***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[boris]

So, Satan is the good guy.

 

[nawghtyhare]

So, Satan is the good guy.

I mean if we being real
Old beezlebub never got to tell his side of the story

 

[RustyShackleford]

Lucifer ain't ever called me a n-word

 

[rolaholic]

So Bolton's threatening the ICC and calling it illegitimate because they'd dare to investigate the army for war crimes? Here I thought they hated 'rogue states'?

 

[Belgium]

Belgium
I appreciate your contributions to this thread, especially as a non-US citizen.
Random question though that you might be able to answer for me: how difficult is it to get a work visa, temporary, or permanent residency in Belgium or the Netherlands for a US citizen?

Specific visa requirements are far from my specialty but part of it is streamlined through the Schenghen agreement Visa requirements. Those should be more or less the same for any given country in the Schenghen zone but they only cover the initial travel to the country or a short stay.
There’s the general set of requirements to qualify for any kind of Schengen travel visa in the first place and then additional requirements depending on the kind of visa. There’s a whole bunch such as diplomatic, business, student, work, sports/cultural, medical, ... visas. You can find those requirements on the Schenen zone’s website and/or the Belgian embassy regarding travel to Belgium.
But that's just the easy part to get here.

In short I would say it's not that hard to get a work and residency permit here in terms of strict requirements like Canada but rather the very complex nature of different permit requirements, language barriers, ... and a general bureaucracy suffering from very long delays across the board. It would be way faster to just apply for a permit in the Netherlands than in Belgium.

Non-EU economic zone residents would need a type B work visa to work in Belgium.
Because Belgium is split in 3 (4 actually but only 3 apply in this case) major governments below the federal level they all require separate permits and requirements.
First you have the northern Flanders region which speaks Dutch as the native language, which is where I live.
Then there’s the French speaking Wallonian region that is essentially the southern half of the country.
Inbetween the two is the Brussels region, which is bilingual but predominantly consists of native French speakers.

If you have a permit to work in Flanders you can't work in Brussels for example unless you successfully apply there as well.

If anything this is probably the biggest barrier for foreigners looking to work in Belgium. Our political system, the number of different governments and different jurisdictions etc. are vastly more complex than any of our European neighbors. The language barrier between the different main regions also causes a lot of bureaucratic delays.
Let me illustrate with the number of different governments all having to work with eachother

1. Municipal/local government
2. Provincial government
3. Regional government (Flanders, Brussels, Wallonia, native German speaking district)
4. Federal government

In theory it doesn't sound so bad but the language barrier causes a massive divide. In our federal parliament for example, many of the politicians require earpieces and translators at all times because they can't understand eachother without them. Really. It's one thing to an earpiece here and there on tv but witnessing the sheer amount of earpieces and translators inside the parliament myself was incredibly sad. I think it's downright embarassing.
Our cabinet Ministers are expected to be at least decently fluent in both languages but there's no such expectation for federal politicians in general. In Flanders we have to learn French as a mandatory language but in Wallonia our native language (Dutch) is not mandated and thus isn't taught or insufficiently taught in many areas in the south.
Obviously not everyone in Flanders can be that fluent in French whether it's a mandatory class or not. Personally if I'm in Brussels or south of the Flemish border I just speak English because it's way better than my French. I can understand it and am somewhat fluent as a speaker but I'd rather just avoid the struggle French altogether.

Bureaucracy in general here is faced with very long delays, outdated equipment, ...
When I applied for a disability statute for example it took the Social Security agency well over a year to judge and grant my application after submitting all documents. Any kind of documentation or review process that requires a government agency is going to cost you a hell of a lot of time across the board. That can be discouraging as other countries like the Netherlands are significantly faster.

(Note: This is the work permit page for the Flemish region)
https://www.werk.be/en/home

As for residency and path to citizenship, all EU and EU Economic Area (Iceland, Norway, ...) residents are granted automatic permanent residency upon 5 years of uninterrupted residency in Belgium. Uninterrupted simply means you can't have left the country for more than 6 months at a time and your total of time spent outside of Belgium can't exceed 1 year out of those 5 years.
Of course you can't commit any crimes either or anything that would revoke your permit to stay in Belgium for that duration.


After 5 to 10 years you can apply for Belgian citizenship under strict conditions. In recent years they have made that review process more strict in light of the inflow of immigrants and refugees.
There's not a whole lot of difference between permanent residency and citizenship aside from the complete freedom of movement and other perks specific to citizens.
Permanent residency already grants you all of these rights for example:

• open access to employment, conditions of employment and working conditions;
• right to education, recognition of qualifications, grants;
• welfare benefits;
• social assistance;
• freedom of association and union membership.

Additionally you are also given the right to vote upon being granted permanent residency. Citizenship is not required for that and all eligible residents have mandatory voting duty either way.

I hope this answered some of your question but again the topic of visa permits for foreigners is far from my specialty.
I can tell you with absolute certainty however that pretty much every neighboring country can do it much faster in a way less complex manner.

 

[Belgium]

PatRiley
'Professional Card' (see above) application form for foreigners residing abroad excerpts:
This is for those who want to work here on a self-employed basis

Spoiler: Images

 

[elpablo21]

The "Resistance" ya'll

 

[PatRiley]

In what state do you live famb?

Because if it is a swing state we ain't letting you leave until at least 2021. #bleedat

Virginia now. Is it a 2020 swing state?

 

[PatRiley]

Virginia now. Is it a 2020 swing state?

Thanks Belgium for all of that! I work in the horticulture industry, which is pretty big in the Netherlands/Belgium. There’s some US companies based in that region of Europe I’ve considered working with as a long term plan to reside in Europe with my family. The thought of raising children here is starting to not look so great, so I’m beginning to look elsewhere. Everyone might not agree with this train of thought but I’m just trying to do what’s best for our future. I was just wondering how difficult it would be to make it happen and the info you provided is very helpful. Thanks!

 

[Based Jesus]

The "Resistance" ya'll

"I'm off twitter. And by 'off' I just mean I aint responding to yall about this sus **** i got caught up in."

 

[RustyShackleford]

Virginia now. Is it a 2020 swing state?

Probably not.

But we still need you to offset Rico's vote.

 

[boris]

Thanks Belgium for all of that! I work in the horticulture industry, which is pretty big in the Netherlands/Belgium. There’s some US companies based in that region of Europe I’ve considered working with as a long term plan to reside in Europe with my family. The thought of raising children here is starting to not look so great, so I’m beginning to look elsewhere. Everyone might not agree with this train of thought but I’m just trying to do what’s best for our future. I was just wondering how difficult it would be to make it happen and the info you provided is very helpful. Thanks!

I don't blame you. I'm looking into moving out of the country once I have enough experience in my new field.

 

[PatRiley]

Probably not.

But we still need you to offset Rico's vote.

 

[IATT]

 

[aepps20]

Had to be done. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Libs only have themselves to blame. Hopefully the employees will get treated with a special pizza lunch from Papa John's.

 

[IATT]

 

[Belgium]

Guess Kim is looking to squeeze another major concession out of Trump without actually doing anything.
I would hope Trump has perhaps learned from that but well it's Trump, the man who repeatedly said he "solved North Korea" and that there was "no longer a nuclear threat" within days after the historic summit. Meanwhile North Korea was continuing to expand their nuclear program rapidly and within a matter of days Trump's claims of complete victory were quashed by Mattis (amongst others), who flatly said he saw no sign of progress towards denuclearization.
The WH's own internal reporting also entirely debunked Trump's public claims and eventually he was later forced to admit he did not in fact 'solve' NK and erased their nuclear threat with a handshake.
I should note that Trump did say in advance that even if the summit didn't yield any results he'd find some sort of excuse either way. He did stick to his word there.

If the summit and NK's actions since then are any indication, Kim has looked sharp in his tactics and Trump's focus seems mostly on praising himself regardless of results, if any.

I don't recall this entirely off the top of my head but Kim Jong Un somewhere in the past few months sent a letter to Trump putting some of his tactics on display. I'd have to go look for the article and pictures of the letter but I remember that Kim used very colorful language, particularly when addressing Trump. It was definitely some time after the summit so I'm guessing July or August. Probably the latter. I don't recall the exact topic of the letter.
In that letter he for example he addressed Trump no less than 4 times by "Your Excellency Mr. President Trump"
There was one additional use of "Your Excellency" but that did not include the mr. president Trump part behind it to the best of my recollection.

I think that displayed Kim's keen awareness of the president's character and likely primary motivations going into negotiations with NK.
Whatever his approach was in the first summit it clearly worked very well for Kim. He managed to get a concession he had been pushing for quite some time, which was the suspension of joint US-South Korea military drills. All in exchange for a handshake and a signature on a piece of paper he disregarded the very moment he set foot back in NK as they continued rapid expansion of their nuclear facilities.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/405928-white-house-planning-second-trump-kim-summit
White House planning second Trump-Kim summit
The White House said Monday that planning is underway for a second meeting between President Trump and Kim Jong Un after the North Korean leader sent Trump a letter requesting another summit.

During a briefing with reporters, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the request was the "primary purpose" of Kim's letter and a second meeting is "certainly something we want to take place."

She added that the White House is "already in the process of coordinating that."

Sanders provided no details about the time or place of a second meeting, saying discussions are still taking place.

The two leaders first met over the summer in Singapore in what was a historic first summit between the longtime foes.

Kim made a vague promise to give up his nuclear weapons in exchange for sanctions relief from the U.S., but no timeline was agreed to following the meeting.

Trump has remained publicly bullish about his efforts to use diplomacy to end North Korea's nuclear program, despite mounting evidence that Pyongyang continues to push ahead with weapons and missile development.

Sanders said Kim's request is a sign Trump has "achieved tremendous success of his policy so far and the letter was further evidence of progress in that relationship."

She cited the return of U.S. prisoners and the remains of American war dead and the lack of new nuclear and missile tests.

But media reports, citing intelligence and military officials, say that progress toward denuclearization has been slow and that North Korea has shown few signs it is interested in giving up its weapons.

Some in the administration have cast a more skeptical eye toward North Korea's desire to denuclearize.

"The possibility of another meeting between the two presidents obviously exists. But President Trump can't make the North Koreans walk through the door he's holding open," national security adviser John Bolton said in a speech in Washington earlier Monday

 

[IATT]

 

[shogun]

Random thought, Zephyr Teachout is one of the weirdest names i’ve heard. Saw one of her campaign commercials and was wondering what zephyr teachout meant, thought it was some motto to help teachers until I realized it was her name.

 

[fargin]

How mind boggling is it, whenever you read one of his tweets and you remember this is the presidency speaking.

 

[whywesteppin]

Fellas, I implore you to register to vote, VOTE and encourage your family and friends to do the same. The stakes are just too high this time. We have to overwhelm the system with sheer numbers to overcome gerrymandering, Russian interference and scumbag tactics. Don't wait until November to check your voting eligibility. Start the process now because every vote counts.

I agree 100%.

We need to give Democrats the majority in the house in 2018 so that the blowback is enough to put Doctor Benjamin Wattes Carson, MD, in the White House in 2020.

 

[whywesteppin]

also, I'm loving the overexposure of Rafael Cruz. the more the Republican puts him on TV and in ads, the worse he does. Because deep down he is an unlikable human being.

If I were Beto, I would just run 30 minutes of a slow-mo close-up of Rafael talking.

 

[Belgium]

Well this roughly sums it up I suppose:
Excerpt:
Ms. Sgamma (president of the Western Energy Alliance) praised the Trump administration for turning the oil companies’ requests into policy, noting that the Obama administration frequently turned proposals from environmental groups into policy. “It all depends on who you trust,” she said. “That administration trusted environmentalists. This one trusts industry.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/10/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Trump Administration Wants to Make It Easier to Release Methane Into Air
The Trump administration, taking its third major step this year to roll back federal efforts to fight climate change, is preparing to make it significantly easier for energy companies to release methane into the atmosphere.

Methane, which is among the most powerful greenhouse gases, routinely leaks from oil and gas wells, and energy companies have long said that the rules requiring them to test for emissions were costly and burdensome.

The Environmental Protection Agency, perhaps as soon as this week, plans to make public a proposal to weaken an Obama-era requirementthat companies monitor and repair methane leaks, according to documents reviewed by The New York Times. In a related move, the Interior Department is also expected in coming days to release its final version of a draft rule, proposed in February, that essentially repeals a restriction on the intentional venting and “flaring,” or burning, of methane from drilling operations.

