[Politics] Trump actually gave Angela Merkel a bill for NATO defense expenses
 

...and the White House denies it (again)!

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/26/donal...nato-bill.html
http://www.dw.com/en/white-house-den...nse/a-38131490
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/3236...kel-nato-bill/

I recently myself pleaded that one shouldn't simply post links to articles, but what can i add? it's outrageous! or, as hazel would say: "You couldn't make it up!"

and we thought things were getting tough when john wayne became president (oops, did i remember that right?).

my colleagues are really rather conservative, but by now they all call for pretty drastic measures against scrooge macduck sorry, donald trump.

Are you aware that the US is twenty trillion dollars in debt? Would it hurt for Germany to pay their fair share?

The truly shocking thing about the debt isn't the mind-boggling amount, but that other countries aren't buying it any more. That is, we used to sell treasuries to China, Japan, Russia and others. Now most of them are selling instead buying, so the FED is just printing the money--like Venezuela does.

what planet are you from, every country in the world has debts!
and why should any of them pay their "fair share" of the united states' debts? because they build the most guns?

Why is NATO even around? There is no need for it. Previous policies from our former "glorious" president Obama and also Madame Cyberhack are responsible for having turned back relations with Russia, so to have an excuse to keep the NATO machine fed.

Rightfully so, why should they? The US cannot possibly think to be able to backup the greenback with anything substantial. It cannot return to the gold standard, because it likely does not have enough in Fort Knox to cover the amount of paper printed.

If thats the case, maybe we will then start using bitcoins and trading and selling of Rare Pepes :D.

styxhexenhammer666 - Kekonomics: Venezuelans now (Sort of) Using Rare Pepes as Currency

That may be so. Maybe this is Trump's strategy for getting us out of it.

You miss the point. I'm not claiming others SHOULD buy our debt, I'm just claiming they aren't. Previously we were actually borrowing the money we spent above and beyond receipts. Now we're just printing it. That's a recipe for hyperinflation like Wiemar Germany, Zimbabwe and Venezuela.

I like bitcoins too. But there are no simple solutions. And if people begin to transfer significant wealth into bitcoin as the dollar fails, the government or the FED will probably prevent it in the US. Yeah, yeah, I know, they can't. But they do a lot of things that they can't do.

Asking other countries to pay for services received is exactly what Trump campaigned on. Unlike most politicians, he's keeping campaign promises. I'm just pointing out that that issue is tiny potatoes compared to the impending doom of the dollar.

All money is "virtual." :)

Anytime, anywhere, that someone wants to execute a transaction, the currency-units must exist to allow the transaction to occur. If the transaction is international, the currency-units must be convertible to any other recognized currency-unit at a small discount.

And this is the problem with bitcoin: they are just a barter token. They have no relation to currency and they have a limited supply. Hence, it is impossible to provide sufficient liquidity. Furthermore, if bitcoin was accepted as a currency unit, it would by definition have exactly the same problems that every other currency-unit has.

"Rarity," or in this case computational difficulty, does not make "value."

What currency did the gold miners use in their camps? Uh huh ... "scrip!" There was no certainty that gold would be found, and, even if it was, it was the product to be shipped out! The daily requirement for liquidity was satisfied within the [isolated ...] camp, by a token that by agreement would be accepted throughout the camp. The scrip was handled "as though it were real money," which of course made it "real money" sufficiently for the purposes at hand.

For many decades, in vaults deep under the streets of New York City, people used to schleb heavy carts full of gold bars from one room of a vault to another ... until someone finally realized that currency does not obtain its value from heavy carts full of gold bars being schlebbed around from one New York room to another! No, currency has value "merely because we all agree that it does."

The United States' problem is that it "borrows from itself," not to provide liquidity, but to buy things. It "borrows" $2 to $3 million dollars a minute, 24/7/365. But, it can(!) do that. Any sovereign nation can do that. Trouble is, nations like China have massive amounts of "dollars" because they've been selling tangible goods to the US and getting nothing but intangible "dollars" in return. This is an indication of the root problem: the USA is not producing.

forgive my ignorance, but what services?
no really, i'd like to know.
maybe some things look different from inside the usa than they look to the rest of the world.

You're forgiven.

First, if the White House denied it happened, it probably didn't happen. President Trump has been a target of a huge volume of fake news ever since he announced his candidacy. The media HATES him and they make every false claim about him that they think they can get away with.

However, in general, he has discussed the fact that the US military provides protection for many other nations and gets insufficient remuneration for it. I guessing this claim is based on that.

And, y'know, I think that the Chief Executive Officer of Germany is also "a pretty grown-up, both-feet on-the-ground kind of person." :)

People in those positions "see plenty of peculiar things." Guess it just comes with the territory.

happy denial.
click the links i provided, they all lead back to large news companies, most of them in the US - oh, believe it, it did happen.

newsflash: the cold war ended sometime in the 1980s.
since then, what's going on other than the usa continuously trying to ascertain their role as sheriff of the world (conveniently hiding the fact that they also hugely profit from all this, erm, "defence", erm, meddling)?

Just something to consider and think about
 

I stumbled upon something interesting:

Alternatehistoryhub - What if Russia Never Existed?
Which leads to this:

Real Life Lore - What If the Soviet Union Reunited Today?
Though I am sure those who prefer to keep NATO around long for another cold war anyhow, otherwise again there is no need for NATO anymore.

Essentially, "NATO is Europe's branch" of the same-old "military industrial complex."

Throughout World War II, capitalists throughout the world realized that "the warring parties are writing blank checks!" :eek:

(It especially helped if your government called itself "neutral," since then you could accept fat checks from both sides, ostensibly "without a guilty conscience.")

After Germany and Japan finally (and, inconveniently ...) surrendered, "World War II" continued – and, it continues to this day.

Remember: real men built the Berlin Wall! (And ... heh ... looks like they're about to find full-time employment along the US Border with Mexico!) :rolleyes:

Likewise, many military contractors made ##CLASSIFIED##ions of d-o-l-l-a-r-s building, one by one, "those ##CLASSIFIED##ions of Nuclear Warheads!" Which they then sold to governments at ##CLASSIFIED##ion d-o-l-l-a-r-s apiece.

And so, as long as World War Two never actually ends, NATO will never end, either. "The inexhaustible stream of money will never die."

Yep, and then it will be the next generation's problem, and then they will kick the can further down the road again and then it will be one after that's problem.

Don't say that in Europe. ;) :p

You have got me agreeing with you again, I'm having withdrawal symptoms here. Can ya say something I'll disagree with, please, pretty please, what is going on here! I need some serious help! Just kidding! ;)

Why does NATO exist? Well for a start it prevented the USSR from invading Western Europe and now probably prevents Russia from treating the Baltic States as they treated the Ukraine. Why should the USA care? Well, they didn't care in the 20s and 30s, and look where that got them in 1941.

@ syndialsvcs. Coloured, underlined italics and bold capitals? I think you need to lie down for a bit!

A reasonable argument, but again I would like to point out that the USSR no longer exists. And before you state 'but Russia is now being belligerent' - I do not see it as such. Why was NATO still expanding after the collapse of the USSR, and NOW there is a massive force in Poland and other countries bordering Russia? Even when Russia brings up that issue, it is somehow spun as if Russia is the one who is somehow being the jerk in all this. As for Ukraine, it is still seen as a buffer state - and has always been the cause of such messes in the past anyways: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Cq4z7GU_40

I still love how butthurt the west was about the annexation of Crimea - when any European let alone those in Eastern Europe fully recognise that Crimea itself is rightfully Russia, and again, never considered Ukraine anyways as nothing more but a Russian Vassal - The Kievan Rus.

Going back to the bigger picture, I am amazed how remarkably patient Russia has been with NATO - and again NATO is the one that is poking the Bear in the first place, and here on this side of the pond - The Don has the never to WANT better relations with Russia. That cannot stand, because then there is obviously no need for NATO - why do you think all the corporate owned pundits and 'news' anchors are so desperately still trying to push the Russia threat narrative. Anyone who has a functioning brain, would know this is extremely reckless - because they do not realise it will escalate to a nuclear confrontation. I am going to keep stressing this point - Russia won't bother with any sort of conventional means of warfare - so what do you think that means?

All the hawks in our government are still pushing for more intervention in Syria, pushing for a no fly zone - would just love to also attack Iran (never mind that the Iranians have a defense treaty with Russia) - so that would end up a direct confrontation with Russia. These people are outright fscking insane. Yet in all his bombastic rhetoric - The Don does have one good idea, lets NOT escalate tensions with the Russians, we need to actually get along.....OMG HOW DARE HE? HE IS A RUSSIAN AGENT! :rolleyes:

Neo Mccarythism 2.0 - and it will only lead to the path of our destruction - thanks democrats.