45th President of the United States, Donald Trump. (Vol 4)
Discussion
Nanook said:
ou sont les biscuits said:
Basically, he's using the 2% as blackmail.
Doesn't change the fact that it's been the figure NATO quote for a long time now.This isn't something he's invented. It's just something he's brought up. He feels others aren't carrying their own weight, and he has a point. He's not complaining that in outright terms, the USA contributes more to defence than anyone else in NATO, that would be stupid.
He's complaining that no-one else is meeting the NATO quoted figure. He might be doing a lousy job of putting the point across, but I can't disagree much with the point.
_dobbo_ said:
All this NATO talk has me wondering, is Trump preparing to pull the USA out of NATO? He's just about clueless enough about the consequences of that to do it, and all this posturing has to be for something. Maybe he wants more defense spending, or maybe he's lining up his excuses...
He's only the president, withdrawing from NATO is beyond his pay grade, that's congress's decision and I'm not sure the GOP are quite that mental. Trump is a vehicle for the GOP to slash taxes, take control over women's wombs and ensure mentally ill people continue to have access to firearms. As soon as he stops providing that service to the GOP I can't see them having any qualms about feeding him to Mueller's lions. Up to the American public really, though it would help if the dems were producing more than tumbleweed.
Tartan Pixie said:
Other than reduced influence in Europe and increased competition for the death trade I don't see what America's getting out of this. I mean sure they could potentially reduce their military spending and spend it on schools, hospitals and infrastructure instead but... oh hang on I just saw a flying pig go past the window.
That’s the thing. Americans are happy to send money on their military, it’s almost a matter of pride. Western Europeans seem to prefer spending money on healthcare, education, and social welfare.Countdown said:
Tartan Pixie said:
Other than reduced influence in Europe and increased competition for the death trade I don't see what America's getting out of this. I mean sure they could potentially reduce their military spending and spend it on schools, hospitals and infrastructure instead but... oh hang on I just saw a flying pig go past the window.
That’s the thing. Americans are happy to send money on their military, it’s almost a matter of pride. Western Europeans seem to prefer spending money on healthcare, education, and social welfare.Tartan Pixie said:
Trump's technique of lashing out at everyone until an oppertunity opens up is finally producing results... for China and the EU: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-09...
Merkel's been in China securing trade deals ahead of yet another Sino European meeting in what has become something of a trend of late, European and Chinese people standing on a podium together to confirm their commitment to rules based international trade (aka rewriting the rules of global trade in their favour instead of America's favour).
The video accompanying the article is a good demonstration of what's happening, the presenters demonstrate pure arrogance in talking about Americans as the 'consumers of last resort' as if this is some god given situation that will last for eternity rather than a result of two world wars stacking the deck of global trade in America's favour. This arrogance runs right through American understanding of the world from top to bottom.
What they are missing is that China needs to find a way to increase internal consumption because the authority of the government relies on expanding the Chinese middle class and continuing economic growth, failure to do so is an existential threat to the Chinese government. Similarly Germany and the EU have a consumption related existential threat, the euro can not function properly unless Spain, Italy and other countries outside the northern manufacturing block have money to consume goods, nor can the problems with the euro be resolved while fiscal transfers are politically impossible due to it being seen by northern taxpayers as a subsidy towards the south.
The thing about existential threats is that they tend to get acted on. The incentive to strip America of its role as the global consumer of choice is extremely high and only really held back by two things, 1) Europe's long cultural and military ties with America, 2) Political and cultural barriers between the EU and China. Trump is going a good job of destroying 1 and it appears that the EU and China are prepared to put effort in to making 2 come about.
It would be a fools errand to predict where this is all headed but the direction of travel is clear, Make Europe and China Great Again at the expense of American consumers.
Have a Merkel's been in China securing trade deals ahead of yet another Sino European meeting in what has become something of a trend of late, European and Chinese people standing on a podium together to confirm their commitment to rules based international trade (aka rewriting the rules of global trade in their favour instead of America's favour).
The video accompanying the article is a good demonstration of what's happening, the presenters demonstrate pure arrogance in talking about Americans as the 'consumers of last resort' as if this is some god given situation that will last for eternity rather than a result of two world wars stacking the deck of global trade in America's favour. This arrogance runs right through American understanding of the world from top to bottom.
What they are missing is that China needs to find a way to increase internal consumption because the authority of the government relies on expanding the Chinese middle class and continuing economic growth, failure to do so is an existential threat to the Chinese government. Similarly Germany and the EU have a consumption related existential threat, the euro can not function properly unless Spain, Italy and other countries outside the northern manufacturing block have money to consume goods, nor can the problems with the euro be resolved while fiscal transfers are politically impossible due to it being seen by northern taxpayers as a subsidy towards the south.
The thing about existential threats is that they tend to get acted on. The incentive to strip America of its role as the global consumer of choice is extremely high and only really held back by two things, 1) Europe's long cultural and military ties with America, 2) Political and cultural barriers between the EU and China. Trump is going a good job of destroying 1 and it appears that the EU and China are prepared to put effort in to making 2 come about.
It would be a fools errand to predict where this is all headed but the direction of travel is clear, Make Europe and China Great Again at the expense of American consumers.
Great post.LoonyTunes said:
Countdown said:
Tartan Pixie said:
Other than reduced influence in Europe and increased competition for the death trade I don't see what America's getting out of this. I mean sure they could potentially reduce their military spending and spend it on schools, hospitals and infrastructure instead but... oh hang on I just saw a flying pig go past the window.
That’s the thing. Americans are happy to send money on their military, it’s almost a matter of pride. Western Europeans seem to prefer spending money on healthcare, education, and social welfare.According to my letter from HMRC from 2016-2017 my tax was spent as follows:
5.2% defence
25.3% welfare (excluding pensions)
12.9% state pensions
12.3% education
20.3% health
Hasn't the warm weather bought the trolls out again...
Nice to see the latest round of Tariffs trumps introducing doesn't affect Ivanka Trump’s Chinese-made products, I mean that's only $34 billion worth of Chinese goods....
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/trump-china...
Nice to see the latest round of Tariffs trumps introducing doesn't affect Ivanka Trump’s Chinese-made products, I mean that's only $34 billion worth of Chinese goods....
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/trump-china...
This ones sneaking in today whilst trump is stiring the s
t at NATO. He's signed an Executive Order to end competitive selection process for Administrative Law Judges, making them political appointees who can be fired at will (and probably appointed).
Oh and add to that tomorrow the Senate is expected to vote to confirm Benczkowski as Asst AG. He would be in the line is succession should Rosenstein get fired The problem? He worked for Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank that the FBI was investigating as part of Russia probe
t at NATO. He's signed an Executive Order to end competitive selection process for Administrative Law Judges, making them political appointees who can be fired at will (and probably appointed).Oh and add to that tomorrow the Senate is expected to vote to confirm Benczkowski as Asst AG. He would be in the line is succession should Rosenstein get fired The problem? He worked for Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank that the FBI was investigating as part of Russia probe
Edited by Byker28i on Wednesday 11th July 16:24
LoonyTunes said:
Countdown said:
Tartan Pixie said:
Other than reduced influence in Europe and increased competition for the death trade I don't see what America's getting out of this. I mean sure they could potentially reduce their military spending and spend it on schools, hospitals and infrastructure instead but... oh hang on I just saw a flying pig go past the window.
That’s the thing. Americans are happy to send money on their military, it’s almost a matter of pride. Western Europeans seem to prefer spending money on healthcare, education, and social welfare.UK: 453 Canada: 158 France: 88 Germany: 57 Italy: 53 Poland: 44 Denmark: 43
Byker28i said:
This ones sneaking in today whilst trump is stiring the st at NATO. He's signed an Executive Order to end competitive selection process for Administrative Law Judges, making them political appointees who can be fired at will (and probably appointed).
Oh and add to that tomorrow the Senate is expected to vote to confirm Benczkowski as Asst AG. He would be in the line is succession should Rosenstein get fired The problem? He worked for Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank that the FBI was investigating as part of Russia probe
Is there no check or balance on this, can one of the houses not introduce a bill or something? This is full on banana republic stuff.t at NATO. He's signed an Executive Order to end competitive selection process for Administrative Law Judges, making them political appointees who can be fired at will (and probably appointed).Oh and add to that tomorrow the Senate is expected to vote to confirm Benczkowski as Asst AG. He would be in the line is succession should Rosenstein get fired The problem? He worked for Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank that the FBI was investigating as part of Russia probe
Tartan Pixie said:
Byker28i said:
This ones sneaking in today whilst trump is stiring the st at NATO. He's signed an Executive Order to end competitive selection process for Administrative Law Judges, making them political appointees who can be fired at will (and probably appointed).
Oh and add to that tomorrow the Senate is expected to vote to confirm Benczkowski as Asst AG. He would be in the line is succession should Rosenstein get fired The problem? He worked for Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank that the FBI was investigating as part of Russia probe
Is there no check or balance on this, can one of the houses not introduce a bill or something? This is full on banana republic stuff.t at NATO. He's signed an Executive Order to end competitive selection process for Administrative Law Judges, making them political appointees who can be fired at will (and probably appointed).Oh and add to that tomorrow the Senate is expected to vote to confirm Benczkowski as Asst AG. He would be in the line is succession should Rosenstein get fired The problem? He worked for Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank that the FBI was investigating as part of Russia probe
The declaration (because thats what it is)
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/ex...
The order cites the recent Supreme Court decision Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, in which the court found SEC administrative law judges are considered “inferior officers” under the Constitution and, as such, are subject to the Appointments Clause. It pulls administrative law judges out of the competitive service where they are vetted by the Office of Personnel Management and into a more traditional appointment process.
https://www.govexec.com/management/2018/07/trump-m...
Then of course there's his other executive order
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/ex...
which provides an exception from competitive service hiring rules for the appointment of criminal investigators and deputy U.S. marshals within the U.S. Marshals Service, which the White House said is needed “to better hire and retain qualified individuals in certain duty locations.”
This is why trumps questions all the govt employees (that he sees as his employees) as to whether they are loyal to him and he gets rid of those he perceives aren't. Which is why the positions of power are full of his cronies who aren't capable of doing anything but supporting him.
Just a reminder from a NY time article in June 2016
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/04/opinion/campaig...
Nanook said:
I know it's not fashionable to deal with real facts and figures in this thread, when the alternative is a bit of bashing, but read what's there. All of it. Then read it again.
The 2% figure is something they're already supposed to be meeting. And were already supposed to be meeting before today, before 2014, before 2006.
So now NATO have reiterated a need to try and reach this 2% figure by 2024, which is fine and dandy, but not really the point that's being made.
It'sexactly the point being made b trump and the trumpettes are lapping it up as usual.The 2% figure is something they're already supposed to be meeting. And were already supposed to be meeting before today, before 2014, before 2006.
So now NATO have reiterated a need to try and reach this 2% figure by 2024, which is fine and dandy, but not really the point that's being made.
The 2% spending target is not a current commitment but a goal set for 2024, still six years away. No one is "delinquent" or owes the US any payments.
Eric Mc said:
He wouldn't have turned his attention to it only for the fact that he wants to butter up Vlad.
Don't masquerade wild speculation and opinion as fact. A theme of Trump's presidency has been him attacking nations based on a perceived (real or not) unfairness to America - this is a very obvious example of that, to suggest it's because of Putin seems tenuous at best.Davos123 said:
Eric Mc said:
He wouldn't have turned his attention to it only for the fact that he wants to butter up Vlad.
Don't masquerade wild speculation and opinion as fact. A theme of Trump's presidency has been him attacking nations based on a perceived (real or not) unfairness to America - this is a very obvious example of that, to suggest it's because of Putin seems tenuous at best.Nothing more needs to be said.
Davos123 said:
Eric Mc said:
He wouldn't have turned his attention to it only for the fact that he wants to butter up Vlad.
Don't masquerade wild speculation and opinion as fact. A theme of Trump's presidency has been him attacking nations based on a perceived (real or not) unfairness to America - this is a very obvious example of that, to suggest it's because of Putin seems tenuous at best.We can't because they are nonexistent (never produced), incomplete, or misleading. Other conversations went undisclosed, denied until revealed.
We don't have any idea what he's raised with Putin. We certainly can't believe what he tells us, because the only thing important to trump is his personal fortune and his ratings
Eric Mc said:
Davos123 said:
Eric Mc said:
He wouldn't have turned his attention to it only for the fact that he wants to butter up Vlad.
Don't masquerade wild speculation and opinion as fact. A theme of Trump's presidency has been him attacking nations based on a perceived (real or not) unfairness to America - this is a very obvious example of that, to suggest it's because of Putin seems tenuous at best.Nothing more needs to be said.
The only person a weakened Nato helps is Putin and his expansionistic ideas. trumps doing his bidding, which keep his political and financial help flowing in midterms and 2020, and keep the lid on all the dirt Putin has on Trump & his circle.
Probably.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff