Friends, Democrats are outraged (yawn!) because President Trump has fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, because she released a set of new jobs numbers that he regards as inaccurate and defamatory to him and his administration. Are his charges valid? That I couldn't say. I tend to trust government statistics. Can the books be cooked, to a certain extent? Sure, but it's hard to make a recession look like a boom, or vice versa, so there's only so much that you can accomplish with such chicanery, and I'm not sure why you'd try it when we're a year and a half from the next election... Bottom line: Trump's politicization of economic statistics will make even fewer people trust "the numbers", and there aren't many people trusting anything or anyone as it is. It's a race to the bottom, or so it seems to me.
Speaking of cynicism, Republicans in Texas are getting closer and closer to passing a reapportionment of their Congressional districts designed to favor their fellow Republicans. The GOP could secure five additional seats in the House in 2026, which would make Democrats furious and would tempt blue states to retaliate in kind. Texas Democrats are boycotting the state legislature to try to deny Republicans a quorum, and as a result those Dems could be fined or even arrested. This could get mighty ugly! The question is: could it work as a stratagem to maintain GOP control of the House of Representatives??? Only time will tell.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz601p6jv8vo
China and India aren't liking the idea of paying massive "secondary tariffs" that would be designed to punish them for buying Russian oil. On the other hand, they aren't willing to stop buying that oil either, meaning that the U.S. and China and India are basically engaged in a global game of chicken. Would the U.S. really risk a massive trade war with China AND India, in order to increase financial pressure on Putin's regime? China and India seem to regard these threats as a bluff, and, I must say, I suspect that Trump doesn't mean what he says in this case either. I think he may be engaged in a last ditch effort to bring Ukraine and Russia to the bargaining table. If that effort fails, then I'm not sure what he'll do, but cutting off trade with China and India doesn't seem very likely, and wouldn't be terribly smart.
Since I would never lower myself to the point of reading the benighted Washington Post, I'm not sure how much the paper has changed since Jeff Bezos decided it would celebrate American freedom and capitalism, but I'm reassured by the fact that some lefties are jumping ship!
Finally, this week's Newsmakers show is definitely worth a listen. It features more than the usual amount of historical analysis, which you'll enjoy to no end!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I think the official he fired was a Biden appointment, who no doubt had to satisfy politically correct doctrinal convictions. And the Dems do have this little "by any means necessary " quirk about them. The President did refer to a concerning number of "corrections" in her stats after the election.
ReplyDeleteSuch "empirical" measures of our economy's performance are maybe most important for the perceptions they convey and I could see the desperate Dems seeking to work them against our President. As decisive a manager as Pres. Trump can be expected not to waffle if he sees it happening. He has the authority and he doesn't apologize for using it.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: The key question is, I think, does Pres. Trump believe that Russia will never give in on preventing Ukraine from joining Nato? If so, why does he not assure Russia that we will never vote to bring Ukraine into Nato; that vote alone would prevent Ukraine from joining.
ReplyDeleteI do not think there is any chance China will stop buying Russian oil at our behest. I agree, China is FIRMLY devoted to protecting its sovereignty; it is their salient foreign policy objective. Besides, the oil travels an overland route to China apparently as secure as is our supply from Canada.
RAY TO DR. WADDY
ReplyDeleteThe issue of Ukraine joining NATO/EU, or not joining, or negotiating some sort of deal at a bargaining table, and so on and so on, is a smokescreen for Russia's real intention. The hard, cold fact is that Russia aims to reincorporate Ukraine back into the new Russian Empire, no matter what, and once again refer to it as The Ukraine. The Crimea is already gone, and at best Ukraine might survive as a separate, independent country, with a much smaller territory after Russia takes over the east bank, and at best as a puppet state of Moscow. The U.S. is not ever going to get into a real shooting war with Russia over Ukraine in any event. The Euro-weenies are not going to fight Russia.
RAY TO DR. WADDY
ReplyDeleteRegardless of the future of Ukraine, it would be beneficial if the people of that country replaced Zelenskyy. The man is never going to be a statesman of any kind. He will always be the comedian and actor that he is. That was his chosen "profession", so he needs to stop pretending that he is some great leader. The man is a literal joke.
