The Market Ticker
Rss Icon RSS available
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
Comments on So What About Kavanaugh?
User: Not logged on
Top Forum Top Login FAQ Register Clear Cookie
Showing Page 2 of 3  First123Last
User Info So What About Kavanaugh? in forum [Market-Ticker]
Robodog
Posts: 282
Incept: 2011-06-12

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
As a side note notwithstanding these Supreme Court conniptions, a ray of sunshine made it through yesterday when the DOJ settled with DIYer Cody Wilson & his plans to publish plans for 3-D printing of lead life-saving devices:

wired.com/story/a-landmark-legal-shift-opens-pandoras-box-for-diy-guns/

----------
I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone. ~ H.L. Mencken
Wakeupcall
Posts: 5191
Incept: 2009-06-08

Hampton Roads, VA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Karl, who did you see on cnn?

----------
"The strongest memory is weaker than the palest ink" Chinese proverb
"The enemy of my enemy is my candidate" Random commenter
"We have the government we deserve"
Click
Posts: 194
Incept: 2017-06-26

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Kavanaugh is a good pick for Trump because America is an empire, and the set of laws which govern an empire are far different than the laws ( or lack thereof) that govern a constitutional republic. The American Empire and its CEO need team players like Kavanaugh to abridge whatever parts of the Constitution that prevent America from becoming "great again", i.e., a Super Empire that Trump himself can be proud of...

Trump is the CEO of the American Empire, and he knows it. And I expect nothing less of him than to choose his political and judicial appointees on the basis of making America not just any run of the mill empire, but an empire befitting the Trump brand name.

Really, I don't think one in a thousand know the kind of leader Trump really is... That man is no Ron Paul.

Trump isn't a non-interventionist in any since of the word. And he sure isn't a Constitutionalist himself. So, don't be surprised to see him appoint those of whom he wishes to help achieve his vision of what an America should like after Trump himself makes it "great again".

Practically speaking, I approve of Kavanaugh only because of his position on the Second Amendment. Because sooner or later the Empire is going to fall, and that's when the Second Amendment becomes more important than any of the others.

As I've said before: buckle up, and enjoy the reality **** show... Because shows like the one Trump is putting on are once-in-a-lifetime **** shows... And I actually love how Trump is turning the tables on the Eurocrats in Euroland. It was nice to watch Trump kick Angela Merkel in the **** just like he kicked Jeb Bush in the nuts.

The summit with Putin should be very entertaining, to say the least. After tacking on additional tarrifs to China's imports, demanding more money from the ****bag EU for a military buildup of NATO, and mocking the Germans for purchasing fuel from Russia, Trump is going into his meeting with Putin in a position of strength....

I predict Putin won't know what the **** hit him. After dealing with Obama, Bush and Clinton, Putin now faces a real CEO.
Whitehat
Posts: 547
Incept: 2017-06-27

The People's Republic of New York
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
The problem with Trump or any other leader as strong man, emperor, empire builder, whatever is that eventually the military rule that there is always someone bigger, stronger, meaner and tougher applies. He is a silver-spooned big man. No doubt that he can best many in terms of intelligence and manipulation, but he is accustomed to limited consequences. Just wait until he gets in with the street fighters, and this is meant on many levels. This is why we do not want his America Great Empire Model as it is only one stronger group or dislocating event away from a larger collapse. Emperors who operate outside the rule of law and proper founding form of our country expose the vulnerable flank of relying on their one trick and not having the whole system work properly much like bailing out a boat instead of patching the holes. Eventually the crew grows tired, everyone to the lifeboats and the storm gets worse and you made the problems worse by allowing the waters to rot the structure over the years. You sure do look like superman while manning that gusher pump until everyone goes tired. There is a line among professional captains, "Weak captains need strong crews." Trump is over working the people and system until everyone and everything gets tired and then the tougher guys will pounce.

Putin and Russia for all of its problems are capable of defeating us or costing us a high price for victory especially since they are accustomed to hardship outside of our imaginations. They are also a much more cohesive society.

