05-11-2016, 01:12 AM
(05-10-2016, 11:10 PM)MillsT_98 Wrote: The situation we're currently in does put us in between a rock and a hard place. So you're saying that Trump can solve the Middle Eastern situation once and for all by giving Syria's control to Assad and fight ISIS? Because clearly you have to sacrifice one to get the other. I wish we could solve both by imposing a new government in Syria and getting rid of ISIS, but that might require a complete occupation of Syria and Iraq, and I don't know if we want that, considering the mess we've been in for decades. Would any of this turn into World War III?
The situation in Syria is pretty simple. Either you deal with Assad or you deal with ISIS. Which is worse? ISIS because they are terrorists--Assad is just a tin pot dictator. Let him have his country and let him kill ISIS with US help or Russian help. Doesn't matter which, and it will piss the Russians off a lot less. We can import oil just as easily from Russia as Saudi Arabia.
Quote:The President can do something about inequality by regulating the corporations and the banks, so businesses don't get too powerful and make it harder for workers to put themselves in a good situation. That includes enforcing pro-labor laws that allow for collective bargaining rights. Many people distrust unions today, and that may be because of the corporations' influence against the unions.
Okay, maybe you failed your civics class in high school but the constitution is pretty clear about who writes the laws, and that would be Congress. The president can ask for new laws or enforce the ones that already exist. But without congress writing new laws, he is limited to enforcing the existing regulations such as they exist.
He can however directly influence trade policy as it falls under the rubric of foreign affairs which is under the direction of the executive.
Quote:As for infrastructure, I strongly support it, and I just want someone to support building this infrastructure. Whether that will be funded publically or privately, that will be up to the voters. Either way, it should happen.
Infrastructure is vital to a healthy economy. In the building stage it provides jobs which increases aggregate demand, and after the infrastructure is built it is then used which facilitates trade, training and so on. Congress of course would have to pay for it, but the executive branch can use already allocated money to help states form private-public partnerships to get said infrastructure built should congress refuse to act--which under Clinton they will. Under Daddy they just might.
Quote:Wouldn't being isolationist mean staying out of diplomatic and military affairs? Is it possible to achieve both? Or are you talking about economic isolation? You did say you wanted Trump to work with Russia and solve the Middle Eastern situation.
No. American Isolationism which is the traditional form of foreign policy going back before WW2 does not preclude the US from getting involved in diplomatic affairs (we'd probably stay in the UN after all) and it wouldn't stop us from going to war with any foreign power we chose. What it would mean is that we wouldn't entangle ourselves in the noise and nonsense of Europe, Asia, and Africa. We'd stay in our hemisphere and mind our own damn business.
Working with Russia to end ISIS and re-stabilize the Middle East does not necessitate forming an alliance with Russia.
Quote:That's very interesting. So the Democratic Party will be the authoritarian party and the Republican Party would be the libertarian party? What would happen on terms of economics, and party platforms?
Culturally speaking the GOP will likely absorb the Cultural Libertarians. The Libertarians, the Classical Liberals, the pro-free speech people, dissident minorities. The Democrats would get the Shrill Conservative Christians, the Feminazis, and the PC Gestapo. Only one is going to end up in charge after the party reset...I hope it isn't the authoritarians because you, and I and everyone here will be plunged into a dystopian pc state that will make 1984 seem like a paradise
Quote:And why do you call Trump 'Daddy' anyway? I find that weird.
It is hard to explain to anyone who doesn't already listen to or read Milo Yiannopoulos already. It is a term of affection, and it also drives regressive leftists nuts.
It really is all mathematics.
Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out ofUN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of