Comments by "Farzana 🇺🇸" (@farzana6676) on "Washington Post"
channel.
-
48
-
22
-
19
-
19
-
15
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jimmcloughlin There are two ways to reduce federal debt. Reduce government spending or increase government revenues or a combination.
1. Taxing China. ie. Restructuring the global supply chain. This is a tool and mechanism to reshore American manufacturing. I would rather machines do the jobs here in the US than low wage labour in China. We should treat China in the same way we treated the Soviets during the Cold War. More manufacturing plants in the US means higher employment, higher exports, higher wages, higher government revenues, less government welfare, for those employed and enjoying the economic benefits of these manufacturing facilities which means a reduction in government spending.
2. Taking Iraqi oil
Trump has never stated this as a policy of his, so I'm not going to discuss the practicalities of achieving this but logically, many a country are known to get rich by way of natural resources. Does not need explanation.
3. Make America Wealthy Again
This is just a generalized statement which WP posted as a policy proposal to malign Trump as a crazy.
4. Pulling out of climate agreements
Certain overbearing, and ridiculous bureaucratic environmental regulations are a shackle on the American economy. The Paris Climate Accords were asymmetrically targeting the United States of America whilst giving free reign to our geopolitical competitors like China. All this did was outsource our smelting, outsource our milling, outsource our furnaces and other industry to China. Outsourcing your productivity and emissions to China doesn't really solve emissions problem on a net basis does it? It just shifts the emissions to another location.
We don't mind being party to the Paris Climate Accord so long as all parties are compelled to abide by the same rules, not asymmetric regulations deliberately targeting the United States whilst omitting our geopolitical competitors. Similarly, the Democrats placed shackles on our coal mines and effectively shut them down completely. All this did was send our foreign customers to purchase their coal from elsewhere. They purchased their coal from Africa and China instead. On a net basis the World hasn't used less coal, it just transferred our customers to our direct competitors who expanded their capacity. It's like every single policy we ever made was deliberately designed to impede us and support our competitors. We are all for clean air, lowering our carbon footprint etc, but it should happen organically, with R&D in renewable energies, the price of renewables will automatically drop below the cost of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels will naturally be replaced by renewables based on price and convenience. Under President Trump, we will never be party to an asymmetric agreement that restricts US industry more than everyone else. Obviously derestricting the US economy spurs economic growth and increases government revenues.
5. Cutting government waste.
Self explanatory. Does not require expounding.
6. Repeal and replace Obamacare.
Obamacare premiums are spiraling out of control but I would need to see the replacement pla before I can make a determination on this one.
7. Overhaul entitlements
I do believe there is rampant abuse of our entitlement and welfare programs. Reforming them would go some way to curb government expenditure.
8. Reducing trade deficits. Encourage more partner countries to purchase from you, generate new business, grow your economy. Rest is same as number 1.
9. Reducing hurricane costs
Nonsensic Washington Post claim to malign Trump. He never claimed we can reduce hurricane costs.
10. Raising interest rates
Trump never suggested we should raise interest rates. This is Washington Posts claim. Trump suggested we should make use of our low interest rates to buy our bonds back at a discount.
11. Lowering interest rates.
Same as number 10.
12. Printing money
Trump never ever suggested this as a solution to reducing the debt. He was commenting on our probability of default. This is another WP mischaracterisation.
Attacking the federal debt is a multipronged approach and would require all the above and perhaps more.
Do you have any other questions?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@frowlinian8175 You are simply wrong. It is Acostas personal opinion.
Read the definition of invasion in the Oxford dictionary: An incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity. An unwelcome intrusion into another's domain. synonyms:influx, inundation, inrush, rush, flood, torrent, deluge, stream, avalanche, violation, breach etc.
This caravan perfectly meets this definition and anything Acosta says to the contrary is him trying to ram his personal opinions on the American people and on the President of the United States.
A real journalist would ask, "Sir what makes you call it an invasion?" But Acosta who is not a real journalist but instead he's an activist, says "Sir you are wrong! It is not an invasion. They are hundred of miles away". So clearly he is not there to ask questions but instead he's there to have a political debate. Even after asking two questions and being answered he is trying to hog the microphone and ask an unlimited number.
This type of lack of respect and courtesy for the rules cannot go unaddressed. The man should have his press pass revoked for life. Send him back to the tabloid newsroom where he belongs and let the real political journalists ask legitimate questions in a professional manner.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1