Maduro Asks OPEC For Help Against U.S. Sanctions

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

6 hours ago, Rodent said:

The US is not a single sentient being, and as such cannot "want" anything. 

But essentially yes, we Americans are overzealous world ruiners. 

 

 

Rodent for President!  Do I hear a second?

[Illurion + 894]

On 2/25/2019 at 1:31 AM, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

I consider USA to be a fanatic state. US has supported jihadis in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Arab region etc to spread their influence and cause major problems world over. So,I tend to consider USA as evil actor which wants to ruin everything.

Ok...

And i consider YOU to be a FANATIC PERSON....

And i consider YOU to be an EVIL ACTOR......

 

You would probably fit in very well at the annual Hollywood Oscars award ceremony........

[John Foote + 1,135]

On 2/25/2019 at 9:10 PM, ronwagn said:

I think we can agree that a wall is not necessary for ALL portions of the border, but it is for most. It is a real money saver overall though. We spend far more on supporting illegal aliens then a wall would cost. I agree that your other means of controlling illegals are essential. That includes a national identity card. I am fervently for the Second Amendment. I would like to see a good poll about what other gun owners think. I doubt it is much different than anyone else, but I could be wrong. There is always a first time. 😀

Choke points need walls, maybe all of Southern California, but not much more  wall in Texas, or New Mexico. So much of the desert does not need a wall, and the Rio Grande. I'm certified marksman and I am cool with gun ownership. But I view running around with one a bit like driving a vehicle. A license and you've demonstrated you can safely handle the thing.

Serious penalties, and enforcement for the folks who hire illegals would do more than anything else. When it's uneconomical to hire them, and you risk putting yourself in jail by hiring them, as opposed to the undocumented in jail and you can just get another one, then much of the problem will correct itself.

I do find the founders notion that guns protect us from our tyrannical government silly. The firepower in the military and police, today is so far beyond what a any small militia can defend themselves with. 

[Jason Ericsson + 13]

On 2/24/2019 at 4:23 PM, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

Socialism, capitalism, communism is just economic theory. I don't just exist to eat and die. It is the higher purpose of life which matters. So, I don't appreciate any of the economic breakdown of society.

I support the division in terms of - clergy, warrior, merchant and worker but in non-hereditary manner in a knowledge oriented society. Something similar to the older system of ancient Europe but without heredity.

Capitalist, communists, socialists are just animals existing only to die.

If you believe in being able to buy things in a free market then its capitalism. Don't confuse the two as they are very different to seizing the means of production.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 2/26/2019 at 7:50 PM, Illurion said:

Ok...

 

You would probably fit in very well at the annual Hollywood Oscars award ceremony........

(clapping...)  Brilliant!

[ronwagn + 6,290]

3 hours ago, John Foote said:

Choke points need walls, maybe all of Southern California, but not much more  wall in Texas, or New Mexico. So much of the desert does not need a wall, and the Rio Grande. I'm certified marksman and I am cool with gun ownership. But I view running around with one a bit like driving a vehicle. A license and you've demonstrated you can safely handle the thing.

Serious penalties, and enforcement for the folks who hire illegals would do more than anything else. When it's uneconomical to hire them, and you risk putting yourself in jail by hiring them, as opposed to the undocumented in jail and you can just get another one, then much of the problem will correct itself.

I do find the founders notion that guns protect us from our tyrannical government silly. The firepower in the military and police, today is so far beyond what a any small militia can defend themselves with. 

We need a wall wherever a wall can be built without some great problem. That will save far more money than it costs. 

We need to prosecute corporations and all employers who hire illegal aliens. We need to enforce the law. We are up against the powers that be, who are large corporations that make billions off of cheap illegal labor. The United States Chamber of Commerce is the biggest political force for the status quo. Dozens of billionaires and millionaires who support both parties are also in favor ot the status quo. That is why the law is not being enforced. Neither Democrats or Republicans are free of guilt. 

Visa overstayers should be arrested and deported also. We need to enforce the law.

Sanctuary cities and states need to be sued and their policies changed by law. Democrats are primarily responsible for the current situation in those cities. 

The Second Amendment Is the law of the land and is just as important as all other amendments. If you think you can repeal it, try it. Democrats and some Republicans are trying to infringe on our Second Amendment Rights. The military and police do not have near the guns and ammo that ordinary civilians do. More than half of them are loyal and realize that they need to honor the Second Amendment. Blood will be shed across America and civilians will show who has the most armament and patriotic men and women. Your attitude is reprehensible IMO. 

