US Political News and Trump’s China visit

[j_hungary]

@RabzonKhan

The Democratic Party needs to mail each and everyone of the most likely to be effected people that once voted democrat (as well as likely to switch to vote independents and republicans) how badly this bill will screw them over and point to how the 2017 Trump tax cuts screwed them mover in 2021 to 2025 as proof that Trump is doing this to them again.

Then list their representatives in the house and senate that screwed them over so they know who to blame.

This has to be a key part of the messaging.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Tax Cut was always a farce.......

Tax cut applies to all, the more you earn the more you get cut, it would have been a big gap between people who earn around 65k and people who earn around 125k. The issue is the trade off, because they are cutting social program (including food stamp and Medicaid) to fund the tax cut, to which most people that earn 125K plus won't really care about them, those who have the lease amount of tax cut would,

 

[FuturePAF]

Tax Cut was always a farce.......

Tax cut applies to all, the more you earn the more you get cut, it would have been a big gap between people who earn around 65k and people who earn around 125k. The issue is the trade off, because they are cutting social program (including food stamp and Medicaid) to fund the tax cut, to which most people that earn 125K plus won't really care about them, those who have the lease amount of tax cut would,

The harm cutting many of these social programs will do, IMHO, outweighs the benefit, giving some money back to the middle class and a lot back to higher earners. It’s regressive. They know it will be unpopular, which is why it will kick in phases; after the 2026 midterms and after the 2028 general election.

The cuts to food aid just seem cruel. Cutting the social safety net so many depend will increase children falling back into poverty. The $200 more in child tax credit won’t go far, when many parents will have to spend more on medical care and/or food.

I understand the desire to have people work for their benefits, but when they tried this before, many people just had to sit for 20 hours a week at a job center to keep their benefits, because they wasn’t enough make work jobs for them to do.

I’m not against health adults being told they have to work for their benefits, but I just hope it’s not turned into a circus to make a political point; 60 year old grandmas being told they have to get a job in rural communities doing heavy manual labor because the county couldn’t find some other work, just so she could keep her benefits.

We will have to see how these cuts shake out. People voted for Trump and the republicans, and are also tired of the dependency many undeserving people have on these benefits, so let’s see what impact this has.

Instead of the tax cuts going back to the wealthy it would have been better to balance the budget and not create inflation down the line like the last tax cuts did. But hey, this was the platform of the republicans. The public just needs to be reminded of the positive and negative of these cuts.

 

[j_hungary]

The harm cutting many of these social programs will do, IMHO, outweighs the benefit, giving some money back to the middle class and a lot back to higher earners. It’s regressive. They know it will be unpopular, which is why it will kick in phases; after the 2026 midterms and after the 2028 general election.

The cuts to food aid just seem cruel. Cutting the social safety net so many depend will increase children falling back into poverty. The $200 more in child tax credit won’t go far, when many parents will have to spend more on medical care and/or food.

I understand the desire to have people work for their benefits, but when they tried this before, many people just had to sit for 20 hours a week at a job center to keep their benefits, because they wasn’t enough make work jobs for them to do.

I’m not against health adults being told they have to work for their benefits, but I just hope it’s not turned into a circus to make a political point; 60 year old grandmas being told they have to get a job in rural communities doing heavy manual labor because the county couldn’t find some other work, just so she could keep her benefits.

We will have to see how these cuts shake out. People voted for Trump and the republicans, and are also tired of the dependency many undeserving people have on these benefits, so let’s see what impact this has.

Instead of the tax cuts going back to the wealthy it would have been better to balance the budget and not create inflation down the line like the last tax cuts did. But hey, this was the platform of the republicans. The public just needs to be reminded of the positive and negative of these cuts.

There are 2 things that people don't like about this bill.

The cutting of social programs and the budget deficits, you can't just cut the tax and get nothing in return.

Social programs are a "safety net" because it was, and that is when I was talking about the economy is up and up and a lot of us don't have to depends on them, same as you, I have no problem forcing able bodies to go to works, but that's not what social program is for (I mean the able bodies) social program is the last ditch effort for people who fall on hard time, again, as I pointed out, it is something those high bracket income earner usually will not face, but for a person who works 5.5 days a week making low to medium income, those social program is there to protect those people if they missed a couple of days of works for whatever reason.

And then we are also looking at market instability, even if people want to look for work, there aren't just anything out there, unless this is THE PLAN for Trump to force people to work under slave condition in American sweatshop so he can bring manufacture home, this plan to cut social program to force people to go to work is nothing but idiotic.

On the other hand, this bill is going to bring in at least 3 trillion of budget deficit over the next 4 years, this will have a longer and more serious reach to the next generation of American, because it would be them who will work their arse off and paying tax in order to pay for the interest of the national debt.

 

[RabzonKhan]

It took Trump a long time to realize this, but it’s good he finally has. As we say in Urdu, Der aye durust aye, better late than never.

Trump tried hard to please Putin, but history shows that attempts to befriend him have consistently failed. When George Bush met Putin for the first time, he famously said, “I looked the man in the eyes. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. I was able to get a sense of his soul.” His trust in Putin faded quickly after Russia’s 2008 invasion of Georgia, and rightly so.

Obama also attempted a reset. In 2009, Hillary Clinton presented Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov with a symbolic red button labeled “reset,” though it was mistranslated as “overcharged.” While the reset led to some cooperation, like a nuclear arms reduction treaty, it collapsed after Russia annexed Crimea and backed separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Then Biden inherited an outright war, following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. His response was more cautious but consistent, support Ukraine, isolate Russia, and prevent escalation.

Trump, meanwhile, had been one of the most openly favorable U.S. presidents toward Putin. Throughout his first term, he praised him repeatedly and portrayed him as a strong leader. During the 2024 campaign, Trump bragged that he could stop the Russia-Ukraine war within 24 hours of taking office. It was classic Trump, like the wall Mexico was supposed to pay for.

But seven months into his second term, the war continues. Trump publicly insulted Zelensky in the White House, blamed him for dragging out the conflict, and pressured Ukraine to accept Russian control over occupied regions. He even went so far as to say that Russia’s decision not to invade the entire country was “a pretty big concession,” a statement widely criticized by analysts and European leaders as a complete misreading of reality.

Now, after months of appeasement and failed diplomacy, Trump has announced renewed support for Ukraine and pledged additional weapons. It seems he’s finally given up on the idea that Putin can be reasoned with.

I clearly see KGB thug as an adversary to the United States and its allies. The sooner our leaders recognize that beyond rhetoric and with concrete policy, the better positioned we’ll be to protect our national interests and stand firmly with our European partners against destabilizing aggression. If we don't stop Putin now, he will continue his geopolitical adventurism, next time, it could be other European states facing the consequences of our inaction.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-says-u-send-more-011400796.html

Trump says U.S. will send more weapons to Ukraine, after halting some shipments

 

[RabzonKhan]

The Epstein files controversy is reaching a boiling point, especially within MAGA circles. In 2024, Trump pledged to release Epstein’s files, fueling hopes that long-suppressed names and details would surface. He once described Epstein as “a terrific guy” who “likes women on the younger side,” comments that have haunted him since.

Attorney General Pam Bondi later told Fox News the files were “on her desk,” sparking speculation about an imminent release. Kash Patel, before becoming FBI Director, accused Congress of hiding names. Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino suggested Epstein was an intelligence asset. Elon Musk added fuel by tweeting that Trump himself was in the Epstein files, though he later deleted it.

By mid-2025, the administration reversed course. Patel and Bongino now insist Epstein “killed himself,” and there’s no client list. Bondi claims she was referring to case files, not a list. DOJ released a memo saying no further names exist, and no evidence of blackmail was found.

This sudden reversal triggered outrage. Musk posted memes mocking Trump’s credibility. Tucker Carlson alleged a government cover-up. Alex Jones called the DOJ statement “sickening.” Laura Loomer demanded Bondi be fired. Marjorie Taylor Greene warned the public wouldn’t accept vague memos.

For years, these same voices pushed Epstein-related conspiracies and pointed fingers at Democrats. But now, with their own allies in power and still no files released, their controversies, lies, and deceptions have clearly backfired. The $1,000,000 question remains: why promise transparency and then walk it back? Whether it’s fear, political pressure, or inconvenient truths, many in the MAGA camp feel misled, and they’re not backing down.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Elon Musk, Tucker Carlson warn of consequences if Trump admin is withholding Epstein information​

 

[RabzonKhan]

@RabzonKhan

The Democratic Party needs to mail each and everyone of the most likely to be effected people that once voted democrat (as well as likely to switch to vote independents and republicans) how badly this bill will screw them over and point to how the 2017 Trump tax cuts screwed them mover in 2021 to 2025 as proof that Trump is doing this to them again.

Then list their representatives in the house and senate that screwed them over so they know who to blame.

This has to be a key part of the messaging.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I mostly agree with your strategy. Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” threatens critical support systems that millions of families rely on. Cuts to Medicaid, EBT, disability programs, affordable housing, and community grants will hit vulnerable groups especially children, seniors, and low-income workers. These aren’t fringe services; they’re foundations of basic stability.

Pair that with aggressive tariffs and trade standoffs, and it’s a perfect storm for rising inflation. Everyday essentials, food, fuel, rent, are already tightening, and the Fed has warned that inflationary pressure from tariffs may spike again. There’s also the DOGE provision, which quietly caps discretionary outreach grants, reducing funding for clinics, local nutrition programs, unnecessary layoffs in public services, and small-scale nonprofits serving the poor. It’s a quieter cut, but potentially just as damaging.

But relying on mass mailers from political parties isn’t enough. Most people ignore them, assume it’s a fundraising pitch, or dismiss it as partisan noise. I believe individuals need to take the lead on messaging, sharing facts, experiences, and accountability through platforms people actually trust and engage with.

That means Facebook, TikTok, Twitter, Threads, Reddit, BlueSky, and other social platforms. It also means Democratic leaders should break out of the traditional media bubble. They need to appear on podcasts, influencer channels, and even conservative-leaning outlets, Fox News, Joe Rogan, and others. Trump proved that showing up anywhere, even in hostile media environments, is a powerful move. Democrats shouldn’t shy away from doing the same.

One more thing, the video you posted makes some decent points, but I found the tone troubling. Dismissing people as “stupid” for not following politics closely isn't just disrespectful, it’s counterproductive. Many voters are exhausted or overwhelmed, not ignorant. Reaching them takes clarity, empathy, and direct communication, not condescension.

 

[RabzonKhan]

That's the issue here, China will never sell TikTok, they share the same algorithm with Bytedance owned Douyin, giving them Tiktok is the same as asking Bytedance to give their algorithm to the US, that's a very productive counter-intelligence tool which I would imagine they won't be sharing to anyone that close to Trump, if there were ever a deal, it would be just the Business is bought off with the right (So basically transfer all assets to the US and Bytedance keep everything digital)

But Tiktok is just one corner of the battlefield Trump don't want us to see, the thing is, we are 3 days from July 9, and if there are any deal to be done, it's not going to matter for 3 days, which mean if there are suitable deal indeed, we would have know already. Which mean either Trump is going to go in gun blazing or extend the deadline (Which I highly suggest it would be latter rather than former) which mean the logistic issue is not going to be taken care of in the next 90 days, by then we will already been in Christmas/Black Friday shopping time, it's not going to be able to sustain, because it take around 40 days for anything to travel from China to the US by ship. You need another month or so to make those product, so if this is not settled by July/August, we are looking at a full blown products crisis. The fun part is, this is not the issue, the issue here is if there are anything to be sold in the US, you are looking at around 10-25% more across the board, because that's what the Tariff is coming to, even if that settle in Trump favor.

Between this and the Big Beautiful Bill, I don't see how GOP can hold the house in 2026 mid-term, they probably will also lose Senate seat, as long as the Dem present themselves as the more votable solution.

You're right, China has long resisted letting ByteDance sell TikTok’s U.S. operations due to its proprietary algorithm, which it considers a strategic asset. Yet recent developments signal a possible shift in tone. The Chinese Foreign Ministry now asserts that companies should be free to make independent decisions based on market principles, a notable departure from previous hardline stances. Still, final approval rests squarely with Xi Jinping, and many observers believe China may use TikTok as a bargaining chip in broader trade and tariff negotiations.

Trump has extended the divestiture deadline to September 17, 2025, and claims a buyer is ready, suggesting trade and TikTok negotiations may proceed in parallel.

The sticking point remains the algorithm. To avoid a full tech transfer, negotiators are exploring alternatives:

Leasing algorithm to a US entity, preserving ByteDance’s IP.

Building a new US-specific algorithm from scratch, less efficient but independent.

Enhancing data security, with the US buyer overseeing audits to block Chinese access.

In sum, while the sale is inching closer to feasibility, any final deal must balance competing interests, maintaining platform performance, appeasing U.S. interests, preserving Chinese tech sovereignty, and minimizing diplomatic fallout. The next few months will test whether trade diplomacy can unlock a resolution that satisfies both US and China.

As expected, Trump’s “90 deals in 90 days” campaign has largely fizzled. With the July 9 deadline behind us, only one notable agreement with the UK has been finalized. Talks with China remain fluid, and a tentative framework with Vietnam may be in the works, but most countries are still in limbo.

To avoid triggering a trade disaster, Trump signed an executive order extending the deadline to August 1. In place of negotiated agreements, he’s issued ultimatum-style notices: take the offered deals or face steep tariffs, with no room for meaningful dialogue. These decisions are being made unilaterally, bypassing traditional diplomatic norms.

At the same time, the administration is rolling out aggressive tariffs across multiple sectors. A proposed 200% tariff on pharma imports would be among the highest on record, joining already elevated tariffs on steel, copper, and other industrial goods. The result is a climate of uncertainty and unpredictability, more in line with a banana republic than a stable trade regime.

In short, the administration's approach continues to rely on coercion over cooperation, creating instability in global markets without delivering the promised wave of trade deals.

Same here. The political landscape looks primed for a Democratic rebound. Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” has been widely unpopular, with polls showing broad disapproval. Critics point to Medicaid cuts, corporate giveaways, limited relief for average Americans, and new restrictions on food assistance and housing. Combined with rising inflation risks from aggressive tariffs, the bill may fuel deep economic anxiety heading into the 2026 midterms.

One of the more overlooked provisions, DOGE, has quietly gutted funding for community programs that support rural clinics, food pantries, and housing navigation services. Many of these programs are in Republican-led districts, particularly across the South and Midwest, where local governments now face service gaps and layoffs. That’s left GOP incumbents scrambling to defend the fallout, especially in swing areas where constituents are already feeling the pinch.

The Federal Reserve has warned that trade-driven price hikes could delay rate cuts and squeeze consumers. That gives Democrats a potent campaign issue. With only a handful of seats needed, analysts say the House is well within reach. The Senate is a steeper climb, but retirements and weak GOP incumbents offer possible openings.

If inflation worsens and discontent grows, especially around issues like DOGE and public service layoffs, Democrats may ride a backlash wave into both chambers.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

MAGA comes for all. So for those like Vivek that think they can win over through their views should see the limits of the latitude they are allowed.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Not really. The youtuber is intentionally conflating.

1) People who went through the visa process and came here legally and had children
2) Fence jumpers who didn't go through the visa process at all and had children.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

And then we are also looking at market instability, even if people want to look for work, there aren't just anything out there, unless this is THE PLAN for Trump to force people to work under slave condition in American sweatshop so he can bring manufacture home, this plan to cut social program to force people to go to work is nothing but idiotic.

I thought the purpose of bringing in these illegals was because we had a shortage of workers. I doubt they are all working the cornfields of Iowa for $1/hr.

Unless THE PLAN by Biden was just to put more people on Welfare?

 

[j_hungary]

I thought the purpose of bringing in these illegals was because we had a shortage of workers. I doubt they are all working the cornfields of Iowa for $1/hr.

Unless THE PLAN by Biden was just to put more people on Welfare?

dude, you need to lay off Biden, issue with Illegal is not just coming from Biden administration, this is a long-suffering issue across different administrations span over 30 years, which included 2 GOP administrations (Bush Jr and Trump)

If you want to understand why illegal migrant is a problem for the US. You need to study the underlying cause, not just focusing on who did what. The underlying clause for illegal immigrant is because we don't take up jobs that offer high labour, paid were never an issue for american, they can pay you $40 an hour to build houses, but most American don't like to do those kind of works.

On the other hand, most people forgot that Biden took over right after the COVID crisis, which US, like most countries, handed out money to people who may not deserve to, and created a budget blackhole. Setting aside the fact that this was actually Trump's fiscal policy by the end of 2020. The issue with joblessness is worldwide, because we, around the world, just come out of a low production cycle with basically the entire 2020 going off with little to no production, that' the issue, it's not just set on Biden, it's the same in the UK, it's the same in Australia. it's the same around the world. People are still surviving 2021 with 2020 hand out, and price started pick up In 2022, and peak in 2023, and gradually coming down in 2024. This is the same pattern we all seen around the world with different government reporting

US CPI Inflation

12-month percentage change, Consumer Price Index, metropolitan areas, all items

www.bls.gov

UK CPI inflation

CPIH ANNUAL RATE 00: ALL ITEMS 2015=100 - Office for National Statistics

Australia Inflation

Consumer Price Index, Australia, March Quarter 2025

The Consumer Price Index (CPI) measures household inflation and includes statistics about price change for categories of household expenditure

www.abs.gov.au

Germany CPI Inflation

Consumer price index

www.destatis.de

Now, either Biden is responsible for COVID or Biden is responsible for all those CPI inflation around the worlds, the downturn is not created by Biden, this is how the world economy reacts when 80% of world's production was inhibited for over a year. And we are now looking at another spike (as you can see with all the graph above) the only difference is, back in 2020/2021, that was COVID, a natural diaster, now this crisis is man-made. And we are counting the same person who made this crisis to solve it.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

If you want to understand why illegal migrant is a problem for the US. You need to study the underlying cause, not just focusing on who did what. The underlying clause for illegal immigrant is because we don't take up jobs that offer high labour, paid were never an issue for american, they can pay you $40 an hour to build houses, but most American don't like to do those kind of works.

Obviously people who are here illegally (ie not being caught at the border) have limited options and end up taking jobs that many others don't want (like farmwork or office cleaners)...and they do this out of desperation not because they want to. So we aren't exactly being "charitable" to them by any stretch (they aren't robots so they still have to eat)...and it isn't admirable to say "well it keeps our prices down" either.

Now most of the people who are jumping the fence, being caught, and asking for "asylum"..they are just visa line cutters. If given visa rights to work in the US there is no expectation they will flock directly to the jobs Americans don't want. They aren't a vast group of morons...as they will simply compete for the same types of jobs American citizens apply for. Especially low skilled jobs. So unless we suddenly have an unemployment rate near zero; I can't see how anybody would think this is a good idea.

The reality will be FAR FAR FAR more competition for jobs this guy in the video below is trying to find (which is insane to put citizens like him through even more grief). What logic are people using???:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Employment in the Inner City​

 

[j_hungary]

Obviously people who are here illegally (ie not being caught at the border) have limited options and end up taking jobs that many others don't want (like farmwork or office cleaners)...and they do this out of desperation not because they want to. So we aren't exactly being "charitable" to them by any stretch (they aren't robots so they still have to eat)...and it isn't admirable to say "well it keeps our prices down" either.

Depends on how you see the issue.

I can go on and on and write a bunch on how illegal immigrant altered or shaped the US economy, but the fact to the matter is this, even if you deported all 12 millions illegal immigrant, that wouldn't change the economy one bit, because illegal immigrant is what economist described as "Positive Contribution" because they don't generally take away a lot of Government resource compare to their contribution, which usually a net contribution. They are the only class of people in the low income bracket that contribute positively to a economy. Becuase they don't have access to many benefit local citizen had.

The downturn and the economy situation is done because of the mismanagement of government funding and tax revenue, that is something deporting illegal won't fix.

Now most of the people who are jumping the fence, being caught, and asking for "asylum"..they are just visa line cutters. If given visa rights to work in the US there is no expectation they will flock directly to the jobs Americans don't want. They aren't a vast group of morons...as they will simply compete for the same types of jobs American citizens apply for. Especially low skilled jobs. So unless we suddenly have an unemployment rate near zero; I can't see how anybody would think this is a good idea.

I agree to your point, however, you also need to look at the other side of the question.

First of all, do you know why even with aggressive enforcement, the deportation number is actually down, not up? The issue here is that people only report to authority when they think they have a fair go, whether or not they deserve that is another matter, but if I am an illegal and I know I am going to get arrested attending immigration court and be deported, do you think I will go to the court again? No, I will go underground, and when there are 12 million of them going underground not wanting to be found (A lot of them have local connection by the way), and there are only roughly 100000 ICE/CBP agent (Which some of them you will need to protect the border) to try to catch them, well, have fun trying to catch them all.

Secondly, the issue is not whether or not you can enforce the border, US border is too big, there are ALWAYS going to be illegal coming thru, I mean, for them, that's 3000 per person to pay a coyote, and a federal agent will cost you $65,000 a year, that is a battle you can't win. Which mean the only thing you can do is to limited the possibility of getting work right and/or residency and that will deter people, you keep catching them, they are just going to keep coming back. As I said even before Trump did all this, the only way you can solve the illegal immigrant issue is by amending the law. It's NOT the enforcement is the issue, it's the law, the law is flaw, no matter how you enforce it, it will still be flaw. That is the issue.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Depends on how you see the issue.

I can go on and on and write a bunch on how illegal immigrant altered or shaped the US economy,

So did slavery...how does encouraging continuing doing things the wrong way because it worked suddenly justify anything?

but the fact to the matter is this, even if you deported all 12 millions illegal immigrant, that wouldn't change the economy one bit,

Well then there should be no argument...

because illegal immigrant is what economist described as "Positive Contribution" because they don't generally take away a lot of Government resource compare to their contribution, which usually a net contribution.

Well again how does encouraging doing things the wrong way suddenly justify anything? Can we concentrate on doing things the correct way instead?

They are the only class of people in the low income bracket that contribute positively to a economy. Becuase they don't have access to many benefit local citizen had.

How does taking advantage of people who can't get the same benefits of US citizens the admirable way of doing things???? This is like US companies moving manufacturing of their most polluting products to Asia. This does not seem like the correct long term path of solving problems at all. This is just some quick shortcut at best...and a potentially long term headache at worst.

The downturn and the economy situation is done because of the mismanagement of government funding and tax revenue, that is something deporting illegal won't fix.

That's fine...deporting illegals wont cure cancer either but that shouldn't stop us from doing it.

The issue here is that people only report to authority when they think they have a fair go, whether or not they deserve that is another matter,

Again just because people aren't playing ball doesn't mean we should cancel anything. Why should we bend any enforcement simply because illegals are being uncooperative?

but if I am an illegal and I know I am going to get arrested attending immigration court and be deported, do you think I will go to the court again? No,

Fear of people being uncooperative isn't a good excuse for loosening enforcement.

I will go underground, and when there are 12 million of them going underground not wanting to be found

Again that's not a good reason to re-write policy.
Do we knock the penalty for murder down to a slap on the wrist so killers wont go into hiding? Certainly would make law enforcement much easier and less dangerous for police.

Secondly, the issue is not whether or not you can enforce the border, US border is too big, there are ALWAYS going to be illegal coming thru,

So? That happens in other countries too. Do you think the answer it to tear the whole thing down because it is 100% useless??

 

[j_hungary]

So did slavery...how does encouraging continuing doing things the wrong way because it worked suddenly justify anything?

The question is, what is "the right way" and what is "the wrong way"?

Is it deporting them is "the right way" while having people who are qualified for residency ANYWAY to get what they wanted is the "the wrong way"? I mean those people are going to get residency anyway, and they had been living and contributing to the US economy?

We have been deporting them since 1996, does that solve the issue? If not, how is this "the right way"?

Well then there should be no argument...

There was never an argument to begin with.

Well again how does encouraging doing things the wrong way suddenly justify anything? Can we concentrate on doing things the correct way instead?

Again, what is "the correct way"?

How does taking advantage of people who can't get the same benefits of US citizens the admirable way of doing things???? This is like US companies moving manufacturing of their most polluting products to Asia. This does not seem like the correct long term path of solving problems at all. This is just some quick shortcut at best...and a potentially long term headache at worst.

Dude, this is more complex than what you just said, economy migrate and evolve like people evolved, the issue here is we aren't in 1950 anymore, you can't base a service base economy on manufacturing, that's the reason why we loose all those to begin with.

As living standard increase, there are some job that aren't going to fill like it was used to be, again, if I offer you $40/hr to build a house, would you do it? That's a lot more than some mid level white collar job.

That's fine...deporting illegals wont cure cancer either but that shouldn't stop us from doing it.

Again just because people aren't playing ball doesn't mean we should cancel anything. Why should we bend any enforcement simply because illegals are being uncooperative?


Fear of people being uncooperative isn't a good excuse for loosening enforcement.

You misunderstood my point, I am not saying we need to stop deporting people, again, look at 2024 when Biden deported probably the most people since probably last 20 years, with a record number of arrest. DEPORTING IS NOT THE ISSUE BEFORE.

ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Statistics

www.ice.gov

Arrest over time



Detention Over Time



Removal Over Time



See how much different this is? And do you want to know why?

That's because when people are trusting the system, they will throw themselves at it, and they will work WITH the system, attending tribunal, attending court, and if it turns out unsuccessful, they are deported, again, that's because those illegal immigrants believe in the system that work for them

If they start believing the system is going against them, they will work AGAINST the system, again, 12 million illegal, 100,000 DHS agents, you do the maths. You need to have a system that works for them, instead of just going everywhere, arresting people left and right, and without processing them, and you now ask them to trust the system? They will just go underground and it make them very hard to catch, that is the reason why with all these threatric, you see the number wasn't even close to the low point during the Biden Administration.

Now, you are talking about "The right way" and "The wrong way" does those number looks like "The Right Way" to you?

Again that's not a good reason to re-write policy.
Do we knock the penalty for murder down to a slap on the wrist so killers wont go into hiding? Certainly would make law enforcement much easier and less dangerous for police.

Again, it does NOT work because the law and the system WAS FLAWED, you aren't going to get a miracle and think this is going to be A-OK, murdering is a different issue, because you don't have 12 million murderer out there and you have way more than 100,000 agent to catch these people.

And for a person who keep accusing those Chinese member of whataboutism, you sure use them a lot too.

So? That happens in other countries too. Do you think the answer it to tear the whole thing down because it is 100% useless??

So? The definition of insane is keep doing the same thing and keep failing and still hope it would work, again, I have shown you deportation isn't really the issue here, and it was the law, and your answer is, "oh if that's not working then should we tear down the whole system?" If it stopped working since 1996, then YES, we need to tear down the whole system.

This exact same thing happened in Australia during the the Tempa Affair, asylum seeker/illegal immigration is not an issue just catering to the American, this is a big headache in Australia too and do you want to know how the Aussie solved the problem? It's by changing the law and eliminating anyone that arrive by boat from getting residency in Australia. It's only either deportation or resettlement. We had seen this problem for a decade since 2001 and in 2013 we changed the law, and now boat largely stopped coming.

Promise check: We will stop the boats

In his campaign launch speech on August 25, 2013, Tony Abbott pledged: "We'll build a stronger economy so everyone can get ahead. We'll scrap the carbon tax so your family will be $550 a year better off. We'll get the budget back under control by ending Labor's waste. We'll stop the boats." See...

www.abc.net.au

So to answer your question, YES, if something wasn't working in the last 30 years, then it's time to look outside the box and start tearing things down, I am not saying what happened in Australia can be applied to the US, as the situation is different, but keep doing the same thing over and over and over again, won't get you anywhere, you don't need to be a genius to see it.

 

[j_hungary]

You're right, China has long resisted letting ByteDance sell TikTok’s U.S. operations due to its proprietary algorithm, which it considers a strategic asset. Yet recent developments signal a possible shift in tone. The Chinese Foreign Ministry now asserts that companies should be free to make independent decisions based on market principles, a notable departure from previous hardline stances. Still, final approval rests squarely with Xi Jinping, and many observers believe China may use TikTok as a bargaining chip in broader trade and tariff negotiations.

Trump has extended the divestiture deadline to September 17, 2025, and claims a buyer is ready, suggesting trade and TikTok negotiations may proceed in parallel.

The sticking point remains the algorithm. To avoid a full tech transfer, negotiators are exploring alternatives:

Leasing algorithm to a US entity, preserving ByteDance’s IP.

Building a new US-specific algorithm from scratch, less efficient but independent.

Enhancing data security, with the US buyer overseeing audits to block Chinese access.

In sum, while the sale is inching closer to feasibility, any final deal must balance competing interests, maintaining platform performance, appeasing U.S. interests, preserving Chinese tech sovereignty, and minimizing diplomatic fallout. The next few months will test whether trade diplomacy can unlock a resolution that satisfies both US and China.

Well, I just don't see how this deal is going ahead, unless either side lose it all (Which would make this a strange deal) I just don't see how this is going to be better for Bytedance if US insist on algorithm transfer, and at the same time I don't see how this is going to be better for the US buyer paying all the money and get everything BUT the algorithm.

And you can't change it because once you change it, it won't work. the algorithm set on different specific things, you either have them all at once, or nothing at all, otherwise either the buyer won't get the juice, or the seller will lose basically everything.

On the other hand, would China really want to give the algorithm to the US? Becuase it's like the secret recipe for coca cola, once you know the secret sauce, not only can you recreate TikTok, but you can manipulate the Chinese user, I just don't see how China will give the whole Algorithm to any US buyer and at the same time I don't see how said US buyer will accept anything other than the unaltered algorithm.

As expected, Trump’s “90 deals in 90 days” campaign has largely fizzled. With the July 9 deadline behind us, only one notable agreement with the UK has been finalized. Talks with China remain fluid, and a tentative framework with Vietnam may be in the works, but most countries are still in limbo.

To avoid triggering a trade disaster, Trump signed an executive order extending the deadline to August 1. In place of negotiated agreements, he’s issued ultimatum-style notices: take the offered deals or face steep tariffs, with no room for meaningful dialogue. These decisions are being made unilaterally, bypassing traditional diplomatic norms.

At the same time, the administration is rolling out aggressive tariffs across multiple sectors. A proposed 200% tariff on pharma imports would be among the highest on record, joining already elevated tariffs on steel, copper, and other industrial goods. The result is a climate of uncertainty and unpredictability, more in line with a banana republic than a stable trade regime.

In short, the administration's approach continues to rely on coercion over cooperation, creating instability in global markets without delivering the promised wave of trade deals.

Same here. The political landscape looks primed for a Democratic rebound. Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” has been widely unpopular, with polls showing broad disapproval. Critics point to Medicaid cuts, corporate giveaways, limited relief for average Americans, and new restrictions on food assistance and housing. Combined with rising inflation risks from aggressive tariffs, the bill may fuel deep economic anxiety heading into the 2026 midterms.

One of the more overlooked provisions, DOGE, has quietly gutted funding for community programs that support rural clinics, food pantries, and housing navigation services. Many of these programs are in Republican-led districts, particularly across the South and Midwest, where local governments now face service gaps and layoffs. That’s left GOP incumbents scrambling to defend the fallout, especially in swing areas where constituents are already feeling the pinch.

The Federal Reserve has warned that trade-driven price hikes could delay rate cuts and squeeze consumers. That gives Democrats a potent campaign issue. With only a handful of seats needed, analysts say the House is well within reach. The Senate is a steeper climb, but retirements and weak GOP incumbents offer possible openings.

If inflation worsens and discontent grows, especially around issues like DOGE and public service layoffs, Democrats may ride a backlash wave into both chambers.

First of all, I am not sure if you are aware of UK Politics, the Big Beautiful Bill is somewhat similar to the mini-budget Liz Truss released during her short (45 days) premiership after Boris Johnson resigned as British Prime Minister.

September 2022 United Kingdom mini-budget - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Both bills lower the corporate tax rate (tax cut), while cut or tax/levy on social program (in BBB case, cut funding for social programs, in the mini-budget case it's a extra levy or sanctioning universal credit.

The mini-budget was EXTREMELY unpopular within the UK during the cost of living crisis, and it's largely agreed to be the downfall for Liz Truss as British Prime Minister. Will BBB suffer something other than what the Birts faced in 2022? Well. only time will tell, but I will say, it's not looking good...

Also, one fun fact, Liz Truss had been known in the UK and internationally as "U-Turner", that is somewhat similar to people labelling Trump "TACO"