Ivanka Trump used personal email account

[Tatetopa]

1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

Socialism is forcing redistribution.  Taking the fruit of labor from some and giving it to others. 

 Taxation then is a basis for that.

So is not President Trump as socialist as any president we have had in modern times?

Propping up the coal industry with favorable regulations,  taking money from taxpayers to subsidize a dwindling industry, making rules about coal fired plants that are not profitable , is that not socialism?

Inducing the Saudis to produce more oil is major international socialist engineering. Lower Saudi price will also lower the price of US oil on the world market.  We are building pipelines and fracking and have become now the biggest petroleum producer in the world.  All of those investments will suffer when the price of oil drops to half of what it was last year. All those hardworking oilmen who are going to be laid off and see their jobs being moved to Iraq and Saudi Arabia may not cheer this move.  That seems a lot more socialist than free market capitalist.

Subsidizing farmers whose crops are now unprofitable is socialist.

Tariffs on Chinese products is socialist.  We will all pay more for products to help a few non-profitable businesses who should fail.

Even the wall is socialist.  Who but a socialist cares if multitudes low cost laborers fill our labor markets?  They don't threaten my job and I can get products cheaper with cheaper labor.  Its a benefit for me.  In a free capitalist society, it is a great deal.  It also keeps the price of domestic US labor low, a great benefit for all businesses.Think how cheap it will be to build a second or third home to rent out when your framing, sheetrocking, electrical. and plumbing can be had for $5 and hour by hardworking quiet non troublesome people instead of $35 an hour for guys that don;t show up. It would sure be a lesson in good work ethics.

So it seems to me that President Trump is in a hurry to push us further down the path of socialism. 

[Cruel_Cahal]

On 11/19/2018 at 4:41 PM, ExpandMyMind said:

Isn't this a capital crime in the US? 

No crime was committed by Ivanka, unlike the multiple felonies committed by Hillary. Also, WaPoo is propagandist fake news. 

[Unusual Tournament]

6 minutes ago, Cruel_Cahal said:

No crime was committed by Ivanka, unlike the multiple felonies committed by Hillary. Also, WaPoo is propagandist fake news. 

Well now that the democrat’s have control of the House of Representatives they’ll investigate and decide whether a crime was committed. 

[Unusual Tournament]

20 hours ago, Big Jim said:

As long as the Democrats are chasing their tails with meaningless investigations they are less likely to pass damaging legislation.  I hope they can occupy themselves like this for 2 more years.

Gotta admit it would be a pleasant distraction. 

[+Hammerclaw]

2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

For one, that is stupid.  And no, I will not.  And this is why.  I am vested in SS and I am entitled to what *I* put in.  My 401 and other investments will supplement.  It was not my choice, but it was foisted on me by government decree.  This is not a program that you can just end.  For better or worse, the government painted itself into a corner with this obligation.  It will take time and effort to wean people off it.  SS was just meant as a temporary stopgap anyway, but some 80 years later, it is still around.  Other solutions will need to be put in place and give people coming into the workforce the option of what they want to do.  SS will end when the last person receiving benefits dies.  My grandfather always walked around with a wad of money in his pocket (his SS).  In our youth we would always hit him up for a buck or two, so we could buy candy or something.  When I start collecting, I hope that will be enough to pay my bills.  I’m not going to have the same money clip full.

It's funny how people can be ardent foes of socialism, unaware of how much of it they already benefit from and would be loathe to give up. 

[+and-then]

12 hours ago, third_eye said:

~

 

~

Daddy made me do it ... I didn't wanna do it ...

I did nothing wrong ...

~

[+and-then]

23 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

I was born in the era the Democrats held an overwhelming majority in the House for forty years, and the Senate, twenty-six of those years until the '80s. I'm starting to think that was a good thing. While the Senate began changing hands in the '80s, the house remained firmly in Democrat hands until 1995. To get anything done, compromise was the order of the day, to be able to over-ride a Presidential veto. The Democrats never felt completely disenfranchised from national government. One Party rule has polarized politics to such an extent, cooperation is anathema in most cases, now. When either rules completely, there is no moderation of excesses from Left or Right, no amelioration and mediation through compromise. Divided government is thus, a good thing, as the wishes and asperations of all the American people have, at least, a chance to be expressed and addressed. 

We've lost the sense of political comradery that once existed, the genteel civility that was the usual order of the day. We could strongly disagree, but more good-naturedly. Now, political differences have become an unbridgeable chasm, with a take-no-prisoners animosity, the rule, not the exception.  

