i mean, maybe you should be reading "hush money" as "payment for services rendered".

i really don't think that there's a lot of people left in america in 2018 that are going to get particularly upset about the president having consensual sex out of wedlock.

but, he has a lot to gain in a young male voting demographic by projecting the image that he's regularly fucking porn stars on the side.

i mean, at this point, you need to make a choice: either this is all bullshit to boost his public image, or there's enough evidence to lay prostitution charges.

i'm actually of the opinion that these porn star stories are fabrications to try and make trump look like a badass - that he thinks banging porn stars will actually win him votes.

it trudeau reacts by exacerbating the situation, and signs a bilateral deal with mexico that is good for shareholders at the expense of workers, we will understand where his head was the whole time.

if he takes a step back, and insists on getting tougher with mexico, we'll know he was just misguided and clueless and frankly straight up ignorant.

kinda can't win.

shouldda offered to dissolve from the start....

your job goes to mexico.

the company pays lower wages, and consequently gets higher profits.

that comes out in terms of dividends, which go to shareholders - like a young justin trudeau in the 90s.

and, like his own kids over the upcoming years.

so, when a justin trudeau stands up for a nafta, it is easy to understand why - the wealth trickled up, and he's exactly who it tricked up to.

there is absolutely no question at all that ordinary canadians will be way better off with a bilateral deal with the united states than they will be with a three way trade deal that includes mexico. but, it is not clear to me if trudeau doesn't understand this or is in fact behaving in the interests of the investor class - that 1% - that benefits from the existing arrangement. he is, himself a trust fund kid.

if you lost a job because of nafta, trudeau was in the class of people that made money from it.

we will have an answer to that question when we see whether he seeks to redefine the trade relationship with mexico or not. i would hope that he will realize that a nafta without the united states would be a foolish thing for canada to carry through with.

....as a tpp without the united states is also a foolish thing for canada to carry through with.

but, we'll see the answer to this, shortly.

i never thought i'd see a day when the republican president of the united states had a better plan for canada than the liberal prime minister does, but here we are.

so, that's april.

as expected, it was a little shorter, and i expect that to hold for the rest of 2014.

the market is not opening up like i hoped, but i do have some showings on the weekend.

back to looking for the day...

it's not like the stock market follows some law of gravity or something.

but, the policy right now is money destruction. and, that means divestment, and deflation.

if you want the dow at 30,000, it's not an impossibility, but you need to print the money that takes us up to 30,000 tokens worth of credit, first.

and, if you insist on destroying money, instead, you're going to deflate the bubble.

to be clear: there's no reason you can't inflate the dow to 40,000, 50,000 - 100,000. but, it's a question of how much money you want to print, to do it.

what you can't do is create paper wealth and destroy it at the same time.

i actually think that you'd get a very strong response if you set up a program to rebuild syria and asked the refugees to volunteer.

i think they'd jump at it.

and, i think they'd thank us for it.

i want to be clear, i'm not saying that we should just round the refugees up and fly them back and yell "see ya later" as we drop them out in parachutes.

we should train them in construction & send them back with bags of concrete, beams of steel and hard hats galore.

we should teach them how to demine, and let them loose.

give them shovels & cranes & other tools to pull back the rubble with.

i just think we need to redefine solidarity. we can't absorb the whole world,. and, even if we take in hundreds of thousands of them, it doesn't rebuild the country, which remains a pile of rubble. so, i want solidarity to mean helping rebuild destroyed cities, helping to fight gangs, dismantling systems of oppression...

the old saying is to teach a man to fish. i think that generalizes to teaching people to fight, and teaching people to rebuild.

this isn't outside of our history, either. remember the marshall plan? well, understand that it wasn't charity - unless you understand it as corporate welfare. building things means awarding contracts....

trudeau should just make the carbon tax federal.