Politics

Calliban · 2024-11-29 05:46:32

Time for Starmer to come clean on what Net Zero means.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/tim … strictions

The attack on UK farming is only the beginning.

RobertDyck · 2024-11-29 10:24:24

Terraformer wrote:

Starmer has announced that Labour plan to cut immigration. Down from close to a million a year (the "Boriswave"). We'll see how it goes. Seems though that the Anglosphere is finally closing the main doors; Trudeu has announced Canada will be severely curtailed immigration also.
I mean, maybe we'll still be running at 200k a year. Which is still bad, but nowhere near as bad as 900k a year.

Reuters: Fact Check: Trudeau announced Canada immigration cuts, not freeze

The department said that Canada will reduce the number of new permanent residents, opens new tab it plans to accept from 500,000 to 395,000 in 2025 and 380,000 in 2026. A target of 365,000 has been set for 2027.
The plan’s targets aim to “pause population growth in the short term to achieve well-managed, sustainable growth in the long term,” according to the government’s news release, and the plan’s reduced targets include temporary residents – international students and foreign workers already in Canada – applying to become permanent residents.
The new immigration targets move away from pandemic-era policies, in which the Canadian government had previously relaxed rules for temporary residents to tackle labor shortages.
In January, Canada announced a two-year cap on international student permits and said it would also stop giving work permits to some students after graduation.
Canada’s Immigration Minister Marc Miller announced plans to cap temporary immigration in March. The cap would reduce temporary residents to 5% of the total population over the next three years from 6.2% in 2023.

We don't have a labour shortage. The issue was the government paid people to stay home, called "COVID payments". When restrictions started to lift, many people in low income jobs just didn't want to go back to work. They stayed home, lived on the "COVID payments". One restaurant where I go regularly, the manager told me they had difficulty getting servers to come back to work. Another restaurant, a buffet, didn't survive COVID. In December 2021, they didn't know when restrictions would lift, so completely closed the restaurant. The building was demolished. Trudeau just doesn't want to accept responsibility for his actions.

In 2023, Canada welcomed 471,808 immigrants and 804,901 non-permanent residents (NPRs), making a total of 1,276,709 newcomers:

If the government believes all those "non-permanent residents" intend to leave, they're delusional.

2021 Census of Population: 8,361,505 immigrants, with 23% of the population being immigrants

Now when I apply for a computer software development job within my own city, I'm asked "work status". When I tell them citizen and that I was born here, they're amazed. The majority of recruiters now have a Hindi accent (from India).

population-growth-in-canada-from-1991-2023-red-is-after-v0-wkqtodwnc6bd1.png?auto=webp&s=f6ff0e79028bf30d43d70eaa6f64f23b5c773c04
?type=area&from=2013-06-01&to=2024-06-01&lang=en
the-bank-of-canada-says-population-correlates-with-v0-yc1oaqonymec1.jpeg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=eba466a84aace50fa0d1d579a7f3cb37cbc85d04

kbd512 · 2024-12-03 10:54:47

President Biden has issued an unconditional pardon to his son, Hunter Biden, after all his blatant lying about accepting the results of his son's trial for federal firearms and tax evasion charges. Although I was against the charges leveled at his son, who was quite obviously guilty as charged, because he videotaped himself smoking crack while waving his revolver around in front of the camera, the real question remains unanswered:

How much did President Biden and Hunter Biden sell out America for, and who did they sell us out to?

That was the only question I ever cared about getting an answer to. I could not be any less interested in what Hunter Biden did with his pocket revolver while he was high on crack. So long as he didn't shoot anybody, nor threaten to shoot anybody, I have zero problems with him doing drugs or owning guns, because that is his right as an American citizen. Freedom doesn't mean that "the free" will always do things I agree with. We don't need any over-glorified nannies to tell us how to live.

