What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Valmy]

'The Grey Lady is coming my lord. She is a herald of woe.'

[Grey Fox]

Really good Freakonomics podcast on the impact of globalization and specifically what has happened with China since 2001, and how it relates to Trumps claims.

Executive summary?

Its a one hour podcast you can listen to in your car.

Any summary I give would not give it justice, since the podcast itself is just a summary treatment anyway. But it brought up some things that I had not considered, and summarized a lot I had in a manner that was illuminating, IMO.

Which Episode?

http://freakonomics.com/podcast/china-eat-americas-jobs/

Thanks mate.

[The Minsky Moment]

Does that still applies for legal business forms were the owner is not legally seperated from its business?  I suppose you also have an equivalent of what we have here, very small businesses operating under a business name, but not incorporated, therefore from a legal and fiscal point of view, there is no difference between the owner and the business?

A person can operate a business as a sole proprietership, which is indistinguishable from the person.  The common law tended to treat partnerships similarly, as did statutory parternships based on the Uniform Partnership Act, the revised statutes tend to treat partnerships as separate entities.  LLCs, LPs, etc - basically anything with a limited liability feature - have separate personality. 

[The Minsky Moment]

http://freakonomics.com/podcast/china-eat-americas-jobs/

Looks like its the Autor et al. study.  That's a serious piece of work by some of the best mins in the field.  But there need to be caution in interpreting the results.  They are basically looking at linkages between Chinese exports and certain labor markets in the US.  But it can't be read as a counterfactual - i.e. that those jobs would exist today had say the US banned the entry of all Chinese exports.  You would need a broader and more complex model for that.

[celedhring]

From the "PC culture has ruined America" and "fuck your feelings" crowd:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/sean-spicer-reacts-to-being-parodied-on-snl-says-the-show-has-crossed-over-to-mean/

Sean Spicer Reacts to Being Parodied on SNL, Says the Show Has 'Crossed Over to Mean'

[garbon]

From the "PC culture has ruined America" and "fuck your feelings" crowd:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/sean-spicer-reacts-to-being-parodied-on-snl-says-the-show-has-crossed-over-to-mean/

Sean Spicer Reacts to Being Parodied on SNL, Says the Show Has 'Crossed Over to Mean'

Clearly has no idea what he thinks.

Spicer seemed to soften his view later in the day, since he spoke with Fox & Friends and said he thought the sketch of him was "cute" and "funny."

[derspiess]

From the "PC culture has ruined America" and "fuck your feelings" crowd:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/sean-spicer-reacts-to-being-parodied-on-snl-says-the-show-has-crossed-over-to-mean/

Sean Spicer Reacts to Being Parodied on SNL, Says the Show Has 'Crossed Over to Mean'

From the crowd or just one person?

[Berkut]

http://freakonomics.com/podcast/china-eat-americas-jobs/

Looks like its the Autor et al. study.  That's a serious piece of work by some of the best mins in the field.  But there need to be caution in interpreting the results.  They are basically looking at linkages between Chinese exports and certain labor markets in the US.  But it can't be read as a counterfactual - i.e. that those jobs would exist today had say the US banned the entry of all Chinese exports.  You would need a broader and more complex model for that.

They state that pretty explicitly, actually.

[mongers]

More on the Speaker of the Commons opposing Trump addressing both houses of parliament:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38885773

Never thought I see the day that Dennis Skinner congratulated John Bercow. 

[Razgovory]

Really good Freakonomics podcast on the impact of globalization and specifically what has happened with China since 2001, and how it relates to Trumps claims.

Executive summary?

Its a one hour podcast you can listen to in your car.

Do I have to be in my car?  It would seem awkward to sit in my car in the dark just so I can listen to some guy talk about economics.  Is this the same guy who thought it would be a good idea to put giant spikes in the steering wheel?

[Ideologue]

http://freakonomics.com/podcast/china-eat-americas-jobs/

Looks like its the Autor et al. study.  That's a serious piece of work by some of the best mins in the field.

Top.  Mins.

[CountDeMoney]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/02/06/president-trump-is-now-speculating-that-the-media-is-covering-up-terrorist-attacks/?tid=pm_politics_pop

President Trump is now speculating that the media is covering up terrorist attacks
The Washington Post
By Philip Bump February 6 at 2:55 PM


"You've seen what happened in Paris, and Nice. All over Europe, it's happening," he said to the assembled military leaders. "It's gotten to a point where it's not even being reported. And in many cases the very, very dishonest press doesn't want to report it. They have their reasons, and you understand that."