Do you think that those of us willing and capable of fighting in a protracted conflict or cleaning up some other mess so big boy can be the emperor will come back to broken inner cities, welfare communities and their associated crime, financial shenanigans, the lack of the rule of law and other indignities and if our number as as large as they could be after a world conflict, not decide to clean things up in a less than desirable fashion. This will always be a fear that the returning fighting men would want a say and why they will always be shunned and marginalized to some extent regardless of heroism.

In some past conflicts of uncertain times it was only that they the soldier class were not numerous enough, society was not broken enough or people were not angry enough to come back and finish the job here.

Trump is stupid if he thinks that conditions are right for another late fifties and sixties post war boom in our future.

MAGA is not forever.

----------
There are two ways to be rich: One is by acquiring much, and the other is by desiring little.
snow, seasons, distance and dirt roads: SSDD
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Gal. 6:7)
Magus
Posts: 2539
Incept: 2008-05-04

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
In what world could Russia defeat the US today? Their GDP is *~6%* of ours and their military is no where near as strong/advanced as ours and their economy is no where near as diversified as ours is - if the world economy crumbles their #1 money maker - energy - goes down the toilet. About the only way they could beat the US at anything is if they got off nukes first and were able to land them before we could retaliate/shoot them down. In other words, zero chance Russia starts a war with the US unless we are going to invade them imminently.

You are right at some point the US will face a threat to the country, but that will most likely either be a China or a united Europe down the road, not Russia.

----------
"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved."

-~~Ludwig V
Asimov
Posts: 109918
Incept: 2007-08-26

East Tennessee Eastern Time
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Quote:
In what world could Russia defeat the US today?


In the world where the US has to be politically correct and not injure civilians and work under goofy ass rules and regulations like we have/had in iraq, while at the same time russia actually wages war?

That's not even considering nukes at all. If it went nuclear, neither country would "win."

----------
It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.

Festina lente.
Whitehat
Posts: 547
Incept: 2017-06-27

The People's Republic of New York
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Magus -- Russia could easily defeat us and NATO in a ground based infantry and mechanized assault. they could overrun Europe any time that they want and we would be forced to use the most horrible weapons to attempt to repel them. they have a much stronger ground assault force and military than all of NATO combined. we are not setup for this type of warfare. their territory is its own defense force, see Winter. they are too big to destroy every square inch or person. they can take care of themselves economically and agriculturally. a nuclear attack on their invading forces also can be risky to Europe due to blast diameter and fallout zones. they are a tougher people than we are due to their lifestyle and experiences and their military is accustomed to being tough and most are dedicated professionals. yes, they do have demographic and other social problems, but some of them actually make them tougher to battle.

the above scenarios have been war-gamed by our military leaders. there is politics and there is reality. they deal with the latter.

----------
There are two ways to be rich: One is by acquiring much, and the other is by desiring little.
snow, seasons, distance and dirt roads: SSDD
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Gal. 6:7)
Magus
Posts: 2539
Incept: 2008-05-04

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
White - First, many in our military would dispute that about ground forces. Second, why do you think it would only be ground force in a theoretical war with Russia? Even ignoring nukes, there are lots of other things to consider. If you were trying to launch a national building campaign, sure that would be crazy difficult to do. But to just beat them and destroy their government?

----------
"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved."

-~~Ludwig V
Asimov
Posts: 109918
Incept: 2007-08-26

East Tennessee Eastern Time
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Magus: The only way to take and hold territory is with ground forces.

That's why.

They aren't the USA. They aren't interested just beating them and destroying the government. They are interested in being in control from then on.

[Edit: That last line is my opinion.]

----------
It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.

Festina lente.

Quik49
Posts: 4711
Incept: 2007-12-11

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Napoleon...Hitler...didn't work out to well for them..... the facts surrounding those two situations sum it up simply in my mind. Add to that it's a BFP....Big F'n Place....

----------
Long Vaseline....

