Posted by: coastcontact | April 18, 2018

Anti-Semitism is alive and well in Germany

Wars won do not end hatred!

Just because WWII ended, hatred of Jews didn’t end.  Kristallnacht, literally, , literally, “Night of Crystal,” is often referred to as the “Night of Broken Glass.” The name refers to the wave of violent anti-Jewish pogroms which took place on November 9 and 10, 1938 in Germany. That was well before the Holocaust. The wave of violence took place throughout Germany as they annexed Austria and areas of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia.

This past week a nationwide controversy erupted in Germany over a taboo-breaking rap duo that won one of the country’s most important music industry awards for a best selling album and song that included lyrics that made references to the Holocaust and Nazi concentration camp prisoners. Then just three days later German police said that they had launched an investigation after two men wearing Jewish skullcaps were attacked and insulted in Berlin. It was an incident that comes amid concern that anti-Semitism could be on the rise in Germany.

What is really curious is the growing Jewish population in Germany.

When Germany was reunited in 1990, there were 28,000 Jews in the country. Since then, the number has more trebled to 107,000, largely due to an influx from Eastern Europe, after Germany passed the “Quota Law”. Enforced until 2004, this gave those from the former Soviet Union who could prove they were Jewish, or had a Jewish parent, the right to settle. Germany now has now the third largest Jewish population in Western Europe after Britain and France.  The New York Times reported on September 27, 2017 that Israelis are also moving to Germany.

Jews must be suffering some kind of amnesia.

Advertisements
Posted by: coastcontact | April 16, 2018

The President Is Not Above The Law

The President Is
Not Above The Law

 

New York Times THE EDITORIAL BOARD

 APRIL 15, 2018

“This great nation can tolerate a president who makes mistakes,” declared Senator Orrin Hatch, the Utah Republican. “But it cannot tolerate one who makes a mistake and then breaks the law to cover it up.”

No, Mr. Hatch wasn’t talking about Donald Trump. It was 1999, and he was talking about Bill Clinton.

At that time, the American system — and the flawed yet sometimes heroic people their fellow Americans choose to lead them — underwent, and passed, a hard test: The president, his financial dealings and his personal relationships were painstakingly investigated for years. Prosecutors ultimately accused Mr. Clinton of lying under oath, to cover up a sexual affair. The House of Representatives impeached him, but the Senate declined to convict, and Mr. Clinton stayed in office.

The public, which learned in detail about everything investigators believed Mr. Clinton had done wrong, overwhelmingly agreed with the judgment of the Senate. It was a sad and sordid and at times distracting business, but the system worked.

Now Mr. Hatch and his fellow lawmakers may be approaching a harsher and more consequential test. We quote his words not to level some sort of accusation of hypocrisy, but to remind us all of what is at stake.

News reports point to a growing possibility that President Trump may act to cripple or shut down an investigation by the nation’s top law-enforcement agencies into his campaign and administration. Lawmakers need to be preparing now for that possibility because if and when it comes to pass, they will suddenly find themselves on the edge of an abyss, with the Constitution in their hands.

[Keep up with the state of the national debate right in your inbox by subscribing to the Opinion Today newsletter.]

Make no mistake: If Mr. Trump takes such drastic action, he will be striking at the foundation of the American government, attempting to set a precedent that a president, alone among American citizens, is above the law. What can seem now like a political sideshow will instantly become a constitutional crisis, and history will come calling for Mr. Hatch and his colleagues.

For months, investigators have been examining whether Mr. Trump’s campaign conspired with the Russian government to undermine American democracy, and whether the president misused his power by obstructing justice in an effort to end that investigation.

Until the last few weeks, Mr. Trump had shown restraint, by his standards, anyway. He and his lawyers cooperated with investigators. Mr. Trump never tweeted directly about Robert Mueller, the special counsel, and spoke about him publicly only when asked.

