Worst President's First 100 Days in History

[BowlBrother85]

Science like anything else can and is polluted with money. That is why theories without definitive proof must be viewed with a skeptical eye.

I assume you would include Trump's completely unsupported claim that vaccinations cause autism in this.

 

[lawgator1]

Basically, Trump is engaged one long, multi year "Opposite Day."

Whatever he says is true, you just go with the opposite. I wonder what stocks he would say I should definitely not buy....

As proof of this, I observe the unmistakeable phenomenon where Trump has repeatedly criticized something, eg NATO, the Chinese, water boarding, but he doesn't know what he's talking about. When he meets someone that does, he changes his mind in about ten minutes.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Basically, Trump is engaged one long, multi year "Opposite Day."

Whatever he says is true, you just go with the opposite. I wonder what stocks he would say I should definitely not buy....

As proof of this, I observe the unmistakeable phenomenon where Trump has repeatedly criticized something, eg NATO, the Chinese, water boarding, but he doesn't know what he's talking about. When he meets someone that does, he changes his mind in about ten minutes.

...or even more concerning, he will change his stance for completely unrelated reasons. The reason he has given for no longer calling China a currency manipulator? They are helping us deal with North Korea. That's not strong leadership at all. No stance he takes is firm. Everything is negotiable.

 

[volprof]

You really are becoming VolProf Lite in your posting.

And I'm still waiting on your response to the gun control post. But if you don't, I knew you couldn't.

As it stands, we're currently deciding between you, Christ Christie, and Piglet to determine which of you all was neutered most by Trumpskoi.

I used to respect your posts, but you have become a complete head-in-the-sand sycophant. It's clear you never stood for anything of which you previously claimed. Just a sand-shifter, as it turns out, and nothing more.

I don't even bother to read your posts anymore, unless I just happen to see my good name dragged into your muck.

 

[volprof]

Science has nothing to do with how policy works. Did you watch Bill Nye's new special on global warming? Do you know what his solution was? "Vote." Wait, what? If I just vote for whatever climate change initiative that comes up, that'll fix things? Alrighty then.

Scientists don't mind using force. They don't necessarily care about cost and they don't even consider opportunity cost. They fought tooth and nail to remove cost/benefit analysis from justifying the EPA's actions. They definitely don't show any understanding for the law of unintended consequences, which is the explanation for the results of nearly every bad policy.

You typically posts good responses, which is why I tolerate your libertarianism, unlike the other libertarians on here.

But this is fairly incoherent by your standards.

You seem to think businessmen are best at determining the value of science. If so, then I fundamentally disagree with that. You're Adam Smithing on us here. This is 2017. We don't need Adam Smiths to determine the value of clean energy as opposed to coal. Or to determine the ultimate cost effectiveness of energy sources for a 10-50 year outlook.

 

[hog88]

I assume you would include Trump's completely unsupported claim that vaccinations cause autism in this.

Of course.

 

[lawgator1]

...or even more concerning, he will change his stance for completely unrelated reasons. The reason he has given for no longer calling China a currency manipulator? They are helping us deal with North Korea. That's not strong leadership at all. No stance he takes is firm. Everything is negotiable.

Being open minded and willing to reexamine views is actually a trait I would admire in a President. And it does seem that when Trump changes his mind on a dime like he does, he is surprised when he does not get a lot of kudos for doing so.

But for a change of opinion on a policy matter to be meaningful, and reflect truly considered weighing of the facts and issues, requires that ab initio you actually have an informed opinion.

Trump does not have a thought-out policy position, on most everything. He's winging it, constantly.

So, no, Donny. When you change your mind you are not going to get credit for reconsidering long-held positions. Rather, you are going to be seen for the uninformed, fickle, hypocrite you are.

 

[apevol]

Awwww, play nice now BOT. Look, I found another Wikipedia page that appears to enumerate most of your symptoms, PLUS it offers a cure!

Neurosyphilis

Neurosyphilis is an infection of the brain or spinal cord caused by the spirochete Treponema pallidum. It usually occurs in people who have had chronic, untreated syphilis, usually about 10 to 20 years after first infection and develops in about 25%–40% of persons who are not treated.

Signs and symptoms

Symptoms of neurosyphilis include, but are not limited to the following:

Abnormal gait
Blindness
Confusion, disorientation
Sudden personality changes
Changes in mental stability
Dementia
Depression
Headache
Fecal and urinary incontinence
Irritability
Memory problems
Mood disturbances
Numbness in the toes, feet, or legs
Poor concentration
Psychosis
Seizures
Neck stiffness
Tremors
Visual disturbances

Treatment

Penicillin is used to treat neurosyphilis, however, early diagnosis and treatment is critical. :good!:

is neurosyphillis what happens when your brain gets ****ed? Cuz i think i might have it.

 

[Septic]

Obama did a lot to bury this country. I would agree.

tl;dr "bbbbuuuutttt obama."

 

[OuterBanksVol]

is neurosyphillis what happens when your brain gets ****ed? Cuz i think i might have it.

Hey juicebox, don't be recycling my disses. Go thinks up sum of ur owns.

 

[MT LeConte]

Basically, Trump is engaged one long, multi year "Opposite Day."

Whatever he says is true, you just go with the opposite. I wonder what stocks he would say I should definitely not buy....

As proof of this, I observe the unmistakeable phenomenon where Trump has repeatedly criticized something, eg NATO, the Chinese, water boarding, but he doesn't know what he's talking about. When he meets someone that does, he changes his mind in about ten minutes.

He changes his mind so easily and often because he never developed realistic ideas that could actually become policy. He mostly just word vomited what he thought his supporters wanted hear on a given issue and called it policy.

 

[luthervol]

One characteristic of wisdom is knowing what you don't know. Trump greatly lacks this characteristic. He thinks he knows everything that needs to be known, and when he is presented with new knowledge he acts as if he discovered some previously unknown truth .......like when he said "health care is complicated."

 

[lawgator1]

One characteristic of wisdom is knowing what you don't know. Trump greatly lacks this characteristic. He thinks he knows everything that needs to be known, and when he is presented with new knowledge he acts as if he discovered some previously unknown truth .......like when he said "health care is complicated."

 

[n_huffhines]

Science should dictate policy or at least policy should be based on science. It's when science is denied or ignored that people get concerned. We have a president that denied global warming and then blamed it on the Chinese once he could no longer completely deny its existence with a straight face.

Like i said, scientists should tell us about the science and let people who understand policy do their best to fix the problems. The scientist is not even going to consider how his measures will affect business, family budgets, the market for better ideas, etc.

Think about the whale oil shortage we faced in the 1800s. A scientist would tell you we need to farm whales....or that we need to ban whale hunting and give contracts to preferred enterprises....or any number of solutions that required government action and disruption. But the government left it alone and we figured out how to refine crude oil.

If our best ideas for fighting CC are to use government to make treaties that probably won't make a difference and the next POTUS can just back out anyway, it seems like we should be doing our best to explore non-government solutuons. The government will let you down.

 

[luthervol]

Like i said, scientists should tell us about the science and let people who understand policy do their best to fix the problems. The scientist is not even going to consider how his measures will affect business, family budgets, the market for better ideas, etc.

Think about the whale oil shortage we faced in the 1800s. A scientist would tell you we need to farm whales....or that we need to ban whale hunting and give contracts to preferred enterprises....or any number of solutions that required government action and disruption. But the government left it alone and we figured out how to refine crude oil.

If our best ideas for fighting CC are to use government to make treaties that probably won't make a difference and the next POTUS can just back out anyway, it seems like we should be doing our best to explore non-government solutuons. The government will let you down.

I thought there were government restrictions on whale hunting. How about ivory trade and rhino horns? I just put less confidence in free market / capitalism than you do. When profit is the sole driving force, poor decisions are often made.

 

[n_huffhines]

I thought there were government restrictions on whale hunting. How about ivory trade and rhino horns? I just put less confidence in free market / capitalism than you do. When profit is the sole driving force, poor decisions are often made.

The government is just a reflection of the market/people, for good or bad. The government didn't clean the air and water by passing laws. We started demanding cleaner air and water and after government noticed the market trends, they started passing laws.

You are too concerned with motives. You want to feel good about the motives. I just want to feel good about the results. There are some problems that the government is more equipped to solve than the market, and vice versa.

In many African countries, the elephants belong to everyone. Governments have outlawed killing them, but the vast plains are too big to police. So greedy poachers kill elephants and steal their tusks.

Roberts said, "It's a nice idea to say it's wrong to kill elephants. But that method has not worked."

In Zambia, Uganda and Kenya, where elephant hunting is banned, the number of elephants has actually dropped dramatically -- from 180,000 to 44,000 -- in the past four decades.

But in Zimbabwe, South Africa, Namibia and Botswana, local villagers have a form of ownership rights. They have the right to sell hunting licenses for about $10,000 per elephant.

And this permission to kill elephants is actually saving elephants.

"Oh, it's disgusting. But it works," Roberts said.

It works, because the villagers now say, these are our elephants. Even a former poacher now works to protect the elephants.

"The villagers have a profit motive to make sure that elephants don't get poached and killed. As a result, they take care of them. They don't want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs," Roberts explained.

In these countries where villagers virtually own the elephants, elephant numbers have almost tripled -- from 80,000 in 1960 to about 230,000 in 2000.

So while sharing may feel warm and fuzzy, it often makes things worse.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=448934&page=1

 

[luthervol]

The government is just a reflection of the market/people, for good or bad. The government didn't clean the air and water by passing laws. We started demanding cleaner air and water and after government noticed the market trends, they started passing laws.

