Trump presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

elasto
Posts: 3102
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby elasto » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:20 pm UTC

sardia wrote:The prudent thing is to be wary anytime someone offers to give you 'the secret or the answer' to all of life's complex problems.

What economist was claiming to give 'the answer to all of life's complex problems'??

At best they were giving a prediction of the future direction of the country's economy, but no economist would claim to have a crystal ball.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5804
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:04 pm UTC

elasto wrote:
sardia wrote:The prudent thing is to be wary anytime someone offers to give you 'the secret or the answer' to all of life's complex problems.

What economist was claiming to give 'the answer to all of life's complex problems'??

At best they were giving a prediction of the future direction of the country's economy, but no economist would claim to have a crystal ball.
BeerBottle wrote:
Vahir wrote:And if China's teetering and the economic record of the far right are any indication, I believe it. At least the downturn will probably hit when these wacos are in power, so they'll be the ones discredited by it. You know what? Let's be optimistic.
Since 1910, the US economy has suffered a recession within 12 months of a two term president leaving office, with one exception, GHW Bush's recession started 17 months after he assumed office following Reagan.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-1 ... ssion-2017

Elastic, this is what I'm talking about. The economy is complex, as are earthquakes, weather, and elections. If someone comes up with a simple answer and rubric like "recessions happens after an election" , then your bullshit sensors should be screaming.

User avatar
PeteP
What the peck?
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:51 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby PeteP » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:58 pm UTC

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jinamoore/trump-just-slapped-an-anti-abortion-rule-on-foreign-aid
President Donald Trump has reinstated the controversial “global gag rule” — a policy reversal that women’s rights and health advocates fear will bring a rise in unsafe abortions around the world.

The Reagan-era rule essentially prevents foreign organizations that receive US money from talking to women about abortion. President Trump’s decision to reinstate the rule comes one day after the 44th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the US Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

Here’s how it works: Foreign organizations that take US family planning money can’t use any money, from any other donor, on abortion-related services. The restriction applies to providing abortions or giving any information about abortion, including medical advice or referrals — even in countries where abortion is legal.

[…]

Earlier research also suggests abortion rates will rise. A 20-country study by the Stanford University School of Medicine, published by the WHO in 2011, found that abortion rates actually went up 40% the last time the gag rule was in place, under President George W. Bush. In countries most heavily affected by the policy, contraceptive use dropped, and a woman’s odds of having an unsafe abortion were more than two times higher after the policy went into effect.

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5651
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Angua » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:05 pm UTC

Fuck it all to hell. So many people are going to be screwed over by that.
'Look, sir, I know Angua. She's not the useless type. She doesn't stand there and scream helplessly. She makes other people do that.'
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
freezeblade
Posts: 1074
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:11 pm UTC
Location: Oakland

Re: Trump presidency

Postby freezeblade » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:26 pm UTC

Angua wrote:Fuck it all to hell. So many people are going to be screwed over by that.

Plot twist: The misogynist asshole doesn't actually care about any of the people he'll be screwing over.
Belial wrote:I am not even in the same country code as "the mood for this shit."

elasto
Posts: 3102
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby elasto » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:18 pm UTC

sardia wrote:[sic]Elastic, this is what I'm talking about. The economy is complex, as are earthquakes, weather, and elections. If someone comes up with a simple answer and rubric like "recessions happens after an election" , then your bullshit sensors should be screaming.

Oh I agree. That guy looks like a quack pure and simple. A snake oil salesman that gives real experts a bad name.

Has it been posted anywhere that Trump ripped up the TPP today? I know it's symbolic in the sense that the US never managed to ratify it anyway, but what do people think about the fact he's dumped it? Is it a good or bad thing for the average Joe?

(My uninformed opinion is that trade makes countries richer, and this would have made a trade area the size of Europe, so it's probably a bad thing - but if none of the wealth would have 'trickled down' I guess it's no great loss.)

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:26 pm UTC

elasto wrote:
sardia wrote:[sic]Elastic, this is what I'm talking about. The economy is complex, as are earthquakes, weather, and elections. If someone comes up with a simple answer and rubric like "recessions happens after an election" , then your bullshit sensors should be screaming.

