Friday, June 22, 2018

Why Trump's Tariffs Are Idiotic And Will Wreak Havoc On His Own Voters


The WSJ editorial of June 13th (p. A20) was spot on in its assessment of the Trump tariffs:

"Tariffs are inherently regressive because low income Americans spend more of their income on household goods.  Wilbur Ross argued that no one will notice price increases...But people in Mr. Ross  income class are not the Trump base."

And indeed, that base is already getting clobbered by the stupid, counterproductive tariffs on steel and aluminum that this fool has already imposed.   In Iowa the Trump tariffs on steel and aluminum directed at Mexico have already cost hog producers $560 million according to an Iowa State University economist.   What do steel and aluminum tariffs have to do with pork? Well, in response Mexico has imposed countervailing tariffs on pork- with the result that hog prices are tumbling.

Next to get hit will be soybean producers in the Midwest as Trump threatens $450b in tariffs on China. China buys a quarter of American soybeans so will now pull back Many think China will be the worse off but they are wrong. The Chinese have been quietly pursuing an independent agricultural strategy for years.

American consumers will also get clobbered - given their love for cheap Chinese made stuff, including  HDTVs, cell phones etc. as the trade war ramps up.  Look for that TV and DVD player to now go up an additional $50 and that cell phone another $100.

Meanwhile, local papers across "flyover" nation are replete with tales of woe regarding value destruction and lost income from Trump's trade wars.  We can debate from now until doomsday the definition of "trade war" but the fact is that Trump's tariffs are already costing millions millions.

Then there are the stupid tariffs against Canadian goods, which makes zero sense and only antagonizes an economic partner and ally.  For reference, when one tallies up goods and services exchanged between the two countries the U.S. enjoys an $8.4 billion surplus.  But all the moron Trumpies focus on are the goods, minus the services.

The Trump bunch, including Wilbur Ross- and the Dotard himself - also don't grasp that trade itself is not purely transactional in the Trump real estate grifter sense of being a zero sum game. Trump barked at one point, highlighting his ignorance:

"Why should I allow countries to make massive trade surpluses as they have for decades?"

Well, dummy, because those  trade surpluses mean more Americans are able to buy those goods because they are cheaper!  More cheap goods =  more items bought, i.e. from the Chinese, so the Chinese run up a trade surplus.   Trump, senseless buffoon that he is, can't seem to appreciate that lower income Americans (i.e. the Trump base) benefit from competitively priced Chinese electronics, or Mexican produce, Japanese cars and Canadian steel. What does Trump want, his voters reduced to having to pay 50- 100 percent more for everything when his tariffs are already eating away at his tax cut benefits?  (The WSJ (ibid.) estimates those in the lowest income quintile "could lose 49 percent of their tax cut gains")

So who is Trump fooling? Well, his own base for sure if they fail to see through what he's doing. But hey, maybe they're ok with anything this turd does like they're A-ok with incarcerating toddlers in wire cages and pup tents.

The other aspect is that Trump and most Trumpkins fail to process that trade deficits are neither good or bad. Indeed, the WSJ's Greg Ip  answered the question of why the US. itself runs trade deficit:

"Because it consumes more than it produces while its trading partners collectively do the opposite.. Another way of saying this is that the U.S. invests more than it saves while other countries save more than they invest."

Hence,  the only way to counter that is for Americans to invest less, and save more.  If then average people-  even Trumpies - saved more, they'd be able to afford higher end U.S. goods if they wanted them, as opposed to buying cheaper Chinese, or Japanese electronics or cars.


Basically then tariffs don't solve any trade or economic imbalance problems - other than in the short term.    Trump and his lackeys may brag about the steel jobs being saved thanks to his 25 % tariffs on foreign steel imports, but left unsaid are the estimated 11,000- 15,000 job losses for the steel users. That is, those who USE steel to manufacture other goods.

So why are tariffs bad then? Because they are a tax on imports which ultimately turn out to be a tax on citizens, especially dinging those with low incomes.  By way of example, say an American retailer purchases 100 umbrellas from China for $5 each.   The U.S. tariff rate is 6.5 % on each one.  Then the retailer would have to pay a total of:

(100) x (0.065) x $5   =   $32.50 

Or the tariff the retailer would then have to pay on the shipment.   This raises the total price for the retailer to:   (100) x $5   +   $32.50  =   $532.50,

Some of which will be passed on to customers since the higher tariff amount would be unsustainable for the retailer to 'eat' over time. The same sort of calculations apply to electronics good, cars, or other import goods.

