Writes a commenter with over 3,000 up-votes on the NYT article "Government Shuts Down as Talks Fail to Break Impasse."
From the article:
While the president has been unwilling to consider dropping his demand to fund his signature campaign promise, Mr. Pence and other White House officials were discussing a number of potential compromises that would force him to do just that, omitting spending on a wall and instead adding money for other security measures at the border, according to several officials with knowledge of the talks.Here's that video:
Late Friday, as his budget director ordered the carrying out of shutdown plans, President Trump told the country in a video on Twitter that “we’re going to have a shutdown.”
OUR GREAT COUNTRY MUST HAVE BORDER SECURITY! pic.twitter.com/ZGcYygMf3a
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 22, 2018
पोस्ट्स
१४८ टिप्पण्या:
Nothing better than demoralizing your employees right before Christmas. The Donald is such a brilliant businessman.
The #1 priority of government is the security of its citizenry. Its not education. Its not real estate. Not construction or development. Not mandating restroom activity. It's security. #1. If there is no secure border, there is no nation. So, while the breathless commenter at the Times sees this as nothing more than racism, it's actually the first time in years that a President has actually worked to secure our nation in a very hostile world.
So you can be for a secure nation or against it. And maybe there are ways to do it other than a wall, but no one has even approached trying something until Trump. When they can do national security, I might feel more comfortable with them trying other things. But right now they are failing miserably at their #1 job.
Anyone who denies that we need better physical security on the border has their head up their ass, or else is playing politics with our future.
"Not one cent of our taxpayer money should be wasted on ...
I thought it was going to be about wasting over $10 Billion on some corrupt shithole countries. Oh, well.
"his absurd monument to Trump's racism and ignorance."
"Overall, 46% of [racist ignorant] whites favor building a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, while a similar share (52%) say they are opposed. By contrast, large majorities of blacks (86%) and Hispanics (83%) say they oppose building the wall."
++
And quite ironically, people who live near Mexico are more likely to be ignorant about Mexico, according to a commenter with over 3,000 up-votes: "In Republicans’ views of a border wall, proximity to Mexico matters"
Right. Because we don’t spend money on health care or infrustructure. Why are partisans such relentless idiots?
to think that House Republicans can pull $5 billion out of thin air
And to THINK that we just sent 11 Billion to Mexico to help them with their border security and shore up their country.
Imagine....I doubt that she* can.
* Whey do I assume female? -----> Illogical, emotional, feeeeeelings, rant with no facts to back up her claim about what matters to The American People. Matters to her. Yes. But not to everyone. Go make a sammich.
What ignorance of Trump's is it referring to, precisely.
11 Billion to Mexico
It was approx. $5 billion to Mexico and the rest to "strengthen" the governments of some other shithole countries which are even more corrupt than Mexico.
It looks like the Stable Genius is going to win again. We know this because the Dem's propaganda readers are on cable right now saying the Dems will accept a see through steel girder fence, but they only refuse a solid concrete 30 foot high brutalist wall they say Trump wants. Hmmm.
I don't get the point of shutdown with back pay, though. There's probably $5b there alone.
One of my FB friends is manager of a major retirement stock portfolio fund.
He floated a theory yesterday that the Federal Reserve and corporate America are deliberately tanking the market to take down Trump, primarily because of the border wall issue.
Foreign aid goes to pay off those who are being paid off under the existing system so they don't exercise the violence they always are threatening to exercise. The other side has to come out ahead in any deal too.
The Fed has to work with leading indicators of inflation, lest it run away. Taking dollars out of the system keeps the economy from being asked to do more at once than it can do at once. It looks like growth but it's price rises if the actual economy can't keep up.
Trump's in error on that one.
ST, I'm afraid that conspiracy theory is one I can believe.
$867 billion "farm" bill. Food stamps are grown on farms.
Raising the interest rates isn't really the point, it's just a meter for the fed to tell how fast it's reducing or expanding the money supply. If it raises the interest rate target, it then sells slightly more new debt into the market (thus soaking up dollars) until the interest rate output from the free market matches the new target.
It's a minimal sort of intervention, all voluntary transactions.
If the interest rate goes above the target, it buys back federal debt (putting dollars back into the economy). A clever system.
Is it more racist to have a barrier immigrants can’t see through or one that lets them see America but has pointy spikes on top?
I’m sure the NYT will let us know at the appropriate time.
Trump appears to think that economic activity measured can't be inflation. It depends on what the actual economy is capable of at the moment, whether it's activity or inflation. The Fed has to distinguish, and Trump ought to.
Who's most hurt by illegal immigration? Poor people, who are disproportionately black or Hispanic. There's your racism right there.
Yes, to a solid concrete 30 foot high brutalist wall with concertina wire on the top of it.
The open border thing gets you immigrants from failed countries, and those are disproportionally those from low IQ countries.
There's the theory that for a stable functioning country you need a certain proportion of smart people, and if there are too few, the country will be a shithole. Shithole countries have smart people but not enough.
So keeping out those who want to come in illegally is in fact racist, but not incorrect. It's a sovereignty thing.
The US can't work with open borders.
The typical IQ by country guy wishes everybody were equally smart. But they're not.
That's the sigh from Jordan Peterson and Charles Murray at separate times. They don't see a solution.
If you let in only the smart people from failed countries, you strip those countries of their smart people. There's a morality problem for the left.
I'd suggest open borders but for every immigrant a leftist has to go the other way. This raises the IQ in the failed country and helps put an end to the source of the problem, by making the failed country a paradise.
