OftenWrong

I have my doubts, at times...

I thought you said they could not possibly be a leftist though.

It's easy to be a nice leader when everyone is your friend and willing to cooperate. What if you are the leader and face a congress that has members who are 100% opposed to anything you want to do, no matter what it is? Then if you want to get something done, can't be too 'benevolent'. You people make it sound like good leader would be Kung Fu Tse. He's all about being a gentleman. But now what if Attila the Hun is coming with his army to your border lands, and you need to recruit some defensive forces pronto? No time for cooperation now. You gotta conscript your young men to war, whether they like it or not. Agree, or not. What if the polecat is in the hen house? You've gotta shut that stuff down, in the best interest of the STATE. A good ruler is one who has a clear vision of what needs to be done, strong determination to follow through and the smarts to pull it off against their political enemies. They know how to make the right compromise between fairness, and necessary unfairness.

That's just normal citizen_2015, every forum I know does that. You can't just keep going back and editing something. It times out usually after about 5 minutes. Who gives a crap what's said anyway? Aint like this is some court of law, or somethin. I mean you're anonymous, there's nothing said here that sticks to you. Unless of course you let it. Don't be like cybercoma, he just flipped his lid. If you're upset about things, like Donald Trump, just take a vacation for a while, don't delete all your posts. I mean what, you really going to delete thousands of posts by hand? That would take weeks.

Obama already tried to be friends with the Ayatollahs, but they laughed at him. They're not gonna be no friend of the Great Satan. There is only one thing these people understand- threats of violence. And that is exactly what Donald Trump is happy to give them.

You're right... I do value her input. I just have a weird way of showing it!

You're right it wasn't directed at her specifically. It's directed at ubersensitive types. It doesn't matter how nice you are to some people, they take offence no matter what. I figured maybe if I say "We are taking over" she might get pissed and say "No you're not!" and come back again. Or shall the left just wither away...

Trump is playing the media for a fool. While you people get excited about things that hardly matter, he's busy signing executive orders like they're going out of style. Protestors can bitch and whine about how rude he is, but that changes absolutely nothing. He;s done nothing worthy of impeachment at this point. Trump was elected in part for those very personality traits you abhor. BECAUSE he is rude. Nothing he's done is self-inflicted. But rest assured, being POTUS means he can readily inflict pain onto others. With a mere word, even...

Simpering leftists can abandon the forum if you wish. No one is driving you away. Your posts shall remain, of course, as the moderator said. Even if you eave, we shall remain. We are taking over now.

Probably a good idea to silence the ones who are telling lies, and encouraging/ inciting violence against the state.

Here's the problem, in some cases those bad guys were planted by people who worked very closely with the Linton campaign. You've heard of n agent provocateur, I assume? This is the sort thing they do. Democratic heads roll after video shows agitators planted at Trump rallies The first video shows Democratic strategists discussing how they hire agitators — including union members, homeless people and the mentally ill — to incite violence by provoking Trump supporters on camera at campaign stops. Project Veritas released a second video Tuesday showing Mr. Foval brainstorming over ways to commit voter fraud, such as by busing people from one state to another, while appearing to indicate that it had already been done in Iowa. I don't know about you people, but I find that among the most damning testimony about the kind of intrigue that's going on.

Perhaps you need to take a shower then my friend. It's probably you

Nope. Remember the Gulags?

Certainly seems like some people are having a hard time making the adjustment. Presumably, suicide hotline call numbers have subsided, although I cannot be sure. Also, seems like the leftist protestors reaction far exceeds the kind of hostility that was Obama faced, when he became president. The right certainly did react and protest, but nothing like this. Worldwide, even. Leftism transcends borders.

"Be careful what you wish for... you might get it."

Not the British though.

I think the excessive media hyperbole is a security risk. Terrorists are watching the spectacle of a divided USA that honours insubordination and are thinking, "Now's our chance."

Or in Newfoundland.

I don't know, but it sure makes for great theatre.

1) There has been strong debate including acceptance and resistance to free trade for centuries. I'm no economist or historian but it seems like changes are needed to any economic system once its advantages have been fully exploited. It appears we have reached that tipping point. I keep thinking about a city like Detroit as example, or maybe Michigan in general. Looking closer to home, we got a lot of industries that are bleeding dry and moving out here. Intelligent, preemptive changes are needed to minimize the loss. Doubtful that Trump won't deliver, a bit too early yet to pass judgement. Results matter not big words, and Trump's got lots of the latter let's see if his ideas actually work. 2) I think protectionism needs to come back to some extent. I'd rather accept the premise that global conflict between nations expresses itself through economic war rather than real war. That's a step up in civility. Reason I mention it is because that's what we're seeing, a power struggle every bit as important as real war. Behind the thin veneer of trade agreements is a desire for national victory at the expense of "others". We have not, and will not, outgrow this. The pressure exists both economically and culturally. 3) We're not in Kansas no more. Again one should look at it in a historical context. The economy was strong in the 50's - 70's, it could weather such changes in the short term. It made sense to enact trade laws to benefit shareholders. Trickle-down theory was a fantasy though, and we need to revise the situation as it is now. There is no golden rule that works, for all time, Dorothy. <added> These matters are very important, in the context of President Trump's impact on America.

They certainly are a start the question now is, is that where it remains for them? For how can these businesses afford to pay poor people more? It always translates to a loss in profit, of a necessary increase in the price of goods. But those possibilities are already highly limited. I know what you are saying, it is an attempt to be helpful, spread the wealth around. But we should not pretend that these things are done to benefit the poor. They are not. At the first sight of profits moving elsewhere, globalists will pull out their money and shut down the high tech factory in Bangladesh, and move it to Dar Es Salamm.

I'm saying it is a bad idea now. It may have been helpful in principle but now that it's become accepted way of doing things, it's become a problem. Not just the economy but globalization in general, including the misguided implementation of multiculturalism. The idea sounded good in principle, but failed to connect the dots with human frailty. Corruption, unfairness, greed. The concept "free trade" has existed long before the modern era, and has been detested as the bane of economic prosperity for the common man. "Free trade policies have battled with mercantilist, protectionist, isolationist, communist, populist, and other policies over the centuries." Globalism was implemented too quickly and broadly, without necessary protections that make it fair. I mean protection from the loss of cultural erosion in the west. Free trade also presents certain moral problems, which need not be listed here. Rather than concern ourselves purely on terms of profit margins for one group, we need to take a larger view that society is an organic system that is connected end to end. It does matter that moving production to a third world country causes local loss of prosperity, when applied on a large scale and without regard for the consequences, both short and long term. Small people matter, because they come in large numbers. That points to a different kind of trade model. That is why I use the words fair trade.

Those are nice ideas for discussion in the uni classroom. They are idealized theories. Human reality shows there is another constant: corruption. There's free trade, and then there's fair trade. You want evidence just look at economic history over the last 2-3 decades, compare that to the standard of living for middle class households in the decades before. I remember when the NAFTA came out, was just a kid but I followed some of the media discussion back then. People were saying the same things as we are now, jobs will go south (way south) giving them the opportunity for a better life, while we lose our livelihood in return. The price of cars the same. But the profit on sales went way higher. Shareholders get the benefit, auto workers get the crankshaft.

Change is the only constant. We can also discuss that the total wealth in any closed system is conserved. Or as renowned political scientist Albert Oftenwrong writes, "For every economic change in one region, there is an equal and opposite economic change in another." Corporations took advantage of the situation at a time when the economy was strong enough to support "free trade", to draw off the remaining wealth in the system. Not by increasing the price of goods for sale, no, but by keeping that price essentially the same and dramatically lowering the cost of production. That worked well for them for a while, until the system became hollowed out. When there is no middle, consumer spending drops. The system is slowing down, coming to a halt. Economy's dying. Something needs to change before that happens, and the sooner the better. Solution- Enter the strongman.

It just seemed that what you said was callous somehow. That is what I meant. "These jobs are good enough for Bangladesh." Note I am not singling you out here. There has been confusion on the left that I've suddenly become sympathetic to the cause of third world child labourers. That is not the point I'm making. The point is that leftists have suddenly come to accept and take advantage of the very things that were their primary raison d'etra which means, their raisin for being..