I want a government that does not prefer any one race. Double standards, unfortunately, exist.

So you condemn the Israeli government then?

Now that the genocide is in full flow and there is an acute crisis in which 14,000 babies could die in the next 48 hours*. Will Donald Trump act, or turn his back on them. Again he has been warned, he will not be able to claim he did not know about it. As there is an intense international effort underway today to get the required aid into Gaza. It is sitting on the border and Tom Fletcher is making every effort to get the trucks in today.

*according to the UN aid chief, Tom Fletcher.

Sachs's points in summary:
- Trump pursues the right policy on Israel and Ukraine, namely peace.
- Trump's approach is effective.
- If successful, this could end 30 years of aggressive US(-Israeli) foreign policy, which would be historic.

What? If Trump want’s to stop these two wars all he has to do is freeze military aid to Isreal and threaten Putin with serious action on blocking oil and bank transactions and increasing military aid to Ukraine. He could end both wars in one day if he did that.

I spent an evening in a hotel room in Athens during the Greek financial crisis. While trying to find something to watch on the TV, I found a Channel devoted to proposing the virtues of wine for cats. There were bottles of wine with a picture of a cat on the label and they showed it being fed to cats in a bowl.

It will be interesting to see if Trump is ok with this amount of blood on his hands. I doubt he expected that he would have to play a role in two genocidal wars when he decided to run again.

Now is the time act, let’s see if Trump will act to prevent a genocide when he has been given full warning. If he fails to act, he will have blood on his hands.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-15/un-aid-chief-urges-security-council-to-prevent-genocide-in-gaza/105293790

Now is the time act, let’s see if Trump will act to prevent a genocide when he has been given full warning. If he fails to act, he will have blood on his hands.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-15/un-aid-chief-urges-security-council-to-prevent-genocide-in-gaza/105293790

Still we will continue to ask the question, what is real? With good reason and what is real will continue to slap us in the face, or stare back at us in the mirror.

Retired police officer arrested over ‘thought crime’ tweet

You parroting gutter press again. Won’t you ever learn.

Not according to Kant, and I have some sympathy with his way of seeing things. In my interpretation of what he said, time is something we bring to the world.

I also have some sympathy with this, but I suppose I lend more weight to ideas that the external world is more external than that and has an existence apart from our minds. Although I don’t see an either/or dichotomy here. Both things could be so and our reduction to either/or, where this happens, as a limited interpretation.

Subjective time is a substance:

You seem to have smuggled in the concept of substance here. Does substance describe a thing, something that has objective existence? Or is substance a substance of mind, or intellect, or something immaterial?

2 By substance, I mean something that exists and has a set of properties.

Does something exist if it is an invention of thought?

What do you think of Bertrand Russell's views on time:

That’s someone trying to formulate a logical language that explains things about time. The problem with logic is it can be difficult to relate it to things outside the mind. Our mind was born into a place with time (and space) therefore time was a priori to mind. So our mind and its contents are a peculiarity, a product of, time (and space) and other aspects of that existence. To make any progress outside of our mind we must find a metric independent of mind. Hence science and we know what science has found out about this existence.

Hollywood has gone to crap.

Hollywood went to crap 30, or 40 years ago. This is just the icing on the cake.

I said developments. Also there are actions, like the U.S. military ceasing it’s delivery of promised arms to Ukraine as a bargaining chip in negotiating a deal(the minerals deal).

The action of conducting secret negotiations with Russia concerning European land, interests and security from which European representatives where excluded.

Apart from what Trump has said. He has single-handedly put the commitments and trust in the NATO alliance at risk of collapse. His actions have destroyed a hard won commitment to it’s values.

It doesn’t take a lot to destroy trust and once destroyed those who have lost it move on. Knowing that it takes time and commitment to restore it.

Straw man then, as I wasn’t talking about what some politicians said.

And some things change and some things don’t.

I was talking about developments. Developments are more concrete than words from individuals. They are changes in status agreed on by large numbers of people. A status which had become outdated and strained. It probably only needed a nudge to bring it about.

Your whole argument that European countries are lazy and just expect the US to carry the can all the time is false. It was a legacy of the post war settlement.

That conclusion is rather premature.

My conclusion is based on two ruptures of conditions in the status of EU member states. Ruptures which cannot be reversed as the conditions which were broken were historic understandings adopted during a process of providing stability following the turmoil of the WW2. And the world has now moved on.
Firstly, the understanding the US would play a senior/caretaking role in providing this stability. Trump has clearly broken this commitment.
Secondly that European countries, primarily Germany would not re-arm following WW2 and would rely on the NATO alliance for security. Again Trump has clearly broken this commitment and Germany is now re-arming.

Both these genies cannot be put back in the bottle whatever happens in the US following Trump’s last term in office.

