America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 41,440 comments
  • 1,934,231 views


Mr Mayor GIF by NBC


"Chinese Peasants"? Really?? This is precisely the kind of hateful and bigoted language that you'd expect from a Nazi.

It's also a bit rich to be calling the people YOU are borrowing billions from "peasants"... staggering.

Vance is trying his hardest to emulate his Orange owner but he comes across as an immature child.
 
SC is a joke. They just said they need to not prevent him from coming back, not help or make sure he comes back. So, if the prison wants to hold him there, they will do nothing. If he’s dead, also c’est la vie. They just can’t prevent him getting back if he somehow gets out of the prison alive.
"Facilitate" I do not interpret as meaning they can just drop it.
 
I'm pretty sure @TexRex posted that it was AI slop stolen from an old Dutch article.

The Beeb ran an article yesterday about how ICE identify gang related tattoos, using the below "guide".


They ran it because it appears they scrapped a random bunch of tattoos from the internet, including a clock tattoo belonging to a British man from Derbyshire. The clock depicts the time and date of his daughter's birth. Real terrorism stuff!

At this point, the White House may as well admit that they're just making up excuses and just want to deport anyone that is not white that opposes Trump and anyone that may look fractionally like a stereotypical 90's criminal from a Hollywood movie.

Other tattoos in the list are:
Image of "dunking man" aka Michael Jordan.
AK-47 gun.
Trains (RIP to any Harry Potter fans with Hogwarts Express tattoos).
Crowns (I suppose if you're pro-Monarchy you're probably anti-Trump)
Stars.

Also worth pointing out on that 8-point score card ICE use to determine if you can be deported, tattoos are worth 4, so just having a train tattoo gets you half way to deported!
 
Last edited:
"Facilitate" I do not interpret as meaning they can just drop it.
The original order said "facilitate and effectuate", but the SC wants clarification on "effectuate".

Facilitate means to make easier, so it certainly feels ambiguous. At least, the administration will certainly stretch the definition as much as they can.
 
Last edited:
The original order said "facilitate and effectuate", but the SC wants clarification on "effectuate".

Facilitate means to make easier, so it certainly feels ambiguous. At least, the administration will certainly stretch the definition as much as they can.
They will, and while I do understand the concern over the ambiguous nature of the term, most legal terms have some level of ambiguity and are nonetheless to be given weight and carried out in accordance with the intent of context of the order. Mucking around that pretending that "facilitate" means essentially doing nothing is not likely to be accepted by the court as complying.

The SC took some kind of specific concern over the term "effectuate" as the court superseding its authority and commanding the executive. They stopped short of saying that this is a required interpretation of "effectuate", which is why they want clarification rather than are saying that it was improper. "Facilitate" is left standing.

Anyway, it's not an order to do nothing.
 
Let me guess, peasants will now be the preferred way for right wing dickwads to refer to Chinese people generally, and then eventually all Asians, in the same way that DEI is now the dog whistle for slurring black people.
Meanwhile, China:

 
They will, and while I do understand the concern over the ambiguous nature of the term, most legal terms have some level of ambiguity and are nonetheless to be given weight and carried out in accordance with the intent of context of the order. Mucking around that pretending that "facilitate" means essentially doing nothing is not likely to be accepted by the court as complying.

The SC took some kind of specific concern over the term "effectuate" as the court superseding its authority and commanding the executive. They stopped short of saying that this is a required interpretation of "effectuate", which is why they want clarification rather than are saying that it was improper. "Facilitate" is left standing.

Anyway, it's not an order to do nothing.
However, its possible Trump WILL take it to mean, do nothing. Then we have a huge constitutional crisis.
 
We received a quote a few days ago for some furniture for a project on campus and it had a line for tariff surcharge.

But everyone knows the supplier pays for it so I don't know why it's even listed. /s
 
Meanwhile, China:



Honestly looks like the wartime production lines that were setup for producing military weapons, tanks, planes and uniforms during WWI and WWII. Strangely fitting considering Trump is waging war with the world right now...

Do you think Trump has considered how wages impact product value? If China pays someone the equivalent of $5 an hour to make a pair of Nike runners, if the production moves to the US, you'd have to legally pay a higher wage, which would surely mean prices of Nike footwear goes up, no?

Tariffs or higher "local" wages. Either way you're paying more for the same products, right?
 
Tariffs or higher "local" wages. Either way you're paying more for the same products, right?
Yes, but (and I'm really generalising here), wages paid for local/domestic production keeps the money within the American economy, it's spent at local American businesses, and the taxes are paid to the US government. I'm not advocating that the entire sweatshop industry gets picked up and moved to the US, but encouraging a broad range of domestically made products isn't something I disagree with personally - it just requires your average consumer to give a crap about something beyond their wallet... like, their society...

Tangentially related, but I love this latest video from Not Just Bikes...

 
Yes, but (and I'm really generalising here), wages paid for local/domestic production keeps the money within the American economy, it's spent at local American businesses, and the taxes are paid to the US government. I'm not advocating that the entire sweatshop industry gets picked up and moved to the US, but encouraging a broad range of domestically made products isn't something I disagree with personally - it just requires your average consumer to give a crap about something beyond their wallet... like, their society...

Tangentially related, but I love this latest video from Not Just Bikes...


Will create jobs (but not high paying ones), will not lower costs for the consumer. In fact, will increase costs for the consumer even more. Trump seems to think these jobs can be moved over in seconds. This is a 3 to 5 year plan at best and it wouldn't take much to disrupt that plan. If Republicans lose the House or Senate, these plans go poof and then we just have higher costs for no reason. There was a smart way to do this and it wasn't how Trump executed it.

I will note that just because there is a smart (well, smarter) way to do it, doesn't mean that it will be a good decision. Trump's method is taken from 50 years ago and it seems he's still stuck in that time period.
 
TB
We received a quote a few days ago for some furniture for a project on campus and it had a line for tariff surcharge.

But everyone knows the supplier pays for it so I don't know why it's even listed. /s
The funny part is that this was all implemented in such a poor way that no one really knows how to proceed.

I work directly with half a dozen US clients and when it comes to customs and invoices they are all over the place. For example, if you consider a panel (with an aluminium frame and finished with wood/glass) no one's really sure if the 25% tariff is to be applied over the whole panel (just because it has aluminium in its composition) or if you need to determine the % of aluminium in the composition of the panel and then only tax that specific amount.

Also, needless to say that most are requesting us to invoice them in a different way now, for example, showing a parcel of 30% for engineering fees.


In the meantime, business with Canada is going pretty smooth as always...
 
Will create jobs (but not high paying ones), will not lower costs for the consumer. In fact, will increase costs for the consumer even more. Trump seems to think these jobs can be moved over in seconds. This is a 3 to 5 year plan at best and it wouldn't take much to disrupt that plan. If Republicans lose the House or Senate, these plans go poof and then we just have higher costs for no reason. There was a smart way to do this and it wasn't how Trump executed it.

I will note that just because there is a smart (well, smarter) way to do it, doesn't mean that it will be a good decision. Trump's method is taken from 50 years ago and it seems he's still stuck in that time period.
Hell, Trump changing his mind on a whim each day alone can threaten that; I'm already reading about it in the import/export automotive circles b/c nobody knows the correct percentages.

But yeah, major companies are not rushing to move their businesses here. They'll suffer through tariff costs than invest billions into something that could be wiped out by midterms.
 
Will create jobs (but not high paying ones), will not lower costs for the consumer. In fact, will increase costs for the consumer even more.
Yeah, like I say, I'm not stanning this as an all encompassing strategy, but I do believe that the continual race to the bottom that consumers want to see for cheap prices, is a bad thing, and that's a global take, not a criticism of the US. If people appreciated that there might be additional value to a higher cost purchase, than just the object they're getting in return, I think that would be a good a thing. All we see in my town is people becoming Amazon distribution slaves.. pissing in bottles, fired based on 2 decimal place blips in productivity, but earning more than small businesses can afford to pay for unskilled labour. We ALL do need to encourage local manufacturing of some sort, it's how society works best.
 
Freedom of speech is dead.


Now, since that is a fact, if the democrats had any balls, they would put some laws (next time they have a chance) with extreme punishment for disinformation, racism, etc.
There's a little positive light in that article.
Khalil will not immediately be deported. His attorneys have said that if he were ordered deported, they would appeal the judge's ruling. Comans gave Khalil until April 23 to request a stay of his deportation if his attorneys believe he qualifies for one. And the judge said if they don't meet that deadline, she will order him deported either to Syria, where he was born, or to Algeria, where he is a citizen.
 
Last edited:
Hell, Trump changing his mind on a whim each day alone can threaten that; I'm already reading about it in the import/export automotive circles b/c nobody knows the correct percentages.

But yeah, major companies are not rushing to move their businesses here. They'll suffer through tariff costs than invest billions into something that could be wiped out by midterms.
The overwhelming sense is that companies are actually pulling back investment in the US (not to mention selling off US debt...which could honestly be nation-breaking) because chaos is simply bad for business.

Also people aren't stupid....as Larry Summers puts it, you cannot simultaneously use tariffs as leverage and as a source of revenue. Companies know this. Either you have tariffs and their associated revenue or you have deals, no tariffs, and therefore no revenue - they are at least partially mutually exclusive, you can't have both. If the tariffs are merely leverage to get better trade deals, then there is no incentive for companies to reshore nor invest because the tariffs will eventually disappear...which is exactly what Moron Bessent has explicitly said they will do! And if they are permanent then US consumers will have to swallow higher prices on everything, one way or another (that is: either pay higher taxes or pay higher prices for goods made with US labor). High sales/consumption tax is a way to fund the government, but it's a very stupid way to fund the government because it puts a bottleneck on consumption...the thing that represents nearly 70% of our GDP! Even if you were to manage to switch our tax structure from income based to consumption based, the only thing you would achieve is to discourage spending and slow/break the economy. It's just monumentally stupid all around.
 
Last edited:
The only thing Trump will achieve is making the rest of the world look to China instead of the USA.
I'm hoping it's not just that, but that like-minded countries start trading with each other as well. So if the US wants to make it harder to trade with Canada or the UK, then I'm hoping Canada and the UK trade more with each other.

I'm also hoping that China keeps trading with those nations, because one of the best ways to avoid war is to trade (and we're really screwing that up). Although honestly the cynical stuff I've been reading lately paints a bleak picture about how humanity basically needs war (or something similar) to cut down on the number of men, because men are not generally happy when there are a lot of them.
 
Freedom of speech is dead.


Now, since that is a fact, if the democrats had any balls, they would put some laws (next time they have a chance) with extreme punishment for disinformation, racism, etc.
If Democrats had any balls they would further arm a future Republican government? Even setting aside my principled positions that no government is fit to be arbiter of the truth and racism itself violates no rights, that's still a hard pass from me because I don't want Republicans to be handed that power. Everyone would be better off if partisans would stop being stupid and remember that the pendulum swings.
There's a little positive light in that article.
I saw this described as a decision by a fake judge and I had to laugh because it's not that far off. Immigration judges, like small town magistrates, needn't have even gone to law school, but where they differ from magistrates is they are appointed rather than elected to that position. Immigration judges exist at the behest of the DOJ and with an ends-justify-means administration with so little respect for an independent judiciary or the rule of law, are effectively rubber stamps.

It's an uphill battle. I gather it's appealable to the Board of Immigration Appeals which is still a DOJ rubber stamp, and then it goes to Circuit. Because this is out of Louisiana, that means CA5, which, save for a handful of principled jurists, may well be a rubber stamp for the Trump DOJ (six appointees from the first administration plus some rather Trumpy judges appointed by GWB, including Elrod what made a public statement with Trump appointee Ho that they would not take clerks from Yale Law because of the political views of the school), so there's going to be a lot of luck involved in pulling two principled or sympathetic judges, and even then the federal appeals system is largely deferential to the state, so it's still a crap shoot. Then it may go to a full panel at the Fifth Circuit--and I'm not sure what it takes either to make that happen or avoid it--before the only place to go is SCOTUS. If, by chance, CA5 rejects the state's case and the DOJ appeals that decision to SCOTUS, I expect SCOTUS to take it and I guarantee there are no fewer than three siding with Trump (Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch) with Kavanaugh being strong on 1A and Roberts/ACB being kind of a jump ball even if they do seem principled. If CA5 sides with the Trump DOJ, I think it's done and dusted and the guy is gone. I wouldn't expect SCOTUS to take the case even if it's 5/4 with Roberts joining the minority, but I think we'd probably get a solo dissent from a named Justice saying the Court should have heard the case but no indication of how the decision to decline was split.
 
The view from across the pond is compelling. And dire. She's not wrong...



PS remember the Cambridge Analytica story?
 
Last edited:
Senator Elissa Slotkin introduces her first bill, which is to ban all Chinese car imports to the United States.


Curious to hear @Joey D ’s thoughts on this.
 
Back