Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Trump's Trade War Defeat
#61
(12-20-2018, 10:24 PM)mv Wrote: Many comments on the Trump decision on Syria here:
  https://twitter.com/search?q=kurds&src=typd

And, if I am reading the news correctly, Trump now said that the war in Afghanistan is half-won, so he is bringing half troops home?

(This is the strangest news I've seen lately.   Taliban controls 2/3 of the country now and on the path of limiting the invader-occupied zone to Kabul in 2019.  Doubling the troops make some sense, withdrawing them all makes more sense, but withdrawing half?  Just to make the Talib's work easier? )

Is this why Mattis resigned, perhaps?

This is kinda bad, actually ...  he was one of the saner ones.  Welcome to the Bolton's Reign. S6

I'm a believer in the concept that if we really have to go in and fight somewhere, then by all means go in and 1) kick ass, 2) take names, and 3) then get the hell out of Dodge.  Sticking around costs huge amounts of money, AND lives.  Its ridiculous, because anybody playing the "TarBaby" game always get stuck, and loses all around.  

This is why I eventually came to the opinion that "Junior" was an intellectual moron, and a true Dumbass.  Its where I got that title to begin with.  The Soviets did the same thing earlier, and it was one Huge ClusterFoxtrot.  They finally had to leave with their tails tucked between their legs.  And we either forgot about it, or believed we were capable of doing the impossible, by civilizing the Afghanis.  It ain't gonna happen, and its a Lose-Lose proposition trying to force them to be just that.  

It's a combination of hubris and insanity to actually think that nation building of this sort will work.  How many time must we squander the citizen's funds, before we finally learn this lesson?

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
Reply
#62
Nothing I can find to disagree with.

I shall note however a couple of things:

1// The cost of the Afghan comedy is 5 billions yearly. The cost of THE WALL is 5 billions once (well, some maintenance afterwards). 

2// The Soviet attempt was an idiocy too.... but slightly less so than the US'.  The Communist regime in Afghanistan managed to survive for three years after the Soviets left, I doubt the current Afghan regime can do this ... three months with luck. Thus, Soviets had at least a chance to succeed... not that it was worth it!
Reply
#63
S2 The U.S. goods trade deficit widened sharply in December

reuters finnncials Wrote:The goods trade deficit jumped 12.8 percent to $79.5 billion in December, boosted also by an increase in imports. Exports fell 2.8 percent amid steep declines in shipments of foods, industrial supplies and capital goods.

....
Manufacturing, which accounts for about 12 percent of the economy, is slowing as some of the boost to capital spending from last year’s $1.5 trillion tax cut package fades.
Reply
#64
(02-27-2019, 08:55 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: S2 The U.S. goods trade deficit widened sharply in December

reuters finnncials Wrote:The goods trade deficit jumped 12.8 percent to $79.5 billion in December, boosted also by an increase in imports. Exports fell 2.8 percent amid steep declines in shipments of foods, industrial supplies and capital goods.

....
Manufacturing, which accounts for about 12 percent of the economy, is slowing as some of the boost to capital spending from last year’s $1.5 trillion tax cut package fades.

Just for the record, that is a "trade imbalance", not a "tread deficit".  If both parties are exchanging items of same monetary value, regardless what they are, they are exercising equal trade, and there is no deficit there.  If one party receives an item of trade, for a promise to pay later, that is a trade deficit because there was a promise to pay for items of equal value at a later time.  

These people are just showing everyone that they are not well versed in economics.  They are, through ignorance,  using phrases that everyone else does.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
Reply
#65
Yes "trade imbalance" is more correct.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)