EPTIt's basically how all his policies were created (self-interest/seemed like a good idea for an instant -> stupid policy -> people explain how it's stupid -> doubling down).
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8540
| 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. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
It's basically how all his policies were created (self-interest/seemed like a good idea for an instant -> stupid policy -> people explain how it's stupid -> doubling down). | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 23 2017 00:14 Plansix wrote: This is amazing. Harry spends one year at Hogwarts and then just becomes a super rich muggle selling low grade potions. There's one for each book (and a slew of others). All amazing. My favourite might be this: “I’m going to build a building so tall you’ll break your neck if you try to make eye contact with me,” Harry said, and then he was gone. Though it's very hard to choose. On August 23 2017 00:48 Mohdoo wrote: I had to read a lot of it in college. It's hilarious how much of it was like: "Ok, so because of this premise..." *400 lines of argument* And of the like 3 basic premises she discusses, not a single one makes any tiny bit of sense. The whole comparison to animals thing in particular. I guess I lucked out on not reading it all. I actually quite liked what she had to say in this piece tho: http://the-toast.net/2015/01/12/actual-letter-ayn-rand-wrote-little-girl/ (though you need to read to the very end that she's actually a human being + she does lay it on a bit thick). | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 24 2017 11:24 Slaughter wrote: Why is he so obsessed with going after trans people in the military? Like why is this even something he cares about. How can anyone in our military take our commander in chief seriously or believe he will have their back. Last time around it was timed to be a distraction for something (I forget what exactly, but iirc wasn't there some report/expose supposed to drop on the day he decided to tweet his original tweet). Maybe he's just going back to the well for another piece of side-tracking inflammatory drivel. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15736 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9025 Posts
Amazon just got much closer to completing its purchase of Whole Foods. The Federal Trade Commission has decided against further pursuing an investigation into the $13.7 billion deal, arguing that there's no evidence the mega-merger "substantially lessened" the competitive landscape. The FTC won't rule out the possibility of an investigation if Amazon exhibits shady behavior down the line, but the internet retailer is otherwise in the clear. At the same time, the wheels are turning inside Whole Foods itself: the grocery chain's shareholders have voted in favor of the deal. The outcome wasn't exactly unexpected (this was far from a hostile takeover), but it's one less issue to deal with as Amazon tries to close the deal by the end of the year. Whether or not Amazon's deal is anti-competitive isn't an easy answer. It's true that this isn't a conventional case of market consolidation, since Amazon only just got into physical grocery stores. However, the concern is that Amazon might dominate in the long term. While its internet shopping know-how could help it minimize food waste and otherwise improve Whole Foods, it could also misuse its knowledge to prevent comparison shopping and design reward systems that discourage you from switching stores. The FTC may be right, but it also hasn't had to deal with an online powerhouse like Amazon making inroads into retail on this scale. Source Anyone have any thoughts on this? Are we entering into a world of mega corporations? | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14101 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
Washington (CNN)Congressional investigators have unearthed an email from a top Trump aide that referenced a previously unreported effort to arrange a meeting last year between Trump campaign officials and Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to sources with direct knowledge of the matter. The aide, Rick Dearborn, who is now President Donald Trump's deputy chief of staff, sent a brief email to campaign officials last year relaying information about an individual who was seeking to connect top Trump officials with Putin, the sources said. The person was only identified in the email as being from "WV," which one source said was a reference to West Virginia. It's unclear who the individual is, what he or she was seeking, or whether Dearborn even acted on the request. One source said that the individual was believed to have had political connections in West Virginia, but details about the request and who initiated it remain vague. The same source said Dearborn in the email appeared skeptical of the requested meeting. Sources said the email occurred in June 2016 around the time of the recently revealed Trump Tower meeting where Russians with Kremlin ties met with the president's eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., his son-in-law Jared Kushner as well as then-campaign chairman, Paul Manafort. While many details around the Dearborn email are unclear, its existence suggests the Russians may have been looking for another entry point into the Trump campaign to see if there were any willing partners as part of their effort to discredit -- and ultimately defeat -- Hillary Clinton. Dearborn's name has not been mentioned much as part of the Russia probe. But he served as then-Sen. Jeff Sessions' chief of staff, as well as a top policy aide on the campaign. And investigators have questions about whether he played a role in potentially arranging two meetings that occurred between the then-Russia ambassador to the US, Sergey Kislyak, and Sessions, who has downplayed the significance of those encounters. www.cnn.com The Russia train keeps rolling | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States14101 Posts