Alas, that whiff of higher executive function is gone. Mr. Trump is openly attacking both Mr. Mueller and Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, appointed by Mr. Trump himself. Mr. Rosenstein is overseeing the Russia investigation and signing off on Mr. Mueller’s actions.

Of course, this president has been known to huff and puff, to bluff and bluster, and he may be doing no more than that now. He may choose not to fire either man. We know he has already twice told his aides he wanted Mr. Mueller fired, only to be talked out of such rash action.

But if the president does move against the investigators, it will be up to Congress to affirm the rule of law, the separation of powers and the American constitutional order. The miserable polarization and partisan anger that have been rising in American life for decades will hit a new crescendo, and that will present congressional Republicans with a heavy burden indeed.

Mr. Trump’s Tweets on the Rule of Law

“DOJ just issued the McCabe report – which is a total disaster. He LIED! LIED! LIED! McCabe was totally controlled by Comey – McCabe is Comey!! No collusion, all made up by this den of thieves and lowlifes!” — @realDonaldTrump, April 13 2018

“So sad that the Department of “Justice” and the FBI are slow walking, or even not giving, the unredacted documents requested by Congress. An embarrassment to our country!” — @realDonaldTrump, April 2 2018

“Why does the Mueller team have 13 hardened Democrats, some big Crooked Hillary supporters, and Zero Republicans? Another Dem recently added…does anyone think this is fair? And yet, there is NO COLLUSION!” — @realDonaldTrump, March 18 2018

“The Mueller probe should never have been started in that there was no collusion and there was no crime. It was based on fraudulent activities and a Fake Dossier paid for by Crooked Hillary and the DNC, and improperly used in FISA COURT for surveillance of my campaign. WITCH HUNT!” — @realDonaldTrump, March 17 2018

Many of them are not fans of this president. Republicans used to warn the nation about Mr. Trump openly, back when they thought they could still protect their party from him. Here’s a short sampling: “malignant clown,” “national disgrace,” “complete idiot,” “a sociopath, without a conscience or feelings of guilt, shame or remorse,” “graceless and divisive,” “predatory and reprehensible,” flawed “beyond mere moral shortcomings,” “unsound, uninformed, unhinged and unfit,” “a character and temperament unfit for the leader of the free world,” “A bigot. A misogynist. A fraud. A bully.” Some still say these sorts of things, albeit anonymously. Just last week, one of the president’s defenders in Congress told a conservative columnist, “It’s like Forrest Gump won the presidency, but an evil, really [expletive] stupid Forrest Gump.”

Yet if Mr. Trump goes after Mr. Mueller or Mr. Rosenstein, even Republicans who have misgivings about the president might be inclined to fall into line. They may resent what feels like an endless investigation, one that is endangering their agenda; or they may resent partisan attacks on Mr. Trump. Such frustrations — like ones Democrats vented when Mr. Clinton was in investigators’ sights — are certainly understandable. Republicans may also find themselves tempted by the political running room they would have with the investigation ended and the three branches of government under their control.

Maybe — and this is the scariest contingency to contemplate — Republican leaders would calculate that with their support, or mere acquiescence, Mr. Trump could get away with it. The overwhelming majority of Americans, including most Republicans, want Mr. Mueller to keep his job, and perhaps a groundswell of revulsion at unchecked presidential power would follow any action against the special counsel. But many Americans, weary of the shouting in Washington, might dismiss the whole thing as another food fight. We can be fairly certain that the pressure on Republican lawmakers from the minority of Americans who support Mr. Trump, as well as from the likes of Fox News and Sinclair, would be intense.

Of course, it’s when overriding your principles is the easy thing to do that you have an urgent responsibility, and opportunity, to demonstrate that you have some.

Look at what’s happening in Missouri right now. The state’s Republican governor, Eric Greitens, has been accused of sexual assault and coercion, and is scheduled to face trial next month on a felony charge of invasion of privacy. It’s a scandal of Trumpian proportions, and Mr. Greitens is responding with Trumpian bravado, calling the investigation and prosecution a “political witch hunt.”

Other Republicans On The Rule Of Law

“In a country based on the system of laws, which is really the great gift given to us under the terms of our Constitution, there needs to be a consistency of application. The idea that all people are equal under the law is not a relative term.” — JUDD GREGG, 1999

“I have asked myself how men from an era when honor was valued above all other traits, men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and James Madison, might have viewed a President who committed perjury and obstruction of justice for personal and political gain.” — Phil Gramm, 1999

“What standard of conduct should we insist our President live up to? … Do not underestimate, my friends, the corrupting and cynical signal we will send if we fail to enforce the highest standards of conduct on the most powerful man in the nation.” — Pete Domenici, 1999

“Committing crimes of moral turpitude such as perjury and obstruction of justice go to the heart of qualification for public office.” — Orrin Hatch, 1999

Yet the legislative report detailing his misbehavior was bipartisan, and top state Republicans have spoken out forcefully. They recognize that Mr. Greitens is unfit. (They also see a threat to their political interests, but the two can go hand in hand.)

Or look at Watergate. We may think of it now as a two-year drama with an inevitable end, the takedown of a president who tried to cover up a criminal conspiracy. But many people forget how close President Richard Nixon came to surviving the affair. He was forced from office only because enough Republican leaders recognized the legitimacy of the investigation and stood up to him. And even then, it took the revelation of incriminating recordings. No recordings have come out this time — yet.

A few senior Republicans have been saying the right things — including Mr. Hatch. He tweeted that anyone telling the president to fire Mr. Mueller “does not have the President or the nation’s best interest at heart.” Senator Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina, warned Mr. Trump that firing Mr. Mueller would be “the beginning of the end of his presidency.”

That’s all necessary and good. But it’s not enough. More Republicans need to make it clear that they won’t tolerate any action against either man, and that firing Mr. Mueller would be, as Senator Charles Grassley said, “suicide.”

Mr. Mueller’s investigation has already yielded great benefit to the country, including the indictments of 13 Russians and three companies for trying to undermine the presidential election. None of us can know if prosecutors will eventually point the finger at the president himself. But should Mr. Trump move to hobble or kill the investigation, he would darken rather than dispel the cloud of suspicion around him. Far worse, he would free future presidents to politicize American justice. That would be a danger to every American, of whatever political leaning.

The president is not a king but a citizen, deserving of the presumption of innocence and other protections, yet also vulnerable to lawful scrutiny. We hope Mr. Trump recognizes this. If he doesn’t, how Republican lawmakers respond will shape the future not only of this presidency and of one of the country’s great political parties, but of the American experiment itself.

Posted by: coastcontact | April 12, 2018

Syria – A Moral Dilemma

Aleppo

Aleppo, Syria

That this discussion is falling on Holocaust Remembrance Day should at least give everyone a pause and a thought about Syria today.

This is a test for President Donald Trump!

Try searching for a strategic value of Syria to the United States on the internet and you will come up empty handed.  That may be the reason the Donald Trump said just eight days ago that America would be leaving very soon.  Our only reason that I can find for being there is to protect the hundreds of thousands of civilians who have been the victims of the continuous bombardment of their cities and towns by Bashar al-Assad’s air force.

A pin prick bombardment by America of Syrian army bases by the United States will not change Assad’s attack on his own people.

If the United States is actually concerned with the well-being of the Syrian people it is obvious that America would have to send a much larger army than the 2,000 or so troops currently there.  This brings up the question of America’s willingness to protect people everywhere from genocide.  Make no mistake Assad’s attacks are a form of genocide.

America’s history in protecting victims of genocide should be obvious.  Most recently the Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar (Burma) is the best example of pretending nothing was happening.  Rwanda is another example.  Historically America refused asylum for Jews attempting to escape the Holocaust during WII.

President Bill Clinton intervention in Bosnia is an example of America standing up to genocide.

No one seems to know or understand the mind of Donald Trump.  If he were to stop the killing of people in Syria he would go down in history as a man who really does care about people.     

Posted by: coastcontact | April 7, 2018

Alzheimer’s Disease

Personally this is a difficult topic for me.  My mother had advanced Alzheimer’s Disease in the last two years of her life.  It was so bad that she could not speak. She could not recognize me.  She could not recognize my sister.  Basically she was a vegetable.  She died two months before her 96th birthday.  Until that loss of cognizance she had a very wonderful life.

Looking back on her senior years I knew something was wrong when she drove her car into cupboards in the garage.  She refused a pill organizer box my sister bought her. She was actually angry that the box was bought.  Small memory problems became apparent about 10 years before those horrible last two.  Never overweight and very well educated her favorite games were Bridge and Mahjong.  She did not suffer from high blood pressure, high cholesterol and other diseases common to the elderly.

Most recently there have been articles posted and printed recommending more exercise as a way of reducing the chance of dementia.  There was also an article saying most elderly have the bodies of 40 year olds.  Wouldn’t that indicate we are being careful of what we eat and are obtaining adequate exercise?  If that is accurate then what would additional exercise do for our minds?

Forget Prevagen.  The Federal Trade Commission and New York’s attorney general charged Quincy Bioscience, maker of Prevagen, with fraud for selling a memory supplement based on a glowing jellyfish protein.  Prevagen isn’t FDA approved.

Mayo Clinic posts this on their web site: Scientists believe that for most people, Alzheimer’s disease is caused by a combination of genetic, lifestyle and environmental factors that affect the brain over time. Less than 5 percent of the time, Alzheimer’s is caused by specific genetic changes that virtually guarantee a person will develop the disease. Your risk of developing Alzheimer’s appears to be somewhat higher if a first-degree relative — your parent or sibling — has the disease. Scientists have identified rare changes (mutations) in three genes that virtually guarantee a person who inherits them will develop Alzheimer’s. But these mutations account for less than 5 percent of Alzheimer’s disease.

People with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) have memory problems or other symptoms of cognitive decline that are worse than might be expected for their age, but not severe enough to be diagnosed as dementia.

There’s no lifestyle factor that’s been definitively shown to reduce your risk of Alzheimer’s disease.

However Mayo Clinic says some evidence suggests that the same factors that put you at risk of heart disease also may increase the chance that you’ll develop Alzheimer’s. Examples include:

  • Lack of exercise
  • Obesity
  • Smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke
  • High blood pressure
  • High blood cholesterol
  • Poorly controlled type 2 diabetes
  • A diet lacking in fruits and vegetables

These risk factors are also linked to vascular dementia, a type of dementia caused by damaged blood vessels in the brain. Working with your health care team on a plan to control these factors will help protect your heart — and may also help reduce your risk of Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia.

It does not appear there is any specific cause of dementia.  With an aging and older population the world is in for many more cases of this disease.

My mother died from the disease.  My father lived to 86.  He was sharp as a tack until he had a stroke. He had high blood pressure for years.  I don’t have that disease.

I think I have chance of living to my mid 90s without a stroke or dementia.

Posted by: coastcontact | April 3, 2018

Can Trump Send the Military to Guard the US Border?

Donald Trump’s dream of a Fascist dictatorship.  Shut down the media, stop freedom of the press, make the congress a rubber stamp body, end the judiciary, and president for life.

Can the president deploy troops to the southern border of the United States to stop illegal immigrants from entering?  The answer is NO!

The military can be deployed for ‘support’ services, which mostly would mean various kinds of surveillance or possibly building things. But if soldiers see people trying to get across the border they have to report that to Border Patrol because only Border Patrol can try to stop them.

The reason is because the Posse Comitatus Act makes two things clear. 1) Soldiers and other military personnel can’t enforce US laws within the United States and 2) They can’t detain or search people or do most of the things that usually go along with police authority in the United States. There are other things they can’t do. But those are the key ones relevant to the border.  Congress would have to pass a law specifically authorizing the military to act as border guards.

In 2006 6,000 national guard troops were sent to the border to assist the border patrol with non-enforcement duties.  Those actions included surveillance, communications, intelligence, analysis, and administration.

The law should not be changed.  If it is it would be the first step towards a Gestapo.  The definition of Gestapo was the German Secret Police during Nazi rule. Gestapo were Secret military police that would come and take away people who opposed the Nazis.

I believe this is part of Trump’s plan.

Posted by: coastcontact | April 1, 2018

April Fool’s Day and Biblical Nonsense

Is it a coincidence that April Fool’s Day and Easter are on the same day or nearly the same day every year?

Religion is all about faith.  Most people have surrendered to believing the stories and tales and instructions described in the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, the Vedas, or other holy scripture.

Many of you reading this posting may call me an atheist or perhaps an agnostic.

In my view it is all well-meaning stories and guiding ideas that will take us to heaven.  Heaven is an imaginary place where we will live forever.  That is our dream because most of us cannot accept the reality that life is not infinite and we will die.

The two most outrageous stories that I am aware of is that 1) the Red Sea opened so that the escaping Jews could leave Egypt.  Then the sea returned killing Egyptian soldiers that were chasing the Jews. 2) A man named Jesus died and then came back to life.  In both instances Christians and Jews believe these stories.

It is written in a book so it must be true.

So the Jews wandered in the desert for 40 years before arriving in Canaan. If one looks at a map of the region between Egypt and Israel, the question of why it took 40 years to travel a straight-line distance of only about 240 miles.

Most Christians believe Jesus to be the Son of God and the awaited Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament.  The evidence is lacking but the people dreamed of someone coming to promise them a place that they will live forever.  Jews as well as Christians want to believe they will live forever even if their bodies fail.  To this day religious Jews believe the Messiah is still to come. 

The other fairy tales are just as ridiculous.

Noah’s Ark is the vessel in the Genesis flood narrative (Genesis chapters 6–9) by which God spares Noah, his family, and a remnant of all the world’s animals from a world-engulfing flood. According to Genesis, God gave Noah instructions for building the ark Seven days before the deluge.  God told Noah to enter the ark with his household and the animals. The story goes on to describe the ark being afloat for 150 days and then coming to rest on the Mountains of Ararat and the subsequent receding of the waters.  Searches for Noah’s Ark have been made from at least the time of Eusebius (c. 275–339 CE) to the present day. There is no scientific evidence of a global flood, and despite many expeditions, no evidence of the ark has been found.

Jews celebrate Hanukkah every year (usually occurring near the end of November to the end of December).  The eight-day celebration commemorates the rededication during the second century B.C. of the Second Temple in Jerusalem, where according to legend Jews had risen up against their Greek-Syrian oppressors.  There was always to be an eternal light in the Temple but the Greeks had contaminated the oil for the light.  One jar of oil that could last for only one day burned for eight days.

Oh and then there was God Tests Abraham’s Faith. When Isaac (son Abraham) had grown older, Jehovah tested Abraham’s faith. He called: ‘Abraham!’ And Abraham answered: ‘Here I am!’ Then God said: ‘Take your son, your only son, Isaac, and go to a mountain that I will show you. There kill your son and offer him up as a sacrifice.’  Then at the last minute God sends an angel to tell Abraham you have shown your faith.  Don’t kill your son but sacrifice a sheep from the nearby bushes.

And finally God created heaven and earth in six days and rested on the seventh. How long is a day?  This was a story to explain the world to children.

April Fool!  It is all a fairly-tale.

Posted by: coastcontact | March 26, 2018

American Bison in Yellowstone National Park

The American bison was once nearly extinct in North America, but this iconic symbol of the American West has largely recovered through the efforts of various public and private agencies. Many herds thrive in national parks and preserves, like the one here making its way through a snowy Yellowstone National Park. The bison endure food shortages in winter only to gorge on spring and summer grass as they fatten up and prepare for another year.

If you have not visited Yellowstone National Park you have missed on of the most spectacular places in the world. The Buffalo (American Bison) are everywhere in the park. You may see them as you are waiting to see Old Faithful spew its water jet or you may see them walking along side of the road you are traveling. If you are planning a trip contact me.  I have been there three times and would willingly go along for another trip.

Posted by: coastcontact | March 25, 2018

The Ultimate Tone Deafness – No New Gun Control Legislation

Hundreds of thousands of young Americans marched around this country demanding action to reduce gun violence. What has been the response?

Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum said “Kids should learn CPR instead of rallying for gun laws.”

Florida Senator Marco Rubio said “many other Americans who do not support a gun ban” because they view it as a threat to the Second Amendment. Rubio has an A+ rating from the gun rights group for supporting NRA-friendly legislation. According to the New York Times, he has received $3.3 million from the group.

Some other Senators and House representatives made remarks about supporting new legislation but their responses were vague.

If you think there is a likelihood of new laws imposing restrictions on gun ownership in the United States consider this report from Fortune magazine this past February. Here is a list of the top recipients of NRA contributions.

Top 5 Senators That Benefited the Most From NRA Funding
John McCain (R, AZ) – $7.74 million
Richard Burr (R, NC) – $6.99 million
Roy Blunt (R, MO) – $4.55 million
Thom Tillis (R, NC) – $4.42 million
Cory Gardner (R, CO) – $3.88 million

Top 5 Representatives That Benefited the Most From NRA Funding
French Hill (R, AR) – $1.09 million
Ken Buck (R, CO) – $800,544
David Young (R, IA) – $707,662
Mike Simpson, (R, ID) – $385,731
Greg Gianforte (R, MT) – $344,630

The United States is ruled by Gun Culture!

Posted by: coastcontact | March 24, 2018

Lowering the Cost of Living

The average Social Security check is only $1,413.08 in 2018, making it hard to get by in the United States. Some retirees look to other countries, where living expenses can be lower, to make their Social Security checks stretch further.

A recent GOBankingRates survey found that more than half of people ages 55 and older have less than $10,000 saved for retirement — and a whopping 34 percent have nothing saved at all.

As the tough economic times continue in the U.S., many people are looking to cut down on their expenses by moving to more affordable cities and towns.

Or is the answer moving to another country where the cost of living is far less than the United States.

southamericaliving.com lists workable budget of $1000 – $1200 USD and up, affording more luxuries such as eating out regularily, shopping excursions, larger apartment or house. The following countries have the lowest cost of living: Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. Chihuahua, Mexico and Guadalajara, Mexico are two of the lowest cost cities in Latin America.

Inexpensive healthcare is often touted as a reason to retire abroad. You become eligible for Medicare at age 65. However, you can’t use this government health coverage overseas.

The annual cost to own and operate a sedan in the U.S. is $8,588, according to AAA. When you retire abroad, you might not need a car because public transit is more common and reliable.

Rent in Mexico is 4.33% lower than in United States. In Santa Ana, Costa Rica a 3-bedroom single family home currently costs about US$212,000.  The cost in other Costa Rican cities housing costs are similar to Santa Ana.  Consider those housing costs in your destination city.  The cost per square meter of a home in Jakarta, Indonesia is $2,120 USD. The cost per square meter of a home in Richmond, Virginia is $2,128 USD.

If you think you’ll lower your tax bill by retiring overseas, think again. You still have to pay U.S. taxes. Even if you move your assets to accounts in your new country, you will be required to file an annual tax return, according to the U.S. Department of State.

If you retire abroad, you still can collect Social Security benefits, said Sally Hurme, author of “Get the Most Out of Retirement: Checklist for Happiness, Health, Purpose, and Financial Security.” In many countries, you can even have your check directly deposited into an account, she said. The Social Security Administration has a Payments Abroad Screening Tool you can use to see in which countries you can live and still receive your check.

