patrick.net

CBOEtrader says

Lol, no you didnt. You are arguing that tax rates shouldnt be 100% BUT the level that Trump lowered them from is tyrannical. You didnt explain why or how you came to that conclusion besides FUCK TRUMP. Do you have rationale or is your argument just FUCK TRUMP?

Please don't make stuff up. I never said anything was tyrannical. If you have to resort to strawman arguments, then you've lost.

I explained exactly how I came to the conclusion.

https://theintercept.com/2017/12/18/tax-bill-corporate-rate-stock-buyback/
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/15/companies-buying-back-stock-at-record-pace-since-trump-tax-bill-may-aid-markets-comeback.html

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/28/tax-cuts-trump-gop-analysis-430781
https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/economy-budget/331434-trumps-tax-plan-a-new-death-tax-for-the-middle-class

LeonDurham says

Please don't make stuff up. I never said anything was tyrannical. If you have to resort to strawman arguments, then you've lost.

Correct, you made no argument whatsoever. I am trying to understand your side without the benefit of you explaining yourself.

Lets start again. Do you feel tax rates should be at 100%?

Please explain how lowering tax rates to an internationally competitive level is anything but good?

Strategist says

I heard Trump say it was $350 billion.
Why do you think Trump must know every single statistic, or else he is a liar? Kinda silly to have such expectations of any human.

No you didn't. He's said it's $500 billion over 19 times.

He literally doesn't understand the trade deficit is imports minus exports. He quotes the import number as the deficit. He is a moron.

CBOEtrader says

Show us the exact quote so we know what you are talking about.

He's said it 19 times. In news conferences, at rallies, you name it.



CBOEtrader says

https://tradingeconomics.com/china/balance-of-trade Simply looking at the charts and saying $500 billion isnt far off. May be more fair to say $400 billion/yr, but $500 million was surpassed more than a few times, and is basically accurate for the purposes of his speech.

It's off by about 40%. If you consider that "not far off", then Trump is definitely your guy.

marcus says

I see no evidence of any of this. Do you actually believe the stuff you say ?

Trump made China agree to the most severe sanctions against NK. NK can never survive for long without China's help.

marcus says

Everyone knows these geopolitical games are complicated

Ha ha ha. Trump didn't find it complicated. He knew exactly what to do.

CBOEtrader says

He got put in his place, and the world is a far safer place because of it.

Wtf ?

Sure he's not threatening war anymore. But you really think the threats were real, and not just trash talk ? I'll admit there are good aspects. And it's something Obama couldn't have done. Can you imagine the field day the right wing media machine would have had, if Obama met with and kissed Kim's ass on the global stage the way Trump did ?

Think about that for a minute.

Many say the deal was far better for Kim than for us. I guess unless you actually believed that Kim was about to nuke us.

Trump really has achieved a historic breakthrough – for the Kim dynasty
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/12/trump-nuclear-north-korea-kim-jong-un

So Kim leaves Singapore having gained much of the international legitimacy the dynastic dictatorship has sought for decades. But the gifts from Trump did not end there. He also announced an end to US military exercises in the Korean peninsula – the “war games” which he said were costly and, deploying language Pyongyang itself might have used, “very provocative”. Trump also hinted at an eventual withdrawal of the 28,000 US troops stationed in the Korean peninsula.

And what did Kim give Trump in return for this bulging bag of goodies? The key concession, the one Trump repeatedly invoked, was a promise of “complete denuclearisation”. Trump held this aloft as if it were a North Korean commitment to dismantle its arsenal, with work beginning right away. To be sure, such a commitment would be a major prize, one that would merit all the congratulation a beaming Trump was heaping on himself. But this is where you need to look at the small print.

First, the text itself says merely: “The DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula.” Kim has promised not “complete denuclearisation” but simply “to work toward” that end. Negotiators the world over know is the fudging language you use when you’ve extracted something less than a real commitment. Kim has offered only an aspiration, with no deadline or timetable, not a concrete plan.

Again, the timeline for your perusal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_North_Korean_nuclear_program

Strategist says

Why do you think Trump must know every single statistic

You don't think it's important for the President of the US to be accurate when discussing the trade deficit? You don't think it's important for him to know whether the figure is 350 or 500?

Yes--I think the President should know what the trade deficit with China is. That's pretty damn important.

LeonDurham says

No you didn't. He's said it's $500 billion over 19 times.

He literally doesn't understand the trade deficit is imports minus exports. He quotes the import number as the deficit. He is a moron.

I heard him say $350 billion on CNBC just last week. Not denying he never said $500 billion.

LeonDurham says

He literally doesn't understand the trade deficit is imports minus exports. He quotes the import number as the deficit. He is a moron.

