The Trump Presidency – 2016

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Qwikshot

Mike Myers didn't really know what to do in that moment.

The extended version is great because Myers can tell Kanye is not reading the screen and he doesn't know what to do. When Kanye says they are sending people to New Orleans to shoot blacks Myers knew there was no saving things.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

dola

Saying De Blasio fucked things up doesn't mean every Dem has done the same thing.

No but it is a real life example of Democratic leadership screwing up as well. I mean NYC is the epicenter of the United State's COVID problems right now.

Someone responded about getting into whataboutism. But that's exactly the opposite of my point. My point is outside of South Korea (and I am not even sure their culture is applicable to the United States) every country in the Northern Hemisphere has had similar issues and problems. Maybe leadership would have made no difference at all and the human race was just not prepared for this? I mean in the hypothetical world Clinton and Bush and Romney are all confronting this problem and making a difference but in reality Trump, De Blasio, GOP leadership, Pelosi, Italy's PM, Spain's PM, Boris Johnson are not having any effect.

[JPhillips]

Also in the real world Jay Inslee and Mike DeWine and Andy Beshear have done very good jobs.

[SirFozzie]

Jobs wise, the last two weeks have equaled two years of the Great Recession. Things are never going to be the same.

[JPhillips]

Furloughs coming in my wife's department. Two out of five expected to be furloughed until the end of June. Hope it's not her.

[Scoobz0202]

My GF is pretty fortunate. Hasn't been working since March 15th, but still getting paid for full time. Just found out 5 minute ago that they are extending her pay protection until June 1st (was April 26th). Very happy for her. And still getting her annual bonus in about a week from the previous year performance (the annual bonus is probably about 25% of her annual income minus bonuses. So its a big deal)

[whomario]

Originally Posted by panerd

It seems as though Merkel's management is manipulating death numbers though right? Where Italy is counting everything as COVID.

.

That fake news shit is still circulating ? An italian right wing faction started it like 3 weeks ago back when it still seemed like defending 'italian honour' was a reasonable thing to do. On the sole basis that Italy had more deaths and "how can that be ?!?"
The tracking here is about as far above reproach as possible. With the way the health care system, data input and oversight is designed (very independent, transparent and not collated at all before publication) you could not fudge those numbers if you wanted to. Unless all hospitals (which are independent entities) secretely made a pact to hide deaths, this is not happening.

Heck, we are even counting deaths outside hospitals contrary to other countries (UK, France until this week. Not sure about Italy, but reports from they are missing a ton) and since we test a shitload from the start we never even had any sort of mysterious rise in deaths from "respiratory disease" or "pneumonia".

Funnily enough the german conspiracy cabal was claiming the government made this into a bigger deal by counting unnecessary deaths like even counting people in palliative care that have decided to stop treatment for Cancer to die without further prolonging suffering. Which are counted, just not with the intent to make this a bigger deal.

So far Germany has done a great job at testing and quarantining as well as a decent one keeping it from spreading in hospitals and retirement homes. We also have a healthcare system with weaknesses but tailormade for this: We have a shitton of ICU facilities and Ventilators (5 times more per capita than the UK and 3+ Italy) and have not had major outbreaks in confined areas like Lombardy or Madrid.

Edit: If anything the low death numbers create a problem because people are growing restless with the restrictions (why not open everything up ? Why kill my job/forbid me from meeting people when here is hardly anybody dying ?)

[tarcone]

Our school district will probably have RIFs next school year and a salary freeze. And I imagine Insurance prices will go way up so the insurance companies can make back the money they lost from this.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Third: I'm actually kind of surprised that Bernie isn't making a loud push for 'Medicare for all' right now.

He most definitely is. Every day. It's just that campaign stuff is being drowned in Covid 19 news (as it should be). And his campaign surrogates are attacking Biden, re: M4A regarding Covid 19.

[RainMaker]

Probably not a great idea to tie health insurance to your employer when everyone gets fired during a pandemic.

[NobodyHere]

On a seperate topic:

I can only imagine public pension funds are getting hammered right now.

[RainMaker]

Is the fed buying up muni bonds or just treasuries? Because it would be a smart move to start buying up those muni bonds.

[Edward64]

Re: Trump vs Hillary.

