What will a Trump presidency look like, concretely?

The US media is in a very bad state indeed when it comes to real journalism. To give a anecdote, a few months ago Reuters came out with a piece of how the US DoD had fudged it's accounts by about 6.5 trillion$. You would think that this kind of news would be big enough to be followed by media in the USA, the more so in an ellection cycle right? Nope. Practicly no US media reported on it.
 
Well, he's appointed a nazi as his "chief strategist" so things are off to a flying start
 
Do you think his plans for large scale infrastructure will come through? Or will they be blocked by the No-More-Spending crew in the house? And if they come through, will they be useful, or will it all go into the pockets of Republican donors?
 
Well, he's appointed a nazi as his "chief strategist" so things are off to a flying start

This is a complete <snip> travesty. This is a man who changed his daughter's school because the first had too many jews, who choked his wife, has called many women <snip>, and has said "trannies" are one of the largest threats to American society.

Unifying America my lily white ass.

Moderator Action: Language infraction. - Bootstoots
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Do you think his plans for large scale infrastructure will come through? Or will they be blocked by the No-More-Spending crew in the house? And if they come through, will they be useful, or will it all go into the pockets of Republican donors?


There'll be a number of people pushing for it. If only to have their brand name on a jobs program, so that they can use it to point to for future votes. But an awful lot of them are so against public spending now that I wouldn't expect it.
 
If the rust belt has lots of shiny new factories pumping out 'Made in America' goods with US workers paying taxes to get our nation out of the hole, then yes, Trump will be a success. The garment industry in the south, textiles, electronics... To make workers for these industries the unemployed retrained, the insurance industry retrained, all the folks who are vampires on industry and heath care retrained to make stuff. Then its the 1950s again and Trump will be reelected. Otherwise no, just another loser in the oval office. We then flip back to the liberals as America looks for some hope, someone to stop the bleeding. For me I could not care which side does it, but...needs to be done. Citizens have to be able to make businesses with fear of the costs. Without fear of the system. Saw a video a while back of a woman in a supermarket spraying water on the floor and then pretending to slip in it. Her lawsuit failed because of the video, but if the video doesn't exist the market is screwed by an unscrupulous person and the lawyer culture. So the cost of the payoff or the cost of the video equipment has to be included in the groceries, and the poor cannot afford top eat. All this must be changed, the system is broken. We send our jobs to China and their workers pay taxes and the government goes into Tibet and the South China Sea with the military equipment those taxes bought. So not only does the US have to pay unemployment and welfare for the unemployed but we need to find more money to fight expansionist totalitarian states which keep their workers down. No more trade with totalitarian states. Vote CavLancer!
 
Do you think his plans for large scale infrastructure will come through? Or will they be blocked by the No-More-Spending crew in the house? And if they come through, will they be useful, or will it all go into the pockets of Republican donors?

It's a scam to help America's billionaires. Sure, he could have the US borrow money at near 0% interest to build a public road, but that would help everyday Americans. Instead he's proposing that the government borrow money to help private companies build toll roads. Afterwards, the companies collect all the tolls.
 
According to this BBC article, he's much worse than that: he's been sued as part of the Madoff Ponzi scheme, he helped run a bank which was condemned for its repugnant trading and he was even involved in litigation from Trump himself! :crazyeye:
 
Credit where credit is due:

 
Do you think his plans for large scale infrastructure will come through? Or will they be blocked by the No-More-Spending crew in the house? And if they come through, will they be useful, or will it all go into the pockets of Republican donors?

The plan so far is to spend up to 1 trillion on infrastructure and use 167 billion in tax credits to finance it. This is the stated plan. The fed will mostly likely raise overnight rates in December, so borrowing later to push this through is speculated to inflate the economy, which is bad if another recession hits but that is neither here nor there I dont think. But right now thats probably fine as inflation has been very low for the last two years anyway. The claim is that the tax credits will create jobs.

Im not super big on politics, but it seems infrastructure is one of the few things both sides can agree on, as to where the money ends up im not good with that stuff. But, if we end up with better roads there will be a tangible benefit for us, as right now it is estimated that pot holes cost 3 billion in damages a year, 32 percent of our major roads are classified as being in "poor" to "mediocre" condition and 10 percent of our bridges are in disrepair.
 
Credit where credit is due:


Keep in mind, Trump promised to bring jobs back. All he accomplished here is to turn a 2,300 job loss into a 1,300 job loss. Before we fall all over ourselves heaping praise on Donald Trump, let's keep in mind what he actually promised to do, and hold him to it. If we anti-Trumpers are supposed to keep an open mind, then those who supported Trump also need to keep a critical eye on him, and hold him to account for the things he said he would do.

1,300 people are still going to lose their jobs. What is Trump going to do for them? We shouldn't lose sight of the bigger picture here.
 
He said he would tax companies that took jobs out of America. Instead, he's giving them a $7m tax cut. And they're still taking jobs out of America. Even on his own stupid terms it doesn't make sense.
 
Paul Krugman ‏@paulkrugman Nov 30


Another metric: Trump would have to do one Carrier-sized deal a week for 30 years to save as many jobs as Obama's auto bailout


Paul Krugman ‏@paulkrugman Nov 30


If Trump did a Carrier-style deal every week for the next 4 years, he could bring back 4% of the manufacturing jobs lost since 2000.


Krugman has a Nobel Prize in economics of trade theory. Think he might know what he's talking about?
 
Well, he might, but (a) he's an economist, which is a famously divisive field, and (b) he's an expert, so it's currently popular to sneer at them regardless.
 
Presumably this fraud wasn't limited to just one year.
 
What can go wrong?
That he may not be “qualified” is unimportant.

That he’s never held a government or elected position is unimportant.

That on a personal level he may be a shmuck is unimportant.

What counts to me mainly at this early stage is that he – as opposed to dear Hillary – is unlikely to start a war against Russia. His questioning of the absolute sacredness of NATO, calling it “obsolete”, and his meeting with Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, an outspoken critic of US regime-change policy, specifically Syria, are encouraging signs.

Even more so is his appointment of General Michael Flynn as National Security Adviser. Flynn dined last year in Moscow with Vladimir Putin at a gala celebrating RT (Russia Today), the Russian state’s English-language, leftist-leaning TV channel. Flynn now carries the stigma in the American media as an individual who does not see Russia or Putin as the devil. It is truly remarkable how nonchalantly American journalists can look upon the possibility of a war with Russia, even a nuclear war.

(I can now expect a barrage of emails from my excessively politically-correct readers about Flynn’s alleged anti-Islam side. But that, even if true, is irrelevant to this discussion of avoiding a war with Russia.)

I think American influence under Trump could also inspire a solution to the bloody Russia-Ukraine crisis, which is the result of the US overthrow of the democratically-elected Ukrainian government in 2014 to further advance the US/NATO surrounding of Russia; after which he could end the US-imposed sanctions against Russia, which hardly anyone in Europe benefits from or wants; and then – finally! – an end to the embargo against Cuba. What a day for celebration that will be! Too bad that Fidel won’t be around to enjoy it.

We may have other days of celebration if Trump pardons or in some other manner frees Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange, and/or Edward Snowden. Neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton would do this, but I think there’s at least a chance with the Donald. And those three heroes may now enjoy feeling at least a modicum of hope. Picture a meeting of them all together on some future marvelous day with you watching it on a video.

Trump will also probably not hold back on military actions against radical Islam because of any fear of being called anti-Islam. He’s repulsed enough by ISIS to want to destroy them, something that can’t always be said about Mr. Obama.

International trade deals, written by corporate lawyers for the benefit of their bosses, with little concern about the rest of us, may have rougher sailing in the Trump White House than is usually the case with such deals.

The mainstream critics of Trump foreign policy should be embarrassed, even humbled, by what they supported in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Instead, what bothers them about the president-elect is his lack of desire to make the rest of the world in America’s image. He appears rather to be more concerned with the world not making America in its image.

In the latest chapter of Alice in Trumpland he now says that he does not plan to prosecute Hillary Clinton, that he has an “open mind” about a climate-change accord from which he had vowed to withdraw the United States, and that he’s no longer certain that torturing terrorism suspects is a good idea. So whatever fears you may have about certain of his expressed weird policies … just wait … they may fall by the wayside just as easily; although I still think that on a personal level he’s a [two-syllable word: first syllable is a synonym for a donkey; second syllable means “an opening”]

Trump’s apparently deep-seated need for approval may continue to succumb poorly to widespread criticism and protests. Poor little Donald … so powerful … yet so vulnerable.

The Trump dilemma, as well as the whole Hillary Clinton mess, could have probably been avoided if Bernie Sanders had been nominated. That large historical “if” is almost on a par with the Democrats choosing Harry Truman to replace Henry Wallace in 1944 as the ailing Roosevelt’s vice-president. Truman brought us a charming little thing called the Cold War, which in turn gave us McCarthyism. But Wallace, like Sanders, was just a little too damn leftist for the refined Democratic Party bosses.
https://williamblum.org/aer/read/147
 
Top Bottom