Also that political instability in the US and the rise of Trump has weakened the NATO alliance and brought into question it’s existence and commitments to article 5. Enabling Putin to conclude that NATO won’t respond to the invasion of Ukraine and may fracture and become divided. While the U.S. will become consumed by internal instability.

That Putin’s hold on power was becoming weak and the distraction of war was needed. To galvanise his hold on power and create the myth that he was a strong leader and necessary to protect the integrity of Russia.

He found an ally in Trump who admired his authoritarian status and would give legitimacy to Putin’s anti European rhetoric.

So in a very real sense this whole geopolitical crisis is a joint venture between Trump and Putin. Even while Trump might not be cognisant of the fact.

Europe has now been weaned off the U.S. teat. It won’t be going back in this generation. Although the U.S. will play a brotherly role.
The Ukraine war is not over, there could be many twists and turns.

There is now an opportunity for Europe to collaborate with Ukraine in low cost battlefield defence technology. Leaving the U.S. behind with its over priced stock.

It’s one step closer to his Nobel Peace prize. Now all he has to do is give Russia “a good deal” and it’s over the line.

And meanwhile, we can see up to 2 million people on our TV, if we are lucky enough to have access to an impartial news channel, starve to death (in Gaza) before our eyes. Care of Donald Trump.
So much winning.

You don’t reform the constitution while a despotic populist is in power. We learnt that in the U.K. with Boris Johnson.
In his attempts to strong arm the EU over Brexit, he prorogued parliament and sent a government representative to lie to the Queen. The intention was to shut out parliament while he acted under executive powers. Fortunately the Supreme Court was able to stop him.

Since there's no operable European coalition to actually provide security (that we know of), such a "guarantee" would be pretty useless. The members of such a coalition would have to be willing to get into a shooting war with Russia without US backing. If such a coalition was feasible, the war wouldn't be in the state it's in in the first place.

Europe has no choice, they will get into a shooting war with Russia, unless they can assist Ukraine to defeat Russia in the meantime.

I’m wondering what all the U.S. troops in bases all around Europe are going to do. Order in some buckets of popcorn. Or return home in a hurry.

Russia has already won since day one: they just wanted the Donbas and Crimea from day one, and they got that.

Then they just stop firing and sit where they are. Or is Ukraine the aggressor?

What's wrong with South American economies?

They were historically volatile. Countries like Argentina and Venezuela are what I was thinking of.

The thing about stagflation, is it is different in different circumstances. Also an inflationary recession is like stagflation, only with a contracting economy. It might contract and then stagnate.

I’m not convinced that a labour shortage can’t happen while an economy is stagnating. In the circumstances I’m referring to the shortage (a limited shortage in certain areas) is happening alongside a so called stimulation of the economy (the purpose of introducing tariffs). So the stimulation will fail due to a labour shortage. Hence a stagnating situation.

That’s worse than stagflation, it’s starting to sound like a South American economy.

What do you mean "down"?

Well in a nutshell, all the measures of success in an economy going in the wrong direction.
I was reading about stagflation, it’s sort of like having long Covid.

From Wiki;

Stagflation presents a policy dilemma, as measures to curb inflation—such as tightening monetary policy—can exacerbate unemployment, while policies aimed at reducing unemployment may fuel inflation. In economic theory, there are two main explanations for stagflation: supply shocks, such as a sharp increase in oil prices, and misguided government policies that hinder industrial output while expanding the money supply too rapidly. The stagflation of the 1970s led to a reevaluation of Keynesian economic policies and contributed to the rise of alternative economic theories, including monetarism and supply-side economics.

In the Keynesian model, higher prices prompt increases in the supply of goods and services. However, during a supply shock (i.e., scarcity, "bottleneck" in resources, etc.), supplies do not respond as they normally would to these price pressures. So, inflation jumps and output drops, producing stagflation.

Now Trump has introduced a supply shock. A sudden end of imports from China and a little from all the other countries facing tariffs. Also he is introducing a labour shortage by sending Latinos back. Both of these are inflationary because demand is not being met.

He intends to increase U.S. production of those products in short supply, which will be expensive, produce more expensive goods and produce another labour shortage. Again both inflationary.

And tariffs are naturally inflationary, as the tariff itself is an increase in cost

So I think I can confidently predict that there will be strong inflationary pressures.

To counter this Trump will need to dampen growth in the areas he wants growth to increase in. Or increase the workforce to reduce wage increase pressures. Both of which work in opposition to what he wants to do. Because, to dampen growth will cause stagnation in the economy and he is ideologically opposed to importing cheap labour.