Ukraine is obviously very problematic, because President Biden said he got their prosecutor fired, on camera. They weren't even investigating his son at the time of this incident, merely Burisma, ties to Russian oligarchs, and shady business practices. However, I'm more curious about the Biden's dealings with the communist Chinese and the Russians. I can forgive their dealings with Ukrainians. I cannot forgive them selling us out to communist China and Russia.

I was hoping that President Trump would be the one to pardon Hunter Biden, as he already said he would do, in exchange for him telling us who he did business with in China and Russia. We need to figure out who, specifically, is trying to infiltrate our government so we can stop them. Figuring out why Hillary Clinton approved the sale of 20% of our Uranium supply to Russia would be better still.

kbd512 · 2024-12-09 23:55:46

The United Health Care CEO was murdered in New York by another equally entitled rich kid. There are an alarming number of people who seem to think his murder was a good thing. Others, such as myself, think it's a bad thing. As someone who has struggled with paying health care costs for my wife and myself, I understand the sentiment, but not the behavior. I think we should never become like the people we despise. To behave exactly as they do is to be no better than they are. Defeating evil people, of whatever stripe, involves good people banding together to render evil people powerless.

United Health Care's power comes from taking money from people who paid into the health care system in good faith, while denying health care coverage claims to those same people. Basically, United Health Care is no longer a good faith actor. The solution to that problem is for us to form a new company filled with as many moral good faith actors as we need, who put prompt and accurate service of health care coverage claims above next quarter's profits statement. The solution is definitely not murdering people who work for United Health Care.

Take the money away from United Health Care by refusing to do business with them, and they'll either go bankrupt or have a "come to Jesus" moment where they rediscover the reason why morality is a good thing. If any group of people need Jesus in their lives, it's people who operate businesses involved in life-or-death situations while making decisions which affect the lives of other people. If you feel you're better than the people who work for United Health Care, then prove it by acting like better people. There's always a very real cost associated with doing the right thing, but that is no less true of doing the wrong thing.

RobertDyck · 2024-12-10 21:43:58

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met with Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago. Trump claimed Canada is dependent on income from the US, and that money is "stolen" from the US. In reality both countries benefit greatly from trade, Canada isn't "stealing" anything. For one Canada sells oil at a price below world price. We also sell a lot of softwood lumber, used by the US construction industry to build houses. The US consumes more lumber per year than it is able to produce. Many US national forests, nature preserves, and parks have a band of trees along the road or highway, but clear-cut (denuded) just a few feet from the road. And even that is not enough to supply the US market. When building cars, parts cross the Canada/US border several times.

Despite all this, Trump threatened to make Canada the 51st state, and called Trudeau a governor. Trump is a bully. Do we have to remind him what happened the last time the US tried to invade Canada in 1812? The war lasted a couple years, in 1814 US troops crossed Lake Ontario in boats, burned the Canadian Parliament building in York to the ground. Nothing left but ashes. Shortly later US troops crossed in boats again, sacked Toronto. Back then Canada was still a colony so had a Governor General, not a Prime Minister. The GG ordered Canada's head military general to do something. He chose to raid Washington DC at a time when the US army was engaged in a major battle with the British army in a field outside DC. They set fire to the Whitehouse. At that time it was called Government House. The fire burned the west wing to the ground, with the President's office. Staff succeeded in saving the residence, but there was fire and smoke damage. They painted it white to cover up the damage. It's been called the White House ever since. The Canadian militia tried to set fire to the Capital building, but it was mostly stone so that didn't work. They did burn many other buildings in DC, including the US army headquarters. This was long before the Pentagon was built. Invading Canada wouldn't work any better than Russia's attempt to invade Ukraine. Canada and the US have been best of friends since World War 1, why threaten a friend? And the Manhattan Project in World War 2 was 3 equal partners: the US, UK, and Canada.

A song by a Canadian comedy group...
YouTube: War of 1812 - Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie

Calliban · 2024-12-10 22:11:44

I thought Canada was part of NAFTA? Tariffs would appear to contravine the purpose of NAFTA.

