So I know we're not supposed to talk politics - Presidential Election - Poll

I'd give him mad props if he can. That would be pretty damn impressive. But nothing, literally nothing that he has done up to this point indicates he can.

Literally nothing

Campaign Promise 1: To replace Antonin Scalia with a like-minded justice from a list of 20

The Nomination of Neil Gorsuch who is one of the most qualified people ever nominated to the SCOTUS whose nomination to the 10th Circuit Court was unanimously approved by Republicans, and Democrats including Cuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden in 2006. And before the opposition says "but, Merrick Garland" tell them to look up up the Biden Rule

Campaign Promise 2: To suspend immigration from terror-prone countries

Trump has attempted to enact a Travel Ban that is 100% CONSTITUTIONAL AND is made from the seven (six, now) "countries of concern" outlined by the Hussein Administration. This has been blocked by an extremely liberal Hawaiian judge who was appointed by Obama. (The blocking of this travel ban might piss me off more than anything that has happened during his presidency, because judges should be blind to politics, but that is proving to be false.) Hopefully this will go to the Supreme Court and be overturned quickly.

Campaign Promise 3: To defund and crack down on sanctuary cities

Trump has implemented a YUGE crackdown on sanctuary cities, threatening to defund them

Campaign Promise 4: To revive the Keystone Pipeline and Dakota Access Pipeline

The revival of the Dakota and Keystone XL Pipelines creating American jobs

Campaign Promise 5: To pull the US out of the TPP, an Obama-era trade deal detrimental to the US

Trump pulled us out of the TPP which would have been absolutely disastrous for the US

Campaign Promise 6: DONALD TRUMP LOVES WOMEN AND WANTS TO HELP WOMEN!

Trump has signed an Executive Order promoting women in STEM jobs (careers real feminists strive for, not "dance therapy" feminists)

Trump has Launched a Council empowering female leaders and female entrepreneurs

Campaign Promise 7: To renegotiate, or pull out of Bill Clinton's terrible trade deal, NAFTA

Trump met with Justin Trudeau (what a joke) to discuss the tweaking of NAFTA to benefit the US more, after he threatens to leave it

Campaign Promise 8: To undo ridiculous Obama-era federal agency regulations

Trump ordered a two-for-one repeal for all new regulations enacted by federal agencies

Campaign Promise 9: To rollback Obama-era regulations on small businesses

Trump has rolled back ridiculous Obama-era regulations that have made it nearly impossible for small businesses to hire employees

Campaign Promise 10: To help America's inner-cities deeply in need of rebuilding

Trump has signed an Executive Order to give major funding to "Historically Black Colleges and Universities," helping out inner-cities immensely

Campaign Promise 11: To protect our policemen, the true everyday heroes

Trump signed an Executive Order protecting our police

Campaign Promise 12: To crackdown on illegal immigration and to BUILD A WALL

Trump has implemented a YUGE crackdown on illegal immigration and he has started the WALL initiative

Campaign Promise 13: To bolster our depleted military

Trump has increased our military budget because we don't want to use our military, but want to be prepared to use it

Campaign Promise 14: To enact a five year lobbying ban on government Officials after they leave office

Trump has placed a five year and lifetime lobbying ban on government officials for when they leave office

Campaign Promise 15: To crackdown on drug cartels and illegal drugs crossing the border

Trump signed an Executive Order cracking down on drug cartels

Campaign Promise 16: To revitalize the dying coal industry in the US

Trump has enacted Joint Resolution 38 putting thousands of coal miners back to work

Campaign Promise 17: To create American JOBS and bring companies back to America

Trump negotiated a deal with Carrier promising to bring manufacturing and jobs back to the US.

Trump has met with CEOs from huge companies to work on bringing jobs back to America

There was an increase of 298,000 jobs in February alone (liberals will say that counts in Obama's fiscal year, but we know the truth)

Trump met with Intel CEO who promised $7 Billion investment and over 3,000 high paying (not "shovel ready" bullshit jobs) in America

Trump met with the CEO of Softbank who has promised 50,000 more American jobs and has already fulfilled 3,000 of those jobs

Kroger has promised over 10,000 new jobs in the era of Trump

The month of March yielded 263,000 new jobs, which passes the month's estimated 185,000 Big League

Campaign Promise 18: Pushing NATO allies to pay their fair share or face the reality of the US possibly leaving

Trump has put major pressure on the members of NATO to pay their fair and equal share because there are only a handful of countries in NATO who currently pay as much as agreed upon

Campaign Promise 19: To make America energy independent, relieving us from our dependence on foreign entities, such as OPEC

Trump has taken major steps towards America's energy independence

Campaign Promise 20: To enact a hiring freeze on government employees to help stop corruption

Trump enacted a hiring freeze to all federal employees, cutting down on the over-bloated bureaucracy

Campaign Promise 21: Trump could be the president that takes us to Mars!

Trump signed a Bill allowing NASA funding, including an exploration to Mars

Campaign Promise 22: To undo many of Obama's unconstitutional Executive Orders

Rescinding (one of) Obama's incredibly unconstitutional actions regarding transgender bathrooms in schools

Campaign Promise 23: The repeal and replacement of Obamacare. The recent GOP fallout of AHCA Plan was no fault of Trump's. The blame solely belongs to Speaker Ryan. He created a shit bill and couldn't even capitalize to get enough votes. Obamacare will crash in 2017 when individual mandates kick in and Democrats will be to blame. That is when Trump will truly work to Repeal and Replace it with a plan he promised us.

