Except that's not how it works. What you'll have is what has traditionally happened, tariffs being used to fend off competition. Consumers end being screwed and the protected industries become less and less competitive.
The idea that tariffs were invented for "freedom" is absurd. They were invented to protect domestic industries against competition. And the lesson of erecting large tariff walls is that it is the consumer that ends up paying to protect these industries, and the industries themselves become ever less competitive, protected in a nice encirclement of economic privilege. But that cannot be sustained forever, and eventually when the door opens a little bit, the coddled and increasingly indolent domestic industry is crushed.
Besides, the whole fucking thing is going to be automated in a few decades. Even the wage slaves of Bangladesh and China will be out of a job. And then what? Erect tariffs against foreign robots, or even better, against domestic robots?
I do expect he'll keep the relatively easy promises. A conservative appointment to the Supreme Court, deregulation, and other bones to the fossil fuel industry and a big "fuck you" to attempts to mitigate CO2. I suspect his foreign policy in other ways will ultimately look a lot like the last seventy years, simply because the alternative would be international chaos. In return Congress will let him produce some big fat deficits to drop short-lived infrastructure programs on the Rust Belt, before a Democrat is elected and is forced to deal with it.
And this demonstrates what happens to conspiracy theories. They have to get bigger and more all encompassing simply because they cannot sustain themselves otherwise.
Tune in next week when this AC starts talking about the evil lizard people behind it all.
That's my view. I think he's probably taken Wikileaks to a place it can't come back from, not unless it dumps Assange. But since Wikileaks is now essentially the Cult of Julian, it's more likely that he'll languish in the Ecuadorian embassy for some time to come, until political changes in Ecuador mean he gets the boot. At which point, regardless of Sweden or the United States' intentions, British courts would like to have a little talk with him, that will almost certainly end up in a stay in a British prison.
The war has been won, really? You think deregulation won't mean more crap gets dumped into watersheds, more dangerous emissions? Oh, and let's not get started on the idea that CO2, despite all the physical and climatological evidence, doesn't increase net energy (temperature) in the oceans and lower atmosphere.
What if Texas were to get rid of winner take all and moved to a proportional system. The one thing the EC does is counterbalance the larger urban vote, and in a country where a significant fraction of the population still lives in relatively small communities and rural areas, a pure popular vote system would render their votes meaningless.
What if, instead, you went to a ranked voting system for selecting the Electoral College, and then you got rid of the winner take all, which means, like a couple of states, Texas could have electors representing some or all of the candidates on the ballot? It still wouldn't be a direct election, and it still wouldn't be truly proportional, but it would mean that the result would retain some of the urban-rural balancing of the current EC voting model, but bring it at least closer to a truly representative election.
No, she's done. I doubt she'd even want to, but even she did, the Democrats wouldn't let it happen. First and foremost, the Democrats actually have a weighed system in their superdelegates so that something like that couldn't happen.
I'm wagering they'll be pushing to the Left of the party, looking for a younger Bernie Sanders type. A lot of it also depends on whether Trump runs again. He's not a young man, and he'll be 74 by a second term. He's at the age where even rich billionaires can start suffering health problems. But if he does run again, he'll have four years of not being the wunderkind his supporters think he is now. So if the Dems don't find their own version of Mitt Romney, but rather do find someone who can rebuild Obama's voter bloc, then the have a decent chance.
Or not. Four years is a long time, and to my mind this isn't like the last three presidents, where you had reasonably young men who would still be fairly young when they reached their second term. A 74 year old Donald Trump may not be as attractive a candidate on many fronts as a 70 year old Trump. Spray tans can't hide ever crack.
Even if the information was accurate, what happened next was typical of what happens when you get large document dumps. People sift through the documents, finding passages that look incriminating or insinuate nefarious acts or conspiracies. This is what happened with Climategate, and both that and the Clinton email dumps are classic examples of quote mining, of the dishonest taking of passages out of context and using them to create a false narrative.
