[paraclete]

But when you say that from a practical standpoint your credentials far exceed his, you make me laugh out loud. So you've built a multinational business worth hundreds of millions of dollars? Wow. What a preposterous statement. And I doubt that you have any more than a slight idea of what he has relied on.

.

I never said I built an international business but I have managed a large business and established successful businesses from scratch without benefit of family money. No business I was associated with became bankrupt. Now you stack that up against a cheat who relied on financial thuggery to profit and like you I appreciate truth.

The whole point of the argument I have put forward is Trump's unconventional dealings will and are creating chaos. However, as you obviously agree with his beggar my neighbour policies I don't expect you to understand

[jlisenbe]

I never said I built an international business but I have managed a large business and established successful businesses from scratch without benefit of family money. No business I was associated with became bankrupt. Now you stack that up against a cheat who relied on financial thuggery to profit and like you I appreciate truth.

Fair enough, and I have no doubt you have a solid knowledge of economics, but it's still a stretch of serious dimensions to suggest that your economic credentials "far exceed" Trump's. I feel quite certain that you have no idea of how Trump built his businesses.

However, as you obviously agree with his beggar my neighbor policies I don't expect you to understand

So we just have to depend upon your wise insights? I think I'll pass on that one. I do agree with Trump's intention to no longer allow China to take advantage of open U.S. markets. Now is his strategy the right one? I don't know, but the idea of endless international trade negotiations plainly did not work.

[talaniman]

I have more up to date data

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...gdp-in-the-us/

And

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...es-since-1990/

[paraclete]

I don't know, but the idea of endless international trade negotiations plainly did not work.

I think you are right on both counts and it was painless too

[jlisenbe]

I have more up to date data

I was in error in my statement. I should have said he did not have a single YEAR of GDP growth above 3%, not quarter. I wouldn't suggest that Obama was an economic disaster, but it took a doubling of the national debt to do it, and still the results were lukewarm, being the slowest recovery from recession since WW2. I'm not sure that Trump is not guilty of the same thing in that he is also running enormous deficits, but the economy is plainly in much better shape than it was under Obama. Reagan came into office with challenges at least the equal of Obama's and probably even more severe, but he had several years of great economic growth in his two terms, producing SIX years of GDP growth in excess of 3%, so I don't accept the idea that Obama did a great job.

[talaniman]

I think that endless talking on multiple fronts is a healthy thing for international relationships. China does many things that can stand adjustments, but trade deficits isn't one of them. No one on Earth can match the US economy, so a deficit is expected. Nor can we expect any country to let our businesses come in and run roughshod over their economy or country. I think you have to keep talking in ANY relationship, be it individuals or countries to arrive at the consensus to move forward that works for both sides.

Wild soaring rhetoric and badmouthing just escalates tensions and leads down a path of intransigence. Even on this forum! *D.

GUILTY!!

[jlisenbe]

I think you have to keep talking in ANY relationship, be it individuals or countries to arrive at the consensus to move forward that works for both sides.

So how did that work out for the Brits when they were negotiating with Hitler in 39? Negotiations are fine as long as both sides mean business, but frequently it comes down to, "How much of your stuff do I intend to take? Let's talk about that." That is what negotiating with the Chinese is like.

No one on Earth can match the US economy, so a deficit is expected.

Why is that true?

Nor can we expect any country to let our businesses come in and run roughshod over their economy or country.

Why should we expect them to run roughshod over our American businesses with their unfair trading practices? Can't we develop enough backbone to stand up for ourselves and for our own citizens?

Most of the world is just fine with accepting the safety of the security net provided by us as long as they don't have to pay for it or even be the least bit appreciative of it. They are perfectly happy to accept our markets and money and will gladly negotiate from now til doomsday as long as nothing real is expected of them. I'm glad Trump is finally saying, "Play fair or be prepared to suffer." I realize it is risky, but it is time to try something else.

[talaniman]

So how did that work out for the Brits when they were negotiating with Hitler in 39? Negotiations are fine as long as both sides mean business, but frequently it comes down to, "How much of your stuff do I intend to take? Let's talk about that." That is what negotiating with the Chinese is like.

Yes the reality is sometimes talking doesn't work, especially when one side or the other is stuck in their position or unwilling to compromise, or and it happens, is deceptive or unwilling to trust...or verify.

No one on Earth can match the US economy, so a deficit is expected.

Why is that true?

I doubt many countries are even capable for whatever reason to take our stuff in the same volume we take theirs.

Why should we expect them to run roughshod over our American businesses with their unfair trading practices? Can't we develop enough backbone to stand up for ourselves and for our own citizens?

That's great in our country, but when we go there it's their rules, and Big Biz can abide or NOT. Of course American biz cares about the profits before people HERE, so they likely take that attitude where ever they go.

Most of the world is just fine with accepting the safety of the security net provided by us as long as they don't have to pay for it or even be the least bit appreciative of it. They are perfectly happy to accept our markets and money and will gladly negotiate from now til doomsday as long as nothing real is expected of them. I'm glad Trump is finally saying, "Play fair or be prepared to suffer." I realize it is risky, but it is time to try something else.

Good point but what nation on Earth besides us can pay nearly a trillion bucks a year for the tools of safety and security? 2% of their GDP is the NATO rate, and they don't PAY us, they join us as best they can. Sometimes they can't afford it. Understandable as conditions are different, but as far as being grateful, I don't get that since when the shooting start they seem to be there. It's coordinated not just follow me because I said so.

You do realize economically we dominate the world as it is bar none. Militarily we dominate the world also. You want grateful subjects then you don't just dominate but socially and culturally we all do our thing. You think you can demand gratitude and loyalty? You do realize that it's big Biz that sets the pace economically as in China and anyone that doesn't think our government isn't as involved in big biz as they are is crazy.

Like we don't manipulate the markets, more than they do.

[tomder55]

China and America are hardly economic rivals

no really ,we are . The US did not know it through 3 administrations but that doesn't change the fact .

If Trump wants to have cheap labour industries in America he only has to open the borders.

No we don't want cheap labor industries . But our trading partners south of the border wouldn't mind US purchasing from them instead of China . We have options besides being hot pokered up the keaster by the Chinese

[jlisenbe]

That's great in our country, but when we go there it's their rules, and Big Biz can abide or NOT. Of course American biz cares about the profits before people HERE, so they likely take that attitude where ever they go.

When I read comments like that, it makes me want to put on a MAGA cap and support someone who actually cares about American businesses and the workers who depend on those businesses.

2% of their GDP is the NATO rate, and they don't PAY us, they join us as best they can. Sometimes they can't afford it.

So Germany, France, the UK, Norway, Japan, and Sweden can't afford to do their fair share? Really? Germany is actually 1.2%. Japan is less than 1%. We are 23 tril in debt, partly because of having to defend countries who are not interested in defending themselves. Israel is spending 5% of GDP on defense, so I won't get teary eyed about expecting wealthy European nations to do their part.

You do realize economically we dominate the world as it is bar none. Militarily we dominate the world also. You want grateful subjects then you don't just dominate but socially and culturally we all do our thing. You think you can demand gratitude and loyalty? You do realize that it's big Biz that sets the pace economically as in China and anyone that doesn't think our government isn't as involved in big biz as they are is crazy.

Yeah. If we are going to protect their rear ends, then I would like to see some gratitude and loyalty. I'd like to see us pull out of a lot of these places and let them fend for themselves. We cannot afford to continue to be the world's policeman and security guard.

[talaniman]

When I read comments like that, it makes me want to put on a MAGA cap and support someone who actually cares about American businesses and the workers who depend on those businesses.

You don't have a MAGA hat? I'm shocked!

[jlisenbe]

You don't have a MAGA hat? I'm shocked!

Not the shirt, hat, bumper sticker, or anything else. However, I could be talked into a "Give American business a level playing field" bumper sticker.

[talaniman]

American business RUNS the whole country already. Has for a very long time.

[jlisenbe]

American business elected a democrat House? I don't think so.

[paraclete]

Business does what business does, however I don't recall businesses despite being regarded as entities been given the vote

[talaniman]

Individuals have the vote, but the big money has the control of the laws, how they are written and enforced, no matter who you voted for. That's why half the eligible voters don't bother to vote in the first place.

[Athos]

Businesses "vote" by paying off the elected officials. They do this by contributing to their PACS and campaigns and in other nefarious ways. The elected officials then vote as their business masters desire while telling the ordinary citizen voter that their needs are being addressed. This has been the Republican playbook for many decades. It is also partially the Democratic playbook but to a lesser degree.

It is important to understand the Republicans are basically a monolithic block worshiping profits and greed. The Democrats are anything but monolithic, being a "big tent" with many different constituencies contained therein.

In a country so dedicated to "getting ahead" and finding happiness in "things", it is natural for the political system to reflect those false values. An American meme is that each generation must be better off (materially) than the previous generation. That bit of nonsense is the result of a "consumer culture" that constantly feeds on itself. Better a culture that concentrates on the unfairly treated segment of society where the meme is appropriate.

There is no better proof of these ideas than the current occupant of the White House. Donald Trump personifies the worst in America, a gross consumer with an ever-widening maw to take in everything he can. He has fooled a sizable portion of the populace with his "money, money, money" theme song, but it is to be hoped his day of reckoning is not far off.

This country is in desperate need of leaders with integrity and decency.

[jlisenbe]

It is important to understand the Republicans are basically a monolithic block worshiping profits and greed. The Democrats are anything but monolithic, being a "big tent" with many different constituencies contained therein.

Conservatives generally vote republican. Liberals generally vote democrat. That's about as monolithic as it gets in both cases.

[tomder55]

imagine all those poor, rural ,barely making ends meet, Republican voters ;and the Dems thinking they worship profits and greed .

[jlisenbe]

Yeah. All those who belong in the basket of deplorables.