Trump to use Executive Order to End Birthright Citizenship

[Ibanez]

Fuck me.

I'll admit i'm not good at math, especially division.


Ahh..I went back to the forumla and found my mistake:


The original answer confused me and I didn't read all the instructions.

STOP!!!! PLEASE STOP!!!!

Your error was having the numerator and denominator reversed.

I know what my error was. What I was saying was that when I did it correctly, the answer didn't look correct. That's because it didn't multiply it by 100.

[Winterborn]

STOP!!!! PLEASE STOP!!!!

Your error was having the numerator and denominator reversed.

I know what my error was. What I was saying was that when I did it correctly, the answer didn't look correct. That's because it didn't multiply it by 100.

Sorry I got to laugh. I did that once in a test for calculating boiler efficiency and my Thermo professor ripped me a new one in front of class the next day when we reviewed the test.

But at least I didn't carry over 8 decimal places on the wrong answer like one guy did.

[mainejeff]

Trump now pledging to send 15,000 troops to the border.

This guy sure knows how to waste money.

[Bisonfanatical]

Just a question, i really don't follow these things that closely.

Where is it from when he came into office?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

DIJA is up ~ 3.2%

Thanks ... even after the above discussion, there has been a substantial increase anyway.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

I believe it was based on Trumps first tweet where he actually started taking full credit for the stock market
which was about a year ago...

from that specific date the market is actually 300 points below

Just a question, i really don't follow these things that closely.

Where is it from when he came into office?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

It closed at 19,827.25 on his inauguration day. So today's close is about 27 percent higher than the day he took office.

I am, however, watching how the yearly performance does in the context of the Bull Market that started on March 9, 2009. In that context his first year in office saw a percent increase in the Dow that was within the range of annual increases prior to that. And unless something changes dramatically the first two years of his term will be within the range of two year increases. So there isn't a situation where one can legitimately say that there was this big spectacular change associated with Trump taking office.

[kalm]

Just a question, i really don't follow these things that closely.

Where is it from when he came into office?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

It closed at 19,827.25 on his inauguration day. So today's close is about 27 percent higher than the day he took office.

I am, however, watching how the yearly performance does in the context of the Bull Market that started on March 9, 2009. In that context his first year in office saw a percent increase in the Dow that was within the range of annual increases prior to that. And unless something changes dramatically the first two years of his term will be within the range of two year increases. So there isn't a situation where one can legitimately say that there was this big spectacular change associated with Trump taking office.

https://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock- ... -president

[CAA Flagship]

Just a question, i really don't follow these things that closely.

Where is it from when he came into office?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

It closed at 19,827.25 on his inauguration day. So today's close is about 27 percent higher than the day he took office.

I am, however, watching how the yearly performance does in the context of the Bull Market that started on March 9, 2009. In that context his first year in office saw a percent increase in the Dow that was within the range of annual increases prior to that. And unless something changes dramatically the first two years of his term will be within the range of two year increases. So there isn't a situation where one can legitimately say that there was this big spectacular change associated with Trump taking office.

Again, it's more impressive to kick a 40 yard field goal IN TO the wind vs. WITH the wind, even though they are both 40 yd FGs and both count as 3 points.

[Col Hogan]

Trump now pledging to send 15,000 troops to the border.

This guy sure knows how to waste money.

Department of Defense...what a better way to spend tax dollars...

[JohnStOnge]

It closed at 19,827.25 on his inauguration day. So today's close is about 27 percent higher than the day he took office.

I am, however, watching how the yearly performance does in the context of the Bull Market that started on March 9, 2009. In that context his first year in office saw a percent increase in the Dow that was within the range of annual increases prior to that. And unless something changes dramatically the first two years of his term will be within the range of two year increases. So there isn't a situation where one can legitimately say that there was this big spectacular change associated with Trump taking office.

https://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock- ... -president

Thank you for that. It's a good presentation. It shows what I've been talking about. There is no great and glorious "OMG things were awful and they just TOOK off with Trump" phenomenon going on with respect to the stock market or anything else. There's been this thing where Trump and his people have been able to create that impression but it's a false impression.

Now, I was wrong with respect to what I thought would happen if Trump got elected. I thought things would turn to crap pretty quickly. Nevertheless, it's also the case that things were already good before he got elected and they just continued to progress. There has been no Trump "turnaround" or anything like that.

[CAA Flagship]

https://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock- ... -president

Thank you for that. It's a good presentation. It shows what I've been talking about. There is no great and glorious "OMG things were awful and they just TOOK off with Trump" phenomenon going on with respect to the stock market or anything else. There's been this thing where Trump and his people have been able to create that impression but it's a false impression.

Now, I was wrong with respect to what I thought would happen if Trump got elected. I thought things would turn to crap pretty quickly. Nevertheless, it's also the case that things were already good before he got elected and they just continued to progress. There has been no Trump "turnaround" or anything like that.

You are out of your league here.
Without tax cuts and without deregulation, the economy would have tanked.
And the economy is humming in the middle of a "trade war" with China. I said several months ago that China's economy is fragile. You said that you didn't think it was. China has just announced more government stimulus today. Proof that they are hurting far more than us.

Here, read this on the Obama years:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/ ... ationship/

[JohnStOnge]

Thank you for that. It's a good presentation. It shows what I've been talking about. There is no great and glorious "OMG things were awful and they just TOOK off with Trump" phenomenon going on with respect to the stock market or anything else. There's been this thing where Trump and his people have been able to create that impression but it's a false impression.

Now, I was wrong with respect to what I thought would happen if Trump got elected. I thought things would turn to crap pretty quickly. Nevertheless, it's also the case that things were already good before he got elected and they just continued to progress. There has been no Trump "turnaround" or anything like that.

You are out of your league here.
Without tax cuts and without deregulation, the economy would have tanked.
And the economy is humming in the middle of a "trade war" with China. I said several months ago that China's economy is fragile. You said that you didn't think it was. China has just announced more government stimulus today. Proof that they are hurting far more than us.

Here, read this on the Obama years:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/ ... ationship/

There is absolutely no evidence to support your contention that the economy would have tanked without the tax cuts and deregulation.

And I don't think I said anything about the fragility or lack thereof of the Chinese economy. What I said is that it is a totalitarian government so that the people in charge don't have to worry about elections and such. They don't have to worry about public sentiment like politicians in the United States have to.

[CID1990]

Thank you for that. It's a good presentation. It shows what I've been talking about. There is no great and glorious "OMG things were awful and they just TOOK off with Trump" phenomenon going on with respect to the stock market or anything else. There's been this thing where Trump and his people have been able to create that impression but it's a false impression.

Now, I was wrong with respect to what I thought would happen if Trump got elected. I thought things would turn to crap pretty quickly. Nevertheless, it's also the case that things were already good before he got elected and they just continued to progress. There has been no Trump "turnaround" or anything like that.

You are out of your league here.
Without tax cuts and without deregulation, the economy would have tanked.
And the economy is humming in the middle of a "trade war" with China. I said several months ago that China's economy is fragile. You said that you didn't think it was. China has just announced more government stimulus today. Proof that they are hurting far more than us.

Here, read this on the Obama years:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/ ... ationship/

The coverage on the trade war with China has slackened off the last few weeks. I don't think we are any closer to knowing what the end result will be, but at this moment in time there really isn't much to criticize

One thing is certain - China is feeling the pain and it has demonstrably driven them to make some concessions in more things than just trade

If we get nothing out of this other than stopping forced tech transfers as a requirement of doing business then this will be a long term win. Of course, it ultimately won't matter when Trump's successor comes in and resets the whole thing back to the status quo ante

[JohnStOnge]

[
One thing is certain - China is feeling the pain and it has demonstrably driven them to make some concessions in more things than just trade

I'm not questioning the proposition that such is true but could you list some concessions they've made?

Regardless, I think if Trump will inevitably lose if he insists on pursuing a trade war with China.

[CID1990]

[
One thing is certain - China is feeling the pain and it has demonstrably driven them to make some concessions in more things than just trade

I'm not questioning the proposition that such is true but could you list some concessions they've made?

Regardless, I think if Trump will inevitably lose if he insists on pursuing a trade war with China.

China has already reduced their tariff on US automobiles and auto parts.
They are now purchasing more US oil - to the tune of several times more than just one year ago. This isn't a tariff item but the result is due to the tariff

The intangibles include Chinese influence on Kim - they are still playing a duplicitous game, but China is significantly more tilted towards the US position on Nork nukes than before. China also sees cooperation on North Korea as an easy concession, which is why they are doing it - but it all ties back into the tariff.

It may not matter much though - my main concerns about this trade war arent whether or not we will be able to change China's behavior (we will - at least temporarily), but at the end of the day Trump will leave office and the next President won't continue on the same course. And more importantly, the trade infrastructure between us and China is ultimately weighted heavily towards China in ways we cannot affect - such as demand in both countries for the things we each can readily produce

[AZGrizFan]

Trump now pledging to send 15,000 troops to the border.

