Trump Timeline ... Trumpocalypse

[Michael Scally MD]

Trump just told the truth
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-just-told-the-truth-he-may-wish-he-hadnt/2017/12/20/26d8332a-e5de-11e7-833f-155031558ff4_story.html (Opinion | Trump just told the truth. He may wish he hadn’t.)

On Wednesday, the 335th day of his presidency, Donald J. Trump did something most extraordinary and uncharacteristic. He told the truth.

The president, celebrating his $1.5 trillion tax cut with fellow Republicans at the South Portico of the White House, was midway through his remarks when he veered sharply off message.

“I shouldn’t say this,” Trump said, “but we essentially repealed Obamacare.”

No, he probably shouldn’t have said it. But it’s true. Republicans, in rushing the tax bill to passage, kept fairly quiet about the fact that they were killing the “individual mandate” and thereby removing the engine that made the Affordable Care Act work. In doing so, they threw the health-care system into chaos without offering any remedy. And Trump just claimed paternity of the destruction.

Trump, in a Cabinet meeting earlier Wednesday, let his fleeting encounter with honesty get the better of him when he read aloud the stage directions that called for Republicans not to advertise that they were killing Obamacare. “Obamacare has been repealed in this bill. We didn’t want to bring it up,” he said. “I told people specifically, ‘Be quiet with the fake-news media because I don’t want them talking too much about it.’ Because I didn’t know how people would —.” Trump didn’t finish that thought, but he said he could admit what had been done “now that it’s approved.”

With those admissions now on tape, Trump has officially claimed full ownership of the health-care system for himself and fellow Republicans. Whatever it is now — or isn’t — is Trumpcare.

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[RobertL]

Yes, Fifth Third Bancorp (FTB) raised minimum wage to $15/hr, which is still jack fucking shit. Biz Journals posted an article on the subject and indicated that in 2018 the raises and bonus will cost (FTB) 23.6M the first year (with one time bonuses) and $10M going forward. FTB's 2016 profit was 2.07BILLION pretax. Tax rates on corps are dropping from 35% to 21%. The annual tax savings will be in the ballpark of 280M (2B X 14%). Thus, the tax savings allocated to employees in first year with bonus will be 11.8% and future years will be 3.5%. So yes, companies are throwing a few breadcrumbs to employees, but the vast majority (88%-96%) of tax savings are going to shareholders. Just call the bill what it is, a give away to the wealthy!!!! WHAT A FUCKING SCAM TO ALL OF THE POOR DIPSHITS THAT VOTED FOR TRUMP.

God damn it.. I'm getting more money but not enough! This is bullshit! I hate the president! I wish we could leave it how it's been where no one gets more money! Not the big corps not the people!

Everyone is making more money. Guarantee you the ones that are getting raises and bonus's won't be bitching and they'll be voting for trump this time around if they didn't already.

All the crying for $15 minimum that everyone was doing was justified when obama was president. Now that trumps policy allows companies to do it it's not good enough.

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Senorman]

God damn it.. I'm getting more money but not enough! This is bullshit! I hate the president! I wish we could leave it how it's been where no one gets more money! Not the big corps not the people!

One problem with the tax cuts are that they go disproportionately to the wealthy, yet are being sold as a break to the middle class. That is the fucking scam part about it. Plus, it is poor tax policy to drop tax rates when our economy is booming. When the economy hits another recession, there will be less tools available to stimulate growth when needed, ie: additional tax breaks will no longer be even remotely feasible.

As a side note, my wife and I earn our money through an s-Corp and stand to save a fuckload of money (by our standards). I’m not bitching about this plan because it will cost us money. Our kids are going to pay for policies like this in the future.

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Michael Scally MD]

She’s a walking advertisement for the danger of nepotism, an exemplar of class privilege and a perfect representative for Republican know-nothingism. She was supposed to be the brains of the family and the moral ballast; instead, she’s a self-righteous enabler.

We’re speaking of Ivanka Trump, as you might have divined. She was out talking nonsense again on Thursday: “I’m really looking forward to doing a lot of traveling in April when people realize the effect that this has … The vast majority will be [doing their taxes] on a single postcard.” Thunk. There’s no postcard. That was a prop. And the filing for the first year under the new tax code will be in 2019.

She also declared of Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who decided to vote for the final tax bill after voting no on the Senate version: “He really believes that tax relief, coupled with the administration’s deregulatory actions, will create the growth that will start to erode and ultimately eliminate the national debt that has been accrued over the last several decades.” I’m confident Corker believes no such thing because that would be preposterous, unsupported by any reputable economic analysis.

...