ST nails it . Since the day Trump fixed the economy, the private bank owned by Europeans that we call the Federal Reserve Bank has thrown every device they have at causing a recession before2020. It is the timing of intense raises to fight "inflation" that literally does not exist. The Fed owner's obvious goal is to knock off the USA on an emergency basis. Meanwhile Trump prepares to abolish the US submission to the FED and have the US Treasury issue dollars backed by gold. Stay tuned.
This is going to be a great “mantle .”
The value of gold is highly variable. Google yourself a graph. A basket of stuff is much more stable, and in fact is the measure the Fed uses.
The Fed doesn't use inflation but leading indicators of inflation. What inflation will be next year if they don't do anything.
Mathematical thing: the particular leading indicator of inflation has to be orthogonal to the interest rate. Why? So that the Fed doesn't blind itself by intervening.
The market is going down because the value of a stock is the sum of all the money it will every earn, discounted to the present value (equivalently the sum of all the dividends it will every pay, discounted to the present value).
That's highly dependent on what interest rate you use to discount future payments.
If you raise the interest rate you assume, the present value goes down.
So that's the price of the stock too.
Surely there will be a judge along shortly to declare a shutdown unconstitutional?
In particular the price of a stock is not much dependent on what the company's future prospects are. That's too hard to estimate. Anything could happen. You just assume it will go on as it is.
Trump knocking out regulations raised the value of everybody's stock, but he's done that now and can't do it again.
The border security problem would solve itself if the Government would enforce the existing laws inside this country!
That is no federal funds to be expended to support non-citizens - especially those here illegally - and prosecution of employers who knowingly hire illegals aliens - and "knowingly" to be interpreted in a common sense fashion.
It's not Trump's.
It's the American People's!
I doubt there is a corporate conspiracy to tank the market. Upper management still needs the large bonuses that are pegged to stock performance and earnings. If earnings are high you can’t keep stock prices low for long. If earnings are low you don’t need a conspiracy to kill stocks. No one would risk their big job by destroying their ability to look like a genius by growing equity value.
Trump knocking out regulations raised the value of everybody's stock, but he's done that now and can't do it again.
=====
Seems to me that there's still a lot of regulations that could be eliminated. Saying that he's done and can't do more is just wrong.
He's barely begun.
John Henry
NB: when oil is $46 a barrel and headed down, the future of inflation is minus 10%.
Business is about money. Politics is about posturing to get money.
The term asylum should also be taken seriously.
European Jews needed it in the 1930's and the Kurds of Turkey/Iraq/Syria shortly will.
The use being made of it by the Democrats' SJW legal brigade is a travesty.
I would immediately discount the market conspiracy theory if I hadn't lived thru the liar's mortgage scam that led to the massive 2008 market collapse.
The most prominent, and supposedly trusted, securities and investment banking firms conspired to defraud the taxpayers out of billions of $$$ and successfully used the levers of government regulatory power to do so.
The number one job of the Fed is to fight inflation. The leading indicator of inflation is real growth in wages. From the mid-1980s on, mass immigration (legal and illegal) coupled with free trade killed real wage growth, allowing the Fed to lower rates without fear of inflation. In the 2008 crisis, the Fed took rates to zero and corporate profits and stock prices recovered, but no real wage growth to worry about.
Trump was elected by the people who bore the brunt of these policies, and those concerned about the consequences for their children and grandchildren. One year of real wage growth, and the Fed springs into action, this must be stopped!
"No one would risk their big job by destroying their ability to look like a genius by growing equity value."
Rational people might not be willing to risk their job. However, the hate for Trump has literally driven people insane. A woman I know who went hard left when she moved to lily white Vermont just posted instagram photos of herself decorating her tree with balls on which she wrote "Fuck Trump." Great example for her tween daughter about the spirit of Christmas. These people are obsessed. I honestly believe plenty of lefties would be willing to kill themselves if it guaranteed Trump going to jail.
286 billion on a farm bill.
Shouting Thomas said:
I would immediately discount the market conspiracy theory if I hadn't lived thru the liar's mortgage scam that led to the massive 2008 market collapse.
The most prominent, and supposedly trusted, securities and investment banking firms conspired to defraud the taxpayers out of billions of $$$ and successfully used the levers of government regulatory power to do so.
We need a monument for Barney Frank.
The fed has an impossible dual mandate of low inflation and high growth. I would humbly say, that I think everyone would be better off if there were no wage increases, no inflation, and minimal unemployment. This would expose the true economy for inspection without changing the measurement scale every year. Many dirty tricks would be then impossible to get away with.
I wonder how the comment writer feels about high speed rail.
"And maybe there are ways to do it other than a wall, but no one has even approached trying something until Trump."
-- That's unfair to Reagan and Bush and Bush, who all took some attempts, but either cut deals with Democrats that ended up not being honored, or were hamstrung by Congress much in the same way Trump is being. Even Obama increased border security in some ways, most notably and historically with his Kids in Cages program.
To clarify, no automatic wage increases, wages should still rise as you progress through your career or get training etc.
Well there's also the matter of almost no convictions by holders justice department or even significant enforcement actions like those by khuzaimi at the sec (hes the one who hunted Michael Cohen like a blood hound)
i don't like the facile way that they describe everyone in favor of the wall as racist and bigoted. It's not just the right that engages in hateful stereotypes. The left have the peculiar fantasy of believing that their resentments and prejudices are ennobling and the way forward.........Not so long ago, they were telling us about how the noted child rapist Daniel Ortega was the moral superior of Ronald Reagan and the true, best hope of Central America.
"He floated a theory yesterday that the Federal Reserve and corporate America are deliberately tanking the market to take down Trump, primarily because of the border wall issue."
-- Two years ago, I'd have said that was a crazy theory. I still don't think it is true, but it is no longer pants-on-head crazy.