 It seems kind of dumb to enact a tax cut, then to clobber your people with a tax increase, no?

See also:

https://www.ft.com/content/6aa73e08-7566-11e8-aa31-31da4279a601

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/nomi-prins/79783/imperial-president-or-emperor-with-no-clothes-how-donald-trump-s-trade-wars-could-lead-to-a-great-depres

Excerpt:

"What the American working and the middle classes will see (sooner than anyone imagines) is that actions of his sort have unexpected global consequences. They could cost the U.S. and the rest of the world big time. If he were indeed emperor and his subjects (that would be us) grasped where his policies might be leading, they would be preparing a revolt. In the end, they -- again, that’s us -- will be the ones paying the price in this global chess match."

Melania's 'I Don't Care' Jacket Proves She's A Clueless Tool & Airhead - OR A Closet Trumpie

The First Lady wore the $39 green, hooded military jacket from Zara that read 'I really don't care, do u?' when she left for Texas and then returned to Washington on Thursday 
Airhead Melania with her crossed message, military style jacket leaving border visit. Or, maybe she just believes the 'fake news' trope like hubby Dotard.

"She could as well have come out and said, 'let them eat cake'" - guest commentator on CNN

Sometimes a jacket is just a jacket....but sometimes not. The 'not' factors in when one is attempting to convey a deeper message of compassion, empathy and sincere interest in the plight of besieged child refugees.   Say when a first lady is on public display and via a public optics visit to a child detention camp at the border.  IF one is sincerely invested in transmitting a message of care, then only the most debased moron or imbecile would deliberately don any kind of apparel that says "I REALLY DON’T CARE, DO U?"

The bejabber from her defenders, e.g. Stephanie Grisham - who chastised reporters that "there was no hidden message" and "it's just a jacket", doesn't prove diddly squat and falls flat.

If accepted it would mean Melania  - on a much publicized visit with 55  children at a detention center in Texas, trying to show her compassion and interest - really didn't give two shits about the crossed message  communicated by her jacket.   This despite her spokeswoman's declarations of "no message".

As Ruth Graham, writing on Slate.com put it:

"It’s a jacket,” the spokeswoman said. “There was no hidden message.” This one little stupid moment in the midst of a humanitarian crisis somehow feels like the apotheosis of the “words don’t matter” presidency. Bragging about grabbing women’s genitals without permission? “It’s just words, folks. It’s just words,” Trump told us. “That was locker-room talk.”

His tweets? We’ve been told to ignore them. And now, the first lady wears a jacket emblazoned in huge letters with the words “I REALLY DON’T CARE, DO U?” and we are told we are foolish or disingenuous for reading and interpreting those words. Haven’t we learned by now? If someone tells you who they are, believe them. "        

This is spot on accurate and insightful, because words DO matter so Ms. Graham's take is more valuable than many mainstream  media takes of bemused indifference. As Lawrence O'Donnell put it on 'Last Word' last night:

"This was the least expensive ($39)  garment the first lady  has ever been seen wearing. And she had to know millions of people would be wondering what she was trying to communicate with he words written on her back 'I Really Don't Care, Do U?".  She's never been seen before wearing clothes with dialogue, a statement and a question.

And on a day designed to show how much she cares"

More to the point, O'Donnell pointed out that once back at Andrews AFB after the flight, and doubtless seeing the internet reaction, Melania put the jacket back on again, in self-evident defiance. Indeed, she wore it in 80 degree weather while returning to the White House with hubby. A good, submissive little wifey she is indeed!  OR - perhaps a closet Trumpie and foot soldier, committed to supporting hubby's evil acts. And let's face it,  neither image supports her photo op as a caring person. She and her assistant also had to know it would become "the most controversial garment any first lady in history had ever worn".

