137 replies to this topic

[themantarays]

For a political thread on Batoto, this has been surprisingly peaceful. But do try to leave off the obscene language, hyperbole, and ad hominems.

[PItiful Boar]

My last point is maybe the reaction shouldn't be so knee jerking against someone who is democratically elected when they haven't done anything in office yet, I dunno seems a little immature is all. Peace

 

Judging by the high number of wall street bankers that are involved on Trump's transition team, I would say he would probably reinforce NAFTA, not weaken it. The CEOs themselves were not the main beneficiary of NAFTA. While the CEOs did get rewarded handsomely with large bonuses for doing the dirty work, the main beneficiaries were the investment bankers and hedge fund managers who invested in their companies. So my guess is that things are going to become more unequal - the rich become richer, the poor poorer still. People will turn more racist, and more violent too. I hope that doesn't happen though.

Edited by Feisty Bit Moar, 17 November 2016 - 05:33 PM.

[Vicmonananya]

Judging by the high number of wall street bankers that are involved on Trump's transition team, I would say he would probably reinforce NAFTA, not weaken it. The CEOs themselves were not the main beneficiary of NAFTA. While the CEOs did get rewarded handsomely with large bonuses for doing the dirty work, the main beneficiaries were the investment bankers and hedge fund managers who invested in their companies. So my guess is that things are going to become more unequal - the rich become richer, the poor poorer still. People will turn more racist, and more violent too. I hope that doesn't happen though.

 

These are all very good points and they're duly noted. From the UK I'm always being fed one angle of information so I'm constantly left skeptical and unsure what to believe. It's really good to hear some clarity in this from various people both from and outside of the US and in such a civil way. What would you say are the potential or apparent positives of electing Trump? =)

[PItiful Boar]

When people are hurt and angry they don't want to listen because they're focused on their pain. Have you ever played Persona? It's like when you're under stress your shadows just take over. So we have hurting people lash out at whatever convenient scapegoat they can find -  Polish migrants over there at UK or the Mexicans/Blacks here in US. That's just human nature, and there are plenty of studies that can show this. This is not exactly something that I would like to see. It is hard to fight your own shadows. If only you can "beat" up shadows like you can in video games, then everybody would be sane and rational. 

 

There are winners and losers in every US election. The Wall Street bankers are elated that Trump is considering to appoint Romney, a former investment banker right out of the wall street establishment, to the post of Secretary of State. Before there was Obamacare there was Romneycare, which is a handout to the largest insurance companies in the US.  So hiring someone who came up with the idea of Obamacare when you're pledging to fix Obamacare is like hiring a wolf to safeguard sheep. The wolves are very happy. Stock values of large banks have jumped since Trump's election. Banks would consider the election of Trump a real positive, but probably not so positive for the rest of us. 

 

Interestingly the stock price of defense contractors/arms manufacturers also rose after Trump's election. So they're happy too. It means probably escalation of the war in the Middle East, perhaps not in Syria but in Iraq and possible in Iran. Oil/gas companies are also big winners, with clear negative impact on future generations' life expectancy. Tech companies, on the other hand, are the losers, and their stock value fell. That's probably indication of political payback for their help in suppressing news of her Clinton's leaks. The other big loser judging from the market reaction is Mexico. The way Mexico has been dealing with NAFTA is by sending their displaced, out-of-work population to the US and getting remittances back (which makes banks very happy, BTW). So if Trump sends unemployed people back to Mexico, then Mexico has to deal with the social unrest caused by a large unemployed population, fueling even bigger underground economy in drugs and a more violent society. (Of course, we have a drug addiction problem here too, with our unemployed/semi-employed workers, one of the reasons why our society is also so violent.) Mexican pesos has dropped a record new low.

 

So, Wall street knows who the winners and losers are. The wall street bankers have have access to information from the ruling class that you and I don't have. They are the ones controlling Washington, and I'm sure most people know it and want that changed. If Trump puts bankers in senior posts, like the CEO of JP Morgan Bank in for Treasury or Romney for Secretary of State, then the status quo is pretty much guaranteed. 

Edited by Feisty Bit Moar, 18 November 2016 - 07:40 PM.

