Yeah , Hillary will say well I stuck to my lover Bill and did not go looking for trophy wives over and over again.

In a sick way I am jealous of Trump

Hillary destroyed Monica. I wonder how Monica is reacting to all this and if she has anything up her sleeve.  

Leonora posted:

Hillary destroyed Monica. I wonder how Monica is reacting to all this and if she has anything up her sleeve.  

Monika just bought a new pair of Knee Pads.

It appears from the debate that Hillary Clinton has numerous options to address Donald Trump's irrational approach to politics.

Of note, it is the first time that Trump is in a focused debate where he has to face questions for a long time.

The stealth cat versus the barking dog.......

While both candidates bring up old matters to highlight character, the question is whether stand-by-your-man and in the process destroying one woman (not all women) is seen as more damaging as the xenophobic calling a lot of women fat pigs and slobs. 

The Trump Foundation/non-payment of taxes/non-payment to the Veterans Association charity until called out/Trump U versus the Clinton Foundation access to officials for donors is another battleground.

Hillary is likely to point out that Trump has no business backers, and that's terrible for a so-called successful businessman.

The email server and Benghazi issues do not seem to have much traction of late as they've been litigated at the highest levels - Congress (Benghazi) and the FBI (email server) with no damages to Hillary.

On the issues - moving away from character stuff - Trump has not shown specifics other than to tell his already committed base . He counter-attacks with the usual Republican recipe of less government, less taxes, which Clinton calls trumped-up trickle-down. Shoots, she's even beating him at the name-calling business.

Trump was effective with the Trade Deal, Iran and Professional politician arguments.

Effective how? Form Chairman tweeted a couple of weeks ago and again on the night about the two re-purposed factories for high tech cars to replace the low end car production that went to Mexico. No businessman or Republican has endorsed Trump's non-free-trade ideas (and Hillary is foolish to follow him on this). He can talk about the Trade pacts from now until the moon disappears he will only be addressing the already-Trump voters (you know the 40%). He doesn't move the other 60% who knows that free trade is good for America and the world, and especially America if it can make the rules (child-labor, pollution, undervalued currency, etc. that the TPP has in it), and not China. 

The Iran money paid is the $400 million seized 3 decades ago plus the Interest. It's their money already and the US has international treaties to honor. Would you want them to seize Burnham money and not give it to Cheddi? And even Netanyahu is ashamedly quiet now that he sees Iran is further away from nuclear weapons than when he went to the UN nd the US Congress some time ago. that's the power of sanctions and falling oil prices.

What Professional argument he refers to?

Ok....class adjourned.

Were you on crack or just tired. The man spoke of the effects of NAFTA and the shortcomings of TTP. Man ah stupid yuh stupid suh!!!!!!!!  No ? necessary.

Hillary jealous of Trump young wife. The man get class with women. 

Cobra posted:

Hillary jealous of Trump young wife. The man get class with women. 

I have to give him credit with the Homan thing.

How many of you have a woman who shared the look of her patax to the public?

How many presidents have/had the same?

Nehru posted:

Cobra posted:

Hillary jealous of Trump young wife. The man get class with women. 

I have to give him credit with the Homan thing.

Can you imagine how Trump wife will decorate the white house with penthouse flavor and slot machines under the Christmas tree. Uh, lala.

Nahhh that wouldn't happen. I seriously doubt the Clintons would be inviting the Trumps to the White House during Christmas.

Bill and Hillary were all decked out and in attendance at Donald and Melania's wedding.  After the elections, nothing will change. 

GNI dead these days, calling Bibi.

Nehru posted:

Were you on crack or just tired. The man spoke of the effects of NAFTA and the shortcomings of TTP. Man ah stupid yuh stupid suh!!!!!!!!  No ? necessary.

What exactly did the man say about NAFTA? Repeat what he said and then think about it for a moment.

Repeat what are the shortcomings of the TPP? But, before that did you read what I said about Trade Agreements in particular and the TPP in particular?

Trading has always been a matter of success of humanity. D_G make only bread but he needs shoes. He cannot make breads and shoes. Hid buddy Yuji makes shoes only and no bread and he also needs bread. So they trade....yes, that word trade.

Now trade after the Great depression was un-free, because everybody became protectionists. Yes, they protect their own industries - subsidies, lower exchange rates, and tax the bejeesus out of imports so these industries can survive the multi-natonals. The GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) after the 2nd world war was one of the institutions (the others being the UN - succeeding the League of Nations, he World Bank and the IMF) that sought to make the world a better place. Comparative advantage became the word. If India makes garments cheaper, let them export it to the rest of the world and if America makes Caterpillar machinery better and cheaper than anybody then let them trade. The GATT brought down tariffs on average fro m35% to 5%. Guess who benefited - you the consumer. That's how you can go to Liberty Ave on a freezing January Saturday and buy raspberries. China joined in Bush's 1st year 2001

Now for some facts about jobs Nehru. If Trump was a businessman in a service or technology industry he would understand that Free Trade Agreements accounted for about half million jobs out of 5 and a half million factory jobs lost from 2000 to 2010. The rest was lost because of technology. BTW, the same factories kept up and even in some case produced more with all this less labor. It's called automation Nehru.

This is the one thing about Obama that people don't realize and it's not lost on Hillary. While you push renewable energy to get more better-paying jobs Obama is focused on mitigating the inevitable income inequality than trying to swim against the tide of technology and automation. Republicans take the opposite tack.

So who's the jackass and who's the donkey!!!

Kari is wrong and is lying once again again:

This is what Trump is exposing:

Mexico automatically charges the USA 16 PERCENT of taxes for certain good exported from the USA under this "Trade Deal"

USA charges ZERO taxes for certain goods imported under this "Trade Deal."

Fair Trade my A**.

Trump must bring up all of what Riff is mentioning. It was Hilary who started the mud slinging at the first debate.

Trump needs to return the favour.

Hillary has a glass house. Old people say that you should not be throwing stones when you have a glass house.

Yuji, you sound like lying Donald - trumped-up trickle down lies.All tariffs are negotiated based on the same tariff code. So America garment exports for instance (let's say high-end expensive suits) to Mexico and Canada get taxed at the same percentage as the garments (mostly inexpensive sorts) imported from Mexico or Canada. The USA only waves tariffs under Agreements that are industry-specific and under bilateral arrangements and outside of Trade Agreements. It's a wonky topic so you won't understand, but consumers all over the world save billions every year and so can afford stuff. Jobs, on the other hand has a cause greater than Trade comparative advantage - do you think Americans will work for $1 a day to make Levi Jeans? - and it's called technology. Automation will make job losses even more stark in years to come and that's why governance is going to be different from the Conservative Republican notion winner-takes-all and survival-of-the-fittest. You don't want pitchforks outside the gates of a gated property and you still have to travel the same road as those people with pitchforks. That's why in the decades to come, theories of government will change. Low taxes and government get out of the way is so 20th century. It will be how much industries will contribute to a National Fund to pay you for leisure. The world is changing and that has always been the problem with Conservatives - you have to drag them on equality for Blacks, for equality for women, for same-sex rights, for abortion, for freedom from church. Yuji lives in that world and he continues to peddle Trump's lies about trade. TPP will protect child labor, working conditions, the environment, cheating currency rates, cheating government subsidies, stop China from eating up Asia. Yuji knows nothing about Free Trade Agreements.

You can write all the shyte like you did above but the truth is:

Mexico imposes 16 Percent taxes on certain American Imports.

America imposes ZERO taxes in certain Mexican Imports.

You are full of shyte and please stop lying once again.

There is no Fair Trade with Mexico and USA. Trump is speaking the truth.

Kari, please stop lying.

yuji22 posted:

You can write all the shyte like you did above but the truth is:

Mexico imposes 16 Percent taxes on certain American Imports.

America imposes ZERO taxes in certain Mexican Imports.

You are full of shyte and please stop lying once again.

There is no Fair Trade with Mexico and USA. Trump is speaking the truth.

Kari, please stop lying.

 

All you have to do is to produce the evidence. Compare the 16% to 0%. I dare you.

Mexico imposes retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods in response to suspension of NAFTA trucking program

Overview

The Mexican government recently imposed import tariffs on $2.4 billion of U.S. goods after the United States suspended a program allowing Mexican trucks to deliver goods across the border. When the U.S. closed the southern border to Mexican trucking in March, Mexico promised to retaliate. Mexico has released a list of 89 U.S. products that will face tariffs of 10 percent to 45 percent.

Background

The economic minister for Mexico, Gerardo Ruiz Mateos, has announced tariffs on approximately 90 items from 40 states. As reported by various news sources, U.S. Republican lawmakers said Mexico would impose tariffs on farm goods such as rice, beef, wheat and beans. In fact, the published list of products includes many other types of products, including wine, household goods and paper products.

Mateos said that halting the trucking program violated the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the United States, Mexico and Canada, which was enacted 15 years ago amid opposition from U.S. labor unions. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which represents U.S. truckers, proclaimed on the union's website that the suspension of the trucking program was a victory. Critics said the program threatened national security and American jobs. However, the American Trucking Associations and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, both trade groups, supported the program and protested its withdrawal.

On the same day that the Mexican tariffs were imposed, the White House responded that the Obama administration would work with Congress to propose legislation creating a new trucking project that will meet the legitimate concerns of Congress and its NAFTA commitments. Mexico's decision to impose tariffs on U.S. products was not taken lightly. For the past 15 years, three successive Mexican administrations have worked to obtain U.S. respect for its NAFTA obligation to allow long-haul trucks across the border. In 1998, Mexico initiated a complaint against the U.S. under NAFTA's dispute settlement procedures, claiming that the U.S. government had violated its commitment to treat Mexican trucking firms in a non-discriminatory manner. A NAFTA tribunal unanimously agreed in 2001 that the U.S. government had violated its commitments under the agreement. The panel ruled not that the U.S. government needed to open its market to all Mexican trucks, but that it must consider qualified applications case by case, rather than assuming all Mexican trucks and their drivers were by definition unsafe.

In 2007, Mexico and the U.S agreed to a pilot program that permitted a limited number of Mexican trucking carriers into the U.S. under rigid safety regulations. The 18-month program challenged the anti-competition Teamsters union's claims that Mexican carriers were not as safe as their U.S. counterparts. Last month the U.S. trucking union successfully lobbied Congress to insert a provision suspending the trucking program into the $410 billion spending bill.

Comment

Given the state of the U.S. and Mexican economies, this trade war will be extremely detrimental for western and southwestern states such as California, Texas and Arizona. Mexico is the U.S.' third largest trading partner, and according to the Wall Street Journal, the new tariffs will affect some $2.4 billion in goods across 40 states. California, an important supplier of fresh fruits, dried fruits and nuts to Mexico, will be hit the hardest.

A 45 percent duty will be imposed on table grapes at the Mexican border; almonds, juices and wine, among other agricultural products, will pay 20 percent. Some 90 percent of Christmas-tree exports from California and 65 percent from Oregon go to Mexico. The volume of these exports will likely decrease beneath a 20 percent tariff.

Under the new tariffs, American pears, which are mostly shipped from Oregon and Washington states, now face a 20 percent tariff, as do a host of paper products from the Pacific Northwest and Wisconsin. Southern and western states will not be the only ones affected by the trade war. New York's $24 million annual exports in personal hygiene products or its exports of $250 million in precious-metals jewelry will not be as competitive after it pays a 20 percent tariff. Nor will Wisconsin's scrap battery industry, which exports $128 million annually to Mexico.

Background on NAFTA

The North American Free Trade Agreement established a schedule for the gradual phasing out of tariffs and the elimination of trade barriers, with the main goal of expanding trade and investment among Canada, Mexico and the United States. NAFTA's adoption and eventual implementation on Jan. 1, 1994, has led to a marked increase in multilateral trade and investment among the three countries. Canada is now Mexico's second-biggest export market, and Mexico is our third. Canadian exports to Mexico have quadrupled since 1993.