"I would immediately discount the market conspiracy theory if I hadn't lived thru the liar's mortgage scam that led to the massive 2008 market collapse."
-- I remember consciously deciding not to buy because I knew it would be a bad investment. To this day, the fact people want the government to help them fix that bad investment irks me. I hate when the government decides the irresponsible choice was the right one and rewards it, then I'm sitting here suffering for being responsible with nothing to show for it. I felt the same way about people who want government forgiveness for student loan debt. I skipped getting my masters and aggressively paid mine off; if someone who was financially irresponsible just gets $40k forgiven, what was the point of me being responsible for the last several years?
The left are giddy watching the market tank. Giddy. Clues.
"i don't like the facile way that they describe everyone in favor of the wall as racist and bigoted."
-- I don't know if the Wall is a good solution; I know it has worked in other places (like Israel), but I also know that you can't just import good ideas from other countries and expect them to work here. I know we need to do SOMETHING though. I think it should be a two-pronged approach; better physical security (perhaps Wall, perhaps something else), and a better streamlined process for admitting legal immigrants to the country. The fact that risking your life and the life of your family with a coyote and sneaking through a desert, hoping that the shady characters you gave what little money you had to actually left water caches there, to sneak into a country where you're in danger of arrest for entering illegally is often the EASIER option than waiting in line and doing paper work is a classic example of the government screwing up one of its actual jobs.
I could go along with her comment, if not another dime of taxpayer money went in anyway, shape, or form to anyone, in this country illegally.
Robother: "Trump was elected by the people who bore the brunt of these policies, and those concerned about the consequences for their children and grandchildren. One year of real wage growth, and the Fed springs into action, this must be stopped!"
Commodity prices are dropping precipitously and the Fed slams in the brakes even more.
This is insane. Even Jim Cramer says it makes no sense......but thats where he is wrong wrong wrong. It only makes no economic sense. It does however make perfect political "OrangeManBad" sense.
Well it's down but not historically it's around 2011 levels, putting ocasio coricon charge of anything.
Rewarding irresponsible behavior is all Pelosi wants. Won't you please help her?
Banks have to get inflation predictions right. Especially long term rates. It's the only way they can stay solvent.
Current 30 year fixed mortgages are about 4.5%. They've been in this ballpark for 10+ years now. If banks were expecting inflation, we would see these rates trending up.
Just one indicator, of course, but a very important one.
John Henry
5 billion dollars is a rounding error in the budget. For examples of pricing -- look at local highway construction. It takes an est. 1 billion to construct a small stretch of local freeway with interchanges.
Temujin said...
The #1 priority of government is the security of its citizenry. Its not education. Its not real estate. Not construction or development. Not mandating restroom activity. It's security. #1. If there is no secure border, there is no nation. So, while the breathless commenter at the Times sees this as nothing more than racism, it's actually the first time in years that a President has actually worked to secure our nation in a very hostile world.
So you can be for a secure nation or against it. And maybe there are ways to do it other than a wall, but no one has even approached trying something until Trump...
But many congressional Republicans and Trump supporters have already (rightly) made the assertion that there have been plenty of occasions in the recent past where Democrats and moderate Republicans willingly voted to fund border security measures including many miles of wall and fencing.
So why not now? I think the reason is simple. It is because Trump has made such a dramatically big deal about HIS wall. With all of the usual insane Trumptalk about drug dealers and terrorists and “a Great Wall!” And a campaign promise that “Mexico will pay for the wall.”
Trump has talked himself into a corner. He’s made new enemies at every turn. Nobody who isn’t already one of his toadies wants to help him or deal with him. They want him to be a one-term (or less) president.
If a dramatic deal to INCREASE border security is what would hurt Trump, they would be for it.
"So why not now? I think the reason is simple."
-- For the same reason that Democrats never delivered on their promises after the amnesty and move the goalposts on Bush as well when it came to this stuff: Because they can. More liberal Republicans are doing as they normally do, and hoping to avoid taking difficult votes. The only difference now is that they can blame Trump instead of trying to come up with some phony baloney gang of whatever compromise.
Money is not wealth. It's a ticket in line to say what the economy does next, presumably for you.
The Fed regulates the number of tickets outstanding to match what the economy is capable of doing at once.
It does this by selling debt (soaking up tickets) or buying back debt (creating new tickets).
It changes its stance a little tighter or a little looser by watching the interest rate that the free market produces and buying back or selling to stay near its "target."
Every so often it meets and changes its target depending on leading indicators of inflation. The target itself is of no interest, just that it's a little higher or a little lower than last time, in response to the indicators.
It's the most gradual and egalitarian intervention possible to conceive that still regulates the number of tickets relative to the economy.
Trump either doesn't understand the inflation part or is willing to sell the country out for a populist move. I think probably the former.
Also: The template for how Democrats are dealing with Trump is not substantively different than how they would have dealt with any other Republican president. It is the logical follow on to how they treated Bush. It is a shame that Trump was the next president to receive their over the top grandstanding, like accusing him of obstructing justice when Comey lied to him and both sides in Congress wanted him gone, but there is no doubt a President Romney, McCain, Cruz or Anyone-R would have faced the exact same tactics.
[I say it is a shame because it allows them to hide the SOP they plan to use on all Republicans going forward under the veneer of "Trump is especially bad. I'll say it again: The best part of Trump being president is that Hillary Clinton is not; the worst part is that Trump is. I'm not his biggest fan, but I also think that he is clearly not The Hitler Devil that he gets made out to be.]
Democrats flush 5 billion dollars down the toilet for waste and fraud each and every day.
But many congressional Republicans and Trump supporters have already (rightly) made the assertion that there have been plenty of occasions in the recent past where Democrats and moderate Republicans willingly voted to fund border security measures including many miles of wall and fencing.
As long as it didn't actually secure the border.
But it is THEIR waste and fraud.
I also have no doubt that a good chunk of the Wall funding will, like those meals that no one ended up delivering in Puerto Rico, will end up not used properly.
Also: If they were fine with funding it then, then to not fund it now just to spite Trump means they accepted the fact that there are dangers to not building the wall.
They're basically saying: We accept some illegal immigrants might, either because they are criminals or through negligence or bad behavior like DUIs, kill some Americans. But it is OK, because, well, Fuck Trump. Anyone who originally was for the Wall, but dropped support just to knife Trump, should be one of the bums we vote out.
When somebody sells his ticket to the Fed, he isn't poorer. He holds a bond instead of a dollar. He can't spend the bond, so the number of tickets is reduced, but wealth is not.
It's all about matching ability to spend with ability to do.
Matthew Sablan:
"So why not now? I think the reason is simple."
-- For the same reason that Democrats never delivered on their promises after the amnesty and move the goalposts on Bush as well when it came to this stuff: Because they can.
Matthew, it's kinda pointless to argue with anybody crazy enough to still believe that the Republicans (let alone the Democrats) want or wanted to enforce immigration law in any meaningful way.
Would not a more competent minority leader than Schumer have managed to get a funding bill passed that trump then would have had to veto?
Any discussion of inflation must start with the basic definitions. Far too many people, including many who should know better ignore these.
Not just here but generally. Not just now but over the past 40 years that I've been talking to people about it.
1. Inflation is defined as a GENERAL rise in prices. Or, as a rise in the AVERAGE price level
If oil prices quadrupled, that by itself would not be inflatio. It might cause govt to create inflation but it would not do so on its own.
Ditto housing, wages, food, health care etc.
It is only "inflation" if all of them, on average, go up.
John Henry
Lets use the gov shutdown to ferret out the porn ( especially kiddy porn ) resident on the idled government desktop computers, and prosecute the perverts responsible for this travesty. I prefer to pay an employee while furloughed rather than one drooling over porn while on the job.
That leads to the second thing to keep in mind:
MV=PQ
Where:
M = quantity of money in circulation. This is controlled by Treasury, Federal Reserve Banks (private) Federal Reserve Board (govt) and commercial banks.
V=velocity or how frequently the money in circulation turns over or changes hands. A large driver of velocity is perception of future inflation as defined in my previous comment.
P= average price per transaction
Q= number of transactions.
Prices, inflation, can only be driven up by increases in the money supply (or velocity whis is effectively the same thing)
Money supply is controlled mainly by govt and mainly for political reasons.
John Henry
“Government shuts down....”
“Racism and ignorance....”
“...spend our money on something that actually matters...healthcare, education or infrastructure....”
How stupid and disingenuous are the mediaswine at NYT? And their followers?
The government isn’t shutting down! Will America benefit from Democrat open borders? How? Will the expenditures to accommodate/support illegal immigrants be less than $5 billion? Not possible!
Ensuring a sovereign nation with immigration laws makes Trump and the rest of us racist.
Rhhardin, a lot of what you say is accurate. But you project the image of a government dispassionately looking out for our interests. Is that your core belief? If I came across Uncle Sam on fire in the middle of the street, I wouldn’t piss on him. I absolutely reject the idea that our government knows how to effectively control the economy. I’d be happier with the bounces of true capitalism rather than the bounces of socialism.
If Mar-a-lago was owned by the fed government the shutdown would have ended before it began.
Private property police... Private property police! Guards - seize Trump, and his land.
Nothing better than demoralizing your employees right before Christmas. The Donald is such a brilliant businessman.
"Mark" strikes a condescending note in the first comment. So typical of know it alls.
"No border, no wall, no USA at all!"
Nobody is fooled any more.
Dicken — how many thousands of acres of private property will the government take for the wall through eminent domain? Do you care?
how many thousands of acres of private property will the government take for the wall through eminent domain? Do you care?
@steve: I'm sure you can link to all the complaints you were making about the government during the Kelo case...right?
How much you want to bet that this punk commenter has doors and locks on his doors to his home?
And at the same time, he/she is all too comfortable with the origin countries being hell-holes and has no interest in changing those origin countries?
Spending even one cent on the absurd monument to hate and ignorance that is the New York Times is pretty revolting too.
Nothing better than demoralizing your employees right before Christmas.
I lived in or in suburb of Washington, DC, from 1969 until I retired and moved in 2016. No one more deserves to be taken down a peg or two than your average government employee. Shut down every department accept Social Security, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Treasury Department, and the Department of Defense. Most of the rest just push paper from one office to another.
steve uhr:"Dicken — how many thousands of acres of private property will the government take for the wall through eminent domain? Do you care?"
You apparently care a great deal (snort), so why don't you tell us precisely how many acres of privately owned property would be eligible for taking through eminent domain.
I mean, since you care so much.
Next perhaps you could explain just when, precisely, you as a lefty began to care about government taking of private property. We could all use a good laugh.
steve uhr: "If Mar-a-lago was owned by the fed government the shutdown would have ended before it began."
If the Govt owned Mar-a-lago it would be an abandoned lot inhabited by illegal alien drug runners.
But at least American citizens wouldn't be able to use it.
That's a lefty win-win!
Gahrie I wasn’t commenting about anything anywhere in 2005. I’m a big believer in private property rights. In part that comes from living in Alaska. If you want to put a broken down car in your front yard it’s your business.
Of course I wasn’t suggesting that the government take over trump property as anyone who’s knows how to read can tell.