Oh I agree. That guy looks like a quack pure and simple. A snake oil salesman that gives real experts a bad name.

Has it been posted anywhere that Trump ripped up the TPP today? I know it's symbolic in the sense that the US never managed to ratify it anyway, but what do people think about the fact he's dumped it? Is it a good or bad thing for the average Joe?

(My uninformed opinion is that trade makes countries richer, and this would have made a trade area the size of Europe, so it's probably a bad thing - but if none of the wealth would have 'trickled down' I guess it's no great loss.)


I am a supporter of the TPP. Despite "common knowledge", China was NOT on the TPP, and the entire agreement seemed to be written in a way to expressly fuck China over.

TPP was all about little things, like encouraging the markets to buy shoes and shirts from Vietnam and Mexico... because Vietnam and Mexico buy US Cotton. So now that TPP has been ripped up, Vietnam is going to buy Chinese cotton to make all those shoes and shirts and the US will end up losing.

Just read the headlines about China's reaction. They seriously can't be happier about Trump's dumbass move: http://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/china-s ... 1485178890

BEIJING—China is prepared to take the helm of the global economy if Western nations abdicate their leadership role, a top Chinese diplomat said Monday, days after U.S. President Donald Trump pledged in his inaugural address to put “America first.”

“If it’s necessary for China to play the role of leader, then China must take on this responsibility,” Zhang Jun, head of the Chinese foreign ministry’s office of international economic affairs, told a small group of foreign reporters in Beijing.

Mr. Zhang made the comments following Chinese President Xi Jinping’s trip last week to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where he delivered a defense of economic globalization in a speech that likened trade protectionism to “locking oneself in a dark room.”


By ripping up the TPP, we just lost Vietnam, Malaysia, and Singapore to China's influence. Canada and Mexico will likely still have the US's back. We've got very good trade relations with them. But the Asian sector will be leaning towards China after this.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

elasto
Posts: 3102
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby elasto » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:57 pm UTC

Yes. I've heard the TPP described in those terms before: An alliance between the US and various Asian countries intended to curtail China's soft power in that region.

However, as I say, would it have ended up enriching the ordinary guy on the street or just swelled the offshore bank balance of multinationals?

(One could argue that it's not the job of global trade to do that: Global trade is about making goods and services cheaper for the man on the street to buy, and other social policies - eg. national infrastructure projects or minimum wage policies etc. - are the way to achieve that goal.)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 8730
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:02 pm UTC

elasto wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:In academia, being wrong means eventually having your work disproven long after you got tenure. In business, being wrong means bankruptcy.

True, but so what? Trump has declared bankruptcy four times and it never hurt him. In fact he described his bankruptcies as 'tremendous things'...


Talking about economists "predicting" recessions. Instead of blabbering on about how "smart" they are, prove it by trading on the market.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7302
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Zamfir » Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:10 pm UTC

elasto wrote:(My uninformed opinion is that trade makes countries richer, and this would have made a trade area the size of Europe, so it's probably a bad thing - but if none of the wealth would have 'trickled down' I guess it's no great loss.)

I suppose (some of the) remaining countries can negotiate a deal anyway, though that takes time. The TPP morphed into a strangely US-focussed thing, mixed with the Cold War containment games that KE alludes to. That never struck me as a healthy basis, but I am not that much of an expert.

elasto
Posts: 3102
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby elasto » Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:24 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Talking about economists "predicting" recessions. Instead of blabbering on about how "smart" they are, prove it by trading on the market.

That's like saying if Hawking is so smart at physics why can't he build a rocket to Mars?

Some economists do make money trading, we just don't call them economists when they do that, we call them traders.

In general, though, neither pure nor applied science* is 'better' than the other: Someone has to do the research and someone has to apply it; They are complementary skills, not in opposition.

(*I use that term loosely when applied to economics; It's still very much in its infancy as a discipline. Cue the xkcd chart showing soft to hard sciences)

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:15 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:
elasto wrote:(My uninformed opinion is that trade makes countries richer, and this would have made a trade area the size of Europe, so it's probably a bad thing - but if none of the wealth would have 'trickled down' I guess it's no great loss.)

I suppose (some of the) remaining countries can negotiate a deal anyway, though that takes time. The TPP morphed into a strangely US-focussed thing, mixed with the Cold War containment games that KE alludes to. That never struck me as a healthy basis, but I am not that much of an expert.


I mean, its fine and dandy to try and pretend that China isn't trying to negotiate very heavily to improve its position in the Pacific at the cost of the USA.

But that's not what is happening. China has the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and the USA had the TPP. Emphasis on had. Now we got nothing. I don't think this is very much a "cold war", because relations between China and USA are still pretty good... all things considered.

But there's no denying that the US and China are in an economic competition of mammoth proportions.

-----------

Now with that said, there are a lot of things I disagreed with the TPP. There were a lot of protections for US-copyright law and for companies to sue countries and whatever. Things that were Hollywood-prescriptions against Malaysia / Singapore's pirate market. I'm not necessarily against forcing Malaysia / Singapore to stop pirating in general, but the provisions went very far in defense of corporate copyright law.

In general though, the TPP was a very pro-American trade agreement, especially once you consider China's current strategy in the area (making the RCEP which left out the USA, Canada, and Mexico)
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

idonno
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 3:34 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby idonno » Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:35 pm UTC

elasto wrote:That's like saying if Hawking is so smart at physics why can't he build a rocket to Mars?

Not really. Building a rocket to Mars is a massive and expensive project. I can engage in trading from my couch at whatever level of investment I am comfortable with. The real reason economists don't bet like this on their prediction, is because they know that one of the hardest things to predict in economics is inflection points. In fact if anyone were to demonstrate a method for accurately predicting inflection points, that method would stop working because the resulting activity would move the inflection point.
Ask yourself this. How many traders make their fortune off of predicting an inflection point and how many gamble on it and lose? How many do you think rely on events that happen less than every four years? Most traders make their money engaging in trades that don't require an inflection point because they are both unpredictable and rare.

User avatar
PeteP
What the peck?
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:51 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby PeteP » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:07 pm UTC

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/23/trump-declares-national-day-of-patriotic-devotionbut-you-already-missed-it.html I get the feeling he has a bit of an ego what with declaring his inauguration date a national holiday.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Dauric » Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:44 pm UTC

PeteP wrote:http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/23/trump-declares-national-day-of-patriotic-devotionbut-you-already-missed-it.html I get the feeling he has a bit of an ego what with declaring his inauguration date a national holiday.


... It's like a child with a new and very expensive toy. He's finding out it's got all these little features that weren't necessarily advertised on the box and he's got to play with them all as he discovers them ("Hey, the hands are articulated. HAHA It's flipping you off! Haha!")
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7302
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Zamfir » Tue Jan 24, 2017 11:38 am UTC

I mean, its fine and dandy to try and pretend that China isn't trying to negotiate very heavily to improve its position in the Pacific at the cost of the USA. [...]

I am not sure where I was pretending that? Might be a miscommunication between us. All I was saying was that TPP is not gone, but will be something very different without the US ( and with Japan withdrawing as well).

Originally, TPP derived from agreements around New Zealand and Singapore, with plans to extend to Australia, the ASEAN countries. With the US and Japan involved, it became a different kind of deal, but it might go back to its roots.

That might not be such a bad thing for the smaller countries - Trump is just one example how vulnerable the other partners are to domestic mood swings in the US (or China for a China-centred agreeent).

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10130
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: AGA?

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:10 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:Nate's the Guy Who Can Predict The Election Because Science. That's the big claim to fame of the website. If he is wrong, then it's a bit cheap to point at everyone else who was also wrong.


Nate is...less wrong. And also usually fairly open about showing his work, and admitting when he was wrong. It's fair to keep in mind his shortcomings, but I I think those positive attributes are still pretty big. So, I kinda like the site, even if it's not always 100% correct. Yeah, maybe he made some errors on this or that, but in comparison to the field, he was off by a lot less.

Zamfir wrote:That's not new, is it? That's the standard relation between journalists and people in power. If the journalists get overly critical, they get cut off and become one of the loonies. The Trump administration is perhaps a tad unexperienced, so the game leaks out to the public.But they'll learn fast enough.


Sure. It's just the same old game, but played with a little less subtlety. Trump and subtlety go together like a hammer and glass.

And yes, Trump's fixation on people loving him enough to swarm to his inauguration is a bit unusual, but...it's very Trump. And ultimately, not very important.

As for recession prediction, yeah. That's not something we predict well. The people who successfully "predicted" past recessions are mostly those who talk doom and gloom all the time. Things like bubbles form because people generally have a bad impression of the facts. You inherently learn that in hindsight. If you *know* you believe something wrong, you stop believing it.

I suspect people hoping that Trump'll get blamed for something that just conveniently happens to occur after he takes office are resorting to wishful thinking. I mean, it *could* happen, but it's hardly a sound plan. Basically just trusting to luck to take care of things for ya.

The global gag rule is a traditional republican/democrat thing. Each administration toggles it to the obvious state they prefer. Also, it really isn't a gag rule, so much as it is a straightforward funding thing. Unfortunately, this is a pretty normal result of losing the presidency.

TPP probably isn't huge, because of the lack of ratification. Depends on how fearful you are of China, I guess, since it's mostly an anti-china thing. I'm not particularly worried about China, so, TPP isn't huge. I'm more interested in what, if anything replaces it, and how sensible any tariffs will be. Trump seems to be leaning towards protectionism, which I'm not overly fond of...so even though I don't see axing the TPP as a significant problem, foreign trade is definitely an area to keep an eye on.

jewish_scientist
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 3:15 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby jewish_scientist » Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:22 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:It's like a child with a new and very expensive toy. He's finding out it's got all these little features that weren't necessarily advertised on the box and he's got to play with them all as he discovers them ("Hey, the hands are articulated. HAHA It's flipping you off! Haha!")

What little kids are you hanging around with that know the word articulate?

User avatar
WibblyWobbly
Can't Get No
Posts: 506
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:03 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby WibblyWobbly » Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:30 pm UTC

jewish_scientist wrote:
Dauric wrote:It's like a child with a new and very expensive toy. He's finding out it's got all these little features that weren't necessarily advertised on the box and he's got to play with them all as he discovers them ("Hey, the hands are articulated. HAHA It's flipping you off! Haha!")

What little kids are you hanging around with that know the word articulate?

Dauric only hangs out with the best little kids. Ones with the biggest vocabularies - many people say these kids' vocabularies are tremendous, a lot of people are saying that, so it's clearly the case.

Opus_723
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:55 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Opus_723 » Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:10 pm UTC

Trump administration freezes all grants at the EPA, prohibits all staff from communicating with the press or Congress and freezes all public-facing publications and social media. Similar restrictions at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture. The freezes are said to be temporary, but the Trump administration REALLY doesn't want anything to go through while they're still settling in.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58878b3ae4b0441a8f7114e2

(I don't usually link to Huffpost, but all of the other articles I saw only mentioned the EPA)

User avatar
Liri
Healthy non-floating pooper reporting for doodie.
Posts: 917
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:11 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Liri » Tue Jan 24, 2017 8:33 pm UTC

I need to take some brownies to the EPA building across the street. Just waiting for my NIH and FDA grants to get zapped.
He wondered could you eat the mushrooms, would you die, do you care.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Jan 24, 2017 8:41 pm UTC

Opus_723 wrote:Trump administration freezes all grants at the EPA, prohibits all staff from communicating with the press or Congress and freezes all public-facing publications and social media. Similar restrictions at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture. The freezes are said to be temporary, but the Trump administration REALLY doesn't want anything to go through while they're still settling in.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58878b3ae4b0441a8f7114e2

(I don't usually link to Huffpost, but all of the other articles I saw only mentioned the EPA)


The Hill is reporting just the EPA right now.

I distrust the Huffpost: its basically a giant blog network with grossly varying quality from article-to-article. So I'll wait for a more "legitimate" news source.

The furthest "The Hill" has gone is reporting what the other sites have reported:

BuzzFeed reported Tuesday that the Department of Agriculture instituted a similar ban, telling its employees not to distribute information about research papers or to post on Twitter under the agency's name. A Tuesday report in the Huffington Post said agency employees under the Department of Health and Human Services were told not to speak to public officials.


---------

Washington Post doesn't have anything on this story yet. Maybe Washington Post doesn't think its an important story yet, or maybe they haven't been able to confirm it?
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Jan 24, 2017 11:54 pm UTC

Washington Post apparently took its time, looks like they were busy trying to get the truth of the matter. (Good job WashPo)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... documents/?

Young’s memo, a copy of which was given to The Washington Post, emphasizes that press releases and policy statements must be routed through the office of the secretary for approval: “In order for the Department to deliver unified, consistent messages, it's important for the Office of the Secretary to be consulted on media inquiries and proposed response to questions related to legislation, budgets, policy issues, and regulations,” said the memo. “Policy-related statements should not be made to the press without notifying and consulting the Office of the Secretary. That includes press releases and on and off the record conversations.”

Young stressed that he is a “career official,” not a partisan appointee, and said that the memo he issued closely mirrored one sent at the beginning of the Obama administration. He also said he shared the memo with Trump transition official Sam Clovis before issuing it.

“This is really just formalizing again what is fairly standard practice within the department. I just felt like, yeah, I want to be cautious because I don’t want any surprises on my watch. I was trying to avoid any surprises,” he said.


And that's why I am willing to wait for a few hours to get the news. Young sent out a similar memo at the beginning of Obama's administration, as a reminder to the department what the proper procedure is for releasing press releases.

IE: Inform the office of the secretary (within USDA) before making a major press release.

------------

So USDA is fine.

EPA and HHS are different departments though. I'd like to see some reporting from them before declaring "all's clear". But based on the USDA response, I don't think we really have anything to worry about here.

In any case, this event only reinforces my disgust of the Huffington Post and BuzzFeed.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Opus_723
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:55 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Opus_723 » Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:23 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Washington Post apparently took its time, looks like they were busy trying to get the truth of the matter. (Good job WashPo)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... documents/?

Young’s memo, a copy of which was given to The Washington Post, emphasizes that press releases and policy statements must be routed through the office of the secretary for approval: “In order for the Department to deliver unified, consistent messages, it's important for the Office of the Secretary to be consulted on media inquiries and proposed response to questions related to legislation, budgets, policy issues, and regulations,” said the memo. “Policy-related statements should not be made to the press without notifying and consulting the Office of the Secretary. That includes press releases and on and off the record conversations.”

Young stressed that he is a “career official,” not a partisan appointee, and said that the memo he issued closely mirrored one sent at the beginning of the Obama administration. He also said he shared the memo with Trump transition official Sam Clovis before issuing it.

“This is really just formalizing again what is fairly standard practice within the department. I just felt like, yeah, I want to be cautious because I don’t want any surprises on my watch. I was trying to avoid any surprises,” he said.


And that's why I am willing to wait for a few hours to get the news. Young sent out a similar memo at the beginning of Obama's administration, as a reminder to the department what the proper procedure is for releasing press releases.

IE: Inform the office of the secretary (within USDA) before making a major press release.

------------

So USDA is fine.

EPA and HHS are different departments though. I'd like to see some reporting from them before declaring "all's clear". But based on the USDA response, I don't think we really have anything to worry about here.

In any case, this event only reinforces my disgust of the Huffington Post and BuzzFeed.


I think you're drastically oversimplifying. According to that same Washington Post article that you're quoting, the memo that Buzzfeed and HuffPo wrote about WAS issued, and says exactly what they claimed that it said. The Washington Post is reporting on another memo issued apparently independently from the one that was reported on earlier, as well as clarifications that were issued after the uproar began. It seems that some of these "clarifications" actually contradict the original memo in important ways. From the Washington Post:

"The ARS guidance was not issued in coordination with other offices at the USDA, department officials said, and partially contradicted a department-wide memo that went out on the same day."


"The “public-facing documents” memo Monday, which was first reported by BuzzFeed, raised fears that the new Trump administration was attempting to filter articles about ongoing scientific research being conducted by ARS.
The ARS sought to ease those concerns Tuesday afternoon. Young also said Tuesday evening that he had spoken with ARS and suggested he might support clarifying or rescinding the research agency’s confusing guidance."


I'm not a big fan of Buzzfeed and Huffpo either, but they didn't get this wrong. The story just evolved while the Washington Post was investigating. I for one am waiting to see if they decide to "clarify" their position at the EPA now.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:34 am UTC

Opus_723 wrote:I think you're drastically oversimplifying. According to that same Washington Post article that you're quoting, the memo that Buzzfeed and HuffPo wrote about WAS issued, and says exactly what they claimed that it said. The Washington Post is reporting on another memo issued apparently independently from the one that was reported on earlier, as well as clarifications that were issued after the uproar began. It seems that some of these "clarifications" actually contradict the original memo in important ways. From the Washington Post:

"The ARS guidance was not issued in coordination with other offices at the USDA, department officials said, and partially contradicted a department-wide memo that went out on the same day."


"The “public-facing documents” memo Monday, which was first reported by BuzzFeed, raised fears that the new Trump administration was attempting to filter articles about ongoing scientific research being conducted by ARS.
The ARS sought to ease those concerns Tuesday afternoon. Young also said Tuesday evening that he had spoken with ARS and suggested he might support clarifying or rescinding the research agency’s confusing guidance."


I'm not a big fan of Buzzfeed and Huffpo either, but they didn't get this wrong. The story just evolved while the Washington Post was investigating. I for one am waiting to see if they decide to "clarify" their position at the EPA now.


The facts may be correct, but the #1 question is:

* Were these memos sent out on behalf of Trump as a silencing campaign against the EPA and other agencies?

Washington Post seems to indicate that these memos were sent out in 2009 under the Bush / Obama transition. This could be standard-protocol in Washington for all we know.

So until we know whether or not these memos were standard protocol or not, we should hold our horses. Instead, Buzzfeed and Huffington Post are stoking the flames of the echochamber. The "outrage" engine is beginning to churn up.

----------

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ene ... dd64bd1414

The Washington Post article on the EPA is mysteriously devoid of any "gag order" reports. Something's up. WashPo beats the liberal drum pretty damn hard, so their silence is deafening. I'm thinking Buzzfeed and Huffington Post are just trying to clickbait you with their articles, instead of reporting the truth.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Opus_723
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:55 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Opus_723 » Wed Jan 25, 2017 1:16 am UTC

Washington Post is implying that the ARS memo sent out by Young is typical, not the original memo. You keep talking about Young's memo when that's not what anyone else is talking about.

Anyway, as for deafening silence, is this explicit enough for you?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal-agencies-ordered-to-restrict-their-communications/2017/01/24/9daa6aa4-e26f-11e6-ba11-63c4b4fb5a63_story.html?utm_term=.575ed99d8b41

At the EPA, for example, communications staff received a memo instructing them that “no social media will be going out” and “a digital strategist will be coming on board” to oversee it. It added, “Incoming media requests will carefully screened.”

According to a former agency official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations, members of Trump’s EPA landing team spent significant time asking about who controlled the department’s communications levers, especially regarding social media.


Many new administrations — including former president Barack Obama’s — have moved quickly to take control of the U.S. government’s public relations machinery and centralize decision-making upon taking office. But the sweeping nature of some of the new controls is unusual, and the fact that they come as departments have been communicating through an array of digital platforms has made the changes particularly visible.


Some issues appear to be off limits for park system officials now that Trump is in office. Badlands National Park tweeted several times about the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the implications of climate change, noting at one point, “Burning one gallon of gasoline puts 20lbs of carbon into our atmosphere #climate.” But by early Tuesday evening, those tweets were deleted.


And, for the sake of completeness:

"Contrary to erroneous media reports, HHS and its agencies continue to communicate fully about its work through all of its regular communication channels with the public, the media and other relevant audiences,” said a Health and Human Services official in an email. “There is no directive to do otherwise.”



I'm not saying that this is a cataclysm. But it concerns me, yes.

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: Trump presidency

Postby pogrmman » Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:05 am UTC

Opus_723 wrote:
Some issues appear to be off limits for park system officials now that Trump is in office. Badlands National Park tweeted several times about the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the implications of climate change, noting at one point, “Burning one gallon of gasoline puts 20lbs of carbon into our atmosphere #climate.” But by early Tuesday evening, those tweets were deleted.


And, for the sake of completeness:

"Contrary to erroneous media reports, HHS and its agencies continue to communicate fully about its work through all of its regular communication channels with the public, the media and other relevant audiences,” said a Health and Human Services official in an email. “There is no directive to do otherwise.”



I'm not saying that this is a cataclysm. But it concerns me, yes.


This also concerns me.

It seems excessive -- deleting things that have been posted?

What are they going to do about the many social media things that government organizations like NASA have put out about climate change?

I have been trying to look for bright spots since Trump's election, but they seem to be growing sparser.

EDIT: As I submitted this, I got an alert from Univision that Trump will announce his plans to build a wall tomorrow -- it'll be interesting to see how this turns out.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5804
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:47 am UTC

pogrmman wrote:
Opus_723 wrote:
Some issues appear to be off limits for park system officials now that Trump is in office. Badlands National Park tweeted several times about the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the implications of climate change, noting at one point, “Burning one gallon of gasoline puts 20lbs of carbon into our atmosphere #climate.” But by early Tuesday evening, those tweets were deleted.


And, for the sake of completeness:

"Contrary to erroneous media reports, HHS and its agencies continue to communicate fully about its work through all of its regular communication channels with the public, the media and other relevant audiences,” said a Health and Human Services official in an email. “There is no directive to do otherwise.”



I'm not saying that this is a cataclysm. But it concerns me, yes.


This also concerns me.

It seems excessive -- deleting things that have been posted?

What are they going to do about the many social media things that government organizations like NASA have put out about climate change?

I have been trying to look for bright spots since Trump's election, but they seem to be growing sparser.

EDIT: As I submitted this, I got an alert from Univision that Trump will announce his plans to build a wall tomorrow -- it'll be interesting to see how this turns out.

Your taxes will go down, and it'll be easier to start a business. That assumes he doesn't start a trade war, or loses one.

KittenKaboodle
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 6:36 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KittenKaboodle » Wed Jan 25, 2017 6:04 am UTC

pogrmman wrote:It seems excessive -- deleting things that have been posted?


CRIME THOUGHT!! the tweets never existed! Also, we have always been at war with Eastasia.

I once read (perhaps in one of these forums) someone's statement that 1984 was "a cautionary tale, not a how-to manual", but of course the two are not mutually exclusive, it could be a cautionary tale for any would be resistance (room 101), AND a how-to for Trump. However there is a window of opportunity before Miniluv is solidly established where resistance is not entirely futile. Trump's insulting the intelligence services (the presumable precursor of the Ministry of Love) is somewhat encouraging.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5804
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Jan 25, 2017 6:53 am UTC

KittenKaboodle wrote:
pogrmman wrote:It seems excessive -- deleting things that have been posted?


CRIME THOUGHT!! the tweets never existed! Also, we have always been at war with Eastasia.

I once read (perhaps in one of these forums) someone's statement that 1984 was "a cautionary tale, not a how-to manual", but of course the two are not mutually exclusive, it could be a cautionary tale for any would be resistance (room 101), AND a how-to for Trump. However there is a window of opportunity before Miniluv is solidly established where resistance is not entirely futile. Trump's insulting the intelligence services (the presumable precursor of the Ministry of Love) is somewhat encouraging.

Trump has decided to kiss and make up with the inteligence services, you can tell because he made up a story about how it was totally the media's fault for them fighting in the first place. And that they were never fighting, it's just a rumor made up by the media, because enemies are everywhere.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:19 am UTC

Opus_723 wrote:Washington Post is implying that the ARS memo sent out by Young is typical, not the original memo. You keep talking about Young's memo when that's not what anyone else is talking about.

Anyway, as for deafening silence, is this explicit enough for you?


Yeah, that's a better article. The main issue is that a lot of news reporting has been pretty bad recently and very knee-jerk. So I want to do the due-diligence and make sure the articles are legit. WashPo is implying that the HHS reporting from other sites has been erroneous.

The EPA restrictions are worrisome however.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1558
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:37 am UTC

Question for people familiar with how the US government operates: is it normal for so much governing to be carried out by executive order? Trying to work out if that's something uniquely concerning about Trump, or just something surprising because of me being used to parliamentary democracy.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7302
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Zamfir » Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:09 am UTC

Is that really so unusual? Parliamentary governments also make decrees (or whatever they are called in each country). It's usual to see a lot of decrees early on, before the lawmaking process has geared up to modify laws entirely.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1558
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:22 am UTC

Zamfir wrote:Is that really so unusual? Parliamentary governments also make decrees (or whatever they are called in each country). It's usual to see a lot of decrees early on, before the lawmaking process has geared up to modify laws entirely.


For some things, yes. The changes of funding to various departments, restrictions on communications from them and the declaration of national holidays seem normal in that regard (though worrying for other reasons). I wouldn't expect banning immigration and asylum from lots of countries and building border walls to be in the category of things you could do that with though... Unless the legislature has already granted a lot of flexibility in those sorts of things to the executive... Which is probably what's happened to be honest and it's just a case of me not knowing that history

Opus_723
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:55 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Opus_723 » Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:32 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
Yeah, that's a better article. The main issue is that a lot of news reporting has been pretty bad recently and very knee-jerk. So I want to do the due-diligence and make sure the articles are legit. WashPo is implying that the HHS reporting from other sites has been erroneous.

The EPA restrictions are worrisome however.


I can certainly get behind that. Today was actually very informative for me.

As for the EPA, I really hope that the restrictions are just a poorly handled transition thing, but I'm bracing for worse.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1558
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:44 am UTC

From some cursory reading on Wikipedia the possible scope of executive orders supported by the Constitution in the US does seem somewhat more broad than orders in council supported by Royal Perogative (which is the UK equivalent). Though I'm not sure whether Trumps executive orders rested on the Cobstitution or on delegated legislation

speising
Posts: 2066
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: Trump presidency

Postby speising » Wed Jan 25, 2017 9:33 am UTC

Citing no new evidence, Trump continues to say there were millions of illegal votes

I don't know, is there some procedure to impeach a president because of mental illness?

morriswalters
Posts: 6899
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:18 am UTC

I have no idea. But I have now seen Trump as a large inflatable Chicken which is pretty funny.

User avatar
Felstaff
Occam's Taser
Posts: 5159
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 7:10 pm UTC
Location: ¢ ₪ ¿ ¶ § ∴ ® © ™ ؟ ¡ ‽ æ Þ ° ₰ ₤ ಡಢ

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Felstaff » Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:22 am UTC

speising wrote:
Citing no new evidence, Trump continues to say there were millions of illegal votes

I don't know, is there some procedure to impeach a president because of mental illness?


That sounds like the kind of thing Trump tweeted before he became president.

Image
Away, you scullion! you rampallion! You fustilarian! I'll tickle your catastrophe.

speising
Posts: 2066
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: Trump presidency

Postby speising » Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:29 pm UTC

Felstaff wrote:
speising wrote:
Citing no new evidence, Trump continues to say there were millions of illegal votes

I don't know, is there some procedure to impeach a president because of mental illness?


That sounds like the kind of thing Trump tweeted before he became president.

Image


well, now we know why he asked that, he was already preparing for his presidency!


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Leovan and 28 guests