[Natureboy]

Feisty repeats a common misapprehension about net Mexican immigration under NAFTA.  See http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/20/what-we-know-about-illegal-immigration-from-mexico/. The population of illegals from Mexico grew under the G.W. Bush administration and has been declining since then.  At least some economists attribute this to better job opportunities within Mexico, thanks to their preferential trade status under NAFTA.

 

Much of the surge in non-Mexican latinos coming into the U.S. illegally is a side effect of the U.S. military providing interdiction support for the "drug war".  Cocaine flow by air across the Caribbean has dropped dramatically. U.S. demand for cocaine has not dropped as much. Thus the smuggling routes moved west to go overland through Central America. The resulting disruption of communities and pressure on local institutions and governments has triggered a flow of refugees from the "drug war".  (See http://reason.com/archives/2014/07/23/drug-war-refugees or a ton of other news pieces and columns that summarize the data on this.)

 

That aside, if you credit the idea that improved employment opportunities in Mexico are, at least partly, from NAFTA, then tearing up NAFTA will make illegal immigration from Mexico worse. Tear up NAFTA and you may need the stupid wall--or at least more Border Patrol agents and better technology on the existing border fences.

 

[Cloggedone]

Speaking of Trump and his staff, I figured I'd share this.

 

Apparently, his VP (and my state's governor for a few more months), Mike Pence, attended a showing of the Broadway show "Hamilton", and was greeted with booing:

http://www.wthr.com/article/vice-president-elect-pence-booed-at-showing-of-hamilton

[PItiful Boar]

I can't believe I'm typing this on a saturday when I could be doing a number of fun things like playing Tales of Xilia on my PS3, but..

 

"On July 30, 2008, the Mexican central bank reported a 3-percent drop in remittances this year. As jobs shrink in the US economy - initially in the construction and housing industries and then spreading to the retail and other industries that employ many Mexican immigrants - immigration into the US is slowing and remittance flows to Mexico will shrink further. Either alone is a threat to Mexico; both together may explode its economy and society. 

 

Already the signs of explosion are proliferating. Drug traffic and the vast network of employment opportunities it generates in Mexico are growing far faster than the Mexican government can manage. crime is so widespread and the corruption in generates is so deeply entrenched among business leaders and government agencies that mass demonstrations demand increasingly basic change just when economic flows steadily worsen Mexico's social stiuation" (Richard D Wolf, Capitalism Hists the Fan, p 192 )

So, no, I don't credit the idea that NAFTA is the reason for immigrants leaving the US. It's the economy and lack of jobs. 

[Cloggedone]

I can't believe I'm typing this on a saturday when I could be doing a number of fun things like playing Tales of Xilia on my PS3, but..

 

"On July 30, 2008, the Mexican central bank reported a 3-percent drop in remittances this year. As jobs shrink in the US economy - initially in the construction and housing industries and then spreading to the retail and other industries that employ many Mexican immigrants - immigration into the US is slowing and remittance flows to Mexico will shrink further. Either alone is a threat to Mexico; both together may explode its economy and society. 

 

Already the signs of explosion are proliferating. Drug traffic and the vast network of employment opportunities it generates in Mexico are growing far faster than the Mexican government can manage. crime is so widespread and the corruption in generates is so deeply entrenched among business leaders and government agencies that mass demonstrations demand increasingly basic change just when economic flows steadily worsen Mexico's social stiuation" (Richard D Wolf, Capitalism Hists the Fan, p 192 )

 

Interesting point. Yeah, Mexico is really in a mess and I think it'd be majorly hard for them to get out of.

 

What do I know though, I suck at politics.

[Natureboy]

I can't believe I'm typing this on a saturday when I could be doing a number of fun things like playing Tales of Xilia on my PS3, but..

 

"On July 30, 2008, the Mexican central bank reported a 3-percent drop in remittances this year. As jobs shrink in the US economy - initially in the construction and housing industries and then spreading to the retail and other industries that employ many Mexican immigrants - immigration into the US is slowing and remittance flows to Mexico will shrink further. Either alone is a threat to Mexico; both together may explode its economy and society. 

 

Already the signs of explosion are proliferating. Drug traffic and the vast network of employment opportunities it generates in Mexico are growing far faster than the Mexican government can manage. crime is so widespread and the corruption in generates is so deeply entrenched among business leaders and government agencies that mass demonstrations demand increasingly basic change just when economic flows steadily worsen Mexico's social stiuation" (Richard D Wolf, Capitalism Hists the Fan, p 192 )

So, no, I don't credit the idea that NAFTA is the reason for immigrants leaving the US. It's the economy and lack of jobs. 

Um. Okay for the underlying diagnosis, but that book is now 6 years out-of-date for current conditions in Mexico.

 

Although it may have been more symbolic than real, I still go back to Reagan breaking the Air Traffic Controllers' Union as a key turning point in income inequality. After that more states became right-to-work. Combined with the threat of job relocation or off-shoring in the remaining closed shop states, it really tilted the system toward management & shareholders, at the expense of labor and host communities. Then bank deregulation tilted things further—toward hedge funds and investment bankers, at the expense of ordinary holders of common stock.

[PItiful Boar]

I agree with what you said about Reagan. Reagan's policies suck but he's one of the most well liked president according to polls or something. That's the power of corporate media for ya. 

 

The situation with Mexico has pretty played out according to the Richard Wolff described. Recall the most recent incident with the protests against the Mexican government about the "disappearance" of the 140 university students. The leader of the drug gang who is being hunted down for their disappearance was originally one of the many who was deported from the US to Mexico. He was originally imprisoned for petty thefts, but he later became a hardened criminal and rose in the ranks to become a tribal head of the Zetas. So imagine the deportation increasing under Trump and likelihood of creating more guys like him.

 

 

Also, Trump has confirmed that he will only deport illegal immigrants with a criminal record, so he's like most Republicans and Democrats who secretly welcome the stay of illegal immigrants. By keeping most of the illegal immigrants in the States, the ruling class can keep wages low and prevent non-immigrants from collective bargaining and asking for higher wages. So the racism of working classes to expel illegal immigrants make a lot of economic sense. But if you only expel them without reversing NAFTA, they won't have jobs when they go back, so they'll no choice but to return, or turn to work for the drug market which are creating jobs. 

 

 

It would be interesting if the Mexicans end up electing an actual socialist who promise to overturn NAFTA, i.e. the same thing that Trump says he will do. And then to protect the ruling class' interests, Trump sends an army to intervene and overthrow the Mexican government. That'd like a Hollywood movie. You can't make that stuff up.

[TeaCat]

Today hate & racism & greed won.

Thank the middle-aged bigots from the old slave plantations the South and Midwest...

 

Crying for the future of our world.

The media painted trump to be bad when he is not.

 

https://conservativedailypost.com/fake-news-obama-nullified-this-law-in-2013-to-make-it-legal-for-cnn-to-lie/

 

Obama made it an actual law in 2012 which was re implemented in 2013 to make our current media (like nytimes, CNN, MSN, politico etc) to speak what the government wants us to hear rather than what the truth is.  This is why they constantly use the same narrative.  Polls are in favor of hillary!  Hillary won popular vote!  Both of which are ridiculous.  They also make everything about race as you can tell. lol.

 

Supporting hillary this election would have been disastrous.  We went from defcon 2 (about to be in nuclear war) to defcon 5 (safest level) when Trump won the president elect title.  

Edited by wife in training, 06 December 2016 - 01:11 PM.

[udarnel]

The media painted trump to be bad when he is not.

 

https://conservativedailypost.com/fake-news-obama-nullified-this-law-in-2013-to-make-it-legal-for-cnn-to-lie/

 

Obama made it an actual law in 2012 which was re implemented in 2013 to make our current media (like nytimes, CNN, MSN, politico etc) to speak what the government wants us to hear rather than what the truth is.  This is why they constantly use the same narrative.  Polls are in favor of hillary!  Hillary won popular vote!  Both of which are ridiculous.  They also make everything about race as you can tell. lol.

 

Supporting hillary this election would have been disastrous.  We went from defcon 2 (about to be in nuclear war) to defcon 5 (safest level) when Trump won the president elect title.  

That law is an interesting (yet controversial https://www.rt.com/usa/smith-mundt-domestic-propaganda-121/)point, but it has nothing to do with this election; it's patent that the US media have been siding with Obama's government for years, to help fighting against weapons, against indiscriminate shooting of black people by police, against Trump and so on; so what? their action has been geared towards keeping news about shootings and so on in front page; they didn't fabricated fake news. What they told about Trump, was reporting the shit Trump himself has been saying publicly. It's Trump who talks about walls, banning muslims, protecting gun ownership and so on.

Anyway, no point in convincing who doesn't want to be convinced. Just wait and see. US have always been a shitty country; under Obama, they were shyly moving onward: but now they'll just drop back to trashiness. I just hope they don't bring us all down with them.

[TeaCat]

That law is an interesting (yet controversial https://www.rt.com/usa/smith-mundt-domestic-propaganda-121/)point, but it has nothing to do with this election; it's patent that the US media have been siding with Obama's government for years, to help fighting against weapons, against indiscriminate shooting of black people by police, against Trump and so on; so what? their action has been geared towards keeping news about shootings and so on in front page; they didn't fabricated fake news. What they told about Trump, was reporting the shit Trump himself has been saying publicly. It's Trump who talks about walls, banning muslims, protecting gun ownership and so on.

Anyway, no point in convincing who doesn't want to be convinced. Just wait and see. US have always been a shitty country; under Obama, they were shyly moving onward: but now they'll just drop back to trashiness. I just hope they don't bring us all down with them.

When you take Trump in context he's no longer a racist xenophobe that people have painted him to be.  Media is quite frankly the strongest force you can use on people.  So you think it's OK to use propaganda on people even if it's wrong?  That's BRAINWASHING.  The fact that you think its ok for media to be biased in favor of the obama admin or in favor of the democratic party is laughable.  Guess who else has such a thing?  North Korea.  Odumbo is pretty much the worst president (even worse than carter) and has increased our debt from 9 trillion to 20 trillion.  He's the WORST and he constantly lies.  The USA is not a shitty country BTW it's the greatest country on this planet.  It was released that if Hillary became president they were going to introduce a new health care system to where its completely government controlled.  In otherwords once you have a socialist healthcare system in place they can draw lines.  "Too old?  Sorry, no medicine for you!"  With hillary winning our right to bear arms would finally be taken away as the democrats would have enough to overturn it all.  With odumbo constantly letting non stop immigrants in through the mexico border (have you seen it btw?  500+ people every 10-30 minutes walking in groups, they can barely be stopped!)  Did you also realize we have over 30 isis training camps in the USA right now that's been verified but they are simply 'monitoring' them?  What the heck is that?  Why aren't they going in and arressting them before they murder people.  They declared bloody friday on inauguration day a few days ago.  I hope you have a gun we might need it!  Thanks Obama!

 

Oooh soo juicy  "Sessions argued that Clinton, with the aid of Mills, had destroyed records under a Congressional subpoena."  We may be seeing that woman in jail soon.  How wonderful.

 

 

https://conservativedailypost.com/breaking-trump-gives-the-order-ag-sessions-to-investigate-comet-pizza-pedophilia-on-evidence/

Edited by wife in training, 06 December 2016 - 02:29 PM.

[Natureboy]

In the run-up to the election, fake news sites overwhelmingly wrote stories that would appeal to Trump supporters. Why? Market forces. Teenagers in Macedonia didn't have dog in this fight. What they did discover was that anti-Hillary/Obama clickbait generated much more ad revenue than anti-Trump clickbait. Trump supporters, on average, were much more gullible than Hillary supporters. They shared/re-tweeted whatever alarming garbage fit their worldview, without checking sources or even reading critically.

 

The crazy conspiracies in the post above are, at least in part, explained by this cultural difference. It's "black helicopters" all the time, every day in Trumplandia.

 

Taking one of the more sane examples, single-payer health care with private providers, like Medicare--as most advanced nations already have, and as advocated by Bernie Sanders during the campaign--becomes "completely government controlled" health care. Which, as we found out in 2008/9 would never get through the Senate, even with Democratic majorities in both houses. So how does this become a prediction of what Hillary would do? Well ... it generates clicks!

Edited by Natureboy, 06 December 2016 - 02:41 PM.

