Political Roundtable Part XXII

[verbal8]

Here is a solution that will make no one happy, but could be good for the country.
It would depend on Dr. Ford wanting Kavanaugh to make amends, rather than keep him off the Supreme Court
I seem to recall initial statements that she did not have a desired outcome of his nomination, but she felt her story needed to be shared

Kavanaugh is withdrawn so he can resolve the accusation against him
Clarence Thomas agrees to retire
Merrick Garland is nominated and quickly confirmed to the open slot
Kavanaugh is nominated for the spot freed up by Clarence Thomas' retirement
Cloture is established for Supreme Court nominees going forward

The only realistic scenario where something like this could happen would be if the Democrats have a "strong Blue Wave" in the House, but the Republicans hang on to the Senate

Also Kavanaugh would have to a better job of coming clean about money and possibly gambling

[Jamaaliver]

In 1992, Cory Booker wrote regretfully of 'groping' a high school classmate and issued a call for sexual respect

When he was in high school, Cory Booker, the New Jersey Democrat and possible White House contender, groped his classmate. He reached for her breast, and when she swatted his hand away, he made another attempt.

The incident resurfaced this week as Booker joined calls for an FBI investigation into the allegation of high-school-era sexual assault leveled by Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court.

But the skeleton in Booker’s closet seized on by outlets such as Fox News and the Daily Caller wasn’t really in his closet. The senator himself chose years ago to air the issue, marking a notable contrast with instances in which accusations of impropriety burst forth as a result of media investigation or opposition research.

Booker, for his part, has called Ford’s allegations “serious and credible” and accused the Republican majority of failing to investigate her account thoroughly. “In a nation with crisis levels of sexual violence & harassment,” he wrote Wednesday on Twitter, “how those who come forward are treated demonstrates the level of our commitment to addressing this heinous societal wrong.”

Washington Post

[Jamaaliver]

Here is a solution that will make no one happy, but could be good for the country.

I give you points for creativity.

I suspect you're giving the cretins in Congress too much credit. Compromise doesn't seem to be a part of their playbook.

[Pointgod]

In 1992, Cory Booker wrote regretfully of 'groping' a high school classmate and issued a call for sexual respect

When he was in high school, Cory Booker, the New Jersey Democrat and possible White House contender, groped his classmate. He reached for her breast, and when she swatted his hand away, he made another attempt.

The incident resurfaced this week as Booker joined calls for an FBI investigation into the allegation of high-school-era sexual assault leveled by Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court.

But the skeleton in Booker’s closet seized on by outlets such as Fox News and the Daily Caller wasn’t really in his closet. The senator himself chose years ago to air the issue, marking a notable contrast with instances in which accusations of impropriety burst forth as a result of media investigation or opposition research.

Booker, for his part, has called Ford’s allegations “serious and credible” and accused the Republican majority of failing to investigate her account thoroughly. “In a nation with crisis levels of sexual violence & harassment,” he wrote Wednesday on Twitter, “how those who come forward are treated demonstrates the level of our commitment to addressing this heinous societal wrong.”

Washington Post

Democrats once again showing that they're the only party that still have some morals.

[Pointgod]

Here is a solution that will make no one happy, but could be good for the country.
It would depend on Dr. Ford wanting Kavanaugh to make amends, rather than keep him off the Supreme Court
I seem to recall initial statements that she did not have a desired outcome of his nomination, but she felt her story needed to be shared

Kavanaugh is withdrawn so he can resolve the accusation against him
Clarence Thomas agrees to retire
Merrick Garland is nominated and quickly confirmed to the open slot
Kavanaugh is nominated for the spot freed up by Clarence Thomas' retirement
Cloture is established for Supreme Court nominees going forward

The only realistic scenario where something like this could happen would be if the Democrats have a "strong Blue Wave" in the House, but the Republicans hang on to the Senate

Also Kavanaugh would have to a better job of coming clean about money and possibly gambling

Or here's a crazy idea but bare with me. Let the FBI investigate the allegations (this will take a couple days at the most based on previous examples) Then hold the hearing and that way Senators can question both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford based on some type of fact base. Republicans could still confirm Kavanaugh before the midterms. The only reason there's opposition to this is because Republicans are disingenuous bastards.

[dckingsfan]

The TPP wasn't doing anything to constrain China from stealing intellectual property. I am torn on this issue - I don't like tariffs they are bad for both the exporting (jobs) and importing country (costs). And I think the renegotiation with the EU, NAFTA and pulling out of the Trans-Pacific partnership were pretty poor moves.

But at this point with China, what do you do? The last three administrations essentially sat on their hands.

I think it is important to keep an open mind on some of the Trump policies. While fully recognizing most of them suck.

For example looking at the tax bill: lowering the corporate tax rate has proven positive. Lowering personal tax rates and further obfuscating the tax code, not so much.

With trade it is much the same way. Putting heavy tariffs on Chinese goods will cause short-term pain (inflation - which hits the lowest 2 quintiles the hardest). But it will push jobs out of China and into other countries and that isn't such a bad thing?

And that Walmart (or Amazon) are the ones crying crocodile tears - too funny.

It's happening. Rising costs will continue to devalue any wage gains. If US had concern about China stealing intellectual property, then we should have stayed in TPP.

Walmart says new batch of Trump tariffs could force price hikes on bikes and Xmas lights

Walmart has warned the Trump administration that its latest batch of proposed tariffs could make it more expensive for U.S. households to buy items ranging from cribs to Christmas lights.

The world's largest retailer delivered the message in a letter dated Sept. 6 to the office of the U.S. Trade Representative. In it, Walmart joined other industry players in sounding an alarm that American shoppers will suffer the most if another batch of levies is imposed on goods and parts bought from China.

"Should the tariffs go into effect, Walmart customers will face cost increases for essential items like car seats, cribs, backpacks, hats, pet products and bicycles,'' the retailer said. And there will be a domino effect. "Either consumers will pay more, suppliers will receive less, retail margins will be lower, or consumers will buy fewer products or forego purchases altogether."

The administration, which has been steadily imposing tariffs on China because it says the Asian nation has stolen intellectual property, is now proposing another set of levies ranging from 10 percent to 25% on items that range from detergent to luggage to vegetables.

USA Today

[dckingsfan]

Here is a solution that will make no one happy, but could be good for the country.
It would depend on Dr. Ford wanting Kavanaugh to make amends, rather than keep him off the Supreme Court
I seem to recall initial statements that she did not have a desired outcome of his nomination, but she felt her story needed to be shared

Kavanaugh is withdrawn so he can resolve the accusation against him
Clarence Thomas agrees to retire
Merrick Garland is nominated and quickly confirmed to the open slot
Kavanaugh is nominated for the spot freed up by Clarence Thomas' retirement
Cloture is established for Supreme Court nominees going forward

The only realistic scenario where something like this could happen would be if the Democrats have a "strong Blue Wave" in the House, but the Republicans hang on to the Senate

Also Kavanaugh would have to a better job of coming clean about money and possibly gambling

Or here's a crazy idea but bare with me. Let the FBI investigate the allegations (this will take a couple days at the most based on previous examples) Then hold the hearing and that way Senators can question both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford based on some type of fact base. Republicans could still confirm Kavanaugh before the midterms. The only reason there's opposition to this is because Republicans are disingenuous bastards.

On this issue they are most definitely disingenuous bastards. They have been willing to hold their noses on the Trump failures in order to load the court.

I would think they would rather withdraw Kavanaugh and move to the next candidate quickly.

[dckingsfan]

In 1992, Cory Booker wrote regretfully of 'groping' a high school classmate and issued a call for sexual respect

When he was in high school, Cory Booker, the New Jersey Democrat and possible White House contender, groped his classmate. He reached for her breast, and when she swatted his hand away, he made another attempt.