RobertDyck · 2024-12-10 23:13:06

Calliban wrote:

I thought Canada was part of NAFTA? Tariffs would appear to contravine the purpose of NAFTA.

Yes. But this is Trump.

kbd512 · 2024-12-11 03:04:05

RobertDyck,

You lefties choose to fixate on some very strange things. Whatever is actually going on upstairs, it's left you joyless, rudderless, and completely unable to laugh at your own predicament. If anyone told me that leftists would start behaving the way that they do today, I would've said "ohhhkay", and backed away very slowly. Seriously, though, y'all need to decide what actually matters.

First off, nobody is threatening anyone. President Trump's running gag about annexing Canada was an obvious joke that nobody but the perpetually offended got upset over. Canada's own PM was laughing about it, because it was pretty damn funny.

Second, woo-woo, Trump, woo-woo. Rinse and repeat. He runs the left's own derpy game right back in their faces. It drives most of them nuts. They clearly forgot how to laugh at themselves. Go figure. The same people who think they're superior to all others in every possible way absolutely cannot handle a smidgen of what they dish out on a daily basis. He does this stuff to get a rise out of the left because it always works. It's just who he is. If you wanna know how to drive him nuts, instead of driving yourselves nuts, the next time he says something like that, respond with nothing at all. You clearly won't initially understand what just happened by choosing to respond that way, but he sure will.

Third, America is not a building. You can knock down any building in our country, but America hasn't meaningfully changed. We don't have any castles, because we'll suffer no kings and queens. Your British friends learned that the hard way at least twice, if memory serves. Symbol-minded people are slow learners. You can walk onto virtually any military base in America, quite easily. Whether or not you get to leave is a different matter, but my point remains. America is the land of slaughtered sacred cows. I always have room on my plate for them, right next to my mashed taters. Maybe that's what the East doesn't get about the West, or at least America.

For the life of me, I will never understand the level of fixation the left has with this one man. He broke their brains, merely by being a mirror for them to stare into. If what's staring back at you is that horrifying, perhaps it's time for some introspection.

RobertDyck · 2024-12-11 06:49:25

kbd512,

Very flowery. However, I'm not a lefty. Many members of the Liberal Party of Canada have accused me of being Conservative. Many Americans get confused because the Liberal Party is not liberal, not in the sense that Americans use the word. At least it wasn't. Traditionally that party has been liberal in the dictionary definition of the word. Republicans in the US confuse liberalism with progressivism with socialism. My views are libertarian. I waffled which party to support. If I want to run myself, I have join a party. An independent in the House will never be a member cabinet. In the 1980s I leaned toward the Conservative party, but the Conservatives were elected in 1984 on a platform to eliminate the deficit, reduce the debt, and reduce taxes. This would be accomplished by reducing government spending and reducing the number of individuals hired in the federal civil service. The voters said "our saviour has arrived!" and gave them the largest majority in Canadian history. Unfortunately they lied, they did the opposite of everything they were elected for. Then Paul Martin became Finance Minister, and he did all those things the Conservatives promised in 1984. I was amazed, and said if he ever becomes leader I would join the party. When he did, I did.

Unfortunately we now have Trudeau and he's certainly not fiscally responsible. That's the term members of the Liberal Party use because they don't want to call themselves conservative. Fiscally responsible Liberals are basically moderate Democrats. But the progressives have taken over the party. No, I haven't helped any candidate since Trudeau was elected. I do still try to convince the party to abandon it's left-wing extremist policies and return to fiscal responsibility. I talked to Pierre Poilievre, leader of the Conservatives. He would accept me into his party. But a staffer at that very same meeting would not. I find Liberals are starting to listen to me now that polls show they're facing an epic election loss. If they don't make some drastic changes, they will hand a majority to the Conservatives. So I have to work with those who will listen. One last attempt to convince the Liberal Party to abandon the lefties, move policy back to the moderate centre.

I have also tried to explain to Liberals why so many Americans support Trump. The US has major problems. I don't think Trump is the solution, but he claims to be willing to fix them, and very few US politicians are. But you have to take Trump at his word. When he speaks of invading Canada, that is a serious threat. If he's just trying to be a bully to violate NAFTA, that's still a problem. You don't pander to a bully, you give him a bloody nose.

Calliban · 2024-12-11 08:23:40

Kbd512, the point is that Trump renegotiated NAFTA in his first term. He brought Mexico into NAFTA, in what was considered to be a geopolitical win. This was one of the big achievements of his first administration because it allows reshoring of a lot of manufacturing capability. NAFTA is a trading block that allows free trade within its boundaries. That is the whole point and its kind of in the name. So applying tariffs against other NAFTA members flies in the face of everything he did before. It risks undermining loyalty and trust and damaging geopolitical interests of all parties. Maybe he has a good reason for threatening to do this (and indeed it hasn't been done yet). I certainly hope so.

Last edited by Calliban (2024-12-11 08:25:21)

kbd512 · 2024-12-11 10:59:53

RobertDyck,

When I think of the left, the image that comes to mind is creative types of people. That is what the left used to be- all the highly creative people who slight misfits ended up on the left. The right, or the image that comes to mind, at least for me, was the rigid rule followers who pontificated endlessly to the rest of us. The left I remember didn't think about the world in terms of their own moral superiority, because that was what the right did, and for most people, myself included, it was insufferable. I didn't wake up one day and think to myself, "I want to be someone who fixates on following a rule book", never mind one which constantly changes.

This is going to shock you, but I really didn't think too much about politics until I was at least 30 or so, and certainly never bothered with voting for people who were otherwise indistinguishable blowhards (left and right) who were more in love with their ideas than doing anything akin to serving others (the way the military or Peace Corps or Red Cross does). I had no real interest in the subject until one party started veering off the deep end while the other was simply regurgitating the silliness they were already known for spouting off.

The modern day blue-haired take-over of the left, the "I'm a lesbian person with a penis" crowd, is just pure unmitigated nuttiness with no grounding in basic reality. I don't ever recall the left of my youth rallying around anything like that. So... Something has definitely changed, both here in America and abroad, and not for the better as near as I can tell, but it's not "the right".

The libertarians I recall wanted little to no government, and to smoke pot, which is basically middle-of-the-road college kid behavior- someone who definitely thinks more than a child does, but is not quite a fully mature adult. My only thought about them was that what they wanted seemed to also not comport well with reality. It's another quaint idea which has never been successfully implemented. We have government because it's needed by most people to at least try to arrive at consensus solutions, not because it's a particularly good solution to any given problem.

I don't know if President Trump is "the solution" to any specific thing that ails us, but I know for sure that both the left and the right, as they define themselves, are not. He's not a politician, and it's obvious from how he speaks and approaches problems. The thing I like about him is that at least he's willing to listen and cut deals, kinda like President Clinton, who was the last President who operated that way. I didn't understand the thought process behind everything Wild Bill did, but I got the sense that he did care about his people. Bush, Obama, Biden... Hell, they wouldn't care if America sank into the ocean tomorrow, so long as their beliefs about what happened were satisfied. I voted for none of those people.

As far as whether or not Justin Trudeau or Pierre Poilievre are better / worse for Canada, I dunno, flip a coin. Both seem to be very infatuated with their ideas about what is best, so you're getting some flavor of ye olde "mother knows best" kind of solution. I can't stand listening to either of them. I've listened to both of them deliver multiple speeches to parliament and each other before parliament, and the only thought I was left with was, "what arrogant self-righteous pricks these two are". As far as pandering to bullies is concerned, what a load of crap. Our leftists almost exclusively cater to bullies these days, while labeling everyone else what they are actively doing.

But you have to take Trump at his word. When he speaks of invading Canada, that is a serious threat.

