US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8094

On July 15 2017 05:05 On_Slaught wrote:


Which is still a win for Dems. If Rs lose the house or Senate because of bitter voters then Trumps presidency is effectively over.

JP Morgan just had the most profitable 12 months ever for a US bank – but it wasn’t enough for Jamie Dimon, the bank’s boss.

“It’s almost an embarrassment being an American traveling around the world and listening to the stupid shit Americans have to deal with in this country,” Dimon told journalists after the bank released its latest quarterly results on Friday.

The world’s largest bank reported a profit of $7.03bn for the second quarter, 13% higher than last year. It has made $26.5bn over the past 12 months, a record profit for a US bank.

But Dimon, who last year turned down Donald Trump’s offer to become treasury secretary, seemed more concerned about low rates of growth in the US and the health of the American body politic. He blamed bad policy for “holding back and hurting the average American” and financial journalists for concentrating on the bank’s trading results when they should be focusing on policy.

“Who cares about fixed-income trading in the last two weeks of June? I mean, seriously,” Dimon said after a reporter asked about the health of the bonds markets.

“That is the weather,” he said of changes in the markets. “It goes up and down, this and that, and that’s 80% of what you guys focus on.”

Dimon said financial journalists would be better off concentrating on the “bad policies” that are hurting average Americans.

“It’s almost an embarrassment being an American traveling around the world and listening to the stupid shit Americans have to deal with,” he said. “At one point, we would have to get our act together, do what we’re supposed to do to the average American.”

Dimon, who also heads the Business Roundtable lobbying group, which has been lobbying for tax reform and more infrastructure spending, set out policy areas he would like to see addressed.

“We need infrastructure reform,” he said. “We need corporate tax reform. We need better skills and education. If we don’t focus on these things, we are hurting average Americans every day.

“The USA has to start to focus on policy which is good for all Americans, and that is regulation, tax, education, we have to get those things done. You guys [journalists] should be writing a lot more about that stuff. That is holding it back and hurting the average American citizen if we don’t do it.

“It’s not a Republican issue, it’s not a Democratic issue. Why you guys don’t write about it every day is totally beyond me.

“I just got back from Israel, Ireland and France – three countries that deeply recognise the importance of having a business tax scheme for jobs and wage growth. We don’t have that.”

Dimon lamented US failure to build an airport in the last 10 years and the opiate addiction epidemic.

The JP Morgan chief has become increasingly outspoken on political issues since the election. In his letter to shareholders, released in April, he took some subtle – and some not so subtle – swings at the Trump administration. While Dimon clearly favours cuts to regulation, he argued: “Some regulations quite clearly create a common good (eg clean air and water).”

Dimon’s letter was written as Trump began his attempts to dismantle Barack Obama’s legacy of environmental protections.

Dimon also worried about the impact of “poorly conceived anti-trade policies” and wrote that it was “alarming” that so many talented immigrants were unable to stay in the US. “We are forcing great talent overseas by not allowing these young people to build their dreams here,” he wrote.

The bank’s shares dipped slightly after the results were released but are still up close to 33% since the election of Trump. The results came as Citigroup and Wells Fargo also released better than expected quarterly results.

On July 15 2017 05:07 GreenHorizons wrote:


He's not passing things as it is, I don't think that's really so bad for him (then he can blame Democrats instead of Republicans).

Now, about losing the house and senate, doesn't look like there is any chance of that at the moment. Unless you've seen something I haven't in some particular states?

Republicans upset Republicans suck are still going to vote Republican because they are terrified of Democrats and many/most would basically vote for a block of wood over the most capable and benevolent Democrat.

EDIT: Before anyone laments that Democrats don't do that too (I know many of you do) think about how well the Republican party represents those people that you claim are voting against their interests like idiots, and realize you want folks on the left to act just as idiotically.

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon conducted a series of secret chemical and biological weapons tests involving military personnel in the 1960s and 1970s. Veterans groups and members of Congress are demanding to know exactly what happened – and who has suffered.

The tests, known as Project 112 and SHAD (Shipboard Hazard and Defense) involved some 6,000 military personnel between 1962 and 1974, the Vietnam War era. Most served in the Navy and Army. The purpose was to identify any weaknesses to U.S. ships and troops and develop a response plan for a chemical attack.

The tests involved nerve agents like Sarin and Vx, and bacteria such as E. Coli. Sarin and Vx are both lethal. According to DOD documents, death can occur within 10 to 15 minutes of exposure to a fatal dose of Vx.

After exposure to a sufficient amount of Sarin, symptoms include, “difficulty breathing, dimness of vision, confusion, drowsiness, coma, and death.”

“Veterans were exposed to some of the most extreme and hazardous agents... and they now suffer from debilitating health care conditions,” said Ken Wiseman, senior vice commander of the Virginia branch of The Veterans of Foreign Wars, one of the nation’s largest veterans groups, at a press conference outside the Capitol Wednesday. They want to know more about the extent to which service personnel were exposed.

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to request for comment.

Information about the tests first surfaced in 2000. At the request of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Pentagon released some limited data about the nature of the tests, including the locations and the agents used. Since then, the VA has sponsored studies by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine in 2007 and 2016 to look at the tests’ effects.

While they found no significant difference in the health of veterans involved in the tests and those who were not, the authors acknowledged the difficulty of studying this issue.

“Our task was challenging because of the passage of time since the tests, and because many of the documents related to the tests remain classified,” last year’s report said. “Our requests for declassification of additional documents were not approved.”

A VA spokesperson did not immediately respond to request for comment.

Lawmakers from both parties are pushing the House to endorse their demand this week when it considers a defense policy bill.

Reps. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., Don Young, R-Alaska, and Walter Jones, R-N.C. are trying to require the secretary of defense to declassify and disclose documents about the tests or tell Congress why he can’t.

“It’s been over 50 years since these tests were conducted and the DOD has yet to provide a complete accounting of what truly happened to our service members,” Thompson said. “Veterans can’t wait any longer.”

Veterans say they need answers to get the proper medical care.

“This amendment would help veterans exposed to chemical and biological agents get the access to care and benefits they’ve earned through their service,” said John J. Gennace, assistant director of the American Legion’s national legislative division.

In the Senate, Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, plans to push the veterans’ agenda.

“We have a duty to make certain our service members’ health is protected both in and out of service, and providing access to classified military records that may prove exposure to toxic substances is critical to veterans applying for VA benefits and service-connection,” Moran said in a statement.

On July 15 2017 05:19 On_Slaught wrote:


Recent history tells us the Presidents party gets crushed in midterms. Coupled with his historically low approval ratings (which will get worse as this story develops), plus the blatant incompetence of the Republicans and their own parties hatred of them, then I'd say that is something that is a bad indicator for Trump.

On July 15 2017 05:19 On_Slaught wrote:


Recent history tells us the Presidents party gets crushed in midterms. Coupled with his historically low approval ratings (which will get worse as this story develops), plus the blatant incompetence of the Republicans and their own parties hatred of them, then I'd say that is something that is a bad indicator for Trump.

On July 15 2017 05:22 KwarK wrote:
I'm not sure how GH struggles with this but in a two party system it's a zero sum game. If one party would be voting against your interests because they want to kill you whereas the other party only wants to maim you then voting for the second party is voting in accordance with your interests because it is in your interests to be maimed, rather than killed.

It doesn't actually matter how closely either aligns to your interests, it only matters which aligns more closely. Both parties cannot be against your interests the most and whichever is the lesser of the two is by default, in your interests.

There isn't a "none of the above" option. If you don't vote for either you're not voting to be neither killed nor maimed, you're expressing disinterest in which is chosen.