Second Amendment RIghts 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lNfCpesT-BhEhMiL5kY2O0VvJtnoAIZiYvvTb0_6eh0/edit

Edited February 28, 2019 by ronwagn

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 hours ago, John Foote said:

 

I do find the founders notion that guns protect us from our tyrannical government silly. The firepower in the military and police, today is so far beyond what a any small militia can defend themselves with. 

John, the American military is forbidden by Statute from "engaging" with civilians in the streets, even in the case of insurrection against local authority.  Those are the Posse Comitatus Acts, passed after the US internal war  ("civil War," or "War between the States," depending on your taste of it).  It would be up to the Governor to call up the State Police, let them deal with it.  In the alternative, the employees of the Federal Government could resign or depart the State; that would be interesting.

Admittedly, the picture is not so clear in the case of an insurrection against Federal Authority.  There was an uprising in Western Pennsylvania at one point which was put down by armed Federal troops.  Whether that was "legal" or not is another question: whoever was in charge did it anyway.  

When Lincoln sent in the US Army against the South back in 1861, there is not much question that he far exceeded his authority as President.  But, as will all Presidents since then, he did it anyway.  There have been efforts to put Presidents in check, including the 90-day Statute of Congress where a President has to seek a Declaration of War if he has troops engaged in combat overseas.  As to domestic situations, he has zero authority.  But Presidents are notorious for ignoring Congress and Statute - witness Janet Reno, the FBI, and David Koresh. Note, however, that the Army was conspicuously not used. 

Will Commanders obey a Presidential Order, or will they keep their men in barracks?  That part is unknown.  I am not convinced that Commanders are that nuanced in the finer points of American Law.  I suspect the Officer Corps from West Point will flatly refuse. State Guard units, hey that's a wild card. 

During Vietnam, one entire State Guard  (now "National Guard") unit refused to report for mobilization under Federal Authority (to go to Vietnam as combat troops), and instead filed suit against the Executive Office.  I vaguely recall it was Minnesota or Wisconsin. The Governor refused to sign the release Order  (releasing his Guard to the Feds), the troops sued, and eventually the War ended before the case went to trial.  Courts are slow. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

For those following this thread, John Foote (above) touched on a raw nerve when he suggested that it was "silly" to think guns would protect from a tyrannical government.

On 2/27/2019 at 8:45 PM, John Foote said:

I do find the founders notion that guns protect us from our tyrannical government silly

Yet both our (US) history and the hemisphere's history is more complex.  If you look back to the US civil war, let's remember that the civilians of the South were, as a practical matter, disarmed.  General Sherman  (among others) marched his admittedly uncouth ruffian troops in a broad swath across Georgia, burning and looting as he went.  He burned the entire city of Atlanta.  He burned everything he came across, stole the cattle, and killed civilians for no other reason than that they were "there."  Now, those are war crimes - all of the above are and were war crimes.  Civilians, and civilian homes, are out of bounds. They are not military targets, they may not be looted, they may not be burned, and the inhabitants as civilians are to be scrupulously left in peace.  But Lincoln and his troops did not do that.  Does that make Lincoln and Sherman war criminals?  Of course it does.  But hey, the victors get to set the pages of history. 

Lincoln has this fabulous Statue down on the Centennial Mall,  in Washington, and all the history teachers in the schools teach total reverence, a bit like the Chinese kids revering Chairman Mao.  Was he really?  I conclude that Lincoln was a Usurper, he usurped State authority for his own; he also usurped Congress' authority for his own.  Was he a war criminal?  Sure looks like it. So were a lot of those guys.  Was war even necessary to collapse slavery?  Of course not.  It would have folded in another 30 years.  So for that, Lincoln generated some 650,000 dead. Is all that a reasonable trade-off? I dunno, but I will say that the issue is not even discussed, or thought about.  That lack of critical examination is rather disheartening. 

If the Southern civilians were all heavily armed, would those troops have attempted to loot and burn?  I doubt it.  They would have given those plantations a wide berth.  And also gone around the city of Atlanta.  As recent televised experience shows, "urban warfare" is no piece of cake. 

Having a heavily armed civilian population is what keeps the megalomaniacs in Washington in check.  You have to give some serious pause to ideas of becoming a national tyrannical government if you recognize that there are hundreds of millions of guns in civilian hands. I can assure you that Nobody has the desire for, or wants a taste of, trying to mess with that.  Deterrence:  the great Equalizer. 

Edited March 1, 2019 by Jan van Eck
scrivener error

[Bhimsen Pachawry + 72]

1 hour ago, Jason Ericsson said:

If you believe in being able to buy things in a free market then its capitalism. Don't confuse the two as they are very different to seizing the means of production.

How can you buy everything in market? Can you buy Plutonium in market? That is what I am saying

[Bhimsen Pachawry + 72]

On 2/27/2019 at 6:20 AM, Illurion said:

Ok...

And i consider YOU to be a FANATIC PERSON....

And i consider YOU to be an EVIL ACTOR......

 

You would probably fit in very well at the annual Hollywood Oscars award ceremony........

Actually, these hollywood actors were bred and groomed by USA itself when it was in alliance with Jihadis. It is just that the snake which was bred by USA is now biting it

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

13 minutes ago, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

On 2/27/2019 at 7:50 AM, Illurion said:

Ok...

And i consider YOU to be a FANATIC PERSON....

And i consider YOU to be an EVIL ACTOR......

 

You would probably fit in very well at the annual Hollywood Oscars award ceremony........

Actually, these hollywood actors were bred and groomed by USA itself when it was in alliance with Jihadis. It is just that the snake which was bred by USA is now biting it

Points taken, Illurion!

[Arjun + 39]

On 2/12/2019 at 7:08 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

OPEC will ignore Maduro.

What happened to Russia Collusion? i wonder how they will play this next.

Edited March 4, 2019 by Arjun

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

6 hours ago, Arjun said:

What happened to Russia Collusion? i wonder how they will play this next.

FISA declas will destroy the "Russia" narrative.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

58 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

FISA declas will destroy the "Russia" narrative.

I hope this pans out.  We'll see, or not.

[NickW + 2,714]

On ‎2‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 12:48 PM, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

 

The US dollar became international currency because of USA funding jihadis in Afghanistan, Kashmir, Yugoslavia,  chechnya etc. This is not free market unlike what you claim

Meanwhile in the real World....

In 1944, when the US dollar was chosen as the world reference currency at Bretton Woods, it was only the second currency in global reserves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_currency

[NickW + 2,714]

On ‎2‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 4:20 AM, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

 

So, USA has no way of repayment for its big debt. USA manufacturing is very small and relies on service provision and returns on foreign investment for its income. This is also very erratic source as the service and investment income can be cut down by foreign countries by changing tax structures.

All in all, I would not say that USA is in a good position 

Meanwhile in the Real World......

https://www.brookings.edu/research/global-manufacturing-scorecard-how-the-us-compares-to-18-other-nations/

2015 figures

Country	Manufacturing Output (USD in billions)	Percent of National Output	Percent of Global Manufacturing
China	$2,010	27%	20%
United States	1,867	12	18
Japan	1,063	19	10
Germany	700	23	7
South Korea	372	29	4
India	298	16	3
France	274	11	3
Italy	264	16	3
United Kingdom	244	10	2
Taiwan	185	31	2

[specinho + 470]

On 2/23/2019 at 2:57 AM, John Foote said:

I enjoy your perspectives, but WWII, you pretty have to credit the Japanese and Pearl Harbor for getting the USA to jump in. The USA actually lobbied Russia to open up a front with the Japanese to help the Americans.  Roosevelt had been doing a "lend-lease" thing to both England and the U.S.S.R. prior to Pearl Harbor. D-Day was actually about a year behind schedule.

It's worth noting there are more Americans of German descent than English. Without Japan attacking the US, FDR probably couldn't have sold the public on a war against Germany.  And back then most Americans hadn't a real clue what communism was. FDR's term for Stalin was "Uncle Joe." Hitler and Germany were caught off guard knowing this would pull the US formally into the war.

Perhaps the Treaty of Versailles after WW1 set the plate for Germany's pursuit of WW2, but England certainly didn't launch the ground war. England was still in the Empire days sucking off the Indian subcontinent, among other places. 

uuhhh............... what is cooking??

