Trump Watch 2.0

[Hoover Attack]

Unless European countries (including the UK) are willing to detach themselves from the likes of AWS, Oracle, Microsoft etc, and restrict acquisition of real estate, agricultural land, and what's left of UK companies by US funds, then there's nothing that we can do that will make any real impact.

Do we have to "do" anything ? Can't we just wait for the American people to get fed up with double digit inflation, no medicare, no government services (and to realise that they actually need those services) and to finally rise up and have a civil war ?

Oh, just for the avoidance of any doubt, doing absolutely nothing is my default.

It's everyone's default. Which is why there will be no civil war. His supporters are lapping this up.

[Hoover Attack]

Trump is planning to defund Federal Judges if they don't toe the line, plus his White House briefings have been "updated" so that his WH speaker and chums define who sits where - if at all - taking control from a press association who have done this for generations. I can't imagine why they might have done this? Oh, and they may also include certain "influencers" as part of the 49 people - normally serious journalists - who receive the WH Wisdom.

Plus the Donald has reiterated that he could stand for a 3rd term.

Plus he's said that he isn't ruling out a military invasion of Greenland if that is what it takes to take control. What a man!

Getting Things Done.

[Hoover Attack]

Unless European countries (including the UK) are willing to detach themselves from the likes of AWS, Oracle, Microsoft etc, and restrict acquisition of real estate, agricultural land, and what's left of UK companies by US funds, then there's nothing that we can do that will make any real impact.

Do we have to "do" anything ? Can't we just wait for the American people to get fed up with double digit inflation, no medicare, no government services (and to realise that they actually need those services) and to finally rise up and have a civil war ?

Just cant see it happening as it would be the lefties that need to rise up and they're mostly middle class folk who are too insulated from these things. Also, they're wimps.

And when lefties do rise up, they get ridiculed for the colour of their hair, their hyphenated surnames and their trust funds.

[BoniO]

Forget the Trust Funds bit - they'll be worth feck all in a couple of months.

[Rich Tea Wellin]

100% he will do everything he can to stay on.

Although would find it amusing if he found a way to amend the constitution to allow a third term and lost to Obama

[Give it to Jabo]

100% he will do everything he can to stay on.

Although would find it amusing if he found a way to amend the constitution to allow a third term and lost to Obama

amen to that. presumably obama would be the younger candidate?

[Long slender neck]

I notice he says his tarrifs are reciprocal. Are we tarrifing them then?

[Dunners]

No. He's simply calculated what he thinks is the trade deficit on the US in respect of each country (which he's calling a tariff) and then divides that figure by two to arrive at their tariff on us.

[Long slender neck]

They're importing too much stuff then?

How can we lower tarrifs that dont exist?

[Mistadobalina]

Seems like services aren't part of these calculations right? Which is where America is absolutely dominant. So Trump is banking that other nations won't dare hit those parts of the trade relationships whilst he cries to cream off the manufacturing and production parts to the US.

Sounds a lot like cakeism.

[Orient_Man_And_Boy]

1). IMO the US has never not been in a state of ‘civil war’ … just slightly less violently these days.

2). The US Constitution does not prohibit DT standing as VP next time … then guess what a Republican P would do…?

3). DT would do well to remember the tariff wars of the 1920s and where that sent things.

[Dunners]

1 - I reckon there's an argument that there's a form of civil warfare between two broad elitist coalitions. And one of those sides, fronted by Trump, has concluded that the US-led "world order" is no longer beneficial to the imperial centre, so they are ending it.

2 - Trump's ego will never permit him to be VP. He'll either make moves to amend the constitution, or just hand over the reins to Vance (and Vance is very much Musk's guy) and walk away with some sort of immunity guarantee.

3 - They don't care.

[Max B Gold]

1 - I reckon there's an argument that there's a form of civil warfare between two broad elitist coalitions. And one of those sides, fronted by Trump, has concluded that the US-led "world order" is no longer beneficial to the imperial centre, so they are ending it.

There is a very good article by Perry Anderson in the London Review of Books which deals with "regime change" and why the US is taking the action it is. Quite long but worth a read.

[Dunners]

1 - I reckon there's an argument that there's a form of civil warfare between two broad elitist coalitions. And one of those sides, fronted by Trump, has concluded that the US-led "world order" is no longer beneficial to the imperial centre, so they are ending it.

There is a very good article by Perry Anderson in the London Review of Books which deals with "regime change" and why the US is taking the action it is. Quite long but worth a read.

Cheers. Found it. All 7,771 words of it!

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v47/n06 ... n-the-west

[Dunners]

Just asked Copilot for a brief synopsis of that article:

"The article "Regime Change in the West" by Perry Anderson, published in the London Review of Books, examines the evolution and impact of neoliberalism in Western societies. Anderson explores how neoliberalism has shaped globalisation, weakened labour through deregulation and outsourcing, and limited democratic choices by enforcing economic policies that favour capital. He also discusses the ideological and political consequences of these changes, including the challenges posed by immigration and the tension between economic and social considerations. The piece provides a critical analysis of the historical and contemporary dynamics of neoliberal regimes."

[Max B Gold]

Just asked Copilot for a brief synopsis of that article:

"The article "Regime Change in the West" by Perry Anderson, published in the London Review of Books, examines the evolution and impact of neoliberalism in Western societies. Anderson explores how neoliberalism has shaped globalisation, weakened labour through deregulation and outsourcing, and limited democratic choices by enforcing economic policies that favour capital. He also discusses the ideological and political consequences of these changes, including the challenges posed by immigration and the tension between economic and social considerations. The piece provides a critical analysis of the historical and contemporary dynamics of neoliberal regimes."

It's still worth reading in full.

[Dunners]

There's quite a lot in that article, so this is by no means an attempt to distil it down to one issue (Max is right that it's worth reading in full). But I think the author does a good job in articulating the convergences and divergences of populist movements on the right and the left. And, captures neatly the dilemma that mass migration places on any leftist attempt to unify behind any policy position.

This section in particular cuts to the chase.

[Bandy Legs]

There's quite a lot in that article, so this is by no means an attempt to distil it down to one issue (Max is right that it's worth reading in full). But I think the author does a good job in articulating the convergences and divergences of populist movements on the right and the left. And, captures neatly the dilemma that mass migration places on any leftist attempt to unify behind any policy position.

This section in particular cuts to the chase.

So basically its saying Right wingers hate Rich bosses for looking for a cheaper work force?

[Max B Gold]

There's quite a lot in that article, so this is by no means an attempt to distil it down to one issue (Max is right that it's worth reading in full). But I think the author does a good job in articulating the convergences and divergences of populist movements on the right and the left. And, captures neatly the dilemma that mass migration places on any leftist attempt to unify behind any policy position.

This section in particular cuts to the chase.

So basically its saying Right wingers hate Rich bosses for looking for a cheaper work force?

That's the contradiction within the Far Right that their followers choose to misrepresent.

On one hand they are supposedly against the obscenely rich oligarchs who are the architects of inequality and the "left behind" but it is the oligarchs that create those conditions and bring in migrant labour to undercut them.

To square the circle they blame immigrants for their misfortunes and not those whose hands are on the economic levers and who deceive them.

[Dunners]

"Tough on migration, tough on the causes of migration"

[StillSpike]

I suppose the left populists might contend that if they can sort out Inequality and Oligarchy, they wouldn't need to worry about Mobility as it wouldn't be an issue.

[Bandy Legs]

"Tough on migration, tough on the causes of migration"

Didnt see any Oligarchs being attacked in hotels after Southport, do the Right wing not go to the Ritz or Claridges etc?

[Bandy Legs]

U.S stock markets falling
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c1dr7vy ... 21f32#post