You might also have to pay taxes in your new country, Hurme said. The U.S. does have treaties with some countries — including Canada and Mexico — that prevent double taxation. But the country you want to retire to might not.

If you own property or have assets in your new country, you’ll likely need to hire an attorney in that country to help draft an estate plan, Hurme said. That’s because any documents that you had drafted in the U.S. — such as a will, trust or power of attorney — might not have any effect overseas.

The alternative to moving to a“low cost” country is considering moving to a low cost city in the United States.

I found a survey of those low cost cities. Actually they are mostly towns that you are not likely to visit let alone move to. Excluding those small towns (less than 100,000 population) the least expensive small city is Brownsville, Texas with a Population of 180,000 and a Cost of Living 14.9% below U.S. average. Indianapolis, Indiana has a population of over 800,000 people and a Cost of Living 13% below U.S. average.

How comfortable will you feel living in another country? Your family and friends will be thousands of miles away. Visiting San Jose, Costa Rica may be fun but living there should at least cause you to wonder about the downsides.  Think through the entire process before moving to another country rather than living in a country where you were born and feels like home.

Posted by: coastcontact | March 22, 2018

The Largest U.S. Trade Deficit Is With China

Why is President Donald Trump imposing tariffs on China?

More than 65 percent of the U.S. trade deficit in goods was with China. The $375 billion deficit with China was created by $506 billion in imports. The main Chinese imports are consumer electronics, clothing, and machinery.

America only exported $130 billion in goods to China.

As this graph indicates this is not a new phenomenon. It goes back to the late 1900s.

China currently assembles the majority of Apple’s iPhones in its Shenzen, China, location by Foxconn. That company maintains factories in countries across the world, including Thailand, Malaysia, the Czech Republic, South Korea, Singapore, and the Philippines. A second company, Pegatron, is a relatively recent addition to the iPhone assembly process also in China.

High End clothing brands we all lust after really have to work hard to minimize the production costs while keeping their products “luxurious” and “high end”. China is their go to manufacturing location. Who are they?
1. PRADA
2. COACH
3. ARMANI
4. BURBERRY
5. MULBERRY
6. MARC JACOBS
7. D&G

Chinese factories manufacture winter coats, gloves, mittens and hats for consumers around the world. These factories also produce maternity clothes and infant clothes as well as wedding dresses and tuxedos. Underwear, T-shirts and slips are among the items exported from China to consumers around the world. Sports caps are also produced in China as are belts and bras.

Luggage, machinery, and furniture are also made in China.

The consequence of the outsourcing of all that manufacturing has resulted in a major loss of good paying blue collar jobs in America.

Trump is correct when he points out that both political parties stood by and did nothing as the jobs left the country.

We couldn’t stop the outsourcing but our government did nothing to train people in new jobs that are needed in the 21st century.

While Trump has accurately identified the problem he does not appear to understand the needed solution. His solution of applying tariffs will only harm the American economy by raising the cost of consumer goods.

Article I of the US Constitution vests the power to set tariffs in Congress. The president has the power to impose tariffs at his discretion only because Congress has passed laws granting him that power. If Republicans in Congress think Trump has a bunch of dumb, destructive ideas about trade, they could pass new laws that strip him of that power.

Congress is in total grid lock. They won’t do anything to counter the new tariffs.

We are headed for a trade war. The last time that happened was 1930. Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, formally United States Tariff Act of 1930, also called Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act, U.S. legislation (June 17, 1930) that raised import duties to protect American businesses and farmers, adding considerable strain to the international economic climate of the Great Depression.

Wall Street bankers are not given to grovelling. But in June 1930 Thomas Lamont, a partner at J.P. Morgan, came close. “I almost went down on my knees to beg Herbert Hoover to veto the asinine Hawley-Smoot Tariff,” he recalled. “That Act intensified nationalism all over the world.”

Older Posts »

Categories