[specinho + 470]

On 2/23/2019 at 6:13 AM, ronwagn said:

Addressing your last paragraph. https://theblacksphere.net/2019/02/trump-crushing-china-trade-war/

China Stories https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wb2YoQGpSWTz32ljsiA_ey6FLVqc2Dpe7Fnpiqn9lBs/edit#

 

On 2/23/2019 at 12:20 PM, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

The foreign debt of over 6 trillion dollars is my emphasis. The internal debt can be managed in one way or another. But foreign debt of USA is simply too large and USA continues to take more debt every year with current account deficit of $500 billion. That is where the problem arises.

Just think of yourself as a bank which lends. You have lent $10 billion for a company and it has repaid only $4 billion. It continues to borrow $500 million every year and shows no sign of repayment. Would you still keep lending or will you cut your losses?

That is the situation with USA. USA has nothing to give anyone except for electronics and arms.

Electronicsis a non critical good and other countries like China already has 22nm technology. So, this is not something that can be used as a big leverage.

The arms of USA can't be given beyond a point as that can result in the buyer becoming stronger than USA or its allies by either buying too much or by reverse engineering & learning.

So, USA has no way of repayment for its big debt. USA manufacturing is very small and relies on service provision and returns on foreign investment for its income. This is also very erratic source as the service and investment income can be cut down by foreign countries by changing tax structures.

Essentially USA has very limited way of repayment and hence is appearing like a sick country which keeps sucking everything into it like a black hole without any signs of giving out anything. This may in turn make the foreign creditors to cut down on their losses and stop selling USA altogether.

The first signs are already visible of foreign countries cutting down on USA. Arabs have asked USA to not buy oil until their foreign deficit is fixed. Only a small amount of oil will be provided for maintaining bases in middle east. The agreement of petrodollar required USA to maintain fiscal balance which has now been breached and hence selling oil to USA in return for the treasury bonds make little sense. This has prompted USA from increasing its oil production and withdrawing from middle east, Afghanistan etc. When many people were blaming Trump for being jingoist, the reality was that the decision was actually well calculated.

All in all, I would not say that USA is in a good position 

Government banking system is sere foonie............. (funy)............ we are collecting 20 eggs but we expect the eggs to hatch and grow into chicken. Hence...... we spend like we are profiting from selling chicken while we are actually holding onto eggs.......... and then we sell chicken birth certificates of each egg to lenders to reassure them the chicken will be fine...................... eerrr........... pardon me....... i'm confused with what i'm saying......... this is Macro-ecomony........ the most difficult subject labelled by the Economist............

"USA has no way of repayment for its big debt.".............. eerrr............ once upon a time........... a man lost his room key in the house. He went out the house and looked for it under the street light. A curious passerby asked what was he doing? The man said:" I'm looking for my room key that i lost in the house because out here is brighter.".................. we might not always need answer just the effort........... or no?

On 2/23/2019 at 2:50 PM, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

USA GDP is based on political alliance of petrodollar and huge foreign borrowing. Just like we saw how despite big GDP, countries like South Korea, Japan etc crashed in 1990s, how Greece, Italy, Spain had to be bailed out, how USAcrashed in 2008 and had to resort to printing dollars in violation of rules yo be accepted as international currency, how USSR collapsed in 1980-90 and so on.

What matters at the end of the day is - production. How much quantity of production of goods happen, either agriculture or manufacturing. GDP including service or market costs is meaningless. GDP purely based on quantity of production is what really matters. Qualitative aspects and services are unstable sources of income

GDP is indeed a little funny. Gross domestic production per capita represents something silly.......... a poor country with 100 residents  produces 1 million of goods and services vs a developed country with 1million residents produces 1 billion of goods and services might be having the same standard of living and national prosperity at GDP 1000 or no? Therefore....... when the global poverty line is used at less than USD 2 per day.......... many more might have been left out because the basic necessicties in the inflated countries could have costed more than $2 per day.................

[NickW + 2,714]

On 2/22/2019 at 6:57 PM, John Foote said:

I enjoy your perspectives, but WWII, you pretty have to credit the Japanese and Pearl Harbor for getting the USA to jump in. The USA actually lobbied Russia to open up a front with the Japanese to help the Americans.  Roosevelt had been doing a "lend-lease" thing to both England and the U.S.S.R. prior to Pearl Harbor. D-Day was actually about a year behind schedule.

It's worth noting there are more Americans of German descent than English. Without Japan attacking the US, FDR probably couldn't have sold the public on a war against Germany.  And back then most Americans hadn't a real clue what communism was. FDR's term for Stalin was "Uncle Joe." Hitler and Germany were caught off guard knowing this would pull the US formally into the war.

