Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Vacamion

President Trump & the USA

Recommended Posts

Trump might get criticised or ridiculed by all and sundry but he's now imposed his travel ban as promised, though with certain amendments. And that just weeks into his administration. Our politicians, by contrast, promise to reduce immigration yet, years later, haven't even made a start.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Thracian said:

Trump might get criticised or ridiculed by all and sundry but he's now imposed his travel ban as promised, though with certain amendments. And that just weeks into his administration. Our politicians, by contrast, promise to reduce immigration yet, years later, haven't even made a start.   

I'd wait to see if it gets gunned down in flames as the last one was before I would safely say it has been "imposed".

 

Edit: In addition, even if it does get imposed and it is thought that this is a good thing, there's a veritable laundry list of other issues waiting for critique.

Edited by leicsmac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Thracian said:

Trump might get criticised or ridiculed by all and sundry but he's now imposed his travel ban as promised, though with certain amendments. And that just weeks into his administration. Our politicians, by contrast, promise to reduce immigration yet, years later, haven't even made a start.   

I don't see how this can be directly linked to immigration - it's mostly down to travelling, not living abroad/settling down.

 

But I guess whatever fits your agenda.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, leicsmac said:

I'd wait to see if it gets gunned down in flames as the last one was before I would safely say it has been "imposed".

 

Looking at what has now been put forward, it appears more professionally done and so I imagine it won't be so open to legal challenge as the first one.

 

The first one was pharsical mind, even if you agree with the aim of the travel ban, how it was initially implemented and the confusion around it was an absolute joke.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Looking at what has now been put forward, it appears more professionally done and so I imagine it won't be so open to legal challenge as the first one.

 

The first one was pharsical mind, even if you agree with the aim of the travel ban, how it was initially implemented and the confusion around it was an absolute joke.

 

 

 

I entirely agree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Looking at what has now been put forward, it appears more professionally done and so I imagine it won't be so open to legal challenge as the first one.

 

The first one was pharsical mind, even if you agree with the aim of the travel ban, how it was initially implemented and the confusion around it was an absolute joke.

 

 

To be fair to Trump he had no cabinet at the time so I imagine Jeff Sessions has had a thorough look through it to make it bulletproof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/news/canada/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-citizen-manpreet-kooner-denied-entry-to-united-states

 

Looks like regular indian (non Muslim- not that it matter ) indians are now being denied entry. Sure its a one off at the moment but there have been other cases  of canadian citizens being denied with  bs excuses or none at all. They chalk it up to whatever they feel like and then say they cant comment on individual cases.

 

This lady is of sikh faith and i question whether i would run into the same problem as i am of sikh heritage  with a typically sikh name. I was born in leicester so i am an immigrant to canada. Already worse off then she is lol.

 

Sadly they will  get away with this though as its a privilege to be allowed to visit the usa as they say.

 

I for one wil not spend  my money going there again. Bloody yanks.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jattdogg said:

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/news/canada/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-citizen-manpreet-kooner-denied-entry-to-united-states

 

Looks like regular indian (non Muslim- not that it matter ) indians are now being denied entry. Sure its a one off at the moment but there have been other cases  of canadian citizens being denied with  bs excuses or none at all. They chalk it up to whatever they feel like and then say they cant comment on individual cases.

 

This lady is of sikh faith and i question whether i would run into the same problem as i am of sikh heritage  with a typically sikh name. I was born in leicester so i am an immigrant to canada. Already worse off then she is lol.

 

Sadly they will  get away with this though as its a privilege to be allowed to visit the usa as they say.

 

I for one wil not spend  my money going there again. Bloody yanks.

 

 

 

I'm white English and Mrs Vac is mixed race Scottish.

 

We have been frequent visitors to the USA over recent years.

 

Not sure now.

 

Seems to be a trend:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2017/feb/28/us-tourism-experiences-a-trump-slump

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vacamion said:

 

I'm white English and Mrs Vac is mixed race Scottish.

 

We have been frequent visitors to the USA over recent years.

 

Not sure now.

 

Seems to be a trend:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2017/feb/28/us-tourism-experiences-a-trump-slump

 

 

 

Before i could cross the border (1 hours drive) and know the only reason  i wouldnt get across is because the border is shut. Have 0 criminal record have a good job, Lots of family in the states if i ever needed help etc etc.