Next up for Steve Uhr: Why California's Not-Bullet Train to NoWhere is a disaster in terms of future Govt eminent domain takings!!
I can't wait to read Uhr on that one!
Don't leave us in suspense Uhr! How many acres are involved? In what areas specifically?
I mean, now that you, unexpectedly and suddenly, care so much about govt takings!
Here's an interesting story on this: https://www.kcra.com/article/eminent-domain-to-be-used-to-seize-land-for-high-speed-rail/5917948
Number of lefty complaints regarding eminent domain to seize land in CA for this latest estimated $85 Billion dollar monstrosity? ZERO
Drago. I take it you haven’t spend any time in a national park or any of the museums on the mall in DC. You really should check out Yellowstone sometime if you think everything the fed government owns goes to hell.
Drago I do know that large portions of the wall is to go on private property. How many of those property owners would refuse to sell to the government I don’t know but even if it’s only five percent we’re talking hundreds of land owners.
Back to the question no one will answer. Do you care?
Why would the govt need to take anything by eminent domain to build the wall? They already own the land or, where privately held, easments.
John Henry
Chuck said...plenty of occasions in the recent past where Democrats and moderate Republicans willingly voted to fund border security measures including many miles of wall and fencing.
So why not now? I think the reason is simple. It is because Trump has made such a dramatically big deal about HIS wall.
--
Bullshit. It's only "HIS" because he is the only one trying to make it fully happen.
He repeatedly frames this as in the interest of the country. It's the press and TDS folk like you who view it through orange tinged glasses.
John Henry - you’re wrong. Do a little research.
The truth is that securing and defending our borders are responsibility of the federal government, while health care, education and even infrastructure maintenance are not. Another truth is that our government overtaxes singles and the childfree to support the needs and desires of the married and breeding, while they might well prefer their tax funds go toward a wall or even direct support of suffering non-Amerikan latino children.
"MV=PQ"
I see that someone beat me to it. Inflation is the rate of increase of "P". The big thing that helped kill inflation at the end of the Carter Administration was the realization that fighting inflation by printing money (M) to keep interest rates down was backwards. The idea had been that printing money increased the money supply, making money more available, so people would be willing to pay less for it, reducing interest rates, and, theoretically, inflation. Except that it is fake wealth, because of that equation. It can be used for a short time at the bottom of a recession to accelerate recovery, as people feel richer than they actually are. But people realize very quickly that the increased money in their pockets doesn't translate into the ability to buy more resources, but rather it just takes more money to buy the old basket of commodities, etc. Since that is the case, rational investors are going to demand more money (interest) to loan out money, because it will be worth less when they get it back. Thus, interest rates rise. Trying to drive down interest rates by printing money (increasing "M") in the long run does just the opposite. I should add that at some point, some theorized that the velocity of money ("V") would somehow compensate for increases in M. Nope. Higher interest rates tend to drive an increase in V. Just think Venezuala, where the money to buy a loaf of bread today will probably be insufficient tomorrow, or at least by the end of the week. So, you buy it today, when you ight not need it until tomorrow, because by then you might not be able to afford it. Which is why V is weakly correlated, in the same direction, to P.
I have written it many times- you don't need a wall if you only enforce the present laws against employing illegal aliens. However, that enforcement is never taken seriously, and even if it was, you would see one court injunction after another for doing so. That is how Trump's Wall garnered so much symbolic power.
Trump said the wall should be called The Trump Wall. Now he can have the shutdown named after him, The Trump Shutdown. A legacy.
“I would build a great wall, and nobody builds walls better than me,” Trump said. “I’ll build a great, great wall on our southern border, and I’ll have Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.”
“I am proud to shut down the government!”
I would have a lot more respect for Democratic opposition to Trump's border wall if I had any clue about what polices the Democrats do support on immigration.
I mean, do they support open borders? Okay, there are arguments in favor of open borders. Just say so, openly & above board. Do they support the present mish-mash catch & release "leaky" border? If so, why?
For the life of me, I can't find any Democrat in power getting in front of a camera & saying "This is our plan on immigration from Mexico & Central America". Now are there policy papers by some immigration mavens? Sure, but until a politician recommends implementing it, that's not policy.
If any of our resident liberal commentators can come up with a Democrat stating an immigration policy rather than stating that the policy of the Democrats is to oppose Trump, please post the link.
"Drago I do know that large portions of the wall is to go on private property. How many of those property owners would refuse to sell to the government I don’t know but even if it’s only five percent we’re talking hundreds of land owners."
Imminent Domain.
"Back to the question no one will answer. Do you care?"
Not really. Governments take private property for public use all the time. Most of those public uses probably benefit the general public far less than many believe a wall would do here. Compare this, for example, to the land being acquired through condemnation in building California's bullet train from nowhere to nowhere. My memory is that the private land that was the subject of the Kelo case is still sitting vacant long after its seizure was authorized by te Supreme Court, and its former residents evicted.
Yes, we're not spending - Trump isn't - on programs for poor or the elderly. It's all going to the wall. If he proposed spending this money on poverty programs the complaint would be, "It's just five billion."
There are good faith arguments about this matter; complaining that the poor are being shortchanged because of it isn't one of them.
"Now he can have the shutdown named after him, The Trump Shutdown. A legacy.
-- It'll be interesting if another parallel between Obama and Trump is they both pushed for a policy only popular among their hardcore base that they came to own, only for it to end up a failure and testament to how the government cannot handle large, big ticket projects. Obamacare, Trumpwall -- who knew they'd be so similar!
“If any of our resident liberal commentators can come up with a Democrat stating an immigration policy rather than stating that the policy of the Democrats is to oppose Trump, please post the link.”
“Democrats believe immigration is not just a problem to be solved, it is a defining aspect of the American character and our shared history.