RAY TO DR. WADDY
ReplyDeleteAlways interesting (an understatement), are the real reasons why Biden decided to help Ukraine in the first place, aside from the leftist propaganda which depicts him as a great humanitarian and so on. Could it be that arms contracts made more than a few rich people even richer? Perish the thought. Does Hunter figure into this? Can't imagine it.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: India: India benefitted from its occupation by the Brits. The probable alternative could have been investment by Russia and the Brits were by far more civilized than the Rus. I've heard it in person from a well spoken Indian and have read a comment from a former Indian PM to the effect that India should recognize its good fortune at having been "managed" by the cradle of democracy. The Brit system of semi independent "Princely States" combined with those directly administered by the Crown was probably far more considerate of Indian culture than would have been true under Imperial Russia and of course under the Bolsheviks. Maybe Russia could not have breached savagely defended "Afghanistan" to get at India but a traditionally ununited and disparate India( I think the Indian Parliament still employs translating devices due to the multitude of Indian cultures and languages often from entirely different roots)would still have been very vulnerable to European powers such as The Netherlands , Spain, Portugal and France. Better the Brits.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, my point is that India may not harbor the measure of deep, deep, unrelenting resentment to a West, including the U.S. ,which saved them from the "inconsiderate" Japanese, which China understandably holds with historically fresh memory and great resolve. China is fully aware of the fact that it is an historically seminal and great civilization and they will never forget how the newcoming, temporarily technologically superior West (including the U.S. - I mean, how would we have felt about Chinese gunboats plying the MIssissippi?) humiliated them in the 19th and early 20th century. They were enduring one of their several historical periods of dissolution, from which they have always delivered themselves stronger than ever and they will never forget how the hairy "barbarians" took advantage of their relatively brief period of weakness. India may well not harbor such definitive and unshakeable resolve never again to be toyed with by the West and may be somewhat more willing to deal with Pres. Trump on this issue of punishing "secondary tariffs"for indirectly helping Russia to savage Ukraine. But China, I think, never, as long as a U.S. demand that it cease purchase of oil from Russia is at contest, would honor it.
I do not assume that President Trump is unaware of this reality. He is a deal maker and therefore willing to, well. . . deal.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Its so redeeming to see seemingly impregnable fortresses of far leftist bigotry and support for incipient totalitarian takeover of our country, crumbling. It lends further support to the now maxim "all it took was a new President". But not only "new" but an extraordinarily courageous survivor of unprecedentedly vicious far left calumny and cynical lawfare.
ReplyDeleteJust don't know enough about what motivates Bezos. Is he simply advising his Washington Post staff to take shelter from the Maga onslaught or does he sincerely mean to reconstruct this "American" Pravda?
Good gads, if it is the latter , here is another big step in the American Rennaissance inspired by this remarkable President and exemplar. And if it is, let it be an example to so many of our shamefully compromised papers and the far left journalistic shills who edit them: "You are no longer welcome in our living rooms! Advertisers please take note."
Jack, I don't pretend to know the rights and wrongs of labor statistics. Here is a BBC exploration of the issue that is surprisingly balanced: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9wyp2kk1e5o
ReplyDeleteJack, if I were Russia, I would regard a Trumpian promise that Ukraine will never join NATO as meaningless, since a Democratic president, or a future Republican president, for that matter, could easily reverse it.
I agree with Ray that it is clear that Russia has territorial ambitions in Ukraine, and, even if it hadn't nurtured such ambitions when the war started, now that hundreds of thousands of Russians have died to claw back some land from Ukraine, Putin can hardly hand it all back to Zelensky. No, permanent neutral status for a rump Ukraine will be part of any final deal, but so will sizeable Russian gains in the Donbass. I don't see any way around that.
Hmm. Would India be more likely to give up Russian oil than China? Could be...for countless reasons, including India's relative weakness. My guess is that the secondary sanctions will never be applied across the board to all Indian or Chinese exports to the U.S. My guess is that this is basically a feint to lend symbolic support to Ukraine. We shall see.
Good question about what Bezos is thinking. If his goal is to turn the WaPo into a MAGA mouthpiece, he's got a long way to go. My assumption would be that Bezos simply doesn't want to be on Trump's bad side. My advice to him would be, if that's the case, then he should consider getting out of the news business...by selling the paper to a good conservative!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I agree: the Donbass and Crimea are very probably lost by Ukraine.
ReplyDeletePermanent neutral status for Ukraine: how might this be accomplished? How much does Russia want this war to end?Would Russia accept an agreement which does not mention Nato but which is worded so that any alliance would be proscribed for Ukraine? Might Russia demand that Ukraine allow it to establish a "tripwire" force against Nato on Ukraine's western border? Would Russia tolerate an American statement of some kind of "fellowship" with Ukraine and consequent concern for Ukraine's sovereignty? We already have a defacto burgeoning economic relationship with Ukraine due to the mineral deal.
I agree too, Russia's motivations may well have, since the war started , ehh, expanded. I still think their sine qua non is " no Nato in Ukraine, no Ukraine in Nato". Their losses may have served to make them even more intransigent on that.
As you say, Jack, the devil is in the details! Ukraine will have to give up a lot, if we're to be honest, but they may get a fig leaf or two in return.
ReplyDelete