Pretty obvious that both would have found lacking in the response (just like pretty much every other leader). I mean this in the early and also current stage.

There's plenty to ding Trump on for sure so using a scale of 1-10 where 10 is perfection and 6 is average. My take is Trump was a dismal, oblivious 3 in the early stages and he is 6-7 now, much of it based on Fauci & Birx and him listening to them (at least for now).

Hillary would have listened earlier, taken it more seriously and been less BS. So I would give her a 6-7 in early stages but do think she would be struggling in current day just like Trump is.

Re: re-election. Yes, Trump can still pull out a win on this. He won't be blamed on the poor economy. He will be blamed for the early response but that won't matter if he does well going forward.

He is more somber now, told a sympathetic story about a friend that went to hospital and 2 days later is in a coma, still spotty in the daily debriefs but great opportunities for him to be presidential and less of an oblivious ass, he's shown some bi-partianship etc.

We've taken some hits and a knee to the groin. Doubled over now taking an 8 count. But once we are over the hump, he needs to find someone to blame.

If he is smart he would continue to attack China. Not with the childish Chinese Virus/Flu but about how it originated there, how they didn't tell the truth etc. Plenty of world leaders would jump on the bandwagon and unite under Trump if they can believe he won't backstab them.

Additionally, if we do find therapeutics and vaccine, we should give it to the world for sure but also use it to build tremendous goodwill with all friendlies, neutrals and borderline frenemies.

... but only if he recognizes he has to change his abrasive approach, see this as an opportunity to position the US better in the world, and see this as an opportunity to rebuild his image & legacy.

[JPhillips]

You must not have seen today's tweets. The new tone is back to the old tone.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by Edward64

...but only if he recognizes he has to change his abrasive approach, see this as an opportunity to position the US better in the world, and see this as an opportunity to rebuild his image & legacy.

So ignoring the rest of your post, what in the world gives you ANY kind of faith that this is going to happen?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

You must not have seen today's tweets. The new tone is back to the old tone.

I can believe it. And hence my last paragraph.

It would be so easy. Quoting Tarcone, I should be President !!

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Vince, Pt. II

So ignoring the rest of your post, what in the world gives you ANY kind of faith that this is going to happen?

I have seen his tone change some. He obviously has not done a 180 but whereas he was an oblivious ass all the time, there are times now where he is not.

But yeah, I'm not disputing he won't change. But if he did (and found a bigger boogie man to blame)... good chance he'll get re-elected

[RainMaker]

And I was just enjoying the freaky low gas prices.

Just spoke to my friend MBS (Crown Prince) of Saudi Arabia, who spoke with President Putin of Russia, & I expect & hope that they will be cutting back approximately 10 Million Barrels, and maybe substantially more which, if it happens, will be GREAT for the oil & gas industry!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 2, 2020

Then again, maybe it didn't happen.



Putin essentially says Trump is a liar.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov refuted on Thursday US President Donald Trump's claims about a phone conversation between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

"No. There was no such conversation." pic.twitter.com/hYSHWOaihB

— Julia Davis (@JuliaDavisNews) April 2, 2020

[albionmoonlight]

The list of people I trust less than Trump is short, but Putin is on it.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by panerd

I guess my whole point is that I can speculate and say so and so would have handled it better. And odds are they probably would have but all we have to go on is the reality which is the prominent democrats didn't do this. So I'm not sure we are doing anything but 20/20 here are we?

https://abc7news.com/sf-chinatown-pe...fears/5964696/

GoDaddy Security - Access Denied

I mean this is what really happened, not "I think this would have happened". I think we all missed this and it's just easier to say it's nobody's fault but Trump's.

"We can't really know what would have happened". I mean, god forbid we try to actually learn from the mistakes instead of throwing our hands up and going "aw, shucks, we'll never know".



SI

[Edward64]

Some good news.

Anti-malaria drug speeds up recovery of coronavirus patients: study

The antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine has shown promise in treating the coronavirus – helping to speed up the recovery of a small number of patients suffering a mild form of the illness, according to a report.

In a study published online this week, Chinese researchers found that patients who were administered the drug saw their cough, fever and pneumonia go away faster than in a group that did not receive it, according to the New York Times.

The illness also appeared less likely to become severe among those who were treated with hydroxychloroquine, according to the small study posted on the preprint server medRxiv before undergoing peer review.

However, the study did not include data on severely ill patients.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Some good news.

Anti-malaria drug speeds up recovery of coronavirus patients: study

or is it?

Hyped Malaria Drug Not Showing Much Effect at One Paris Hospital

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Re: Trump vs Hillary.

Pretty obvious that both would have found lacking in the response (just like pretty much every other leader). I mean this in the early and also current stage.

There's plenty to ding Trump on for sure so using a scale of 1-10 where 10 is perfection and 6 is average. My take is Trump was a dismal, oblivious 3 in the early stages and he is 6-7 now, much of it based on Fauci & Birx and him listening to them (at least for now).

Hillary would have listened earlier, taken it more seriously and been less BS. So I would give her a 6-7 in early stages but do think she would be struggling in current day just like Trump is.

Wait? What? Using your numbers and words above, if 6 is average then Hillary gets an "average" to, I dunno "slightly above average" for her entire handling of the crisis but "she would be struggling just like Trump". But Trump gets a awful "3" and is up to "6-7" in the last week or two and they're pretty similar? That seems like grading on the curve of lowered expectations. Never mind that those first few weeks mattered /a lot/ to get us to where we are today.

If, for instance, you had shut it all down the week of March 13th (Trump Euro ban/NBA suspension/Tom Hanks night) instead of letting morons like Desanits wait until YESTERDAY, the next month wouldn't be nearly as bad.

And, look, this isn't even about re-litigating the 2016 election. Hillary was a flawed candidate but it's who would have won if not for Trump. I mean, right now it would be the mostly warm body of Joe Biden. Same thing. Ted Cruz? Marco Rubio? I mean, hell, Cruz was self-quarantining himself on the 14th. Rubio has done everything from work on the stimulus to give a sobering evaluation on the 17th to say the media loves the high death tolls but I'm pretty sure he'd have done a better job. I'm not saying Trump was the absolute worst person in the world for dealing with this, but he's in the bottom quartile. So let's grade him up against everyone else not against his arbitrarily low curve.

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by panerd

No but it is a real life example of Democratic leadership screwing up as well. I mean NYC is the epicenter of the United State's COVID problems right now.

Someone responded about getting into whataboutism. But that's exactly the opposite of my point. My point is outside of South Korea (and I am not even sure their culture is applicable to the United States) every country in the Northern Hemisphere has had similar issues and problems. Maybe leadership would have made no difference at all and the human race was just not prepared for this? I mean in the hypothetical world Clinton and Bush and Romney are all confronting this problem and making a difference but in reality Trump, De Blasio, GOP leadership, Pelosi, Italy's PM, Spain's PM, Boris Johnson are not having any effect.

I notice that people not included on that list are Angela Merkel, Andrew Cuomo, or Jay Inslee.


SI

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

If, for instance, you had shut it all down the week of March 13th (Trump Euro ban/NBA suspension/Tom Hanks night) instead of letting morons like Desanits wait until YESTERDAY, the next month wouldn't be nearly as bad.

I feel compelled to point out again that Constitutionally, the president does not have the authority to do this. Governors do. It would have been better if we had a president who issued clear statements on that point as you describe, but again a lot of Democrats weren't ready to make that move at that point in time either.

Even more important - and more likely IMO with a better president - would have been getting going on setting up temporarily medical facilities, using the DPA to ramp up equipment production, etc. basically as soon as we saw it spreading to places like Korea.

I agree with your basic point - others would have done better than Trump, no question. But at the same time, nobody was adequately prepared. Nobody wanted to move fast enough. There would have been blood on anyone's hands, and there is on all of ours for presuming that this wasn't really something we needed to prepare for years ago despite the experts saying otherwhise.

[RainMaker]

In fairness, Trump doesn't really have any authority over the states. He could ask for a ban and sycophants like Desantis would oblige, but that's still primarily on Desantis. He could have ordered a shelter-in-place at anytime over the past month.

Trump deserves blame for the lack of preparation, testing, and resources. His decisions will kill a ton of people but that shouldn't give Governors who had the power a pass.

Dewine for instance has done a terrific job in Ohio.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I feel compelled to point out again that Constitutionally, the president does not have the authority to do this. Governors do. It would have been better if we had a president who issued clear statements on that point as you describe, but again a lot of Democrats weren't ready to make that move at that point in time either.

Even more important - and more likely IMO with a better president - would have been getting going on setting up temporarily medical facilities, using the DPA to ramp up equipment production, etc. basically as soon as we saw it spreading to places like Korea.

I agree with your basic point - others would have done better than Trump, no question. But at the same time, nobody was adequately prepared. Nobody wanted to move fast enough. There would have been blood on anyone's hands, and there is on all of ours for presuming that this wasn't really something we needed to prepare for years ago despite the experts saying otherwhise.

This isn't some fake "both sides suck" dichotomy, though. Yes, "there would have been blood on anyone's hands", but the amount really does matter. The degrees of difference matter in this case. If the pandemic kills 100K or 2M, that matters. So, yeah, I have a hard time with "well, it was going to suck either way" - this is not one of those cases that is a distinction without a difference.


SI

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I notice that people not included on that list are Angela Merkel, Andrew Cuomo, or Jay Inslee.

Cuomo shut down many hospitals over the years and is cutting back on Medicaid to this day. He was late to shutdown the state because he was in a pissing match with De Blasio. In no way is Cuomo a hero despite the media love affair that is going on.

If any Governor should be commended, it should be people like Dewine and Inslee. But they don't get on TV everyday so they don't get the media love.

[Brian Swartz]

I agree the difference matters, but I think the death toll overall would have been a lot closer together than those numbers indicate. Again, you can see that in the different way governors reacted across the country. Generally Democrats have acted more quickly … but not by all that much. The similarities have been much greater than the differences.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I agree the difference matters, but I think the death toll overall would have been a lot closer together than those numbers indicate. Again, you can see that in the different way governors reacted across the country. Generally Democrats have acted more quickly … but not by all that much. The similarities have been much greater than the differences.

It will be curious to see the end results when adjusted for size. Though that will be hard to suss out. For instance, North Dakota's problems are going to be different than New York's, of course.


SI

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Wait? What? Using your numbers and words above, if 6 is average then Hillary gets an "average" to, I dunno "slightly above average" for her entire handling of the crisis but "she would be struggling just like Trump". But Trump gets a awful "3" and is up to "6-7" in the last week or two and they're pretty similar? That seems like grading on the curve of lowered expectations. Never mind that those first few weeks mattered /a lot/ to get us to where we are today.

I thought I was clear in saying that Hillary would have done better in early stages than Trump but that both would be struggling now. My grading was not on a curve, it was on 2 different "tests" (e.g. early stage & current stage).

If, for instance, you had shut it all down the week of March 13th (Trump Euro ban/NBA suspension/Tom Hanks night) instead of letting morons like Desanits wait until YESTERDAY, the next month wouldn't be nearly as bad.

I don't disagree. For me, current stage began soon after Trump's Wed 3/11 "I can't read" speech. I think it was on that Fri/Sat when he was deferring more to Fauci and Birx.

So let's grade him up against everyone else not against his arbitrarily low curve.

And what are the criteria you would grade Trump/Hillary on in this "current stage".

1) Would Hillary have less deaths? The deaths occurring now are not due to shortage of medicine or equipment, it is in spite of our best efforts

2) Would Hillary have had more ventilators or masks made by now? Don't think we can say

3) Would there be less confusion by government agencies? I doubt it

4) Would the stimulus bill be better? Arguably yes/no depending on your POV but it was bi-partisan

5) Would Hillary have picked a better response team than Facui & Birx? Would she have listen better to Fauci & Birx? No on first, probably yes on second but Trump is listening to them now

6) Would Hillary have held better daily briefings? No argument from me, yes

7) Would Hillary have instilled more confidence or helped morale in the US population? Arguably yes but probably not for the 38-42%, the independent voters have the tie breaker

etc.

What is it that you believe Hillary would have done better than Trump in this current stage that would have significantly changed current state?

Again, if your argument is that Hillary would have done better in the early stage, you won't get an argument from me.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Cuomo shut down many hospitals over the years and is cutting back on Medicaid to this day. He was late to shutdown the state because he was in a pissing match with De Blasio. In no way is Cuomo a hero despite the media love affair that is going on.

Agree, Cuomo has recovered well but there was an article that De Blasio wanted quarantine/PAUSE (so likely earlier than was publicized), Cuomo said no way, and then Cuomo issued PAUSE 3-4 days later.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Edward64

1) Would Hillary have less deaths? The deaths occurring now are not due to shortage of medicine or equipment, it is in spite of our best efforts

Deaths now? No, probably pretty similar. But what do deaths now matter? We're still "only" at 5K. Deaths over the next two months to two years? I think the rest of the questions matter toward that.

2) Would Hillary have had more ventilators or masks made by now? Don't think we can say

I'm going to guess she wouldn't have states bidding against each other to get them to curry industry favor. Hell, she might have had some going directly to companies she favored, but she struck me as more corrupt than incompetent. Trump is both.

3) Would there be less confusion by government agencies? I doubt it

I strongly disagree here. If you don't spend the first three years of your Presidency trying to dismantle the very agencies tasked with dealing with problems (or assigning people to actively sabotage them like Perry, DeVos, Pruitt, Zinke, etc), then you're going to have better run agencies. More on this in #5.

4) Would the stimulus bill be better? Arguably yes/no depending on your POV but it was bi-partisan

Agreed. Probably wouldn't have mattered as it was Congress, especially McConnell driving it. There's probably even a number of alternate universes where it hasn't gotten done because of sparring between Hillary and Mitch.

5) Would Hillary have picked a better response team than Facui & Birx? Would she have listen better to Fauci & Birx? No on first, probably yes on second but Trump is listening to them now

Obviously, Fauci and Birx are proving to be a good team. But it took them a /long/ time to get Trump onboard because he only wanted sycophants around him until he personally figured out how bad it was. I think Hillary listens a lot sooner and that matters a lot when we're talking about exponential growth.

Who else beyond that? And this will matter a lot in the coming weeks and months. Funny how Pence is supposedly the one "in charge", Azar is a forgotten man, and where the hell is Redfield? Those are all positions that could have been better filled. In a perfect world, a former Pharmaceutical executive and a research scientist could be useful (a toady VP who decries science, less so).

But Redfield's CDC botched the tests and cost us 4-6 extremely valuable weeks. Maybe they don't if they have a better administrator in charge. Maybe Azar's expertise in the pharmaceutical field is helping our clinical trials be more effective behind the scenes. If that's the case, bravo. But, if not, why is he there? Why don't we have anyone on the team who can help with the medical supply chain?

6) Would Hillary have held better daily briefings? No argument from me, yes

7) Would Hillary have instilled more confidence or helped morale in the US population? Arguably yes but probably not for the 38-42%, the independent voters have the tie breaker

In a way, these matter least of all but are also really important. If the federal government gives more stringent guidelines, then maybe we don't have governors doing their own things because Trump was trying to preserve the economy for just a minute longer before it fell apart.

If we don't have people at the top doing the "it's just a flu, bro" schtick for weeks, then maybe we aren't still fighting as much of it now, harming our social distancing efforts. Maybe we don't have people going out because they want to, talking about this false "letting people die or the economy" choice. Then again, I'm open to the idea that it wouldn't have mattered. These people would do what they were going to do anyway. And if it hadn't been Trump at the top, it would have been Tucker Carlson or Devin Nunes or whoever.

SI

[JPhillips]

Hillary, or any other president, wouldn't have Jared running around with his own group trying to take over from the people who actually know what they are doing.

[JPhillips]

CBO projecting a 9% unemployment rate for the end of 2021.

[Brian Swartz]

I'd take that projection right now. I think it's optimistic.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The list of people I trust less than Trump is short, but Putin is on it.

If you don’t have a dog in the fight, it’s a really tough call. Putin is undoubtedly more directly dangerous, but Trump sways with the wind and is arguably more indirectly dangerous...

[PilotMan]

I think we're going to have a slight recovery after a painfully hard fall. The recovery will feel awesome, even though everything will not be awesome, and then, we'll have a rotation between shutdown and normalcy that will probably last until the end of next year. By then, the major question becomes do we have a reliable vaccine that drastically reduces the threat? Or will we have gotten too many people infected by that time and it won't really matter anymore?



I think it's quite plausible that in a few weeks time we could see daily numbers 10 times higher than what we see right now. We don't need to, but it's plausible.

[Thomkal]

Hilary would have had what 40+ years of federal govt. experience over Trump, so she would have handled this so much better/more like normal with it being a national emergency. She never would have been the mad dictator Trump has been. She would have listened to her intelligence people and then her health care people on this and would not have tried to hide it so it hurt her re-election chances. She wouldn't have gutted the various agencies/committees that could have helped get a good plan going early on.



C'mon how can you say after 3 years of Trump that Clinton and/or most of the other R/D candidates for President would have handled this a hell of lot better? There still would have been deaths, maybe a lot, but there would have been a good detailed plan on how to handle this from the very start.

[PilotMan]

Why is thing not being called Trump Virus?

He takes credit for all kinds of things he had nothing to do with. Might as well add to his list if accomplishments.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

there would have been a good detailed plan on how to handle this from the very start.

We've had lots of presidents without good, detailed plans on how to handle far less pressing emergencies. And again, look at the governors. How many of them had a good, detailed plan for stuff in their control? How many foreign countries did?

I think a lot of what's going on here is we're looking for something to blame because we're mad. And the answer is, we're all to blame. Some have more than others, and Trump's near the top of that list, but there's plenty to go around.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I think we're going to have a slight recovery after a painfully hard fall. The recovery will feel awesome, even though everything will not be awesome, and then, we'll have a rotation between shutdown and normalcy that will probably last until the end of next year. By then, the major question becomes do we have a reliable vaccine that drastically reduces the threat? Or will we have gotten too many people infected by that time and it won't really matter anymore?

I think it's quite plausible that in a few weeks time we could see daily numbers 10 times higher than what we see right now. We don't need to, but it's plausible.

I think we're coming out of this in a new world. Just looking around my neighborhood. Two small bars across the street will likely be out of business. Same with the nail salon and brunch place. The little late night Mexican joint is not going to make it since their business is people coming home from the bars.

My Mom lives in a smaller town. There's a hot dog joint that's been there for 60 years. Right across the street from the baseball parks. They'll be out of business soon with little league cancelled and no one allowed to come inside. The local tavern is trying to set up carryout but how long can that keep them afloat? Their whole downtown is filled with these little retail shops that are closed.

It'll just be weird to see all these small businesses that have been around for decades die. The whole thing is incredibly depressing. Not just from an economic loss, but a cultural one too. You forget how much some of these places mean to the community.

[JPhillips]

Jared is now in charge by the looks of things and he has wisdom to share:

"The notion of the federal stockpile was it's supposed to be our stockpile. It's not supposed to be states stockpiles that they then use."

[RainMaker]

In a administration filled with dummies, Kushner may take the cake. He sounds like a high school senior who took his first business class and learned a couple buzzwords but doesn't understand anything else.

[Lathum]

I saw on Twitter even Fox News went away from Trump speaking at the press conference eventually. Anyone know if thats true?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I saw on Twitter even Fox News went away from Trump speaking at the press conference eventually. Anyone know if thats true?

They did. They had another program to go to at the tail end.

The difference is that CNN didn't show the beginning a couple days ago.

[JPhillips]

Another quote from Jared, this one coming to a Biden ad soon.

"What a lot of the voters are seeing now is that when you elect somebody...think about who will be a competent manager during the time of crisis."

[whomario]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It'll just be weird to see all these small businesses that have been around for decades die. The whole thing is incredibly depressing. Not just from an economic loss, but a cultural one too. You forget how much some of these places mean to the community.

This will kill diversity in a lot of areas and also will further drive all sorts of Business towards online retail ...

[PilotMan]

Why does the WH try and put out "Really Important" memo's and statements from Ivanka?

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It'll just be weird to see all these small businesses that have been around for decades die. The whole thing is incredibly depressing. Not just from an economic loss, but a cultural one too. You forget how much some of these places mean to the community.

Originally Posted by whomario

This will kill diversity in a lot of areas and also will further drive all sorts of Business towards online retail ...

It's going to drive a ton of consolidation. If you thought this world we lived in now was a world of oligopolies and megacorporations which screws consumers and consolidates wealth at the top, I'm worried we haven't seen anything yet. Our future has science fiction dystopia potential. We were slowly heading that way but now we may race towards it.

SI