(12-08-2015 05:20 PM)Jaydublin Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 03:57 PM)Deepdiver Wrote:  Not sure if we can wait another 13 months until Mr. Trump might be sworn in ... unfortunately for the economy this negative news will just give Trump a greater chance as he has already published his economic recovery plan:

Peter Schiff Warns: “The Whole Economy Has Imploded… Collapse Is Coming”
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/pe...g_12062015

A short and to the point read. Shades of 2008 all over again.

Peter Schiff makes those warnings by the day.... I have met this man in person multiple times and spoken with him and his gold digging wife... He is a complete asshat.

He became famous for being on point about 2008 before it became mainstream news. However, he's like the broken clock that is right twice a day. It's looking more and more like he just throws his predictions up on a wall and hopes one of them will stick.

He's an alarmist and a chicken little and makes his money taking on extremely bearish and apocalyptic market views.

He's so inconsistent that even Joe Rogan was able to call him out.

Peter Schiff predicted massive decoupling in 2008 but that didn't happen.

Austrian economists are kind of like Marxists. They always predict everything's going to hell so eventually they're right.

Anyway, I'm currently doing a writeup about all of this brouhaha. Even I have to admit that Trump's comments are a bit more visceral and ugly to me than I thought, but at the end of the day, the man is right.

(12-08-2015 07:04 PM)Roardog Wrote:  The proposal would not really be effective in preventing terrorism in the short term (those people are most likely already in your country) and as it has been pointed out, how could it be implemented?

Completely disagree. The 9/11 hijackers slipped in because they were not scrutinized. They were also not home grown U.S. terrorists. Dearborn, Michigan isn't really the threat here but new recruits and "students" coming in from these sketchy countries definitely need to be scrutinized or severely restricted.

Quote:Do you block anyone with an Arabic or Muslim sounding name? That's going to block a lot of Coptic and others Christians from middle eastern backgrounds.

Do you block anyone from a Muslim country? So no Indonesian's can visit the US?

You don't need to completely block everyone just severely restrict the numbers coming in and add on additional and stricter background requirements. All this can be done in practical terms. If people don't want to go through the process then they don't have to come to the U.S. it's pretty simple. People who are 2nd citizenship nationals or 3rd nationals living in Europe with origins from the middle east, islamic hot zones in SEA, or the subcontinent should also be scrutinized in the same way.

Quote:This has probably already been debated ad nauseam in this thread but do people here actually think Trump is electable as President? I can see him getting the GOP nomination (if they actually let him) but the Presidency? I can't see his appeal being wide enough as he'll drive anyone in the political centre to vote Democrat.

In short, yes. There's a high probability of him being elected at this point. He's not as polarizing as you would think since the U.S. is exhausted by failed policies and repeated lies from the Democrat and Republican parties. There is a general mood out there that people are willing to take a chance with someone more on the outside. Plus the news and the general mainstream liberal extreme left nonsense pushed on the masses has caused the pendulum to start to swing back to the right. The American public is getting tired of this shit.

(12-08-2015 07:16 PM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 07:04 PM)Roardog Wrote:  The proposal would not really be effective in preventing terrorism in the short term (those people are most likely already in your country) and as it has been pointed out, how could it be implemented?

Completely disagree. The 9/11 hijackers slipped in because they were not scrutinized. They were also not home grown U.S. terrorists. Dearborn, Michigan isn't really the threat here but new recruits and "students" coming in from these sketchy countries definitely need to be scrutinized or severely restricted.

I didn't mean completely home grown. I meant that people planning a terrorist attack on US soil in the next 6 months (short term) are most likely already in your country. Beyond that time frame it would probably have an impact on restricting would be terrorists from entering.
However it could also cause an increase in home grown terrorism due to the policy radicalizing Muslims already existing in your country. Such a negative policy towards Muslims by the government would cause a societal negative view of them as well leading to them feeling discriminated against and marginalized.

(12-08-2015 07:16 PM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 07:04 PM)Roardog Wrote:  This has probably already been debated ad nauseam in this thread but do people here actually think Trump is electable as President? I can see him getting the GOP nomination (if they actually let him) but the Presidency? I can't see his appeal being wide enough as he'll drive anyone in the political centre to vote Democrat.

In short, yes. There's a high probability of him being elected at this point. He's not as polarizing as you would think since the U.S. is exhausted by failed policies and repeated lies from the Democrat and Republican parties. There is a general mood out there that people are willing to take a chance with someone more on the outside. Plus the news and the general mainstream liberal extreme left nonsense pushed on the masses has caused the pendulum to start to swing back to the right. The American public is getting tired of this shit.

That really amazes me because he is viewed as a joke by the rest of the world. It would be a foreign policy disaster for the US for him to be elected.
My feeling is that if he's elected he'll only get one term before people go "well that was a nice experiment, now lets put the adults back in charge."
However don't get me wrong, from an outside looking in, Trump is great entertainment value, like Sarah Palin was for '08.

(12-08-2015 07:48 PM)Roardog Wrote:  That really amazes me because he is viewed as a joke by the rest of the world. It would be a foreign policy disaster for the US for him to be elected.

He is "seen as a joke" by the main-stream media of the rest of the world. And, since when does the leftist media represent what the people really think and like?

Anyway, about this: "It would be a foreign policy disaster for the US for him to be elected", it doesn't make a lot of sense.

For, it's the rest of the World that quickly adapts to the president of the USA, not the other way around.

There can't be any "foreign policy disaster" when you're the most powerful kid on the block. Other kids wait and remain polite (whether or not they like it).

Also, it is very probable that the Indian and Russian and Chinese presidents, who are Alpha males, would love the personality of D. Trump...

(12-08-2015 07:48 PM)Roardog Wrote:  That really amazes me because he is viewed as a joke by the rest of the world. It would be a foreign policy disaster for the US for him to be elected.
My feeling is that if he's elected he'll only get one term before people go "well that was a nice experiment, now lets put the adults back in charge."
However don't get me wrong, from an outside looking in, Trump is great entertainment value, like Sarah Palin was for '08.

Yes lets put the treasonous servants of the international bankers, zionists, and satanists back in charge.

That way everyone but the elites can live in third world communist police states under martial law and absolute subjugation.

I can't believe so many on here are uncomfortable with what he said. Muslims make dysfunctional countries, that's the end of it. This is easily observable. This is a common sense view.

The idiots should make their own countries desirable to live in, I feel 0 sense of altruism towards their idiotic and destructive cultures. and MAYBE, just MAYBE, someone will shut up with the retorts of 'but muslims are doctors and lawyers!, you're kicking out PhD geniuses!'. I don't fucking care how educated they are, or that 1 out of 200 works as a doctor. I don't care about their children either. This is about survival, but the comforts of the past 60 years have made everyone deeply removed from self preservation. Since many men feel this is racist or xenophobic, I'm sure 90% of females still want to let in the pwecious wittle muslims and give them tax dollars.

Not trolling but there's a good chance Trump might get assassinated if he becomes president.

The powers that be will not allow it Trump to ruin what they've done.

(12-08-2015 07:04 PM)Roardog Wrote:  This has probably already been debated ad nauseam in this thread but do people here actually think Trump is electable as President? I can see him getting the GOP nomination (if they actually let him) but the Presidency? I can't see his appeal being wide enough as he'll drive anyone in the political centre to vote Democrat.

I've been watching this, Roardog, and I actually think there's a shot for him at least. There have already been informal polls of "bellwether" seats in the US -- the ones that predict the outcome of elections in the way we've got a couple of seats out here that when polled reliably predict the outcome of Australian Federal elections -- and they're saying Trump's going to be the next President. Trump has name recognition, no institutional donors to fellate, and has a massive outsider appeal which is probably his biggest factor in favour. If he's not made the GOP candidate, the GOP will lose the next election -- period. Not one of their candidates has a skeleton-less closet or name recognition enough to take on Hilary Clinton. Indeed some of them are basically white Obamas -- no experience of the outside world other than time in the Senate. Ben Carson is basically no different to a ballerina running for President: he has immense technical skill in one tiny area, but has some oddball ideas and no real experience in management.

I think the MSM's saturation bombing campaign against Trump is telling. If he was a candidate likely to blow away in the wind they wouldn't be fighting so hard to keep him out of the race.

Quote:However it could also cause an increase in home grown terrorism due to the policy radicalizing Muslims already existing in your country. Such a negative policy towards Muslims by the government would cause a societal negative view of them as well leading to them feeling discriminated against and marginalized.

At the risk of being facetious: if Islam is indeed the "religion of peace" it constantly says it is, it'll shut the fuck up, take it quietly, and prove that the US has nothing to fear from it.

If, however, so-called "moderate" Islam is radicalised by a decision to stop Muslim entry into the US, it will only be proving Trump's point for him: that the religion's adherents are way too fucking unstable to wave its immigrants through without a thorough and deep check into their backgrounds.

(12-08-2015 01:39 PM)CleanSlate Wrote:  So, Trump is proposing that all Muslims without a US passport cannot enter the United States. If the Muslim-Americans are US citizens, they can go overseas and re-enter.

Trump also proposes that immigration officers ask the question "Are you Muslim?" to foreigners entering the US. If they say yes, they cannot enter.

Although Trump does admit that the details will have to be figured out, I see one big gaping hole in this proposal.

What if they lie and say "no"? What are the immigration officers expected to do then? Let them in?

EDIT: There are also varying levels of Muslim practice. Some are Muslims-in-name-only. Some are actually atheist or follow another religion, but have a Muslim-sounding name. Others are devout who pray to the east 5 times a day. Many are in between who don't pray every day, but go to the mosque once a month or so, celebrate the Eid and abstain from eating pork. Where do we draw the line here with regards to who is allowed in the US?

What the hell is a "Muslim sounding name"? Islam is not an ethnicity. Do you mean Arab sounding last names?

(12-08-2015 07:04 PM)Roardog Wrote:  This has probably already been debated ad nauseam in this thread but do people here actually think Trump is electable as President? I can see him getting the GOP nomination (if they actually let him) but the Presidency? I can't see his appeal being wide enough as he'll drive anyone in the political centre to vote Democrat.

Don't worry, a few more hundred dead bodies and Trump will easily be the most electable guy in the country. The Left's pet muslims will be more than happy to oblige.

I am sure the left is confused why their pets keep attacking them and hurting their election chances. The left is like a woman who cannot resist her abusive boyfriend (Islam).

Too fucking bad. The American left is going to die after the next few terrorist attacks.

(12-08-2015 07:48 PM)Roardog Wrote:  That really amazes me because he is viewed as a joke by the rest of the world.

That's okay, because the rest of the world is a joke compared to America.

(12-08-2015 08:41 PM)colblionel Wrote:  Not trolling but there's a good chance Trump might get assassinated if he becomes president.

The powers that be will not allow it Trump to ruin what they've done.

A great way to start a civil war. Not sure that is the direction the left is looking for.

(12-08-2015 02:13 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

Quote:So, Trump is proposing that all Muslims without a US passport cannot enter the United States. If the Muslim-Americans are US citizens, they can go overseas and re-enter.

Trump also proposes that immigration officers ask the question "Are you Muslim?" to foreigners entering the US. If they say yes, they cannot enter.

Although Trump does admit that the details will have to be figured out, I see one big gaping hole in this proposal.

What if they lie and say "no"? What are the immigration officers expected to do then? Let them in?

Use their best judgement, the same way they do for any other case. Immigration officers have to make a lot of guesses about people already. Is he likely to skip out on his Visa? Does he have enough money to survive when he gets to the US? Is he carrying any diseases? They don't know the answers to any of these questions for sure, but they make their decisions anyway.

Remember, the policy doesn't have to be 100% successful to work. If a potential immigrant is from a country where every religion but Islam is outlawed, you assume they're Muslim and turn them back. Outright banning immigration from places like Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Afghanistan and Qatar would solve 90% of our problems at a stroke. If we'd done that, for instance, there would have been no 9/11 hijackings. Even if a couple Muslims lie and get through, this single policy has made us much safer.

Quote:EDIT: There are also varying levels of Muslim practice. Some are Muslims-in-name-only. Some are actually atheist or follow another religion, but have a Muslim-sounding name. Others are devout who pray to the east 5 times a day. Many are in between who don't pray every day, but go to the mosque once a month or so, celebrate the Eid and abstain from eating pork. Where do we draw the line here with regards to who is allowed in the US?

None of them are, of course. Why waste time trying to figure out someone's specific level of devoutness? Access to America is a privilege, and it's one we're under no obligation to grant to anyone else. No Muslims means no Muslims.

Quote: I'm trying to understand what exactly Trump is trying to accomplish and how.

Americans have this problem where we keep getting killed by Muslims. Just last week, a couple of them shot up a center for disabled people. One of couple worked there, and the people at the center had thrown him and his wife a baby shower not too long ago. He didn't care. He shot them anyway.
Trump is attempting to prevent Muslims from shooting up any more people. Since a Muslim who isn't in America can't kill any Americans, he's decided there will be no more new Muslims coming into America.
Hope this clarifies.

And banning all Muslims will completely stop terrorism, right?! Please. ISIS is way smarter than that. They have many members here in the US already, and many more who are smart enough to lie their way into our country. Trump's rhetoric is going to create the problems he is trying to solve. We do need top to bottom reform of our refugee vetting process for sure, but to ban Muslims for the sake of being Muslim is just fucked up. Ban them for having a sketchy background, no problem.

(12-08-2015 08:26 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  I can't believe so many on here are uncomfortable with what he said. Muslims make dysfunctional countries, that's the end of it. This is easily observable. This is a common sense view.

The idiots should make their own countries desirable to live in, I feel 0 sense of altruism towards their idiotic and destructive cultures. and MAYBE, just MAYBE, someone will shut up with the retorts of 'but muslims are doctors and lawyers!, you're kicking out PhD geniuses!'. I don't fucking care how educated they are, or that 1 out of 200 works as a doctor. I don't care about their children either. This is about survival, but the comforts of the past 60 years have made everyone deeply removed from self preservation. Since many men feel this is racist or xenophobic, I'm sure 90% of females still want to let in the pwecious wittle muslims and give them tax dollars.

I can't believe that people actually oppose something that resembles preservation. I'm still coming to terms with the realisation that they would rather die, than live to be called a racist bigot. Or maybe they're so r selected that they don't even see the threat of allowing Middle eastern muslims into a country that their government has been bombing and destabilising for years.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when watching the media. The American government sells weapons and bombs to people in the middle east on a daily basis, where's the outrage from the media and people, it should be constant and unrelenting. One American candidate proposes to close the border and

(12-08-2015 08:50 PM)kingdarwin Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 01:39 PM)CleanSlate Wrote:  So, Trump is proposing that all Muslims without a US passport cannot enter the United States. If the Muslim-Americans are US citizens, they can go overseas and re-enter.

Trump also proposes that immigration officers ask the question "Are you Muslim?" to foreigners entering the US. If they say yes, they cannot enter.

Although Trump does admit that the details will have to be figured out, I see one big gaping hole in this proposal.

What if they lie and say "no"? What are the immigration officers expected to do then? Let them in?

EDIT: There are also varying levels of Muslim practice. Some are Muslims-in-name-only. Some are actually atheist or follow another religion, but have a Muslim-sounding name. Others are devout who pray to the east 5 times a day. Many are in between who don't pray every day, but go to the mosque once a month or so, celebrate the Eid and abstain from eating pork. Where do we draw the line here with regards to who is allowed in the US?

What the hell is a "Muslim sounding name"? Islam is not an ethnicity. Do you mean Arab sounding last names?

Mohammad

(12-08-2015 08:56 PM)kingdarwin Wrote:  And banning all Muslims will completely stop terrorism, right?! Please. ISIS is way smarter than that. They have many members here in the US already, and many more who are smart enough to lie their way into our country. Trump's rhetoric is going to create catalyse the problems he is trying to solve. We do need top to bottom reform of our refugee vetting process for sure, but to ban Muslims for the sake of being Muslim is just fucked up. Ban them for having a sketchy background, no problem.

Fixed that for you. Maybe Trump's rhetoric will generate more terrorist attacks on American soil, but would only be bringing to the fore a problem that was otherwise going to start affecting the US 20 or 30 years down the line. One of America's biggest problems in recent times -- since roughly Vietnam -- is that it would prefer to put off dealing with a problem until it's pretty much too late. That is the exact approach it is taking with respect to its national debt and its economy generally by injecting cash into it.

(12-08-2015 08:52 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 07:04 PM)Roardog Wrote:  This has probably already been debated ad nauseam in this thread but do people here actually think Trump is electable as President? I can see him getting the GOP nomination (if they actually let him) but the Presidency? I can't see his appeal being wide enough as he'll drive anyone in the political centre to vote Democrat.

Don't worry, a few more hundred dead bodies and Trump will easily be the most electable guy in the country. The Left's pet muslims will be more than happy to oblige.

I am sure the left is confused why their pets keep attacking them and hurting their election chances. The left is like a woman who cannot resist her abusive boyfriend (Islam).

Too fucking bad. The American left is going to die after the next few terrorist attacks.

(12-08-2015 07:48 PM)Roardog Wrote:  That really amazes me because he is viewed as a joke by the rest of the world.

That's okay, because the rest of the world is a joke compared to America.

(12-08-2015 08:41 PM)colblionel Wrote:  Not trolling but there's a good chance Trump might get assassinated if he becomes president.

The powers that be will not allow it Trump to ruin what they've done.

A great way to start a civil war. Not sure that is the direction the left is looking for.

I've been thinking about this too.

The Global Elite/Deep State establishment are absolutely terrified of Trump. His brand of populism is antithetical to everything they've built.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if they try to pull a "Bobby Kennedy" on him this during the general election and blame it on ISIS or some other group.

(12-08-2015 09:01 PM)Dusty Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 08:50 PM)kingdarwin Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 01:39 PM)CleanSlate Wrote:  So, Trump is proposing that all Muslims without a US passport cannot enter the United States. If the Muslim-Americans are US citizens, they can go overseas and re-enter.

Trump also proposes that immigration officers ask the question "Are you Muslim?" to foreigners entering the US. If they say yes, they cannot enter.

Although Trump does admit that the details will have to be figured out, I see one big gaping hole in this proposal.

What if they lie and say "no"? What are the immigration officers expected to do then? Let them in?

EDIT: There are also varying levels of Muslim practice. Some are Muslims-in-name-only. Some are actually atheist or follow another religion, but have a Muslim-sounding name. Others are devout who pray to the east 5 times a day. Many are in between who don't pray every day, but go to the mosque once a month or so, celebrate the Eid and abstain from eating pork. Where do we draw the line here with regards to who is allowed in the US?

What the hell is a "Muslim sounding name"? Islam is not an ethnicity. Do you mean Arab sounding last names?

Mohammad

Lol

(12-08-2015 08:57 PM)zombiejimmorrison Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 08:26 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  I can't believe so many on here are uncomfortable with what he said. Muslims make dysfunctional countries, that's the end of it. This is easily observable. This is a common sense view.

The idiots should make their own countries desirable to live in, I feel 0 sense of altruism towards their idiotic and destructive cultures. and MAYBE, just MAYBE, someone will shut up with the retorts of 'but muslims are doctors and lawyers!, you're kicking out PhD geniuses!'. I don't fucking care how educated they are, or that 1 out of 200 works as a doctor. I don't care about their children either. This is about survival, but the comforts of the past 60 years have made everyone deeply removed from self preservation. Since many men feel this is racist or xenophobic, I'm sure 90% of females still want to let in the pwecious wittle muslims and give them tax dollars.

I can't believe that people actually oppose something that resembles preservation. I'm still coming to terms with the realisation that they would rather die, than live to be called a racist bigot. Or maybe they're so r selected that they don't even see the threat of allowing Middle eastern muslims into a country that their government has been bombing and destabilising for years.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when watching the media. The American government sells weapons and bombs to people in the middle east on a daily basis, where's the outrage from the media and people, it should be constant and unrelenting. One American candidate proposes to close the border and

That's why they're all mad at us. We have no clue what we're doing.

In a logical and sane world, any leader with a rational mind would take the steps necessary to protect his people. To say that Trump is discriminating against Muslims and that his statements are wrong, is to suggest that there is no islamic terrorism or that it isn't a problem. And this is the next level denial that exists by the virtue signalers and people who enjoy the smell of their own farts.

Trump is doing important work

(12-08-2015 09:07 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 08:56 PM)kingdarwin Wrote:  And banning all Muslims will completely stop terrorism, right?! Please. ISIS is way smarter than that. They have many members here in the US already, and many more who are smart enough to lie their way into our country. Trump's rhetoric is going to create catalyse the problems he is trying to solve. We do need top to bottom reform of our refugee vetting process for sure, but to ban Muslims for the sake of being Muslim is just fucked up. Ban them for having a sketchy background, no problem.

Fixed that for you. Maybe Trump's rhetoric will generate more terrorist attacks on American soil, but would only be bringing to the fore a problem that was otherwise going to start affecting the US 20 or 30 years down the line. One of America's biggest problems in recent times -- since roughly Vietnam -- is that it would prefer to put off dealing with a problem until it's pretty much too late. That is the exact approach it is taking with respect to its national debt and its economy generally by injecting cash into it.

Huh? So you're okay with terrorist attacks that banning all Muslims would cause? His ideas are NOT "bringing to the fore a problem" that we've been suppressing...it's just fodder for more radicalization.

The people on this forum who are actually in favor of this are in the very slight minority. It doesn't even matter what we common people think; a ban like this would never be implemented, plain and simple. ISIS is 10 steps ahead of us, and when they hear stupid ass ideas like this, they just laugh and plan their next attack with glee.

(@Mechulus)

Oh, we (the USA) know exactly what we're doing, Mechulus...

The game is all about power. It's all about control. There are no accidents going on. These Islamic radicals and other crazies have been groomed, coddled, and supplied for years. The US and its flunkies have been using them as battering rams to take down the Syrian government, which the US hates because it is allied with Iran.

We just have to start thinking on that Other Level Of The Game, like the CIA and the Mossad do.

Remember, we're through the Looking Glass here, and we're like Alice in Wonderland.

The game is to destroy any governments or countries that present a challenge to US interests. The game is to destroy governments that place their own interests ahead of being a client state of the US and Israel. You are expected to open up your economy, open up your markets, to US investment by the banking and commercial sectors.

If you don't do this, you're a "rogue state" who must be destroyed.

Those hapless Muslim refugees are just pawns in the game. They're just collateral runoff. They mean nothing to the big powers.

(12-08-2015 12:02 AM)RioNomad Wrote:  I don't know Trump's plan, but if it were me,

1. All Muslim US citizens would stay in the US. They are citizens and we are not deporting US citizens.

2. Immediate halt to Muslim immigration.

3. Cancel all work visas of Muslims from Arab countries, and countries known to have a significant population of radial Islamists. I.E. Turkey.

4. I would not close any mosques or places of worship. I would however close all mosques known to promote Jihadism, and punish it's leaders to the fullest extent of the law. All followers would be put under extreme scrutiny and closely monitored. All who are not US citizens would be deported immediately.

5. I would make it law that anyone who knows of a terrorist attack before it happened who does not report it to the police will be sentenced to life in prison.

So basically CS, guys like you would be safe.

You're nicer than I am about #5. I'd say "if tried and found guilty, subject to summary execution."

(12-12-2015 09:59 PM)captndonk Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 08:08 PM)Orion Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 07:50 PM)captndonk Wrote:  I have watched a speech of Trump. He talked about bringing back the jobs to America. I think this is impossible. If it's cheaper to produce in Asia the companies will keep on doing this.

Yes you probably described quite accurately how a country where companies are untouchable divinity works like.

However, what if...

Tell me, what if.

Mr. Friedman explains why tariffs do more harm than good:






edit: Or this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlkQRGZEycI

The problem with his analysis is that he assumes everyone can compete equally in a global playing field. But it's not even close to the case. Other countries impose tariffs or only support certain American companies (often stuffed with foreigners) to do business with them. Regular Americans are shut out of production markets in this way while these same companies then sell goods at fire sale prices.

To make matters worse, these production companies in places such as China, Mexico, etc, have a set of laws in place to keep their population enslaved while they work to produce crap for America. China, for example, has a currency peg set at roughly 6:1. So no matter how much a Chinese worker saves, his dollars of value are always worth six less than American dollars. So if America prints 3 trillion dollars, that means his base currency supply has also necessarily devalued by 18 trillion.

The end game is that the Chinese man works until he dies because he will never accumulate savings, and the American man goes without real work until he dies because his country men have no jobs and cannot accumulate capital to start new businesses.

The only reason this state of affairs occurs is because of collusion between both American and Chinese elites; American elites know they can use Chinese slave labor to sell dirt cheap goods in American markets and hog all the cash and profits for themselves (which is why the income disparity has gotten so bad in America), while Chinese elites secretly use the immediate profits they gain to buy American goods and convert to American dollars yet simultaneously placing capital controls on the average Chinese person so they cannot do the same.

The reason why bitcoin and gold are so popular in China is because it is a way for the average Chinaman to escape the capital controls and brutal currency peg. By changing his Chinese dollars into bitcoins he can avoid the steady devaluation of his money. This is also the reason why the Chinese elites buy up tons of American property in major cities, because these places are priced in American dollars which are worth 6 times as much as Chinese dollars, via the peg.

The ultimate situation today is not much different than the old slavery system of the American south. You had the working black slaves (chinese), high unemployment among free whites (Americans), and the rich plantation owners (corporate shareholders). Since slaves are forced to work below a market wage, just like the Chinese are via their peg, there is no chance for the free men to compete with their labor on an open market because free men would never work for the pitiful wages given to the slaves.

Libertarian and classical economists got it wrong on free trade. They did not consider how international markets could be manipulated to turn groups of people into slaves for the sole benefit of an elite few. I don't know many libertarians who support slavery, so usually when I point out the above analysis they quickly change their opinion on how free trade is supposed to operate.

Trump has a very sensible plan regarding free trade. His official policy paper states that total free trade will not occur unless the country America does trade with also applies the same labor laws and currency standards that we do. There will be no more enslavement of third-worlders in the name of global profits under the Trump administration. Countries, such as China, who refuse to comply will be met with huge tariffs that will force American companies to think long and hard before they start opening up sweat-shops in these countries.

(12-12-2015 09:59 PM)captndonk Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 08:08 PM)Orion Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 07:50 PM)captndonk Wrote:  I have watched a speech of Trump. He talked about bringing back the jobs to America. I think this is impossible. If it's cheaper to produce in Asia the companies will keep on doing this.

Yes you probably described quite accurately how a country where companies are untouchable divinity works like.

However, what if...

Tell me, what if.

Mr. Friedman explains why tariffs do more harm than good:



edit: Or this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlkQRGZEycI

Friedman also believed in the abolition of the federal reserve and a fair/competitive market.

Economists make a lot of assumptions, including a free market and ceteris paribus-all else being equal- the catch is we do not live in this world and things are always changing. We have a foreign owned federal reserve, multiple oligopolies and monopolies as well as cutthroat foreign competition. The crash of 2008 is enough proof of how dysfunctional the "free" market is.

Trump is right, the US is a net loser on trades with China. A protectionist approach is needed, American jobs are more important than cheap consumerism and making some shareholders rich.

I take it you have not heard of Keynes or the long list of countries who successfully used protectionism, including the U.S and the UK. It doesn't have to be one way or the other, a mix of policies depending on a country's strengths and weaknesses is the way to go.

Trump, being the savvy businessman that he is, will be more interested in end results and use whatever works in the proper context. What he said about the trade deficit with China and the chinese hoarding minerals makes me realise how well informed Trump is.

(12-12-2015 10:36 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 01:12 AM)RawGod Wrote:  This is Soros we are talking about here. A man who has dedicated his life to destroying Gentile societies. He is lower than scum, and there needs to be due process and then the ultimate penalty for his crimes.

So what's stopping you from making billions and starting NGOs with the money with your righteous agenda?

It's a free world and you're both entitled to your opinions.

I don't agree with some of the policies his orgs advocate.

But it's easiest to criticize, easy to have an idea, hard to make something real. Like he did. And you?

What did you do?

I never stole the life savings of my own people for personal profit before they were killed, so I have that one on Soros.