CalvinBall wrote:they could also just think it is wrong, regardless of impact on business?

CalvinBall wrote:they could also just think it is wrong, regardless of impact on business?

PSUsarge wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:they could also just think it is wrong, regardless of impact on business?

Well, right, which is the case (for now).

My point was more that tech seems to be the dominant industry speaking out against it, which is fantastic (and I'm proud to be part of that industry), but that I assumed there was a much larger immediate impact given how many big-time leaders have spoken out against it.

Youseff wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:they could also just think it is wrong, regardless of impact on business?

yeah, I think this is it. or, perhaps more selfishly, they see that it impacts the perception of immigrants and the "others" as a whole, and they see the negative impact that has on their valued employees mental health and overall well being.

JFLNYC wrote:I think any rational argument is welcome in this thread. But no refugee from any of the seven countries included in Trump's ban has been involved in a terrorist attack on American soil. The ban is a craven and cynical attack on American values designed to generate fear and hatred and is a reckless, unnecessary and dangerous distraction from real issues facing our country. It is a solution in search of a problem and does not withstand any rational discourse.

Here’s the list of predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East covered by Trump’s order:

Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen.

Here’s the list of predominantly Muslim countries where the Trump Organization has done business:

Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Azerbaijan.

What a coincidence; there’s no overlap. The places where the Trump Organization has done business are exempted from the ban.

Even Saudi Arabia, for goodness’ sake! The one country we know for certain has allowed, if it did not actively encourage, emigrants who attacked the United States on 9/11. But Trump has business interests in Saudi Arabia, and a guy shouldn’t have to give up his business interests just because he’s going into “public service,” now should he?

Youseff wrote:I don't really watch much TV News, but I was wondering how FOX is handling the administration so far? He's an obese TV addict, so if there were some respected, dissenting voices on FOX, I could see that affecting him.

Youseff wrote:I don't really watch much TV News, but I was wondering how FOX is handling the administration so far? He's an obese TV addict, so if there were some respected, dissenting voices on FOX, I could see that affecting him.

Combining all of these facts, we have a fairly clear picture in play.

Trump was, indeed, perfectly honest during the campaign; he intends to do everything he said, and more. This should not be reassuring to you.
The regime’s main organizational goal right now is to transfer all effective power to a tight inner circle, eliminating any possible checks from either the Federal bureaucracy, Congress, or the Courts. Departments are being reorganized or purged to effect this.
The inner circle is actively probing the means by which they can seize unchallenged power; yesterday’s moves should be read as the first part of that.
The aims of crushing various groups — Muslims, Latinos, the black and trans communities, academics, the press — are very much primary aims of the regime, and are likely to be acted on with much greater speed than was earlier suspected. The secondary aim of personal enrichment is also very much in play, and clever people will find ways to play these two goals off each other.

If you’re looking for estimates of what this means for the future, I’ll refer you back to yesterday’s post on what “things going wrong” can look like. Fair warning: I stuffed that post with pictures of cute animals for a reason.

JFLNYC wrote:According to the CATO Institute you have a 0.000003% chance of being killed by a foreign-born terrorist.

Warszawa wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:According to the CATO Institute you have a 0.000003% chance of being killed by a foreign-born terrorist.

You actually have a greater chance of being killed by a cow

Warszawa wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:According to the CATO Institute you have a 0.000003% chance of being killed by a foreign-born terrorist.

You actually have a greater chance of being killed by a cow