I doubt there's a public figure in the world that you couldn't make look like the spawn of Satan if you could get a hold of a few tens of thousands of their emails. I'll wager if someone were to break into my email store, they could probably make me look like a monster by this technique.
His chief problems are going to be if he tries to get family members into Cabinet.
As to Breitbart's rationality, other than that I think the writers are pretty intelligent people who know how to manipulate irrational people, I see little that is rational.
And how exactly did he impose anything on the 25%? It's not like any of them were put into abortion camps to have fetuses "ripped" out of them. It wasn't like they were all forced into gay marriages.
A lot of Trump's battleground state victories were damned tight, and if electors were assigned proportionally, and there was no winner take all, while Trump may still have won (because no state-level voting system is ever going to mirror national vote share precisely) it would have been significantly closer.
The other thing you can never assume if you start modeling another voting system is that people would have voted exactly the same way as they would under a winner take all system. I imagine that in a number of states, under, say, some sort of ranked voting system, you would find third parties performing a lot better.
In other words, voting patterns to one extent or another are shaped by the voting system itself. People won't vote third party in the US simply because FPTP and the EC winner take all systems make a third party's battle so uphill that voting third party literally is throwing your vote away.
Even in the reddest of states like Texas, there are areas of Democrat support. If you had a PR system for selecting electors, and winner take all was removed, Texas would still have elected mainly, probably even overwhelmingly electors for Trump, but Clinton would have actually got some votes. You can't just simply declare that in such a variant situation that the election would have gone the same way.
No, they weren't. It was falsified, and "Project Veritas" was propogating a scam. The fact that you still don't accept that demonstrates my point. You're just as deranged as the people you hate, and just as fearful of your worldview being supplanted. If they are cowards, then so are you.
It's wrong to give that 25% the effective power to impose their beliefs on the other 75% through the force of law. You can protect the 25%s interests without basically making them the masters of the 75%.
Less emotionally, abortion rights are really about people having an inherent right to personal autonomy. There's no one reasonably suggesting a ban on tubal ligation or snipping the vas deferens in man's testes, and yet gametes are just as capable of forming a human life as is a zygote or a fetus. So really, all the anti-abortion types just pick their own artificial moment when some cells are a human life, declare that point the point where the state should use its vast powers to prevent interference.
If you're going to declare that a batch of cells that will eventually become a fully formed human must be protected as legal persons, then why not sperm cells and ova? Why aren't anti-abortion types demanding an end to surgeries that remove the fallopian tubes?
If the Left is so irrelevant, why is it you concoct absurd claims like this? Clearly you still feel you need to lash out by basically inventing nonsensical and frankly utterly retarded conspiracies about the current POTUS.
Either that or you are indeed just a simpering halfwit.
There's no narrative here. Manufacturing is increasingly automated, and it won't be that many years before all those cheap wage slaves in Mexico, China and India are in the same boat.
He didn't learn that, that was an unevidenced claim he made to a British court when he was fighting extradition to Sweden. When the British courts rejected his conspiracy theory and deemed Sweden's request valid, that's when he hightailed to the Ecuadorian embassy.
It should be notes that not only does Sweden want him for allegedly sexual offenses, he is also wanted by the UK, and that even if Sweden dropped its investigation, he would almost certainly have to face a British court again.
I agree, but that's not to say that the states themselves couldn't insert some proportionality into their electors, and indeed that's exactly what I suggest people angry about this election should do. Rather than impotently run around the streets making noise and mayhem, start putting pressure on state legislatures to get rid of winner take all and maybe even try a different voting system, like ranked or some sort of PR.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that's not how it works. What you'll have is what has traditionally happened, tariffs being used to fend off competition. Consumers end being screwed and the protected industries become less and less competitive.
The idea that tariffs were invented for "freedom" is absurd. They were invented to protect domestic industries against competition. And the lesson of erecting large tariff walls is that it is the consumer that ends up paying to protect these industries, and the industries themselves become ever less competitive, protected in a nice encirclement of economic privilege. But that cannot be sustained forever, and eventually when the door opens a little bit, the coddled and increasingly indolent domestic industry is crushed.
Besides, the whole fucking thing is going to be automated in a few decades. Even the wage slaves of Bangladesh and China will be out of a job. And then what? Erect tariffs against foreign robots, or even better, against domestic robots?
Tariffs end up costing consumers.
How much do you want to pay for iPhone? Because if tariffs are erected, most of the components in that unit will be subject to punitive measures.
I do expect he'll keep the relatively easy promises. A conservative appointment to the Supreme Court, deregulation, and other bones to the fossil fuel industry and a big "fuck you" to attempts to mitigate CO2. I suspect his foreign policy in other ways will ultimately look a lot like the last seventy years, simply because the alternative would be international chaos. In return Congress will let him produce some big fat deficits to drop short-lived infrastructure programs on the Rust Belt, before a Democrat is elected and is forced to deal with it.
And this demonstrates what happens to conspiracy theories. They have to get bigger and more all encompassing simply because they cannot sustain themselves otherwise.
Tune in next week when this AC starts talking about the evil lizard people behind it all.
That's my view. I think he's probably taken Wikileaks to a place it can't come back from, not unless it dumps Assange. But since Wikileaks is now essentially the Cult of Julian, it's more likely that he'll languish in the Ecuadorian embassy for some time to come, until political changes in Ecuador mean he gets the boot. At which point, regardless of Sweden or the United States' intentions, British courts would like to have a little talk with him, that will almost certainly end up in a stay in a British prison.
The war has been won, really? You think deregulation won't mean more crap gets dumped into watersheds, more dangerous emissions? Oh, and let's not get started on the idea that CO2, despite all the physical and climatological evidence, doesn't increase net energy (temperature) in the oceans and lower atmosphere.
What if Texas were to get rid of winner take all and moved to a proportional system. The one thing the EC does is counterbalance the larger urban vote, and in a country where a significant fraction of the population still lives in relatively small communities and rural areas, a pure popular vote system would render their votes meaningless.
What if, instead, you went to a ranked voting system for selecting the Electoral College, and then you got rid of the winner take all, which means, like a couple of states, Texas could have electors representing some or all of the candidates on the ballot? It still wouldn't be a direct election, and it still wouldn't be truly proportional, but it would mean that the result would retain some of the urban-rural balancing of the current EC voting model, but bring it at least closer to a truly representative election.
No, she's done. I doubt she'd even want to, but even she did, the Democrats wouldn't let it happen. First and foremost, the Democrats actually have a weighed system in their superdelegates so that something like that couldn't happen.
I'm wagering they'll be pushing to the Left of the party, looking for a younger Bernie Sanders type. A lot of it also depends on whether Trump runs again. He's not a young man, and he'll be 74 by a second term. He's at the age where even rich billionaires can start suffering health problems. But if he does run again, he'll have four years of not being the wunderkind his supporters think he is now. So if the Dems don't find their own version of Mitt Romney, but rather do find someone who can rebuild Obama's voter bloc, then the have a decent chance.
Or not. Four years is a long time, and to my mind this isn't like the last three presidents, where you had reasonably young men who would still be fairly young when they reached their second term. A 74 year old Donald Trump may not be as attractive a candidate on many fronts as a 70 year old Trump. Spray tans can't hide ever crack.
What if it had been, say, a ranked vote, and then the elector was chosen based on an instant run off system? How might you have voted then?
There are ways that the EC in any state could be reformed so that a fairer (though never perfectly fair) result could be arrived at.
Even if the information was accurate, what happened next was typical of what happens when you get large document dumps. People sift through the documents, finding passages that look incriminating or insinuate nefarious acts or conspiracies. This is what happened with Climategate, and both that and the Clinton email dumps are classic examples of quote mining, of the dishonest taking of passages out of context and using them to create a false narrative.
