I reread his tweet. He didn't say anything racist. It was racially insensitive, especially since he has a bad reputation on that issue. But he literally said these people are criticizing our country. They should go help the countries where they come from to be better than the US and then they can criticize. The worst thing was that 3 of them are not from other countries. That is the most racist thing you could assume. That he assumed they were from another country because they were brown. That could belie racism, but it isn't explicitly. Now the "send her back" chant was not good whether you want to judge it racist or not. The worst part to me is that it is about an illegal and coercive act.
I appreciate that you recognize it might belie racism. We'll have to agree to disagree that is was explicit. If you're waiting for racial epithets to denote racism you might think Trump is dumber than I do. He didn't call Judge Curiel a Mexican epithet either yet his statements were still racist. His 7 year support of the Obama is Kenyan conspiracy is still racist. Trump's continued claim of guilt for the Central Park 5 is still racist. Heck, the Trump Org settled federal discrimination lawsuits. If none of these things are racist please show me where Donald Trump has ever made similar statements about a Caucasian individual. (Ted Cruz is as hispanic as he is caucasian.)
That just means that you don't understand what explicit means. Probably for political reasons. I mean Trump has to be a flaming racist because he hangs out with Kanye West. He call the President of Sweden to say they should go easy on American rapper A$AP Rocky. He is racially insensitive but helps black rappers get out of jail. He signed a prison reform bill into law that disproportionately helps black males. Black activists have been calling for this for years. Clinton didn't do it. Bush didn't do it. Obama didn't even do it. Trump did it. That is what you call explicit.
Trump received more black and latino votes than Romney and McCain. So he appeals to them more than establishment Republicans.
With all of the corruption that we have seen from Puerto Rico lately sure makes all the people blaming Trump for Hurricane Maria deaths look really ridiculous now. FBI Arrests Former Top Puerto Rico Officials In Government Corruption Scandal
DOJ announced it is opening an antitrust probe into social media companies. “Without the discipline of meaningful market-based competition, digital platforms may act in ways that are not responsive to consumer demands."
"A federal judge decided Wednesday to leave in place a rule that imposes restrictions on individuals seeking asylum in the United States if they passed through a third country on their way to the border between the U.S. and Mexico." Trump administration scores win over challenge to asylum restriction
That is one thing that is not being reported enough. China's banks are seriously manipulated. They are way more overleveraged than US banks. They inflate their money supply faster than the US. It is so bad their stock market isn't even trusted by those in the country any more it is so manipulated. Their debt to GDP ratio is bad. China didn't just follow the West into allowing a market to exist. They copied Keynesian central banking, but on steroids compared to the West. Their economy is going to have problems for many years to come. Much like Japan who has been doing the same thing and has had zero to low growth since 1990.
How does a Chinese bank fail? Is there a run on the bank? Will the Chinese military allow a run on a bank? My assumption: this is really bad for China. They must really be hurting to have a bank failure at a major Chinese bank. I think Trump may have won the trade war with China.
The Chinese banks have state support, until they don’t. It will be a managed bankruptcy. The end result is less loans for growth whether in real estate, retail, manufacturing, etc. On the other hand, they still have growth to manage, so it won’t be as bad as the global financial crisis. I suspect growth rates will drop from 6% to 3%.
Interesting. Unless you have ever tried to deal with a Chinese bank it is difficult to understand the ridiculous regulations that either they follow or enact (or both). It is frustrating to deal with them as a non-resident. Throw a little industrial espionage top of heavy regulation and the business climate is poor. I recall 60 Minutes episode about an entire city built in China that had no residents. Young Chinese were investing borrowed money in condo rental properties that were never occupied. I'm sure they were all leveraged to the hilt. Those chickens come home to roost just like the U.S. in 2008.
Chinese home loans require 40-50% equity, so no it won’t be a major problem. The debate is great growth vs typical western growth.
When the rents stop, the market is already gone. You can't sell the residences and you can't collect rent.
So why would you stop paying the mortgage after sinking 50% of equity into the propriety? Also, these units will fill up eventually. You realize that the older residences are torn down after 20 years? The older ones were mostly built for migrant workers, have community kitchens and bathrooms on each floor, etc. Also built with concrete suppers instead of steel. These units will fill as workers upgrade their living standards.
These are long term investment vehicles. Who said they were collecting rent? They sell them at a future date - no rent is involved.
It will take away from future investment that will hurt future growth since they will be servicing the loans, or selling at a steep discount. The banks will be fine on this. The business and real estate development loans on the other hand will be problematic since they are more leveraged.
The better analogy for the Chinese residential market is the US stock market of 2008-2011. If you didn’t sell, you were okay. Also, both represent the main investment vehicles in their respective countries.
