SpankyMcFarland

Who is denying that? I took examples where many people clearly didn’t love their leaders and still fought for their country, eg Iran itself in 1980 when the ‘Shah’s pilots’ helped halt Saddam’s invasion. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/how-the-iranian-air-force-turned-the-tide-of-the-iran-iraq-war-in-1980/ Or 1941 when the Soviet Army, still reeling from Stalin’s murderous purges, stopped the mighty Wehrmacht in front of Moscow. I’m sure many Vietnamese weren’t too keen on communism either but people will naturally unite to fight foreigners who attack their country whatever the state of internal politics. One of many mistakes America made in its constitutional order was to combine the roles of head of state with head of government. The executive du jour and the nation should always be clearly distinguished.

America after this Bill will resemble any Trump business, headed for negative territory on the financials. He sure loves debt.

Any tax on corporations can end up being paid by customers. Does that mean we should give up taxing corporations? We are a country with an economy, not an economy with a country.

What will we get for being right about this? Not much. You think I want the CCP to win? This is one of the central delusions of the fossil fuel crowd.

America under Trump seems to be offering a retrofuturist fossil fuel alternative to China’s renewable tsunami. It’s a form of denial as pathetic as it is worrying.

I know they lead the way in those technologies and I suspect you do too. Of course they still use a lot of coal because China is still a rapidly developing country with 1.4 billion people. You have to look at the direction they are taking to assess where they will soon be.

Trump’s own campaigns for the presidency criticized the forever wars in the Middle East that his country embroiled itself in which is why some of his supporters were disappointed by this new development.

We are getting a little off track here. Unfortunately, English speakers have generally received a lopsided education in Napoloeon through a British lens of yesteryear that equated him crudely with the likes of Hitler and ignored the way in which he transformed France, and European law. One example would be the emancipation of Jews in his empire and what happened to many of them after he fell from power, eg in the original ghetto of Venice. Needless to say, there were wars in Europe involving the great empires before and after Napoleon. That’s another day’s work. My initial point was that a young French corporal was given an opportunity to seize power in France because of a foreign invasion of the country. To reiterate: foreign ‘liberations’ rarely work because they are usually not aligned with the interests of the invaded nation.

He was defeated eventually because he became a despot himself and also because the emperors of Europe hated the dangerously meritocratic example he offered their oppressed subjects, especially their ethnic and religious minorities, thus conspiring against him for years with the British who didn’t care one whit about absolutism on the European mainland. The ideas of the French Revolution lived on. The point I’m making is we are all tribal creatures first. France was divided by the Revolution but rallied around the flag once foreigners invaded the country. The same thing happened in both Iran after Saddam’s invasion and the USSR during Barbarossa. Uncle Joe may have been a tyrant but he was their tyrant.

The US used to lead on renewables. Now China is pulling away. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/06/30/climate/china-clean-energy-power.html

DSTs are only going to become more common around the world. Governments have been remarkably patient about the shenanigans of American high-tech firms partly because of the benefits their products have brought but their patience has run out. Facebook, Google and the rest have wiped out the revenue from local tax-paying media companies, replacing them with complex arrangements that squirrelled money away in havens like Ireland, the Caymans and Luxembourg. Trump shouting at Canada isn’t going to stem the tide.

Generally speaking, a foreign bombing campaign rallies people around the flag and whatever regime is in charge, eg Britain, the Soviet Union, Vietnam. When foreign forces tried to end the French Revolution they made Napoleon a hero.

Yes, we’re negotiating with Trump and his team, not all of America. They described it as caving.

Canada ‘caved’ - this is the thuggish mentality we have to negotiate with. Really classy people. They hate us when we bargain with them and despise us when we compromise. So it looks like we will have to postpone DSTs because of our geography but rest assured they’re only going to become more common in the rest of the world and will make it to our shores eventually. In a digital age, governments can’t afford not to have them.

Now he has added the abolition of supply management to his list of demands. Has anybody explained to him that the US: has a big surplus in dairy products with Canada and an enormous surplus in agricultural produce overall (nobody buys more of their eggs than we do); subsidizes its own farmers; and employs thousands of undocumented workers to milk its cows, meaning that Trump effectively wants us to accept the proceeds of crime.

That’s a design flaw in the forum. Most sites like this can do that.

One problem with politicians being landlords is that they are at risk of conflicts of interest. They shouldn’t be involved in any legislation relating to domestic property, esp. tenants’ rights, or any policy discussions on planning, zoning etc. It’s a bad look for anybody to be writing laws that may be benefit themselves and a serious faux pas in the midst of a housing crisis. In this case we are talking about the actual housing minister concealing assets. Couldn’t make it up.

Can somebody correct the spelling of the person’s name in the thread title? It’s Mamdani with an ‘n’.

Voters are desperate for change which is why they can vote for a right-wing populist in one election and a left-wing candidate in the next. What they didn’t want was the status quo offered by the Democratic establishment - a disgraced, elderly politician backed by millions of dollars, much from right-wing sources. Mamdani sounded fairly out there on some proposals but he ran an energetic campaign, hardly surprising given the fact that he was literally half the age of his opponent. The Dems should have two priorities - to sweep away the gerontocracy and start listening to voters. https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/jun/29/does-zohran-mamdani-new-york-primary-victory-offer-roadmap-for-democrats

If you’re talking internationally, not in remotely the same way. Trump is actively destroying the bonds that tie the West together.

Have you seen the extraordinary lengths to which US tech companies abroad go to avoid paying tax? When it comes to multinationals, the international tax system has broken down. Where Facebook etc are actually paying tax at this stage has become a bewilderingly complex and opaque matter which is why so many countries have run out of patience and are speaking together on this: if you make money here, you pay tax here. It’s very simple, really.

Let me try to make this clear. I am not defending Bitcoin or encouraging anybody to buy it. Bitcoin is far more dangerous than a mere Ponzi scheme. It’s more like a global cult that empowers criminals. Look at the way Trump and Co have gotten involved in crypto. There’s a potential disaster heading our way.

China is going to see some serious problems in the next few decades but the achievements of its entrepreneurs, engineers and scientists will continue to astound the world and it has a lot more of them than anybody else does. Frankly, I can’t see the West keeping up. The last thing we need are people like Trump dividing us from within.

Strictly speaking, a Ponzi scheme has particular criteria that Bitcoin doesn’t have. Madoff ran a Ponzi scheme where the money from new investors was used to keep the scheme going as Charles Ponzi did. In a classic Ponzi scheme there is one person controlling the scam: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme Bitcoin is different from that and in some ways more dangerous.

Unfortunately, there’s a particular species of landlord on the make that sees politics as merely a convenient step on their real (estate) career path. I would prefer our politicians to be in mutual funds or blind trusts and own no property other than their primary residence and maybe a flat in Ottawa and a cabin in the woods. Why can’t more follow the spirit of de Gaulle’s example? https://telegrafi.com/en/presidenti-de-gaulle-dhe-faturat/