So he’s going to fail to increase domestic production of the restricted goods (there will be some exceptions), he’s going to cause shortages of lots of consumables, raw materials and minerals. Causing inflation which will be very difficult to stop, while not improving the income of U.S. workers, not growing the economy, which will stagnate and making everyone feel a lot poorer.

A classic case of stagflation, which will be very difficult to break out of.

Not to mention people all around the world boycotting U.S. goods and other countries imposing counter tariffs on U.S. exports.

I can’t see any good news in there apart from those few exceptions where there will be some growth in U.S. production.

Yes and the only way is down from now on. Until he’s kicked out of office.

Yes, I thought that’s what had happened, but it did focus my mind though, and I came out with a response that surprised myself. And I’m sticking to it now.

But here, he's not saying that the point of the tariffs was to make a deal with China. He's saying that China wants to end the trade war. I honestly don't think he has framed the latest tariffs as a method of extortion. I think he truly wants to shut down imports. But I learn something new everyday. :cool:

And a few days later he exempted IT products from the China tariffs. A very stable genius.

Your go-to reaction seems to be "wait and see" and geopolitics is about "potential" instead of well, grounded in fact. If it's not true in 3 years, we must wait 5, if it's not true then it must be 10, but maybe in 20. Not very convincing. To put it differently, if my dad had a vagina he would've been my mother.

I outlined the most direct route to a stable progressive world. I know it’s not realistic, or likely in the near term. But only a few years ago, say 10years, that is what we had. U.S. EU and China cooperating and providing stability and a safe arena for global trade.

Now if we are talking about the geopolitical situation right now. It’s simple in my view. China is becoming the new dominant superpower and the U.S. is turning in on herself having lost that status. The rest is just the pieces falling as they fall around that new reality.

Once that reality is accepted by the world, then we can go back to that. China, U.S. and the EU cooperating and providing global stability.

I heard Trump say both those things, it’s over a week ago now. I wouldn’t be able to find the quotes. That he was going to do a great deal with China and that the high tariffs where to “incentivise”countries, including China, to come to the table.

Trump is going to do a great deal apparently. It was only posturing prior to a negotiation.This is what Trump expects to force China into, while insulting them. This is backing down, but China is not playing ball. I heard a report from the Canton trade fair which opened today, China’s biggest trade fair. Everyone they spoke to said they have already stopped all trade with the U.S.

To return to substantive posts, a nice summary of the folly of this absurd trade war by William Hague. Quoting the Chinese sage Sun Tzu, on how to win a war.
https://archive.ph/o0h9T

That reminds me of Donald Trump’s map. You’re not Russian are you?

That’s 19th century nonsense. At the time it was formulated the greatest nation was Great Britain, an upstart from a little island in rim world.

Anyway, your repeated attempts to paint Russia as great are unconvincing. And your venom for Europe reminds me of Neomac.

Yes, the moves towards greater cooperation on defence are promising. It’s more in terms of trade that I’m worried about the approach of the U.K. government. This is not a new thing, repeatedly U.K. governments have leaned in the direction of the U.S. to try to be a bridge between the U.S. and Europe. A fetishisation of the special relationship.
Now we are out of the EU there is a real possibility that the U.K. could become tied in to U.S. trade demands, driving a wedge between them and the EU. We have not diverged yet and the path to a realignment with the EU is clear. Trump is trying to break and prevent this.

I don’t disagree with what you suggest. Rather I’m thinking of how to arrest the drift towards autocracy, isolationism, fascism, war mongering. Failed states, the breaking of international agreements, conventions etc. Things can easily spiral out of control here.

I’m suggesting moves towards a stabilisation of the situation. global cooperation over pandemic response and climate change are just about holding together at the moment. This could easily reach the point where these things break down and they need to be stabilised, strengthened and restored, to enable our civilisation to ride the storm and fend off the next collapse, or fracturing of civilisation.

For starters, they can stop doing all the stupid shit I'm calling out as stupid.

For the U.S. to remain relevant on the world stage she needs to work with China and Europe to reach stability and pragmatism and restore the global order that was being forged via the UN. This is not a good time due to pandemics and climate change to break the world order.

This fixation with Russia seems a bit outdated. She really is a basket case, a pariah state and run by a tinpot dictator. She is going to become an irrelevance. It was only the money Putin was getting for oil and gas that gave them the ability to start this war. That income stream is largely gone now (apart from what she can trade with China) and what money is left will be poured into this crazy war in which the working age men of Russia are being sacrificed en masse for a vanity project of their tin pot dictator.

The real geopolitics is between the U.S., China and Europe. Which is now being won hands down by China, while the U.S. keeps repeated shooting herself in the foot and Europe is now stepping more onto the world stage. The pragmatism of Europe will balance well with the pragmatism of China and could potentially introduce some stability. Countries like the U.S. and India are too gung-ho at this stage which will push the EU and China closer together.