Huawei Ban

[dealmaker]

A Break for Huawei?

The White House's budget chief is asking for a delay to the law that would restrict the government's relationship with Huawei. The letter, by acting budget chief Russell T. Vought, says the ban would result in a "dramatic reduction" of the companies that could supply the government, and would hit rural areas particularly hard. If granted, the delay could represent a sudden reprieve for Huawei. WSJ

 

[piezoe]

Apparently, the beliefs and ideals the Founding Fathers set forth regarding the Office of the President, and other officials, that have gotten us this far, are no longer desired; as shown by the last election.

________________
“In a [republic] democracy, people get the leaders they deserve.” – Joseph de Maistre

This is a lovely example of how common wisdom, despite its irresistable, simplistic appeal, is often wrong. (Gore Vidal, as a matter of fact, said, "... common wisdom is almost always wrong.")

When the people make choices based on truth they get what they deserve. When they base their decisions based on disinformation that is the result of intentional acts of others intended to deceive, they may get what they do not deserve.

In his defense, De Maistre could not have foreseen the "internet age."

 

[piezoe]

A Break for Huawei?

The White House's budget chief is asking for a delay to the law that would restrict the government's relationship with Huawei. The letter, by acting budget chief Russell T. Vought, says the ban would result in a "dramatic reduction" of the companies that could supply the government, and would hit rural areas particularly hard. If granted, the delay could represent a sudden reprieve for Huawei. WSJ

Money speaks louder than politics.

 

[userque]

...When they base their decisions based on disinformation that is the result of intentional acts of others intended to deceive, they may get what they do not deserve. ...

If a society allows disinformation, then it can still be argued that they get what they deserve.

If a society puts individuals in charge of themselves without proper vetting, then it can still be argued that they get what they deserved.

If you trust a snake oil salesman selling things that are too good to be true, things that appeal to your greed, and you get scammed because you trusted the salesman without exercising due diligence, then it can still be argued that you get what you deserved.

In our case, Trump's history and propensities were/are no secret. He is exactly the same as he has been for decades.

When a people have the power to determine that the propensity and history of an individual is that of a liar, racist, con man, and moral-less individual; when these facts are not hidden, then certainly, a people get the leadership they deserve when they put such an individual in charge.

I'd love to hear your rebuttal to this.

Your rebuttal to: "A people are responsible for whatever the outcome of knowingly electing someone like Trump"

 

[elitenapper]

This is a lovely example of how common wisdom, despite its irresistable, simplistic appeal, is often wrong. (Gore Vidal, as a matter of fact, said, "... common wisdom is almost always wrong.")

When the people make choices based on truth they get what they deserve. When they base their decisions based on disinformation that is the result of intentional acts of others intended to deceive, they may get what they do not deserve.

In his defense, De Maistre could not have foreseen the "internet age."

Agreed, but only on the assumption the disinformation is well crafted and well disguised so that the average person of reasonable intelligence, education and life experience cannot be expected to see through.

I'm afraid that assumption doesn't apply in most cases in today's politics. The deceit / disinformation in US politics has been on-going for more than a century. People are supposed to be able to learn from experience and use common sense.

If a society allows disinformation, then it can still be argued that they get what they deserve.

If a society puts individuals in charge of themselves without proper vetting, then it can still be argued that they get what they deserved.

If you trust a snake oil salesman selling things that are too good to be true, things that appeal to your greed, and you get scammed because you trusted the salesman without exercising due diligence, then it can still be argued that you get what you deserved.

In our case, Trump's history and propensities were/are no secret. He is exactly the same as he has been for decades.

When a people have the power to determine that the propensity and history of an individual is that of a liar, racist, con man, and moral-less individual; when these facts are not hidden, then certainly, a people get the leadership they deserve when they put such an individual in charge.

I'd love to hear your rebuttal to this.

Your rebuttal to: "A people are responsible for whatever the outcome of knowingly electing someone like Trump"

Agreed with minor exceptions - (1) Trump is not in charge. Neither the White House nor Congress wields real political power. (2) It's not that the American society allows disinformation; rather, the society has become grossly negligent and incompetent, partly as a result of the machinations of the Establishment.

And in a democracy, leadership is a popularity contest, not an ability contest.

True. It really doesn't take a PhD thesis to explain why democracy doesn't work. As well-respected former American journalist H.L. Mencken put it: "Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance."

 

[ironchef]

True. It really doesn't take a PhD thesis to explain why democracy doesn't work. As well-respected former American journalist H.L. Mencken put it: "Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance."

It has a lot of shortcomings but none has figured out a better system to replace it.

Tyranny of the majority is still better than tyranny of the minority, of the few, of the elite.... Perhaps the majority needs to be more inclusive and respectful of the minorities.

 

[newbreak]

the market IS MANIPULATED,,,the market makers manipulate the price the market makers advantage
1. 90% leverage in stocks
2. unlimited NAKED shorting powers
3. see retail client orders coming and pays for orders to fill market maker orders get filled first.

why would anyone pay the cost of being a market maker with no benefit? they pay 3 times more for market data and obligated to put a bid on illiquid stocks etc.
anybody can be market maker. anyone can be broker or have a seat in the Chicago futures exchange.

 

[ironchef]

the market IS MANIPULATED,,,the market makers manipulate the price the market makers advantage
1. 90% leverage in stocks
2. unlimited NAKED shorting powers
3. see retail client orders coming and pays for orders to fill market maker orders get filled first.

why would anyone pay the cost of being a market maker with no benefit? they pay 3 times more for market data and obligated to put a bid on illiquid stocks etc.
anybody can be market maker. anyone can be broker or have a seat in the Chicago futures exchange.

We retails do have an advantage: If we don't like the price, we do not have to trade.

If you want to trade for a living, you need patience.

 

[elitenapper]

It has a lot of shortcomings but none has figured out a better system to replace it.

People who know what's actually been going on in this country would beg to differ.

Tyranny of the majority is still better than tyranny of the minority, of the few, of the elite.... Perhaps the majority needs to be more inclusive and respectful of the minorities.

What we've got here is not tyranny of the majority, but tyranny of the extreme minority, like the 0.1% or less.

 

[curiousGeorge8]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Senator Marco Rubio filed legislation on Monday that would prevent Huawei Technologies Co Ltd from seeking damages in U.S. patent courts, after the Chinese firm demanded that Verizon Communications Inc pay $1 billion to license the rights to patented technology.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...bio-targets-huawei-over-patents-idUSKCN1TI2T3