Objectively intelligent.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not sure what's so different about capitalism in the last fifty years. Earlier you were fingering Newt Gingrich. It's not like he's the product of capitalism.

Gingrich made total war politics acceptable.

Capitalism since the Powell Memo and Milton Friedman has pretty much been focused solely on shareholder returns. Labor doesn’t work for a company that reinvests in itself, grows, and value them. It serves to provide maximum productivity for the participants in the casino betting on companies.

Capitalism is now a mix of crony capitalism and late capitalism. In this environment, total war politics finds a fertile breeding ground. Candor like that offered in Trump’s campaign (and Bernie’s and Liz’s) gets a guy like Trump elected — an extreme but not entirely unpredictable event. He behaves extremely and his opponents match his extreme behavior. And when he does something amazingly dumb, they impeach him.

It’s a ratcheting up of the crazy. Now, of course, sooner or later, populism would emerge. So many people can’t be lied to and fucked over for so long without a hiccup. But Gingrich was the first guy to make the extreme commonplace on the political strategy side.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Another article about Adder's "non'problem." https://www.thedailybeast.com/russia...to-us-citizens

What's the problem?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

What's the problem?

i am a strident supporter of the value of immigrants coming here. They tend to bust their asses and do work no one born here would want to do. Do you think those attributes will likely be found in the child of a woman who paid to fly here 9 months pregnant?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

i am a strident supporter of the value of immigrants coming here. They tend to bust their asses and do work no one born here would want to do. Do you think those attributes will likely be found in the child of a woman who paid to fly here 9 months pregnant?

I don't see a reason to think that those children will make worse citizens than other children, and I think we have a lot of other problems that are more urgent.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I don't see a reason to think that those children will make worse citizens than other children, and I think we have a lot of other problems that are more urgent.

Huh? We only address the single most urgent problem?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Huh? We only address the single most urgent problem?

What's the problem?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

i am a strident supporter of the value of immigrants coming here. They tend to bust their asses and do work no one born here would want to do. Do you think those attributes will likely be found in the child of a woman who paid to fly here 9 months pregnant?

You never know.

I have a lot of foreign entrepreneurs who were born rich and came here for school, and do an awful lot to drive the economy.

Has anyone looked at data or are we all just winging it here?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Huh? We only address the single most urgent problem?

Of course not, but my general view is that we have limited resources and should use them to address significant issues that resources can help fix.

In this case, assume we decide it's a problem. Maybe pass a law to shut down the agencies that make this easy, and see if that takes care of 90% of the issue? It sounds like they have been operating openly and in accordance with existing law.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Populism (which includes Trump) is a symptom. Late Capitalism (largely “rentier” as Picketty would assert) is the problem.

An alternate narrative for your consideration, Comrade: https://www.themuckrake.com/blog/a-faulty-messiah

[Adder]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

"Until now, traveling to the U.S. to give birth has been entirely legal, as long as women did not lie about their intentions on their visa application. The lack of restrictions helped fuel a lucrative “birth tourism” business, in which U.S.-based brokers—including several*operating out of Trump properties—charged women tens of thousands of dollars for lodging during their pregnancy and birth."

From some Daily Beast article.

What is the problem?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

An alternate narrative for your consideration, Comrade: https://www.themuckrake.com/blog/a-faulty-messiah

A Venn diagram of the two groups would show significant overlay between the crackpots described there and right wing populists.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Huh? We only address the single most urgent problem?

Yes! Think of govt like money. Retire loans by highest interest first (assuming tax benefits don’t suggest otherwise as to some of them).

Address issues by allocating maximum resources to most acute problems and fewer resources to other issues in terms of importance. Govt where every issue is as important as every other issue is untenable. Govt where a small issue deemed important by one loud group and therefore given as much attention as the objectively more important issues is insane.

The “problem” here is not necessarily a problem at all. And if it is, it’s the smallest of problems on which we might spend money and efforts. If Trump wants to pass a law or reg to address it, fine. But devoting significant resources to the enforcement of them is a waste. And the whole thing stinks of politics.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Yes! Think of govt like money. Retire loans by highest interest first (assuming tax benefits don’t suggest otherwise as to some of them).

Address issues by allocating maximum resources to most acute problems and fewer resources to other issues in terms of importance. Govt where every issue is as important as every other issue is untenable. Govt where a small issue deemed important by one loud group and therefore given as much attention as the objectively more important issues is insane.

The “problem” here is not necessarily a problem at all. And if it is, it’s the smallest of problems on which we might spend money and efforts. If Trump wants to pass a law or reg to address it, fine. But devoting significant resources to the enforcement of them is a waste. And the whole thing stinks of politics.

I hate days I agree with Sebby. But yes on all fronts here. Policy wise, this looks like a yawner. But this isn't about policy. This is about getting women coming to the US to spread their legs for CBP's pee stick in the hopes that the trauma will deter them and titillate the trumpers.


BTW, my group won a Grammy last night. I ended up not going - the Grammy folks didn't want me on the stage we discovered (they have an "artists only" policy, more directed at keeping record producers off the stage but also charitable board members) and it was too spendy a weekend for me given how much I have going on - a decision I think I will now regret for the foreseeable future. Those of you on FB will soon see me post a self with hardware, though.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

This Bolton thing is really a big inconvenience for Republican Senators, who will now have to find some other pretext for doing what Trump wants them to do.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

This Bolton thing is really a big inconvenience for Republican Senators, who will now have to find some other pretext for doing what Trump wants them to do.

Anyone he fired can be counted on to lie.