The new rules follow two regulatory rollbacks this year that, taken together, represent the foundation of the United States’ effort to rein in global warming. In July, the E.P.A. proposed weakening a rule on carbon dioxide pollution from vehicle tailpipes. And in August, the agency proposed replacing the rule on carbon dioxide pollution from coal-fired power plants with a weaker one that would allow far more global-warming emissions to flow unchecked from the nation’s smokestacks.

“They’re taking them down, one by one,” said Janet McCabe, the E.P.A.’s top climate and clean-air regulator in the Obama administration.

Officials from the E.P.A., the Interior Department and the White House did not respond to emails and telephone calls seeking comment.

Industry groups praised the expected changes. “It’s a neat pair” of proposals on methane, said Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Western Energy Alliance, an association of independent oil and gas companies that is based in Denver. The Obama-era E.P.A. methane rule, she said, “was the definition of red tape. It was a record-keeping nightmare that was technically impossible to execute in the field.”

Ms. Sgamma praised the Trump administration for turning the oil companies’ requests into policy, noting that the Obama administration frequently turned proposals from environmental groups into policy. “It all depends on who you trust,” she said. “That administration trusted environmentalists. This one trusts industry.”

The regulation of methane, while not as widely discussed as emissions from cars and coal plants, was nonetheless a major component of Mr. Obama’s efforts to combat climate change. Methane makes up only about nine percent of greenhouse gases, but it is around 25 times more effective than carbon dioxide in trapping heat in the atmosphere. About one-third of methane pollution is estimated to come from oil and gas operations.

The forthcoming proposals from the E.P.A. and Interior Department would allow far more methane to leak from oil and gas drilling operations, environmentalists say. “These leaks can pop up any time, anywhere, up and down the oil and gas supply chain,” said Matt Watson, a specialist in methane pollution with the Environmental Defense Fund, an advocacy group. “The longer you go in between inspections, the longer leaks will go undetected and unrepaired.”

The proposals exemplify President Trump’s policy quest to roll back regulations on businesses, particularly oil, gas and coal companies. While significant aspects of the president’s broader agenda — including immigration and trade policy, and the proposed border wall with Mexico — remain mired in confusion, and as the administration struggles under the investigation into the presidential campaign’s ties with Russia, the E.P.A. and Interior Department have steadily pressed forward with rollbacks of environmental regulations.

“In other areas of policymaking, like immigration and health care, they appear to have brought into the administration ideologues who don’t know a lot about policymaking,” said Cecilia Muñoz, who directed the White House Domestic Policy Council in the Obama administration. “But in climate change and energy, they appear to have brought in people who know exactly what they’re doing, and know exactly where the levers are.”

The pace of the proposals has not been slowed by the resignation in July of Scott Pruitt, who left the top job at the E.P.A. under a cloud of ethics scandals. Andrew Wheeler, a former coal lobbyist who worked in the E.P.A. under the first President George Bush, is now the agency’s acting chief.

The E.P.A.’s new methane proposal, according to the draft seen by The Times, would loosen a 2016 rule that required oil and gas drillers to perform leak inspections as frequently as every six months on their drilling equipment, and to repair leaks within 30 days. The proposed amendment would lengthen that to once a year in most cases, and to as infrequently as once every two years for low-producing wells. It would also double the amount of time a company could wait before repairing a methane leak from 30 to 60 days.

It would also double the amount of time required between inspections of the equipment that traps and compresses the natural gas, from once every three months to once every six months. On the Alaskan North Slope, where oil and gas companies contend that harsh weather makes it difficult to conduct inspections, such equipment would only have to be monitored annually.

In addition, the E.P.A. proposal would let energy companies operating in states that have their own state-level methane standards follow those standards instead of the federal ones. That would include states such as Texas, where the pollution standards have been more lax than federal standards.

If implemented, the proposal would recoup nearly all the costs to the oil and gas industry that would have been imposed by the Obama-era regulation. The E.P.A. estimated that rule would have cost companies about $530 million by 2025. The E.P.A. estimates that the proposed changes would save the oil and gas industry $484 million by the same year.

 

[whywesteppin]

Trump Administration Wants to Make It Easier to Release Methane Into Air

THANK YOU.

I'm tired of having to hold in my farts.

 

[plansb]

THANK YOU.

I'm tired of having to hold in my farts.

Thank god for trump, it's finally ok to fart again.