The (more generous) take on Melania, i.e. as a simple tool and bimbo, really the classic trophy wife (called "furniture" in the terrific sci fi movie 'Soylent Green') was at least partially  contradicted when hubby Dotard tweeted:

"I REALLY DON'T CARE DO U? written on the back of Melania's jacket, refers to the Fake News Media. Melania had learned how dishonest they are and she truly no longer cared".

Oh really?  Then she KNEW what she was doing, what the inherent message was and didn't care? So, she really  cared nothing about Rachel Maddow's breakdown on MSNBC the other night , believing it to be "fake news",
Image may contain: 1 person
while trying to report an AP story about child detention centers, called "tender age shelters" e.g.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKuIjT-k-C8

Apart from the fact this tweeted outburst contradicted Melania's spokeswoman's claim there was no hidden message it showed Melania to be just as bad as hubby Trump if she accepted it.   Though perhaps in a more passive aggressive way -or as my newly minted Ph.D. in psychology niece Shayle put it. (I.e. "She really hates it but has to play along for her own sanity.")  Maybe, but maybe not, and perhaps she really loves it!

What about Melania's expressions of care, the specific words she imparted during her visit? Anything pithy, worthy of remembering? All she offered us was a standard platitude, more in the way of feel goo posturing:

"The children were eager to learn, and were kind and in good spirits."

Wow! Pithy plus!  How long did it take her to figure out how to say that?  For  sure, Prof. Michael Eric Dyson, author of the new book, 'What Truth Sounds Like'  wasn't having any of the balderdash peddled by Melania's dopey defenders. Responding  on 'Last Word', to Melania's words and O'Donnell's question "Is that what truth sounds like?":

"Not at all. It sounds like anesthesia. That sounds like addiction to forgetfulness. That sounds like trying to paper over a volcano of hurt and pain and trauma that these children are enduring. Can she imagine her own beloved son being subjected to forcible separation from his mother or his father.

This is the politics of un-empathy. This is the politics of denial of the humanity that binds us together. And to have such a statement emerging from a woman who we've come to expect - at least - to be sensitive to the needs of the vulnerable. This is a repudiation of every good instinct we might nurture in our own hearts when we think about our own children. And it's a devastating rejection of the common decency all of us should share."

And, hence, the wearing of that jacket multiplied the indecency effect a hundredfold.

The takeaway here? Even if we are generous enough to assert or insist Melania isn't a genuine 'fake news' Trumpie pushing the debased agenda of hubby Dotard, then she must be at least a tool and airhead - oblivious to public optics, indeed dismissive of them- and willing to carry 'water' for him.  Above all, she is no innocent player!

Thursday, June 21, 2018

So Trump Has Suddenly Found "Compassion" To Stop Family Separations? Don't Buy It For A second!

Image may contain: 1 person, sitting
"Hmmmmm...how many more of those migrant kids can I send to concentration camps?"

Let us first accept as an axiom that the Trump cabal lies habitually and basically anything they say can be treated as a LIE. The evidence for this - all objective - has been on display the past week or so as various lies, large and small, have been trotted out not only by Trump (e.g. "I can't change this, only congress can!", "the Dems are responsible for the law they have to change it." etc.) as well as Kristjen Nielsen i.e.. "This is not a policy. Period!".

So given this axiom, then nothing the Trump bunch says or does can be accepted at face value which brings us to the alleged "executive order" signed by Trump yesterday following which which many media sources say he "caved in" or "retreated".  Horse pockey!

These media nabobs  appear to have fallen hook, line and sinker for Trump's  latest 'rope a dope' that he has stopped the child separations from parents with an executive order. Well, here's a newsflash for any who've fallen for this bull shit: NONE of those 2,342  separated kids - now "gone to the four winds" - are to be grandfathered into Trump's supposed "compassionate" E.O.   Trump may have signed an executive order to end the separation of families at the southern border, but his administration is not making any special efforts to immediately reunite the 2,342 children who have already been separated from their parents under his “zero tolerance” policy.

 That means none of those kids - including the toddlers and infants interred at the child concentration camps...errrr..."tender age shelters" -   are to be reunited with their parents anytime soon.

Indeed, as one commentator put it on 'All In'  last night, these forlorn kids have been sent off to the 4 winds, many still suffering from bedbugs, chickenpox, lice and other diseases, as NY Mayor  Bill DeBlasio described in an interview on New York One.

SO Trump's pathological lies continue on an epic scale, and since the fish rots from the head down, it follows his lackeys will continue to lie too.

According to an analysis by The Post’s Fact Checker through the end of May, Trump had made 3,251 false or misleading claims in 497 days — an average of 6.5 such claims per day of his presidency," Parker writes. But this rate seems to be increasing, she notes.

According to New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman :


"Trump is lying, obfuscating and inventing his own version of reality more frequently - a period that began post-Cohen raid but which intensified in recent days.


Two major issues have prompted a deluge of new falsehoods,  Parker notes: the FBI inspector general report on Hillary Clinton's email investigation, and the administration's policy of separating immigrant families at the border.

Basically, Trump has had to compulsively lie in the latter case - using every permutation of falsity - to cover his fat ass that HE was the one who implemented the zero tolerance policy barely 60 days ago. HE and HE alone, not the Dems, not Obama, not Bush Jr. or Bill Clinton.  

In regard to this executive order, let's be clear it does not and cannot override the Flores Agreement, i.e. that children cannot be detained for more than 20 days.  Now, since the bullshit executive order  says ok, kids and adults can be together - but  still detained - that means those kids again must be separated after twenty days.  Trump likely knew this all along, which is why this E.O. is just a fig leaf to shelter him and his odious administration from public blow back on his hideous policy.

Sessions has evidently asked a federal judge in California to modify the Flores Agreement so that the kids can be detained longer with parents (hence not be separated) but that is doubtful.  Without modification of the agreement, congress has less than 3 weeks to come up with a permanent solution, and there is no evidence at all they will, or can.

And again, there is nothing being done at all to reunite the 2,342 kids (including infants, toddlers) already separated - and who are now spread across 17 states- thanks to the Trump Nazis spiriting them out on covert plane flights.  (The major commercial airlines have now adopted a non-cooperation policy so will no longer be flying kids to other destinations while their parents are incarcerated.)

According to Sen. Tim Kaine, on 'All In' last night:

"If they are not going to reunite these kids with their families, then the American public needs to stay outraged until they do. This is a humanitarian atrocity that this administration created - a separation of families, devastating to the children and devastating to the parents."

The executive order itself, has loopholes large enough to drive proverbial 'Mack trucks' through, i.e.

"it is the policy of this Administration to maintain family unity, including by detaining alien families together, where appropriate and consistent with law and available resources."

In other words, if those available resources are lacking there will be no obligation - according to the E.O. - to maintain family unity.   Four major questions also surface as one inspects the content of the E.O.:

1) Will the families be detained indefinitely?

2) Where will the families be detained?

3) What will be the process to determine their future status?

4) Will you still treat lawful asylum seekers as criminals?

The last hearkens back to Sessions' statement last week that the U.S. will no longer treat well founded claims, e.g. of escaping from violence, as admissible. If not admissible for asylum the migrants then become criminals.

This again is Nazi type thinking.  Criminalize all those deemed 2nd class humans.

In the words of  Gov. Andrew Cuomo, also interviewed last night by Hayes, and filing a lawsuit against the Trump admin.:

"I don't think the deception has stopped. I believe the executive order is a sham. I think it was a press release to vent some of the anger. I don't even think it's legally enforceable. The executive order says they're going to set up family detention centers. The only problem is there are no family detention centers. 

There is the Flores case, where this has been litigated for twenty years.  And the  Court has said you cannot put young people in a detention center with adults except for a very brief period of time. So you can't set up a family detention center.  And then you see the words in the executive order as allowed by law and available resources.  But the court is not going to allow them to put young people in detention centers. That is how we got here in the first place."

This also appears to comport with what long time Flores case specialist Peter Schey said last night on Lawrence O'Donnell's 'Last Word'.  This is in reference to the Trumpies trying to modify the Flores Agreement to allow placing kids with parents in unlicensed facilities. (The Flares case only allowed licensed facilities and only for the limited 20 day period).

Further, as Mr. Schey emphasized, the Flores Agreement specifically detailed all licensed facilities had to be equipped with the means to deal with children, including staff having the requisite training to ensure the psychological well being as well as health of child detainees. This emphatically will hot apply if the kids are shipped off with their parents to military bases, as the despicable Trumpies want.

Given as Gov. Cuomo said, the chances of getting those licensed facilities - as permanent detention venues- are slim and none, then we finally do see what a sickening sham this E.O. is. And as Mr. Schey added, there is no plan at all to reunite those already separated thousands of kids with parents.

Conclusion: This executive order about which so much is being made in terms of 'retreat" is merely another cynical lie at the expense of those isolated kids, and the trust of the American people. The sooner these sick bastards go down in flames, the better!

See also:


And:  From Henry Giroux  Henry Giroux's picture

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/henry-giroux/79768/trump-s-war-on-children-is-an-act-of-state-terrorism

Excerpt:

Separating children from their parents is indeed a form of terrorism and it points not only to a society that has lost its moral compass, but has also descended into such darkness that it demands both the loudest forms of moral outrage and a collective resistance aimed at eliminating the narratives, power relations and values that support it.

Amnesty International has called Trump’s current decision to separate children from their parents and warehouse them in cages and tents as a cruel policy that amounts to “nothing short of torture.” Many of the parents whose children have been taken away from them entered the country legally, unwittingly exposing what resembles a state-sanctioned policy of racial cleansing.

And:  From Jill Richardson Jill Richardson's picture

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/jill-richardson/79767/immigrant-kids-are-suffering-trauma-that-will-last-years

Excerpt:

"I grew up in a wealthy, white, educated family, and I was born a U.S. citizen. I was able to get therapy. Most of the children Trump is locking in cages likely won’t get that opportunity. Already pediatricians are warning about the lasting damage they’re likely to suffer from this cruel treatment.
Now we’ve found out why Trump is doing this: It’s a bargaining chip in order to get his dumb wall, even though net migration across the border has been zero or negative in recent years (and a wall would scarcely prevent it anyhow)"

Wednesday, June 20, 2018

New Low For Subhuman Trump Slime: Ripping Infants From Mothers And Putting Them Into Cages

A woman carries a baby as immigrants are dropped off at a bus station shortly after being released from detention


















Infant - about to be taken to a cage in a detention center which the Trump Nazis  euphemistically call "tender age shelters".

After Janice called me into the family room with her cries of "You have to see this! You have to see what these Nazi monsters are doing! It's on Rachel right now!"   I pulled asway from my desk and went to the tube to see a crying Rachel Maddow.  Normally I don't watch her show as I limit myself to just one politically accented MSNBC show per night, usually Chris Hayes' 'All In'.  To try to keep one's sanity in this debased era of Trumpist authoritarianism and perfidy -  with multiple atrocities usually unfolding at once - it's best to ration one's media exposure. Especially to all things Trump!
Image may contain: 1 person
Rachel Maddow overcome reporting sordid piece on imprisoning babies  last night.

In this case,  I beheld Maddow overcome by emotion -  crying actually-   and unable to conclude her show while trying to read the breaking AP  news over the transom: the Trump Nazis were now tearing babies from their mothers and putting them into cages at detention centers.  Those interested can see what Janice and I saw here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKuIjT-k-C8

This elicits the question of how much more debasement, abomination and outrage can be fired up before this malignant disease infecting our country is finally extirpated - every last trace.   So far we learned only that the sights and sounds of screaming children held in the border detention facilities are simply serving as "music" to the ears of the Trump backing perverts. They literally get off at evey child's cry and - evidently- every liberal's tear or cry of outrage.   Corey Lewandowski on one FOX show actually cheered "Whomp! Whomp!" when the on set screen showed a child with Down's syndrome taken from its mother.  This shows the level of degradation we've now reached, and why it will probably take decades to finally clean out the  sewer the nation has sunk to since the ascension of the Trump cabal  full of traitors, n'er do wells, poltroons,  cowards  and rank enablers.

Anyway, what upset Rachel (as well as Janice and myself ) was the news that Trump administration officials have been sending babies and other young children forcibly separated from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border to at least three “tender age” shelters in south Texas.  Lawyers and medical providers who have visited the Rio Grande Valley shelters described play rooms of crying pre-school aged children in emotional crisis, most kept in cages. The Associated Press learned that the government also plans to open a fourth shelter to house hundreds of young migrant children in Houston, where city leaders denounced the move on Tuesday.