That was a time when people who were elected to such offices were loyal to our nation and not so much to Lobbyists and globalists.  Today's problem cannot be solved by goodwill or decorum.  The Left has declared war on our rule of law and our electoral process.  This is not hyperbole and unless people wake up and let these b******* know they will be fought by ANY means, this country WILL FALL.  All they need at this point is one more consistently blue state like Texas or Florida and we become a single party nation.  I guess that's where the revolution begins in earnest.

[+and-then]

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

That’s a misconception of Socialism.  It is not the equal sharing of resources.  Socialism is forcing redistribution.  Taking the fruit of labor from some and giving it to others.  It’s not just the redistribution of wealth but also the forcing uniformity of thought and violation of one’s beliefs.  That is the furthest from sharing and more into coercion.  The only thing people share in common in Socialism is their labor.  Not the fruit of it, just the labor they offer to the state.  You cooperate with other people in respect and respect is Socialist-free.

 

Ultimately, it's the true nature and final expression of Orwell's "all animals are equal but some are more equal than others".  I used to be all about compromise but the full-bore assault on our rule of law and the lockstep nature of media and the Left has made me ready to fight.  The only way these islands of blue get their way is if the rest of the citizenry are too timid to fight back.  IMO, if America is going to be pushed into chaos by this movement then they'll by-God feel the pain as much as the rest of us.  Maybe when those islands of blue find themselves literally isolated and travel and commerce become nearly impossible, we can come to an agreement.  If not, screw them.  

[Agent0range]

1 hour ago, Cruel_Cahal said:

No crime was committed by Ivanka, unlike the multiple felonies committed by Hillary. Also, WaPoo is propagandist fake news. 

How can you unequivocally state that without knowing the contents of the emails?

[+joc]

3 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

How can you unequivocally state that without knowing the contents of the emails?

What difference at this point does it make? 

 

[Agent0range]

1 minute ago, joc said:

What difference at this point does it make? 

 

I didn't say it did.  But to make such a bold statement as no crime was committed, that seems a little odd.  You can't think Hillary committed a crime, and say Ivanka absolutely didn't.  That just doesn't make sense.  I have steered clear of this topic, because I am not a fan of hypocrisy.  I don't care what Ivanka did.  I wasn't outraged at Hillary, and I'm not outraged at Ivanka.  But I won't go around making crazy statements about legality when I don't know the contents.

[+joc]

2 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

I didn't say it did.  But to make such a bold statement as no crime was committed, that seems a little odd.  You can't think Hillary committed a crime, and say Ivanka absolutely didn't.  That just doesn't make sense.  I have steered clear of this topic, because I am not a fan of hypocrisy.  I don't care what Ivanka did.  I wasn't outraged at Hillary, and I'm not outraged at Ivanka.  But I won't go around making crazy statements about legality when I don't know the contents.

i was making a snide comment AO... sort of ... You know, Hills comment on Bengazi...never mind... 

 

[+Hammerclaw]

2 hours ago, and then said:

That was a time when people who were elected to such offices were loyal to our nation and not so much to Lobbyists and globalists.  Today's problem cannot be solved by goodwill or decorum.  The Left has declared war on our rule of law and our electoral process.  This is not hyperbole and unless people wake up and let these b******* know they will be fought by ANY means, this country WILL FALL.  All they need at this point is one more consistently blue state like Texas or Florida and we become a single party nation.  I guess that's where the revolution begins in earnest.

You and those like you have become so obsessed with they whom you perceive your enemy you have become your own enemy. You must be better than that, or you'll become no different than what only a few of them are; bigoted reactionaries. Don't climb down into the trenches, take the higher ground and stake your claim. To be successful in making your case, you must understand them and see them as fallible and mostly good people like yourself with different points-of-view, not the grotesque caricature of them that poisons your mind. If you don't, your playing their game and into their hands because they're better at it than you.

[RavenHawk]

5 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

I am implying that it is dangerous.

No one has to imply something like that.  That is a given.  Always has been.  Why do you think we teach our children to be careful about not putting certain information out on facebook, etc.?  A stranger is still a stranger, whether in person or virtually.

 

Yes indeed I can be hacked, but nobody cares about me, the free world would not shudder if something did happen to me. 

Don’t get full of yourself.  That is perhaps what makes you a better target.  Hacking a hundred like you would be more profitable than hacking the President.  They have a better chance to get away.

 

With me, the level of risk is low because I am inconsequential; not because I am encrypted, but because    I am not a valuable target to anyone. 

You are still a valuable target.  Most of us play the safety in numbers card.  We don’t encrypt our data or communicate with encrypted email.  The President has a security detail.  It’s that security detail that nullifies low risk threats.  And that is what makes all of this a nothing burger.  And you don’t realize that it is the MSM making something out of nothing because there are still too many ignorant people out there that the Progs use to create anarchy.  The more dangerous threat is from the Progressives, not some freelancer/lone wolf.

 

If you don't have a secure computer network then you use a secure phone until you do have a secure network and not a cell phone.  I would think a secure network would be one of the first priorities of a new administration..

We have plenty of secure networks.  We use them to work on developing our nukes and battle plans, etc.  They aren’t used for sharing itineraries.  And this is where you are not thinking things out.  What do you think was done before computers?  Coordinating itineraries was done over the phone with multiple staff (“My people will contact your people”, etc.).  And before that, it was done by courier or letter (not that secure).  No one has a STU or STE (or very few do).  And they also contacted the local papers.  The security detail would be contacting the local authorities over the phone.  No encryption.  This is an acceptable low risk.  What do you think Ivanka did in the Trump Empire when scheduling their itinerary there?  How do you think all wealthy and important people do it?  Carrier pigeon?  How do you think the Progressives do it?  You think Pelosi or Waters just hop in their limo to go someplace and just expect a crowd to be waiting for them?

[Tatetopa]

1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

You are still a valuable target.  Most of us play the safety in numbers card.  We don’t encrypt our data or communicate with encrypted email.  The President has a security detail.  It’s that security detail that nullifies low risk threats.  And that is what makes all of this a nothing burger.  And you don’t realize that it is the MSM making something out of nothing because there are still too many ignorant people out there that the Progs use to create anarchy.

Well, I have some money yes that's true, and desirable to many.  I am not pivotal to the function of the US or the world.  Somebody may get pi**ed at me and kill me, or a random shooter might take me out, but I don't have a position that makes me valuable either to preserve or take out.  I will take your advice about personal encryption, thanks.   

If you think the threat is trivial, OK.  I think we are living in some hair trigger times.  If anything happens to the President or his family from any source, violence will ensue before any investigation is even begun.  Rational people don't want that.

[RavenHawk]

Wow!  This is just simply wrong.

On 11/21/2018 at 5:03 PM, Tatetopa said:

 Taxation then is a basis for that.

You’re thinking in absolutes.  Taxation in itself is neither socialism or anything else.  It’s about how people are taxed, do they have a choice?

 

“It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency. ”

 

"Sentiments on a Peace Establishment" in a letter to Alexander Hamilton (2 May 1783); published in The Writings of George Washington (1938), edited by John C. Fitzpatrick, Vol. 26, p. 289

 

If we follow Washington’s example, it is not socialism but an obligation to the country.  When the government takes it is socialism.  Something offered by the individual is not socialism.  Taxing corporations at 70% is socialism.  Everyone should be giving at least a 10th and in lieu of taxes, then service to the nation because we enjoy the protection of a free government.  This may be too subtle for you??  Reading your reply, that is one conclusion.  The other conclusion is that you are brainwashed from the propaganda.

 

 So is not President Trump as socialist as any president we have had in modern times?

 

No, he’s not.  That honor still goes to Obama and his Fundamental Change.  Trump is the furthest from it.

 

 Propping up the coal industry with favorable regulations,  taking money from taxpayers to subsidize a dwindling industry, making rules about coal fired plants that are not profitable , is that not socialism?

 

He’s not propping up the coal industry; he’s trying to save it.  Coal still provides the bulk of our energy needs.  It is hardly a dwindling industry.  Someday we will wean ourselves off of fossil fuels, but that day is not today.  Science is working on burning coal cleaner and we’ll end up mining it (carbon atom) off the ocean bed.  Is that a problem?  Someday we may unleash the carbon atom to create clean fusion energy & steal??  Trump has been removing regulations so that it becomes profitable again.  Energy production is the mainstay of a nation (along with manufacturing).  It creates innovation and breakthroughs.  Without energy and manufacturing, there is no nation.  I guess for some that is the idea.  When you restrict creativity, you enslave the culture.  Socialism does not want creativity, it wants obedience.  Trump is creating an environment conducive to creativity and problem solving.