Perhaps the Treaty of Versailles after WW1 set the plate for Germany's pursuit of WW2, but England certainly didn't launch the ground war. England was still in the Empire days sucking off the Indian subcontinent, among other places. 

Recalculate that including Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish (and indeed Irish Republic) residents of the British Isles and that figure will come out decidedly as of British origin. I don't think that Scots, Welsh, Ulster or Irish Republic origin Americans would have been any keener on Hitler than the English

[John Foote + 1,135]

9 hours ago, NickW said:

Recalculate that including Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish (and indeed Irish Republic) residents of the British Isles and that figure will come out decidedly as of British origin. I don't think that Scots, Welsh, Ulster or Irish Republic origin Americans would have been any keener on Hitler than the English

Nope, still more Germans. Don't include the Irish, who most definitely are not English. Now the USA is more English in most respects, but not from a direct immigration perspective. The English got her first, a lot of Magna Carta in us, and definitely set the tone. You have to go pre 1850 to have more UK than Germans coming. The reality is they all mostly assimilated a long time ago. In Central Texas the heritage German/Czech settlements, very little english heritage. I suppose in New England there is no such thing as a German settlement. So we Texans have good beer, and know how to do sausages and smoke meat. 

[Jason Ericsson + 13]

On 2/20/2019 at 11:11 PM, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

Stealing from thieves is not theft but reclaiming. In Venezuela, the private companies were interfering in politics which they were not supposed to do. Otherwise they become criminals, not business.

 

About USA helping Russia, USA simply wanted to avoid bolshevik revolution and hence helped Russia. But USA was dead against USSR after the revolution. Only when forced to side with USSR due to WW2 where UK & USSR were against Germany, USA again joined the waron USSR side.

 

So who is magically going to invest all the money needed to pump all that oil Venezuela has? The installed crony employees don't seem to know what to do and where is the billions of USD required going to come from? It's easy to try and blame rather than focus on how to actually fix a problem. Without private investment in their oil industry the Venezuelan's won't be able to share in the prosperity of the oil they have.

[NickW + 2,714]

5 hours ago, John Foote said:

Nope, still more Germans. Don't include the Irish, who most definitely are not English. Now the USA is more English in most respects, but not from a direct immigration perspective. The English got her first, a lot of Magna Carta in us, and definitely set the tone. You have to go pre 1850 to have more UK than Germans coming. The reality is they all mostly assimilated a long time ago. In Central Texas the heritage German/Czech settlements, very little english heritage. I suppose in New England there is no such thing as a German settlement. So we Texans have good beer, and know how to do sausages and smoke meat. 

You appear to have trouble distinguishing the difference between English and British. British includes Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Irish. I'm not suggesting British Immigrants were the majority but they were the biggest single group.

I doubt that Czechs like being grouped in with Germans either.....

Any data to back your claim up? 

The US President test is an interesting one. Most US presidents have English or British names. I accept in a  few cases those surnames may have been anglicised. Language of the USA would also appear to be a significant clue. 

 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

3 hours ago, Jason Ericsson said:

So who is magically going to invest all the money needed to pump all that oil Venezuela has? The installed crony employees don't seem to know what to do and where is the billions of USD required going to come from? It's easy to try and blame rather than focus on how to actually fix a problem. Without private investment in their oil industry the Venezuelan's won't be able to share in the prosperity of the oil they have.

I agree. 

But maybe the answer for Venezuela is to focus on other things than oil? 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

7 hours ago, John Foote said:

Nope, still more Germans. Don't include the Irish, who most definitely are not English. Now the USA is more English in most respects, but not from a direct immigration perspective. The English got her first, a lot of Magna Carta in us, and definitely set the tone. You have to go pre 1850 to have more UK than Germans coming. The reality is they all mostly assimilated a long time ago. In Central Texas the heritage German/Czech settlements, very little english heritage. I suppose in New England there is no such thing as a German settlement. So we Texans have good beer, and know how to do sausages and smoke meat. 

Finally!  A clue about Texans....  LOL   

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

2 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I agree. 

But maybe the answer for Venezuela is to focus on other things than oil? 

Do tell!  What should broke, starving, sick Venezuela focus on other than putting good governance in place and getting their petroleum back on line?