On July 15 2017 05:21 Seuss wrote:


It's a bad indicator but if Democrats trust indicators rather than actually getting off their butts and working toward a win they're in for unpleasant surprises.

On July 15 2017 05:23 GreenHorizons wrote:


Hopefully that gives you an appreciation for how pathetic it will be for them to lose to these Republicans again.



The idea being that Republicans will suddenly abandon their entire political outlook and start advocating for the opposite of their agenda is going to somehow force Democrats into changing their agenda into being more positive. I don't buy it. The influence of the corporate donors running both parties is too strong for that.

On July 15 2017 05:22 KwarK wrote:
I'm not sure how GH struggles with this but in a two party system it's a zero sum game. If one party would be voting against your interests because they want to kill you whereas the other party only wants to maim you then voting for the second party is voting in accordance with your interests because it is in your interests to be maimed, rather than killed.

It doesn't actually matter how closely either aligns to your interests, it only matters which aligns more closely. Both parties cannot be against your interests the most and whichever is the lesser of the two is by default, in your interests.

There isn't a "none of the above" option. If you don't vote for either you're not voting to be neither killed nor maimed, you're expressing disinterest in which is chosen.

On July 15 2017 05:35 KwarK wrote:

Sure, but it still remains that it's not possible for a vote for both Democrats and Republicans to be a vote against your interests because if you don't get the one you get the other by default.

I've said it before and I'll say it again before we're done here. FPTP is a shitty system but it's the system you have.

On July 15 2017 05:07 GreenHorizons wrote:


He's not passing things as it is, I don't think that's really so bad for him (then he can blame Democrats instead of Republicans).

Now, about losing the house and senate, doesn't look like there is any chance of that at the moment. Unless you've seen something I haven't in some particular states?

Republicans upset Republicans suck are still going to vote Republican because they are terrified of Democrats and many/most would basically vote for a block of wood over the most capable and benevolent Democrat.

EDIT: Before anyone laments that Democrats don't do that too (I know many of you do) think about how well the Republican party represents those people that you claim are voting against their interests like idiots, and realize you want folks on the left to act just as idiotically.

On July 15 2017 05:36 Sbrubbles wrote:


This assumes away the possibility of the party reacting to GH's intransigence (and of other like-minded folks). If you assume the party that only wants to maim you is willing to change its stance in order to get elected, then you have every reason to claim beforehand that you will vote for the opposing party if they don't. Furthermore, it helps if the party thinks you are crazy enough to do it, in a rational irrationality sort of way.

Hardball politics like this can fail miserably, but they aren't irrational.

On July 15 2017 05:19 On_Slaught wrote:


Coupled with his historically low approval ratings (which will get worse as this story develops), plus the blatant incompetence of the Republicans and their own parties hatred of them, then I'd say that is something that is a bad indicator for Trump.

On July 15 2017 06:22 TheTenthDoc wrote:
The main problem for the Dems will be if the GOP and Dems both go all in blasting money into every remotely competitive House seat in 2018 to energize their bases. I'm pretty sure even positive ads for Democrats energize some Republicans, that's how much some hate liberals. If every election looks like GA, Dems have a much slimmer chance of getting the House than if every one looks like SC or the GA pre-runoff.

On July 15 2017 04:57 KwarK wrote:

Americans, by and large, don't use HSAs because they have no money. The people who do use HSAs are the people who don't need additional tax deductions.

HSAs don't give you any kind of magical matching or free money from the government, they just make your healthcare costs tax deductible if you save for them in advance and then pay yourself.

1) People who need help don't typically pay themselves
2) People who need help don't typically save for shit in advance
3) People who need help don't typically pay much in tax

The problem with HSAs, as with all Republican plans, is that they basically only exist to give me something to do in my evenings when I'm trying to min-max personal finance as a game. I use all of the shit they create and I love it. But I have to wonder why there is an entire party devoted to just helping me personally dodge taxes.