 

 Inducing the Saudis to produce more oil is major international socialist engineering.

 

There is a lot going on than what meets the eye.  There are backroom deals going on.  If you are aware of certain information, it becomes clear.  This is not socialism, it’s unrestricted capitalism at its best.  Trump wields it like a sword and he’s very good at it.  Sweet Crude is running out.  It could take 100,000 years to replenish.  People are shocked when they hear that but there is plenty of oil locked up in shales and tar sands.  The question is how to get to it?  I think Trump has a deal with King Salmon that will help the stability of his nation at the same time Westernize it more and curtail Wahhabism.  There is a schism in the Saud family.  If we don’t support the pro West sect, then we will lose it as Carter lost Iran.  I don’t think anyone is interested in that are they?  Khashoggi is but an inconvenient bump in the road.  People talk about how we’re not being very moral.  But what is the moral thing here?  Punishing Saudi Arabia for the death of a journalist which really has more to do with Saudi internal politics or nullifying Wahhabism which can export terrorism worldwide?  How many here think that the fall of ISIS is the end of Islamic terror?  We are still fighting that war, there’s just a lull in fighting.  It’s beginning to raise its head in Israel again.

 

 Lower Saudi price will also lower the price of US oil on the world market. 

 

For now.  Trump is playing the long game and he’s risking the resilience of our economy to do it.  The long-term ROI will be immense.  Trump is more comfortable at pressing our dominance with the economy rather than a carrier group.  Presidents before him were not that savvy.

 

 We are building pipelines and fracking and have become now the biggest petroleum producer in the world.  All of those investments will suffer when the price of oil drops to half of what it was last year.

 

Short-term suffering for long-term gain.  It’ll all work out in the end.  Success does not come without risk.  Americans have become too soft.

 

 All those hardworking oilmen who are going to be laid off and see their jobs being moved to Iraq and Saudi Arabia may not cheer this move. 

I have to laugh at this.  It is reminiscent of the Zorg speech on chaos right before he chokes on a cherry from “5th Element”.

 

That seems a lot more socialist than free market capitalist.

 

The market has been depressed during Obama far too long.  There has been a lot a fluctuation in the oil industry.  Oil workers never knew if they had a job or not one day to the next.  That’s because of Obama’s war on fossil fuels.  This is just an indication that we really hadn’t recovered from the recession, which makes this the longest recession we’ve had.  Our economy is ready to break through finally.  Not because of Obama, but in spite of him.  Obama artificially stifled it.  Trump is taking advantage of that to bring long-term stability.  When we have that stability, we will already have the infrastructure in place for profit.

 

 Subsidizing farmers whose crops are now unprofitable is socialist.

 

Socialism is long-term subsidizing.  What Trump is doing is short-term relief until the world markets are opened to our farmers.  How can food not be profitable?  The reason is that the world does not want our GMOs.  That is why places like Canada put high tariffs on our food.  That is killing our agriculture.  I think that like in the case of Canada, is now opened to our products as long as it is properly labeled.  I’d be curious to hear from our friends to the north, how they see US food products being presented and sold there?  Are they being properly labeled?  This is utilizing the free market to its fullest.  When the Canadians can now choose if they want GMOs or not, they just need to look on the label.  The market may now be open, but it’s the consumer that rejects GMOs, not the Canadian government.  When the demand drops then Monsanto will have to adapt and remove GMOs from the market or go out of business.  It’s going to take a very long time to recover from GMOs being in our environment, but we will be better off.  And our economy will get stronger.

 

Tariffs on Chinese products is socialist.  We will all pay more for products to help a few non-profitable businesses who should fail.

No, it is a weapon in a trade war to end the Chinese tyranny on the world market.  This has nothing to do with non-profitable businesses.  Non-profitable businesses will fail because of the war and will in turn make our economy healthier.  It is a war that China can’t match us in.

 

Even the wall is socialist.  Who but a socialist cares if multitudes low cost laborers fill our labor markets? 

The wall is to keep them out.  A Socialist would want the border open.

 

They don't threaten my job and I can get products cheaper with cheaper labor.  Its a benefit for me. 

In the long-term it does threaten your job.  It devalues everybody’s work.  It will eventually cost you your job.  That doesn’t sound like a benefit to me.  So you want to artificially keep wages low?  Cheap labor creates cheap products.

 

In a free capitalist society, it is a great deal.  It also keeps the price of domestic US labor low, a great benefit for all businesses.

It devalues labor.  It wears away at the middle class.  That is no great deal.  This is the core of the free market.  Business looks for cheap labor and labor looks for a living wage.  Whatever level that is, it cannot fight what the market will bear.  It will find a balance.

 

Think how cheap it will be to build a second or third home to rent out when your framing, sheetrocking, electrical. and plumbing can be had for $5 and hour by hardworking quiet non troublesome people instead of $35 an hour for guys that don;t show up. It would sure be a lesson in good work ethics.

If these workers are such saints, why did they leave their country?  If they are such good workers, then why can’t they build up their nation?  They are the dregs of their nation.  They are unwanted.  They are unskilled labor.  En mass they bring poverty, crime and disease.  That is a danger to any nation. 

 

So it seems to me that President Trump is in a hurry to push us further down the path of socialism. 

You’re not thinking clearly.  Why would he want that?  The man eats, breathes, and sleeps capitalism.  His children and their children will be living in this nation after he is gone.  What Trump is doing to make this nation great again is a legacy worth more than any profit margin.  It is clear that you’ve been listening to the MSM for far too long.  They have you wrapped around their little finger.  It was in fact Obama that was pushing this nation down the path of Socialism.

[RavenHawk]

On 11/21/2018 at 6:29 PM, Hammerclaw said:

It's funny how people can be ardent foes of socialism, unaware of how much of it they already benefit from and would be loathe to give up. 

Who says we benefit from it?  We are forcibly dependent on it.  There’s a difference.  We don’t need the government to tell us what is good for us.  I am all too aware of it and I do not like that.  I would love to give up the program, but my government owes me the money it stole from me.  This is why SS is a program that must be phased out because the government holds the responsibility.  Things like QE have devalued my money.  I will never get the same value back that my grandfather had.  You just don’t end it with a snap of the fingers.  I’m surprised at you??

[+Hammerclaw]

1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

Who says we benefit from it?  We are forcibly dependent on it.  There’s a difference.  We don’t need the government to tell us what is good for us.  I am all too aware of it and I do not like that.  I would love to give up the program, but my government owes me the money it stole from me.  This is why SS is a program that must be phased out because the government holds the responsibility.  Things like QE have devalued my money.  I will never get the same value back that my grandfather had.  You just don’t end it with a snap of the fingers.  I’m surprised at you??

 

It won't be fazed out because the vast majority are of the same mind as you. Surprised? Ours is a Government of the People, by the People, and for the People. WE are responsible for our government and it answers to US. 

[RavenHawk]

23 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

It won't be fazed out because the vast majority are of the same mind as you. Surprised? Ours is a Government of the People, by the People, and for the People. WE are responsible for our government and it answers to US. 

Precisely!  If the majority is of the same mind, it will be phased out.

[Tatetopa]

2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

f we follow Washington’s example, it is not socialism but an obligation to the country.  When the government takes it is socialism.  Something offered by the individual is not socialism.  Taxing corporations at 70% is socialism.  Everyone should be giving at least a 10th and in lieu of taxes, then service to the nation because we enjoy the protection of a free government.  This may be too subtle for you??  Reading your reply, that is one conclusion.  The other conclusion is that you are brainwashed from the propaganda.

I actually don't mind paying taxes for the privileges I receive but it is not voluntary.  It is a membership fee if you will. Obligation yes by those who feel that call to duty, but I think you are splitting hairs when you imply the government doesn't take it and therefore it is not socialism,.  And yes, the point may be too subtle for me.  What difference if King George said there was a duty to the monarchy for all subjects who enjoyed the privileges of the British Empire pay to support the monarchy?

 

2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

He’s not propping up the coal industry; he’s trying to save it.  Coal still provides the bulk of our energy needs.  It is hardly a dwindling industry.

You are absolutely correct that we need fossil fuels.  I say propping up, you say saving.  Why does the coal industry need either in a free capitalist society?  If it is profitable it will compete successfully and make profits.  If oil runs out we will still have the coal.  Then it will be profitable.  We don't need the government to tell capitalist corporations what is good for them.  Creativity is not engendered by coal mining. Creativity is generated by free market competition and the willingness to move into new fields.   I guess you could also argue that creativity might be spurred by shortages and ingenious ways to substitute other products.  Our manufacturing is not hampered by a lack of energy and neither is creativity.  Giving coal a discounted ticket is like corporate welfare.  If  the president is serious about helping coal and spurring creativity then  he could  fund research projects that might be too expensive for a single corporation to do but would benefit the industry. Like the space program and all of the technological advances we owe to that. Sounds like  socialism too though.

