It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Donald Trump, Disintermediation and streamlining America

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

When it works the way you are describing without concent of Congress it has never gone well for the people.

Doing business with a major human rights and liberty abuser to control industrialists manipulation of supply and currency value was a mistake. But it can't be undone overnight. It's literally a weapon of mass destruction. The Congressional leaders are supposed to be informing the president with trade policy. It directly effects domestic product and the cpi. There is no way out with a scale this large of commerce.




posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
When it works the way you are describing without concent of Congress it has never gone well for the people.


Do you not understand that the Senate gets consent on foreign treaties?



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

I would venture to guess that he is cutting out the MSM and using twitter so he can go directly to the people with what he is doing, because the MSM cut him out of fair and balanced coverage during the campaign. That is what caught them completely off guard when he won. The MSM has been so biased and pro establishment that they forgot they are the ones who are to be protecting and informing us of the establishments doing. Even the CIA is in the pocket of the establishment and can't be trusted either Both o these groups were to be for the people not against them.


edit on 14-12-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Congress can vote up or down but it's wouldn't be unprecedented to use other methods of deals.

I don't know if your are arguing what is constitutionally supposed to happen or how tariffs and laws and the jumble that surrounds them actually happen today.

In any case unraveling this mess is a long term project. Which should be handed back to the people and away from the oligarchs. There are plenty of big businesses that can absorb and gamble on the future disaster of trying to change the cpi inflation problem overnight. That could even benifit from laying off lots of people.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
Congress can vote up or down but it's wouldn't be unprecedented to use other methods of deals.


Such as?


I don't know if your are arguing what is constitutionally supposed to happen or how tariffs and laws and the jumble that surrounds them actually happen today.


How it is supposed to happen which is typically how it does happen.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Such as calling a leader and stirring up a hornets nest creating congress to have to act because of political maneuvering. Or weapons of mass destruction. Many of these type of trade acts come in emergency situations.

Just going by the last guy with an MBA.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
Such as calling a leader and stirring up a hornets nest creating congress to have to act because of political maneuvering.


Calling other world leaders is part of the President's job description.


Or weapons of mass destruction.


Be more specific.


Many of these type of trade acts come in emergency situations.


Such as?



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

Thats great. So, instead of a corrupt political sphere allowing corporations to get too close to government, you now have a full fledged corporatism.

All those who like to call the United States a republic... well, it soon won't be. The corporations own you out in the open now. Its too late to fight them now, and I would laugh at your misfortune if it were not for the fact that I had such high hopes for you.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Trump has obviously made China part of his boogemen. Phoning in Taiwan publicly before he even starts the job things like that over a course of time are the type of push your opponent to make a move we don't need anymore.

Many trade policies come in emergency situations. Military standoffs, terrorism, you name it.

A congress an people previously opposed to being spied on changes overnight.

To me trump has put some key people in place that could make such a common scheme possible.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

What is america without its corporations?

This is more in line with the founding fathers, who were all militant rich white businessmen.

Xcept john adams. He was a lawyer/ politician. Screw john adams.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
Phoning in Taiwan publicly before he even starts...


Last I heard, they called him. And to be honest, let China suck it up. We already sell Taiwan arms and have them as a very large trading partner.


Many trade policies come in emergency situations. Military standoffs, terrorism, you name it.


Name one.


A congress an people previously opposed to being spied on changes overnight.


I do not understand what you are trying to say here.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

What I am saying is generally the only trade tariffs that are reworked are to lesson them.

Trade tariffs come in a totally different form. They are sanctions. They get done by loosely proving guilt , usually for things our government readily does. Often strategic for alies or monetary or resource gain under the guise of some kind of human rights or fairness.

The reason nobody has touched tariffs except to lesson them is because of global competition in manufactured goods. The worker and his spending worth are tied to imported goods. So is manufacturing.

Trade agreements and sanctions are done for political profit reasons all the time. You ask me to name one.

There is no need. The president has the authority to cancel trade agreeements, he can declare people currency manipulators, he can take emergency, he can impose temporary tariffs.

It's is hardly cut and dry.


edit on 14-12-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
The president has the authority to cancel trade agreeements...


The President has no authority to unilaterally cancel a Congressionally approved agreement.


...he can impose temporary tariffs.


Wrong.


The rest of your post is mostly hyperbolic opinion.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Section 122/Balance-of-Payments

Section 301/Unfair Trade Practices

IEEPA/International Economic Emergencies

Section 232(b)/National Security



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
Section 122/Balance-of-Payments



Presidential proclamations of temporary import surcharges and temporary limitations on imports through quotas in situations of fundamental international payments problems...


Deals with non-payment issues.



Section 301/Unfair Trade Practices




Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974, authorizes the President to take all appropriate action, including retaliation, to obtain the removal of any act, policy, or practice of a foreign government that violates an international trade agreement...


Deals with violations of existing trade agreements.


IEEPA/International Economic Emergencies



...is a United States federal law authorizing the President to regulate commerce after declaring a national emergency in response to any unusual and extraordinary threat to the United States which has a foreign source.


A national emergency due to a foreign threat must be declared.


Section 232(b)/National Security



These unique defense industry reports are the result of formal U.S. Government investigations of the effects of imports on U.S. national security. Typically such investigations are initiated at the request of industry.


Does not originate with the President.


I really, really, really despise lazy posters who just put unlinked blurbs with no context into a reply. All of your examples have very defined and narrow parameters that must be met, day to day function of trade agreements still take place under Constitutional guidelines. These are ultra-extreme examples that will NOT be utilized in any regular form.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Just a note, luthier, to say that I have been reading your posts here and in other threads and have a like mind on much. You have a very realistic grasp of the complexity of situations. I find it refreshing.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Wow, despising Internet folks is probably a waste of time.

Your arguing nothing here but semantics.

Politicians exploit these loop holes all the time.

At any given moment there are massive trade discrepancies between nations. These type of things slide for a long time and China has had a lot of leniency. Plenty to use those guidelines. And he can stir up the hornets nest and make a full on trade war hard or soft.

My point is what trump is suggesting is a nightmare. We have to back out slowly if we expect to be getting the new iPad next Christmas.

As far as linking.

My expirience is that is usually folks linking to articles that back their claim.

Rarely does it back a sense of knowledge of the subject. If you don't think Trump can make some serious disturbances with China you have lost it.

Yes they have scammed us a bit but you can't pull out overnight, they have a pretty good hand and we have a lack of manufacturing base at the moment.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 03:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
Politicians exploit these loop holes all the time.


You keep saying this, 'all the time'.

Show me one instance for any of the above.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

One example? The entire invasion and asset seizure in Iraq. The Patriot act and everything that followed.


Also I pointed out to start this was a congressional issue. Only congress will be around long enough to solve these trade issues. The president and congress together work these deals with trade and commerce committees.

I don't think I understand your arguement.

Are tou saying that Trump couldn't use any of those 4 examples?

All you did was copy and paste something. It in no way discredited Trump being able to exploit any of those situations to gamble on an alpha male business deal.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
One example? The entire invasion and asset seizure in Iraq. The Patriot act and everything that followed.


Nope. Nothing to do with trade tariffs or trade agreements. Try again.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join