No, you don't. You take President Trump at his actions. That is always what counts. He made the very same joke the last time he was voted into office. It's the same schtick, 8 years later. Canada was not invaded. Canada will not be invaded, unless it's by the flood of illegals from who knows where. Nobody in your government took it that way, either, because there is at least some sense of humor remaining amongst our brothers in the Great Snowy North.

main-qimg-36533b4cf1a85dc98e975a610eef9b7f-pjlq

Regain the ability to joke and enjoy life.

Calliban,

NAFTA was negotiated amongst nations. Nations have and enforce their own borders, when last I checked, because that's part of what makes them sovereign nations. If there are no effective borders, then there is no more trade agreement, because those agreements were between governments that recognized they were distinct and independent entities responsible for enforcing their own sovereignty. We seem to have lost that concept entirely, somewhere over the rainbow. That is President Trump's point, regardless of how people feel about it, and I think it's a perfectly valid point.

RobertDyck · 2024-12-11 17:14:41

The bi-national free trade agreement was negotiated between Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. Negotiations began under Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in the early 1980s. Mulroney promised to not enter into a free trade agreement, but then did. One of the many promises he broke. I thought free trade was a good thing. It only included the US and Canada. The US negotiators snuck in an obscure clause that takes a lawyer to understand. It meant that the US has a "right" to Canadian oil: 30% of all oil produced in Canadian provinces, and 90% of all oil produced in Canada's northern territories. Canadians felt that was a threat to soverignty. It was removed when Trump renegotiated. Moot anyway since Canada wanted to increase sales.

In the early 1990s, the EU formed. President Bill Clinton was worried Europe would become the dominant economic force in the world because it initially was only Western Europe so all first world economies and had a larger population than the US. Larger than the sum of Canada & US. So Clinton wanted.to add Mexico. Canada didn't want free trade with Mexico because they had a 3rd world economy. But Clinton pushed it through. A lot of manufacturers moved from Canada to Mexico, it damaged our economy. But Mexico has greatly improved, has almost become 1st world.

Now Trump is threatening a 25% tariff on everything from both Canada and Mexico. So he doesn't believe in complying with the deal that he himself made when he renewed NAFTA. His concerns are illegal immigrants cominge from Canada and fentanyl. Fentanyl is a purely synthetic drug made from components that are used for other things, so those components cannot be banned. China is making the components, they can be shipped by mail. It's easy to make, Peter Zeihan says it takes 3 people who barely passed high school chemistry in a garage with a hotplate. Premier of Alberta takes Trump's threat of tariffs seriously, but if you stop what little fentanyl comes from Canada, dealers can just make it in the US.

Re illegals: there is an issue. Some Canadians in Ontario point out immigration to the US is an American issue, asking Canada to deal with it is unreasonable. Well... what's happening is Canada thoroughly screens applicants for permanent residency, but not so much refugees or temporary foreign workers. So shady people eg those involved with terrorism in other countries come to Canada as refugees then cross the border to the US illegally. Canadian border security only has jurisdiction at official border crossings, not some farmer's field that backs onto the border, or forest. RCMP have to deal with the rest. Canada & US have the longest undefended border in the world. Trump doesn't understand that's an asset. And he doesn't understand Canada is not Mexico.

kbd512 · 2024-12-11 22:10:54

RobertDyck,

Thanks for the history lesson, but you sound exactly like any old politician who we mostly just gave the boot to.

Undefended borders are NOT an asset to people who have to live with the consequences of governments refusing to perform the one basic function all governments are supposed to perform on behalf of their own people- to defend them from criminals. Self defense is the most basic of human rights- the right to merely exist without being subjected to the whims of capricious and violent street thugs.

If you were in charge of Canada's government, do you, RobertDyck, think / believe that defending your own people from violent criminals is one of your top priorities as a leader of your people?

Here's what I think:
If my government isn't at least making a worthy attempt to find and arrest people who are trafficking people, weapons, and drugs into or out of the US, then they aren't worthy of my support. I don't even care about the rest of their politics, whether I agree or disagree, if they cannot first take care of that most basic of duties as a real leader.

I'm only guessing here, but I'd wager you'd have a big problem with anyone who was randomly bringing dozens of strange people through your yard at all hours of the day and night. Even if you had no personal problem with their comings and goings, ask your girlfriend how she feels about that.

I expect my government to treat the many millions of people doing that very thing with at least the same level of seriousness that you would treat it, if such a thing was happening to you and yours. Any nation we consider to be an ally, I would expect the very same from. As a father and a husband, I'm keenly aware of just how important security / protection is to women and children. There is no human flourishing when women and children are terrified of what's going on around them. In point of fact, women and children are the most frequent victims of said criminals, because the criminals know they cannot effectively fight back. I'm not "showing how much I care" by neglecting their needs, so as to not exclude "the other". Screw that. I take care of my own people first and foremost, because my duty is to them. If I can actually help someone else, after all the basic needs of my own people have been met, then wonderful.

RobertDyck · 2024-12-11 22:45:07

Post was already too long. Trudeau is letting too many people into Canada, and not screening them well enough. That's already a political issue. Doesn't justify violating NAFTA. And threatening to annex Canada... that's not a joke.

kbd512 · 2024-12-12 09:16:32

RobertDyck,

Actions always speak louder than words. I'm way more concerned with what politicians actually do than I am with what they say in public or private. That goes for our politicians as well as anyone else's politicians. Canada is not going to be invaded or annexed. It was a joke the last time President Trump tweeted it, it's still a joke this time, and everybody with a sense of humor took it that way.

RobertDyck · 2024-12-12 12:33:20

Trump is a bully. As long as he supports Russia in the war.on Ukraine, I will strongly opposes him. If he reverses himself and gets tough on Russia, then I'll consider him. General Kellogg says get tough. I was surprised when Trump appointed Kellogg. We'll see what happens. As you said, actions, not words.

Meanwhile Russia couldn't help Assad, so Syria fell. We'll see if the rebels can form a government. Turkey supported the rebels, then helped Russia evacuate their bases in Syria. One guy on Twitter (X) equated Turkey's president to Littlefinger from Game Of Thrones, everyone's ally and enemy at the same time.

And the Georgia election was blatantly falsified. Voter's demand a new election but the pro-Russian candidate refuses. The previous Prime Minister said analysis showed the pro-Russian candidate actually won 15% of the vote. With 100s of thousands protesting in the streets, this looks like Euromaidan in November 2013 in Ukraine. This is what started the war in Ukraine.

kbd512 · 2024-12-12 12:49:39

RobertDyck,

If President Trump supports Russia, as you falsely claim, then why would Russia invade Ukraine while President Biden was in office, rather than President Trump?

Lying to yourself is fine if you must, but when you publicly state something that is completely incongruent with observable reality, expect someone else to call it out.

President Trump has repeatedly stated that he wants the wars in Ukraine and Palestine to stop, because he wants the killing and the dying to stop. That is very far from "supporting Russia".

As far as your "Trump is buly" claim, President Trump is doing to other nations, that which other nations are doing and have been doing to the nation he's supposed to advocate on behalf of. If that is your definition of "being a bully", then it would seem that we only have bullies at the national leadership level, because all of them are at least attempting to do that which benefits their own nation.

kbd512 · 2024-12-12 15:40:07

RobertDyck,

Russia also looks to be on the verge of collapsing yet again, because Putin is bankrupting the country and killing all the working age men by sending them to fight in Ukraine. I have never like the communist Russians or Chinese, but they're as much a threat to themselves as they are to anyone else.

The "big problem" that I see, is that the last time Russia collapsed, America footed a major portion of the bill to keep the communists, err Russians, fed. So, as much fun as it might be to "fight the Russians", America and the rest of the world seem to have major issues with thinking further ahead than their next move. When are we going to start playing chess instead of checkers?

I finally caught that gosh darned ole bear! Yee-haw! Okay, dude, so now what? You succeeded in trapping a giant angry bear and the place around him is completely ruined from the tantrum he just threw. We got an angry wild animal and total ruins to work with here. What's our play? It's never going back to the way it was, so how's it gonna be? If you didn't think that far ahead, isn't that a sign you shouldn't be playing this game?

I wanted Ukraine and Russia to sue for peace two long years ago when it was apparent to everyone that nobody was going to win much of anything, but the Derpistanis from DC told our man in Ukraine to "make the Russians bleed", so he then told the Russians to go pound sand because some dimwit from Biden's administration thought Ukraine was "gonna win against Russia". Fast forwarding a bit, it's now two years later, there's an ever-growing pile of dead bodies (ours and theirs), both military forces are utterly decimated, and there's no end in sight unless Russia does finally collapse again. That result is worse than it already is. The next thug in line to replace Putin might be more effective.

Can we ever stop feeding into this lunacy?

If, as a soldier on the battlefield, you "luck into" getting an enemy sniper who never hits his target, assuming you know what's good for you, the very last thing you'd do is shoot him, because then the enemy just might replace him with someone who is an effective sniper.

From where I'm sitting, it's like everybody was out sick the day they taught warfighting at the war college.

Russia is on its way out, regardless of what we do. Demographics and dead bodies made that inevitable. Putin made a play because he thought he could get away with it, like he has so many times before. This time, he thought wrong. Simple as.

China is an actual military threat, and they've threatened pretty much every single one of their neighbors, to include North Korea.

Could we maybe focus our efforts on containing that one adversarial country that still has a real military and is becoming more belligerent by the day?

That seems like a better use of our time.

Calliban · 2024-12-12 16:24:23

Woman has sex with 100 men in 1 day.
https://www.youtube.com/live/PhSKY2d44zU

This is altogether one of the most depraved things I have ever seen. She did it to get attention on social media and to rake money in. What is worse, she isn't remotely ashamed of having desecrated herself in this way. What the hell is wrong with these people? How did we get to the point, as a society, where this sort of thing became acceptable? What kind of a man would actually pay to be part of this abomination?

Last edited by Calliban (2024-12-12 16:25:59)

RobertDyck · 2024-12-12 17:56:26

Wikipedia: Trump tariffs

Legality
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution: "Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises." But Congress has repeatedly shifted its powers regarding tariffs to the president. Beginning in 1917 with the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 the president can impose any tariff while the nation is at war. The affected trade does not have to be connected to the ongoing war. Since 1974 the Trade Act of 1974 allows the president to impose a 15% tariff for 150 days if there is "an adverse impact on national security from imports." After 150 days the tariff expires unless extended by Congress.
In 1977, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act shifted powers even more towards the White House. The Trump administration claims that it gives the President the authority to raise tariffs without any limits during a national emergency of any kind. Legal scholars disagree because the IEEPA does not mention tariffs at all and transfers no authority of tariffs towards the President.

So Trump doesn't even have authority to impose tariffs. Next ensure the attorney general is competent.

RobertDyck · 2024-12-12 18:21:09

kbd512 wrote:

If President Trump supports Russia, as you falsely claim, then why would Russia invade Ukraine while President Biden was in office, rather than President Trump?

Trump looks at everything as a business deal. He thinks a simple deal with put an end to the war in Ukraine. But it's not that simple. Putin gave his terms to end the war: Ukraine must surrender not only everything Russia currently occupies, but also of the 4 oblasts that Russia only partially occupies, Ukraine must surrender them all. There's no way that will happen. Furthermore, Putin demands that Ukraine must never join NATO. And that Ukraine must de-militarize. That means surrender all their weapons, all their means of self-defence. There's no way in hell that'll happen. Forcing Ukraine to come to a deal while Russia has a position of strength only forces capitulation. Ukrainians know what it was like to live under Russian rule, it's only 33 years since they gained independence. They know their only choices are win or die.

However, good news is appointing General Kellogg. His advice to Trump is to get tough: if Russia refuses to deal, then increase military aid to Ukraine to a level they've never seen before. If Ukraine refuses to deal, cut off aid entirely. So Zelenskyy said he is willing to deal. He will never acknowledge Russia now owns any territory of Ukraine, but will accept a ceasefire with Russia controlling territory they currently temporarily control. Ukraine must join NATO as a full member, because there must be a credible security guarantee that Russia will not simply invade again. In fact, Zelenskyy has offered to replace US troops in Europe with Ukrainian troops. Trump should like that. We'll see what Russia is willing to surrender back to Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine withdrawing from Kursk. The additional complication is Russia has already said they will not accept any such deal. If Trump attempts to force a deal like the one Zelenskyy proposed, they'll just continue to fight. Sounds like a Trump presidency will increase support for Ukraine.

Ps. The Budapest Memorandum was a deal signed by President Clinton. They convinced Ukraine to surrender their nuclear weapons in exchange for guarantee that the US would defend Ukraine should Russia invade. Well, Russia did invade and we don't see any US boots on the ground. Sounds like a bad deal. Yes, the loop-hole was this was a memorandum signed by the US President, not a treaty ratified by Congress. Which means it effectively expired when Clinton's term ended. Ukraine is not going to be so stupid again.

RobertDyck · 2024-12-12 18:37:10

Kyiv Post: 43,000 Ukrainian Troops Dead, 370,000 Injured Since 2022 – Zelensky

Ukraine lost 43,000 troops with a further 370,000 wounded since Russia launched its invasion in 2022, President Volodymyr Zelensky said on Sunday.
He said the wounded figures included injuries of all kinds, and that roughly half of those wounded have returned to service.

Euromaiden Press: Pentagon: Russia lost 700,000 people since February 2022 and spent over $ 200 bn on war

US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said on 7 December that Russia has suffered at least 700,000 casualties, including killed and wounded, since the full-scale invasion began in February 2022. Lloyd also said that Russia expenditured of over $200 billion on the war effort against Ukraine.
Speaking at the Ronald Reagan National Security Forum in California, Austin said that the Russian losses “exceeded the total losses Moscow experienced in all conflicts since World War II combined.”
The Ukrainian military estimated Moscow’s losses at over 750,000 as of November 2024, including killed and wounded. Russia has not publicly disclosed its casualties, while slamming Donald Trump’s claim Russia has lost around 600,000 troops in the Ukraine war.

X (formerly Twitter): Igor Sushko

Russia: Soldier confessed to his wife he was sent on missions in Ukraine with orders to execute wounded Russian soldiers with a control shot to the head. Russian commanders call it "cleanup" and claim it must be done for the "safety of the comrades."

So this means majority of Russian casualties are dead, while majority of Ukrainian casualties are alive. How much longer can Russia afford to keep fighting?

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#2726 2024-11-29 05:46:32

Re: Politics

#2727 2024-11-29 10:24:24

Re: Politics

#2728 2024-12-03 10:54:47

Re: Politics

#2729 2024-12-09 23:55:46

Re: Politics

#2730 2024-12-10 21:43:58

Re: Politics

#2731 2024-12-10 22:11:44

Re: Politics

#2732 2024-12-10 23:13:06

Re: Politics

#2733 2024-12-11 03:04:05

Re: Politics

#2734 2024-12-11 06:49:25

Re: Politics

#2735 2024-12-11 08:23:40

Re: Politics

#2736 2024-12-11 10:59:53

Re: Politics

#2737 2024-12-11 17:14:41

Re: Politics

#2738 2024-12-11 22:10:54

Re: Politics

#2739 2024-12-11 22:45:07

Re: Politics

#2740 2024-12-12 09:16:32

Re: Politics

#2741 2024-12-12 12:33:20

Re: Politics

#2742 2024-12-12 12:49:39

Re: Politics

#2743 2024-12-12 15:40:07

Re: Politics

#2744 2024-12-12 16:24:23

Re: Politics

#2745 2024-12-12 17:56:26

Re: Politics

#2746 2024-12-12 18:21:09

Re: Politics

#2747 2024-12-12 18:37:10

Re: Politics

Board footer