The comment immediately harked back to comments from senior adviser Kellyanne Conway on MSNBC last week.

"I bet it's brand-new information to people that President Obama had a six-month ban on the Iraqi refugee program after two Iraqis came here to this country, were radicalized and were the masterminds behind the Bowling Green massacre," she said. "Most people don't know that because it didn't get covered."

It was brand-new information to people because there was no "Bowling Green massacre." Conway had referred to the supposed terrorist attack previously, including in response to a question posed by TMZ. But the two Iraqis arrested in Bowling Green, Ky., in 2011 never committed an attack in the United States. She later admitted that she'd misspoken.

Trump's comment goes far further than Conway's, though. Her statement that "it didn't get covered" probably referred to the alleged "six-month ban" from the Obama administration. (That this, too, didn't happen has been somewhat swept under the rug.) Trump is positing that the media actively suppresses news of terrorist attacks to fulfill a political agenda.

It's certainly true that not every terrorist attack receives broad coverage in the national media. FiveThirtyEight looked at the likelihood that a terrorist attack in a foreign country would be covered by the New York Times, looking at coverage of 40,129 attacks from 1968 to 2009. Not every attack received coverage over that period. Last spring, the Los Angeles Times set out to log every single terrorist attack in the month of April, counting 180 attacks that killed 858 people. Not every one of those attacks made your local nightly newscast.

But filtering what to cover is very different than suppressing information. On any given day, local newspapers and news broadcasts decide what to spend resources on. If your home is burglarized, it may not make the cut. This probably isn't because the Channel 5 news director has a vendetta against you; it's that there are limited resources.

Trump's comment is very much in line with comments he made last June about President Barack Obama.

"Look guys, we're led by a man that either is not tough, not smart or has something else in mind," Trump said about Obama's response to the attack at a gay nightclub in Orlando. "And the something else in mind — people can't believe it. People cannot believe that President Obama is acting the way he acts and can't even mention the words radical Islamic terrorism. There's something going on."

The clear implication: Obama is on the side of the terrorists. Trump didn't quite say that the media was siding with the terrorists, just that the media would happily ignore terrorism if it made Trump look bad.

Interestingly, Trump himself ignored the mass shooting that occurred at a mosque in Quebec last week, killing six people. White House press secretary Sean Spicer told the media that the president and the Canadian prime minister had spoken, but Trump himself declined to weigh in. (Spicer cited the attack mostly as somehow validating Trump's immigration policies.)

Trump did tweet about another attack.

    A new radical Islamic terrorist has just attacked in Louvre Museum in Paris. Tourists were locked down. France on edge again. GET SMART U.S.

    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 3, 2017

In that one, no one was killed.

Trump has consistently seen attacks like that in Quebec — committed by a young man who espoused anti-Muslim politics and defended Trump online — as isolated incidents from mentally disturbed individuals, while attacks by Muslims are part of a broader pattern spurred by radical Islamism. He sees an institution behind attacks by Muslims that he doesn't see behind attacks like that in Quebec or in Charleston in 2015. That helps explain why he is willing to focus the country's anti-terrorism efforts solely on terrorism committed in the name of Islam: He doesn't see how other threats are systemic.

With his comments on Monday, Trump implied that the media is complicit in making terrorists successful. It's part of a recent pattern of suggesting that others are standing in the way of his terrorism-fighting efforts, which includes disparaging a federal judge who halted his immigration executive order.

Conway's comments about Bowling Green earned her an enormous amount of public mockery — an undue amount, given the likelihood that her comments were a mistake rather than an intentional lie. Trump's comments are of an entirely different order and magnitude.

Trump's relationship with the media has never been strong during his time in politics. But he's never before tried to push the media into the "against us" circle alongside those who commit acts of terrorism — at least, not so explicitly.

[LaCroix]

it's possible

[mongers]

Really good Freakonomics podcast on the impact of globalization and specifically what has happened with China since 2001, and how it relates to Trumps claims.

Executive summary?

Its a one hour podcast you can listen to in your car.

Do I have to be in my car?  It would seem awkward to sit in my car in the dark just so I can listen to some guy talk about economics.  Is this the same guy who thought it would be a good idea to put giant spikes in the steering wheel?

Jesus, Raz you've got it easy, how am I suppose to listen to this whilst hurtling down a hill on a bike?

[CountDeMoney]

it's possible

Shut up, Marti.