American Politics the 2016 edition

Steve, I believe your growing pains occurred around the time of the "Rump Parliament". 

If the Chinese revalued their currency, wages would go up and cost of imports would also come down dramatically.  They have been stalling it because they have to get high enough in the value chain at an overall economy level (they are not entirely absent from hi tech) so that it doesn't affect their exports.  Still, with a war chest of some $ 800 billion dollars or so plus huge current account surpluses, they can do it and it's only a matter of time that they will.  And when they do, they will be in a position to buy out some of the American companies that would like to see the Chinese revalue.  So in a nutshell, I am saying the Chinese have come a long way from the days of using cheap labour to dump bargain price goods in the international market.  They had to start somewhere because they had to create jobs.  You have to see conditions in Asia - high population and high poverty - to understand that some low paying jobs is a better predicament to have than no jobs at all.  From the 60s or so, the East Asian economies had a clear focus on capturing a good share of exports in labour intensive industries which would create jobs, which is what the people need.  They will aspire for first world standards when income levels also swell to those heights.  What happens with strong ideological convictions in the West is the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater.  So, for example, had Clinton maintained welfare along with de-regulation, workers losing their jobs to globalisation would have had a safety net.  There is too much focus on deficit levels and the existence or absence of a surplus and not on whether the policies in sum create jobs and good quality ones at that.   Europe committed to something even worse vide the Maastricht Treaty and they continue to pay the price for the built in inflexibility of the way the Eurozone and its institutions are set up.

Do not worry about November.

 

1. Clinton is not going to be indicted. That is Sander's pipe dream rather than any possible reality.

 

2. Sanders was right when he said that no one cares about the emails, except for the far-right and far-left. You will also note that the report that said Clinton used a private email server also stated that the previous 5 SOSs had done the exact same thing.  None of them will be indicted either.  No one is putting Colin Powell in jail, and apparently his use of private servers was much more egregious than Clinton's.

 

3. Clinton's poll numbers are going up, which is always what was going to happen once it became clear that she was the nominee, and once people started actually paying attention to what comes out of Trump's mouth.  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/06/03/1534138/-Clinton-opens-up-double-digit-lead-46-35-over-Trump-nationwide-Reuters-Ipsos-poll  And remember, this is before Sanders drops out of the race. Her numbers will improve again after that, and again after the convention, when most of the Bernie-or-busters wake up and smell the roses.  Or, in the case of Trump, the manure pile.

I'm glad you're so confident about Clinton's indictment never happening because there are a lot of people who are not so confident. That would be the members of her staff who are also being questioned. Is Clinton confident that they will take the bullet for her? Then there's the young computer guy who actually set up the off site server. He took the fifth when called in for questioning but has now agreed to tell what he knows if granted immunity. The FBI would not have granted immunity if they did not think that what he knew was very important to their investigation. 

Clinton has already broken more than one federal law. Add to this the facts that her attorney had a copy of her server on a storage device in the safe at his office and that Clinton eventually stored the server at a small private company. I don't think her attorney has security clearance to handle government classified documents and I'm positive that the owners of the small company have any security clearance either.

"I did it because others have done it" is about the lamest defense I've heard. 

Your link to Clinton/Trump poll numbers means nothing to me because that has nothing to do with my post.

Don't assume that my concerns about Clinton have anything to do with Trump. 

For the third time in this thread, I am not a Republican and I'm not voting for Trump.

 

I apologize. I read your post to say you were worried about November.

 

The only thing to worry about is if Trump should win. Then the entire world should be very worried indeed.