TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#108226: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:25:32 AM

I can't argue with that logic, except to say that the U.S. is in something of a Catch-22 with respect to corruption in developing nations. If we ignore it, we get accused of letting our big businesses take advantage of poor Mexicans or Brazilians; if we try to root it out, we get accused of interfering with their sovereignty.

Edit: I just posted in this in the General Economics thread, but there is new information suggesting that the decline of labor's share of income in the United States may be completely the result of the increase in capital investment in intellectual property. In layman's terms, the middle class is dying because of patent law.

edited 7th Jan '16 7:29:57 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#108227: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:29:00 AM

Sanders' most attractive policy proposal is also the one that ensures he'll never win the nomination: he intends to break up "too big to fail" financial corporations to reduce both incentives to greed and systemic risk. The national Democratic apparatus takes in millions from these folks, so has every reason to want to freeze Sanders out of the process.

Mind you, extending that to manufacturing and all business might be a decent idea.

However, the United States does not practice free trade, because it heavily subsidizes a number of its export industries, such as agriculture, in order to artificially reduce competition.

Boeing, perhaps?note  smile

Keep Rolling On
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#108228: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:32:15 AM

Don't get me started on how the subsidization and preferential treatment of defense and aerospace companies lock out any hope of meaningful competition in those industries. F-35*, anyone?

*Cue incoming screams of outrage from military Kool-Aid drinkers.

edited 7th Jan '16 7:33:32 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
JackOLantern1337 Shameful Display from The Most Miserable Province in the Russian Empir Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Shameful Display
#108229: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:36:31 AM

Were their other better options for the Joint Strike Fighter program? From my understanding the US has only two companies capable of producing these craft, and we can't very well outsource the capability to foreigners.

I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#108230: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:40:47 AM

NAFTA definitely further plugged Mexico into the most dynamic economy in the world, but the country's development across the 1990s, including the NAFTA period, was unequal" said Guillermo Perry, World Bank Chief Economist for Latin America and the Caribbean. "The most developed and competitive regions and sectors have clearly benefited from the trade liberalization, while those lagging behind have not. Extending the benefits of greater integration all society remains the challenge.

This, coming from a World bank peeps. In general, I can see economic growth as a whole will look bigger but again, my problem is with its distribution. Its benefits do not reach the people who need it most, and Free Trade and the examples of the U.S, leave much desired.

Now, of those things I just linked the first one is not from quite an economic expert, and the second is a "ERH MEH GERD DE JERBS" argument, but it is still something to take into account when you add the fat the enviromentalconcerns it has caused, along with its insufficient benefits to Mexico and other Free Trade signing, only to end up benefiting the United States as a whole.

As a little bit of a personal thing, the Free Trade agreement between the United States and mycountry was a subject to referendum in which I was old enough to vote. I voted yes for it (A narrow victory) and I do not regret it, but I cannot call Free Trade agreements a real success for anyone but the bigger country.

Look at it the other way too. Imagine Mexico, or Costa Rica did not sign the Free Trade agreement. yet there will be other nations the U.S sign it with. With the economical juggernauts that the U.S and other european countries are, do tinier nations really have a choice in signing Free Trade agreements? Not signing them is going to give trade preferences to other nations and will end up having poor access to goods which is going to harm them more than an "eh" agreement such as Free Trade.

edited 7th Jan '16 7:41:40 AM by Aszur

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#108231: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:41:38 AM

[up][up] A lot of component production — and even assembly of entire aircraft — is outsourced to foreign manufacturers.

[down] Concorde was a British/French Joint Venture.

edited 7th Jan '16 7:42:17 AM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On
probablyinsane Since: Oct, 2011 Relationship Status: I LOVE THIS DOCTOR!
#108232: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:41:47 AM

I dunno... Somehow, I feel planes with German engineering would be better. unless we're talking about the german company which installed cheat devices in their cars.

I don't know which company made the Concorde planes. should rectify this ignorance.

Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#108233: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:44:20 AM

Germanic Efficiency

You know the Germans always make good stuff

edited 7th Jan '16 7:44:29 AM by Aszur

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Julep Since: Jul, 2010
#108234: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:44:58 AM

For some reason I highly doubt a single plane crash would have been enough to stop its exploitation altogether had the Concorde been American, lobbying issues and all that. Although to be fair the whole project was a supersonic middle finger to the US, of the "we Europeans can do cool stuff too" kind.

Speaking of Concorde, its French test pilot died a few days ago.

edited 7th Jan '16 7:45:52 AM by Julep

Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#108235: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:45:48 AM

Strategic industries like defense always exist at a junction of politics and economics. All of Boeing's competitors enjoy similar amounts of state aid. I suppose the United States could reduce its military spending, but that's a political and not an economic argument.

@Aszur

Your first link admitted it did better but simply that it failed to achieve convergence between Mexico and US-CAN. Your second is from a whole debate series in the NYT, which featured also pro-NAFTA viewpoints as well. The third is from the EPI, which is a think-tank in the style of the AEI or Cato Institute, so I'm not really inclined to trust its judgement over the NBER sources I already cited.

edited 7th Jan '16 7:53:21 AM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#108236: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:46:40 AM

@ probablyinsane: Concorde was a British/French Joint Venture, between French Aérospatiale (now part of Airbus) and the British Aircraft Corporationnote  (nationalised and became British Aerospace, now privatised BAE Systems).

[up] Indeed. See the histories of the firms that made Concorde.

edited 7th Jan '16 7:52:16 AM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On
probablyinsane Since: Oct, 2011 Relationship Status: I LOVE THIS DOCTOR!
#108237: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:51:11 AM

[up] I still sad that they mothballed their Concorde planes.

Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#108238: Jan 7th 2016 at 7:56:41 AM

They were forty years old, uneconomical to run, and the regulators were no longer prepared to certify them as airworthy.

edited 7th Jan '16 8:10:29 AM by Deadbeatloser22

"Yup. That tasted purple."
AdricDePsycho Rock on, Gold Dust Woman from Never Going Back Again Since: Oct, 2014 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
Rock on, Gold Dust Woman
#108239: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:16:59 AM

Well I'm turning 18 on Tuesday, but I guess I might not vote if all the candidates are stupid. Clinton always rubbed me the wrong way, she just acts so upper crust that it feels like she's a caricature. Bernie is never getting voted, he's too extreme for some people's tastes (I live in the South, a lot of people hate him). On the conservative side...well they're conservatives.

I mean, I'm in the middle, politically speaking, but I can't find a candidate who I wholeheartedly like.

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#108240: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:18:15 AM

Never don't vote though. At the very least vote against the Republicans, it's better than sitting at home and doing nothing.

Oh really when?
AdricDePsycho Rock on, Gold Dust Woman from Never Going Back Again Since: Oct, 2014 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
Rock on, Gold Dust Woman
#108241: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:23:28 AM

An Us vs. Them mentality like that seems wrong. I mean...I really don't know anymore. I'll probably vote for a Congressman or something.

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#108242: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:25:32 AM

Eh, we simply can't afford to pretend the Right in this country are even remotely sane or not malicious with their policies.

I'm not too thrilled with Clinton or even Sanders the more he talks but I'll be damned if I'm letting a Republican gain any power in this country.

Not to mention the Republicans are banking on you staying home.

Oh really when?
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#108243: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:27:15 AM

In right there with you, AdricDePsycho. I wouldn't be automatically opposed to voting conservative except we have candidates like Trump leading the charge. I'm iffy on Hillary too, but less so than I was and, other flaws aside, she is unquestionably the most qualified candidate. That, more than any issue of policy, is what's guiding my vote.

My brother got upset with me for being willing to vote Hillary, as he's conservative and dislikes her and Obama. He's called Hillary a criminal for some of her shenanigans, but my feeling is better a crook than a bigot.

Still, if you absolutely can't vote for a mainstream candidate then maybe you can throw it to some third party candidate if there is one. Even if that person has no shot getting elected at least you can say you voted how you wanted to vote. I remember a quote by Jesse Ventura that the only wasted vote is the one that's never cast.

edited 7th Jan '16 8:28:52 AM by sgamer82

AdricDePsycho Rock on, Gold Dust Woman from Never Going Back Again Since: Oct, 2014 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
Rock on, Gold Dust Woman
#108244: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:27:15 AM

If Trump gets voted in, I'm moving. My dad is Mexican, he just got full citizenship a few years ago. I'll only vote to keep the Right out, but I'm not happy about it.

Edit: But a third-party candidate might do as well.

edited 7th Jan '16 8:28:10 AM by AdricDePsycho

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#108245: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:28:55 AM

All the other candidates are just as bad if not worse than Trump.

He's just the loudest.

Oh really when?
FieldMarshalFry Field Marshal of Cracked from World Internet War 1 Since: Oct, 2015 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
Field Marshal of Cracked
#108246: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:29:05 AM

spoil your ballot (I encourage you to write "British Empire" on it and put a tick next to that), makes more of a statement than not turning up

advancing the front into TV Tropes
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#108247: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:29:10 AM

Problem is that a 3rd party vote in the US isn't just a waste; it can often be a vote against your best interests.

"Yup. That tasted purple."
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#108248: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:30:27 AM

Your first link admitted it did better but simply that it failed to achieve convergence between Mexico and US-CAN. Your second is from a whole debate series in the NYT, which featured also pro-NAFTA viewpoints as well. The third is from the EPI, which is a think-tank in the style of the AEI or Cato Institute, so I'm not really inclined to trust its judgement over the NBER sources I already cited.

Allow me to phrase my argument better then. I have not denied that Free Trade theoretically and practically brings economical benefits to those involved. I just do not think it does so realistically. I do not believe and I think those links support, that Free Trade agreements do not come without negative consequences (Enviromental, of easying illegal drug trade, of patent issues) PLUS its benefits are not enjoyed by the average citizen of the poorer nation in the agreement.

There is more than I added too, where Free Trade Agreements are hardly an option for the smaller nations who do not get to pick their trade partners.

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#108249: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:30:51 AM

@AdricDePsycho: A single vote is ultimately a fart in the wind. What really matters is which side gets the most people to attend the chili cook off. Given that, there's no reason not to use your vote however you see fit, for better or worse.

That's my opinion anyway.

[up][up] & [down]If you mean because it siphins votes away from a mainstream candidate that might represent you interests, I posit that's only true if you intended to vote for that person then changed your mind. Adric's said he didn't like the idea of voting for Hillary in the first place and was prepared to not vote period.

edited 7th Jan '16 8:35:18 AM by sgamer82

LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#108250: Jan 7th 2016 at 8:33:13 AM

Due to the unique nature in how the US political system is totally fucked any vote that's not for the Democrats is a vote for Republicans.

That includes not voting or voting third party.

Oh really when?

Total posts: 417,856
Top