EPTlmfao trump
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3754
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
lmfao trump | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 06 2016 21:29 oneofthem wrote: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/us/politics/donald-trumps-idea-to-cut-national-debt-get-creditors-to-accept-less.html?smid=tw-share lmfao trump That's called debt cut and has been done various times throughout history. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On May 06 2016 21:30 WhiteDog wrote: That's called debt cut and has been done various times throughout history. not for treasury bonds | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
There's a first to everything. There are less dangerous way to fix the debt tho. Just to be clear, Trump at least in this article seems to understand that the debt will never be "fixed" by reducing spending and increasing revenue, at best you can stabilize the debt, but not reduce it - you need to do something else to reduce it, either monetary policy, seeking inflation for exemple, or renegociate the debt, which seems to be what Trump wants here - or growth but that's just wishful thinking. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 06 2016 21:39 oneofthem wrote: yea the point is how dangerous this is and it is dangerous/irresponsible to even say it Less dangerous than having higher interests each years to the point that you can't spend on anything tho. But Mr. Trump’s statement might show the limits of translating his business acumen into the world of government finance. This part of the article is point on ; from my point of view, Trump's solution really make it seems like he is using the knowledge he has in regards to managing firm for his policy proposals. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Some Republicans who held off on backing Donald Trump are reluctantly coming around to the presumed GOP nominee. But for those who are still vowing never to support Trump, the big question is what to do. The first Republican U.S. senator to disavow Trump was Ben Sasse, a freshman from Nebraska. This week, as Trump has become the party's apparent nominee, Sasse has doubled down. Sasse has published an open letter on Facebook and a storm of tweets criticizing both major parties and calling for a third way. For weeks, Sasse has been saying that he will never vote for Donald Trump. He's even threatened to leave the Republican Party if it embraces the billionaire. On Twitter, he's said he thinks there's room for a conservative third party candidate in the race — though he says he'd settle for a moderate. Sasse says when he goes home to Nebraska, he meets a lot of people who are frustrated with their options. "At the grocery store or the gas station, the more common lament is, we have 320 million people in this country and we put a man on the moon, and these two candidates, these two party frontrunners, one Democrat and one Republican, both really similar in some ways, that's the best we can do? People are confused by that," Sasse says. At the Lincoln Marathon last weekend, Sasse's Senate campaign fund hosted a water stand where he and supporters passed out paper cups filled with water to thirsty runners. Craig Ames, a retired hospital administrator who came to help out, says he has concerns about Trump, but he can't imagine voting for Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton. "I've never been quite so conflicted in a presidential election, and so concerned," Ames says. Ames says he may end up voting for Trump — with a lot of misgivings. He adds he that respects Sasse for "voting his conscience." Source | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
to be clear there are two things he's saying, giving less than face value, and refinancing with longer term debt. the former is completely insane | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 06 2016 21:45 oneofthem wrote: him saying this as a pres candidate will raise future interest faced by the debt From a theorical standpoint, in reality there's so much savings right now, and the US is such a stronghold, that it will not happen at all. giving less than face value After renegociation, which is entirely okay. It's not a unilateral decision, pretty sure half the finance would gladly accept anything from the US. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 06 2016 21:51 oneofthem wrote: there is a big difference between giving less for existing bond contracts, leegally enforceable mind you. and issuing negative interest debt. Yes it can create some kind of problem on the balance sheet of banks and such, but if it's negociated, I don't see the problem. You're overstating the situation just because it's Trump from my point of view - just like the article, that seems to believe reducing spending and increasing revenue is the only solution to the high debt the US has, which is dumb and basically ignorant (it's the worst solution by far). Trump is just proposing what all CEO and investors do with their firms : they contract debt, then renegociate if the results are not as forecasted and can't pay the interests. The state can't do that without it having some kind of effect on the financial market, especially a state as big as the US, and at the same time it can do it way easier than any kind of firm because it has huge negociation power. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
to renegotiate you need to have some kind of leverage. what's the leverage here? default? | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7813 Posts
On May 06 2016 21:24 WhiteDog wrote: It's mainly in chaos because of Iraq ... Most of ISIS commanders are Iraqis, things would have turned a lot different if it was not for Iraq. Syria is both a civil war and an invasion. Whatever the dislike one can have for Hillary, I think it's safe to say she is not responsible for the sorry state of the middle east. The problem with GH and overal the vibe I get from Bernie right now is that he forgot what was his strength - discussing what actually matter - and lost itself in mud politics. Who cares about Hillary ? Discuss the policies, that's where she is weak by the way, as she is always running after others. I can't for the life of me understand how the Sanders campaign has turned into personal attacks, ad hominem and mud politics, considering how much he had to offer to the American politics. That's just tragic. From what I have heard and seen, Sandernistas attitude has been toxic from almost the very beginning. The really really sad thing is that it will be remembered as the left wing Trump, anti-establishment populism, while his platform was mostly positive and had an enormous amount to bring to the national debate. GH is a good example; he seem to think that Clinton is the devil, while the one thing that REALLY matters is to prevent a lunatic egomaniac monster to become the most powerful man in the world. When people start to consider their own side as the enemy, you know something has gone wrong. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 06 2016 22:04 oneofthem wrote: problem is you are looking at very long standing and fundamental expectations built upon the rule of law and contract. the u.s. could always just credit the accounts with some numbers but to not pay will introduce all kinds of problems. to renegotiate you need to have some kind of leverage. what's the leverage here? default? Expectations are not entirely based upon rule of law and contract, they're also rationally assessed, they're informed ; all investors in the world know the debt can't rise up infinitly, and won't fix itself in such a low growth and low inflation world economy. They know a change will come in regards to public debt, they just want to make sure the change won't harm them. About the leveradge, you're the US, you have all kind of leveradge. A hot head like Trump could even threaten investors with all kind of legislation. I'm just saying that Trump's plan is not stupid, it's reckless, but not stupid. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21389 Posts
On May 06 2016 22:05 Biff The Understudy wrote: I can't for the life of me understand how the Sanders campaign has turned into personal attacks, ad hominem and mud politics, considering how much he had to offer to the American politics. That's just tragic. From what I have heard and seen, Sandernistas attitude has been toxic from almost the very beginning. The really really sad thing is that it will be remembered as the left wing Trump, anti-establishment populism, while his platform was mostly positive and had an enormous amount to bring to the national debate. GH is a good example; he seem to think that Clinton is the devil, while the one thing that REALLY matters is to prevent a lunatic egomaniac monster to become the most powerful man in the world. When people start to consider their own side as the enemy, you know something has gone wrong. Because for the toxic elements of the Sanders campaign (its important to remember there not all like this) it was never about what was best for America but to 'fight the evil system'. Bernie just provided a catalyst for those feelings, his actual platform is irrelevant to them. They are more akin to the Tea Party then you are probably willing to admit. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21389 Posts
On May 06 2016 22:16 xDaunt wrote: Wow, liberals are finally concerned about the debt? When did this happen? Liberals have often remarked about the debt. They are just not willing to cut social welfare for it and would rather cut in the bloated defense budget. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43827 Posts
If Sasse says he'd settle for a moderate, then I guess he'll be voting for Hillary. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On May 06 2016 22:18 Gorsameth wrote: Liberals have often remarked about the debt. They are just not willing to cut social welfare for it and would rather cut in the bloated defense budget. You aren't really serious about the debt if you're only willing to touch the defense budget. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7813 Posts
On May 06 2016 22:16 xDaunt wrote: Wow, liberals are finally concerned about the debt? When did this happen? Seriously, xDaunt, and with all due respect, get real. Your party has contributed immensely to the US debt and will keep doing so by cutting taxes on the super rich and corporation. That's basically their whole program. debt evolution in the US | ||
| ||
