More US election stuff

[Nearly Sane]

Trading in the real stuff is different to gambling in the shadow banking world or using people as near slaves.

Metal trading isn't real stuff, it's primarlily a derivatives market.

[Nearly Sane]

Who's they?

Trump's statements in the recording support sexual assault, you think this is no big deal.

[Jack Knave]

Trump's statements in the recording support sexual assault, you think this is no big deal.

I thought we were talking about Farage?

[Jack Knave]

Metal trading isn't real stuff, it's primarlily a derivatives market.

So who deals with the real stuff then, as in trading it and selling it and so on?

[ad_orientem]

I feel sorry for the American people. I couldn't in good conscience vote for either candidate. For the life of me though, I don't understand how Clinton is considered any better than Trump. Clinton is a compulsive liar and at least as hawkish as any previous American president. Clinton would mean more war, more terrorism and more refugee crisis. In fact I think I want Trump to win if only because it would throw a major spanner in the works of the current system.

[Nearly Sane]

I thought we were talking about Farage?

and what happened arising from Trump's remarks supporting sexual assault. Something you were not too bothered about.

[Nearly Sane]

So who deals with the real stuff then, as in trading it and selling it and so on?

It's worth reading the link below. The contracts are futures contracts which can result in actual transfer but the trading of this amounts to multiple times the amount of metals traded in total across the world never mind on the LME. These are derivatives.



https://lme.com/trading/

[ad_orientem]

It's worth reading the link below. The contracts are futures contracts which can result in actual transfer but the trading of this amounts to multiple times the amount of metals traded in total across the world never mind on the LME. These are derivatives.



https://lme.com/trading/

Sounfs like a con, if you ask me.

[Nearly Sane]

Sounfs like a con, if you ask me.

It's certainly big financial business

[jeremyp]

I think we're splitting hairs a bit here. Farage was a commodities dealer: he made a lot of money out of it. Whether he was selling real metal to real people or betting on price fluctuations (most metals deals are more the latter than the former), he is part of the elite that everybody was supposed to be voting against in Brexit and will be voting against in the US General Election.

To make matters worse, he also takes money from the EU as an MEP - an organisation to which he is opposed. He and Donald Trump make a good pairing.

[Jack Knave]

I feel sorry for the American people. I couldn't in good conscience vote for either candidate. For the life of me though, I don't understand how Clinton is considered any better than Trump. Clinton is a compulsive liar and at least as hawkish as any previous American president. Clinton would mean more war, more terrorism and more refugee crisis. In fact I think I want Trump to win if only because it would throw a major spanner in the works of the current system.

I agree. And that is what I think Farage is trying to do. Mess up these elites fuckers.

[Jack Knave]

and what happened arising from Trump's remarks supporting sexual assault. Something you were not too bothered about.

I think I said that there was a bigger picture involved. But this was just a general comment about Trump. I think someone said Farage has now dropped trump.

[Jack Knave]

It's worth reading the link below. The contracts are futures contracts which can result in actual transfer but the trading of this amounts to multiple times the amount of metals traded in total across the world never mind on the LME. These are derivatives.



https://lme.com/trading/

I know this stuff. What I don't know is what Farage actually did. But if he is as bad as you make out then he wouldn't haven't dropped such a lucrative career to run a backwater movement party that most people ridiculed for years, working his balls off 24/7 and losing his private life, and which achieved pretty much nothing until recently.

[Nearly Sane]

I know this stuff. What I don't know is what Farage actually did. But if he is as bad as you make out then he wouldn't haven't dropped such a lucrative career to run a backwater movement party that most people ridiculed for years, working his balls off 24/7 and losing his private life, and which achieved pretty much nothing until recently.

then why misrepresent what he was doing as not being the sort of financial instrument trading that you seem to despise? As to working hard, isn't that true of many politicians but they are 'elite', he is hard working. It's your double standards I am taking issue with.

[jeremyp]

What I don't know is what Farage actually did.

He traded in commodities. He brokered deals in metals specifically

But if he is as bad as you make out

Nobody is making him out as bad for that. What they are doing is pointing out that it makes him part of the elite that Brexit voters were allegedly protesting against.

then he wouldn't haven't dropped such a lucrative career to run a backwater movement party that most people ridiculed for years, working his balls off 24/7 and losing his private life, and which achieved pretty much nothing until recently.

He's done very nicely for himself as an MEP. His salary is looking even better right now, what with him helping to stitch up Sterling.

[Brownie]

One of our posters put this up on another forum and I thought others might find it interesting, especially Christians - I told him I would copy it.   Apologies if it has already been posted here, I've only just logged on.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/08/04/christians-can-vote-for-trump-but-they-cant-do-it-in-the-name-of-christianity/?utm_term=.78986b21098b

[floo]

A lot of Republicans seem to be right-wing very unpleasant Christians. One could do without one of them as president, just as one wouldn't want Trump to hold that office!

[Nearly Sane]

The thing that it underlines, as do the comments, is the visceral impact of the subject of abortion in the U S. I don't see opposition to abortion as indicative of being very unpleasant.


It also underlines the difficulty of dealing in moral absolutes in a world where you are forced to make relativist decisions. The writer is correct that pro life is a wider position than a single issue, but I don't understand how an absolutist balances a situation where there is no absolutely satisfactory outcome, and how when they do, they can still remain an absolutist.

[floo]

The thing that it underlines, as do the comments, is the visceral impact of the subject of abortion in the U S. I don't see opposition to abortion as indicative of being very unpleasant.


It also underlines the difficulty of dealing in moral absolutes in a world where you are forced to make relativist decisions. The writer is correct that pro life is a wider position than a single issue, but I don't understand how an absolutist balances a situation where there is no absolutely satisfactory outcome, and how when they do, they can still remain an absolutist.

I think a woman should have an absolute right to abort a pregnancy in the early stages, for whatever reason. To make abortion illegal as pro-lifers would seek to do is very unpleasant!

[Aruntraveller]

I think a woman should have an absolute right to abort a pregnancy in the early stages, for whatever reason. To make abortion illegal as pro-lifers would seek to do is very unpleasant!

Whilst not wishing to start a discussion on abortion again (!) I have to just say that you do see things in a very cut and dried manner.

Now while I can agree that the right to an abortion lies mainly with the woman - I can't help feeling that your attitude relegates men to a 'no choice but to agree' position. And I do not think that is helpful or fair.

Women (rightly in some cases) complain that men do not take responsibility for their actions and yet here you are removing any responsibility in this area for any actions. It just isn't as simple an issue as that.

That goes both for the strongly pro-abortion stance that you appear to hold - and the equally strong stance that anti-abortionists hold.

Abortion is a serious issue and to remove all shades of gray from the discussion is not helpful or sensible imo.

[Nearly Sane]

I think a woman should have an absolute right to abort a pregnancy in the early stages, for whatever reason. To make abortion illegal as pro-lifers would seek to do is very unpleasant!

and they would say to murder babies as they say it is very unpleasant. If you merely define things you disagree with as very unpleasant then it's a fairly useless phrase.

[Brownie]

Indeed it is NS. 

Trent: Abortion is a serious issue and to remove all shades of gray from the discussion is not helpful or sensible imo. You are right about that, every aspect needs to be discussed.

Floo, your attitude is as dogmatic as those who are anti-abortion.

In reality, no politician is going to be able to ban it altogether in the USA which is so vast and encompasses people of every opinion- but opinions have to be considered and politicians are obliged to say something on the subject.  The successful ones will take the middle ground, Obama did.  He was blasted by pro-lifers but really, his stance is moderate.  He devotes an entire chapter of his (self written) book, "The Audacity of Hope" to the subject of abortion.  The book is well worth reading.

Trump is sucking up to a particular strata of society with, it has to be said, some success but if anyone bothers to look beneath the surface, he is just paying lip service to the Pro-lifers.   If he does become President he won't be able to deliver most of the promises he is giving but he can talk the talk.

Abortion is only one issue.  I keep on saying that to people who are bogged down with it but there are so many important issues.  I wonder how many of us think about our politicians' views on abortion?  Not many I'm sure, but we in the UK, generalisation here, have a different attitude to politics and politicians to the Americans as we do to religion.

[floo]

Whilst not wishing to start a discussion on abortion again (!) I have to just say that you do see things in a very cut and dried manner.

Now while I can agree that the right to an abortion lies mainly with the woman - I can't help feeling that your attitude relegates men to a 'no choice but to agree' position. And I do not think that is helpful or fair.

Women (rightly in some cases) complain that men do not take responsibility for their actions and yet here you are removing any responsibility in this area for any actions. It just isn't as simple an issue as that.

That goes both for the strongly pro-abortion stance that you appear to hold - and the equally strong stance that anti-abortionists hold.

Abortion is a serious issue and to remove all shades of gray from the discussion is not helpful or sensible imo.

Whilst a woman should discuss having a termination with her partner, it is her decision that counts as she has to carry the foetus for nine months, and then give birth, which isn't a load of laughs!

[Aruntraveller]

Whilst a woman should discuss having a termination with her partner, it is her decision that counts as she has to carry the foetus for nine months, and then give birth, which isn't a load of laughs!

Well thanks for that I hadn't realized that the woman carried the foetus - me being a poor thick man who clearly can't read an article about pregnancy and retain any information about it.

Nuance as a concept isn't your strongest suit is it.

[floo]

Well thanks for that I hadn't realized that the woman carried the foetus - me being a poor thick man who clearly can't read an article about pregnancy and retain any information about it.

Nuance as a concept isn't your strongest suit is it.

Ehhhhhhhhhhh?