Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6817

  • DRW50

    5991

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3465

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Forget dramedy.  In some ways, this is the most fascinating soap I've seen since KNOTS LANDING.  All it needs, of course, are Donna Mills and her eye shadows.

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

^ I've wondered the same thing. I remembering hearing on one of the news shows that Trump can limit the number of refugees to 50,000 as has been announced and that we are basically at that number for the year anyway. I'm not sure what that means for the Syrians who were on track to come though. Hopefully they can get in.

 

I think it's basically a myth the the majority of the American public has ever been welcoming to new comers.  At the same time at least we do take a large number of people overall and there are a lot of good people who work hard to help people settle in.  There are plenty of countries who won't take anyone, including Japan. Abe was quoted not that long ago saying something along the lines of 'We need to get our native population growing before we can take in other people'.  Meanwhile their economy has been floundering for years in part because they have negative population growth. Pure madness and if Bannon has his way we'll be headed down the same path.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/01/japan-rejected-99-percent-refugees-2015-160124070011926.html

Edited by Juliajms
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wish I could find the link but I was reading an article in the Wall Street Journal the other day talking about the budget plan being now tweaked by the White House. THey are changing the growth numbers increasing them to around 4% which is 1.5% higher than the Obama white house had them. Most economists and the CBO have the projections at around 2% for the next 10 years, but of course Trump doesn't believe in economists.  The Congress of course has to follow the CBO in the budget.

 

What's interesting about it was the fact that our labor market participation rate has been up while unemployment has been down, not hard to see why(baby boomers starting to leave the workforce) and the only reason we are able to maintain a decent participation rate is - lets wait - immigration and foreign workers. So the WSJ article basically is saying if the rate of immigration is reduced that there is no possible way those growth numbers are achievable and likely would not be even if we weren't kicking people out, deporting, and cutting back on immigration. And they can keep increasing H1B Visa's but that won't make up for it, as many younger people who come here on Visa's going to college end up staying and become permanent residents.

 

It's amazing the ignorance of these people. While this country may not be welcoming to many, these people help our economy thrive and grow. It's what has separated us from everyone else. There are already 3 million jobs in this country that can't be filled due to lack of skilled personal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's going to be interesting to see when those first set of numbers that are truly from the Trump administration (not riding the Obama administration's coattails) come in, particularly from the agricultural sector.

 

With these travel bans issued by executive order, it will also be interesting to see how the healthcare field (which uses an enormous amount of immigrant labor, some of the foreign doctors that many practices had hoped would fill vacant family doctor/GP positions have already been affected) will be impacted.

 

Hold onto your hats.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Absolutely! Brad should've simply moved on from Lunacy. There's no point of freeing her, if you're not going to at least make an attempt at redemption or incorporating her into the fold. It happened with Quinn, who committed quite a few felonies before become the Forrester Matriarch.  Heck, keep Lunacy in prison and have Poppy/Finn discover that she gave birth to twins - 'Sunny' could've come on with a clean slate and still had Sheila/Finn and all the other drama. It certainly couldn't have been worse than what we've witnessed with the destruction of $B.    
    • I would enjoy it if Swan popped up on BTG as an old one time friend/mentor of Anita’s for a cameo. This is just

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I had totally forgotten that Courtney story. I see Burton was already phoning it in by that point.
    • omg I completely missed that, but now when I see it typed here in your post, it's obvious icky cringe. So now I just checked and Tomas said that -- on May 27 that he likes the author Carl Ivati.  He said it with sort of an accent, so I didn't catch the stupid joke or think about the spelling.   I remember when that aired, that I actually said to myself at the time, "I wonder if that's a Latin American author, and I will have to google him later." And now I see your post, and I see. Well that's cringe, and I feel stupid to have fallen for it.

      Please register in order to view this content

         
    • There's a lot you don't need if you have the writing.  You don't even need large casts!  You could make do with a cast of 12-18 actors if the writing is there.
    • Thank you. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with sleeping around if your spouse actually knows about it. She’s just a cheating slut.
    • OMG...Robert Mandan! And Donna Mills is a child. I keep hoping for more of early Ross/Vanessa.
    • I get your point, but I also know that if the roles were reversed -- if a man were screwing around on a woman this way -- everyone would be all "All with his head!" When I say Vanessa needs therapy, I'm actually being kind, because I could begin and end with the fact that she's a cheating slut.
    • Is nobody going to mention the cringefest that is 'Carl Ivati'?
    • I've accepted we'll probably never see any of the Roger/Holly 1976-1978 storyline. Whenever any of Roger/Holly 1979 and 1980 storylines surface, those are must watch as they set in motion everything we saw a decade later.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy