Donald Trump and the aftermath of his presidency

miami · 30 Jan 2017

Paul Sidorczuk said:
I am sure that David Cameron will not be bothered one jot by this matter, having divested himself of matters political and would be more likely to be working on his new role as President of the charity, Alzheimers Research UK.

I'm sure that he will be concerned with the state of the country he lives in. Whether he applauds May's authoritarian stance and worship of dictators like you, or whether he takes a view that things have gone dramatically downhill since May 2015, is another matter. I'd hope he'd view things as the latter.

Hornet said:
Apt, seeing as he has a tendency to forget where he left his daughter.

Uncalled for on so many levels

RailUK Forums

Bromley boy · 30 Jan 2017

Neil Williams said:
Some are, some aren't.

For example, the proposals to force the normal minimum wage to be paid to those working in the "gig economy" (Deliveroo etc) are in my view bad. They prevent innovation in terms of the ways people can work. Rather than do this, there is a need to accept that "per hour" is not the only sensible way to pay people to work, and to research and develop new ways of ensuring such people are paid a proper amount of money for the work they do.

I would actually much rather be paid for results than flatly per hour. That would go both ways - hard work = more money, but also would mean, subject to deadlines, more control over what hours I put in and when.

Isn't this quite an idealistic point of view, though? It's nice to imagine the "gig economy" is creating a utopia where people can work flexibly to suit their lifestyles.

I suspect the reality is that most people working in "gig economy" zero-hours type jobs are doing so because they have no choice. Rather than giving them control, they will end up working every hour god sends to prevent the work from drying up with absolutely zero job security.

Reference uber trumpeting the wonderful "flexibility" of their method of working versus the reality of drivers urinating in front gardens, sleeping in the cab, working dangerously long shifts to make ends meet.

me123 · 30 Jan 2017

Aldaniti said:
Ah, that usual trick.... ignore a substantive point and twist someone's words to suit your own agenda.

I'm just a thick, Brexit-voting northerner.

Typical liberal. Keep it up...

I did address your point. I'd hardly call it substantive. It consisted of two sentences (one of which wasn't really a sentence). I'm not entirely sure what else to say about Starbucks, considering that this thread isn't really about Starbucks, and that's I've actually addressed the point you've made.

I do not support Starbucks' policy with regard to tax avoidance. I'm not going to discuss their policy towards the homeless population, as a lot of that is potentially subjective. I do support this policy. On the whole, I have a fairly neutral view of Starbucks as a company.

I'm not entirely sure how I've "twisted your words" given that, in my last post I didn't use any of your words, other than taking a direct quote from you (which included your entire post, unedited, and was done so that I could directly reply to you).

I've never called you thick, I've not brought leaving the EU into this, and I did not know where in the world you resided until just now.

What you are demonstrating is the inability of many people with right wing views to construct a coherent argument. I truly miss the days when I could come onto this forum and have a reasoned debate. I may not always have agreed with other forum members, but we could usually have a civilised and informed debate. In the last year or so, "debate" (in society in general, not just on here) has descended into childish taunts and mockery.

But then again, what do I know. I'm just a lefty loony commie tree-hugging pinko snowflake.

Xenophon PCDGS · 30 Jan 2017

President Trump constantly used the mantra of "America First" in his campaign for the Presidency and seems not have made any move away from that point of view.

WelshBluebird · 30 Jan 2017

Paul Sidorczuk said:
President Trump constantly used the mantra of "America First" in his campaign for the Presidency and seems not have made any move away from that point of view.

Indeed. We also already have a trade surplus with the USA, so he certainly isn't going to give us a bigger slice of the pie when they are trying to give that same bigger slice to the people who voted for him.

Hornet · 30 Jan 2017

paulweaver said:
Uncalled for on so many levels

As someone who has had to care for an Alzheimers sufferer, I can see one of the lighter sides of his appointment.

He probably forgot he told porkies during the EU Referendum.

Lighten up. A sense of humour helps in the dark days. Go out and get one.

miami · 30 Jan 2017

For those trump fans around here, feel free to sign the petition to give him a state visit.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/178844

AlterEgo · 30 Jan 2017

paulweaver said:
For those trump fans around here, feel free to sign the petition to give him a state visit.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/178844

That's excellent. It's asking for something that's already happening and comes with a spelling error.

Dave1987 · 30 Jan 2017

It appears Mrs May was possibly briefed on the immigration ban whilst at the White House.

Bletchleyite · 30 Jan 2017

Bromley boy said:
Reference uber trumpeting the wonderful "flexibility" of their method of working versus the reality of drivers urinating in front gardens, sleeping in the cab, working dangerously long shifts to make ends meet.

I'm not saying regulation isn't needed, I'm saying regulation needs to be modernised.

For instance, Uber could be regulated by setting a minimum fare level, and by regulating hours that can be worked like is already done with buses and coaches. Deliveroo could be regulated by setting a minimum charge per delivery, or per mile of delivery on average, or any one of a number of ways.

Yet regulation tends to be conservative (small C), and that stifles innovation.

Aldaniti · 30 Jan 2017

AlterEgo said:
That's excellent. It's asking for something that's already happening and comes with a spelling error.

You forgot to mention the three grammatical errors....

me123 · 30 Jan 2017

Dave1987 said:
It appears Mrs May was possibly briefed on the immigration ban whilst at the White House.

This leads to the obvious conclusion that the ban on British citizens entering the US (at least, those with dual citizenship) could have been easily prevented had Mrs May clarified this at the time.

We, of course, do not know what words the two have exchanged behind closed doors. I'd like to have thought that this ridiculous policy was challenged in private, but I doubt that this is the case. It certainly took her some time to criticise the ban.

Bromley boy · 30 Jan 2017

Neil Williams said:
I'm not saying regulation isn't needed, I'm saying regulation needs to be modernised.

For instance, Uber could be regulated by setting a minimum fare level, and by regulating hours that can be worked like is already done with buses and coaches. Deliveroo could be regulated by setting a minimum charge per delivery, or per mile of delivery on average, or any one of a number of ways.

Yet regulation tends to be conservative (small C), and that stifles innovation.

I don't disagree with that. However one obvious issue, given the pace of technological change, is that regulations will inevitably always be a long way behind the "leading edge" of disruptive technology companies such as uber and their latest working practices.

In addition, regulation of working conditions tends to require a pre-existing employment relationship in order to be effective. I think a lot of the current problems in the labour market stem from a tendency for employers to categorise workers in casual jobs as self-employed. I wonder if that's something that has increased over the last few years. Anecdotally I suspect it has, although I have no statistics to back that up.

miami · 30 Jan 2017

me123 said:
This leads to the obvious conclusion that the ban on British citizens entering the US (at least, those with dual citizenship) could have been easily prevented had Mrs May clarified this at the time.

We, of course, do not know what words the two have exchanged behind closed doors. I'd like to have thought that this ridiculous policy was challenged in private, but I doubt that this is the case. It certainly took her some time to criticise the ban.

To be fair she was too busy selling weapons to a country at risk of nato suspension, who's leader has been busy purging his political opponents and squashing dissent rather than defending the rights of the citizens she claimed to represent.

Aldaniti · 30 Jan 2017

Looks like posts in this thread have disappeared or been removed. At least one made by me has. Whatever has happened, it has allowed one individual conversation to appear very one-sided. Not good form at all.

DynamicSpirit · 30 Jan 2017

Aldaniti said:
Looks like posts in this thread have disappeared or been removed. At least one made by me has. Whatever has happened, it has allowed one individual conversation to appear very one-sided. Not good form at all.

Message the moderators - they should have access to the full thread, including any deleted posts, so should be able to tell you what has happened. (Easiest way is to click the report button for your post - that should alert someone)

Aldaniti · 30 Jan 2017

DynamicSpirit said:
Message the moderators - they should have access to the full thread, including any deleted posts, so should be able to tell you what has happened. (Easiest way is to click the report button for your post - that should alert someone)

Much obliged DS. Don't really want to create a fuss though, just worth being aware it can happen I guess.

Busaholic · 30 Jan 2017

Question ; What's the difference between Adolf and Donald?
Answer : There's no f in Donald. (would that were true)

Read aloud for best effect.

EM2 · 30 Jan 2017

It is being reported that Trump will issue an executive order later this week that will allow gay people to be sacked from their jobs, refused service, barred from adoption and eliminate non-discrimination laws.

Xenophon PCDGS · 30 Jan 2017

paulweaver said:
I'm sure that he will be concerned with the state of the country he lives in. Whether he applauds May's authoritarian stance and worship of dictators like you, or whether he takes a view that things have gone dramatically downhill since May 2015, is another matter. I'd hope he'd view things as the latter.

Worship of dictators....Moi..

hock:

You'll be saying next that I see such a Labour Party/Momentum worship movement at the shrine of the benign dictator, the Blessed Jeremy next...

Howardh · 30 Jan 2017

EM2 said:
It is being reported that Trump will issue an executive order later this week that will allow gay people to be sacked from their jobs, refused service, barred from adoption and eliminate non-discrimination laws.

Surprised he's waiting that long...

Wonder what his next target will be? Note that there's now some concern that UK dual-nationals WON'T be allowed into the US (Mo Farah for one) - nobody seems to know. hes hould try, and take a camera team with him.

Darandio · 30 Jan 2017

Howardh said:
Surprised he's waiting that long...

Wonder what his next target will be? Note that there's now some concern that UK dual-nationals WON'T be allowed into the US (Mo Farah for one) - nobody seems to know. hes hould try, and take a camera team with him.

I thought the Mo Farah one had already been quashed today, and confirmation was given he would not be barred from entering given he does not have dual nationality.

Xenophon PCDGS · 30 Jan 2017

Darandio said:
I thought the Mo Farah one had already been quashed today, and confirmation was given he would not be barred from entering given he does not have dual nationality.

As ever, do not let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

Xenophon PCDGS · 30 Jan 2017

Aldaniti said:
Much obliged DS. Don't really want to create a fuss though, just worth being aware it can happen I guess.

It may be useful to draw your attention to the final two items of the Forum Rules section that is headed "Appropriate". The wording there is crystal clear.

me123 · 30 Jan 2017

EM2 said:
It is being reported that Trump will issue an executive order later this week that will allow gay people to be sacked from their jobs, refused service, barred from adoption and eliminate non-discrimination laws.

No surprise there. Drumpf has been a pretty consistent opponent of marriage equality and gay rights. He's supported the HB2 bill in North Carolina (the so-called "bathroom bill"). He doesn't appear to be an overt homophobe, and has said that he would protect those in the LGBT+ community in the past. But he certainly supports a conservative approach to marriage and equality (which si to be expected from a Republican). He also (in another Republican move) supports that many decisions are made on a state-by-state basis rather than a nationwide approach - this will probably lead to a divide in many issues, as the Republican run states are more likely to oppose equality legislation and the Democrat run states support it. He will, however, look to enact the First Amendment Defense Act, designed to promote religious (i.e. Christian) freedom which will probably be at the expense of the freedoms of the LGBT+ community.

Drumpf's choices for underlings are certainly telling. Most notable is of course VP Mike Pence, who is a rather vocal opponent of the LGBT+ community. He has previously actively supported gay conversion therapy at the expense of HIV funding. In his job as governor of Indiana, he has failed to make hate crimes against the LGBT+ community illegal, tried to block equal marriage in Indiana, and supported a "right to discriminate" bill. Tom Price (health secretary) proposed a constitutional amendment to prohibit gay marriage. Betsy DeVos (education secretary) actively supports organisations that support gay conversion therapy and call the gay rights movement a "civil war". Reince Priebus (Chief of Staff) was responsible for the Republican party's "most homophobic platform ever".

Drumpf is also likely to appoint a conservative judge to the Supreme Court (a lifelong position), who often decide upon major issues (most notably supporting equal marriage recently in a narrow vote).

So an attack on the rights of the LGBT+ community is hardly surprising. I'm not hugely convinced that it's going to come just from Drumpf, though. I think the wider Republican party will be the ones that are really pushing this.

Busaholic · 30 Jan 2017

Aldaniti said:
Ah... Starbucks. The company which pays millions in UK corporation tax and gives jobs to the homeless who sleep outside its stores.

Keep it all coming, I've not laughed so much since Del Boy fell behind the bar.

Radio 4 news bulletin 3 p.m. today reported COSTA as doing what this news report says Starbucks is doing. Confusion somewhere.

Aldaniti · 30 Jan 2017

Paul Sidorczuk said:
It may be useful to draw your attention to the final two items of the Forum Rules section that is headed "Appropriate". The wording there is crystal clear.

Thank you for that guidance Paul, I did suspect some deletions. I do have strong views and can sometimes be blunt, but I don't think anything I said earlier crossed a boundary within a thread where robust debate is often found. If I have unwittingly offended any forum member, then I do of course apologise and I will now withdraw from the forum to avoid any reoccurance.

My best wishes to all members in your future discussions and deliberations.

overthewater · 30 Jan 2017

Unless there is an actually executive order pdf then its just all Hearsay and adding more fuel to the fire.

Its getting very bad now when people are taking what other people are saying instead of getting it direct, Elon musk is now pipping up about this:
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/825936326264360961?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet

Worse still were all the good people when this was happening:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4NRJoCNHIs&

I think alot of people need to sit back and take a deep breath.

me123 · 30 Jan 2017

Busaholic said:
Radio 4 news bulletin 3 p.m. today reported COSTA as doing what this news report says Starbucks is doing. Confusion somewhere.

The confusion lies with the BBC, who appear to have screwed up here. Very certainly being widely reported as Starbucks. Since Costa don't have any locations in the USA at present, I'd be very surprised if they were looking to hire refugees there.

Aldaniti said:
Thank you for that guidance Paul, I did suspect some deletions. I do have strong views and can sometimes be blunt, but I don't think anything I said earlier crossed a boundary within a thread where robust debate is often found. If I have unwittingly offended any forum member, then I do of course apologise and I will now withdraw from the forum to avoid any reoccurance.

My best wishes to all members in your future discussions and deliberations.

I hope it's needless to say that you certainly didn't offend me.

Bletchleyite · 30 Jan 2017

EM2 said:
It is being reported that Trump will issue an executive order later this week that will allow gay people to be sacked from their jobs, refused service, barred from adoption and eliminate non-discrimination laws.

He really is scum, isn't he?

Donald Trump and the aftermath of his presidency

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

On Moderation

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member