He understands China imposing a 25% tax on cars we export to them while we don't is not fair. Obama did not understand that.

Strategist says

I heard him say $350 billion on CNBC just last week. Not denying he never said $500 billion.

I highly doubt it.

Strategist says

He understands China imposing a 25% tax on cars we export to them while we don't is not fair. Obama did not understand that.

lol--the list of things he understands that Obama didn't is empty.

Strategist says

He understands China imposing a 25% tax on cars we export to them while we don't is not fair. Obama did not understand that.

You can be sure he had thought long and hard about it and consulted many Washington wonks and economists about the pros and cons of a trade war with China.

You can be sure that Trump did none of that. AS experts working close to Trump have often acknowledged, he seems to have the understanding on these issues of a 5th grader.

Hey, I get it. That's very attractive to a lot of people (I wonder why ?).

LeonDurham says

You don't think it's important for the President of the US to be accurate when discussing the trade deficit? You don't think it's important for him to know whether the figure is 350 or 500?

Yes--I think the President should know what the trade deficit with China is. That's pretty damn important.

No President can expect to know everything. It's not a high school geography test. That's why they have teams of advisors, who's job is to know the details.
Trump knows how to make things happen, how to negotiate, how to get things done. That's the President 's job.

marcus says

Strategist says

He understands China imposing a 25% tax on cars we export to them while we don't is not fair. Obama did not understand that.

You can be sure he had thught londg and hard about it and consulted many Washinton wonks and economists about the pros and cons of a trade war with China.

You can be sure that TRump did none of that. AS experts working close to Trump have acknowledges, he was the knowledge on these issues of a 5th grader.

Hey, I get it. That's very attractive to a lot of people (I wonder why ?).

There won't be a trade war of any significance. They will eventually work things out with us coming out ahead.

Strategist says

No President can expect to know everything. It's not a high school geography test. That's why they have teams of advisors, who's job is to know the details.
Trump knows how to make things happen, how to negotiate, how to get things done. That's the President 's job.

So, what have been the results of his negotiation skills so far? What are his accomplishments?

LeonDurham says

Strategist says

No President can expect to know everything. It's not a high school geography test. That's why they have teams of advisors, who's job is to know the details.
Trump knows how to make things happen, how to negotiate, how to get things done. That's the President 's job.

So, what have been the results of his negotiation skills so far? What are his accomplishments?

Making unprecedented progress on:
NK
Iran
Islam
Israel/Mid East
China trade
NAFTA trade
European trade
------
He fucks up on pollution and fossil fuels. No worries. Promoting fossil fuels will be one of his few losers. And I'm glad.

Strategist says

Making unprecedented progress on:
NK
Iran
Islam
Israel/Mid East
China trade
NAFTA trade
European trade

Nonsense. We've made no real progress on any of those fronts. Please detail any concrete gains.

LeonDurham says

It's off by about 40%. If you consider that "not far off", then Trump is definitely your guy.

Read the stats. The August numbers were estimated to be $500 B and came in at $300 B. Given this type of fluctuation it is not at all unrealistic to give a back if the envelope figure of $500B.

Regardless if you cant even post what Trump said then I'll assume you are simply refusing to acknowledge nuance.

Try harder, offer the actual support of your critiques and maybe someone would agree w you.

LeonDurham says

So, what have been the results of his negotiation skills so far? What are his accomplishments?

Better trade deals around the globe. A compliant NKA. China actually respecting us and negotiating its tariffs is huge.

LeonDurham says

Strategist says

Making unprecedented progress on:
NK
Iran
Islam
Israel/Mid East
China trade
NAFTA trade
European trade

Nonsense. We've made no real progress on any of those fronts. Please detail any concrete gains.

Here is a sample:
Sanctions on Iran to ensure a permanent and verifiable end to 100% of their nuclear program. Anything else will only result on them getting nukes like NK did.

CBOEtrader says

Try harder, offer the actual support of your critiques and maybe someone would agree w you.

As if a hard core Trump cuck, or hyper libertarian, is ever going to agree with a middle of the road reality based person ?

marcus says

But you really think the threats were real, and not just trash talk ?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Hawaii_false_missile_alert

The left was all too keen to blame collective fear on Trump back when they thought missiles could be launched.

Trump ended that threat and SoKo Moon suggested he earned a peace prize for his efforts. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-southkorea-trump/south-korea-president-says-trump-deserves-nobel-peace-prize-idUSKBN1I10OD

Do you think your opinion about Korea is more authoritative than Pres Moons?

Strategist says

Here is a sample:
Sanctions on Iran to ensure a permanent and verifiable end to 100% of their nuclear program. Anything else will only result on them getting nukes like NK did.

So what has that accomplished?? We've had sanctions on Iran for decades. Why are we going to get a different result this time??