Democrats will continue to work toward comprehensive immigration reform that fixes our nation’s broken immigration system, improves border security, prioritizes enforcement so we are targeting criminals – not families, keeps families together, and strengthens our economy.
Democrats know the importance of our country’s history as a nation of immigrants. We honor our fundamental values by treating all people who come to the United States with dignity and respect, and we always seek to embrace — not to to attack — immigrants.“
-Democratic Party Platform
Not surprising, zero distinction between legal and illegal immigration in that Dem party excerpt.
But no attacking!
Inga: That's not a policy. Those are talking points. We're talking about actual policy (HOW do you want to fix it, not YES, we want to fix it.)
The problem with that statement, Inga, is that it is an outright lie, or rather a gathering together of a pack of outright lies.
"Comprehensive immigration reform" is, of course, a euphemism for baiting the GOP into another amnesty, to be followed by another round of mass illegal immigration.
Our "nation's broken immigration system" isn't broken. The Democratic Party stalls and blockades every attempt to enforce our immigration laws, which are not broken at all. They just don't really allow you to import a new electorate in order to nullify the conservative white vote.
So, as usual, you're lying. You're against Russian interference in U.S. election, but in favor of importing Mexican illegals to nullify the conservative white vote.
You're a commie, Inga. You're a devious liar. Our immigration laws aren't broken. You are in defiance of those laws and determined to undermine enforcement.
Trump will eventually get most or all Wall funding. The "shutdown" is very limited since DoD is already funded (as are other large agencies), social security will be uninterrupted, etc. Outside parts of Homeland Security, there is no real price to pay for shutting down Departments like Agriculture and Commerce. Obama made melodramatic kabuki theater with shutting down parks, making flamboyant spectacle of kicking out WWII vet from memorials and the like, none of which is necessary. It can be managed so that it is transparent to the overwhelming majority of voters.
Schumer is playing a more dangerous game than he thinks. If the voters figure out the vast federal bureaucracy has that much fat in it, that would be a bad day for Democrats.
Also remember: It was Obama-era policies that jailed kids and lead to detainee abuse. It was under Trump that anyone bothered to report it. So, I really don't believe Team Blue wants to protect immigrants any more than Team Red does.
@Inga,
Democrats will continue to work toward comprehensive immigration reform that fixes our nation’s broken immigration system, improves border security, prioritizes enforcement so we are targeting criminals – not families, keeps families together, and strengthens our economy.
That's platitudes, not policy. What are they going to do about illegal immigrants already in country? What about birthright citizenship? What about catch & release? What about sanctuary cities & states? The list goes on & on.
Thanks for proving my point.
TSA "screens" people before they board planes.
Steps are ... Show boarding pass, ID, body scan, patdown, go to boarding gate.
At USA/Mexico line (think of it as two whales of plane never get off ground no danger of crashing) what would be steps to follow?
Illegal immigration is not popular with the Ammerican public. It is just popular with Dem politicians, and their enablers, including those in the MSM (Dem operatives with bylines). They are in it to grow their power by increasing the size of the underclass, whom they can lead to financial security through dependency upon them.
Their problem this time around is that the choice is pretty stark here. They passed in the Senate the CR w/o the wall, and refuse to consider it with. A $5 billion dollar rounding error that would otherwise just be tossed in as part of the sausage making. That is what the Fed is for - hiding overspending. It's the principle of the whole thing - Dem politicians have to toe the line on supporting open borders, or else, despite opposition by a decent majority in this country. Most of the time, they can pretend to support border security and the like, while sabatogueing it in the background. But this time, because the amount is so low, and is the only thing separating the CR from passage, they have no other excuses. They don't want a border wall because it might work, and that would separate them permanently from what they believe is their permanent majority status in Congress. They can bluster all they want, but in the end, Trump has tge bully pulpit, knows how to use it, and many of them will probably pay a political price for hewing to the party line, as they did in 2010 after voting to enact Obamacare.
Let me repeat that the way in which our immigration system is broken is that our laws don't really allow the stealth importation of Mexican illegals to vote for Democrats.
Basically, Inga, your problem is that you're in favor of criminal immigration. And, you keep lying and pretending you have some good motive.
You're just power hungry.
cronus titan said...Obama made melodramatic kabuki theater with shutting down parks, making flamboyant spectacle of kicking out WWII vet from memorials and the like, none of which is necessary. It can be managed so that it is transparent to the overwhelming majority of voters. Schumer is playing a more dangerous game than he thinks. If the voters figure out the vast federal bureaucracy has that much fat in it, that would be a bad day for Democrats.
--
Agreed.
Yesterday I noted an NBC news update played repeatedly on radio that referred to this as a "partial shutdown".
I'm not sure that phrase was prominently used in in MSM last go round.
"Democrats will continue to work toward comprehensive immigration reform that fixes our nation’s broken immigration system, improves border security, prioritizes enforcement so we are targeting criminals – not families, keeps families together, and strengthens our economy."
Actions speak louder than words. Trump offered comprehensive immigration reform to the Dems, and they rudely rejected it. The big sticking point was chain migration, which allows entire villages of peasants Central America to be given legal status if one member of the village gets citizenship. They talk family unification, but that is just code for accepting entire villages, thanks to their extensive intermarriage. Until they are willing to address chain migration, they are lying through their teeth when they mouth platitudes about supporting comprehensive immigration support. I would probably throw in there their abject refusal to consider shifting to some sort of merit immigration, countering the current situation where ignorant peasants have a significantly higher chance at citizenship than do PhDs here on H1B visas. But those PhDs might vote Republican at some point, while the peasants with 3rd grade educations can safely be steered to vote Democrat.