Whitehat
Posts: 547
Incept: 2017-06-27

The People's Republic of New York
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Magus wrote..
First, many in our military would dispute that about ground forces. Second, why do you think it would only be ground force in a theoretical war with Russia?


regarding your first point many in the military would dispute your point about them. based upon first-hand knowledge.

your second point is more involved. since the late eighties we have showcased our high tech weapons, etc. if they are so great, why is it that we have not totally decimated to the point of absolute surrender the significantly more minuscule forces in other conflict areas? they have their uses, but as Asimov said, territory must be taken completely or else you have a perpetual Guerrilla warfare. Russia would install itself in any territory that it invaded and their own would defy any attempts by us to seize it. this is distantly one reason that battles were once fought on selected areas since invasion was so difficult. this is why the British ultimately gave up the colonies as we controlled the land by residence. we would be traveling to other lands to fight Russia; the logistics would be terrible. Europe is in land contiguous to theirs, a much easier takeover, just need to control roads and rail and establish residence. we would never get them out and the Europeans cannot fight and would not and would probably adapt to life under Russian rule.

our heavy ground forces are not that large, add in bad logistical challenges and Russia can manufacture and already possesses a large old-fashioned kit of heavy mobile weapons, tanks, trucks and troops. low tech that is dead reliable and in massive quantity beats the high tech stuff. and their soldiers can fight under very hard conditions. now let's add in that other groups that just love us will also contribute, perhaps quietly. it would be a real mess for us.

Russia has a terrible demographic situation and needs to solidify power bases around the world for strength to ride the trend out. this makes them a little aggressive. we successfully waited out Iran and now they will age out of being able to aggressively do much. Russia is positioning as China does the same and they are fair weather friends to each other only. It is best to leave sick animals alone and not agitate them. few things are as dangerous as a sick animal or a man with nothing left to lose.

----------
There are two ways to be rich: One is by acquiring much, and the other is by desiring little.
snow, seasons, distance and dirt roads: SSDD
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Gal. 6:7)
Magus
Posts: 2539
Incept: 2008-05-04

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
You only need to worry about guerrilla warfare/holding the land if you plan to hold the country. I am frankly tired of nation building campaigns. They are insanely expensive and usually never work. The only thing I'd do is destroy the entire military and government of Russia, tell them to have back at it themselves with the promise if they do anything again it will repeat.

----------
"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved."

-~~Ludwig V
Whitehat
Posts: 547
Incept: 2017-06-27

The People's Republic of New York
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
i would also add that nothing would destroy the Russian government. they are well prepared to ride out any assaults. this is not some little desert country. even North Korea's govt. rode out the war intact in the mountainous country. Russia has a lot of those too. also, what ever they did to someone else could never justify us making a strike on them. then they could do a similar warning strike to us say New York City or one of our nuclear plants. what would we ****ing do? start WWIII. any high tech hit on them would yield one for us. they can weather such things much better than us. our economy would be wrecked, they would adapt much better. still think that we can do anything. if so, why are we still in numerous quagmires all over the world for so long without end. let's see, we tried to do this to them and it cost them a lot. we are fairing much worse.

----------
There are two ways to be rich: One is by acquiring much, and the other is by desiring little.
snow, seasons, distance and dirt roads: SSDD
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Gal. 6:7)
Whitehat
Posts: 547
Incept: 2017-06-27

The People's Republic of New York
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Quote:
You only need to worry about guerrilla warfare/holding the land if you plan to hold the country. I am frankly tired of nation building campaigns. They are insanely expensive and usually never work. The only thing I'd do is destroy the entire military and government of Russia, tell them to have back at it themselves with the promise if they do anything again it will repeat.


impossible for us or an alliance with the rest of the world to do.

----------
There are two ways to be rich: One is by acquiring much, and the other is by desiring little.
snow, seasons, distance and dirt roads: SSDD
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Gal. 6:7)
Tickerguy
Posts: 153486
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Russia is second only to China in attempted breakins and scams in cyberspace today. Indeed they go back and forth quite frequently as to who's responsible for the greater volume of attacks.....