You are too concerned with motives. You want to feel good about the motives. I just want to feel good about the results. There are some problems that the government is more equipped to solve than the market, and vice versa.



http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=448934&page=1

I see we're traveling down the same road we've been down once before and I appreciate your consistency. The market can work with a well informed public, same with government. I guess the big sticking point is the "well informed public". And you're correct, motives are critically important in my mind.

 

[n_huffhines]

I see we're traveling down the same road we've been down once before and I appreciate your consistency. The market can work with a well informed public, same with government. I guess the big sticking point is the "well informed public". And you're correct, motives are critically important in my mind.

If governments/markets only worked with a well informed public we wouldn't have gotten out of the dark ages.

 

[TennFan]

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s failure to make good on his signature promise to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act is the most crushing political defeat of his early days in the White House.

But it is hardly the only one.

Mr. Trump — who sold himself as a winner who could turn around a country that “doesn’t win anymore” — has endured a litany of missteps, controversies, resignations and investigations, all of which have dented his “I alone can fix it” vow to remake government with businesslike efficiency.

A month shy of the 100-day mark that presidents use to gauge success, Mr. Trump’s largely self-inflicted setbacks are evidence of a novice politician, often uninterested in the inner workings of government, who is struggling to wield his constitutional authority or fully understand the limits of his office.

“No administration has ever been off to a worse 100-day start,” said Steve Schmidt, a longtime Republican strategist who served as a counselor to Vice President Dick Cheney.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/25/us/politics/trump-policy-goals-missteps.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news


Hey, Donald! Make America Great Again... RESIGN!!!!

View attachment 129541

^^^ Agreed, Donald. Agreed.

Sounds like a true liberal to me. Guess you preferred Hillary. Whose term has been the worst?

 

[luthervol]

If governments/markets only worked with a well informed public we wouldn't have gotten out of the dark ages.

True - I guess I should have said "work best".

 

[n_huffhines]

True - I guess I should have said "work best".

IDK about government, but yes, markets work best when there is symmetrical information.

A lot of the reason we have regulation in the first place is that consumers in the past have not had access to a ton of information.

So then government stepped in to try to fix this with various rules intended to make businesses behave. Many times the rules end up favoring companies with market power, creating a system of croney capitalism.

But then we got the internet, which would have solved a lot of these problems without the need for government creating many of these rules.

Now we are stuck with a lot of unnecessary red tape. We don't need the government to tell United Airlines how to behave because the market knows about what happened and freaked the **** out over it. United and all the other airlines are going to readdress their policies.

I don't need the government to tell me that Mucho Taco is a safe place to eat. I see that it's a 4.5 out of 5 stars on google reviews.

But we will be stuck with obsolete bureaucracy forever because we couldn't wait for free people to sort out societal imperfections. Yeah, maybe we had some short term benefit, but we have to think about the long run.

 

[luthervol]

IDK about government, but yes, markets work best when there is symmetrical information.

A lot of the reason we have regulation in the first place is that consumers in the past have not had access to a ton of information.

So then government stepped in to try to fix this with various rules intended to make businesses behave. Many times the rules end up favoring companies with market power, creating a system of croney capitalism.

But then we got the internet, which would have solved a lot of these problems without the need for government creating many of these rules.

Now we are stuck with a lot of unnecessary red tape. We don't need the government to tell United Airlines how to behave because the market knows about what happened and freaked the **** out over it. United and all the other airlines are going to readdress their policies.

I don't need the government to tell me that Mucho Taco is a safe place to eat. I see that it's a 4.5 out of 5 stars on google reviews.

But we will be stuck with obsolete bureaucracy forever because we couldn't wait for free people to sort out societal imperfections. Yeah, maybe we had some short term benefit, but we have to think about the long run.

Sounds good in theory, I just don't think society is advanced enough for it to work in practicality.

 

[n_huffhines]

Sounds good in theory, I just don't think society is advanced enough for it to work in practicality.

So because we are imperfect people we should look to imperfect people in power to fix our problems....I guess you think politicians are some advanced species? :good!:

 

[luthervol]

So because we are imperfect people we should look to imperfect people in power to fix our problems....I guess you think politicians are some advanced species? :good!:

Politicians are no more advanced than the CEO of United Airlines, the manager at the Taco place, or the judge and jury hearing a case.

Humans have always collectively formed laws with means of enforcement and punishment. That can never change. In many ways regulations are just a type of law, they may be a necessary evils, but they are necessary none the less.

 

[n_huffhines]

Politicians are no more advanced than the CEO of United Airlines, the manager at the Taco place, or the judge and jury hearing a case.

The CEO at United Airlines only has power over me if I choose to do business with him or if he gets in bed with politicians to write regulations that harm the market. Otherwise, he has absolutely no power over me.

The elected or appointed official has power over me, no matter what I do.

Humans have always collectively formed laws with means of enforcement and punishment. That can never change. In many ways regulations are just a type of law, they may be a necessary evils, but they are necessary none the less.

You think all pre-emptive government regulation is necessary? I would guess most of it is not and that's becoming more and more true.