[udarnel]

When you take Trump in context he's no longer a racist xenophobe that people have painted him to be.  Media is quite frankly the strongest force you can use on people.  So you think it's OK to use propaganda on people even if it's wrong?  That's BRAINWASHING.  The fact that you think its ok for media to be biased in favor of the obama admin or in favor of the democratic party is laughable.  Guess who else has such a thing?  North Korea.  Odumbo is pretty much the worst president (even worse than carter) and has increased our debt from 9 trillion to 20 trillion.  He's the WORST and he constantly lies.  The USA is not a shitty country BTW it's the greatest country on this planet.  It was released that if Hillary became president they were going to introduce a new health care system to where its completely government controlled.  In otherwords once you have a socialist healthcare system in place they can draw lines.  "Too old?  Sorry, no medicine for you!"  With hillary winning our right to bear arms would finally be taken away as the democrats would have enough to overturn it all.  With odumbo constantly letting non stop immigrants in through the mexico border (have you seen it btw?  500+ people every 10-30 minutes walking in groups, they can barely be stopped!)  Did you also realize we have over 30 isis training camps in the USA right now that's been verified but they are simply 'monitoring' them?  What the heck is that?  Why aren't they going in and arressting them before they murder people.  They declared bloody friday on inauguration day a few days ago.  I hope you have a gun we might need it!  Thanks Obama!

 

Oooh soo juicy  "Sessions argued that Clinton, with the aid of Mills, had destroyed records under a Congressional subpoena."  We may be seeing that woman in jail soon.  How wonderful.

 

 

https://conservativedailypost.com/breaking-trump-gives-the-order-ag-sessions-to-investigate-comet-pizza-pedophilia-on-evidence/

Ever wondered whether *you* are being brainwashed by that conservativedailypost of yours? isn't it media too? why shouldn't it be messing with *you* too if media is brainwashing us? I'll stop here.

 

I don't trust media blindly. I try to read from many of them, possibly choosing from different ideological standpoints. Not perfect, but better than dwelling on some clickbait groundless blog like that.

Edited by udarnel, 06 December 2016 - 03:23 PM.

[Natureboy]

Couple of links to serious (though not scholarly) discussions of fake news propaganda this past year:

 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-macedonia-became-a-global-hub-for-pro-trump-misinfo?utm_term=.cxWxDLLA2#.yvRaozzp9

 

https://www.engadget.com/2016/11/21/clickbait-fake-news-and-the-power-of-feeling/

 

http://www.salon.com/2016/11/29/fake-news-is-modern-propaganda-in-the-trump-era-history-repeats-itself-not-as-farce-but-as-clickbait/

 

Personally, as a retired scholar, I think the scholarly discussion of what actually happened still has a ways to go. Investigative journalism is, necessarily, hasty. Multiple sourcing, etc. helps, but there's still rarely time to delve into potential motives and interests of all the relevant actors and never time to carefully pour through reams of primary source material. It'll take quite a bit of patient scholarly labor, as well as critical back-and-forth, before the relative importance of various types of propaganda is understood or a consensus developed how this U.S. election cycle fundamentally differed from previous elections.  Of course, by then the public will have moved on to the next 'shiny thing', but at least scholars and political professionals will benefit from the lessons learned.

[TeaCat]

In the run-up to the election, fake news sites overwhelmingly wrote stories that would appeal to Trump supporters. Why? Market forces. Teenagers in Macedonia didn't have dog in this fight. What they did discover was that anti-Hillary/Obama clickbait generated much more ad revenue than anti-Trump clickbait. Trump supporters, on average, were much more gullible than Hillary supporters. They shared/re-tweeted whatever alarming garbage fit their worldview, without checking sources or even reading critically.

 

The crazy conspiracies in the post above are, at least in part, explained by this cultural difference. It's "black helicopters" all the time, every day in Trumplandia.

 

Taking one of the more sane examples, single-payer health care with private providers, like Medicare--as most advanced nations already have, and as advocated by Bernie Sanders during the campaign--becomes "completely government controlled" health care. Which, as we found out in 2008/9 would never get through the Senate, even with Democratic majorities in both houses. So how does this become a prediction of what Hillary would do? Well ... it generates clicks!

or uhh wikileaks?

 

https://www.lifezette.com/polizette/wikileaks-hillary-wants-obamacare-unravel/

Ever wondered whether *you* are being brainwashed by that conservativedailypost of yours? isn't it media too? why shouldn't it be messing with *you* too if media is brainwashing us? I'll stop here.

 

I don't trust media blindly. I try to read from many of them, possibly choosing from different ideological standpoints. Not perfect, but better than dwelling on some clickbait groundless blog like that.

There are wikileaks showing the DNC working with the MSM to provide fake news.

 

Here is a fake news list with wikileaks sourced

 

http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/archives/revealed-the-real-fake-news-list

 

 

SO I understand what you are both saying.  But the fact is that the left has been quite frankly criminal in their doings

Edited by wife in training, 06 December 2016 - 03:56 PM.

[Natureboy]

or uhh wikileaks?

 

https://www.lifezette.com/polizette/wikileaks-hillary-wants-obamacare-unravel/

There are wikileaks showing the DNC working with the MSM to provide fake news.

 

Here is a fake news list with wikileaks sourced

 

http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/archives/revealed-the-real-fake-news-list

The lifezette link doesn't even provide the context for the quoted e-mail. It's impossible to know what those statements meant in context without the whole conversation.  (Recall the infamous "open borders" quote that omits the fact that the discussion was about electricity and energy markets, not labor movements.)  Internal campaign discussions of the future of the Affordable Care Act are likely to highly technical, given Hillary's expertise in health care reform, and are rather unlikely to be discussing the Act as a whole. Given that her opponent in the primaries was advocating single-payer, as a responsible policy analyst I'd be remiss if I didn't discuss with her various hypothetical scenarios under which single-payer might become politically viable. I'm not even certain this snippet was talking about the long-term viability of the insurance exchanges. Also we don't know what happened to those documents in between the hacking and publication on wikileaks. It's not like the e-mails were watermarked to prevent editing after the fact.

 

In any case, e-mail bull sessions aren't serious policy proposals. There's the generic problem, famously captured by a 1869 quote:

"'Laws,' says that illustrious rhymer, Mr. John Godfrey Saxe, 'like sausages, cease to inspire respect in proportion as we know how they are made;' and we fancy it is much the same with impeachment trials." (see http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/07/08/laws-sausages/for quote sourcing)

 

As a citizen, it's usually more productive to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of actual public policy proposals—rather than the horse-trading and "what ifs?" behind them.

Edited by Natureboy, 06 December 2016 - 04:31 PM.

[TeaCat]

The lifezette link doesn't even provide the context for the quoted e-mail. It's impossible to know what those statements meant in context without the whole conversation.  (Recall the infamous "open borders" quote that omits the fact that the discussion was about electricity and energy markets, not labor movements.)  Internal campaign discussions of the future of the Affordable Care Act are likely to highly technical, given Hillary's expertise in health care reform, and are rather unlikely to be discussing the Act as a whole. I'm not even certain this snippet was talking about the long-term viability of the insurance exchanges. Also we don't know what happened to those documents in between the hacking and publication on wikileaks. It's not like the e-mails were watermarked to prevent editing after the fact.

 

In any case, e-mail bull sessions aren't serious policy proposals. There's the generic problem, famously captured by a 1869 quote:

"'Laws,' says that illustrious rhymer, Mr. John Godfrey Saxe, 'like sausages, cease to inspire respect in proportion as we know how they are made;' and we fancy it is much the same with impeachment trials."

 

As a citizen, it's usually more productive to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of actual public policy proposals—rather than the horse-trading behind them.

I was just showing you that I wasn't making baseless claims.  The wikileaks are what I primarily base my conclusions on.  

 

Argh i cant even type correctly * edit

Edited by wife in training, 06 December 2016 - 04:19 PM.

[Natureboy]

I was just showing you that I wasn't making baseless claims.  The wikileaks are what I primarily base my conclusions on.  

 

Argh i cant even type correctly * edit

Fair enough.  Can we agree that, given how the Constitution constrains executive power, most of the good or bad things discussed on both sides are unlikely to happen?