This guy sure knows how to waste money.

Department of Defense...what a better way to spend tax dollars...

No shit. i mean,we’re already PAYING them...let them DO something.

[CAA Flagship]

I'm not questioning the proposition that such is true but could you list some concessions they've made?

Regardless, I think if Trump will inevitably lose if he insists on pursuing a trade war with China.

China has already reduced their tariff on US automobiles and auto parts.
They are now purchasing more US oil - to the tune of several times more than just one year ago. This isn't a tariff item but the result is due to the tariff

The intangibles include Chinese influence on Kim - they are still playing a duplicitous game, but China is significantly more tilted towards the US position on Nork nukes than before. China also sees cooperation on North Korea as an easy concession, which is why they are doing it - but it all ties back into the tariff.

It may not matter much though - my main concerns about this trade war arent whether or not we will be able to change China's behavior (we will - at least temporarily), but at the end of the day Trump will leave office and the next President won't continue on the same course. And more importantly, the trade infrastructure between us and China is ultimately weighted heavily towards China in ways we cannot affect - such as demand in both countries for the things we each can readily produce

I'm believing more and more that one of the main goals is to reduce our dependency on China. We are trying to create an environment so that other Asian, Central America, and South American countries can compete with China. Also the U.S., especially in critical areas such as aluminum and steel. As a government, we can't tell the US corporations to stop buying goods from China, but if the Mexis, Guats, various Chinksters, et al. seize the opportunity to be competitive, it will slow the economic growth of China. There are already signs of this happening, but it will take another year or so to shift the supply chains to effect max pain. We know that the trade imbalance will not narrow by China buying more of our goods, so it's got to come from the other direction.

[mainejeff]

Department of Defense...what a better way to spend tax dollars...

No shit. i mean,we’re already PAYING them...let them DO something.

What are they going to do down there.....whack each other off?

[CAA Flagship]

No shit. i mean,we’re already PAYING them...let them DO something.

What are they going to do down there.....whack each other off?

phpBB [video]

[mainejeff]

I wish that Republicans were "tough guys" on immigration from the Middle East (Saudi Arabia!) like they want to be on Mexico & Central American countries. If they are....my mistake. I guess that the messaging has been lost on me.

9-11 vs. tacos.

[AZGrizFan]

I wish that Republicans were "tough guys" on immigration from the Middle East (Saudi Arabia!) like they want to be on Mexico & Central American countries. If they are....my mistake. I guess that the messaging has been lost on me.

9-11 vs. tacos.

He tried to be tough on immigration from the ME and you fucking snowflakes pissed and moaned about how unfair it was...you got a real short memory, Jeff.

[AZGrizFan]

No shit. i mean,we’re already PAYING them...let them DO something.

What are they going to do down there.....whack each other off?

Target practice, bro.

[mainejeff]

I wish that Republicans were "tough guys" on immigration from the Middle East (Saudi Arabia!) like they want to be on Mexico & Central American countries. If they are....my mistake. I guess that the messaging has been lost on me.

9-11 vs. tacos.

He tried to be tough on immigration from the ME and you fucking snowflakes pissed and moaned about how unfair it was...you got a real short memory, Jeff.

Saudi Arabia wasn't on the list.

[mainejeff]

What are they going to do down there.....whack each other off?

Target practice, bro.

You are getting our U.S. Military confused with ICE (otherwise known as Trump's SS).

[AZGrizFan]

He tried to be tough on immigration from the ME and you fucking snowflakes pissed and moaned about how unfair it was...you got a real short memory, Jeff.

Saudi Arabia wasn't on the list.

So?

[CID1990]

He tried to be tough on immigration from the ME and you **** snowflakes pissed and moaned about how unfair it was...you got a real short memory, Jeff.

Saudi Arabia wasn't on the list.

Neither was Oman, Kuwait, Jordan, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, etc. And man for man, if you want to ban the citizens of a country based on Islamic terrorism risks only, you'd cut off Uzbekistan before most others.

I know this won't affect your opinion because you are pretty much the mirror image of a low information Trumper - but Saudi Arabia, for all its faults, complies with the guidelines that dictate who wound up on the travel restriction list. Guidelines that pre-date the Trump presidency.

They accept and assist with accepting their deported citizens back. They share law enforcement info. The countries on the list do not do those things and that is why they are on it. We cannot properly vet visa applicants without that cooperation. It is also possible to get off the list, as Chad has done.

I am no apologist for the Saudis, but the travel ban was based on an articulable set of guidelines with which the Saudis are compliant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk