[Roundy]

Good thing the crowd in Texas was so huge.

[Lord Dave]

I give him a 5/10


He said some good things but basically boasted how big and amazing recovery is.  How it'll be the best ever.  Most expensive.  Bla bla bla.


Typically Trump.

[Lord Dave]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-tower-moscow-russia-presidential-campaign-felix-sater-emails-brooklyn-vladimir-putin-a7916006.html


I don't know if Trump is just flat out lying or doesn't know what his company was doing.




Also, totally missed this:

His first re election camapign ad.


And one more thing...

After saying how much fixing Houston is gonna cost, he is (literally the next day) going around saying how much we need to cut taxes across the board in support of a tax bill that he has no real details on except "Everyone gets lower taxes" and "Simplify the code".  The details are for congress, apparently.

But my point being:
HOW ARE YOU GONNA PAY TO FIX HOUSTON WHEN YOU WANNA LOWER TAXES?!

[Pete Svarrior]

HOW ARE YOU GONNA PAY TO FIX HOUSTON WHEN YOU WANNA LOWER TAXES?!

By closing loopholes and ensuring that people actually pay their taxes, hopefully. At least that was the idea pre-Trump.

[Roundy]

http://www.avclub.com/furious-incorrect-trump-supporters-think-obama-was-pre-1798679764

Have I mentioned how fucking stupid Trump's supporters are? It really can't be overstated.

[Lord Dave]

http://www.avclub.com/furious-incorrect-trump-supporters-think-obama-was-pre-1798679764

Have I mentioned how fucking stupid Trump's supporters are? It really can't be overstated.

When you hate someone, it doesn't matter if they should be blamed or not, just that they are.


Also, ironic they'd attack Obama with golfing while praising the golf course president.




Also, good job Trump, if you follow through.
http://www.npr.org/2017/08/31/547658004/trump-promises-1-million-of-personal-funds-to-aid-harvey-victims


Though odd that they'd ask the fake news for research....

[Lord Dave]

In positive Trump News:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-trump-visits-harvey-victims-20170902-story.html

This is presidential.  Maybe if we cause a natural disaster every month, we can keep this Trump?

Flip side, NK keeps getting better with bombs.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/09/03/523913820/north-korea-possibly-conducts-sixth-nuclear-test-south-korea-says

[garygreen]

deportation and strict immigration controls are fucking expensive.

integrating immigrants is also fucking expensive.

hey maybe let's do the one that isn't just throwing money away.

[Pete Svarrior]

hey maybe let's do the one that isn't just throwing money away.

Which one is that, in your view?

[Roundy]

hey maybe let's do the one that isn't just throwing money away.

Which one is that, in your view?

The one experts aren't saying is going to cost the US 150 to 400 billion dollars in the long run (rescinding DACA), I would imagine.

[Pete Svarrior]

The one experts aren't saying is going to cost the US 150 to 400 billion dollars in the long run (rescinding DACA), I would imagine.

To be clear, I'm quite strongly pro-immigration and I don't support rescinding DACA. I'm just curious about Gary's perspective, since he presented both options as "fucking expensive".

[Tom Bishop]

hey maybe let's do the one that isn't just throwing money away.

Which one is that, in your view?

The one experts aren't saying is going to cost the US 150 to 400 billion dollars in the long run (rescinding DACA), I would imagine.

In "the long run" those illegal peoples and their offspring will generate infinity in taxes. Why not just estimate that it will cost the US infinity? This line of argument is also assuming that these jobs would not otherwise exist to generate taxes for the US if these illegal people were not here to take them. Some "experts" these are.

DACA was never a law, or even an executive order. It was a memo to the DHS requesting them to stop enforcing the law for certain people. Why should we continue to enforce Obama's illegal law?

[Roundy]

hey maybe let's do the one that isn't just throwing money away.

Which one is that, in your view?

The one experts aren't saying is going to cost the US 150 to 400 billion dollars in the long run (rescinding DACA), I would imagine.

In "the long run" those illegal peoples and their offspring will generate infinity in taxes. Why not just estimate that it will cost the US infinity?

This is an excellent point. The further out we project, the more money we lose.  Seems like an argument in favor of keeping DACA to me.