 

2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

This is not socialism, it’s unrestricted capitalism at its best.  Trump wields it like a sword and he’s very good at it.  Sweet Crude is running out.  It could take 100,000 years to replenish.  People are shocked when they hear that but there is plenty of oil locked up in shales and tar sands.  The question is how to get to it?  I think Trump has a deal with King Salmon that will help the stability of his nation at the same time Westernize it more and curtail Wahhabism. 

.  If sweet crude runs out we have shale oil and coal.  The Saudis will not help us extract oil from shale.  That is the creativity we need that you mentioned earlier.  No doubt the president has a deal with the Saudis.  Are they playing him?  Maybe he trusts too much.  Keeping the nation stable is probably a good thing to do,  but I am not so sure the royal family or any branch of it will curtail Wahhabism which as you state is a large, very large threat to the West.  A lot of the Islamic training camps across North Africa spread Wahhibism and are funded by the Saudis.    It is strange to talk of unrestricted capitalism when the corporations and resources involved are not consulted.  The President is deciding who will prosper and who will suffer and none of it is his money to gamble.  If that is

 

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

It devalues labor.  It wears away at the middle class.  That is no great deal.  This is the core of the free market.  Business looks for cheap labor and labor looks for a living wage.  Whatever level that is, it cannot fight what the market will bear.  It will find a balance.

the sword of capitalism, we are speaking of an oligarch not a president.

 

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Short-term suffering for long-term gain.  It’ll all work out in the end.  Success does not come without risk.  Americans have become too soft.

I can't decide if this is merely socialism or outright communism.  Who decides if you have become too soft and should pay more taxes and have your wage cut.  That is not a capitalist sentiment.

 

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Socialism is long-term subsidizing.  What Trump is doing is short-term relief until the world markets are opened to our farmers.  How can food not be profitable?

How long is long-term, how short term does it have to be to not be socialism? Food is not profitable if a farmer's cost exceed his profits.  It is GMOs, yet more than that.  The world is full of hungry people who can't pay the farmer enough to meet his expenses.   He sell to the people that can pay his price. The Chinese won't starve without American soybeans.  They can pay a little more and buy them from Brazil.  Chinese consumers pay more  just like we do when there is a tariff on their products.  If new deals are established between suppliers and customers that short term could be long term.

 

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

No, it is a weapon in a trade war to end the Chinese tyranny on the world market.  This has nothing to do with non-profitable businesses.  Non-profitable businesses will fail because of the war and will in turn make our economy healthier.  It is a war that China can’t match us in.

I know what is supposed to do, we will see what the results are.  It does have to do with non-profitable businesses.  There is no incentive for creativity and technological development if someone protects your industry by making everybody else's product 25% more costly. 

 

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

The wall is to keep them out.  A Socialist would want the border open.

 I don't know why a socialist would want the border open.  More mouths to feed and not enough taxes to do it.    A capitalist on the other hand sees a way to devalue labor and increase his profit.

 

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

In the long-term it does threaten your job.  It devalues everybody’s work.  It will eventually cost you your job.  That doesn’t sound like a benefit to me.  So you want to artificially keep wages low?  Cheap labor creates cheap products.

Restricting immigration keeps wages artificially high.   Now you sound like a trade unionist.  How do you compete with cheap labor around the world?  Good technology and cheap labor.  As you said yourself,  Americans have become too soft.  Want better wages, get creative.

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

It devalues labor.  It wears away at the middle class.  That is no great deal.  This is the core of the free market.  Business looks for cheap labor and labor looks for a living wage.  Whatever level that is, it cannot fight what the market will bear.  It will find a balance.

It is a great deal for investment bankers and middle to upper level managers as well as a host of others.  if it finds a balance then it will find a balance.  Either we make products in other countries to take advantage of their cheap labor or we import cheap labor.  Which do you prefer? Which is less socialist?

 

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

If these workers are such saints, why did they leave their country?  If they are such good workers, then why can’t they build up their nation? 

They want to get rich by making $8 an hour instead of $2.   Basic capitalism.

 

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

You’re not thinking clearly.  Why would he want that?  The man eats, breathes, and sleeps capitalism.  His children and their children will be living in this nation after he is gone.

