Trump presidency

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

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26440
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:47 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:I'm not even a diehard leftist

Don't worry, I don't think that's a mistake anyone could make after seeing any of what you post here.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10002
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:56 pm UTC

To be fair, given that "women should be equal to men", "homosexuality should be legal/normal", and "governments shouldn't censor the media" are not overwhelming supported throughout the world, it's actually very easy to be far-left on social issues.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11213
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:12 pm UTC

Standard libertarian problem. The leftists believe you're part of the far right, whereas the right wing sorts think you're dangerously lefty, and will probably destroy society.

One would think that all of those issues CU mentions would be obvious, but sadly, even in the US...

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26440
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:47 pm UTC

You'd think "kids shouldn't be separated from their parents and thrown in cages as part of a targeted xenophobic policy" would also be uncontroversial, and yet apparently it's hypocritical to point that out unless Tyndmyr is personally aware that your objected sufficiently strongly to Obama's immigration fuckups.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11213
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:01 pm UTC

This again?

Trump's responsible for his immigration failures, Obama's responsible for his. Calling out both is reasonable.

Anyways, in Trump news, looks like China's responded to Trump's latest threats of tariffs with a further escalation: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/08/03/china-announced-60-b-tariffs-us-goods-if-trump-strikes-first/897915002/

My bet's that Trump's gonna keep doubling down. He seems to like confrontation. Could be interesting, in the same way that a game of chicken with motor vehicles is. On the one hand, China has more to lose, thanks to the trade deficit relative to them, but on the other hand, China also has a certain sense of national pride, and may just not care, so long as it hurts Trump. Thoughts?

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10002
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:07 pm UTC

Also to be fair, most of the world is not welcoming to migrants. India, for instance, responded to illegal Bangladeshi immigration with an outright mass murder.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6347
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Sat Aug 04, 2018 1:29 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:This again?
Trump's responsible for his immigration failures, Obama's responsible for his. Calling out both is reasonable.
Anyways, in Trump news, looks like China's responded to Trump's latest threats of tariffs with a further escalation: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/08/03/china-announced-60-b-tariffs-us-goods-if-trump-strikes-first/897915002/
My bet's that Trump's gonna keep doubling down. He seems to like confrontation. Could be interesting, in the same way that a game of chicken with motor vehicles is. On the one hand, China has more to lose, thanks to the trade deficit relative to them, but on the other hand, China also has a certain sense of national pride, and may just not care, so long as it hurts Trump. Thoughts?

The thing is the Chinese play dirty, or at least, they know they can't match tariffs. But guess what they have? A billion people who will blindly buy whatever is most convenient as dictated by party leadership. You out tariff them? All of a sudden, all your factories that sell to Chinese local markets get surprise rat inspectors and are forced to close.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10002
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Aug 04, 2018 3:13 am UTC

So basically, a ban on foreign imports, which that China has/had a massive trade surplus with many countries, is still going to hurt China more.

China doesn't produce critical, high tech components that can't be made elsewhere. What they produce is rare earths (which they refuse to export anyway), foodstuffs, economy quality construction materials, etc. If the US/EU suddenly stopped trade with China, the price of various goods would increase but the economy would not grind to a halt. As for the rare earths, the problem isn't the lack of deposits but the unwillingness to mine them, due to mining being an extremely dirty business.

gd1
Posts: 168
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:42 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gd1 » Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:27 am UTC

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/03/paul-manafort-trial-2018-761300

Of note:

Laporta said that when preparing tax returns and related records, she agreed to treat as loans $2.4 million in funds that Manafort’s consulting firm received from offshore businesses, even though she had doubts that they really were loans and got little documentation to back up that claim.

The accountant said her requests for details on the loans yielded unusual one- or two-page documents, not the typical stack of paper with numerous clauses. The alleged loans were also recorded in the books of Manafort’s DMP International as coming from the consulting firm’s customers, which Laporta found suspicious.

“I had not seen that before,” she said. “Yes, it was a concern.”

