me than people literally dying at the border, than people being denied rights by the executive branch and backed up by a court system (and especially a supreme court) stuffed with conservative judges, than a planet being destroyed by climate change that we do nothing about, than a democracy at risk due to foreign interference, corporate ownership of politicians, and gerrymandering.

Even a couple years global recession, when looked back at from a long distance, pales in comparison with these, IMO.

Plus, we don't have much control over what global bond markets do. We do have control over who is elected and directly influences those items above*.


*And if you want to argue they have some influence on bond markets, well, maybe somewhat (though nothing compared to the super rich hedge fund speculators), but with the way Republicans tend to claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility and then raise the national debt by so many trillions, well, that's something to consider too.

Either way, if I'm thinking about ethics and the right side of history, I'm not worried as much about a recession (though I do think a lot of people would suffer, and I think we should do what we can to avoid it, it's a lot less directly easy to affect, even for our politicians, than an executive order to not have camps at the border).

...meanwhile - US consumer debt hit $13.9T, eclipsing debt loads seen just before the 'great recession'.

We've only just now hit that? Even though real estate prices recovered years ago, stock market hit all time high, and, of course, student loan debt has had another decade to get even more ridiculous?

I'm quite surprised at that.

I'd have guessed they'd have hit the 2007 peak by about 2014 or so, not 2019.

[LennStar]

Irrelevant nonsense. Don't let Epstein, Russian agents and all the other paranoid nonsense of left and right distract you.

Winter is coming. Trump could nominate some lefty darling of the day as his VP, resign and hand the country over to them, and you'd still be in trouble. We all are.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-18/a-third-of-global-bonds-17-trillion-dollars-have-negative-yields/11420860

That's the thing you're worried about? In this thread?

In the big picture/long run, a global recession that's somewhat overdue (IMO) is a lot less worrying to me than people literally dying at the border, than people being denied rights by the executive branch and backed up by a court system (and especially a supreme court) stuffed with conservative judges, than a planet being destroyed by climate change that we do nothing about, than a democracy at risk due to foreign interference, corporate ownership of politicians, and gerrymandering.

On that note, reaching the 1.5 degree instead of the 2 degree would save the world economy more than 20 trillion dollar. Just for perspective.
And now imagine what 4 degree will cost us, which would be the minimum with more Trumps (and, of course, millions of dead people).

[scottish]

I agree with rebelspy, I think the destruction of the American democratic system and its constitution is a much bigger deal than a global recession.

[MDM]

...the destruction of the American democratic system and its constitution....

Fortunately, that's unlikely to happen any time soon.

As the saying goes, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Both the Democrats and Republicans are very good at overplaying their hands when they get in power, thus tending to cause a movement back to the other party.

[RetiredAt63]

I've found our minority governments tend to be much better behaved than majorities, because they know if they aggravate everyone else too much, they are gone.

[FIPurpose]

...the destruction of the American democratic system and its constitution....

Fortunately, that's unlikely to happen any time soon.

As the saying goes, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Both the Democrats and Republicans are very good at overplaying their hands when they get in power, thus tending to cause a movement back to the other party.

I don't think this is some rule of nature or politics. There's no reason why one party can't have a hold on power for 70+ years at a time. Some countries legitimately run this way and our country has long periods of time by one party rule. There's a chance the GOP are making themselves unelectable for the next 20 years because of this administration

[ysette9]

I've found our minority governments tend to be much better behaved than majorities, because they know if they aggravate everyone else too much, they are gone.

Sort of like how restrained and well behaved the Rs were during Obama’s tenure?