[Tom Bishop]

This is an excellent point. The further out we project, the more money we lose.  Seems like an argument in favor of keeping DACA to me.

As mentioned, you are assuming that those jobs would not otherwise exist without them here. This is fallacious. In fact, this is a point against them. They are taking jobs which could otherwise go towards Americans.

Mexico has welcomed DACA kids back with open arms:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/5/mexico-says-it-will-embrace-dreamers-open-arms/

But Mexico, in a statement released by the government, also said it would gladly take back the hundreds of thousands of its citizens currently living in the U.S. without permission.

“Mexico will receive Dreamers who return to our country with open arms,” the government said, adding it’s already begun making preparations. “In accordance with instructions from President Enrique Peña Nieto, the agencies of the federal government are strengthening their efforts to offer them the greatest support, take advantage of their talents and skills, and fully integrate them into our society and national economy.”

Mexico said it was creating a special job bank to help Dreamers find jobs back home, would offer scholarships for future study, and would help those returning to enroll in public benefits programs.

[Tom Bishop]

Another quote from that Washington Times article:

President Trump’s decision, announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, phases out the DACA program over the next couple of years, allowing those already approved to use the remainder of their two-year stays of deportation, but quickly halting new approvals.

The administration said it had little hope of successfully defending the program in court, so the phaseout was better than the alternative, which could have meant a court order immediately stopping DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.

Trump was being sued by several states about this illegal DACA law. This phaseout decision sounds like Trump is being thoughtful to me

[Roundy]

I actually think this is far from the worst thing Trump has done and those elements of the media who are calling it evil and such are engaging in the worst kind of hyperbole. Really I just hope Congress can resolve this so the Dreamers can be allowed to stay.

[Lord Dave]

Holy fuck!
Hell has frozen over!

http://www.npr.org/2017/09/06/548935056/trump-sides-with-democrats-in-deal-on-storm-relief-and-fiscal-deadlines

Though the whole "fix it for only 3 months" is really for politics.  And hey, Conservatives are the ones who don't wanna raise the ceiling so 3 months vs 18 months should be good for them.  So maybe Trump is just being more Conservative than the Republicans?

[Roundy]

This is an excellent point. The further out we project, the more money we lose.  Seems like an argument in favor of keeping DACA to me.

As mentioned, you are assuming that those jobs would not otherwise exist without them here. This is fallacious. In fact, this is a point against them. They are taking jobs which could otherwise go towards Americans.

It's cute that you assume these reports don't take such factors into account. The consensus seems to be that many more jobs are going to be opening over the next several years than Americans alone will be able to fill in the vocations the Dreamers are supposed to be pursuing. Unemployment rates are excellent now and employers are already having trouble finding qualified candidates for many positions. This article lays out the issue in detail:

http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/05/news/economy/daca-us-economy/index.htm

Also I kind of consider people who were raised and educated here Americans anyway. I see no reason they should be denied the same opportunities as "real" Americans. It's not their fault they're here and they shouldn't be forced to move to a land that's foreign to them.

[Lord Dave]

And think of this: we paid to educate them, shouldn't we get our money's worth?

[Tom Bishop]

This is an excellent point. The further out we project, the more money we lose.  Seems like an argument in favor of keeping DACA to me.

As mentioned, you are assuming that those jobs would not otherwise exist without them here. This is fallacious. In fact, this is a point against them. They are taking jobs which could otherwise go towards Americans.

It's cute that you assume these reports don't take such factors into account. The consensus seems to be that many more jobs are going to be opening over the next several years than Americans alone will be able to fill in the vocations the Dreamers are supposed to be pursuing. Unemployment rates are excellent now and employers are already having trouble finding qualified candidates for many positions. This article lays out the issue in detail:

http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/05/news/economy/daca-us-economy/index.htm

If there are a lack of doctors then that the solution for us is to open more medical schools and make the process of becoming a doctor more accessible, or bring in legal immigrants as a last resort. Considering illegal immigrants for those positions as the only possibility is a bad argument.

Also I kind of consider people who were raised and educated here Americans anyway. I see no reason they should be denied the same opportunities as "real" Americans. It's not their fault they're here and they shouldn't be forced to move to a land that's foreign to them.

If a father sneaks into a baseball game and brings his kid along with him, who gets kicked out when they are found?