In another exchange, Laporta testified that Gates told her in September 2015 that Manafort’s income needed to be reduced so he could afford to pay his taxes. To finesse the situation, she said, Gates instructed her to reduce Manafort’s income by not counting one of his loans.

While Laporta said she followed the instructions, she told Mueller prosecutor Uzo Asonye that the move was “not appropriate.”

“We can’t pick and choose what’s a loan and [what’s] income,” she explained.

Although the purported loans allowed Manafort at one point to bring in cash without paying taxes, a $1.5 million loan from a company called Peranova in 2012 caused problems by 2016 when Manafort was seeking a fresh loan from Citizens Bank.

“The bank wanted to see more money available to pay back the loan” it was considering, Laporta said. “There wasn’t enough income and there was the debt.”

Laporta said Manafort or Gates — she was unclear about which one — told her the loan had been forgiven in 2015, so she passed on that information to the bank.

“What information did you rely on in providing this response?” Asonye asked.

“Their word,” Laporta replied.

“Did you believe the $1.5 million loan from Peranova had actually been forgiven?” the prosecutor asked.

“Uh … no,” she answered.

When the bank asked for documentation, Gates sent Laporta a draft forgiveness letter dated June 2015, even though it was February 2016, she said.

“At the time, did you believe this document was true or false?” Asonye asked.

“False,” she said.


I'd like more information on this and better interpretation?
There is no emotion more useless in life than hate.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6347
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Sat Aug 04, 2018 1:39 pm UTC

She knew something was wrong/fishy, but she looked the other way to keep the paychecks coming. That's why she has immunity.

gd1
Posts: 168
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:42 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gd1 » Sun Aug 05, 2018 6:34 am UTC

sardia wrote:She knew something was wrong/fishy, but she looked the other way to keep the paychecks coming. That's why she has immunity.


I don't understand what's wrong with taking out a loan though. Also:
And I'm really sorry about this:
I mean it addams, I just can't help myself:
Image
There is no emotion more useless in life than hate.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6166
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Sun Aug 05, 2018 6:37 am UTC

Lying on a loan application because you know that if you tell the truth they won't give you a loan is fraud. Generally speaking, lying for financial gain is wrong unless you are in a position of power.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 733
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Aug 06, 2018 3:49 am UTC

You don't have to pay income taxes on a loan.

Spoilered for OT and pedantry:
Spoiler:
Tyndmyr wrote:Millenial


Public service announcement:

You've gotta spell that word with two Ns, if you want it to mean a thousand years rather than a thousand anuses.

mille = thousand
annus = year
anus = asshole

(And yes, "It takes one to know one" is probably an appropriate response to my posting this advisory.)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10002
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:19 am UTC

Spoiler:
ObsessoMom wrote:Public service announcement:

You've gotta spell that word with two Ns, if you want it to mean a thousand years rather than a thousand anuses.

mille = thousand
annus = year
anus = asshole

(And yes, "It takes one to know one" is probably an appropriate response to my posting this advisory.)


Also, the adjective of the planet Venus is "Venereal", the word "yard" is the original English word for penis, "nothing" is an Elizabethan word for vagina, and the Victorians had so many slang words for "vagina" that you can't write a paragraph without stumbling over half a dozen of them.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3491
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:22 am UTC

Yesterday, Trump put up a truly idiotic tweet about the California wildfires. Seemed like a policy-position upon damming rivers and clearcutting. Which at least shows he knows about the problem that he hasn't even posted "thoughts and prayers" for the victims of. (Hey, Cal didn't vote for him, amirite?)

It now appears to be deleted. But with near universal derision in the replies obviously his madcap "say something random, see if it rolls, run more with it if it does" obviously rolled so far the wrong way...

edit: Ok, I so it seems he didn't delete it, it was probably just too stupid to bother appearing any longer on my usual page I glance at to see the latest shenanigans.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6347
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:33 pm UTC

ObsessoMom wrote:You don't have to pay income taxes on a loan.

Spoilered for OT and pedantry:
Spoiler:
Tyndmyr wrote:Millenial


Public service announcement:

You've gotta spell that word with two Ns, if you want it to mean a thousand years rather than a thousand anuses.

mille = thousand
annus = year
anus = asshole

(And yes, "It takes one to know one" is probably an appropriate response to my posting this advisory.)

If a loan is forgiven, that counts as income, as in the example "they loaned you 10 million, but had no intention to get the money back."

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11213
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Aug 06, 2018 2:41 pm UTC

sardia wrote:The thing is the Chinese play dirty, or at least, they know they can't match tariffs. But guess what they have? A billion people who will blindly buy whatever is most convenient as dictated by party leadership. You out tariff them? All of a sudden, all your factories that sell to Chinese local markets get surprise rat inspectors and are forced to close.


That's certainly true, but I don't think that Chinese local markets are usually the target market. Usually, it's to export back to the west. Sure, they can shut down the export industry, but thanks to their policy of insisting upon Chinese involvement wherever possible, it's going to directly impact them pretty heavily. The trade gap ultimately means that their factories rely on US consumers a great deal more than we rely on their consumers.

Escalating the impact ultimately runs into the same limit of us being able to hurt them more than the reverse.

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 733
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Aug 06, 2018 3:00 pm UTC

sardia wrote:If a loan is forgiven, that counts as income, as in the example "they loaned you 10 million, but had no intention to get the money back."


Yes. The whole situation reminds me a bit of the accounting shenanigans that went on in my local diocese of the Catholic Church. Certain real estate was declared to be assets of the Church, and therefore exempt from property taxes. But when when local clergy sex scandals prompted investigation of the diocese's finances to determine what sort of financial settlement might be reasonable for the victims to seek, somehow the Church was trying to claim that that same real estate didn't really belong to the Church, and shouldn't be included in the assessment. I can best summarize the judge's reaction to that as :roll:

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10002
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:21 pm UTC

That reminds me of something we had in school, during the looming housing crisis. A lot of banks were renegotiating with home-owners to forgive the debt, because the bank would rather have a guaranteed $150,000 instead of a less likely $200,000. The problem was that for tax purposes, that was a $50,000 gain for the home-owner, and thus extra taxes, yet someone who has to renegotiate with their banks likely doesn't have a whole lot of leeway to pay extra taxes. There was talk about creating a loophole for this, but the obvious problem was a parent loaning a child $1m then forgiving the debt and skirting inheritance tax.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4797
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Pfhorrest » Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:41 pm UTC

What happens if a parent loans a child money and never forgives it but dies before it's paid off? Does the child still owe the money to the parent's estate... which they then inherit, paying inheritance taxes?
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6347
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Mon Aug 06, 2018 5:07 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:What happens if a parent loans a child money and never forgives it but dies before it's paid off? Does the child still owe the money to the parent's estate... which they then inherit, paying inheritance taxes?

https://www.barkerevanslaw.co.uk/2014/0 ... ative-die/
It depends on what the dead guy wrote in his will. Loans don't expire if the bank/loaner/parent dies.
A. Loan becomes gift, follow gift & inheritance taxes.
B. Loan is still active. Executor of will collect on loan as written.
C. Trump and manafort attempt to game loan system. Law enforcement try to catch them, but most slip through the cracks.
The IRS treats the loan accordingly.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10002
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Aug 06, 2018 5:42 pm UTC

I would hazard a guess that the child inherits a credit and has to pay tax on that. If a parent lends out $1m to a neighbor, and the parent dies, the neighbor now owes the child $1m and the child would have to pay inheritance, but whether it's paid on the fair value of the whole loan or only as the debt is repaid, hmm...

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6166
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Mon Aug 06, 2018 6:45 pm UTC

The estate should be taxed, not the child's income on the estate, and the loan should be seen as an asset valued around the payoff amount.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6347
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Mon Aug 06, 2018 6:57 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I would hazard a guess that the child inherits a credit and has to pay tax on that. If a parent lends out $1m to a neighbor, and the parent dies, the neighbor now owes the child $1m and the child would have to pay inheritance, but whether it's paid on the fair value of the whole loan or only as the debt is repaid, hmm...

It's a moot point most of the time. Very few people will ever exceed the threshold for both the gift AND estate tax. The first 11.18 million is tax free, and every dollar after that is taxed. The gift tax has$15000 annual exemption, with a $5 million lifetime exemption. You would have to give over$20 million dollars before the recipient would get taxed on that 1$over the limit. The tax bill would be 18 cents.

My parents would always freak out about the gift and death tax when they don't know anything about it. It's kinda sad how they're affected by bad news sources and friends.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11213
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Aug 06, 2018 7:25 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I would hazard a guess that the child inherits a credit and has to pay tax on that. If a parent lends out $1m to a neighbor, and the parent dies, the neighbor now owes the child $1m and the child would have to pay inheritance, but whether it's paid on the fair value of the whole loan or only as the debt is repaid, hmm...


If the loan goes to the child, it's effectively forgiven(or at least, it's an asset that balances the liability so same same). If it goes elsewhere, nothing really changes.

As stated, inheritance and gift taxes contains exceptions sufficiently large enough that avoiding them is pretty doable with or without loans unless you are exceptionally lucky in inheriting wealth.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10002
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:48 am UTC

Oh FFS.

The EPA is reintroducing asbestos

It's less like Trump doesn't care about the common man, so much as he actively hates the common man...

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: Trump presidency

Postby pogrmman » Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:57 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Oh FFS.

The EPA is reintroducing asbestos

It's less like Trump doesn't care about the common man, so much as he actively hates the common man...


Isn't the whole point of the EPA to protect people and the environment from shit like asbestos? I mean, it’s a known carcinogen. That’s been proven for decades. Sure, it’s fireproof. Sure, it has other neat qualities. But is any of that really worth the risk of exposing more people to it? It’s almost like something you’d see from the Onion...

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6166
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:58 am UTC

The whole point of Republicans is that they believe corporations should be able to act with impunity.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10002
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:08 am UTC

Snopes take on it. Currently banned uses will remain banned, but new uses may be permitted. So you can't use asbestos to insulate your home or filter your cigarettes, but you might be able to use asbestos to, IDK, make coffee cups out of.

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: Trump presidency

Postby pogrmman » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:18 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Snopes take on it. Currently banned uses will remain banned, but new uses may be permitted. So you can't use asbestos to insulate your home or filter your cigarettes, but you might be able to use asbestos to, IDK, make coffee cups out of.

Even still, I thought we’d already tried just about everything with asbestos. The worse part is the fact that the EPA won’t use studies on health concerns in existing uses when deciding to approve a new use. That’s unacceptable, no matter what you think about it.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10002
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:56 am UTC

What's scary to me is what do you define as a "new" use? Asbestos was used for insulation, and used to wrap wires, but is an asbestos sheet with built in wiring now a "new" use if combining two prior tasks is "innovation"?

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3491
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Aug 08, 2018 9:31 am UTC

pogrmman wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Snopes take on it. Currently banned uses will remain banned, but new uses may be permitted. So you can't use asbestos to insulate your home or filter your cigarettes, but you might be able to use asbestos to, IDK, make coffee cups out of.

Even still, I thought we’d already tried just about everything with asbestos. The worse part is the fact that the EPA won’t use studies on health concerns in existing uses when deciding to approve a new use. That’s unacceptable, no matter what you think about it.


Beyond that, what the hell is the context behind (from the original article):
the agency will “no longer consider the effect or presence of substances in the air, ground, or water in its risk assessments.”


Call me naive, but isn't that a key part of what Environmental Protection is..?

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3900
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 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 11:53 am UTC

Soupspoon wrote:Beyond that, what the hell is the context behind (from the original article):
the agency will “no longer consider the effect or presence of substances in the air, ground, or water in its risk assessments.”


Call me naive, but isn't that a key part of what Environmental Protection is..?


Frontline: War on the EPA

The regulated have become the regulators, and are dismantling the EPA from the inside.
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
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3491
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:11 pm UTC

I knew that was a thing, but if that quote (within the quote) is not out of the obvious context then it's like a baker saying that he's no longer going to use any kind of oven in the future.