Trump got rid of the idiotic penalty in Obamacare that fines you if you choose not to participate in the program

Campaign Promise 24: To "Bomb the shit out of ISIS"

He called for a drone strike in Afghanistan killing Qari Yasin, a Pakistani Al-Qaeda leader

Campaign Promise 25: To not take a salary as President

He donated his first quarterly salary to the National Park Service

ACTIONS NOT PROMISED ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, BUT HAVE BEEN PUT IN EFFECT:

(Even though it was Mike Pence) The defunding of clinics that perform abortions. Because no matter whether you are pro-choice/pro-life, the government should not be funding abortions. (Also, if people bring up the Hyde Amendment which is supposed to not let any federal funding go towards abortions, LET THEM KNOW that US taxpayers pay for about 24% of abortions despite of that "amendment")

Huge spikes in the NASDAQ average index and the DOW average index starting November 8th. (This will count for Obama unfortunately, but we know where the real credit belongs.)

He has placed sanctions on Iran after they tested ballistic missiles

He has met with/talked to over 30 foreign leaders.

Trump has moved on to tax reform, lowering taxes for Americans

He negotiated down the Price of the new Air Force One one billion dollars in a meeting that lasted just one hour

He issued major cuts to the costs of the F-35 saving billions

He has opened the eyes of the American public to just how unbelievably corrupt (pretty believable to most) the Hussein Administration was.

 

Approximately 65% of USA electricity comes from coal. About 41% worldwide.

 

Think about that for minute.

 

I work in energy and trust me, if you turned off the coal the world would go DARK in short order. I'm all for alternative energy and actually look for ways to improve efficiency in all sectors. Nothing wrong with keeping the lights on while we continue to develop alternatives.. Nuke, Nat Gas, Propane,Oil,and Solar combined can NOT keep the lights on.

 

Yup, I'm in energy as well let's put it this way: Compared to the alternatives Coal is a miracle energy source. It's abundant, easy to(relatively speaking) to extract and manipulate, and the amount of energy you get from it is pretty mind blowing. The alternative "green" technologies are the inverse, they are much more complex and difficult to build, manipulate and the energy you get from them is nowhere near what you see with coal. Now I am not a hard core coal and oil guy, like any tech coal has it's issues. But don't believe all the fairy-tale hype the Green tech guys are spinning, half of it is feel-good fluff meant to get you to invest major $$$ while they try to get it figured out on their end.

 

What makes coal so great in the short term and long as well is that since we've now figured out how to extract and refine oil shale (most oil is produced from oil sands) we've effectively added a significant amount to our oil reserves. Of all other alternative technologies, nuclear is the one with the most promise because of how efficient it is and how much power it can out but...but no one wants one in their back yard because when something goes wrong, it goes really wrong.

 

Why the Paris accord is just fluff is for the following reasons:

 

1) The Agreement was non binding by any country which means anyone can opt out of it at any time. There are no legal repercussion, it's all about "the honor system." The only legal aspect is that you have to provide your report once every 5 years.

 

2) Each country has to set their own defined "aggressive goals." That can literally mean anything. China can say reducing it's greenhouse emissions by .002% is "aggressive."

 

3) This Agreement required the US to pay billions to smaller countries to help them reach the agreement, so of course they want the US in to keep the bankroll open and going because most of these countries can't afford the energy projects they want and they don't want to pay for them.

 

4) None of this was about actually climate change. It was about a bad deal and Trump got us out of it plain and simple.

 

5) In the US we effectively have this accord in place with the Energy Regulatory Commission, so why do we need to pay to join a world organization that has no teeth or enforcement ability? It's literally lighting money on fire.

 

That's the issue with a lot of the left and media...people who don't know how the energy world actually works or what is actually in these deals but they hear it's green an think we need to drop everything and be involved in it. Most of the green tech guys are absolute pirates that have way over promised and under delivered. By no means are the guys in coal saints, but what they did built the modern world and you have to understand that much. You pull the plug on coal and yes, the world will go dark the second that happens.

Robster Craws..

 

Dropping so many Mega Tons of Truth Bombs my eyes are tearing up from the delicious fallout.

Robster Craws..

 

Dropping so many Mega Tons of Truth Bombs my eyes are tearing up from the delicious fallout.

 

Yup, I'm in energy as well let's put it this way: Compared to the alternatives Coal is a miracle energy source. It's abundant, easy to(relatively speaking) to extract and manipulate, and the amount of energy you get from it is pretty mind blowing. The alternative "green" technologies are the inverse, they are much more complex and difficult to build, manipulate and the energy you get from them is nowhere near what you see with coal. Now I am not a hard core coal and oil guy, like any tech coal has it's issues. But don't believe all the fairy-tale hype the Green tech guys are spinning, half of it is feel-good fluff meant to get you to invest major $$$ while they try to get it figured out on their end.

 

What makes coal so great in the short term and long as well is that since we've now figured out how to extract and refine oil shale (most oil is produced from oil sands) we've effectively added a significant amount to our oil reserves. Of all other alternative technologies, nuclear is the one with the most promise because of how efficient it is and how much power it can out but...but no one wants one in their back yard because when something goes wrong, it goes really wrong.