The incident resurfaced this week as Booker joined calls for an FBI investigation into the allegation of high-school-era sexual assault leveled by Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court.

But the skeleton in Booker’s closet seized on by outlets such as Fox News and the Daily Caller wasn’t really in his closet. The senator himself chose years ago to air the issue, marking a notable contrast with instances in which accusations of impropriety burst forth as a result of media investigation or opposition research.

Booker, for his part, has called Ford’s allegations “serious and credible” and accused the Republican majority of failing to investigate her account thoroughly. “In a nation with crisis levels of sexual violence & harassment,” he wrote Wednesday on Twitter, “how those who come forward are treated demonstrates the level of our commitment to addressing this heinous societal wrong.”

Washington Post

Democrats once again showing that they're the only party that still have some morals.

Anecdotal? They just traded their program increases for a larger military? I guess you are emphasizing "some".

[verbal8]

Or here's a crazy idea but bare with me. Let the FBI investigate the allegations (this will take a couple days at the most based on previous examples) Then hold the hearing and that way Senators can question both Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford based on some type of fact base. Republicans could still confirm Kavanaugh before the midterms. The only reason there's opposition to this is because Republicans are disingenuous bastards.

If the Republicans shoot this down, it is clear they aren't interested in even pretending to seek the truth.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/christine-blasey-ford-apos-attorneys-044208845.html

[Jamaaliver]

The TPP wasn't doing anything to constrain China from stealing intellectual property.

Are you sure?

Trump wouldn’t need a trade war with China if he’d stayed in the TPP trade deal

The White House has a plan to deal with all those pesky Chinese companies stealing Americans’ hard-earned intellectual property. It will impose tariffs on Chinese imports or revoke some Chinese companies’ licenses to sell products in the US, according to multiple reports.

Under the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, China would have been forced to crack down on these types of imitations, as well as bring tariffs in line with those of other countries...

The TPP was intended to give countries a counterbalance to China’s growing dominance in world trade. It would have “absolutely” been tough on China’s intellectual-property violations, said Christopher Balding, a professor of political economics at Peking University. Among other things, “companies and countries could sue sovereigns and have the cases heard by courts not controlled by the sovereign,” he said. “In other words, if Nike sued China, it wouldn’t be heard in a Chinese court.”

Chinese courts have been notoriously lenient on Chinese companies that steal trademarks or designs from foreign companies, and tough on foreign challengers.

QZ.com -- Aug 2017

[Jamaaliver]

The TPP wasn't doing anything to constrain China from stealing intellectual property.

Are you sure?

Intellectual property will make or break US-China relations

A trade war threat on China from the U.S. is nothing new. Back in the early nineties, both countries were on the brink of trade war over intellectual property (IP) disputes. Fast forward two decades later, and the threat looms again.

The U.S. is challenging China for alleged violations of IP rights and practices of forced technology-transfers.

The former Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) could have been an effective tool in preventing China from pursuing its IP policies; the TPP’s high-standards could have encouraged China to improve its IP practices over a period of years. However, the Trump administration eliminated this option when it exited the agreement.

The Hill -- March 2018

[Jamaaliver]

The TPP wasn't doing anything to constrain China from stealing intellectual property.

Are you sure?

Why Do the US and China Take the Approaches to IP Protection That They Do?

What explains the divergent approaches between the two powers?

Like the United States at certain times in the past, China has sought to appropriate foreign IP by whatever means necessary. This has allowed Chinese businesses to catch up with their foreign counterparts. On the security side, the acquisition of foreign technologies has allowed China to leap ahead in the sophistication of its own designs and manufacturing processes.

The question is how China will approach the growing body of international IP regulation.

It’s also worth noting that the Trump administration’s sudden interest in reigniting the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) may have to do with its growing appreciation of the vulnerability of U.S. IP. The TPP included rigorous procedures for the protection of U.S. IP, procedures that have been watered down in follow-on treaty negotiations since the United States withdrew. The Obama administration viewed the IP protection procedures set forth in the TPP as central to its appeal, an appeal that was temporarily lost on the Trump administration.

