Did Trump get anything right?

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

The word "anything" covers a lot. Trump appears to being way more bad than good but the OP is asking for any examples of anything good. So while I agree with you the that overall answer is No line by line everything isn't No.

I thought the pardon of Jack Johnson was good-ish. Pardoning Alice Johnson was good-ish as well. Of course I suspect he is exercising so many pardons as a way to get everyone use to the idea that he has that authority so it goes over better when he pardons his kids. 

3

Now you've crossed the line...  philosophically speaking. 

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Silvestru said:

I am asking if there is something good for US. Not for him

The problem is that "good" is subjective. Some people think it's "good" for the US that he's been tearing down EPA regulations and doing things that allow businesses to rape the environment. Some people think it's "good" that he's been stripping away banking regulations from Dodd-Frank and allowing Wall Street to once again gamble with peoples money. Some people think it's "good" that he's throwing people out of the country who have been here 20+ years, including some who served honorably in our military. Some people think it's "good" that he's put tariffs on solar panels and is trying to prop up the coal industry. Some people think it's "good" that he's separating refugee children from their parents at the border, saying that domestic abuse is no longer an acceptable reason to seek refuge in the US, and some people think it's "good" that Jeff Sessions is cracking down on marijuana use, forcing judges to try nonviolent immigrants, and that schools are being unfunded, sanctions on Russia unenforced, and ignored sanctions from Chinese companies unpunished.

The problem is that "good" is subjective...

[Phi for All]

From the perspective of extreme wealth capitalism, he's doing everything right. The theatrics hide his removal of restrictions and regulations that limit profit, and allow the GOP to claim shock at his outrageousness while passing bills to promote more private ownership of previously public or state owned operations. He repealed Obama-era regs that required ISPs to take reasonable measures to protect your sensitive data, just before we came to find out about all kinds of breaches of our sensitive data on the web, so that saved the major providers a LOT of legal trouble. 

From the perspective of those who want us to align more with China and Russia in the future, and less with our traditional allies (too socialist and won't promote 100% capitalism), Trump is working furiously to Make America Better (Redder?). Without NATO and all the other stumbling blocks to increasing investments exponentially worldwide, extremist gazillionaires will be able to create a capitalist utopia where everyone will have work, and those with the most money will just trickle that down to everyone else. That makes a lot more sense (if you already have a lot of money) than the humanitarian strategy currently in place.

From the perspective of fringe groups that hold negative views, Trump is the Savior. He has done so much good promoting traits and behaviors that so many people were trying to remove from society, like bigotry and misogyny. Just because the people who actively discriminate on a daily basis are a small minority, that doesn't mean their hate-filled voices shouldn't be heard, or treated on an equal basis with more mainstream thought by the media. 

[rangerx]

Canada always played second fiddle to America. Now they don't. Now Canada has taken the lead on climate change trade. Trudeau is not afraid to stand up to Trump.

That's a good thing.

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, rangerx said:

Canada always played second fiddle to America. Now they don't. Now Canada has taken the lead on climate change trade. Trudeau is not afraid to stand up to Trump.

That's a good thing.

Trump's not wrong about your dairy farmers (just in his ignorant, superficially-researched approach). Your agricultural system is kind of borked because of the power your milk producers have, and you're using an antiquated system that hurts your own folks. Trump was right to point some of that out. Canada needs to fix this (not necessarily the trade imbalances).

And maybe you will fix it, just about the time the US does the same thing with our sugar producers (who do the same thing your dairy farmers do). Canada has only been in the grip of the dairy lobby since the 1970s, but the US sugar lobby has been around since the early 1800s. 

[John Cuthber]

5 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Discuss what? The answer to the OP is NO.

He said N Korea was bad and he said N Korea was good.
It's likely that one of those is right.

[rangerx]

51 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Trump's not wrong about your dairy farmers (just in his ignorant, superficially-researched approach). Your agricultural system is kind of borked because of the power your milk producers have, and you're using an antiquated system that hurts your own folks. Trump was right to point some of that out. Canada needs to fix this (not necessarily the trade imbalances).

And maybe you will fix it, just about the time the US does the same thing with our sugar producers (who do the same thing your dairy farmers do). Canada has only been in the grip of the dairy lobby since the 1970s, but the US sugar lobby has been around since the early 1800s. 

Milk is a terrible example for initiating a trade war. Canadians don't use growth hormones (bovine somatotropin). It's use in Canada is illegal. Even if trade was on par, it's widely not desirable. I live on Vancouver Island, which has world class fresh milk. I wouldn't drink American milk or eat cheese products, even if it was cheaper.

The milk example also demonstrates the American double standard on subsidies. American agriculture is highly subsidized. Far more than Canada.

American beef is also highly subsidized. A lot of public land is used for ranching yet, America punishes Canadian softwood lumber for being harvested from public land.

NAFTA resolved a lot of those issues by balancing one for other, which takes extensive dialog, economic consideration and pollution control.

Americans catch Canadian fish and Canadians catch American fish. The International Salmon Agreement has been in place for decades and works reasonably well. There's nothing to be re-negotiated, so trashing the deal is absurd, if not detrimental to the entire industry.

Thing is, tariffs on wood (for example) only drive up the cost of housing starts, which is the single most important financial  investment for the middle class.

Perhaps we'll dam the Columbia River and cut off Washington and Oregon, much like America dammed the Colorado from Mexico. We'll also bump the cost of bottled water. We have zero demand for American water.

Oil. We forego refining it to favor (and pass off pollution) to Texas, who are better equipped and willing to deal with it. Both sides of the border were okay with that, but hey... we'll just refine it ourselves and sell it domestically or overseas. So much for America's motivation toward energy independence.

Movies, television and other media. We can pull that plug, but I doubt Canadians would want that, but we can apply additional carrier costs for networks, Netflix and impose greater Canadian content laws, which would invariably revitalize the industry in Canada.

A lot of pharmaceuticals are manufactured in Canada. A trade war in that would greatly affect seniors and the disabled in both countries.

The Auto Pact of 1965 was trashed in 2001. It was designed to keep cars in North America, but Canadian production wasn't efficient and we ran a trade deficit, so America nixed it. Since then, the industry took a dive in America, because imports were cheaper and America didn't embrace technology.

Canadian airlines largely fly Boeing aircraft, yet Trump applied a 300% tariff on Bombardier Canada in the USA (yet again a double-standard, to counter the milk argument). Okay, fine, we won't buy your planes anymore, we'll build our own or buy Airbus.

America cannot win a trade war.

[Phi for All]

14 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Milk is a terrible example for initiating a trade war. Canadians don't use growth hormones (bovine somatotropin). It's use in Canada is illegal. Even if trade was on par, it's widely not desirable. I live on Vancouver Island, which has world class fresh milk. I wouldn't drink American milk or eat cheese products, even if it was cheaper.

The milk example also demonstrates the American double standard on subsidies. American agriculture is highly subsidized. Far more than Canada.

American beef is also highly subsidized. A lot of public land is used for ranching yet, America punishes Canadian softwood lumber for being harvested from public land.

NAFTA resolved a lot of those issues by balancing one for other, which takes extensive dialog, economic consideration and pollution control.

Americans catch Canadian fish and Canadians catch American fish. The International Salmon Agreement has been in place for decades and works reasonably well. There's nothing to be re-negotiated, so trashing the deal is absurd, if not detrimental to the entire industry.

Thing is, tariffs on wood (for example) only drive up the cost of housing starts, which is the single most important financial  investment for the middle class.

Perhaps we'll dam the Columbia River and cut off Washington and Oregon, much like America dammed the Colorado from Mexico. We'll also bump the cost of bottled water. We have zero demand for American water.

Oil. We forego refining it to favor (and pass off pollution) to Texas, who are better equipped and willing to deal with it. Both sides of the border were okay with that, but hey... we'll just refine it ourselves and sell it domestically or overseas. So much for America's motivation toward energy independence.

Movies, television and other media. We can pull that plug, but I doubt Canadians would want that, but we can apply additional carrier costs for networks, Netflix and impose greater Canadian content laws, which would invariably revitalize the industry in Canada.

A lot of pharmaceuticals are manufactured in Canada. A trade war in that would greatly affect seniors and the disabled in both countries.

The Auto Pact of 1965 was trashed in 2001. It was designed to keep cars in North America, but Canadian production wasn't efficient and we ran a trade deficit, so America nixed it. Since then, the industry took a dive in America, because imports were cheaper and America didn't embrace technology.

Canadian airlines largely fly Boeing aircraft, yet Trump applied a 300% tariff on Bombardier Canada in the USA (yet again a double-standard, to counter the milk argument). Okay, fine, we won't buy your planes anymore, we'll build our own or buy Airbus.

America cannot win a trade war.

Those are strawmen dressed in whataboutism clothes! I gave specific examples of why Canada's dairy farmers need to be reigned in. I specifically said he was right about the farmers, not about his fatuous reasons for insulting an ally. It has nothing to do with trade wars, quality, content, or even imported milk. It's the system of price controls and quotas Canada uses to manage dairy supply that's the problem because it raises the price unnaturally to your own countrymen for Canadian dairy products. My point had nothing to do with trade imbalance imagined or otherwise, and everything to do with political clout given to your dairy industry in exchange for their endorsements in trade deals, and other concessions that have squat to do with making dairy products. 

Again, it's very similar to the mistake we made with sugar in the US. They're too powerful for any politician to tackle, and have been for a long time. If Trump dislikes the protectionist practices, he should start weeding them out at home before criticizing other countries.

[MigL]

Of course he's done something good for the country.
He quit show business, didn't he ?

( he's taken his act on the road, and is now firing people in government about as often as he did on that stupid show )

[iNow]

Good for the country?

He’s woken a lot of people up to the importance of paying attention and the criticality of voting. 

[Ten oz]

25 minutes ago, iNow said:

Good for the country?

He’s woken a lot of people up to the importance of paying attention and the criticality of voting. 

This remains to be seen. 

[iNow]

34 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

This remains to be seen. 

No, it doesn’t. A lot of people have, in fact, awoken to politics and the importance of getting out to vote.

What DOES remain to be seen, however, is whether ENOUGH people have done this to significantly alter the makeup of our legislatures. 

[Ten oz]

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

No, it doesn’t. A lot of people have, in fact, awoken to politics and the importance of getting out to vote.

What DOES remain to be seen, however, is whether ENOUGH people have done this to significantly alter the makeup of our legislatures. 

If the voter participation as a percentage is no higher than 2010, last initial mid term under a new POTUS, I don't see how you can quantify there has been any increase. Yes, everyday new people awake to Politics. That was true before Trump. If participation is down in 2018 I'd argue Trump has created more apathy toward politics than anything else. 

[iNow]

And if wishes were fishes we’d all swim in riches. I guess we’ll see. Fingers crossed. 

[Phi for All]

22 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

If the voter participation as a percentage is no higher than 2010, last initial mid term under a new POTUS, I don't see how you can quantify there has been any increase.

I'm hearing there are already more first time voter registrations among 18 year-olds than in years past, most likely due to all the school shootings and the Parkland survivor's efforts. Efforts to reduce gerrymandering are gaining momentum. If this keep up, and reduce Republican efforts to keep minorities from voting, I don't think Trump (or Pence if Trump is impeached) will get a second term. The GOP has relied on redistricting and repression far too long, and it will be their undoing.

Unless, of course, there's no Democrat on the ballot under 70, who isn't a gun supporter, or a billionaire, or has had an extramarital affair. In that case the new voters may pick an independent, and Trump gets a chance to make America greater.

[rangerx]

5 hours ago, Phi for All said:

It's the system of price controls and quotas Canada uses to manage dairy supply that's the problem because it raises the price unnaturally to your own countrymen for Canadian dairy products. My point had nothing to do with trade imbalance imagined or otherwise, and everything to do with political clout given to your dairy industry in exchange for their endorsements in trade deals, and other concessions that have squat to do with making dairy products. 

Again, it's very similar to the mistake we made with sugar in the US. They're too powerful for any politician to tackle, and have been for a long time. If Trump dislikes the protectionist practices, he should start weeding them out at home before criticizing other countries.

To that end, I agree. I have no love for marketing boards. I haven't compared the price to milk elsewhere, but it doesn't seem expensive either for a fresh, healthy product. It's less than two bucks CDN per liter. Imported cheeses are expensive... really expensive though. That's not exclusive to America either. Pretty much every country does that for booze. Funny nobody mentions the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, which is the largest monopoly in the world. The single greatest international purchaser of spirits.

So we play dirty pool with milk, we can change that. especially since it's come to light. It pales to the way America plays dirty pool with softwood lumber, which has a profoundly larger effect. Will America change that? I doubt it. Americans will always fight with Americans over softwood and blame Canada for it. It's not just beside the point, it's egregious, really. Pretty much all countries protect something under the guise of nationalism, so singling out Canada for milk without addressing the bigger issue is patently unfair and shows bad faith in demanding re-negotiation. America had it's way with our forests for the pulp and paper industry too for decades and left us holding the bag with the pollution and ghost towns when they laid everyone off and ran away. Same thing goes for iron ore and other mines, which have chronic containment or toxic issues to this day. Though admittedly Noranda does not have a favorable reputation in the US, again it's small on the big scale of things.

Like I say, NAFTA has been a tit for tat. We overlook one thing, America another and that's how a deal gets made. Economic, not political balance. A trade war (no less further deregulation) is a race to the bottom for pollution and a loss to sustainability and public health/spaces. Each of us have strengths and weaknesses. Canada has more trees, so we produce more wood. America has more people, so they manufacture more goods. If trade means going one on one for each and every product, we'd be doing without or paying a lot for each other's products.

So in the figurative sense of milk and the OP, just because Trump was right to point to a typo is wrong to discard the book.

[Ten oz]

35 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I'm hearing there are already more first time voter registrations among 18 year-olds than in years past, most likely due to all the school shootings and the Parkland survivor's efforts. Efforts to reduce gerrymandering are gaining momentum. If this keep up, and reduce Republican efforts to keep minorities from voting, I don't think Trump (or Pence if Trump is impeached) will get a second term. The GOP has relied on redistricting and repression far too long, and it will be their undoing.

Unless, of course, there's no Democrat on the ballot under 70, who isn't a gun supporter, or a billionaire, or has had an extramarital affair. In that case the new voters may pick an independent, and Trump gets a chance to make America greater.

I don't disagree however until registration estimates are become votes  on election night and counted we don't actually know if Trump has impacted people's awareness and interest is voting. We know Obama sure woke lots of white Evangelical conservatives. We saw the spikes on 2010.