 

With the uncertainty  lots of people are just not going to bother which is going to kill their tourism industry which the articlr you posted pointed to. The people who will feel it most are the border town areas who rely on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Vacamion said:

 

I'm white English and Mrs Vac is mixed race Scottish.

 

We have been frequent visitors to the USA over recent years.

 

Not sure now.

 

Seems to be a trend:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2017/feb/28/us-tourism-experiences-a-trump-slump

 

 

 

That's possibly one  reason but the 20% drop in value of the pound has to have had an effect.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Rincewind said:

And the home grown terrorists and serial killers will still live there.

Don't they live everywhere? I recollect quite a few in the UK. Brady, Morris, Neilson. not to mention our home grown Colin Pitchfork

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Smudge said:

Don't they live everywhere? I recollect quite a few in the UK. Brady, Morris, Neilson. not to mention our home grown Colin Pitchfork

Yes and that is my point. Trump and others like him going on about the overseas threat yet nutters are not exclusively caused by foreigners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Proposed EPA budget cuts for the next year.

 

17191201_1767611620233569_58627681453508

 

Wonder how useful that saved money will be when the water you can buy and the crops you can raise with it are contaminated? Save now, pay later. In full.

 

(And no, trusting businesses and individuals to do the right thing and regulate and preserve on their own dime in this matter doesn't work. The past has proven they don't think long term enough, and the individual legal system is not good enough when punishing them to get them not to do it.)

Edited by leicsmac
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Proposed EPA budget cuts for the next year.

 

17191201_1767611620233569_58627681453508

 

Wonder how useful that saved money will be when the water you can buy and the crops you can raise with it are contaminated? Save now, pay later. In full.

 

(And no, trusting businesses and individuals to do the right thing and regulate and preserve on their own dime in this matter doesn't work. The past has proven they don't think long term enough, and the individual legal system is not good enough when punishing them to get them not to do it.)

From what I have read a lot of the above is done a state level anyway. I'm pretty sure that everyone didn't die prior to EPA so I am sure the US can survive with one with its wings clipped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Local rant: 

The Great Lakes contains 21% of the worlds fresh water. It contains 90% of the US's water supply. 700,000 jobs in Michigan (alone) are related to the great lakes and related tourism. 

We're putting all of that at risk, for 290M USD of savings. That's not even enough to build two F-35 jets. 

 

What kind of buffoon puts one of our most valuable resources at risk to save 0.007% of the federal budget. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/03/2017 at 13:18, Rincewind said:

Yes and that is my point. Trump and others like him going on about the overseas threat yet nutters are not exclusively caused by foreigners.

Everyone realises that. But it's one thing dealing with our own nutters (hard though it seems to be) and quite another importing some more. I can't speak for Trump (who can?) but Brexit is not and has never been about importing nobody, but about restoring our nation's right to choose who comes and on what basis.     Exactly what's wrong with seeking to protect our security? Judging by the number of threats thwarted already, I'd say it was paramount. Think back Rincey. How many security cameras did you see on the streets in your childhood?        

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SMX11 said:

From what I have read a lot of the above is done a state level anyway. I'm pretty sure that everyone didn't die prior to EPA so I am sure the US can survive with one with its wings clipped.

Yes. I'm also pretty sure both life expectancies and mortality rates due to unhealthy food and water were higher prior to the EPA (that organisation not of course being the only factor in the improvement of both) too, so "everyone" didn't die...just lots more people than today. Is a step back to that a good idea?

 

If the states pick up the slack entirely, fine. But I'm extremely unconvinced that they will. Besides, since when does fresh air and water (or for that matter, polluted air and water) stay in one state anyway?

 

Small, multiple managements for environmental issues doesn't work. It's been proven time and time again, and yet, this erroneous dangerous belief persists that if you leave people alone they'll take care of the Earth (or at least do enough to mitigate the damage others do) for future generations after they die because...reasons. That's not the way (most) humans work.

 

At least those passing these cuts should be honest enough to say that they simply don't give a toss and/or think the next life will be the one that matters, rather than quoting the same old BS above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Thracian said:

Everyone realises that. But it's one thing dealing with our own nutters (hard though it seems to be) and quite another importing some more. I can't speak for Trump (who can?) but Brexit is not and has never been about importing nobody, but about restoring our nation's right to choose who comes and on what basis.     Exactly what's wrong with seeking to protect our security? Judging by the number of threats thwarted already, I'd say it was paramount. Think back Rincey. How many security cameras did you see on the streets in your childhood?        

They weren't invented in Rincy's childhood lol 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...