Trump Should Strike China Now Before They Get Any Stronger

[Bleipriester]

We will see what he is going to do. But calm down, it cannot get any worse, that´s for sure.

What are you talking about? Unemployment at 4.5%, market headed for 20,000, wages going up. But not to worry, Trump will reverse this terrible situation, and, by 2019 we can enjoy 15% unemployment and a market even below Bush's 6500.

Here comes why your funny figures are bs. For example, unemployed who are not searching for a job are not unemployed according to your government.

Tackling The Real Unemployment Rate: 12.6%


The true unemployed rate may be even more then the U6 figure if we are to assume further manipulations.

If you're not searching for a job, then you're not a burden on the state, so what difference does it make? Spending money and not taking, that's good.

Unemployed is unemployed and there is no hint that those discouraged are not on food stamps. Also, this is not the only group that the government excludes.

You're making assumption that these aren't people who just choose not to work because they have enough money not to do so.

No, you do! Discouraged means:
"741,000 discouraged workers – workers not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them"
Tackling The Real Unemployment Rate: 12.6%

So why do you argue when you did not even read the given source? Instead, you invent your own reality...

 

[frigidweirdo]

What are you talking about? Unemployment at 4.5%, market headed for 20,000, wages going up. But not to worry, Trump will reverse this terrible situation, and, by 2019 we can enjoy 15% unemployment and a market even below Bush's 6500.

Here comes why your funny figures are bs. For example, unemployed who are not searching for a job are not unemployed according to your government.

Tackling The Real Unemployment Rate: 12.6%


The true unemployed rate may be even more then the U6 figure if we are to assume further manipulations.

If you're not searching for a job, then you're not a burden on the state, so what difference does it make? Spending money and not taking, that's good.

Unemployed is unemployed and there is no hint that those discouraged are not on food stamps. Also, this is not the only group that the government excludes.

You're making assumption that these aren't people who just choose not to work because they have enough money not to do so.

No, you do! Discouraged means:
"741,000 discouraged workers – workers not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them"
Tackling The Real Unemployment Rate: 12.6%

So why do you argue when did not even read the given source? Instead you invent your own reality...

Firstly this article states that unemployment is at 6.1%, because it was written more than 2 years ago.

Now here's a question I have for you about "discouraged workers", if they believe there is no work for them, what does this say about the US? It might suggest that people work towards a job but they won't go for any other job. It might mean that many of these people just don't have the skills to get a job.
What is the govt doing about this? Nothing. In fact whenever I make suggestions for this I get told that this isn't what education is for, or individuals should go make their own educational prospects or things like this. When it then impacts society people start complaining and blaming the president when it's not really his job to deal with this anyway.

Then you have those who were working part time, but aren't considered unemployed, er... because they're employed.

The thing is, that the unemployment statistic is the unemployment statistic, and it was that when Bush was in power and the right weren't complaining about part time workers. And when Bush went and spent trillions on war the right weren't complaining. Now because they perceive Obama has had an impact all of a sudden they take notice. What a surprise.

 

[Bush92]

China flies nuclear-capable bomber in South China Sea after Trump Taiwan call, US officials say
China continues to provoke US and its allies. Let's put a couple carrier groups off coast of China.

 

[Bush92]

Compare World Military Powers Results
We still have a technological advantage over the People Army. I think we should strike now and crush them before it's to late. Their economy would collapse if they could not dump their garbage into our markets. We owe them $$$$$? Not after we go to war. Wall Street won't like it...but they are the most unpatriotic mothetfuckers in the country. Screw their " investment portfolios."

Good god this is such lazy, dangerous, ignorant fucking thinking. Beyond being out of your mind suggesting we go to war with the 2nd world's military power, it would be stupid to think eliminating China would somehow fix our economy. China and the USA are interdependent on each other. If one goes down, the other goes down. The world's economy would then follow.

Lol this thread is something else. When I saw your title I honestly thought you were making a sarcastic point, but oh no, you are serious. Wow. Just wow. This forum never ceases to amaze me.

Why are you supporting a threat to the United States?

There is no threat you loon. China would only be fucking themselves over by goijng to war. Hell if even if they won, their economy couldn't sustain itself.

They are the threat. They sponsor terrorism and steal our copyrights, intellectual property and jobs. We don't need them. Cut them off from our economy, make everything here. How many manufacturing products do we sell there? Not a fucking thing. Time for a change.

Oh we really do need them.

Why do you want them? Because they are a socialist state?

 

[Syriusly]

The OP is very, very brave in suggesting that other people's children should go to war for him.

There is a reason nuclear powers don't actually go to war with each other- because no one can be sure that the other side won't use nuclear weapons.

The OP is quick to offer a rash, stupid suggestion- but slow on offering any actual plan on how that would be done.

The United States can certainly defeat China at sea. We could even defeat them locally in the air. But without a WW2 type effort- that happened only because of Pearl Harbor- the United States does not have- and would not have the resources to invade and defeat China.

The reasons that you highlight about American superiority is why we should eradicate them as a threat. So you would not have snuffed out Tojo and Japan in 1938, or Hitler in 1938? Nope...you want to wait for the threat to metastasize.

As I said:

The OP is quick to offer a rash, stupid suggestion- but slow on offering any actual plan on how that would be done.

No- I don't think we should have attacked Japan or Germany before we were at war with them.

 

[Syriusly]

The OP is very, very brave in suggesting that other people's children should go to war for him.

There is a reason nuclear powers don't actually go to war with each other- because no one can be sure that the other side won't use nuclear weapons.

The OP is quick to offer a rash, stupid suggestion- but slow on offering any actual plan on how that would be done.

The United States can certainly defeat China at sea. We could even defeat them locally in the air. But without a WW2 type effort- that happened only because of Pearl Harbor- the United States does not have- and would not have the resources to invade and defeat China.

I have been in combat and I do not take it lightly. You are just a pussy.

You are an armchair warrier, who has never so much as seen the inside of a pup tent.

You are big on the idea of sending other people's children to fight a battle that Americans don't want.

 

[Syriusly]

Compare World Military Powers Results
We still have a technological advantage over the People Army. I think we should strike now and crush them before it's to late. Their economy would collapse if they could not dump their garbage into our markets. We owe them $$$$$? Not after we go to war. Wall Street won't like it...but they are the most unpatriotic mothetfuckers in the country. Screw their " investment portfolios."

What an absolutely idiotic idea. Before our missiles struck China, there would be incoming from Russia. There is not winning in a nuclear war. The MAD paradigm is aptly named. And even if Russia did not strike, the incoming from China would render the USA an memory as a power in the world.

Nuclear war? We would evaporate them.

There is a reason why it is called MAD.

China could probably hit the United States with 100 or so nukes.

You think that doesn't matter. That it would be worth it.

Meanwhile, we destroy China, and the resulting fallout destroys our allies, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea.

God what a great plan an asshole armchair warrior like you has- billions of people dead, dozens or more American cities destroyed, our allies destroyed and leaving Russia the strongest power in the world.

What a plan.

 

[Syriusly]

China flies nuclear-capable bomber in South China Sea after Trump Taiwan call, US officials say
China continues to provoke US and its allies. Let's put a couple carrier groups off coast of China.

Wow- China flies a bomber in international waters.

How very provocative.

 

[Syriusly]

Compare World Military Powers Results
We still have a technological advantage over the People Army. I think we should strike now and crush them before it's to late. Their economy would collapse if they could not dump their garbage into our markets. We owe them $$$$$? Not after we go to war. Wall Street won't like it...but they are the most unpatriotic mothetfuckers in the country. Screw their " investment portfolios."

A war on China would not only expose the world to nuclear risk but would also cut off America´s supplies. Imagine the empty shelves. Even if the US would be military successful, an inside revolution would put the government down.

Sounds like a very Trumpish thing to do

In fact, what Trump is going to try is to pay the debts and relocate the industry to the US. Of curse, jobs and financial surpluses are bad things by now and even racist and will destroy America.

Well now, we will see how that has worked out by 2019. I think by then, most of the work force in the US will be looking for work.

US workers have been humiliated enough by China. War means 100% full employment.

War means the death of millions of American workers.

That would be even more humiliating.

Of course our economy would be destroyed to- we export billions of dollars worth of product to China and Japan and South Korea- all of that would stop.

And all of our major centers of industry would likely be vaporized.

Great plan- well done.

Sounds like something Russia would propose.

 

[Syriusly]

Hell, no,

No war.

We must before it is too late. Our younger generation is weak. Politically correct and weak. Been taught that America is a bad place...white people should feel guilty by birth...and everyone gets a participation trophy. No. We need another "Greatesst Generation" and that can only. Be achieved through a major war.

