Jump to content

TahoeHorn

banned
  • Posts

    617
  • Joined

Everything posted by TahoeHorn

  1. I track the appointment of federal judges mostly using four websites: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_judges_appointed_by_Donald_Trump https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/executive_calendar/xcalv.pdf http://judicialnominations.org/ The Trump Administration may have as many as 200 ARTICLE III federal judges confirmed in his first two years, but has has only 33 confirmed to date. (Obama appointed 329 in eight years.) However, the process appears to be rolling. There are 70 names in the hopper and 8 more hitting any day. The hearing process has been slow but it looks like 6 circuit court nominees and 29 district court nominees may come up for a vote very soon, dumping 35 from the hopper and getting the number up to 68 or so. I am unclear how the midyear election process will affect things. Maybe things slow down. And if the Dems win control of the Senate God help us. If the GOP keeps control then we'll get to 200 easy by the end of 2019.
  2. Watch: https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/4/28/17293694/nfl-draft-udfa-signings-tracker-results-2018
  3. It's better to be an undrafted free agent than a seventh round pick if you can sign a free agent contract. And Poona will be able to get a contract. I've been rooting for Williams, Dickson and Ford.
  4. I don't like Cleveland - the team or the city. And I enjoy the high comedy of their terminal stupidity. But despite all that I'm rooting for them to get their act together and become a team that can win four games a season. It's not good for the league to have such screwups. They need to quit being overly cute. Just draft good players with success on the field. Don't go for that gem that only they see. Don't go for that flawed player with amazing upside. Forego the great pick with big downside and get football players who aren't royal fuckups (e.g. Manziel).
  5. I'm always intrigued by players who could go anywhere - players with prominent attributes and at least one prominent drawback. And nobody knows how GMs will weight the factors. This draft has a lot of those kinds of players. A big portion of the UT players fall into that category. Williams - but he regressed as a Soph Jefferson - but he can't think Dickson - but he's a Punter Hill - but he likes weed Ford - but he's short Elliott seems "normal" to me. I think we have a good idea where he'll go. The others could go in a wide range depending on how much some GM is willing to wink at the shortcoming. Texas players obviously aren't the only ones like this. Josh Allen looks like the most prominent one. Rosen is maybe second. Then Mayfield. Usually I am prejudiced in favor of the guy who can play. I have a great aversion to "problems", and a disdain for potential. But sometime you gotta gamble.
  6. I've noticed that players who shoot a 10 under for the round move up the leaderboard. Yowza.
  7. Zach Johnson is going nuts. 8 under through 14. 10 under for the tourney.
  8. Four birdies works, but he lost eight strokes on bad holes. Four over. Ouch.
  9. It seems that there is a golf tournament this week. Who knew?
  10. You seem to refuse to give me your advice. You only talk about what you wouldn't do.
  11. I voted for five I think, but I wouldn't support just any law. For example I'd support expanding background checks but there would be a lot of proposals I wouldn't support. It needs to have tyhe right exceptions, cost and so on.
  12. I thought I did. I'll do it again. My strategic objectives are to significantly raise the GDP. I'd do that by selling high value stuff and buying low value. Like an individual who has a high value product like brain surgery I'd try to maximize my brain surgery revenue. I wouldn't use resources for mowing lawns and cleaning toilets. I'd buy that. And cars and food. I'd buy it from places that would buy my brain surgery. If the folks of Possum Hollow won't buy my brain surgery even though it's better, or want to set a low price I'll use my purchases as leverage to get them to change. You can argue for free trade but you have to deal with the reality of places that buy somebody else's brain surgery because they buy their lawn services, or more likely, they protect their own inferior brain surgeon. These aren't hard and fast rules. There are many considerations to balance - fairness are the needs of people in this country who have low skills and find it hard to participate in high value industries are two biggies. I'd like free trade. But we don't let monopolies practice free trade. We don't allow slave labor. We have environmental considerations. We don't let an uncompetitive GM fail. My perfect solution would be much more free but I'm not ready to allow slave labor or Chinese monopolies. And if the EU is helping Airbus, (and it is) I'm not leaving Boeing to go against both the EU and Airbus. I'm not interested in your principles. I'm not interested in your critique of my thoughts. I'm interested in your specific advice on any negotiation - what you'd ask for, what you'd give up to get it and why you think that deal would sell to the party in question whomever (one country or many) you choose.
  13. Every country (or every major country and essentially every country) in the world has laws about how they treat goods bought from or sold to the US. We have treaties with them to try to improve the favorability of these laws. That's fact. These treaties are a deal. Whether we structure that deal by getting ten countries together or one is a detail. It may be important from one perspective. I'm more interested in what we want when we deal and what we are ready to give up when we start bargaining. For instance is it important that they don't use child labor? Or slave labor? What about the environmental rules? The list is long. If you want me to negotiate the purchase of a car for you I not only want to know what you'd like but I want to get a sense of how important it is to you. Is $1,000 for a sunroof too much or too little? I know you'd like it if it's free, but it won't be. You probably don't want it if it has to be custom made for $10,000. But where are you in between? When I hear about a deal like TPP people just say it's good or bad. Even me. I like the concept of TPP but I don't really know any details. A trade negotiator might say "We loved draft #57 but Japan hated it. When didn't like draft $58. Both the US and Japan liked #59, but Malaysia and Indonesia didn't. " So what were they asking for and what were they giving away? Don't give me some principles. Everybody in the room understood that a trade deal was good. But how fussy were we with, say, the child labor clause? Too fussy or not fussy enough? What would you have done differently? Give me ANY specifics. I would have put more emphasis on protecting our high value products and making them more competitive and less emphasis on protecting our uncompetitive low value industries, like steel, textiles, shoes, agriculture, and even autos. If every country makes men's shirts I'm not interested in getting concessions; I'm giving concessions to the countries that don't make much else. I want them to buy our products that only we make (e.g. social media, a specific movie). Or only a few countries can make (e,g, satellites, microprocessors). Instead of commenting on my proposal, or Trump's, tell me what you'd have told opur trade negotiators to do differently when negotiating TPP or NAFTA. Obviously whether you can get the other countries to do it is important so I want to hear about where you'd give to get what you want and why you think that would work. For example if you'd like stronger child labor features what do you think would be a concession that would get that feature in the treaty?
  14. My solutions focus on people, not guns. I have a number of solutions. The two biggest focus on the mentally ill and small children with, practically speaking, no parenting. I think an expert could look at 1,000 elementary school children and find the 25 or so that are a serious risk to society. Almost all the problems (e.g. mass shootings) from that cohort will come from those 25 kids. My solutions start dealing with those kids very, very differently. A stitch in time saves nine. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. There are some kids who are six years old we KNOW will be trouble. We KNOW it but we wait and deal with them when they're 16 and have committed a felony. Insanity.
  15. You couldn't be more wrong.
  16. bozo, I'm trying to address trade objectives, not Trump and not the nature of trading. I'm trying to get people to say what they would do instead of what they wouldn't do. I've failed. You don't seem to want to present an affirmative position on anything.
  17. When I lived in Douglas County, NV those of us on the Lake Tahoe side of the mountain piped our waste and drinking water to the desert side of the mountain. They partially processed the waste and used the water for irrigation, and the rest for fertilizer.
  18. I supported TPP. If you want to give advice on a TPP deal instead of a CHina deal I'll listen. Hell, I'll listen to anything which is more than "bad Trump" or "bad Tahoe". I knew that advice a long time ago.
  19. I've checked three sources, including the link I provided. The limit in Zone C in Alabama on does is one per day. (My brother says antlered deer were that way too about ten years ago. Now the limit on antlered deer is three.)
  20. And back to my original question: What does a good deal with China look like? Assume you're my trade expert and I'm Prez, and lean heavily on my experts. Give me your proposal. (I gave you mine.)
  21. Well, I am totally open to be educated. What major country has free trade?
  22. http://www.outdooralabama.com/season-and-bag-limits He shot his limit on antlered deer, and I'm led to believe there isn't a practical limit on does, but I don't know. Also, as I said, his wife hunts with him. I don't know how that works.
  23. That's reality. Everybody has tariffs. We have worked to get freeER trade but free trade is not possible. I'm advocating freeER trade. I'm not in dreamland.
  24. My comment is not about Trump. I have other comments (all critical) about his trade policies. In the general spectrum I am a free trader. But there is no such thing as free trade. We have trade deals. I was asking what a good deal looks like, per experts. My concept of a good deal is very different from Trump's, as I laid out. What is your concept of a good deal? Would you try to cut a deal to, say, buy men's shirts or blue jeans and sell aircraft? Would you try to cut a deal for better protection against pirating movies in exchange for lower tariffs on steel? I would. Even if you're a free trader you have to get a deal to fight counterfeiting our movies. What's the motive of the Chinese government to do so?
  25. You must have a third grade reading level. My position on trade is the polar opposite of Trump's. I advocate LOWER tariffs on steel. He just raised them.
×
×
  • Create New...