I doubt there's a public figure in the world that you couldn't make look like the spawn of Satan if you could get a hold of a few tens of thousands of their emails. I'll wager if someone were to break into my email store, they could probably make me look like a monster by this technique.
If you have some actual independent confirmation of the veritas claim, please provide it.
But you don't, because it was a load of horseshit.
His chief problems are going to be if he tries to get family members into Cabinet.
As to Breitbart's rationality, other than that I think the writers are pretty intelligent people who know how to manipulate irrational people, I see little that is rational.
And how exactly did he impose anything on the 25%? It's not like any of them were put into abortion camps to have fetuses "ripped" out of them. It wasn't like they were all forced into gay marriages.
A lot of Trump's battleground state victories were damned tight, and if electors were assigned proportionally, and there was no winner take all, while Trump may still have won (because no state-level voting system is ever going to mirror national vote share precisely) it would have been significantly closer.
The other thing you can never assume if you start modeling another voting system is that people would have voted exactly the same way as they would under a winner take all system. I imagine that in a number of states, under, say, some sort of ranked voting system, you would find third parties performing a lot better.
In other words, voting patterns to one extent or another are shaped by the voting system itself. People won't vote third party in the US simply because FPTP and the EC winner take all systems make a third party's battle so uphill that voting third party literally is throwing your vote away.
Even in the reddest of states like Texas, there are areas of Democrat support. If you had a PR system for selecting electors, and winner take all was removed, Texas would still have elected mainly, probably even overwhelmingly electors for Trump, but Clinton would have actually got some votes. You can't just simply declare that in such a variant situation that the election would have gone the same way.
No, they weren't. It was falsified, and "Project Veritas" was propogating a scam. The fact that you still don't accept that demonstrates my point. You're just as deranged as the people you hate, and just as fearful of your worldview being supplanted. If they are cowards, then so are you.
It's wrong to give that 25% the effective power to impose their beliefs on the other 75% through the force of law. You can protect the 25%s interests without basically making them the masters of the 75%.
Less emotionally, abortion rights are really about people having an inherent right to personal autonomy. There's no one reasonably suggesting a ban on tubal ligation or snipping the vas deferens in man's testes, and yet gametes are just as capable of forming a human life as is a zygote or a fetus. So really, all the anti-abortion types just pick their own artificial moment when some cells are a human life, declare that point the point where the state should use its vast powers to prevent interference.
If you're going to declare that a batch of cells that will eventually become a fully formed human must be protected as legal persons, then why not sperm cells and ova? Why aren't anti-abortion types demanding an end to surgeries that remove the fallopian tubes?
Wow, so you would seriously let a woman die rather than allow her to have a lifesaving abortion.
Yeah, the Alt-right is just so well behaved, as they run around spreading rumors about bus-loads of illegal Mexicans going to the polls.
Both sides have their share of malcontents, but because you're a partisan, you are incapable of seeing just how badly your side behaved.
If the Left is so irrelevant, why is it you concoct absurd claims like this? Clearly you still feel you need to lash out by basically inventing nonsensical and frankly utterly retarded conspiracies about the current POTUS.
Either that or you are indeed just a simpering halfwit.
There's no narrative here. Manufacturing is increasingly automated, and it won't be that many years before all those cheap wage slaves in Mexico, China and India are in the same boat.
He didn't learn that, that was an unevidenced claim he made to a British court when he was fighting extradition to Sweden. When the British courts rejected his conspiracy theory and deemed Sweden's request valid, that's when he hightailed to the Ecuadorian embassy.
It should be notes that not only does Sweden want him for allegedly sexual offenses, he is also wanted by the UK, and that even if Sweden dropped its investigation, he would almost certainly have to face a British court again.
I agree, but that's not to say that the states themselves couldn't insert some proportionality into their electors, and indeed that's exactly what I suggest people angry about this election should do. Rather than impotently run around the streets making noise and mayhem, start putting pressure on state legislatures to get rid of winner take all and maybe even try a different voting system, like ranked or some sort of PR.
Start taking your meds again