Fuck you, you damned son of a bitch. War is not some video game. Real people and families die, and you are talking nuclear war, where whole cities die. Go volunteer for Isis, they are your soul brothers. Please get out of this nation, we don't need crazies like you.

I've been in war. Combat. Infantry. I'm a realist and love my grandkids and my democratic republic which is the hope for all the world. Stop Hitler before he becomes a threat. Stop Tojo before he becomes a threat. Sorry you are too weak.

If you had actually been in combat, you wouldn't be so quick to want your grandkids killed in an unnecessary war.

You are just an armchair weeny who thinks war is a video game.

 

[pinqy]

Lol Trump's massive tariffs, subsidies, increases in federal spending, and cutting of taxes to the most wealthy people and entities in the country are going to be a disaster. And accomplish the opposite of what you're expecting, as they always have. Of course, there's always the hope that he's been lying his fat ass off for the entire campaign, which is growing increasingly likely for most of his promises.

We will see what he is going to do. But calm down, it cannot get any worse, that´s for sure.

What are you talking about? Unemployment at 4.5%, market headed for 20,000, wages going up. But not to worry, Trump will reverse this terrible situation, and, by 2019 we can enjoy 15% unemployment and a market even below Bush's 6500.

Here comes why your funny figures are bs. For example, unemployed who are not searching for a job are not unemployed according to your government.

Tackling The Real Unemployment Rate: 12.6%


The true unemployed rate may be even more then the U6 figure if we are to assume further manipulations.

If you're not searching for a job, then you're not a burden on the state, so what difference does it make? Spending money and not taking, that's good.

Unemployed is unemployed and there is no hint that those discouraged are not on food stamps. Also, this is not the only group that the government excludes.

Unemployed has always been defined as those who are not working AND who are TRYING to work. No one has ever considered retirees, stay-home spouses, kids in school, those too disabled to work, independently wealthy or others (who do not want and or do not need a job) as unemployed.

Why would you want to include someone who is not trying to get a job when you're looking at how easy/hard it is to find work?

And the U-6 also includes all marginally attached: those who want to work, could start work immediately, and who have looked for work in the last year but not the last 4 weeks. Most of them quit looking for personal reasons: illness, injury, pregnancy, family issues, transportation issues, school, etc and are now ready to rejoin the labor force but haven't yet.

The U-6 also includes those who have jobs but who, during the reference week, worked fewer than 35 hours because of business conditions or couldn't find a full time job. Many of these have full time jobs. I'm puzzled why anyone would want to consider them unemployed.

 

[Bleipriester]

We will see what he is going to do. But calm down, it cannot get any worse, that´s for sure.

What are you talking about? Unemployment at 4.5%, market headed for 20,000, wages going up. But not to worry, Trump will reverse this terrible situation, and, by 2019 we can enjoy 15% unemployment and a market even below Bush's 6500.

Here comes why your funny figures are bs. For example, unemployed who are not searching for a job are not unemployed according to your government.

Tackling The Real Unemployment Rate: 12.6%


The true unemployed rate may be even more then the U6 figure if we are to assume further manipulations.

If you're not searching for a job, then you're not a burden on the state, so what difference does it make? Spending money and not taking, that's good.

Unemployed is unemployed and there is no hint that those discouraged are not on food stamps. Also, this is not the only group that the government excludes.

Unemployed has always been defined as those who are not working AND who are TRYING to work. No one has ever considered retirees, stay-home spouses, kids in school, those too disabled to work, independently wealthy or others (who do not want and or do not need a job) as unemployed.

Why would you want to include someone who is not trying to get a job when you're looking at how easy/hard it is to find work?

And the U-6 also includes all marginally attached: those who want to work, could start work immediately, and who have looked for work in the last year but not the last 4 weeks. Most of them quit looking for personal reasons: illness, injury, pregnancy, family issues, transportation issues, school, etc and are now ready to rejoin the labor force but haven't yet.

The U-6 also includes those who have jobs but who, during the reference week, worked fewer than 35 hours because of business conditions or couldn't find a full time job. Many of these have full time jobs. I'm puzzled why anyone would want to consider them unemployed.

Don´t make things up. U4 (Discouraged) is clearly described. Those who gave up. They are probably on Food Stamps.

 

[pinqy]

What are you talking about? Unemployment at 4.5%, market headed for 20,000, wages going up. But not to worry, Trump will reverse this terrible situation, and, by 2019 we can enjoy 15% unemployment and a market even below Bush's 6500.