 

Why the Paris accord is just fluff is for the following reasons:

 

1) The Agreement was non binding by any country which means anyone can opt out of it at any time. There are no legal repercussion, it's all about "the honor system." The only legal aspect is that you have to provide your report once every 5 years.

 

2) Each country has to set their own defined "aggressive goals." That can literally mean anything. China can say reducing it's greenhouse emissions by .002% is "aggressive."

 

3) This Agreement required the US to pay billions to smaller countries to help them reach the agreement, so of course they want the US in to keep the bankroll open and going because most of these countries can't afford the energy projects they want and they don't want to pay for them.

 

4) None of this was about actually climate change. It was about a bad deal and Trump got us out of it plain and simple.

 

5) In the US we effectively have this accord in place with the Energy Regulatory Commission, so why do we need to pay to join a world organization that has no teeth or enforcement ability? It's literally lighting money on fire.

 

That's the issue with a lot of the left and media...people who don't know how the energy world actually works or what is actually in these deals but they hear it's green an think we need to drop everything and be involved in it. Most of the green tech guys are absolute pirates that have way over promised and under delivered. By no means are the guys in coal saints, but what they did built the modern world and you have to understand that much. You pull the plug on coal and yes, the world will go dark the second that happens.

 

You expressed that so well the mods should sticky it.

 

You expressed that so well the mods should sticky it.

 

Agreed. Thanks ACE for that thorough explanation.

Its amazing that the same trump haters are going ballistic on the pullout but I have not heard one of these geniuses explain why this deal was good for us and why india and china get to defer doing anything for 15 years. Lets hear where the money goes and when it gets there who administers it and what does our US funds do to help climate change in the US? A Miami Mayor just went on Tucker and looked like an idiot as he could not explain the benefit of the accord. How about we start with our own country and let our money go towards programs that affect the US, All the moron celebtards thing this means no one believes there is any climate change and to the contrary people want to know where exactly is our money going and is it pretty much untraceable after that point and none of it comes back to help the US? Sounds like a horrible agreement that the 80% that get big funds with no requirement should defend

 

Robster Craws, that was a great read

The biggest issue with the green energy stuff (wind and solar primarily) is the inconsistent delivery and especially with solar, how it drops off typically around peak usage. It makes throttling output from the controlable power plants a real struggle to match demand.

 

Truth be told, i bet most guys in the energy sector that really know the nuts and bolts of it would tell you we're in the red, not only financially but environmentally.

 

If we could all muster just a little rational thought and let the smart guys do their jobs, everything would be nuke powered, but people have irrational fears that they wont let go of.

 

Yes, nukes can have issues. But the ones that have were built when, the 1960-70's? Are we ignoring any technological development in control systems and safety features over the last 50 years? The same people afraid of flying, who text and drive 80mph while on 750mg of vicodin.

 

Per a friend of mine in the nuke industry, their new plants are so safe, if it ever suffered an earthquake large enough to render it unsafe, it wouldnt make the top 10 list of related current immediate problems (globally).

Robster Craws, that was a great read

It was a copy and paste and left out the links to each article on the completed promises but to say he's done nothing in his short time in office is silly. Pakisho enjoyed my nuclear fallout from all the bombs dropped by it but he forgets only bombs I want dropped are in the Middle East. A MOAB a day keeps the Islamist away

The biggest issue with the green energy stuff (wind and solar primarily) is the inconsistent delivery and especially with solar, how it drops off typically around peak usage. It makes throttling output from the controlable power plants a real struggle to match demand.

 

Truth be told, i bet most guys in the energy sector that really know the nuts and bolts of it would tell you we're in the red, not only financially but environmentally.

 

If we could all muster just a little rational thought and let the smart guys do their jobs, everything would be nuke powered, but people have irrational fears that they wont let go of.

 

Yes, nukes can have issues. But the ones that have were built when, the 1960-70's? Are we ignoring any technological development in control systems and safety features over the last 50 years? The same people afraid of flying, who text and drive 80mph while on 750mg of vicodin.

 

Per a friend of mine in the nuke industry, their new plants are so safe, if it ever suffered an earthquake large enough to render it unsafe, it wouldnt make the top 10 list of related current immediate problems (globally).

 

Nuke power is where it's at, build the damn thing FAR away from civilization, I don't see what the issue is.

 

I was trying to go green haha I have some massive roofs and I was going to clad them in solar panels, the local energy provider said they will not allow me to put more than a certain volume back on their grid because the grid isn't designed to cope with it LOL, the governments don't want your hippy power, they want your money!

So is he getting impeached or not? Or was that last week's news? LOL

You expressed that so well the mods should sticky it.

 

Thank you

 

Agreed. Thanks ACE for that thorough explanation.

 

 

The biggest issue with the green energy stuff (wind and solar primarily) is the inconsistent delivery and especially with solar, how it drops off typically around peak usage. It makes throttling output from the controlable power plants a real struggle to match demand.

 

Truth be told, i bet most guys in the energy sector that really know the nuts and bolts of it would tell you we're in the red, not only financially but environmentally.

 

If we could all muster just a little rational thought and let the smart guys do their jobs, everything would be nuke powered, but people have irrational fears that they wont let go of.

 

Yes, nukes can have issues. But the ones that have were built when, the 1960-70's? Are we ignoring any technological development in control systems and safety features over the last 50 years? The same people afraid of flying, who text and drive 80mph while on 750mg of vicodin.

 

Per a friend of mine in the nuke industry, their new plants are so safe, if it ever suffered an earthquake large enough to render it unsafe, it wouldnt make the top 10 list of related current immediate problems (globally).

 

The problem with solar (besides from how expensive it is) is that without an auxiliary battery storage system you can't store any energy and you waste most of the potential energy captured. Wind is worse and has an efficiency rating around 24%. As systems they aren't as reliable as coal tech and are highly geographically dependent so mass deployment is also a huge issue for these systems as well.

 

Environmentally speaking we've made a lot of strides with being friendlier, though there is work to do. Coal tech has gotten a lot cleaner and more efficient which actually qualifies it as a "clean" technology based on modern regulatory standards. But the other side of the coin is that the "green" guys never tell you how the sausage is made. For example, solar panels are made from polycarbinate (also called microcrystaline) silicon. Silicon in this form occurs nowhere in nature, so it has to be synthesized and refined. With lots of hydrofloric acid. That may or may not end up in a river just outside the manufacturing facility. Or wind turbines, which require lots of metal and miles of wiring to make, as well as large areas of land dug up. Or hydrogen fuel cells, which seem really cool. But where on this planet can you find naturally occurring liquid hydrogen? Well to get that you'll actually have to go to space to Jupiter or Saturn to get it. So, you need to refine it and produce it, which takes energy, usually sourced from coal based technologies.

 

The stigma of nukes is still very real, with Fukushima, 3 Mile Island and Chernobyl as very recent examples of when it goes wrong. Yes, many modern nuclear plants are insanely safe and they use non-weapons grade fuel sources, but again, no one wants it in their back yard and they are insanely expensive to make. Selling the public on that is a very tough thing to do, so it's not so much the tech but the PR that is the main issue there. Germany, the "we used 85% sustainable power for day" country, is actually decommissioning all of their nuclear power plants right now and guess what they are replacing them with...you guessed it...coal power plants. So invest in some German coal because they are building new coal plants to meet the energy demands for Europe since Germany is the number 1 exporter of Energy to everyone in Europe except for Switzerland.

 

Solving energy problem is a large task, but a lot of the "climate change" (the rebranded global warming because it proved not to be accurate) hype is specifically targeted at fear-mongering to get people to buy into these things under the guise a righteous planet saving cause. Now, before you look for a tinfoil hat, I will say that yes, climate change is a thing. It's a thing we've only been looking at for 60 years (which is nothing considering the Earth's estimate age), so we actually don't have a solid idea of how it really works, we're making a guess. Since the industrial age we've seen an exponential rise in greenhouse gas emissions and CO2 output, and the curve has continued since we've started looking at this stuff 60 years ago. However, when looking at the earth's temps in correlation overlayed over the same period of time, average temperatures have been consistently fluctuating up and down despite the exponential increase in greenhouse gas output. We don't give enough credit to solar radiation which has a larger and more direct effect on our temperatures. Now, I am not saying that pumping out tons of CO2 is a good thing...but I also know to be suspicious of anyone coming along saying everyone is doomed yet they magically have a world saving solution (that can conveniently be purchased) in hand. Right now coal, natural gas, and nuclear are the best bets, and the sustainable technologies have a long way to go before they become viable replacements.

 

But as an FYI the US is poised to become the single largest exporter of natural gas in the world in the very near future, so the world energy scape is going to have an interesting shift since 65% of known oil reserves in the world reside in North America, and the US controls over 80% of them, combined with the global demand for natural gas rising and the US make preparations to meet that demand.

 

Nuke power is where it's at, build the damn thing FAR away from civilization, I don't see what the issue is.

 

I was trying to go green haha I have some massive roofs and I was going to clad them in solar panels, the local energy provider said they will not allow me to put more than a certain volume back on their grid because the grid isn't designed to cope with it LOL, the governments don't want your hippy power, they want your money!

 

The issue with building a power plant far from civilization comes from energy transmission. The further the distance, the more infrastructure is needed get the power from point A to point B reliably.

 

The issue with residential solar panels is 2 parts:

 

1) You are correct, they don't want hippie power they want money because they are for profit, which is fine and fair, but if they have to buy back power they are losing some revenue, which leads to the major point of...

 

2) If you are "off the grid" so to speak you're still likely using power from the grid at night, but even if you aren't, you're putting the utility in a losing situation. The utility, which is the one that built, installed, and pays to maintain the transmission lines now has to pay you money while you use the service lines they paid for and pay to maintain. It's a rapidly unsustainable model when put in the large scale. It's like you're an Uber driver but when you pick people up and drop them off you have to pay the passengers for their ride in your car with the gas you bought for it and you have to do your own maintenance. So for the utility it's a bad scenario because they are losing a customer who is still utilizing the hardware that they pay for. Government subsidies can only go so far, which leads to the issue now sees: If solar takes over who's going to pay to keep on the existing or new power transmission lines serviced? Right now people take for granted the fact that the utility does it. Some food for thought.

Literally nothing

Campaign Promise 1: To replace Antonin Scalia with a like-minded justice from a list of 20

The Nomination of Neil Gorsuch who is one of the most qualified people ever nominated to the SCOTUS whose nomination to the 10th Circuit Court was unanimously approved by Republicans, and Democrats including Cuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden in 2006. And before the opposition says "but, Merrick Garland" tell them to look up up the Biden Rule

Campaign Promise 2: To suspend immigration from terror-prone countries

Trump has attempted to enact a Travel Ban that is 100% CONSTITUTIONAL AND is made from the seven (six, now) "countries of concern" outlined by the Hussein Administration. This has been blocked by an extremely liberal Hawaiian judge who was appointed by Obama. (The blocking of this travel ban might piss me off more than anything that has happened during his presidency, because judges should be blind to politics, but that is proving to be false.) Hopefully this will go to the Supreme Court and be overturned quickly.

Campaign Promise 3: To defund and crack down on sanctuary cities

Trump has implemented a YUGE crackdown on sanctuary cities, threatening to defund them

Campaign Promise 4: To revive the Keystone Pipeline and Dakota Access Pipeline

The revival of the Dakota and Keystone XL Pipelines creating American jobs

Campaign Promise 5: To pull the US out of the TPP, an Obama-era trade deal detrimental to the US

Trump pulled us out of the TPP which would have been absolutely disastrous for the US

Campaign Promise 6: DONALD TRUMP LOVES WOMEN AND WANTS TO HELP WOMEN!

Trump has signed an Executive Order promoting women in STEM jobs (careers real feminists strive for, not "dance therapy" feminists)

Trump has Launched a Council empowering female leaders and female entrepreneurs

Campaign Promise 7: To renegotiate, or pull out of Bill Clinton's terrible trade deal, NAFTA

Trump met with Justin Trudeau (what a joke) to discuss the tweaking of NAFTA to benefit the US more, after he threatens to leave it

Campaign Promise 8: To undo ridiculous Obama-era federal agency regulations

Trump ordered a two-for-one repeal for all new regulations enacted by federal agencies

Campaign Promise 9: To rollback Obama-era regulations on small businesses

Trump has rolled back ridiculous Obama-era regulations that have made it nearly impossible for small businesses to hire employees

Campaign Promise 10: To help America's inner-cities deeply in need of rebuilding

Trump has signed an Executive Order to give major funding to "Historically Black Colleges and Universities," helping out inner-cities immensely

Campaign Promise 11: To protect our policemen, the true everyday heroes

Trump signed an Executive Order protecting our police

Campaign Promise 12: To crackdown on illegal immigration and to BUILD A WALL

Trump has implemented a YUGE crackdown on illegal immigration and he has started the WALL initiative

Campaign Promise 13: To bolster our depleted military

Trump has increased our military budget because we don't want to use our military, but want to be prepared to use it

Campaign Promise 14: To enact a five year lobbying ban on government Officials after they leave office

Trump has placed a five year and lifetime lobbying ban on government officials for when they leave office

Campaign Promise 15: To crackdown on drug cartels and illegal drugs crossing the border

Trump signed an Executive Order cracking down on drug cartels

Campaign Promise 16: To revitalize the dying coal industry in the US

Trump has enacted Joint Resolution 38 putting thousands of coal miners back to work

Campaign Promise 17: To create American JOBS and bring companies back to America

Trump negotiated a deal with Carrier promising to bring manufacturing and jobs back to the US.

Trump has met with CEOs from huge companies to work on bringing jobs back to America

There was an increase of 298,000 jobs in February alone (liberals will say that counts in Obama's fiscal year, but we know the truth)

Trump met with Intel CEO who promised $7 Billion investment and over 3,000 high paying (not "shovel ready" bullshit jobs) in America

Trump met with the CEO of Softbank who has promised 50,000 more American jobs and has already fulfilled 3,000 of those jobs

Kroger has promised over 10,000 new jobs in the era of Trump

The month of March yielded 263,000 new jobs, which passes the month's estimated 185,000 Big League

Campaign Promise 18: Pushing NATO allies to pay their fair share or face the reality of the US possibly leaving

Trump has put major pressure on the members of NATO to pay their fair and equal share because there are only a handful of countries in NATO who currently pay as much as agreed upon

Campaign Promise 19: To make America energy independent, relieving us from our dependence on foreign entities, such as OPEC

Trump has taken major steps towards America's energy independence

Campaign Promise 20: To enact a hiring freeze on government employees to help stop corruption

Trump enacted a hiring freeze to all federal employees, cutting down on the over-bloated bureaucracy

Campaign Promise 21: Trump could be the president that takes us to Mars!

Trump signed a Bill allowing NASA funding, including an exploration to Mars

Campaign Promise 22: To undo many of Obama's unconstitutional Executive Orders

Rescinding (one of) Obama's incredibly unconstitutional actions regarding transgender bathrooms in schools

Campaign Promise 23: The repeal and replacement of Obamacare. The recent GOP fallout of AHCA Plan was no fault of Trump's. The blame solely belongs to Speaker Ryan. He created a shit bill and couldn't even capitalize to get enough votes. Obamacare will crash in 2017 when individual mandates kick in and Democrats will be to blame. That is when Trump will truly work to Repeal and Replace it with a plan he promised us.

Trump got rid of the idiotic penalty in Obamacare that fines you if you choose not to participate in the program

Campaign Promise 24: To "Bomb the shit out of ISIS"

He called for a drone strike in Afghanistan killing Qari Yasin, a Pakistani Al-Qaeda leader

Campaign Promise 25: To not take a salary as President

He donated his first quarterly salary to the National Park Service

ACTIONS NOT PROMISED ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, BUT HAVE BEEN PUT IN EFFECT:

(Even though it was Mike Pence) The defunding of clinics that perform abortions. Because no matter whether you are pro-choice/pro-life, the government should not be funding abortions. (Also, if people bring up the Hyde Amendment which is supposed to not let any federal funding go towards abortions, LET THEM KNOW that US taxpayers pay for about 24% of abortions despite of that "amendment")

Huge spikes in the NASDAQ average index and the DOW average index starting November 8th. (This will count for Obama unfortunately, but we know where the real credit belongs.)

He has placed sanctions on Iran after they tested ballistic missiles

He has met with/talked to over 30 foreign leaders.

Trump has moved on to tax reform, lowering taxes for Americans

He negotiated down the Price of the new Air Force One one billion dollars in a meeting that lasted just one hour

He issued major cuts to the costs of the F-35 saving billions

He has opened the eyes of the American public to just how unbelievably corrupt (pretty believable to most) the Hussein Administration was.

 

Excellent Rob! Doesn't get better than this!

 

 

This is what happens when trump doesn't pull out...

 

And you would rather have this?

Supercar Ace thank you for the very informative post.

 

I was talking solar at large scale industrial levels, I understand how the infrastructure works but if we put back in the system clean energy can't they sell it? They give the generator peanuts for it so they would be able to generate very high revenues by just maintaining the "vehicle" IMO their interest isn't to transfer the power of generation in the hands of independents which can not be controlled.

 

I am still investigating it at the moment, a company I am leasing a building to does solar, they want to rent my roof space so I am considering it.

Thank you for the excellent explanation!

 

Make's crystal clear sense.

Great read Rob, ACE finally some real info instead of this boring hamster wheel of Trump bashing we've been on.

Its amazing that the same trump haters are going ballistic on the pullout but I have not heard one of these geniuses explain why this deal was good for us and why india and china get to defer doing anything for 15 years. Lets hear where the money goes and when it gets there who administers it and what does our US funds do to help climate change in the US? A Miami Mayor just went on Tucker and looked like an idiot as he could not explain the benefit of the accord. How about we start with our own country and let our money go towards programs that affect the US, All the moron celebtards thing this means no one believes there is any climate change and to the contrary people want to know where exactly is our money going and is it pretty much untraceable after that point and none of it comes back to help the US? Sounds like a horrible agreement that the 80% that get big funds with no requirement should defend

 

It's rather straight forward. Simply look at the development, size, and growth rates of India and China, and then look at that of the US or the EU. Those two countries are still growing massively and as such, their energy needs and restrictions need to be looser in the mid-term. The US is a rich country, very well developed, and growing at a much slower rate. China and India are still industrializing at a rapid pace. It would naturally be unfair to impose the same restrictions on them as the US, not to mention how important Chinese growth is to the global economy as well.

 

Also keep in mind that US emissions per capita are vastly higher in the US than China. In fact, it's higher than every large economy. I suppose a question others would pose is "Why should the US be allowed to produce emissions per capita far greater than anyone else?"

 

Looking at a simple CO2 emissions number, the US per capita emissions are over 2x that of China, at 16.4 and 7.7, respectively. So if we took a simple average between these two countries, we'd see that the US would need to curb emissions by over 20% and China should be allowed to increase by 60%. Is the US entitled to more emissions than China just because we got a head start?

 

The US should lead by example. It's one of the wealthiest and most advanced countries in the world, a leader in science and technology. It's one of the strongest economies in the world. It should lead by example and show the world that it is at the forefront of solving global problems. I find it disgraceful that the US would pull out of the accords and very embarrassing. The US is a country that can and should put the long-term global good before it's short-term interests in misplaced sectors of economic growth.

It's rather straight forward. Simply look at the development, size, and growth rates of India and China, and then look at that of the US or the EU. Those two countries are still growing massively and as such, their energy needs and restrictions need to be looser in the mid-term. The US is a rich country, very well developed, and growing at a much slower rate. China and India are still industrializing at a rapid pace. It would naturally be unfair to impose the same restrictions on them as the US, not to mention how important Chinese growth is to the global economy as well.

 

Also keep in mind that US emissions per capita are vastly higher in the US than China. In fact, it's higher than every large economy. I suppose a question others would pose is "Why should the US be allowed to produce emissions per capita far greater than anyone else?"

 

Looking at a simple CO2 emissions number, the US per capita emissions are over 2x that of China, at 16.4 and 7.7, respectively. So if we took a simple average between these two countries, we'd see that the US would need to curb emissions by over 20% and China should be allowed to increase by 60%. Is the US entitled to more emissions than China just because we got a head start?

 

The US should lead by example. It's one of the wealthiest and most advanced countries in the world, a leader in science and technology. It's one of the strongest economies in the world. It should lead by example and show the world that it is at the forefront of solving global problems. I find it disgraceful that the US would pull out of the accords and very embarrassing. The US is a country that can and should put the long-term global good before it's short-term interests in misplaced sectors of economic growth.

 

It's not that straightforward. We're all in the same technical time period with similar available technologies, why shouldn't they be held to the same standards? The idea of country wealth is ridiculous, China specifically has more than enough money if they want to. Instead they continue to construct gov't owned businesses to compete directly in the free market with private corporations. It's in their best interest to keep emissions requirements low, it's an economic advantage to them in the free market.