On August 24 2017 12:43 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Source Anyone have any thoughts on this? Are we entering into a world of mega corporations? Eh. They're forceing a massive disruption into the retail market but at the end of the day Tech companies arn't going to form mega corps on the level of the oil company/sovereign wealth fund/car company level of corporate footprint. Amazon risks a lot of exposure and they don't provide a product themselves they're especially a service company at this point. You could say that about walmart but Walmart has the power to make and break the people that supply them that Amazon can't ever get. Mega corporations will form when they have the power to stand on the same level as nation states. TPP would have done it but unless theres a corporate takeover of china I don't see it happening. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15736 Posts
On August 24 2017 12:49 Plansix wrote: Man, a lot of people in Trumps camp write a lot of emails about meeting Russians. Can't help but wonder: Why Russia? Why not Germany? Sweden? England? Korea? Japan? Canada? | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On August 24 2017 12:55 Mohdoo wrote: Can't help but wonder: Why Russia? Why not Germany? Sweden? England? Korea? Japan? Canada? Which ones of those are not going to instantly hate him? | ||
|
Kyadytim
United States886 Posts
On August 24 2017 12:43 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Source Anyone have any thoughts on this? Are we entering into a world of mega corporations? I think we're already in a world of mega corporations. Not quite at sci-fi levels, but there's some corporations that have pretty absolute control over their market in large regions. Telcoms are a good example of this. Comcast does internet, phone, and some sort of TV service. There's also food companies like Kraft Foods that have products in basically every branch of food, or companies like Johnson & Johnson that do everything health related. I haven't been able to easily find if there's any company that has its fingers in something like health products and food, though. But yeah, anyway, because of the way monopoly laws are written, corporations have instead expanded vertically or into similar markets rather than expanding within a single market by using their financial power from the markets they're established in. The result has been a number of markets dominated by a handful of extremely large corporations. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15736 Posts
On August 24 2017 13:10 LegalLord wrote: Which ones of those are not going to instantly hate him? What would make Russia not hate the US? | ||
|
Kyadytim
United States886 Posts
Also, what would extensive contact with Russia offer the US via the Trump administration? What would Trump be looking to get out of Russia for the US? I don't think it's anything related to Russian aggression in Eastern Europe, as Trump only transitioned from oblivious to ambivalent about those issues during the campaign. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
Well that's a bit of a more complex topic than the one of why Trump might be inclined to have some nice friendly backroom talks with Russia. Incidentally one of the few talks that he apparently feels are actually friendly in the political arena. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On August 24 2017 13:26 Kyadytim wrote: Also, what would extensive contact with Russia offer the US via the Trump administration? What would Trump be looking to get out of Russia for the US? I don't think it's anything related to Russian aggression in Eastern Europe, as Trump only transitioned from oblivious to ambivalent about those issues during the campaign. I think one of the things Russia definitely got out of it was a much more inside look into the political environment of the US. It was clear from the start that the Russian government never really had any illusions that there might be any thaw in relations with the US any time soon. There might have been optimists but it wasn't a likely result. Trump? He could have just not known any better. He's sleazy enough for it and so are all his surrogates. | ||
|
Kyadytim
United States886 Posts
On August 24 2017 13:33 LegalLord wrote: I think one of the things Russia definitely got out of it was a much more inside look into the political environment of the US. It was clear from the start that the Russian government never really had any illusions that there might be any thaw in relations with the US any time soon. There might have been optimists but it wasn't a likely result. Trump? He could have just not known any better. He's sleazy enough for it and so are all his surrogates. Thanks, but I wasn't really wondering what Russia was looking to get out of it. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15736 Posts
On August 24 2017 13:29 LegalLord wrote: Well that's a bit of a more complex topic than the one of why Trump might be inclined to have some nice friendly backroom talks with Russia. Incidentally one of the few talks that he apparently feels are actually friendly in the political arena. So you think it was Russia basically figuring they may as well give it a shot, then realizing "holy shit lol they're actually going for it"? | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On August 24 2017 14:03 Mohdoo wrote: So you think it was Russia basically figuring they may as well give it a shot, then realizing "holy shit lol they're actually going for it"? I mean, why not? There's always sleazy shitbags willing to betray their country given the right incentive. And you can't deny the first impulse of the Trump team to something like the DNC leaks would be "I like their style." | ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
And it keeps rolling nowhere. Just more speculation about more vague e-mails to Russians, probably about getting more information on how to defeat Hillary, which at most breaks campaign finance rules and nothing else. But it is nice that we at least had a break from this religious coverage of what looks to be a "nothing burger". I guess we'll see as the investigation continues | ||
| ||
