What has Trump done now?

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

The speech was mainly about terrorism, and he made it some years ago, 2017 I think, but the content of that speech still applies to-day IMO, how could it not? And now that Trump is President again, things are moving along with the release of Israeli hostages. One Israeli is worth 50 Palestinians up there.

Edited Saturday at 03:29 PM by Grumpy Old Nasho

[rgmwa]

Yes it was, and for all his urbane sophistication, Netanyahu is just as much a terrorist in the region as the Hamas militants.

[rgmwa]

Another predictable move by Trump to wind back the protections consumers, including his MAGA supporters, currently have:

The director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Rohit Chopra, was fired on Saturday, prematurely ending a five-year term that was scheduled to run through late 2026. “With so much power concentrated in the hands of a few, agencies like the C.F.P.B. have never been more critical,” Mr. Chopra wrote in a letter he posted on social media announcing his departure.

He will appoint a loyalist to ensure banks, lenders and other sharks have less accountability. 

[Jerry_Atrick]

1 hour ago, rgmwa said:

there is no solution to that particular problem because the antagonists on both sides will never agree to a peaceful solution.

Er.. I think you will find there was one side that was always agreeing to a compromise, and not the other. Bill Maher trained as a historian. What he also doesn't mention, as I guess this is a TV slot, is that after the 67 war, Israel handed back the Sinai in return for peace, but Egypt and others invaded again. And lost... again.

 

Israel would probably compromis again today, but on much stricter terms about guaranteeing peace. At the moment, there is one side that is still about wiping jews off the map..

 

I would recommend watching this video and then asking who has not been willing to compromise, and then ask, if you were in Israel's shoes, would you want a two state solution as it was originally proposed?

 

 

[rgmwa]

I agree with what Bill Maher says but it takes two sides to agree to compromise. i’m sure the vast majority of Palestinians and Jews don’t hate each other snd would live happily enough side by side given the chance. Israel has been repeatedly  attacked since it was created and has hit back to defend itself, which it has a right to. It has also spent decades pushing into the West Bank and creating new settlements. The conflict will continue until all the countries in the region accept each other’s right to exist. Hamas wants Israel to disappear, which it won’t, but the hardliners in Israel don’t want a two-state solution. If Trump can fix that he’s a better man than I give him credit for.

[onetrack]

GON, I signed the Oath when I was conscripted, because I knew what I was signing. and knew I was potentially putting my life on the line for my country.

 

I had been in business for myself, in partnership with a brother, for 4 years, before I entered the Army. I wasn't a dumb 20 yr old, I was an astute business owner, used to dealing with a large and wealthy clientele face to face, training others, and owning and operating and repairing a good range of equipment and plant.

 

For what it's worth, I also volunteered to serve in Vietnam. As an Engineer, I had the choice of volunteering to serve overseas, or electing to stay in Australia. I elected to serve overseas, knowing it was a traditional move, and one that carried benefits, and also looking like an adventure to a 20 yr old who had previously not left Australia.

We did all have reservations about the style of American conduct of the Vietnam War, but at that time, the constant advance of Communism via terrorism, DID pose a real threat to SE Asian countries.

 

I do know that Nasho's who joined the infantry did not have that choice, as they were attached to Regiments that were rotated into and out of SVN, whereas Support Units members were rotated in and out of SVN on an individual basis.

 

I do think you're becoming a bit of a tired "One Note Charlie" with your constant harping on the "Nashos Fair Go" angle. You seem to fail to understand that major difference in treatment and recognition, between soldiers who served in combat zones, and those who didn't leave the comforts of Australia, where the biggest danger was being abused by an anti-Vietnam War protestor. 

 

This separation between "returned servicemen" and those who never left Australia, in the form of entitlements and treatments is enshrined in the Veterans Entitlements Act 1986, and returned servicemen entitlements have been in place since the Soldiers Repatriation Act was first introduced in 1917, and this Act was promoted by Gen. Sir John Monash.

 

The Veterans Entitlements Act 1986 is a two-booklet Act full of court decisions and legal definitions that precisely define all the entitlements due to returned servicemen. It is not an Act designed to cater to National Servicemen, because it is the modern version of the 1917 Soldiers Repatriation Act.

You seem to equate some of the hardships endured by National Servicemen as on a par with the hardships endured by returned soldiers who served in combat zones. I can assure you, no-one accepts that argument.

 

https://www.dva.gov.au/sites/default/files/files/publications/corporate/P03428.pdf

[facthunter]

The RSL treated you as bad as  anyone did. I Never GO there now. Silly old Colonel Blimps. It wasn't LIKE OUR WAR. BS.  Nev

[red750]

https://au.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-poised-ignite-trade-war-203539161.html

[facthunter]

He's BREAKING a lot of agreements HE signed. Promises KEPT?  Nev

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

3 hours ago, onetrack said:

GON, I signed the Oath when I was conscripted, because I knew what I was signing.

Thanks for answering that onetrack, that's all I wished to know. I'd like to discuss the subject further, not in here, in a new thread perhaps, specific to conscription only, in the past and for the future. It's still on the books.

[facthunter]

Conscription is $#!t. Nev

[pmccarthy]

We were also traumatised, who had to wait for their marble to be pulled out.

[kgwilson]

It was an unjust war championed by Mcarthyism scare mongering and our politicians grabbed the coat tails of the US system. Our soldiers were the best they could be and politics did not enter their collective conscience. They did their duty and should always be celebrated for it. It was just a very sad and unfortunate turn of events that much of the public finally saw through the lies and deceit and the divisions in our society then meant returning veterans were very badly treated. This is history now and we know the truth but I still feel bad for the returned veterans and utter contempt for the politicians of the day.

[rgmwa]

I also remember listening to the radio one night waiting for my number to come up as they read down the list of marbles they’d pulled out. Although I was a permanent resident and not an Australian citizen I still had to register for the call up. The ridiculous thing was that I wasn’t eligible to volunteer for the army, but being conscripted was OK.

[nomadpete]

 

[old man emu]

Trump and his mates might be billionaires because their involvement in global corporations, but that does not mean they have any real knowledge of Economics. Trump sure doesn't. He goes on and on about tariffs affecting the countries to which the USA owes squillions. A tariff or duty (the words are used interchangeably) is a tax levied by governments on the value including freight and insurance of imported products. Tariffs have long been a part of the economic structure of countries. One could say that "tariff" is the politically correct term for "import duty".

 

Import duties have existed for centuries, but became more important during the Industrial Revolution as a means of shielding local manufacturers from foreign manufacturers whose production costs may have been lower. Thus a country's manufacturing base could be shielded from the effect of cheaper imports. That worked before the global economy developed into what it is today. It should be kept in mind that it was the manufacturing corporations of the USA which moved the manufacture of their product out of the USA to countries where production costs were lower. Now it may be too expensive to re-establish that manufacturing in the USA. 

 

To Trump's way of thinking, it is the other country that pays the tariff. However, it is the importer who pays. The result is that the importer has to decide if a consumer is more likely to pay for the imported item instead of buying a locally produced item. The only effect on the exporting country is on volume of purchases the importer is prepared to make. If an importer reduces purchases, then the exporter either suffers financial loss, or looks elsewhere for sales. In the end, it is the consumer who loses. Either the object the consumer wants becomes unavailable, or becomes too expensive. The only winner in the process is the government which collects more tax money.

[facthunter]

I don't  think ANY government encouraged the disgusting way the returnees from Vietnam were treated and as I've said a few times, the way the RSL of the time treated them was completely disgusting and the Media would have had some part in it as well, no doubt.  It's far too easy for ANY Govt  to declare war.    Democracy needs to be more than 50% plus almost nothing. multiplied a number of time s along the way. 1/2 of a 1/2 is a 1/4 so it can rapidly compound to a small number. You need RULES specifying Rights of individuals and due process (legal) and guaranteed access without prejudice and NO ONE being ABOVE the LAW. or able to put pressure on it.. Nev

[onetrack]

Donald Trump earnestly believes that tariffs are a "beautiful tool" to beat other countries over the head with. He believes he can use tariffs to make other countries do his bidding.

Unfortunately, he's too dumb to realise that imposing tariffs brings a whole raft of unforeseen problems. If importers see a major sales decline in the goods they've previously been importing, and there's reluctance to "buy local" due to much higher local product costs, then the importer will cease to import the product and shortages will result, causing an increase in pricing as local manufacturers take advantage of the massive demand, and their inability to meet it.

 

Then there's the "backlash effect" that Trump barely grasps. He thinks he has total power, being in "control" of the American economy. But he doesn't have total control, he's got hold of the steering wheel, but many others have control over the brakes and clutch and gearshift.

The "backlash effect" is when Trump underestimates how much damage can be done by other countries introducing tariffs on American goods and products. This can be very substantial, as many other countries can produce exactly what America can manufacture, grow or mine.

 

The Chinese thought they could use the "beautiful tool" of tariffs on Australian products to punish us for daring to criticise China's opaqueness over the source of the COVID-19 virus.

But they ended up shooting themselves in the foot, as local coal and metal ores and LNG producers rapidly found new markets - and prices often went up, meaning China had to find new sources for their vital Australian imports, and then pay more for them.

Little has been revealed about what happened to Chinese consumers when Australian lobster sales to China fell 64% during the China-Australia tariff war. The simple result would have been Chinese diners fighting over a very limited supply of Australian lobster, and for them having to pay a lot higher price for it, resulting in reduced spending power for them overall.

 

Canada is a vital supplier of car parts and energy products to America and it has responded to American tariffs on Canadian products by imposing tariffs on American goods.

This will have the immediate result of reducing sales of American manufactured goods to Canada, and Canadians turning to other manufacturers. The tariff was will be a direct kick to the goolies of American car manufacturers, as American car sales slump in Canada, and Canadians end up buying more Chinese cars. This effect will go right across the board, so it will effect ALL American industry.

 

Then there's American farmers, who are the backbone of Trumps support. Last time he messed with tariffs on Chinese goods, the Chinese retaliated by imposing tariffs on U.S. farm imports.

Trump ended up having to pay a lot of Govt support money to U.S. farmers to make up for their reduced export sales and lower prices for their products.

 

https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/how-china-reduced-its-reliance-us-farm-imports-softening-trade-war-risks-2024-11-13/#:~:text=Beijing retaliated with tariffs of,%2C wheat%2C corn and sorghum.

 

If Trump thinks that American consumers will make up the shortfall of export sales by purchasing more local goods, then I've got news for him, there's nowhere in history where that has happened.

The bottom line is that the price of everything will go up in a tariff war, and Donald Trump promised all his followers that he'd reduce the cost of everything. Somewhere along the line, soon, MAGA adherents are going to realise they've been sold a pup.

 

Edited Monday at 12:04 AM by onetrack

[facthunter]

It's now proven the Americans will vote for any IDIOT, who tells them what they WANT to HEAR and are too lazy or disinterested to LOOK harder. In actual fact the vote was NO landslide and offered NO power of MANDATE to do  things that are not within the LAW. The trouble is that NOW, when we are where we are, how do we undo it with the Power Shift that has happened? THOSE people are not going to give up the Power readily, NOW that they HAVE it. People like that NEVER do.   Nev

[rgmwa]

He’s just told Americans to expect some ‘pain’ as a result of his tariffs, but that ‘it will be worth it’. He’s also said before that ‘trade wars are good and easy to win’. Well, maybe not. Some of his supporters may be feeling the first twinges of concern that their cost of living may not be going down like he promised. 

OT’s right that he may be at the wheel but others are in control of the clutch, brakes and gears. As he’s such an erratic and angry driver, a crash seems inevitable. 

[octave]

It is not clear to me what the tariffs on Canada are supposed to achieve.  Perhaps one of the Trump supporters here can explain the game plan.

[rgmwa]

I’m hardly a supporter, but it’s primarily about punishment and payback because he sees the fact that the US buys more from Canada than the Canadians buy from them that they are being treated very unfairly because it should be the other way around. He also wants to stop drugs and immigrants coming into the US across the Canadian border, although it’s hard to see how tariffs are supposed to do that. Same story with Mexico. To make matters worse, he’s torn up his own free trade agreement with these countries in the process. What does that tell the world about his trustworthiness?

[facthunter]

The Person controlling the Gearbox has the best chance of making America GRATE again. It's "Crunch" time now.   Nev

[octave]

My understanding is that Canada is not a huge source of drugs compared to Mexico. This surely this should be something that the US has some control over at its border. 

 

How much Canadian fentanyl crosses into the U.S.?

As the opioid epidemic raged in the United States, killing thousands, Congress in 2020 established a commission to look into ways to reduce the flow of the drugs into the country. The commission found that “Canada is not known to be a major source of fentanyl, other synthetic opioids or precursor chemicals to the United States, a conclusion primarily drawn from seizure data,” according to its February 2022 report.

Last year, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents intercepted about 19 kilograms of fentanyl at the northern border, compared with almost 9,600 kilograms at the border with Mexico, where cartels mass-produce the drug.

 

As far as trade imbalance goes.

 

In 2023, the goods and services trade between the two countries totalled $923 billion. U.S. exports were $441 billion, while imports were $482 billion, resulting in a United States $41 billion trade deficit with Canada.^[1

 

^{This hardly seems enormous, especially given the differences in population US 345 Million and Canada 41 Million.  What is Canada supposed to do, buy stuff it does not need?  Trump sees the fact that the US buys more from Canada than Canada does from the US as an injustice but it is just about what one country has to sell and what another country needs to buy.}

[octave]

this is an interesting article.  Tariff On Canada Not Justified By U.S. Immigration And Drug Claims

 

Furthermore, the migration flow is not one-sided. In 2023, the last year for which we have statistics at the moment, more people crossed illegally from the United States into Canada than in the opposite direction. With Canada experiencing a labor shortage and increasing economic opportunities, it is likely that the number of individuals moving north in 2025, both legally and illegally, will continue to surpass those moving south.

 

In Fiscal Year 2024, USCBP seized 21,148 pounds of fentanyl at the southwest border, mostly smuggled from Mexico. In contrast, only 43 pounds were intercepted at the northern border. This means that less than 1% of all fentanyl seizures occurred at the U.S.-Canada border.

Furthermore, drug flows are not a one-way street. In 2024, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) seized approximately 10.8 pounds of fentanyl coming into Canada from the United States. In comparison, CBSA reported that 17.6 pounds of fentanyl were smuggled from Canada into the U.S. This suggests that the trafficking issue is not as one-sided as the administration claims.