2907 days until President 46th

[rb]

No worries. Happy posting :)

[ccplz]

Troll thread.

 

Unbelievable.

[Spekulatius]

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/no-gday-mate-on-call-with-australian-pm-trump-badgers-and-brags/2017/02/01/88a3bfb0-e8bf-11e6-80c2-30e57e57e05d_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpaustralia-815pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e7cb44811e2c

 

 

I may vote for him next time because I have never been entertained so much by a real life show. There is something to look forward to everyday.

 

Watching politics now is like watching a Coen brothers movie: Everbody has a dumb plan, nothing works and at the end there are a lot of dead bodies.

[rkbabang]

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/no-gday-mate-on-call-with-australian-pm-trump-badgers-and-brags/2017/02/01/88a3bfb0-e8bf-11e6-80c2-30e57e57e05d_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpaustralia-815pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e7cb44811e2c

 

 

I may vote for him next time because I have never been entertained so much by a real life show. There is something to look forward to everyday.

 

Watching politics now is like watching a Coen brothers movie: Everbody has a dumb plan, nothing works and at the end there are a lot of dead bodies.

 

"nothing works and at the end there are a lot of dead bodies"

 

That has been an accurate description of politics/government for at least the last 5000 years, it is a good thing that people are starting to notice.

 

[Cardboard]

"In 2000 the economy was doing well and then republicans won the presidency with a program of top end tax cuts and deregulation and then bricked the economy."

 

"It pays for people to have short memories i guess."

 

RB, RB, RB... You don't remember that crash starting in March of 2000? Clinton was still in office. There was talks that this was the start of the 2nd Great Depression and by none other than Prem Watsa.

 

The trajectory of the crash on the Nasdaq was near identical to 1929. A bubble of monumental size had just popped and with it defaults on margin accounts, Silicon Valley was not doing well at all, Nortel imploded. Then it was WorldCom, Tyco, Enron. The entire utility sector near imploded. The whole thing did not stop until 2002-2003.

 

While 911 did occur during that period, I still believe that this crash would have followed a largely similar course. Things were not pretty and I recall vividly looking at the rate on U.S. long term treasuries in 2002 and being scared to death about a real depression being in the works.

 

In any case, if you want to say that Obama inherited a bad economy: fair. If you want to say that Trump inherited a good economy: fair. If you want to say that Bush inherited a good economy when he got into office in January 2001: unfair.

 

Cardboard

 

 

 

[rkbabang]

In any case, if you want to say that Obama inherited a bad economy: fair. If you want to say that Trump inherited a good economy: fair. If you want to say that Bush inherited a good economy when he got into office in January 2001: unfair.

 

Bush came into office in the wake of the tech crash and 9/11 hit less than 9 months later.  It is fair to say the ge got screwed.    Of course I disagree with how he handled it, but I'll admit he was dealt an awful hand.

 

[Guest]

Only in republican circles the economy sucked in 2000 and 2016.

 

What??  2000 was not even referenced in the post.  The post started with Bush in office.  If you don't think the weaker economy in the rust belt had any effect then you need to do more reading.    It doesn't take a national issue like 2008.  Regional can matter too.

 

 

In addition the current administration wants to remove the Obama fiduciary rule. That regulation states that an advisor has to act as a fiduciary. Every honest advisor's reaction when that was passed was "Huh? That wasn't there already?". That's the correct reaction. Every client or 4th grader would have had the same reaction. Why the rush to undue it i wonder?

 

I'm a big believe in the fiduciary rule. But if your advisor didn't know the difference between a broker-dealer and RIA before the DOL ruling then...you need a new advisor. ;)

[Dalal.Holdings]

"In 2000 the economy was doing well and then republicans won the presidency with a program of top end tax cuts and deregulation and then bricked the economy."

 

"It pays for people to have short memories i guess."

 

RB, RB, RB... You don't remember that crash starting in March of 2000? Clinton was still in office. There was talks that this was the start of the 2nd Great Depression and by none other than Prem Watsa.

 

The trajectory of the crash on the Nasdaq was near identical to 1929. A bubble of monumental size had just popped and with it defaults on margin accounts, Silicon Valley was not doing well at all, Nortel imploded. Then it was WorldCom, Tyco, Enron. The entire utility sector near imploded. The whole thing did not stop until 2002-2003.

 

While 911 did occur during that period, I still believe that this crash would have followed a largely similar course. Things were not pretty and I recall vividly looking at the rate on U.S. long term treasuries in 2002 and being scared to death about a real depression being in the works.

 

In any case, if you want to say that Obama inherited a bad economy: fair. If you want to say that Trump inherited a good economy: fair. If you want to say that Bush inherited a good economy when he got into office in January 2001: unfair.

 

Cardboard

 

The tech bubble crash in early Bush's term did not compare to Great Depression. The 2008 crash did because it was a full blown financial (debt) crisis. This was after 8 years of trickle down Republican economics. The 2008 recession >>> tech bubble.

[Dalal.Holdings]

On another note, how nice of our forum creator to close down the other presidential discussion thread and allow this one clearly a trolling attempt by Trump supporter to exist.

[Paarslaars]

I'll make a prediction right now that Trump is re-elected and serves 8 full years. That is as long as he stays healthy, he is 70.

 

Depends on how bad the democrat will be. If he/she can get half of the country that did not vote to the booths, I don't think Trump will stand a chance.

But for all we know we might get a decent Republican challenging him...

 

I do have questions about his health though, presidency will be hard on a 70y old, especially on the american diet. :)

[Tim Eriksen]

Only in republican circles the economy sucked in 2000 and 2016.

 

What??  2000 was not even referenced in the post.  The post started with Bush in office.  If you don't think the weaker economy in the rust belt had any effect then you need to do more reading.    It doesn't take a national issue like 2008.  Regional can matter too.

 

Against my better judgement, I am going to try to shift this political discussion to something that is more relevant to investing.

 

Tim,

 

I have seen some of your investing commentary and I respect that you are thoughtful in that regard.  I have also seen some of your political commentary and would say that I am generally in disagreement with respect to Trump.  To be clear, I am certainly no "Liberal" as it pertains to economic policy.  Given that I haven't read everything you have written on all things Trump, I am going to make some assumptions here about your support for his economic agenda generally and as it pertains to trade.  If I am wrong about this, I apologize.

 

That being said, I am curious as to why you think the Trump economic policies that we can make reasonable predictions about at this point are going to actually help, rather than hurt, the rust belt areas.  Specifically, I think it is pretty clear at this point that there will be some sort of anti-free trade legislation passed in some form.  Given the EOs so far, the Trump trade rhetoric during the campaign, and the commentary from Navarro, I believe that is a near certainty that either (1) the corporate tax reform bill will include some sort of border adjustment tax or other measure that will be a de facto tariff on imports or (2) direct tariffs or border taxes (the same thing) will be implemented against China, Mexico, etc.

 

I am in agreement that things like lower tax rates (individual and corporate) and deregulatory measures will be of some help to the rust belt areas.  However, it seems to me that there is a very high likelihood that border adjustment taxes or tariffs are going to ultimately be a net negative.  I am EXTREMELY skeptical that such anti-free trade measures will ultimately result in any significant increases in jobs for low skilled labor and that the nearly certain rise in consumer prices will be a net negative for these individuals.  Further, the second order effects from ad hoc economic policy (e.g. border tax on Mexico to pay for the wall) are very likely in my view to have very negative unintended consequences.

 

So, I am just curious if you have any specific empirical data that would support the notion that a border adjustment tax or some similar measure will yield a significant net positive benefit to low skilled labor in the rust belt.

 

I don't and I don't even know if that will be the end result. 

 

Brief summary of my views:

1. Republican policies (social and economic) are generally closer to my views.  I am Sasse or Rubio Republican although I dislike NeoCon interventionism (I am a realist not idealist in terms of foreign policy).

2. I don't like Trump at all in terms of demeanor and how he treats others.  Would have preferred Rubio or Kasich. 

3. I felt voting third party wasn't meaningful and voted for Trump in spite of how much I dislike him because his policies in general were closer to mine than Hillary's.  Hillary's ethics sucked too.

4. I have always been pro free trade and still am although I am seeing some softening in my view.  I still reject Buffett's alarmism on a negative trade balance. 

5. I support the President using his bully pulpit to keep companies in the US.  Trump has done well on this so far.  Inversions need to be stopped.

6. In general the US under both parties has been soft in most deals.  They need to push harder for what is in our interest.  That inversions were legal reflects this let alone trade deals or deals with Iran.

7. I don't support tariffs.  The preferred solution is in taxation - if the profits are made in the US then taxes should be paid here.  Even then, this is a complex issue - e.g. Where should Apple be taxed (corporate HQ, where they manufacture, where they sell ?? certainly not some little country where they transfer IP rights to for a below market price).   

8. Lower corporate taxes will help keep companies in the US improving employment and economic growth.

9. I am not anti immigrant but I believe our immigration policies hurt the poor and even middle class with by keeping wages down.  For years I was probably against most minimum wage laws based on Thomas Sowell's arguments.  I am moving away from that view based on a better understanding of what I believe my responsibilities are as a person of faith. 

9. Sensible regulations should be in place but we have way too many and agencies are going beyond their authority.  Reducing regulations will not harm our air or water (nobody wants that) and can be done, which will help economic growth. 

 

Thus even though there are aspects of Trump's economic policies that I do not favor I think on the whole it will be better for overall growth and for blue collar Rust belt workers.  He may screw that up but I hope not.

 

 

[rkbabang]

On another note, how nice of our forum creator to close down the other presidential discussion thread and allow this one clearly a trolling attempt by Trump supporter to exist.

 

And if there is anything recent events such as at Berkeley show, the left will simply not tolerate Trump supporters to exist.

[rkbabang]

I'll make a prediction right now that Trump is re-elected and serves 8 full years. That is as long as he stays healthy, he is 70.

 

Depends on how bad the democrat will be. If he/she can get half of the country that did not vote to the booths, I don't think Trump will stand a chance.

But for all we know we might get a decent Republican challenging him...

 

I do have questions about his health though, presidency will be hard on a 70y old, especially on the american diet. :)

 

You are thinking about today.  My prediction is that in 4 years he will be so popular that it almost won't matter who the Ds run against him.

 

I agree with you about his health 100%.  If you look at the before and after pictures of almost any president, it isn't pretty and he already doesn't look like the picture of health.

 

[Dalal.Holdings]

On another note, how nice of our forum creator to close down the other presidential discussion thread and allow this one clearly a trolling attempt by Trump supporter to exist.

 

And if there is anything recent events such as at Berkeley show, the left will simply not tolerate Trump supporters to exist.

 

No, the moderator should have kept the original thread going that was at least an attempt at a serious discussion and shut this troll thread down.

 

The alt right butthurt is strong. That speaker had engaged in doxxing, threatening people online (among many other scum tactics). He was fit to speak at a place like Trump University. At a legitimate university not so much.

[rkbabang]

The alt right butthurt is strong. That speaker had engaged in doxxing, threatening people online (among many other scum tactics). He was fit to speak at a place like Trump University. At a legitimate university not so much.

 

The 1st amendment mentions who is "fit to speak" does it?  Point me to where the right is burning things, assaulting people, and destroying property to stop people from speaking?  I see but hurt fascists, but not on the right.

[Dalal.Holdings]

The alt right butthurt is strong. That speaker had engaged in doxxing, threatening people online (among many other scum tactics). He was fit to speak at a place like Trump University. At a legitimate university not so much.

 

The 1st amendment mentions who is "fit to speak" does it?  Point me to where the right is burning things, assaulting people, and destroying property to stop people from speaking?  I see but hurt fascists, but not on the right.

 

The first amendment does not regulate who gets to speak at a university. It starts with the phrase "Congress shall make no law..."

 

Using your logic, Harvard not allowing you to give a speech on constitutional law in one of their lecture halls is a violation of free speech.

 

Love it when alt rightists go on about free speech.

[doc75]

On another note, how nice of our forum creator to close down the other presidential discussion thread and allow this one clearly a trolling attempt by Trump supporter to exist.

 

And if there is anything recent events such as at Berkeley show, the left will simply not tolerate Trump supporters to exist.

 

Milo is a provocateur who has made a fine living for himself as a professional troll. (Many of these on the left, too.)    Berkeley is a far-left haven full of young idealists with lots of time to protest.  Some type of protest was a foregone conclusion.  But I find it scary that our universities are trending toward this idea that we should ban speakers if they have "heretical" views. 

 

I'm just baffled why a lot of lefties can't see Milo for the actor that he is; or Trump for who he is, etc. The alarmism is pretty unreal.  IMO it only serves to lessen the impact of the broader left's argument on issues of substance, where perhaps there is a call for alarm.  Nobody who was on the fence about Trump is going to listen to this type of screaming and say "I guess I was wrong".

 

Also, the bipolar left-vs-right thing is so strange to me.  It's a spectrum, no?  What's the point of making over-broad statements like "the left won't allow Trump supporters to exist"?  Is it tongue-and-cheek or is American politics really that divisive even at the average local level?

 

[rkbabang]

The alt right butthurt is strong. That speaker had engaged in doxxing, threatening people online (among many other scum tactics). He was fit to speak at a place like Trump University. At a legitimate university not so much.

 

The 1st amendment mentions who is "fit to speak" does it?  Point me to where the right is burning things, assaulting people, and destroying property to stop people from speaking?  I see but hurt fascists, but not on the right.

 

The first amendment does not regulate who gets to speak at a university. It starts with the phrase "Congress shall make no law..."

 

Using your logic, Harvard not allowing you to give a speech on constitutional law in one of their lecture halls is a violation of free speech.

 

Love it when alt rightists go on about free speech.

 

It is a public university.  Do some research on the 14th amendment and the incorporation doctrine.  But even without the first amendment if a group at Harvard law invited me to speak and another group lit fires and beat people up to stop me, whether that is a first amendment violation or not it isn't the way civilized human beings behave.  If you do not want to hear someone speak don't attend.

 

"I don't agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death to protect your right to say it shut you up"

[valcont]

It is a public university.  Do some research on the 14th amendment and the incorporation doctrine.  But even without the first amendment if a group at Harvard law invited me to speak and another group lit fires and beat people up to stop me, whether that is a first amendment violation or not it isn't the way civilized human beings behave.  If you do not want to hear someone speak don't attend.

 

"I don't agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death to protect your right to say it shut you up"

 

Civility should only be shown to a reasonable decent person. Scumbags like this guy should be treated with contempt and disgust. This is the bottom of the barrel trash who is not fit to speak in a street corner let alone at an institution of higher learning.Civilized societies always set up certain standards of decency.

BTW this piece of crap isn't even a US citizen. He is some greek trash imported from Britain. Why can't he be thrown out of this country? I really want to know what kind of visa this lowlife is on.

[rkbabang]

It is a public university.  Do some research on the 14th amendment and the incorporation doctrine.  But even without the first amendment if a group at Harvard law invited me to speak and another group lit fires and beat people up to stop me, whether that is a first amendment violation or not it isn't the way civilized human beings behave.  If you do not want to hear someone speak don't attend.

 

"I don't agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death to protect your right to say it shut you up"

 

Civility should only be shown to a reasonable decent person. Scumbags like this guy should be treated with contempt and disgust. This is the bottom of the barrel trash who is not fit to speak in a street corner let alone at an institution of higher learning.Civilized societies always set up certain standards of decency.

BTW this piece of crap isn't even a US citizen. He is some greek trash imported from Britain. Why can't he be thrown out of this country? I really want to know what kind of visa this lowlife is on.

 

I disagree. Civility should be shown to all non-violent people.  Were the people who were beat outside the event deserving of violence?  How long before the left start murdering people?  The moment you initiate violence you are no longer on the correct side, it is you who no longer deserves respect, and the victims of your aggression have every right to defend themselves, with deadly force if necessary, against you.  There is nothing left for me to say to you, for you are not a civilized human being.

 

[valcont]

I disagree. Civility should be shown to all non-violent people.  Were the people who were beat outside the event deserving of violence?  How long before the left start murdering people?  The moment you initiate violence you are no longer on the correct side, it is you who no longer deserves respect, and the victims of your aggression have every right to defend themselves, with deadly force if necessary, against you.  There is nothing left for me to say to you, for you are not a civilized human being.

 

Yes go back to your firing range and join an urban militia to confront all these lefties who are threatening your shitty way of life. And don't lecture me on civility, learn how to be a decent human being first.

[Cardboard]

Valcont,

 

"BTW this piece of crap isn't even a US citizen. He is some greek trash imported from Britain. Why can't he be thrown out of this country? I really want to know what kind of visa this lowlife is on."

 

"Yes go back to your firing range and join an urban militia to confront all these lefties who are threatening your shitty way of life. And don't lecture me on civility, learn how to be a decent human being first."

 

Don't you think it is time for you to calm down?

 

If I read this thread, it is definitely more the left than the right that has a violence and discrimination problem. We are being called trolls, we should shut up, etc. I started this as a joke with the countdown and see where this is going.

 

Cardboard

[Tim Eriksen]

It is a public university.  Do some research on the 14th amendment and the incorporation doctrine.  But even without the first amendment if a group at Harvard law invited me to speak and another group lit fires and beat people up to stop me, whether that is a first amendment violation or not it isn't the way civilized human beings behave.  If you do not want to hear someone speak don't attend.

 

"I don't agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death to protect your right to say it shut you up"

 

Civility should only be shown to a reasonable decent person. Scumbags like this guy should be treated with contempt and disgust. This is the bottom of the barrel trash who is not fit to speak in a street corner let alone at an institution of higher learning.Civilized societies always set up certain standards of decency.

BTW this piece of crap isn't even a US citizen. He is some greek trash imported from Britain. Why can't he be thrown out of this country? I really want to know what kind of visa this lowlife is on.

 

This is a big part of what is wrong in our country.  When people on either end of the political spectrum come to this conclusion.  Sad.

[LC]

If I read this thread, it is definitely more the left than the right that has a violence and discrimination problem. We are being called trolls, we should shut up, etc.

You are painting with a broad brush there...I would say most reasonable people are holding their tongue. The ones speaking out are the ones with extreme viewpoints.

[rkbabang]

If I read this thread, it is definitely more the left than the right that has a violence and discrimination problem. We are being called trolls, we should shut up, etc.

You are painting with a broad brush there...I would say most reasonable people are holding their tongue. The ones speaking out are the ones with extreme viewpoints.

 

If insisting on civilized discourse and not advocating violence and the destruction of property to shut down political speech for which you disagree is an extreme viewpoint that should say something in and of itself don't you think?