USA - США - SAD

Creepy Uncle wrote:

MNE wrote:epstein je tip osobe koji bi jedva čekao da progovori na suđenju i povuče za sobom što više njih

tako i meni izgleda. neverovatno je šta se izgubilo ovim.

<_alph4_> cedra when are you coming to live with me
<_cedra> I can't
<_alph4_>
<_cedra> Unless you live here in this country
<_alph4_> i do not
<_alph4_> i live in the democratic republic of trump
<_cedra> What state
<_alph4_> denial
<_alph4_> sometimes confusion

bruno sulak wrote:mislim ti razumes da im se ubio krunski svedok koji mozda moze da poveze acting presidenta sa slucajem u kojem je ovaj navodno silovao 13godisnju devojcicu?

Creepy Uncle wrote:impuls da se ovaj...događaj apsorbuje bez preispitivanja je bukvalno smrt politike.

Gargamel wrote:

bruno sulak wrote:mislim ti razumes da im se ubio krunski svedok koji mozda moze da poveze acting presidenta sa slucajem u kojem je ovaj navodno silovao 13godisnju devojcicu?

ko išta zna o američkim javnim službama, zna koliko su sveprisutni kurcobolja i nesposobnost. u skladu sa tim, samo će hajvan (ili neko ko je u SAD bio samo turistički) tvrditi da je nepojmljivo ili nelogično da je u pitanju samoubistvo.

Gargamel wrote:

bruno sulak wrote:mislim ti razumes da im se ubio krunski svedok koji mozda moze da poveze acting presidenta sa slucajem u kojem je ovaj navodno silovao 13godisnju devojcicu?

ko išta zna o američkim javnim službama, zna koliko su sveprisutni kurcobolja i nesposobnost. u skladu sa tim, samo će hajvan (ili neko ko je u SAD bio samo turistički) tvrditi da je nepojmljivo ili nelogično da je u pitanju samoubistvo.

паће wrote:Курцобоља је ладно могла да има облик "пази ша ми веле ови из министарства, да посебно пазим на Епштајна... ае, они ће да ми га кажу, паз што ћу да се трзам за таквог жгада, нек си јебу матер".

Gargamel wrote:

bruno sulak wrote:mislim ti razumes da im se ubio krunski svedok koji mozda moze da poveze acting presidenta sa slucajem u kojem je ovaj navodno silovao 13godisnju devojcicu?

ko išta zna o američkim javnim službama, zna koliko su sveprisutni kurcobolja i nesposobnost. u skladu sa tim, samo će hajvan (ili neko ko je u SAD bio samo turistički) tvrditi da je nepojmljivo ili nelogično da je u pitanju samoubistvo.

bruno sulak wrote:ili jim garrison. ono turista.

https://www.ft.com/content/a7a5d16c-ba97-11e9-96bd-8e884d3ea203

Opinion The FT View
US should drop concerns around state planning
The need to transition to a worker-led economy is increasingly clear

The editorial board 8 HOURS AGO

There is a great irony that while the US essentially invented modern industry policy, many there still view it as a dangerous subject. Under Alexander Hamilton, founder of America’s first national bank, politicians directed US industrialisation. Presidents including Kennedy also supported a state role in directing capital flows. But since Reagan, trickle-down and laissez-faire have ruled, despite evidence markets do not allocate capital to the most productive places.

There is a sense that monetary policy can no longer support US growth, and that the country may be heading for a recession. The private sector is uninterested in low return public infrastructure projects, or investment in education and training needed to bolster underlying growth in the real economy. This has made government-led industrial policy a major topic on the Democratic presidential campaign trail, with candidates such as Senator Elizabeth Warren advocating for some modern industrial planning.

Ms Warren points out that despite distrust around state planning, which is viewed by many Americans as dangerously “socialist”, the US government already does make economic choices. For example, it has chosen to support a debt-driven, two-speed economy rather than one that prioritises income and industry. Ms Warren’s response would be to create a new “Department of Economic Development,” to increase federal funding for core research. It would ensure companies that benefit would manufacture in the US, especially if they plan to sell to government. Taxpayers would receive a cut of corporate profits from state funding. The workforce would also be better trained as part of the effort to build a worker-led economy, not a consumer-led one.

Other liberals such as Joe Biden and Kirsten Gillibrand are also considering adopting aspects for their own platforms. But interest stretches beyond the Democratic party to some members of the GOP. In May, Senator Marco Rubio, chair of the Senate small business committee, issued a report on the challenges to capital investment in the US. The report acknowledged that capital markets were no longer helping non-financial business and that the policy of putting shareholders’ priorities above all else should stop. It suggested that public policy could play a role in directing capital to more productive places — Main Street, not Wall Street.

None of this implies an easy bipartisan solution. Republicans and Democrats alike agree that the country desperately needs better infrastructure, but cannot agree on how to pay for it. Still, the fact that some important conservatives like Mr Rubio are now willing to concede that the market system simply is not serving American business is a real sea change.

The question now is how to ensure that a strategy to boost jobs at home does not become a zero-sum effort that would further alienate allies abroad, or trigger more nationalism and protectionism. Ms Warren’s own plan for “economic patriotism” includes some misguided measures, such as allowing for currency manipulation. As the events of the past few weeks have shown, both trade and currency wars are a losing proposition for all of those involved in them.

Simply copying parts of President Trump’s “America first” rhetoric is not a winning strategy for Democrats, either politically or economically. Their presidential candidates in particular need to articulate a plan that can connect the dots between domestic job creation, trade and more constructive foreign policy. The future of the US, and the world economy, depends on it.

Djamolidine Abdoujaparov wrote:učestalosti samoubistava, odnosu samoubistava u opštoj i zatvorskoj populaciji, stanju i procedurama u menhetenskim zatvorima, bejzijanskoj epistemologiji, statistici i psihologiji prosečnog milijardera-pedofila naglo rastu i postižu status svakodnevnih...

Gargamel wrote:

Djamolidine Abdoujaparov wrote:učestalosti samoubistava, odnosu samoubistava u opštoj i zatvorskoj populaciji, stanju i procedurama u menhetenskim zatvorima, bejzijanskoj epistemologiji, statistici i psihologiji prosečnog milijardera-pedofila naglo rastu i postižu status svakodnevnih...

ako bi ko da se igra Okamovom oštricom, potrebno je poznavanje nekih osnovnih činjenica. može čovek gadno da se poseče ako ne zna čime barata.

bruno sulak wrote:svi: iz drugog pokusaja se ubio milijarder pedofil prijatelj dva predsednika, ranije vec padao pa misteriozno blago kaznjen intervencijom sadasnjeg secretary of labor, koji je mogao potencijalno da implicira gomilu ljudi za ono kao trgovinu maloletnicama.

Obama’s defenders often judge him according to imaginary, free-floating criteria such as how good he was at ‘getting things done’. According to such criteria, they say, he did ‘pretty well’. But presidents should be judged by how well they respond to historical situations, not by trans-historical criteria such as how many bills they get passed. We judge Lincoln by how he handled the Civil War and Roosevelt by how he handled the Depression. Obama came to the presidency at a potentially momentous crossroads, when the neoliberal order was deeply discredited because of the disaster in Iraq and the financial crisis. In that context, Obama was the object of charismatic longings of rare intensity. Grasping this, he ran on the promise of moving in a wholly new direction, claiming we needed not just new policies but a new mindset. Once elected, however, he governed on the basis of ‘pragmatism’, ‘little steps’ and ‘bipartisanship’. In the end, it was not Obama but Trump who answered the call for a wholly new direction, but in a disastrous way.