----------
Winding it down.
Magus
Posts: 2539
Incept: 2008-05-04

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Whitehat - the wars you keep referring to were not real wars. They were NATION BUILDING campaigns. For example, the Iraq War II was over in a couple of days. The nation building campaign lasted 10+ years. Even back in the 50s/60s/70s we could have destroyed N Korea/Vietnam entirely - but we wanted to leave it intact and ultimately restore it a capitalistic country with the south and we didn't want bad PR. You keep conflating nation building and wars. While the military industrial complex benefits from the former rather than the latter and continues to push them, they are not necessary to protect the US. You also need to consider in the case of Russia, due to their low GDP and un-diversified economy, it would not take long to completely cripple their entire economy if we wanted to do so without firing a single shot.

As Karl alluded to, I'm far more worried about Russia and China with tech/hacking than I am a physical war with Russia.

----------
"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved."

-~~Ludwig V
Tickerguy
Posts: 153486
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I'm far more-worried about a thousand dudes in small cells, all with a single focus on ****ing us hard, coming over the Mexican border.

A major cyber-assault *today* would be pretty tough. Now once China gets some counterfeit Intel instruction-set chips into sensitive places, not so much -- then we're in a WORLD of ****, and AMD's recent action means that IS going to happen.

But right now the thousand dudes is a far more serious threat. By a lot. And they may well be here in the country already.

----------
Winding it down.
Wakeupcall
Posts: 5191
Incept: 2009-06-08

Hampton Roads, VA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Asi, are you talking about the russians or the us government?

----------
"The strongest memory is weaker than the palest ink" Chinese proverb
"The enemy of my enemy is my candidate" Random commenter
"We have the government we deserve"
Peterm99
Posts: 5938
Incept: 2009-03-21

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Magus wrote..
In what world could Russia defeat the US today? Their GDP is *~6%* of ours . . .
That GDP percentage is quite possibly true, but that doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means. I believe that relying on relative GDP numbers as a basis for comparison of the capabilities of various countries is being overly simplistic and makes one prone to making highly misleading and/or unwarranted assumptions.

Let's do a thought experiment. (Except for Russian worker pay, I'm pulling these numbers out of my ass, but it still serves to illustrate the point.)

Assume that the US and Russia each have a company of 1000 people in size and of roughly equivalent technology that produces widgets, with each line worker able to produce one widget per 8 hours of actual work. Assume the American workers get paid roughly $25K a year and the average Russian worker gets paid roughly $5160 per year (according to the Russian Federal State Statistics Service), that is, the US worker gets paid ~4.8 times as much as the Russian one.

Assume that both companies have roughly 10% as corporate officers/managers/supervisors who don't actually produce widgets. However, that 10% in the US company will probably average at least 3 times (or more) of the salary/benefits of each line worker, while the Russian average is probably significantly smaller, but, for the sake of argument, assume that its only twice as much

The US company also has close to 20% or so of the workforce employed in administrative positions, primarily HR, who also don't produce widgets, while I would expect the Russian companys administrative workforce to be half that. Assume that the admin staff's salary/benefits are the same as the line workers.

In the US, the line workers will spend at least 5% of their work time not really working but on administrative matters, union meetings, and repeatedly attending many, many HR mandated lectures such as "Diversity & Anti-Discrimination Programs", "Anti-Sexual Harassment Education", "Gender Fluidity Accommodation Seminars", "Eliminating Micro-Aggressions Training", etc., etc., etc. Add in liberal holidays/vacation/sick leave, then 15% work time loss is not an unreasonable assumption. In Russia, I would expect that the HR-related time wastage and holidays/vacation/sick leave losses to be significantly less, say 5% for the purposes of this illustration.

So, cranking through the arithmetic, one gets the line workers in the Russian company working a total of 1,580,800 hours and producing 197,600 widgets a year, while the US company's line workers productively working a total of 1,237,600 hours and producing only 154,700 widgets a year.

Thus, the Russian company's actual production is nearly 28% greater than the US company's. Yet, given the way GDP is counted, the GDP contribution of the US company is 5.24 times the GDP contribution of the Russian company. Or, looking at it another way, the Russian company is able to produce about 6.7 times more widgets per unit of GDP (measured either in dollars or rubles) than the US company.

So, anytime you see data comparing countries by GDP, be sure you take that info with a grain (hell, make it many pounds) of salt before jumping to conclusions about relative productive capabilities.

----------
". . . the Constitution has died, the economy welters in irreversible decline, we have perpetual war, all power lies in the hands of the executive, the police are supreme, and a surveillance beyond Orwells imaginings falls into place." - Fred Reed
Tickerguy
Posts: 153486
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
BTW I cannot speak to the union worker of today, but I CAN speak to him in the mid-to-late 1970s, because I TIMED HIM a couple of times -- with a stopwatch.

He got paid for 8.0 hours and actually WORKED for about four, +/- roughly 15 minutes. Consistently.

----------
Winding it down.

Magus
Posts: 2539
Incept: 2008-05-04

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Peterm - hours worked and salary is irrelevant to GDP. GDP is the sum value of the final products sold + capital investments + exports - imports and then adjusted for neutral currency when comparing across nations (which should fix the "salary problem" above). Hours worked goes to productivity.

----------
"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved."

-~~Ludwig V
Quik49
Posts: 4711
Incept: 2007-12-11

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Peter....you forgot about an hour a day dicking around with thier phones.

----------
Long Vaseline....

Tickerguy
Posts: 153486
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Magus -- GDP is a fraudulent statistic and meaningless since it is not in an SI unit.

Take two nations with exactly identical outputs in terms of actual quantity of a single identical good produced. Let's make it pairs of scissors.

One runs a $200 billion a year budget deficit. The other runs a $200 billion a year budget SURPLUS. Both use the same currency and both start with $1 trillion in federal debt.

The first WILL show a materially higher GDP growth rate AND a numerical GDP amount over the second, yet the first and second have in fact produced an EXACTLY IDENTICAL output.

----------
Winding it down.
Magus
Posts: 2539
Incept: 2008-05-04

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Oh, I know GDP isn't a perfect measure by any stretch of the imagination. Even beyond the debt issue, paying for things like childcare counts as as service sold add GDP while the grandparents watching for free counts as $0, even though its the exact same service. Bringing in millions of no/low wage illegal immigrants technically adds GDP too since they consume goods and services as well, but its actually terrible for the country.

But Russia' economic output isn't even remotely in the same ballpark as USA's no matter how you slice or discount it and my point above was hours worked/salary doesn't factor into GDP (which is a productivity measure). Before Russia defaulted in the 90s, their government deficit as % of the economy was more than double the USA.

----------
"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved."

-~~Ludwig V
Whitehat
Posts: 547
Incept: 2017-06-27

The People's Republic of New York
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Tickerguy wrote..
I'm far more-worried about a thousand dudes in small cells, all with a single focus on ****ing us hard, coming over the Mexican border.

A major cyber-assault *today* would be pretty tough. Now once China gets some counterfeit Intel instruction-set chips into sensitive places, not so much -- then we're in a WORLD of ****, and AMD's recent action means that IS going to happen.

But right now the thousand dudes is a far more serious threat. By a lot. And they may well be here in the country already.


agreed, the Russia scenario is unlikely to happen due to the potential severity and us not being completely insane.

would like to add that the 1000 dudes cells are already here. We have complete neighborhoods which give the impression that one has crossed the border into Mexico or in other areas as if one traveled to the Middle East. These are going to be the support areas for warfare on our soil if we are not careful and cleaning them out will be like house to house fighting in no go zones, especially if we have any type of dislocating or catastrophic event.

regarding the tech assaults, for the last decade it seems like many persons of Islamic and Middle Eastern descent are in the computer field. once they are integrated into the system, they can setup for any attack.

----------
There are two ways to be rich: One is by acquiring much, and the other is by desiring little.
snow, seasons, distance and dirt roads: SSDD
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Gal. 6:7)
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Showing Page 2 of 3  First123Last