 

Also, CO2 per capita is a function of population density. It's like saying top fuel dragsters pollute 3x more than a prius, so they are the problem. Well, there are only two dozen of them in any kind of functioning order at any given time, so it's not really as big of an issue as it seems. Look at the total volume of output and see who has the most dramatic impact on the world as a whole. US and China occupy essentially the same land mass area, but they have 4.26x as many people. Economies of scale being what they are, those people, due to lower requirements for long distance travel, SHOULD have a lower per-capita pollution rate. But in the grand scheme of it, their country pollutes massively! And we haven't even looked at the truly dangerous aspects, hydrocarbons and particulates specifically.

 

Look at the air around Beijing and compare it to ANY city in the US, and tell me we're the problem.

https://www.inverse.com/article/32209-air-p...ettes-unhealthy

 

You can only use statistics to lie when you're surrounded by dumb people.

 

There was an increase of 298,000 jobs in February alone (liberals will say that counts in Obama's fiscal year, but we know the truth)

 

The month of March yielded 263,000 new jobs, which passes the month's estimated 185,000 Big League

 

Huge spikes in the NASDAQ average index and the DOW average index starting November 8th. (This will count for Obama unfortunately, but we know where the real credit belongs.)

 

Just out of curiosity, why do you only quote ADP reports and will you attribute poor reports to Trump as well? ADP is generally not the most accurate picture of jobs. It often over and underestimates things.

 

February 2016 non-farm payrolls were actually higher than Feb 2017, as were March 2016. Today's job report was quite mediocre as well, with revisions to the downside in previous months. One could argue that YoY, Trump has not done for jobs what you've implied. Q1 GDP came in weak and Q2 probably isn't going to come in very strong either.

 

The stock market spike should not be used to measure economic growth or even success. You're seeing PE expansion and a significant amount of gains are actually entirely due to a handful of massive companies -- Apple, Google, Amazon, etc. The market is also doing a YoY comp to a time when energy company earnings were annihilated by energy price decline. The global economy also saw worries out of China in 2016. Interest rates did jump significantly post-election from what were unreasonable lows, but now they are back down to 2017 lows and trending lower again, even with rate increases.

 

The reality is that Donald Trump has not really made any meaningful impact on the economic situation in the US. Nothing has actually changed yet. The US still isn't seeing inflation picking up. Wages aren't really doing much. The US is still pushing the limits of full employment much like it has been for a while. Fed fund rates are increasing and expected to increase, but real interest rates are trending down again. Today's labor participation rate declined.

 

The US economy does not actually react as quickly as a President can speak. Stocks fluctuate on a day to day, rumor to news basis, but simply put, the economic situation is still pretty much based on the policies far prior to what the President has done or could have done so far. Donald Trumps effect on the economy has largely been limited to a "reflation trade" that is starting to fade.

 

I believe Bloomberg has excellent general coverage of the US economic situation and I would encourage reading it regularly if you're interested in a rather non-political view of things. It has good global coverage in general. I also believe we are on the cusp of an economic transformation far beyond what politics can alter or effect due to the progress in AI.

 

Cheers

 

HAVE BEEN PUT IN EFFECT:

(Even though it was Mike Pence) The defunding of clinics that perform abortions. Because no matter whether you are pro-choice/pro-life, the government should not be funding abortions. (Also, if people bring up the Hyde Amendment which is supposed to not let any federal funding go towards abortions, LET THEM KNOW that US taxpayers pay for about 24% of abortions despite of that "amendment")

 

Why, should the government not be funding abortions?

It's not that straightforward. We're all in the same technical time period with similar available technologies, why shouldn't they be held to the same standards? The idea of country wealth is ridiculous, China specifically has more than enough money if they want to. Instead they continue to construct gov't owned businesses to compete directly in the free market with private corporations. It's in their best interest to keep emissions requirements low, it's an economic advantage to them in the free market.

 

Also, CO2 per capita is a function of population density. It's like saying top fuel dragsters pollute 3x more than a prius, so they are the problem. Well, there are only two dozen of them in any kind of functioning order at any given time, so it's not really as big of an issue as it seems. Look at the total volume of output and see who has the most dramatic impact on the world as a whole. US and China occupy essentially the same land mass area, but they have 4.26x as many people. Economies of scale being what they are, those people, due to lower requirements for long distance travel, SHOULD have a lower per-capita pollution rate. But in the grand scheme of it, their country pollutes massively! And we haven't even looked at the truly dangerous aspects, hydrocarbons and particulates specifically.

 

Look at the air around Beijing and compare it to ANY city in the US, and tell me we're the problem.

https://www.inverse.com/article/32209-air-p...ettes-unhealthy

 

You can only use statistics to lie when you're surrounded by dumb people.

 

Don't get me wrong, China is a massive polluter in many ways beyond emissions. I see where you're coming from, but you could argue the same for the US being incredibly inefficient by its policies that created urban sprawl and therefor pollution due to unnecessary long-distance travel. Why has China proper been able to attain a population density 8x that of the US? Why has Germany been able to attain a density 7x the US? Why is China moving the masses into cities while the US seems content with sprawl?

 

Both countries are inefficient. I'd argue the US should be building and investing in nuclear, yet the President is doing everything he can to save a coal, and that state-owned enterprises aren't that bad when it comes to critical things like infrastructure and energy. It is what it is.

 

I believe the fact remains that China is still a developing country experiencing significant growth and structural change, and it's reasonable to see why it should be accommodated in that respect. That doesn't mean they should poison the planet with all their other industrial waste, but to force the standards and situation of the US onto other countries that are further behind in their development cycle would be no better than them trying to force their efficiencies upon the US. Why can't most Americans live without heat and/or AC? Why can't they share kitchen and bathrooms by the 10s or hundreds of millions?

 

At the end of the day, it's a complex equation and you have to decide if this accord was about climate or economics. I personally believe the US should meet emission goals simply because it's the right thing to do. Whether we lose a little from an economic standpoint or whether it's just "unfair" is rather irrelevant to me. You shouldn't do bad things simply because they're bad. It's not because there is some level social or economic agreement among people not to do bad things. Leaving the accord and abandoning the agreements will do nothing to change China's emissions.

 

If the US feels this is more about the economics than the environment, then they should probably focus more on reform that focuses mainly on economics instead of trying to squeeze out shreds of growth and prosperity from environmental issues. Economics is man-made, science isn't. The US has developed an entitlement problem IMO.

Why, should the government not be funding abortions?

In the case of medical emergencies and only situations were child birth threatens the mothers life or will cause major complications then I could see a reason but for the US take payer to be subsidizing Shaniquas 4th abortion because she doesn't know how to make her 6th baby daddy put a condom on. That's garbage

Don't get me wrong, China is a massive polluter in many ways beyond emissions. I see where you're coming from, but you could argue the same for the US being incredibly inefficient by its policies that created urban sprawl and therefor pollution due to unnecessary long-distance travel. Why has China proper been able to attain a population density 8x that of the US? Why has Germany been able to attain a density 7x the US? Why is China moving the masses into cities while the US seems content with sprawl?

 

Because we can. The gov't doesn't determine these things, the citizens do. In areas where people want to live close by you see dense metro areas with high-rise buildings. But thankfully we have options so we aren't forced to live in a 600 sq/ft apartment. If Roman wants to sprawl out over enough land to equal a majority stake in Rhode Island, so be it. It also means all that property generates revenues and is put to good use (see, economics again). Economics will find an organic way to put all available resources to their best use. As that 'best use' evolves, so will the people and property.

 

Both countries are inefficient. I'd argue the US should be building and investing in nuclear, yet the President is doing everything he can to save a coal, and that state-owned enterprises aren't that bad when it comes to critical things like infrastructure and energy. It is what it is.

It isn't the president, it's uninformed people, lobbying groups, and people with significant vested interests in green energy.. it's green for money, nothing else. Nuclear needs to hire a PR firm and in 10 years it might be an option.

 

I believe the fact remains that China is still a developing country experiencing significant growth and structural change, and it's reasonable to see why it should be accommodated in that respect. That doesn't mean they should poison the planet with all their other industrial waste, but to force the standards and situation of the US onto other countries that are further behind in their development cycle would be no better than them trying to force their efficiencies upon the US. Why can't most Americans live without heat and/or AC? Why can't they share kitchen and bathrooms by the 10s or hundreds of millions?

 

The perk of not being the absolute innovation leader is the learning curve is substantially shorter. There is nothing to develop, the solutions are readily available in the market and reasonably easy to implement, they just don't want to. An efficient HVAC system is relatively complex, and if left to our individual own devices 10,000 people in the US could figure out how to build one from scratch. Thankfully I can do what i'm good at, leverage that for compensation and just go buy one from a dude who builds them. The same can be applied to LITERALLY EVERYTHING. You think every power plant, steel mill, oil refinery is a blank slate engineering evolution? fcuk no, you buy or lease them just as you would anything else. With that, the highest level of technology is immediately available to these developing countries anytime they want it, and China has more than enough money to buy everything they need. So please save the 'developing country' victim card, this isn't the african desert where people don't have an economy beyond bartering gazelle pelts. They are playing us, to get the US to fund things they are more than capable of handling on their own. Until the world forces them to get their shit together, they won't, because they ultimately don't care, it's not in the global business strategy of their country. They want to be the world economic power and via many avenues they are getting there. Being clean and environmentally friendly isn't anywhere on that list.

 

At the end of the day, it's a complex equation and you have to decide if this accord was about climate or economics. I personally believe the US should meet emission goals simply because it's the right thing to do. Whether we lose a little from an economic standpoint or whether it's just "unfair" is rather irrelevant to me. You shouldn't do bad things simply because they're bad. It's not because there is some level social or economic agreement among people not to do bad things. Leaving the accord and abandoning the agreements will do nothing to change China's emissions.

 

If the US feels this is more about the economics than the environment, then they should probably focus more on reform that focuses mainly on economics instead of trying to squeeze out shreds of growth and prosperity from environmental issues. Economics is man-made, science isn't. The US has developed an entitlement problem IMO.

 

And that's the largest problem we face, economics isn't irrelevant no matter how much you want it to be. Unless you can force everyone to play the same game, you're crippling yourself, many times in ways you can't overcome. It's easy to say oh, it's worth it, when you're the leader, but it's also VERY easy to get knocked off that spot by people with a lot more hunger to win. We don't have an entitlement problem, we have an arrogance problem, we believe we will always be #1 in the world and that's definitely not guaranteed. And I would argue economics isn't man made anymore than science, it's the understanding of how the world reacts to things.

 

PS, i'm pretty sure you're not supposed to be posting in this thread.