pongo Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 one thing that seems definitely true is that what Trump says does not match with what he does Autocracy: Rules for Survival - New York Review of Books #1: Believe the autocrat. He means what he says. Whenever you find yourself thinking, or hear others claiming, that he is exaggerating, that is our innate tendency to reach for a rationalization. This will happen often: humans seem to have evolved to practice denial when confronted publicly with the unacceptable. Back in the 1930s, The New York Times assured its readers that Hitler’s anti-Semitism was all posture ... it is now the establishment that is rushing to accommodate him—from the president, who met with him at the White House on Thursday, to the leaders of the Republican Party, who are discarding their long-held scruples to his radical positions. However well-intentioned, this talk assumes that Trump is prepared to find common ground with his many opponents, respect the institutions of government, and repudiate almost everything he has stood for during the campaign. In short, it is treating him as a “normal” politician. There has until now been little evidence that he can be one ... (It was hard not to be reminded of Neville Chamberlain’s statement, that “We should seek by all means in our power to avoid war, by analyzing possible causes, by trying to remove them, by discussion in a spirit of collaboration and good will.”) #2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality. #5: Don’t make compromises. Like Ted Cruz, who made the journey from calling Trump “utterly amoral” and a “pathological liar” to endorsing him in late September to praising his win as an “amazing victory for the American worker,” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 Woolley - interesting post - lots to discuss, but when you say this: We managed to industrialise the world and progress multiple technologies for 200 years before globalisation. You are being profoundly ahistorical. +++++++++++++++++++++++ Woolley, do you get Ricardian Comparative advantage? It is by far the most important economic result and for all it misses at a basic level it expresses a profound truth - open trade and communication increases everyone's wealth. And even more to discuss there, China. I am in work mode (well, theoretically) at the moment, but I will just say this. I see where wealth has been sucked up and concentrated with a few and I see places where all hope has been extinguished for millions. And this is called progress. Worthy academic works and theories are all very well, but try telling this: open trade and communication increases everyone's wealth. to millions of people in the western world who once had good jobs and now eke out a living on benefits or minimum wage. I am not sure they would agree. It isn't so much the open trade and communication that does the damage, it is the screwing down of costs to wherever it is cheapest in the world that has gone along with it. Or efficiency as you would have it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted November 18, 2016 Author Share Posted November 18, 2016 You're right. It is never a good idea to make over strong claims. I agree not every one benefits. A more nuanced claim is that in general the long term gains of openness far outweigh any short term disruption. That short term disruption needs to be managed but the alternative of subsidising, sheltering, and protecting uneconomic companies is economically ruinous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 He's still a looney l. But by now the magnitude and raft of admin might just be sinking in. The result will be that nothing will actually happen for four years. Trump will be the biggest non-entity the world and the USA has ever experienced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 He is an entertainer not a statesman. And now the circus has closed up shop for another four years, we'll get to see just how little he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 You might be surprised at how much gets done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 You might be surprised at how much gets done. I really doubt it. All if not most of his main campaign promises will either not happen, or only appear as a shadow of what he actually promised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 You might be surprised at how much gets done. I really doubt it. All if not most of his main campaign promises will either not happen, or only appear as a shadow of what he actually promised. Yes. That view is widespread, but it comes mainly from the losing side consoling themselves with their "post-truth" explanation of what has happened. Of course it is post THEIR truth because as we all know, they have the monopoly on what is true, what is right and the way that things should proceed. They reason that because his agenda is the antithesis of theirs, it cannot possibly be viable and therefore nothing will get done. The concept "post-truth" is risible because successive governments haven't told the truth for years. I appreciate that there are many in the Washington establishment who will fight tooth and claw to thwart many proposed changes, but suppose for a moment that some things do get done. Suppose there is an alliance with Russia, or at least a global understanding on geo-political issues, and suppose that the tariffs proposed are established and the revenues are brought back onshore from tax havens. What if they start to make a difference and American manufacture and trade imbalances start to improve? Investment starts to flow back in to the rust belt and areas that have been starved of it for years? What if it actually looks like it might work? Wouldn't that be awful? Obama has presided over decay. He achieved precisely nothing at home and his foreign policy has been pretty much a global disaster. Time for a change from the "truth"? I guess we will have to wait and see. Interesting times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Obama has presided over decay. He achieved precisely nothing at home and his foreign policy has been pretty much a global disaster. And that has nothing to with a Republican majority in the Senate? The least productive Senate that actively shut the country down out of spite over free health care? Trumps claims were just that...he has no strategy or actual backing for any of his "selling points". 11 million immigrants aren't going to be deported, because immigrants do jobs that Americans are either too lazy or too "proud" to do. Also taking into account it would cost more to achieve than the immigrants actually generate for the US economy. The wall isn't going to be built. Bush (Senior I believe) tried with a fence and at one point it was costing $11 million a mile. A concrete wall at 30ft has been estimated at around $25 billion (minimum), and that is not taking into account after care once its build. Muslims aren't going to be rounded up into internment camps and then deported. The list goes on and on...he sold a dream to a few and they are going to be just as disappointed in 4 years time as they were under Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Suppose there is an alliance with Russia, or at least a global understanding on geo-political issues Giving in to Putin in this manner would mean accepting the old Soviet notion of regions of influence. It would mean abandoning our commitment to the countries only relatively recently liberated from Russian dictatorship. Normal countries don't require buffer zones beyond their borders. Imagine if Germany were continually trying to dangerously destabilize the internal politics of France or the Netherlands in the way which Russia behaves in the Baltic States. We should not treat Putin's Russia as a normal country. Ronald Reagan would be turning in his grave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Russia: Many worms in that particular can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Yup Anyway, looks like Pence is going to be running the administration Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Yup Anyway, looks like Pence is going to be running the administration Indeed. Trump is the idiot front man, but its Pence people need to be worried about...nothing more dangerous than a true believer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 If anything I think Trump will be the Trojan Horse that delivers Pence into the Whitehouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.