“ And at the same time, he/she is all too comfortable with the origin countries being hell-holes and has no interest in changing those origin countries?”
Take up the White Man’s Burden...
I like to give my fellow commenters the benefit of a doubt but this is just too moronic.
Trump is the anti-diversitist and pro-native. The Sun Wall will be paid through taxed remittances and a shared energy market, and an added layer to secure the civil rights of all Americans independent of their diversity (e.g. race, sex, gender, girth) class. It will stop a ready source of labor arbitrage that threatens the living wage of Americans and Mexicans alike. Use the revenue to fund the construction of clinics, schools, businesses, parks, etc. for all of America's unPlanned children.
steve uhr said...
John Henry - you’re wrong. Do a little research.
12/22/18, 11:24 AM
Steve, you are wrong, do a little research.
Steve I've posted Several comments here on different topics.
Which of my posts are wrong?
None, I think but I have no idea what you're talking about.
John Henry
Inga...Allie Oop said...
"-Democratic Party Platform"
George Orwell said...
In our time it is broadly true that political writing is bad writing. Where it is not true, it will generally be found that the writer is some kind of rebel, expressing his private opinions and not a ‘party line’. [Ahem, Trump?] Orthodoxy, of whatever colour, seems to demand a lifeless, imitative style. The political dialects to be found in pamphlets, leading articles, manifestos, White papers and the speeches of undersecretaries do, of course, vary from party to party, but they are all alike in that one almost never finds in them a fresh, vivid, homemade turn of speech. When one watches some tired hack on the platform mechanically repeating the familiar phrases — bestial, atrocities, iron heel, bloodstained tyranny, free peoples of the world, stand shoulder to shoulder — one often has a curious feeling that one is not watching a live human being but some kind of dummy: a feeling which suddenly becomes stronger at moments when the light catches the speaker's spectacles and turns them into blank discs which seem to have no eyes behind them. And this is not altogether fanciful. A speaker who uses that kind of phraseology has gone some distance toward turning himself into a machine. The appropriate noises are coming out of his larynx, but his brain is not involved, as it would be if he were choosing his words for himself. If the speech he is making is one that he is accustomed to make over and over again, he may be almost unconscious of what he is saying, as one is when one utters the responses in church. And this reduced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at any rate favourable to political conformity.
"Politics and the English Language" (1946)
I have many times mentioned here that I subscribed to The New Republic for 22 years. In 2002, TNR & the Democratic intelligentsia in general were pushing a book called The Emerging Democratic Majority by John Judis & Ruiy Teixeira. The thesis of the book was that inexorable demographic forces, primarily the expanding minority populations, would create a permanent Democratic electoral majority. The book still has tremendous influence among Democratic strategists.
Well, it didn't happen quite that way. One big problem are the blacks. The black population was expected to grow quite a bit more than it did. The Democrats were counting on this black population growth, since the blacks are among their most stalwart constituency.
The Democrats planned on having baby carriages sweep them into power & it didn't work. So, where to get those Democratic voting baby carriages? Why, from south of the border, from immigrant Latino constituencies who are almost as reliably Democratic as the blacks.
It's because I remember the hoopla over "Emerging Majority" that I don't just poo-poo Republican concerns over states like California letting illegals vote, or "bringing in a new electorate" as whack-job conspiracy theories. While Judis & Teixeira never advocated illegal actions, I know that Democratic operatives on the ground are not so moral. But, the main thrust was --- bring in & on the minorities to water down the white majority.
I cannot help but see Democratic mush-mouthedness over immigration policy as anything but an attempt to build a Democratic electorate by means fair or foul after those years of reading TNR.
"When one watches some tired hack on the platform mechanically repeating the familiar phrases — bestial, atrocities, iron heel, bloodstained tyranny, free peoples of the world, stand shoulder to shoulder — one often has a curious feeling that one is not watching a live human being but some kind of dummy..."
Notice the language: the DNC platform conflates legal and illegal immigration, which allows them to avoid articulating a policy on illegal immigration.
Democrats believe immigration is not just a problem to be solved, it is a defining aspect of the American character and our shared history.
Democrats will continue to work toward comprehensive immigration reform that fixes our nation’s broken immigration system, improves border security, prioritizes enforcement so we are targeting criminals – not families, keeps families together, and strengthens our economy.
Democrats know the importance of our country’s history as a nation of immigrants. We honor our fundamental values by treating all people who come to the United States with dignity and respect, and we always seek to embrace — not to to attack — immigrants.
"I'm not going to negotiate here on air, but I would answer that question very simply," Miller said of a potential shutdown. "If Democrats don't want the government to shut down, support border security. It's that simple. I heard earlier you were discussing the steel slat barrier, what that's referring to is the border patrol's preferred method of building a physical impediment to illegal entry."
"Are you talking to Democrats right now to come up with a compromise before midnight tomorrow night?" CNN host Wolf Blitzer asked.
"The Democrats, all they need to do is support border security and the government will be funded," Miller answered.
"The Democrats -- Stephen, the democrats support border security," Blitzer said. "They don't support $5 billion for a wall."
"Could you identify, Wolf, for me some of the border security they support?" Miller asked the host.
"They all support border security," the CNNer responded.
"Like what? They voted against case law. They voted against ending sanctuary cities. They voted against supporting MS-13 gang members, they voted against supporting violent criminals. They voted time and time against a physical border wall to stop illegal entry. I mean, where is the evidence that you keep asserting they're for border security? They haven't been. They oppose closing loopholes for asylum," Miller told Blitzer.
"Stephen, I want to move on to another issue. Stephen," Blitzer told Miller.