User avatar
Plasma_Wolf
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:11 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Plasma_Wolf » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:37 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Oh FFS.

The EPA is reintroducing asbestos

It's less like Trump doesn't care about the common man, so much as he actively hates the common man...


Sometimes I wonder if we all ended up in the South Park universe, especially when I saw how Trump arguing with North Korea on Twitter was worse than Mr Garrison Trump doing it in the South Park episode.

This however, makes it absolutely certain that we are not in the South Park universe, as even they would not be so completely fucking batshit crazy to legalize Asbestos again.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:44 pm UTC

Soupspoon wrote:I knew that was a thing, but if that quote (within the quote) is not out of the obvious context then it's like a baker saying that he's no longer going to use any kind of oven in the future.


If the baker has decided they don't want to make bread any more, but for some reason can't shut up shop entirely, they might very well declare that they will no longer use an oven.

On that, does anyone know why Trump isn't just shutting down the EPA? Does he lack the requisite support of Congress, or whoever would get a say in that move? Or is it just an image management thing?

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3491
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:10 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:If the baker has decided they don't want to make bread any more, but for some reason can't shut up shop entirely, they might very well declare that they will no longer use an oven.
…and not sell any baked goods. He'll be a bakery, in a bakery, but the shop will be empty and due to a local by-law no other shop in town sells bread and costs go up for anyone who wants to bake their own bread-products at home, under pressure from militant celiacs who just don't see the point of anything they won't eat themselves… which is starting to stretch the analogy somewhat, but still actually not too far adrift.

What we have is poacher-turned-person-pretending-to-be-a-gamekeeper, putting up signs saying "Trespassers Will Be Ignored".

gd1
Posts: 168
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:42 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gd1 » Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:48 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Oh FFS.

The EPA is reintroducing asbestos

It's less like Trump doesn't care about the common man, so much as he actively hates the common man...


I have a paranoid suspicion that Trump is somewhat like this guy (Grima Wormtongue):
Image

He's met with Putin behind closed doors. He's met with Russian Officials in the White House as well.

I think he's getting instructions from Putin to make the most destructive policy decisions he possibly can to weaken and possibly destroy the United States. Making political decisions formally generally requires open discussion that is monitored and voted upon in congress. Having one person make deliberately bad decisions and stoke destructive tendencies can be done without most people even noticing (well I mean, noticing that this would be the reason behind it).

"How long is it since Saruman bought you? What was the promised price, Gríma? When all the Men are dead, you'll take your share of the treasure?"

Maybe secured oligarchy status in Russia?

Could likely be completely wrong though. No tangible evidence of anything to my knowledge.
There is no emotion more useless in life than hate.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:28 am UTC

gd1 wrote:*snip*


My feeling is that it's less deliberate than this. Trump is *highly* insecure and narcissistic, and that makes him easily manipulated (article as per sourcing rules in this thread). Putin is currently performing such manipulation.

If he wasn't in such a damaging position I'd almost feel sorry for him. It must be fucking horrible living with such deep insecurity.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2936
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: Trump presidency

Postby orthogon » Thu Aug 09, 2018 12:29 pm UTC

As an aside, I thought I'd read somewhere that asbestos was a net benefit overall, i.e. it has been responsible for more lives saved in fires than lives lost from asbestos-related diseases. I can't remember where I read it, and can't find any statement like it on the Intertubes. From what I have found, annual worldwide deaths from fire (in 2004) were around 150,000 whereas the figure for asbestos-related deaths (for the same year) was about 107,000. Rate of fire deaths have reduced by a factor of 10 since the early 20th Century (Enlightenment Now, Pinker 2018), but that is the result of many different interventions (sprinklers, alarms, fire escapes, etc.), so fire retardant building materials including asbestos are only responsible for a fraction of those 1.3m or so lives saved per year.

Of course this does't mean we should reintroduce asbestos: we have materials that are fire retardant and much less hazardous to health. (Also it's only about deaths and doesn't consider impairment to quality of life).
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: The Great Hippo and 15 guests