Want to understand what Trump is doing?

Today's development.

A top Treasury official resigned today because Musk wanted access to the Federal payment system. He refused to hand over the keys to Musk to the money.

The system Musk wants access to pays out Social Security payments, tax refunds to US citizens, and vendor payments.

It is unclear why Musk wants access to the money, but the leading theory arising is that he wants to use his control of the money to push Trumps agenda.

This is a rather worrying turn of events as Musk is not an elected, or even hired, official. Trumps team has already tried impoundment (illegal since 1974) to control the money. After the huge backlash, Trump rescinded his executive order impounding the money, while at the same time a Federal Judge issued a restraining order against him.

Looks like this is their next move. Seize the money? I will stay updated, but right now DOGE is refusing to answer any questions on the situation.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

^…but I do come back to my own viewpoint which is, ALL are welcome to apply for ANY job but posts should only be given on MERIT alone^

I do tend to agree FriedGreenTomatoes2, not least because in the past, women - and 'minority' groups - have themselves professed to dislike the idea that they were, or would be, chosen on that basis, which makes sense, especially to those who don't want their sex, colour or disability to define them.

Thank you Dickens.
Once again the voice of common sense and reason.

Ah, Once again the voice of common sense and reason

Its the new calling card of the right 😂😂😂

(not you Dickens!)

its this use of the phrase that tickles me straight from GB news and Reform supporters. No one else, of course, who happens to have a different POV, can possible have common sense or be reasonable.

Did you read the rest of Dickens' post, FriedGreenTomatoes2? Like the press you have been so selective that you have turned the truth of what was said to make it appear the Dickens agreed with the whole sweep of your argument.

And yet, the very next sentence Dickens wrote was:

The problem is though that prejudice appears to be an inherent part of people's make-up, and even though you can legislate on how people act, you can't legislate against how they think or feel.

Later in the post you were asked So you can see the argument for 'inclusivity'?. You totally ignore this.

…but I do come back to my own viewpoint which is, ALL are welcome to apply for ANY job but posts should only be given on MERIT alone

I do tend to agree FriedGreenTomatoes2, not least because in the past, women - and 'minority' groups - have themselves professed to dislike the idea that they were, or would be, chosen on that basis, which makes sense, especially to those who don't want their sex, colour or disability to define them.

Thank you Dickens.
Once again the voice of common sense and reason.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

^I did ask if you agreed that the citizenship of each person was equal. If it is, surely intentional actions and policy interventions must be put in place to at least move towards equality of opportunity. While the ideal of equal citizenship is a core principle of democracy, achieving true equality often requires ongoing efforts to address systemic inequalities, promote inclusivity, and ensure that all citizens can fully participate in and benefit from democratic governance.^

There is no need for ‘intentional actions and policy interventions’. It’s this kind of HR gobbledook that gets us in this liberal inclusivity muddle. It’s tinkering - well meaning - but in my opinion, ticking DEI boxes may seem virtuous PoliticsNerd but I do come back to my own viewpoint which is, ALL are welcome to apply for ANY job but posts should only be given on MERIT alone.

... but I do come back to my own viewpoint which is, ALL are welcome to apply for ANY job but posts should only be given on MERIT alone.

I do tend to agree FriedGreenTomatoes2, not least because in the past, women - and 'minority' groups - have themselves professed to dislike the idea that they were, or would be, chosen on that basis, which makes sense, especially to those who don't want their sex, colour or disability to define them.

The problem is though that prejudice appears to be an inherent part of people's make-up, and even though you can legislate on how people act, you can't legislate against how they think or feel.

Which is why, I assume, these policies were enacted. And why here, in the UK, Remploy factories were closed en masse to end segregated employment - apart from the fact that they were running at a loss - the idea being to support disabled employees into mainstream work.

But, human nature being what it is, an awful lot of those former workers were never going to find work outside of Remploy...

So you can see the argument for 'inclusivity'?

If we lived in a perfect world, then sex / race / colour / disability / whatever - all these would be ignored and the individual would be given the job on Merit. But we don't, and such people have to live, eat, and pay their bills - not to mention face up to those who say things (about the disabled) like, "well, they could work if they wanted to, there must be something they can do"...

I was once (early 70s) sacked from a temporary job for being 7 months pregnant. The manager of a household-name bank in the City told the agency for whom I worked at the time that it wasn't right that a woman "should be walking around like that". In the back-office!

It didn't matter - in the sense that the agency immediately found me another temporary job with a company which didn't have an arse as a manager. But, it was quite a shock, to be discriminated against, when you are perfectly capable of sitting at a desk and using an electronic typewriter whilst being pregnant.

How do you deal with such people who hold the power to hire or fire you?

🤣🤣🤣

What is wrong with that question? (Allira)

It's intrusive, confrontational and makes an assumption that I read a newspaper, which might not be the case. It adds nothing to the discussion.

www.cnbc.com/2025/01/23/trump-third-term-amendment-constitution-ogles.html

They are already trying for a 3rd term

I also get daily updates from Haaretz but recently I've felt too depressed to read them!

To try to get a balance of views, I subscribe online to The Times, Telegraph, Guardian, Washington Post and New European. I also follow radio 4 news and CNN . I don't read everything but I do scan the headlines and how important topics are covered and where they are in the various media. I also listen to podcasts, TRIP, TRIP US, The Times daily and American Life.

Casdon

Rula

Do some research. There's plenty of evidence,*Wyllow3*

There is no evidence that he is being embraced by any of the European leaders except far right ones Rula. Nobody else is, or will ‘fall over themselves’ to embrace a regime which is against their principles and interests. They will maintain a civil working relationship of course, because that is mutually beneficial in negotiations.

It's called diplomacy Rula.

Casdon

pascal30

MayBee70

Does anyone know why we can no longer access Al Jazeera? I personally didn’t watch it but my ex did and he says he is no longer able to watch it.

I watched it yesterday.. no problems

It’s on YouTube MayBe, you can watch live news.

Thanks. I’ll tell him. It’s no longer available on a tv channel though, is it? It used to be near to Sky News 233.

pascal30

MayBee70

Does anyone know why we can no longer access Al Jazeera? I personally didn’t watch it but my ex did and he says he is no longer able to watch it.

I watched it yesterday.. no problems

It’s on YouTube MayBe, you can watch live news.

MayBee70

Does anyone know why we can no longer access Al Jazeera? I personally didn’t watch it but my ex did and he says he is no longer able to watch it.

I watched it yesterday.. no problems

We have the Guardian daily and the Observer on Sunday. We have the i a couple of times a week and on Saturday. I read CNN and Fox news on line and have a brief glance at the Daily Mail on line. I think that’s quite a good assortment of views.

Does anyone know why we can no longer access Al Jazeera? I personally didn’t watch it but my ex did and he says he is no longer able to watch it.

We stopped subscribing to The Telegraph a few years ago. Now going to quit The Times, but not sure where to go next. My newspaper of choice always used to be The Observer until it became very expensive and it’s sports section shrunk.

This is good if you want to see which media outlets including newspapers are the most trusted.
There is a chart which breaks it down by type of voter and the trustworthiness they consider it has. Reuters is my preference, but they don’t cover every topic. I’d go for the Independent otherwise..
yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/45744-which-media-outlets-do-britons-trust-2023

I trained senior staff in recruitment and selection in the late 80s/early 90s. I find it really sad that there is still so much ignorance with regard to diversity and inclusion practices. I rather optimistically thought we had moved on but clearly there's still a lot of misunderstanding. Good practice is about removing discrimination, widening access and having transparent and fair employment practices with the ultimate aim of ensuring that the "best person" is employed. It is not about discriminating against white men (and possibly white women), however, if two candidates are equal but one is from a group that has previously suffered discrimination, I would employ that one on the basis that in the past it would have been common practice to employ the other.
I've sat on hundreds of interview panels over the years and tbh I've never had to make that choice because if you are using a well constructed recruitment and selection system with people using the same graded method of selecting people for interview etc it's generally pretty obvious who to interview and who is the best candidate at interview. It's also good practice to offer a debrief to unsuccessful interview candidates is they want one. I've worked in the public and private sector. Trump is, as often the case, talking a lot of nonsense as are people who talk about employing unsuitable people to do highly challenging jobs. Sorry, but it just does not happen except in Trump's administration.

GrannyGravy13

HousePlantQueen please could you inform us which newspapers we are allowed to get our information from?

Don't be silly, we can all get our information from any newspaper or source, but we do have a responsibility to just consider what group that particular source is aimed at, and as I said, sadly, The Telegraph is not the once responsible and respectable source it once was.

mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-telegraph/

Overall, we rate The Telegraph Right Biased based on story selection that strongly favors the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to poor sourcing of information and some failed fact checks

The choice, of course, is personal.

So which newspaper in your opinion is your go-to for news of the day?

What is wrong with that question?

Which newspaper do you consider to be the most reliable and factual source of information, PoliticsNerd? Please. You could point us in the right direction as it seems that everyone has their own preferences.

Bearing in mind we can't trust politicians to tell the truth, of course.

^Okay.
So which newspaper in your opinion is your go-to for news of the day?^ (FriedGreenTomatoes2)

So far, you have asked people to research information necessary for your argument, and now you are seeking my personal preferences for news sources simply because I mentioned my view on one newspaper that others seem to regard as a reliable source of factual information.

Could you clarify your perspective on the format of this discussion?

Claremont

Allira

Claremont

His Press Conference after the accident was just insane. And he says we need 'the highest intellect and psychologically superior people' in key posts. Well, I'd agree with him there, but he has been appointing the worst, with no experience, and certainly none of the above qualities.

And you'd hope POTUS would have 'the highest intellect and psychological stability, never mind superiority'.

Our family and friends in the USA are all looking at options to get out, right now- they are scared (and they are all white and medium ++ class, and very well off).

Our family and friends in the USA are all looking at options to get out, right now- they are scared (and they are all white and medium ++ class, and very well off).

Were they living there last time he was POTUS or have they moved there since then, Claremont?

If they have been there for a long time, do they think Trump has got worse since the last time he was in office?
I'm thinking back and there were protest marches back then when he was elected in 2017.

Will people leave or will there be even more protests this time?

They have all been there for generations and yes, they hoped Trump's last election was just a terrible mistake, and could never happen again. And yes, they do believe that being elected for a second time has emboldened and empowered him massively, and that he is now more dangerous than first time.

I suppose the only thought to cling on to is that he won't be there for ever, although goodness knows how things will change in four years.
They won't be the only ones feeling like that and so many didn't vote either.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

^Don’t anybody tell me the colour of your skin or your sexuality diminishes intellect or “psychological superiority”
Famous scientists, philosophers, writers, athletes, psychologists, musicians, mathematicians^

I don’t think that’s what DEI is about Maw.
I take it to mean that tick boxes of quotas have to be filled.

Of course different diversity groups are of equal or superior intelligence … but let’s base offering jobs on that basis ALONE.
Not LBGQT+ not colour, nor ethnicity. We can’t pretend this isn’t happening nowadays.

ABILITY only would be good. In my opinion anyway.

I was quoting Trump in yesterdays Press conference.

You do realise the majority of UK citizens, including many top business people, do think Brexit is a disaster, don't you.

I am asking about Sovereignty- are you happy to have Trade and total loss of Sovereignty. Bizarre.