I'd like to be the person who thinks I'm not racist because I believe Mexicans should be able to come here and work for sub-American wages.
Inga quotes:
Democrats believe immigration is not just a problem to be solved, it is a defining aspect of the American character and our shared history.
Democrats will continue to work toward comprehensive immigration reform that fixes our nation’s broken immigration system, improves border security, prioritizes enforcement so we are targeting criminals – not families, keeps families together, and strengthens our economy.
Democrats know the importance of our country’s history as a nation of immigrants. We honor our fundamental values by treating all people who come to the United States with dignity and respect, and we always seek to embrace — not to to attack — immigrants.“
Platitudes and open borders policy.
@Walter,
They voted against case law. They voted against ending sanctuary cities. They voted against supporting MS-13 gang members, they voted against supporting violent criminals.
Bad case of AI speech to text.
"Case" should be "Kate's" as in Kate Steinle, a tourist shot in SF by an illegal immigrant with a long criminal record sheltered from INS by SF's sanctuary laws.
"Supporting" should be "Deporting", & is obvious after that change.
Dems are always thinking of taxpayer's dollar.
Like in taxing them away. Then spending even more.
$5 Billion is less than a week in Syria.
But Dems love Syria and the mess they made.
Yeah YH..that was a shitty transcript.
Video here
The commenter forgot to add about how how an effective border wall might keep illegal aliens from voting Democratic and bankrupting the US. I suspect that's his real grievance.
steve uhr said...
Drago I do know that large portions of the wall is to go on private property. How many of those property owners would refuse to sell to the government I don’t know but even if it’s only five percent we’re talking hundreds of land owners.
Back to the question no one will answer. Do you care?
*********
You *do* know how eminent domain is supposed to work, don't you? Before Kelo, at least, it required compensation for compelling the taking of land/property to be used for a public purpose.
"Border Security" is certainly a public purpose, ergo...
chickenlittle said...
Inga quotes:
Democrats believe immigration is not just a problem to be solved, it is a defining aspect of the American character and our shared history.
***************
does she even know that from the 1920's through the mid-1960's we had very little immigration, and those let in were admitted by quotas for certain countries, not everyone who wanted to come here.
And, of course, **illegal** immigration is what we're talking about.
Cacimbo Cacimbo@8:46 "... I honestly believe plenty of lefties would be willing to kill themselves if it guaranteed Trump going to jail."
You just may have something there. If we can advance the theory that a mass suicide of Democrat party members will bring the end of the Era of Trump, say 100,000. Instead of marching or screaming at the moon, they commit sausage. The best part is that when it doesn't work, we can say that it was because we didn't do it enough, then gather 1 million for the ritual Seppuku to get rid of Trump....
Rinse and repeat.
Democrats know that immigration reform is necessary to cover-up mass migration and waterboarded (Mediterranean) refugees forced by social justice adventures. Democrats know that CAIR is necessary to cover-up the human rights and GDP deficits from selective and recycled-child and replace America's Planned babies. Democrats know that CAIR and fraud are necessary to gerrymander the vote, sustain redistributive change, diversity, and political congruence in high-density population centers.
Michael Fitzgerald said...Instead of marching or screaming at the moon, they commit sausage.
They'd sooner commit turkey baster than sausage.
Legal immigrants don't support border jumpers. Most Americans favor controlled immigration , border jumpers, not so much. The NYT and its readers fail to understand that distinction.
Rhhardin, the core mission of the Federal Reserve is to maintain the value of the currency. Since its founding in 1914 the purchasing power of $1 is now $28. Some job of preserving the value of the currency.
Crying racist is the last refuge of the scoundrel.
Average Americans want border security and the immigration laws enforced.
The anti-American left and rich cheap labor lobby doesn't.
Who will rule, the people or Wall Street and the crazy Left?
rhhardin said...
"Shithole countries have smart people but not enough."
What? I thought you said all that matters is "character".
Democrats believe immigration is not just a problem to be solved, it is a defining aspect of the American character and our shared history.
One aggravating factor is that assimilation is no longer a goal. Generations of immigrants all followed a simple rule that eventually, a common language would be spoken. This is changing and is one reason there is resistance.
If Nancy Pelosi really believes the wall is immoral, she should take down the wall around her mansion, remove the door and window locks, and then invite President Trump over for tea. In the meantime we could fill a couple of buses with illegal immigrants and deposit them in her front yard. Then video what comes next
Jay Elink: "does she (Inga) even know that from the 1920's through the mid-1960's we had very little immigration, and those let in were admitted by quotas for certain countries, not everyone who wanted to come here"
No.
No she doesn't.
And tomorrow she still won't.
Nor the next day.
There are many many things you must not allow yourself to know in order to be a lefty or LLR.
We could fix immigration with a 1 foot tall wall and some strategically placed testicles.
The refugees could be waterboarded in the Mediterranean... Caribbean. Cooper could report an emotionally-appealing cover-up.
Perhaps hang Planned American fetuses... babies as cannibals once hung the skulls of their victims. Something wicked this way lies.
I prefer the clean, green, yet colorful, Sun Wall, which will be paid through a tax on remittances, and a shared energy market. Accompanied by emigration reform to mitigate the collateral damage from immigration reform at both ends of the bridge and throughout. The revenues could pay for construction of hospitals, businesses, schools, homes, theaters for the unPlanned American children, without discrimination for their diversity class. Perhaps a join venture with Mexico, as part of a good neighbor policy, that will promote emigration reform.
"is just popular with Dem politicians, and their enablers, including those in the MSM (Dem operatives with bylines)"
You should also add Chamber of Commerce Republicans who like cheap labor. Of course, they don't crow about it the way the Dems do, but out of the spotlight, they like the status quo.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा