A more assertive US? From the guy who wants the US to leave Ukraine to Russia, and overrode the Republican party on the platform issue? Stating that he wants to give Putin a free hand in Syria? Insists that there's no evidence that he kills journalists, political opponents and invades countries? The guy who's exchanged repeated back-and-forth praise with Putin on the campaign trail, with fawning language like "It is always a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond" and "a very bright and strong leader"... so much of a bromance that people in Eastern Europe have started painting murals? Are you talking about the same Donald Trump here?
Trump said nothing about leaving Ukraine to Russia. On NATO, he has demanded that if US troops are to still be in Europe decades after the Cold War, then Europe needs to pay its fair share. That doesn't mean that he'll sign off to Russia everything Putin wants.
Trump is right on Syria, however. The policy of the US State Department, as well as the EU/NATO has been to pretend that nothing has changed since 1991. But since 9/11, Islam has clearly replaced Communism as the ideological threat to the West, and Trump's suggesting a partnership with Moscow reflects a recognition of that simple fact. Russia has been busy since 1991 fighting the Chechens, and other potential Muslim secessionist groups. The policy of the Bushes and Clintons and Obamas was to support these Jihadi campaigns against Moscow. Trump recognizes that Jihadi victories anywhere represent Jihadi victories everywhere, and is reversing policy on that. He doesn't have to endorse Russian incursions into the Donbass, but he is doing well by encouraging Putin to accept the US as a partner, instead of countries like Iran.
Another point: NATO is as outdated today as the League of Nations was after WWII. NATO existed for the explicit purpose of stopping a Communist conquest of all of Europe. That threat has ceased to exist since 1992. However, since 2001, there has been an Islamic threat to the rest of the world, and NATO, the way it currently exists, has Turkey as a member, while considering Russia as an adversary. But Russia is not out there backing an Islamic takeover of any place in the world. Turkey is, and under Erdogan, has been busy rediscovering its Turkic Islamic roots. They've been the gateway for Jihadis from the world over to go to Raqqa via Gaziantep to join ISIS. Any organization that includes Turkey but excludes Russia is completely anachronistic, and stuck in the 80s. If Trump is the only one who recognizes that Muslims are the enemy, all power to him!!!
Still invested, just overseas.
If you believe that, you are an idiot.
The speaking fees are influence fees.
It's clearly an advantage. But one that can go away overnight.
As soon as a big currency is managed better than the US dollar, it will take over.
But the other major currencies don't even appear to be trying. If anything they are getting worse and are proud about it.
Even my German cousins now have to admit VWs are crap. If you know any Germans, you would realize how hard it is for them to admit that. But the fact is that VW is on their 'never again' list.
I tasted it about 30 years ago. Blech.
Your priority should be to hack up your firmware with a new high, but still reasonable, version number. So they won't downgrade your ECU to the clean one.
Water cooled VWs are junk, always have been. No loss.
You realize VW is largely owned by a German state (and the Porsche family)? Good luck with that, you'll be suing them in their own courtroom.
They don't just pretend to compete. Do you know how a power pool dispatches units?
Owners bid into the market (the default bid is the unit's marginal cost), the system stacks the bids up against the load, cheapest first. Tells the units what to do, than pays them all their generation times the highest price unit running that hour.
All done in an auditable and transparent way. They are competing and they all make independent decisions regarding capacity expansion. The intention is to shake out the 'fat dumb and happy' nature of the government sponsored monopolists and have the most competitive organizations take over. They don't really want 7 parts, but likely expect 4 of them to fail and be bought up by the successful (hopefully from neighboring regions to promote more competition).
Of course that description is drastically simplified, ignores transmission, capacity charges and operational issues (where in 'emergencies' economics are just ignored until after the mess is handled).
We might have met, my client at the time was ETSA.
You _can_ just make an addition to your home. But you are going to have a problem when it comes time to sell the house.
The stewardess with the velcro shoes? Sublime?
The trouble with money is it costs too much!