She’d like to tout the child tax credit, but that, too, is less than advertised. Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who championed the child tax credit, came on board with very little inducement. “Rubio and Lee didn’t get the biggest change they wanted, which was to apply the credit to low-wage workers’ entire income. Under their proposal, a minimum-wage worker making $14,500 would get a $494 tax credit; under the current bill, she’ll get only $75, according to the liberal Center [on] Budget and Policy Priorities.”

 

[Michael Scally MD]

Sooner or later, the United States will either be in negotiations with North Korea or at war with North Korea. Given the unacceptable consequences of war, it is long past time to get realistic about diplomacy. That means not just exploring whether talks are worth trying, but also clarifying what each party would have to accept, and concede, in order to give diplomacy a chance to work.

The U.S. debate about policy options toward North Korea has long suffered from a lack of candor, on all sides. Calls for military strikes are based on the fallacy that Pyongyang can’t be deterred, a rationale offered by U.S. National Security Adviser H. R. McMaster, among others. Pleas for diplomacy, meanwhile, rarely address the serious obstacles that make talks more likely to fail than to succeed. And claims that pressure will force North Korea to give away its prized nuclear arsenal are similarly unrealistic.

Policymakers must face the facts. There are no acceptable U.S. military options involving a first strike, given the inevitable retaliation and mass casualties that would follow, and North Korea is not handing over its nuclear weapons anytime soon. Yet keeping the peace will ultimately mean making diplomacy work. A “freeze for freeze” agreement (in which Pyongyang stops missile and nuclear tests and Washington stops military exercises with South Korea) could help get both sides to the negotiating table. But even that would mark just the beginning of a thorny diplomatic process—one that would inevitably demand wrenching choices and considerable political sacrifice.

...

Ultimately, the question is not whether the United States can get everything it wants; it’s whether a deal can secure vital interests. In the case of North Korea, that means protecting the lives of Americans, keeping the peace, securing allies, and containing North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs. Right now, there is still a chance to achieve those basic goals. Pyongyang may be approaching the point of feeling secure enough with the weapons it has, and recent tensions with Beijing gives it reason to reduce its dependence on its long-time ally. Washington, meanwhile, should recognize that failure to respond while questions are asked about whether it would be willing to risk a strike on a U.S. city for the sake of standing up for allies in Asia will erode alliances and create opportunities for China and for North Korea. With time, in other words, the options will only get worse.

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Michael Scally MD]

American arrogance and President Donald Trump’s delusional worldview have brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Before it is too late, American citizens must make overwhelmingly clear that we do not want millions of Americans or others to perish in a reckless attempt by the Trump administration to overthrow the North Korean regime or denuclearize it by force.

We would rather accept a nuclear-armed North Korea that is deterred by America’s overwhelming threat of force than risk a US-led war of choice, one that would almost surely involve nuclear weapons. Yet National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster has explicitly said that Trump rejects “accept and deter.” The danger from Trump could not be greater.

“Accept and deter” is not appeasement. It is the moral and practical requirement of survival. Appeasement would be the case if North Korea were demanding the surrender of the United States or South Korea, but that’s not the case. North Korea argues that it needs nuclear arms to protect the regime from the threat of a US attack. According to North Korea, it seeks a “military equilibrium,” not a surrender of the United States or South Korea.

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has just called for direct talks with North Korea without precondition. This is a glimmer of hope. Given Tillerson’s fragile hold on office and Trump’s continued reckless rhetoric vis-a-vis North Korea, we need to rally in favor of diplomacy.

Sad to say, North Korea’s fears of a US-led overthrow are realistic at this moment in history. Creating the conditions for North Korea’s eventual denuclearization would require trust-building over many years of patient diplomacy and interaction, including US diplomatic recognition of North Korea.

...

The Trump administration is threatening North Korea with war if it fails to denuclearize. There are probably senior US military advisors who believe in the possibility of a quick “decapitation” of the North Korean regime before its nuclear weapons are unleashed. Some advisors may believe that America’s antimissile systems would protect the US and its allies in the event that North Korea launches its nuclear weapons.

In my view, any confidence in a military solution is reckless and immoral. Most expert assessments suggest massive deaths in South Korea, perhaps 20,000 per day, from a conventional war, much less a nuclear war. Most experts believe that the antimissile systems are highly imperfect, with a real possibility of failure.

If there is one lesson of history, it is to doubt the boastful pronouncements of warmongers.

 

[Michael Scally MD]

 

[Big_paul]

November 2018, which isn’t that far away.

Every poll points to a blood bath. Republicans are between a rock and a hard place. They can't live with trump and they can't live without him.

 

[Michael Scally MD]

I just threw up in my mouth after that one.

Until Trump, I believed that official public spectacles of personal loyalty and nationalism that reminded me of the Stalinism were limited to dictatorships.

Not the prayer aspect, of course, but as we see now with Putin and have seen so many times throughout history, religion in the service of power is always about power, not religion.

 

[Michael Scally MD]