• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher

Status
Not open for further replies.
Keith Schiller is officially gone from the white house and apparently Donald Trump is spending the night at Trump tower. Tweet storm here we go.
 

Ithil

Member
DKHrY9RUIAAVSAm.jpg


Sen. Chris Coons:
DKHs__IXUAIoDw3.jpg


via https://twitter.com/ToddRuger/status/910269195044184064

Graham introduces this solid legislation, but also that wretched healthcare bill. Can he make up his mind as to whether he's trying to do harm or help?
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Graham is openly stating that he has the support of Steve Bannon on the healthcare bill now?

If that isn't a clue these guys are scared of being primaried by Trump's base, I don't know what is.
 
Graham is openly stating that he has the support of Steve Bannon on the healthcare bill now?

If that isn't a clue these guys are scared of being primaried by Trump's base, I don't know what is.

Franken: "I'd vote for you"

Graham: "And that's what worries me"

And there goes the Mercer Money too!
 

Teggy

Member
Graham is openly stating that he has the support of Steve Bannon on the healthcare bill now?

If that isn't a clue these guys are scared of being primaried by Trump's base, I don't know what is.

They name dropped Jeb Bush as well, believe it or not.


Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
I was saddened to see how bad the ratings were on the Emmys last night - the worst ever. Smartest people of them all are the "DEPLORABLES."
10:41 PM · Sep 19, 2017

What...what do those two sentences have to do with one another?
 
The emmys weren't even last night. They were Sunday night, so I feel like he had that one as a saved draft ready to tweet the second John Kelly wasn't around lol.
 
Neolizabethral had been trying to learn about foreign policy. Silly woman, learning is for chumps.

Trump doesn't want to learn anything. And he's President.

Shillizabeth should stick to her knitting.
 
I know open borders is generally good for an economey, but does that analysis make any assumptions about the immigration of surrounding countries? Like if the US is the only country allowing everyone in, would tbe effects be worse than if there were other option for these immigrants? What about the state of an economey when open policy is enacted?
 
Free flow of labour between countries would basically double gross world product and amount to the largest reduction in global poverty ever.

Studies on the impact of immigration on wages and employment have typically found it is minimal from memory.
 

Ecotic

Member
I know open borders is generally good for an economey, but does that analysis make any assumptions about the immigration of surrounding countries? Like if the US is the only country allowing everyone in, would tbe effects be worse than if there were other option for these immigrants? What about the state of an economey when open policy is enacted?
In theory a nation is never worse off from opening itself up to the resources of other nations, even if the rest of the world is in autarky. However, that doesn't account for hidden negative externalities (some real and some perceived), such as some people perceiving a loss of cultural homogeneity, or the adjustment costs as businesses and people shift employment patterns to accommodate new workers and capital.
 
Free flow of labour between countries would basically double gross world product and amount to the largest reduction in global poverty ever.

Studies on the impact of immigration on wages and employment have typically found it is minimal from memory.

This assumes WW participation though. I'm wondering if the effects are different if the sharing is more one sided.

In theory a nation is never worse off from opening itself up to the resources of other nations, even if the rest of the world is in autarky. However, that doesn't account for hidden negative externalities (some real and some perceived), such as some people perceiving a loss of cultural homogeneity, or the adjustment costs as businesses and people shift employment patterns to accommodate new workers and capital.

This is kind of what I was assuming. Would some level of control just shy of "open", or possibly a transition period over time reduced some of the actual hidden negative externalities. The perceived ones would always exist, at least until racism dies

I believe there is some merit to: "we can't even take care of who we got" as well. In theory the economic boom comes, but in practice, could that boom be filtered away and off to the rich?
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
I wonder what republican senators who are voting for Cassidy-Graham think politics and healthcare will be in the next 5 or 10 years if they passed it. Do they think their propaganda networks and anti-democracy tactics would hold back any voter blowback indefinitely? Do they think voters will like this new system, and give up on looking for alternatives after they salted the earth on the best chance for a long lasting private-based system?

Or maybe they just don't care what happens in the future as long as they can always say they denied obama the achievement.
 

pigeon

Banned
This assumes WW participation though. I'm wondering if the effects are different if the sharing is more one sided.



This is kind of what I was assuming. Would some level of control just shy of "open", or possibly a transition period over time reduced some of the actual hidden negative externalities. The perceived ones would always exist, at least until racism dies

I believe there is some merit to: "we can't even take care of who we got" as well. In theory the economic boom comes, but in practice, could that boom be filtered away and off to the rich?

I don't think fear of racists should affect our policy choices, except maybe for policies that involve restricting racism.

The second point is literally the economic anxiety argument. You get that, right? It's logically extensible to banning all immigration.
 

Zolo

Member
Or maybe they just don't care what happens in the future as long as they can always say they denied obama the achievement.
Most (if not all) members in congress are safe enough from the backlash of stuff they pass. Worst thing happens is that they get voted out of office which people like Heller expect to happen to them anyway.
I never got the impression that he was the type of guy to pull something like that off

Guess that means he's good at undercover work.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Looking over the details of this health care bill and seeing things written about how newborns born with birth defects could hit their lifetime cap before they leave the hospital for the first time, I think I'm comfortable saying that, if this passes, this would be worst piece of legislation to be enacted in several decades.

And all because the Koch brothers threatened their funding.
 

PBY

Banned
This assumes WW participation though. I'm wondering if the effects are different if the sharing is more one sided.



This is kind of what I was assuming. Would some level of control just shy of "open", or possibly a transition period over time reduced some of the actual hidden negative externalities. The perceived ones would always exist, at least until racism dies

I believe there is some merit to: "we can't even take care of who we got" as well. In theory the economic boom comes, but in practice, could that boom be filtered away and off to the rich?
We gotta stop making the rights arguments
 

dramatis

Member
How Rick Santorum Got A Haircut And Revived The GOP's Obamacare Repeal Effort
There's a chance Republicans wouldn't be so close to repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act if former GOP Sen. Rick Santorum, of Pennsylvania, hadn't dropped into the Capitol barbershop this spring.

"I was up on the Hill, I happened to just go by the barbershop to see if I could get a haircut, and Lindsey was in the chair," Santorum said. "And Lindsey asked me what I was doing, and I thought to myself, 'Well, let me just bounce it off Lindsey.' "
Who let this guy back in DC?
 

Blader

Member
I wonder what republican senators who are voting for Cassidy-Graham think politics and healthcare will be in the next 5 or 10 years if they passed it. Do they think their propaganda networks and anti-democracy tactics would hold back any voter blowback indefinitely? Do they think voters will like this new system, and give up on looking for alternatives after they salted the earth on the best chance for a long lasting private-based system?

Or maybe they just don't care what happens in the future as long as they can always say they denied obama the achievement.

I don't think there's much thought put into it. For most Republicans, Obamacare = bad and anything that repeals Obamacare = good. That's all. Many of them will never even read what they're voting for.
 
I wonder what republican senators who are voting for Cassidy-Graham think politics and healthcare will be in the next 5 or 10 years if they passed it. Do they think their propaganda networks and anti-democracy tactics would hold back any voter blowback indefinitely? Do they think voters will like this new system, and give up on looking for alternatives after they salted the earth on the best chance for a long lasting private-based system?

Or maybe they just don't care what happens in the future as long as they can always say they denied obama the achievement.
They're only thinking about not being primaried.

They also have to erase a successful black man's legacy. That's been their only mission since 2008.
 
New talking point from the Trumpsters in my orbit: Trump is going to pardon everyone anyways, so the investigation should just end. It’s a waste of taxpayer money!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom