they did the research that i just abstracted. good article.
basic point is that he can't talk it down forever.
https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/usd/6155-anti-dollar-rhetoric-is-responsible-for-the-greenback-s-current-plight-say-goldman-sacs
Sunday, February 5, 2017
this works through the contradiction properly.
trump claims he wants to lower the dollar. and, this would be in the benefit of us workers, at the expense of investors. of course, i am aligned with workers and not with investors. the fact that i'm a canadian complicates things, but only mildly - a lower dollar is in my self-interest and i would support policies to weaken the greenback.
great, right?
...but the problem is that his policies are starkly inflationary.
he says one thing and he does another. and, the thing we know about trump is that it's what he does that is substantive, not what he says.
now, he might think he can push through inflationary policies and then talk the dollar down. but, this is probably a rationalization.
the smart analysis is that the rate of increase may slow slightly, but the trendline will remain in place.
http://business.financialpost.com/investing/investing-pro/all-donald-trump-talk-aside-the-u-s-dollar-rally-will-continue
trump claims he wants to lower the dollar. and, this would be in the benefit of us workers, at the expense of investors. of course, i am aligned with workers and not with investors. the fact that i'm a canadian complicates things, but only mildly - a lower dollar is in my self-interest and i would support policies to weaken the greenback.
great, right?
...but the problem is that his policies are starkly inflationary.
he says one thing and he does another. and, the thing we know about trump is that it's what he does that is substantive, not what he says.
now, he might think he can push through inflationary policies and then talk the dollar down. but, this is probably a rationalization.
the smart analysis is that the rate of increase may slow slightly, but the trendline will remain in place.
http://business.financialpost.com/investing/investing-pro/all-donald-trump-talk-aside-the-u-s-dollar-rally-will-continue
...and, fwiw, i still support ranked ballots and will continue to advocate for them in future election cycles.
it's going to be awkward when the election comes up in 2019 and nobody is promoting what is clearly the superior system, leaving advocates to point out that the governing party had the best idea, and won, but wouldn't implement it.
it's going to be awkward when the election comes up in 2019 and nobody is promoting what is clearly the superior system, leaving advocates to point out that the governing party had the best idea, and won, but wouldn't implement it.
could california defend itself, though?
well, it has natural defenses in the rockies that would actually be pretty hard to penetrate. it would be a defensive game, no doubt. but, with a couple of strategic moves (like air defenses...and i don't know what exists....), it would be almost impossible for washington to assert control.
well, it has natural defenses in the rockies that would actually be pretty hard to penetrate. it would be a defensive game, no doubt. but, with a couple of strategic moves (like air defenses...and i don't know what exists....), it would be almost impossible for washington to assert control.
if i was a modern nihilist republican, i'd probably jump at the opportunity to kick california out of the country.
i've made this argument before: canadians lean overwhelmingly democrat, although you have to realize that it's entirely cynical. we're not actually democrats, we just can't stand the republicans. but, that's exactly why we're so much safer under a republican administration. canadians are in the end kind of fatalist about our eventual annexation by the united states; we value our sovereignty, but we can see the reality in front of us. let me be clear: it will not be a republican that annexes canada. they'd be annexing away the presidency for at least a generation, and probably sentencing themselves to single payer health care.
for the same reason, the republicans have to look at a map and conclude that they'd love to expel california. and, what other outcome could the president have in mind when he threatens to withhold federal funds from the single largest contributor to the treasury?
that lincoln fetish might be more accurate than anybody realized.
....although, realize that that comes from somebody that thinks that lincoln was actually a bumbling nincompoop that launched an unnecessary war that needlessly killed millions (and knows that he never intended to abolish slavery, and that it wasn't actually an outcome of the war - that this is all myth).
it's a scary thought. but the american mythology is just that. and, the country is due for a civil war.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/05/trump-threatens-to-defund-california-in-fight-against-sanctuary-cities.html
i've made this argument before: canadians lean overwhelmingly democrat, although you have to realize that it's entirely cynical. we're not actually democrats, we just can't stand the republicans. but, that's exactly why we're so much safer under a republican administration. canadians are in the end kind of fatalist about our eventual annexation by the united states; we value our sovereignty, but we can see the reality in front of us. let me be clear: it will not be a republican that annexes canada. they'd be annexing away the presidency for at least a generation, and probably sentencing themselves to single payer health care.
for the same reason, the republicans have to look at a map and conclude that they'd love to expel california. and, what other outcome could the president have in mind when he threatens to withhold federal funds from the single largest contributor to the treasury?
that lincoln fetish might be more accurate than anybody realized.
....although, realize that that comes from somebody that thinks that lincoln was actually a bumbling nincompoop that launched an unnecessary war that needlessly killed millions (and knows that he never intended to abolish slavery, and that it wasn't actually an outcome of the war - that this is all myth).
it's a scary thought. but the american mythology is just that. and, the country is due for a civil war.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/05/trump-threatens-to-defund-california-in-fight-against-sanctuary-cities.html
i was legitimately planning on heading to the show tonight. the vocals
did start to get a little grating, as expected, but i haven't been out in
a while and it was supposed to be nice out tonight, so it was kind of just meant as an excuse to get out of the house...
when i double checked the forecast last night, i learned that the cold front was coming in a few hours early. that meant that what i was expecting to be a mild walk a few degrees above freezing was instead going to be a walk through a punishing north wind, and i pretty much decided against it at that moment. i'd be dealing with a -15 windchill for the final leg. yuck. my blankie is far more inviting than that...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpNn1nht0_8
i could have decided otherwise if they shifted the weather a third time at the last minute, and these late winter blizzards can end up that way more often than not. see, you've got these warm pacific air masses clashing with these outbursts of arctic air, and when they really clash it becomes hard to predict which one is going to overpower. the weather forecast could, in the end, just simply be wrong: we might end up with a nice night, after all.
but, then i slept in.
worse, i was really only interested in the second band, and would have probably left a few minutes into the headliner. in situations like that, i will give the headliner a chance, but it just never works out. even if i wanted to brave the weather (and i don't....), it's too late to get going.
this is what i'm missing:
as mentioned, it was more experiential: a night out. i'm not really a fan, and this is quite a ways out of my normal sphere of interest. i'll survive.
the cloud nothings show on tuesday is closer to my normal area of musical interest.
i was supposed to clean some time this weekend and haven't yet. i guess that will need to happen soon. but i need to eat. and i guess i'll just get back to the rebuild for the rest of the night.
when i double checked the forecast last night, i learned that the cold front was coming in a few hours early. that meant that what i was expecting to be a mild walk a few degrees above freezing was instead going to be a walk through a punishing north wind, and i pretty much decided against it at that moment. i'd be dealing with a -15 windchill for the final leg. yuck. my blankie is far more inviting than that...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpNn1nht0_8
i could have decided otherwise if they shifted the weather a third time at the last minute, and these late winter blizzards can end up that way more often than not. see, you've got these warm pacific air masses clashing with these outbursts of arctic air, and when they really clash it becomes hard to predict which one is going to overpower. the weather forecast could, in the end, just simply be wrong: we might end up with a nice night, after all.
but, then i slept in.
worse, i was really only interested in the second band, and would have probably left a few minutes into the headliner. in situations like that, i will give the headliner a chance, but it just never works out. even if i wanted to brave the weather (and i don't....), it's too late to get going.
this is what i'm missing:
as mentioned, it was more experiential: a night out. i'm not really a fan, and this is quite a ways out of my normal sphere of interest. i'll survive.
the cloud nothings show on tuesday is closer to my normal area of musical interest.
i was supposed to clean some time this weekend and haven't yet. i guess that will need to happen soon. but i need to eat. and i guess i'll just get back to the rebuild for the rest of the night.
this was the dominant influence on the guitar concerto i finished in early 2015.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stiRLvlGIaI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stiRLvlGIaI
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)