It remains to be seen whether Trump’s newfound concern about IP will translate into further multilateral action.

The Diplomat -- April 2018

[dckingsfan]

And I think the renegotiation with the EU, NAFTA and pulling out of the Trans-Pacific partnership were pretty poor moves.

Well, the TPP isn't in place yet - so, yes I am sure it hasn't protected the US. Pulling out of the TPP was brain dead though... and maybe that is your point?

The TPP wasn't doing anything to constrain China from stealing intellectual property.

Are you sure?

Why Do the US and China Take the Approaches to IP Protection That They Do?

What explains the divergent approaches between the two powers?

Like the United States at certain times in the past, China has sought to appropriate foreign IP by whatever means necessary. This has allowed Chinese businesses to catch up with their foreign counterparts. On the security side, the acquisition of foreign technologies has allowed China to leap ahead in the sophistication of its own designs and manufacturing processes.

The question is how China will approach the growing body of international IP regulation.

It’s also worth noting that the Trump administration’s sudden interest in reigniting the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) may have to do with its growing appreciation of the vulnerability of U.S. IP. The TPP included rigorous procedures for the protection of U.S. IP, procedures that have been watered down in follow-on treaty negotiations since the United States withdrew. The Obama administration viewed the IP protection procedures set forth in the TPP as central to its appeal, an appeal that was temporarily lost on the Trump administration.

It remains to be seen whether Trump’s newfound concern about IP will translate into further multilateral action.

The Diplomat -- April 2018

[Jamaaliver]

The TPP wasn't doing anything to constrain China from stealing intellectual property.

Are you sure?

U.S. Was Winning War Against China's Intellectual Property Theft
Then Trump took office.

What was most painful in listening to these experts is hearing them talk about how close we were to making major strides in solving the remaining problem before Trump took office. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, which the U.S. had negotiated with 11 other countries and which excluded China, had strong intellectual property protections. The Obama administration was also negotiating a similar agreement with the European Union that toughened IP protection.

Kennedy told me he believes those agreements, which gave the signatories big trade advantages, would have “left China on the outside looking in.” To get the same favorable treatment, China would have had to strengthen its IP protections as well.

Bloomberg -- April 2018

[Jamaaliver]

But at this point with China, what do you do? The last three administrations essentially sat on their hands.

I disagree.

U.S. Was Winning War Against China's Intellectual Property Theft

Then Trump took office.

It also turns out that the Obama administration was in the process of negotiating a bilateral trade agreement with China that it was unable to complete before leaving office. That agreement, I’m told, had strong language about IP protections. All of these agreements used the World Trade Organization as the ruling body if disputes arose.

Which is to say, we were getting there, slowly -- probably too slowly, but getting there.

Bloomberg News -- April 2018

[dckingsfan]

Terrific - agree to disagree on this one. The previous Administration didn't win anything with the Chinese. The Chinese were playing a containment game with the previous administration and did a terrific job keeping things status quo.

But at this point with China, what do you do? The last three administrations essentially sat on their hands.

I disagree.

U.S. Was Winning War Against China's Intellectual Property Theft

Then Trump took office.

It also turns out that the Obama administration was in the process of negotiating a bilateral trade agreement with China that it was unable to complete before leaving office. That agreement, I’m told, had strong language about IP protections. All of these agreements used the World Trade Organization as the ruling body if disputes arose.

Which is to say, we were getting there, slowly -- probably too slowly, but getting there.

Bloomberg News -- April 2018

[Jamaaliver]

Terrific - agree to disagree on this one.

This is fun.

Economists, trade specialists and experts in the media the world over have decried the Donald Trump administration’s approach to measuring the ‘fairness’ of US’ trading partners by the size of their bilateral trade deficit with the US. With absolutely zero effect. No amount of preaching, ridiculing, sniggering or even pleading has changed its obsession with bilateral deficits.

Experts argue that bilateral trade deficit is a nonsensical measure. It reveals nothing, and it hides everything.

Economic Times

Spoiler:

The most cited example is that of iPhones that are assembled and exported to countries the world over mostly from China. But China’s value addition to iPhones is less than 4%. The rest is produced in other countries.

So, while China has a large bilateral deficit with the US, it, in turn, has bilateral deficits with a number of other countries that are part of the supply chain. What matters is not its total export dollars, but the value it adds to the supply chain.

Trump refuses to acknowledge this complex web of supply chains.

Bullying China into buying US goods is another matter. Can Trump bully Americans into buying goods at noncompetitive prices? No. The US is a free-market economy and presidents cannot dictate who its residents should buy from.

The Chinese government has substantial control over its imports and has offered to purchase from the US a few items (semi-conductors, for instance) that it earlier purchased from elsewhere. In the long run, however, competitiveness will reign.

[Jamaaliver]

Terrific - agree to disagree on this one.

I'm actually really learning a lot today.

...experts generally agree that trade imbalances are not a good metric for economic health as they are influenced by many factors. In 2017, the US had merchandise deficits with 102 nations, including China, Mexico, Japan, Germany, Vietnam, Ireland and Italy.

According to data from the US Department of Commerce, the country had a merchandise trade deficit of 375 billion US dollars with China in 2017. The 500 billion US dollars that Trump has chanted, is fully one-third larger than the official figure. And it conveniently overlooks the US service trade surplus with China.

The international specialization of comparative advantage also explains the gap.

China has the comparative advantage of cheaper labor cost, as with other developing countries, while the US is at the high end of the global supply chain, boasting its capital and technology. US manufacturers send materials to China for low-cost assembly, but when they are assembled and shipped back, they are considered imports.

Based on the value added of what is actually produced in China, the 47 percent share of the US deficit ascribed to China would be reduced to around 28 percent.

CGTN -- July 2018

[Jamaaliver]

Terrific - agree to disagree on this one.

Why Donald Trump should blame the strong US dollar, not China, for its trade deficit

Neal Kimberley says given the role of the strong US dollar owing to its status as the primary reserve currency, tariffs will not help reduce the trade deficit and may backfire

US President Donald Trump doesn’t like the US trade deficit. “We’re like the piggy bank that everyone’s been robbing,” he said last month. His attempts to address the issue, through recourse to tariffs, have raised trade tensions around the world. Yet his strategy might be misguided.

A constant demand for US dollars outside the United States should always help to underpin the currency’s value, and the stronger the greenback is relative to other currencies, the more it makes US imports of overseas goods cheaper in US dollar terms and the less competitive it makes US exports.

Indeed, Cliff Tan, the Hong Kong-based East Asian head of global markets research at MUFG Bank, wrote on June 27 that “no matter what Trump does, he can’t affect the overall US trade deficit”.

SCMP -- July 2018

[dckingsfan]

He can't change the overall trade deficit - but he can and is shifting it. Do you have a problem with that?

Adding to this - why do you think we have a net trade deficit. The "argument" (bolded and italicized) below is only a small part of the reason.

Terrific - agree to disagree on this one.

Why Donald Trump should blame the strong US dollar, not China, for its trade deficit

Neal Kimberley says given the role of the strong US dollar owing to its status as the primary reserve currency, tariffs will not help reduce the trade deficit and may backfire

US President Donald Trump doesn’t like the US trade deficit. “We’re like the piggy bank that everyone’s been robbing,” he said last month. His attempts to address the issue, through recourse to tariffs, have raised trade tensions around the world. Yet his strategy might be misguided.

A constant demand for US dollars outside the United States should always help to underpin the currency’s value, and the stronger the greenback is relative to other currencies, the more it makes US imports of overseas goods cheaper in US dollar terms and the less competitive it makes US exports.

Indeed, Cliff Tan, the Hong Kong-based East Asian head of global markets research at MUFG Bank, wrote on June 27 that “no matter what Trump does, he can’t affect the overall US trade deficit”.

SCMP -- July 2018