So does a Russian Oligarch, yet I do not think they object to socialism where it serves their interests.

I would prefer strong borders, controlled immigration, and the survival of the middle class, I just don't see everything as a battle between socialism and whatever the other thing is called.  I like a little socialism mixed in with my freedom.

 

[+Hammerclaw]

1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

Precisely!  If the majority is of the same mind, it will be phased out.

Yeah, and if wishes were fishes, we'd never want for food. What's Socialism to a Democrat, is Government Of the People to a Republican.

[+and-then]

On 11/21/2018 at 10:34 PM, Hammerclaw said:

You and those like you have become so obsessed with they whom you perceive your enemy you have become your own enemy. You must be better than that, or you'll become no different than what only a few of them are; bigoted reactionaries. Don't climb down into the trenches, take the higher ground and stake your claim. To be successful in making your case, you must understand them and see them as fallible and mostly good people like yourself with different points-of-view, not the grotesque caricature of them that poisons your mind. If you don't, your playing their game and into their hands because they're better at it than you.

You sing Kumbaya with them, the 2 years since Trump was elected has shown me what their movement is about with a level of clarity I've never been aware of before.  At this point, only a fool would give them any further benefit of a doubt.  They can hardly frighten me with their labels.  Those who are willing to see this nation fully in their control are going to reap what they've sown and to know they were complicit.  

[+Hammerclaw]

55 minutes ago, and then said:

You sing Kumbaya with them, the 2 years since Trump was elected has shown me what their movement is about with a level of clarity I've never been aware of before.  At this point, only a fool would give them any further benefit of a doubt.  They can hardly frighten me with their labels.  Those who are willing to see this nation fully in their control are going to reap what they've sown and to know they were complicit.  

Fully in control by either group is a folly best avoided. The ideologies of the Far Left and the Far Right are a sickness and blight on the body politic. Oscillating, wildly, between those two extremes is a recipe for disaster. For this country and it's style of government and democracy to survive, we must forge the middle road anew. I see good and bad in both sides and choose to exalt the good and commonality of our essential humanity. Politicians and their obsession with ideologies have their single hour upon the stage, but the people endure and it is in them I put my trust and hope for the future. We ARE America, Democrats and Republicans, Blacks and Whites and all shades of color between. We are all the future, not just one sect, division or ideology. We are fellow countrymen, we are family and what ever our differences, that is the one thing we must hold on to with all our strength and will and spirit. That is what makes us unique. That is what makes us, Americans.

Edited November 24, 2018 by Hammerclaw

[+joc]

On 11/21/2018 at 10:34 PM, Hammerclaw said:

You and those like you have become so obsessed with they whom you perceive your enemy you have become your own enemy. You must be better than that, or you'll become no different than what only a few of them are; bigoted reactionaries. Don't climb down into the trenches, take the higher ground and stake your claim. To be successful in making your case, you must understand them and see them as fallible and mostly good people like yourself with different points-of-view, not the grotesque caricature of them that poisons your mind. If you don't, your playing their game and into their hands because they're better at it than you.

And on the other hand...the alligators in the swamp do play an important role in the ecology of the swamp.  So does the mosquito and the boa constrictor.  The problem is...we don't live in the swamp.  We work hard to create a better world for our children and when we encounter alligators and mosquitoes we remove them.  Hence...drain the swamp.   It is a well known fact that, in reality, Washington is a sewer of self-serving politicians who have set up a gravy train for themselves at the expense of the tax payer.  It is a seething cesspool of lobbyists, journalists, arms dealers, and good ole boys.  Be ye Democrat or be ye Republican...no difference in the game.

The Swamp seeks to divide us at every aspect of life.  Rich vs poor. Gay vs straight.  Minority vs majority.  Democrat vs Republican. Liberal vs Conservative.   The end game is...keep the Gravy flowing boys!   Long live the gravy machine!  

 

[+DieChecker]

My two bits worth is to recommend throwing the maximum that they can at her. As an example, a precedent, for those who come after.

I'd agree she didn't do much wrong. So, theoretically, she shouldn't be punished much. Imagine if she gets NO punishment? What does that say for the next Hillary Clinton that tries to hide their actions, and emails, from FOIA requests? It will allow for leniency, that's what.

If anyone, at all, supported the idea that Hillary Clinton was wrong... Then they should understand that at some level, this is the same, and should be punished.