4 ms·

Its a general posture. Amazon is an industrial powerhouse and Trump has signaled that he can and will attack his political opponents no matter how rich they are

Its a general posture. Amazon is an industrial powerhouse and Trump has signaled that he can and will attack his political opponents no matter how rich they are. If he wants to, Trump may actually nationalize Amazon; the alternative is presumably becoming his toady.

cryptonector 2y ago
See "the steel cases". The POTUS cannot unilaterally nationalize any businesses.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  See Dobbs and Loper Bright, past precedent previously viewed as solid and well-established is no guarantee of future outcomes with this Court.
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    Or Brown vs. Board of Education. The courts can change their minds once in a while. There are no indicia that this court wants to overturn the steel cases.
- Gooblebrai 2y ago
  More context? A search on Google doesn't bring anything useful to me.
  - kalleboo 2y ago
    My googling turned up this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co._v._Sawyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co._...
- kalleboo 2y ago
  The current Supreme Court has been pretty clear that there is no such thing as settled case law anymore
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41952951 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41952951
  - 0x457 2y ago
    > The current Supreme Court has been pretty clear that there is no such thing as settled case law anymore It's always been the case. That's how Supreme Court works.
lenkite 2y ago
When did Trump threaten to nationalize any business ? His argument has always been for the opposite.
- dymk 2y ago
  His behavior has been he’ll do whatever he wants; he has almost no consistent political positions.
  - lenkite 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - dymk 2y ago
      He makes arguments that change with the wind. If you haven’t been paying attention to his erratic behavior for the last eight years, that’s not something I can fix for you.
      - lenkite 2y ago
        [flagged]
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  AFAICT, while he has threatened extreme and unconstitutional retaliation against businesses (e.g., pulling broadcast licenses and jailing journalists for unfavorable coverage) [0] if he wins, he has not specifically threatened nationalization. [0] https://www.npr.org/2024/10/22/nx-s1-5161480/trump-media-threats-abc-cbs-60-minutes-journalists https://www.npr.org/2024/10/22/nx-s1-5161480/trump-media-thr...
  - DiscourseFan 2y ago
    Fair enough. Though I wouldn't put it past him.
anonzzzies 2y ago
Trump has signaled he will get the military involved against his opponents. And people are still going to vote for him.
- valval 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    > And by the looks of it, the majority of people. Where are you getting this? He is down against Harris in most polls, and neither candidate is clearing a majority. There are projections that he has a narrow edge in winning the Presidency due to the electoral college, but that's not the same as being most likely to win a majority (or even plurality) of the votes (e.g., 538 gives Trump currently a 53% chance to win the electoral college, while Harris has a 65% chance to win the popular vote.)
    - valval 2y ago
      Betting odds.
      - dllthomas 2y ago
        Betting on winner, or on popular vote? Because even assuming the betters have the odds right, those are not the same thing.
        valval 2y ago
        To me the popular vote is irrelevant and in my original post I meant the winner, despite saying the majority which you interpreted to mean “more than 50% of the population of the US”. We have a system in place to counterbalance the fact that large numbers of likeminded people concentrated in one area could otherwise rule over everyone else through tyranny of the majority. To me the majority therefore just means “most of the US”. If you think betters do not have the odds right, you should start betting right now.
alvah 2y ago
"Trump has signaled that he can and will attack his political opponents" You write this, apparently sincerely, as if the other side of politics do not and will not attack their political opponents.

cryptonector 2y ago

See "the steel cases". The POTUS cannot unilaterally nationalize any businesses.

dragonwriter 2y ago
See Dobbs and Loper Bright, past precedent previously viewed as solid and well-established is no guarantee of future outcomes with this Court.
- cryptonector 2y ago
  Or Brown vs. Board of Education. The courts can change their minds once in a while. There are no indicia that this court wants to overturn the steel cases.
Gooblebrai 2y ago
More context? A search on Google doesn't bring anything useful to me.
- kalleboo 2y ago
  My googling turned up this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co._v._Sawyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co._...
kalleboo 2y ago
The current Supreme Court has been pretty clear that there is no such thing as settled case law anymore
- cryptonector 2y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41952951 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41952951
- 0x457 2y ago
  > The current Supreme Court has been pretty clear that there is no such thing as settled case law anymore It's always been the case. That's how Supreme Court works.

lenkite 2y ago

When did Trump threaten to nationalize any business ? His argument has always been for the opposite.

dymk 2y ago
His behavior has been he’ll do whatever he wants; he has almost no consistent political positions.
- lenkite 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - dymk 2y ago
    He makes arguments that change with the wind. If you haven’t been paying attention to his erratic behavior for the last eight years, that’s not something I can fix for you.
    - lenkite 2y ago
      [flagged]
dragonwriter 2y ago
AFAICT, while he has threatened extreme and unconstitutional retaliation against businesses (e.g., pulling broadcast licenses and jailing journalists for unfavorable coverage) [0] if he wins, he has not specifically threatened nationalization. [0] https://www.npr.org/2024/10/22/nx-s1-5161480/trump-media-threats-abc-cbs-60-minutes-journalists https://www.npr.org/2024/10/22/nx-s1-5161480/trump-media-thr...
- DiscourseFan 2y ago
  Fair enough. Though I wouldn't put it past him.

anonzzzies 2y ago

Trump has signaled he will get the military involved against his opponents. And people are still going to vote for him.

valval 2y ago
[flagged]
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  > And by the looks of it, the majority of people. Where are you getting this? He is down against Harris in most polls, and neither candidate is clearing a majority. There are projections that he has a narrow edge in winning the Presidency due to the electoral college, but that's not the same as being most likely to win a majority (or even plurality) of the votes (e.g., 538 gives Trump currently a 53% chance to win the electoral college, while Harris has a 65% chance to win the popular vote.)
  - valval 2y ago
    Betting odds.
    - dllthomas 2y ago
      Betting on winner, or on popular vote? Because even assuming the betters have the odds right, those are not the same thing.
      - valval 2y ago
        To me the popular vote is irrelevant and in my original post I meant the winner, despite saying the majority which you interpreted to mean “more than 50% of the population of the US”. We have a system in place to counterbalance the fact that large numbers of likeminded people concentrated in one area could otherwise rule over everyone else through tyranny of the majority. To me the majority therefore just means “most of the US”. If you think betters do not have the odds right, you should start betting right now.

alvah 2y ago

"Trump has signaled that he can and will attack his political opponents" You write this, apparently sincerely, as if the other side of politics do not and will not attack their political opponents.