Particularly harsh cartoons but if the shoe fits then post.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Time for Israel to declare her own borders? (See 1 and 1a below.)
IDF says it thwarted Hamas, prevented ‘victory picture’ of breached border fence. https://tiny.iavian.net/md3l
And:
Definition of confidence? Borders on arrogance?(See 1a below.)
Gun supporter unloads on city council: I am the majority – GOPUSA
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A contrary view with which I tend to agree. (See 2 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Fake news for liberals and facts for conservatives. Which category do you fit in and this is why I maintain a wall and other methods of intervention pay for themselves because they persist for years, hopefully.https://youtu.be/2u4Vlgr2iHs
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Everyone from American farmers to American industrialists acknowledge China has not been playing straight. They are rigging markets, taking advantage of having been brought into the world's trading agreements but when Trump decided to do something about it, saying enough is enough, the mass media attack him for doing harm and investors understandably flee the market fearing a trade war.
Rather than support his moves the mass media focuses on how we are being hurt and this undercuts any effectiveness because we demonstrate our weakness and willingness to cave. Why not report on our resolve?
If taking corrective action against harm is beyond logic then I assume the mass media would have us sit back and enjoy the continued pain of excessive tariffs levied against our products, theft of our intellectual property and continued abuse by China and others.
In other words, since you cannot stop rape just sit back and enjoy? I seriously doubt that is the feminist's message and why should it be America's?
I am not smart enough to have an answer but I know continued allowance of bad behaviour will beget increased bad behaviour and there comes a time when such must be addressed/challenged. What makes the current dilemma more difficult is that former administrations and Congresses willingly ignored China's perfidious abuse and cowardly looked the other way and thus, when Trump takes appropriate actions, he is the villain for dealing with a trade cancer that has metastasized.
It is as if we accuse the doctor who correctly diagnoses the illness and seeks/prescribes appropriate action preferring doctors who failed by ignoring the reality..
I suspect, in time, the issue will be resolved by some mutual agreement but until that occurs it is only natural for China to fight back in their desire to protect their previous and ongoing theft.
What Trump must not do is back down because that will only worsen the problem. He must give only when he gets something for the near term pain and suffering this confrontation will cause.
Trump declared he would drain the swamp and by swamp he did not only mean the one in D.C. There are swamp issues all over the world and he is addressing the ones in Mexico, N Korea and Iran. They too must be drained or we will regret the consequences which can only lead to a world ravaged by constant wars which will ultimately turn nuclear and America a border-less nation.
Feeding/ignoring bullies simply increases their appetite.Lamentably, we always attack the one who addresses the issues head on, seeks solutions and exempt/reward the ones who have been stirring the pot serving their own interests by cheating.
Perhaps this is natural human behaviour but I find it both stupid and disgusting when America willingly allows itself to be a "patsy." (See 2a below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) It is time Israel declared her borders
By Devon Sper
Recent violations of Israel’s border by an Iranian drone and mass protests by Hamas supporters in Gaza highlight a broader problem: Israel has never actually declared her borders. While the 1948 armistice line and 1967 cease fire lines became temporary de facto borders Israel never declared either as her official border, nor did any country recognize them as such. Her failure to do has left a vacuum, that Israel’s enemies have repeatedly exploited to undermine her legitimacy, for a country without borders is not a country.
Israel has avoided declaring her borders because she feared this would preclude peace negotiations. Israel assumed her Palestinian enemies would gradually abandon their maximalist demands as they got to know and trust her via small steps towards peace. In fact, just the opposite occurred. Palestinian expectations were continually raised by Israel’s failure to insist on reciprocity; in fact, she did not even insist that they honor previous agreements. Today there is no peace process, so Israel has nothing to lose by declaring her borders. Far from precluding peace, Israel’s declaration of her borders is its only logical starting point.
The Palestinians have never been shy about declaring their aims or claiming what they believe to be rightfully theirs. It is past time that Israel did the same. Were she to do so, her citizens would feel an increased sense of security in finally knowing where their country begins and where it ends. Israeli soldiers would at least know what border they are to risk their lives defending.
Even Israel’s enemies would know where she stands, and what border they are not supposed to violate. Israel cannot credibly accuse Iran, Hamas, or Hezbollah of violating Israeli sovereignty when she has never actually declared the territory over which she considers herself sovereign.
The Israeli left likes to refer to the 1967 cease-fire lines as Israel’s “internationally recognized” border, but in fact no country has ever recognized them. Calls for Israel to return to them, therefore, ring hollow. On the other hand, the United States under President Trump would likely recognize almost any border Israel declares. The President is highly sympathetic to Israel and sees right through the whole Palestinian charade. Moreover, securing and enforcing the U.S. border has been one of President Trump’s primary objectives; he would not object if Israel sought to do likewise.
The United States and other powers today well understand that the endemic violence and chaos in the Arab world are not solely, or even primarily, caused by the Palestinian issue or the location of Israel’s borders. They know that nothing they, or Israel, do will turn the Middle East into a peaceful place. But while the delusion of a suddenly peaceful Middle East is over, they would like to see greater stability. For this reason, it is ultimately in the interest of every country to recognize a declared Israeli border as the de facto border, and inevitably, as Israel’s de jure border. Middle East stability, and not the Palestinian fantasy of destroying Israel, is the overriding world interest, and in the end, interest dictates policy.
But of course, the prerequisite for international recognition of Israel’s borders is that she declares them. There is no practical or moral reason why Israel need wait for permission from unrepentant enemies sworn to her destruction. Israel’s adversaries’ objection was never about the location of Israel’s borders; it was opposition to her existence in principle. Declaring her border is the most effective antidote to her enemies’ relentless attempts to delegitimize Israel.
Having sacrificed so much, for so long, defending their country against ruthless enemies bent on her annihilation, the Israeli people have earned the right to unilaterally decide, and declare, their borders. When they do, they will find that every fair-minded person understands their decision, and all of us who love Israel will defend it.
Devin Sper was born and raised in New York and lived in Israel for 10 years. He holds a degree in Jewish History from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and served in the Israel Defense Forces. Devin Sper is the author of The Future of Israel.
1a)
1a)
He gives her a quick glance then casually looks at his new Apple watch for a moment.
The woman notices this and asks, "Is your date running late?"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The intrigued woman says, "A state-of-the-art watch? What's so special about it?"
He says, "It uses alpha waves to talk to me telepathically."
The lady says, "What's it telling you now?"
"Well, it says you're not wearing any panties."
The woman giggles and replies, "Well it must be broken because I am wearing panties!"
The Navy man smirks, taps his watch and says, "Damn thing's an hour fast."And that, my friends.......is Confidence
2)
Here's Why the 'China Trade War' Is Good News for Investors
You've probably heard a lot of media noise about China and President Donald Trump – and the possibility of a trade war.
Trump has said he will level tariffs on Chinese imports. The tariffs would amount to about $50 billion, especially focused on technology products. This comes after his March 1 announcement that imported steel – one of China's major exports – will now be taxed at 25%.
Now, China has threatened to retaliate with $3 billion worth of tariffs on U.S. goods.
How will this affect our China portfolio?
Many of our investments took a quick dip after Trump's announcements. Some of them are still struggling.
Here's my opinion today...
This is a great buying opportunity.
The financial markets are making a much bigger deal out of the tariffs than they should be... Investors were looking for a reason to sell stocks, and the tariffs made the perfect excuse.
As for the possibility of a trade war, that seems unlikely.
2a)
Punishing America First
Trump to Iowa: You’ll have to suffer while I force Xi Jinping to give in.
By The Editorial Board
Donald Trump and his advisers spent much of Friday telling everyone that the U.S. is not in a trade war with China, but investors weren’t buying it. Equity markets took a major header, falling by more than 2% across the board. Maybe investors are starting to look at the damage Mr. Trump may do to the Farm Belt states and to the GOP’s chances of holding Congress.
Mr. Trump raised the stakes late Thursday in his tariff showdown with Beijing, vowing to impose another $100 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods in light of its “unfair retaliation” after his initial $50 billion in tariffs. The latest target list still hasn’t been drawn up, and the silver-lining crowd is hoping that Mr. Trump was merely popping off as part of his negotiating strategy. Maybe that’s right. But then China popped off in return, saying it is ready to “forcefully” strike back if the new tariffs are imposed.
That’s the problem with protectionism. The other side can strike back, and businesses and markets don’t know when the politicians will decide to stop pounding their chests.
***
We’ve been warning since Mr. Trump first emerged as a candidate that his nationalist economics should be taken seriously. This is one policy he seems truly to believe in, he has empowered protectionist advisers, and previous Congresses have given a President wide latitude to act unilaterally. Trade was always the biggest economic risk of the Trump Presidency, and now we’re living through his punch-first policy as he tries to stare down Xi Jinping.
Mr. Trump doesn’t even seem to mind if the tariffs do some economic damage while he’s supposedly fixing the U.S. trade deficit. “I’m not saying there won’t be a little pain, but the market has gone up 40%, 42%, so we might lose a little bit of it. But we’re going to have a much stronger country when we’re finished,” the President told a New York radio show on Friday. Nice to know it will all turn out for the best.
Meanwhile, much of that pain will fall on American agriculture, not least the Farm Belt states that Mr. Trump carried in 2016. Apparently he thinks he has them in the bag for 2020 as well, though he might want to reconsider if the tariff wars continue.
China targeted the $14 billion of U.S. soybean exports a year to China, about half of the U.S. crop, with a 25% tariff. Chinese consumers will pay more for pork because the beans are used mainly to feed pigs. But U.S. farmers will suffer more if Argentine and Brazilian soybean producers snatch American market share.
The financial hit would come at a rough time in the farm states, which have had to cope with low commodity prices for several years. The nearby table shows how several agriculture states underperformed in income gains last year. Iowa, which Mr. Trump carried by 9.5% in 2016, finished 49th out of 50. As a swing state that Barack Obama carried twice, Iowa could easily swing back in 2020.
Farm-state Republicans are beginning to notice. “China is guilty of many things, but the President has no actual plan to win right now. He’s threatening to light American agriculture on fire,” said Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse on Thursday. “Let’s absolutely take on Chinese bad behavior, but with a plan that punishes them instead of us. This is the dumbest possible way to do this.”
Someone in the White House seems to know the risks because its press shop spent Friday sending out missives telling farmers not to worry. Mr. Trump’s $100 billion tariff threat on Thursday included that he had told the secretary of agriculture “to use his broad authority to implement a plan to protect our farmers and agriculture interests.”
What’s Secretary Sonny Perdue going to do—buy up all the soybeans China no longer buys? Order farmers to slaughter their pigs to produce less pork that will also be subject to Chinese tariffs?
The basic economic problem with trade protectionism is that it is a political intervention that distorts markets. One political intervention leads to another, and the cumulative consequence is higher prices, less investment and slower economic growth.
Mr. Obama spent eight years interfering in the domestic economy for his political purposes, and the resulting slow growth was one reason Mr. Trump won. The Republican tax reform and deregulation have put the economy on a faster growth path, but Mr. Trump’s restrictions on trade, and on immigration amid a labor shortage, are threats to that progress.
China’s trade abuses need to be addressed, but Mr. Trump’s tariffs first strategy risks punishing America first. He—and we—had better hope Mr. Xi is willing to bargain.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
