Dog Protect Owner Compilation 2017

Ed Sheeran - Shape of You Official Video 2017

Ed Sheeran - Shape of You [Official Video] 2017

J Balvin & Pitull ft. Camila Capello - Hey Ma (English Version)

J Balvin & Pitfall ft. Camila Capello - Hey Ma (English Version)

Trump is letting China and Mexico off the hook

Donald Trump the president looks less and less like Donald Trump the candidate.

While campaigning last year, Trump promised, among other things, to label China a currency manipulator and rework or withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement within his first 100 days. Neither is happening.
Trump recently told the Wall Street Journal that he won’t officially accuse China of currency manipulation, at least not any time soon. He hasn’t done anything about NAFTA, except to say “pleasant surprises” are coming. He has continued to threaten tariffs on certain imports from the two countries, but he hasn’t backed that with legislative or policy proposals. For all his bluster, Trump seems to be letting China and Mexico off the hook.
The two countries served as Trump’s most convenient bogeymen during the campaign, when he repeatedly claimed that low-paid workers from Mexico and China had taken millions of jobs that once belonged to Americans. Among Trump’s more memorable accusations:
“We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country.”
Mexico is “killing us on trade.”
“Other countries are eating our lunch.”

Trump used the threat of trade wars to great effect during the campaign, convincing millions of American workers that a tougher stance on trade would make them better off. He now seems to be changing his mind, which is not surprising given that hundreds of economists and business leaders have warned that punitive tariffs and other protectionist measures would do more economic harm than good.

It might be tempting to call Trump a flip-flopper, but it’s also worth noting that his views on key economic issues seem to be maturing as he shifts from campaigning to governing. It has certainly happened to other newly elected presidents. Many campaign promises are never fulfilled, which is perhaps one reason Americans have soured on electoral politics.

Many Trump campaign promises would also be reckless if fulfilled. Labeling China a currency manipulator would open the door for US trade restrictions on China, and China would probably retaliate with similar sanctions on the United States. This would spook markets, probably sending stocks down. If such measures actually went into effect, prices of some imports would rise, with many ordinary families paying more. This is not what to do if you want to boost economic growth, a key Trump goal.
Trump has also threatened companies that build products in Mexico with sizeable “border tariffs” if they could just as easily make such goods in the United States. He has tangled on that issue with automakers such as Ford and General Motors, which both build cars in Mexico that are for sale in America. Those flare-ups have been doused by automaker promises to hire more Americans and invest more in America—no border taxes needed.

Trump meets regularly with CEOs and other top business minds, and he undoubtedly gets an earful about the risks of protectionism. He appears to be listening. Trump could still seek trade concessions from China and Mexico as various agencies finalize reports and investigations into America’s trade relationships. Perhaps most likely are targeted, modest requests on trade from key partners. But the odds of outright trade wars seem to be dropping. That is good for businesses and might even benefit their workers at some point.

Sean Spicer Throws In the Towel

When the president of the United States makes several major shifts on policy in the course of the week, it’s bound to raise a series of questions. Luckily, there’s someone whose job is to answer those questions, giving the press information about the president’s thinking and direction: the White House press secretary.

Related Story

The Education of Donald J. Trump

At least in theory. Sean Spicer seemed less than enthused on Thursday about trying to explain why Donald Trump shifted his view on issues ranging from the Export-Import Bank to interest rates to Chinese currency manipulation in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. Trump also announced that NATO, which he had said was obsolete, is no longer obsolete. During Thursday’s White House briefing, reporters wanted to know what had happened, and what this meant for other Trump positions—were they equally malleable?

“I think, respectfully, I think you can look at what you’re referring to as a shift in a lot of ways, and by that I mean I saw a couple instances with respect to NATO being one of those shifts, and if you look at what’s happened, it’s those entities or individuals in some cases or issues evolving toward the president’s position,” he said.

On NATO, Spicer noted that Trump had demanded that the alliance focus more on terror and that other members increase their defense spending. Both those things are seeing movement, Spicer said. This is fair as far as it goes: The changes may not be due to Trump, but there has been movement.

But it doesn’t explain the economic-policy shifts, and on those Spicer was rather more vague. Why had the president decided the Ex-Im Bank wasn’t such a bad idea?

“Let me get back to you on the Ex-Im bank. It’s a very complex issue and I would like to get back.”

Why does Trump no longer believe China is devaluing its currency, even though he has said so as recently as February?

“It’s a very, very complex issue and I’m gonna leave it to the president to specifically answer it,” Spicer offered.

There’s an element of comedy to this: Spicer’s job is to explain the president’s positions to the press and the public. And sure, the press secretary can’t be expected to be an expert in every topic. Except that Spicer knows a thing or two about trade policy, having served as a spokesman for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative during the George W. Bush administration

Spicer’s had a rough week. On Tuesday, he stumbled into an unfortunate and ill-conceived comparison between Bashar al-Assad and Adolf Hitler, only digging himself deeper before realizing his error and trying to reverse it. It’s also hard to defend Trump when he changes his positions so abruptly, especially while admitting in some cases that he simply did not understand the question at hand. Moreover, Spicer has reason to be nervous. Trump is believed to watch press briefings closely. Spicer could be concerned about wedding himself too closely to any one position, since Trump could easily just change his mind back. He has on occasion contradicted Spicer’s statements in the briefing room.

Still, the correct answer is surely to defend whatever whatever the president says his policy is right now. If even his own spokesman can’t understand and explain that, how is anyone else to do so?

Selena Gomez Kill Em With Kindness Latest 2017

Dhera Dheere sa Meri zindagi man ana

Defense Secretary Mattis won't say what a US aircraft carrier is up to near North Korea

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis explained Tuesday the decision to strike Sharyat air base in Syria with 57 cruise missiles, and noticeably seemed to avoid a looming nuclear threat — North Korea. 

The USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier and strike group have been deployed to the Korean peninsula in response to North Korea's nuclear threats, which prompted the Kim regime to warn the US of potential nuclear strikes should they be provoked.
But according to Mattis, there's nothing to make of the carrier strike group redirecting itself to the region.
"She's stationed there in the western Pacific for a reason. She operates freely up and down the Pacific," said Mattis of the Vinson, implying the imposing carrier would send a message to North Korea and other actors in the region.
However, when pressed on what exactly that reason might be, Mattis seemed to backtrack saying "there's not a specific reason or demand signal," that brought the Vinson to the Korean peninsula.

North Korea's Kim regime, which US presidents have tried for decades to engage with diplomatically, has recently stepped into a visible and distressing stage of its nuclear and ballistic missile program that requires testing.

Experts have told Business Insider that once North Korea perfects an intercontinental ballistic missile, it reaches a "point of no return" whereby the US no longer has any military credibility against the Kim regime and may be forced to acknowledge it as a national power. 

The US has repeatedly and openly mulled military action against the Kim regime, but Joel Wit, co-founder of 38 North, a website that brings together experts on North Korea, told Business Insider that "it's almost universal that the downsides of military strikes are so great that it's hard to see them taking place."

North Korea's nuclear and conventional forces are too spread out to wipe out all at once. Additionally, their artillery installations and missile launchers could likely level Seoul, South Korea's capital city and home to 10 million people.

Trump reiterated in a tweet on Tuesday that "North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them!" also adding that he told Chinese President Xi Jinping at their meeting on Thursday "a trade deal with the US will be far better for them if they solve the North Korean problem!"

However, the US can only threaten North Korea with force or cut off business ties. North Korea's main backer for years has been China, which carries out 85% of North Korea's external trade and provides a similar percentage of its energy imports.

China could potentially curb North Korea's nuclear program through a limited deployment of military forces or by halting trade with the Hermit Kingdom. But China has a strong interest in preserving the North Korean state, as it acts as a buffer between the US's 25,000 permanently stationed troops in South Korea.

A Chinese envoy of diplomats arrived in South Korea on Monday and reportedly reached an agreement on how to handle North Korea's nuclear ambitions. It remains to be seen if the South Korean-Chinese action will be good enough for the Trump administration.