CBOEtrader says

Better trade deals around the globe. A compliant NKA. China actually respecting us and negotiating its tariffs is huge.

OK--show me the better deals and how they are improvements.

marcus says

As if a hard core Trump cuck, or hyper libertarian, is ever going to agree with a middle of the road reality based person ?

Trump is middle of the road. Hes a centrist pragmatist more than any president in our lifetime.

It's the R's and D's, the globalist never trumpers who are the extremists.

CBOEtrader says

Read the stats. The August numbers were estimated to be $500 B and came in at $300 B. Given this type of fluctuation it is not at all unrealistic to give a back if the envelope figure of $500B.

Nope. Try again. The August numbers prorated to a yearly deficit of $500MM. If Trump doesn't know the difference between 300 and 500, then he's even dumber than I thought.

CBOEtrader says

Regardless if you cant even post what Trump said then I'll assume you are simply refusing to acknowledge nuance.

I posted it for God's sake. What the hell are you talking about??

LeonDurham says

CBOEtrader says

Read the stats. The August numbers were estimated to be $500 B and came in at $300 B. Given this type of fluctuation it is not at all unrealistic to give a back if the envelope figure of $500B.

Nope. Try again. The August numbers prorated to a yearly deficit of $500MM.

All the more reason to do something about it.

Strategist says

All the more reason to do something about it.

By all means. And it's easier when you (Trump) don't lie about it.

LeonDurham says

Strategist says

All the more reason to do something about it.

By all means. And it's easier when you (Trump) don't lie about it.

Why would Trump "lie" about this?

Strategist says

Why would Trump "lie" about this?

Only God knows. Why did he lie about the size of the inauguration crowd? Why did he call into National Enquirer pretending to be someone else?

I just want to thank Senator Collins and other White Women for insuring that the Assumption of Innocence remains a Societal Ideal, despite pressure groups to end it in the name of Identity Politics.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

I just want to thank Senator Collins and other White Women for insuring that the Assumption of Innocence remains a Societal Ideal, despite pressure groups to end it in the name of Identity Politics.

A job interview is different from a trial.

LeonDurham says

A job interview is different from a trial.

I said Societal Ideal, not confined to Courts.

It would be a Kafka-esque terror state where unevidenced accusations could prevent somebody from reaching the pinnacle of their profession. To reject the flawed accustaion was the moderate, skeptical, considered view.

Good thing the Enlightenment views still hold sway over cynical Post Modernism.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

I said Societal Ideal, not confined to Courts.

lol--I don't think job interviews ever have a presumption of innocence. It's not a trial.

LeonDurham says

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

I just want to thank Senator Collins and other White Women for insuring that the Assumption of Innocence remains a Societal Ideal, despite pressure groups to end it in the name of Identity Politics.

A job interview is different from a trial.

Biggest bullshit argument ever. Same standard applies everywhere. There's libel and slander laws for good reasons. If the Ford case continues to fall apart like this she should be sued, maybe even trialed.

mell says

Biggest bullshit argument ever. Same standard applies everywhere. There's libel and slander laws for good reasons. If the Ford case continues to fall apart like this she should be sued, maybe even trialed.

Give me a break. There is libel and slander for good reason. Kavanaugh has every right to sue any of his accusers. Why isn't he doing so??

There is NO such standard in a job interview. You can hire or not hire someone based on any evidence. There is absolutely NO burden of proof guiding someone's decision about whether or not to hire someone.

Please stop posting BS.

LeonDurham says

There is NO such standard in a job interview. You can hire or not hire someone based on any evidence. There is absolutely NO burden of proof guiding someone's decision about whether or not to hire someone.

Senators have a responsibility to uphold standards of societal decency. This means rejecting vague, unbacked accusations against an appointee.

Funny how accusers will volunteer therapist notes to the Washington Post to create the awareness of the accusation, but not to Senators or the FBI to judge the accusation.

The kind of irresponsible behavior we witnessed over the past weeks is why the Democrats will be kept from power.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Senators have a responsibility to uphold standards of societal decency

lol--do you follow politics? The standards of societal decency were abandoned long ago in the Senate.

In any event--if a businessman was looking to hire an office manager and 3 people came forward to tell him that the candidate had assaulted them, I guarantee 99% of owners would not hire the candidate,

LeonDurham says

In any event--if a businessman was looking to hire an office manager and 3 people came forward to tell him that the candidate had assaulted them, I guarantee 99% of owners would not hire the candidate,

1. It's unlikely three people are going to show up to a 50 year old office manager's interview and tell the businessman that he groped them at a HS Party 35 years ago.
2. This isn't an Office Manager, it's a Supreme Court Judge, and it's highly politicized, which calls for extra skepticism about last minute, ancient, unverifiable accusations.