During the same time period, cross-border investment has also dramatically increased. Canadian investment in Mexico, for instance, has grown to about $5 billion, 20 times what it was in 1990. From 1990 to 2003, Canadian investment in the U.S. more than tripled to $198 billion, and U.S. investments in Canada soared 150 percent to $215 billion.

With the cost of imported U.S. products now higher, Mexicans will likely substitute products from Canada, Europe and Latin America for these U.S. brands. According to the Commerce Department, in 2008, the U.S. and Mexico had $368 billion in total trade, making Mexico the third-largest U.S. trading partner after Canada and China. While Americans wait for Washington to refocus on its NAFTA commitments, U.S. exporters will lose significant market share as a result of the Mexican tariffs.

Addressing the urgency of these retaliatory tariffs, President Barack Obama met with Mexican President Felipe Calderon on April 16, 2009, and some news sources have reported that President Obama may be on the verge of reviving the controversial cross-border trucking program.

For more information on NAFTA, cross-border trucking or transportation issues, please contact Brian Del Gatto (Partner-Connecticut and White Plains) at brian.delgatto@wilsonelser.com or 203.388.9100; or Aide C. Ontiveros (Of Counsel-Los Angeles) at aide.ontiveros@wilsonelser.com or 213.443.5100.
View more Client Alerts

Oi yugi, you remind me of a banna who went hunting with his French buddy. They came upon an awesome chick stepping out of the lake, pair of white breasts just a- glistening in the sun as the water trickled down...down passing her fresh Pretty Rose.

The Frenchman remarked ""YUMMMMMMYYYYY.... I'd love to eat that"

The banna upped his gun and shot her.

How does this story remind me off you you ask?

Well it's really easy ma friend, you lil stupidy. You are forgiven.

I state facts. I could care less about what other posters think about me.

Trump has to dominate the debate by painting Hillary as being in the pockets of the wealthy few. He has to attack from the start and keep attacking Jalil style. That is the only way he will win.

What would you have done in that case yugi, if you were one of the hunters?

Prashad posted:

Trump has to dominate the debate by painting Hillary as being in the pockets of the wealthy few. He has to attack from the start and keep attacking Jalil style. That is the only way he will win.

Hillary will dominate the debate by telling the people exactly what she's said, more or less, that Trump is in the pockets of the poor, those with businesses trying to feed their family and their workers families...ketch ma drift?

Prashad posted:

Trump has to dominate the debate by painting Hillary as being in the pockets of the wealthy few. He has to attack from the start and keep attacking Jalil style. That is the only way he will win.

Which in fact is true.

Hillary has friends in the same lobby which are already in place and supported by all governments (Especially the crooked Democrats) to screw the poor who bend over like those on GNI who are asking Hillary for more.

Ask the crooked Democrats what they have done for poor African Americans lately. I was in total shock as I visited a few African American communities.  No one cares for these people except the crooked Democrats who throw scraps at them for a few votes.

I can now understand why those who are blessed with wealth remain wealthy because the poor promote their own demise.

yuji22 posted:

I state facts. I could care less about what other posters think about me.

This is the umpteenth time you're using this expression, and it is really stale like a weeks-old coconut bun. As your friend, I suggest you use a variation like "I could not care more".

Gilbakka posted:

yuji22 posted:

I state facts. I could care less about what other posters think about me.

This is the umpteenth time you're using this expression, and it is really stale like a weeks-old coconut bun. As your friend, I suggest you use a variation like "I could not care more".

Thanks Gil. Will use another line next time.

yuji22 posted:

Gilbakka posted:

yuji22 posted:

I state facts. I could care less about what other posters think about me.

This is the umpteenth time you're using this expression, and it is really stale like a weeks-old coconut bun. As your friend, I suggest you use a variation like "I could not care more".

Thanks Gil. Will use another line next time.

I got a line for you use

GOOD TING PPP LOST.