Here comes why your funny figures are bs. For example, unemployed who are not searching for a job are not unemployed according to your government.

Tackling The Real Unemployment Rate: 12.6%


The true unemployed rate may be even more then the U6 figure if we are to assume further manipulations.

If you're not searching for a job, then you're not a burden on the state, so what difference does it make? Spending money and not taking, that's good.

Unemployed is unemployed and there is no hint that those discouraged are not on food stamps. Also, this is not the only group that the government excludes.

Unemployed has always been defined as those who are not working AND who are TRYING to work. No one has ever considered retirees, stay-home spouses, kids in school, those too disabled to work, independently wealthy or others (who do not want and or do not need a job) as unemployed.

Why would you want to include someone who is not trying to get a job when you're looking at how easy/hard it is to find work?

And the U-6 also includes all marginally attached: those who want to work, could start work immediately, and who have looked for work in the last year but not the last 4 weeks. Most of them quit looking for personal reasons: illness, injury, pregnancy, family issues, transportation issues, school, etc and are now ready to rejoin the labor force but haven't yet.

The U-6 also includes those who have jobs but who, during the reference week, worked fewer than 35 hours because of business conditions or couldn't find a full time job. Many of these have full time jobs. I'm puzzled why anyone would want to consider them unemployed.

Don´t make things up. U4 (Discouraged) is clearly described. Those who gave up. They are probably on Food Stamps.

But you didn't mention the U-4. You said that "The true unemployed rate may be even more then the U6 figure"

But if you are going to stick with U-4, why should people who "gave up" be considered unemployed but no others who are not looking for work?

 

[g5000]

Compare World Military Powers Results
We still have a technological advantage over the People Army. I think we should strike now and crush them before it's to late. Their economy would collapse if they could not dump their garbage into our markets. We owe them $$$$$? Not after we go to war. Wall Street won't like it...but they are the most unpatriotic mothetfuckers in the country. Screw their " investment portfolios."

Today China, tomorrow the world. Sieg Heil!

 

[Bleipriester]

But you didn't mention the U-4. You said that "The true unemployed rate may be even more then the U6 figure"

If your government tampers with the stats like mine does it will be more than 12,6. That´s what I said.

But if you are going to stick with U-4, why should people who "gave up" be considered unemployed but no others who are not looking for work?

Because unlike school kids they belong to the labor force potential.

 

[pinqy]

But you didn't mention the U-4. You said that "The true unemployed rate may be even more then the U6 figure"

If your government tampers with the stats like mine does it will be more than 12,6. That´s what I said.

But if you are going to stick with U-4, why should people who "gave up" be considered unemployed but no others who are not looking for work?

Because unlike school kids they belong to the labor force potential.

Then look at the U-4. The U-3 measures actual availability, not potential.
But it's not just school kids...what about the non-discouraged marginally attached (the U-5). They are also potential.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

How many Chinese nuclear tipped ballistic missiles would hit the USA before China pleaded for peace.

Dont forget that those Chinese missiles are going to be painted with a lead based paint just like the happy meal toys.
We do not need to have a society here suffering from lead poisoning, so before you wage war on China, you go ahead and think about the damage that is going to come from the paint. Do we really want our children to suffer that?

 

[bendog]

Compare World Military Powers Results
We still have a technological advantage over the People Army. I think we should strike now and crush them before it's to late. Their economy would collapse if they could not dump their garbage into our markets. We owe them $$$$$? Not after we go to war. Wall Street won't like it...but they are the most unpatriotic mothetfuckers in the country. Screw their " investment portfolios."

Today China, tomorrow the world. Sieg Heil!

I remember when I was a kid and the vision of dying on a hill with an M-14 and thousands of those guys coming was not totally unrealistic. LOL

 

[TNHarley]

Good GAWD. No wonder everyone talks shit about Trump supporters.
Stupid as fuck

 

[Bleipriester]

Then look at the U-4. The U-3 measures actual availability, not potential.

Don´t distract.

But it's not just school kids...what about the non-discouraged marginally attached (the U-5). They are also potential.

Why don´t you read the article? It is tampering:

"“Marginally attached” describes individuals not currently in the labor force who wanted and were available for work. The official unemployment numbers exclude them, because they did not look for work in the 4 weeks preceding the unemployment survey. In July, this marginally attached group accounted for 2.2 million people."