Since the White House announced its zero tolerance policy in early May, more than 2,300 children have been taken from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border, resulting in a new influx of young children requiring government care. The government has faced withering critiques over images of some of the children in cages inside U.S. Border Patrol processing stations.
According to Kay Bellor, vice president for programs at Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, which provides foster care and other child welfare services to migrant children:
"The thought that they are going to be putting such little kids in an institutional setting? I mean it is hard for me to even wrap my mind around it.  “Toddlers are being detained.”
Alicia Lieberman, who runs the Early Trauma Treatment Network at University of California, San Francisco, said decades of study show early separations can cause permanent emotional damage. 
 Let's also acknowledge here that the procedures at the border are actually multiplying the numbers of those detained, branded "criminals" and increasing separations.  This is because the border officials - acting on orders from on high, e.g. from Obersturmfuhrer Stephen Miller, and Der Fuhrer Dotard Trump, are "slow walking" those seeking to present themselves to Customs and Border Patrol for Immigration interviews. 
Since "der Fuhrer" wants no one entering, period, they're not allowed to place two feet over the border - which would trigger an interview and usually a judge's ruling and temporary landing rights.  Now, with every newcomer stopped, crowds have piled up and few - if any- can get in.  (One mother interviewed by Chris Hayes managed to do it by walking in amongst the motor vehicles - as opposed to with the line of immigrants.)
But she should not have had to resort to this subterfuge after trekking over a thousand miles from Guatemala after she was targeted for death by a gang of thugs. 
This country right now is in the throes of degenerates and vermin. We can't let them continue to foul this nation and its reputation, and its record of being a sanctuary for all those striving to breathe free. They do not deserve a lump of coal, or cyanide when they arrive here - but a humane welcome, understanding and respect. 
All the more reason to get rid of the Trump excrement ASAP.

At the end of Lawrence O'Donnell's MSNBC show 'Last Word', Janice asked plaintively:

"How are we going to get rid of these sick bastards?  It's so long until the midterm election and the first chance to get them out?"

I replied that we can be sure of one thing:  that the words and actions of the abominable scum in office will only get worse in the interim. This is given Trump is now, effectively,  a mad dog - as Mueller's probe shadows him. Like all mad dogs he needs to be put down and that time will come - as each rash, rabid 'bite' he takes is another nail in his electroral  coffin and that of his cult "party". We just need to hang on long enough to put those nails in, for Trump and his cabal.
See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/p-m-carpenter/79749/a-trumpian-clusterfuck-inside-a-gop-clusterfuck

Excerpt:
"Trump believes that his policy of separating children from parents at the southern border is a political winner for him, reports the Washington Post. The Post then provides some polling results, which, in general, Trump is said to be obsessed with. A CNN poll "found that 28 percent of Americans approve of the policy"; a Quinnipiac University poll found a near identical percentage of support.

In light of those statistics, is Trump mistaken as to his separation policy being a political winner — for him? Not at all. It's just that he knows, as do the rest of us, that his base of hardcore support is pathetically small. He can cling to enormously unpopular positions because he is not, after all, the president of the United States. He is the president of Crackpot America."

 


 Excerpt:


"Make no mistake: Donald Trump and Jeff Sessions’ assault on immigrant families and their “tactic” of separating parents from their children are right out of the Nazi playbook. It’s no accident US immigrations officials are telling parents they’re taking kids to “bathe,” then making them disappear … and then telling their parents they will never see them again.

This ghoulish reminder of Auschwitz shames us all. It should also terrify us. And make us ACT!"

Selected Questions - Answers From All Experts Astronomy Forum (Basic Refracting Telescope)

Question:   I'd like to know how a basic lens combination can be formed into a simple refracting telescope, including how the calculations are made.

Answer:  The simplest astronomical refractor will consist of two converging lenses and that is what we will look at here. The key step is to use the known focal lengths (we will use f1 = 10 cm and f2 = 20 cm) and then perform the necessary calculations. The trick is to find the image distance s1' for the first lens, then having done that find the object distance s2 of the second lens. One can also obtain the total magnification (lateral) using the magnification formula.

Before outlining the procedure we will use we need to set out the sign conventions to apply:

s is (+) if the object is in front of the lens

s is (-) if the object is in back of the lens

s' is (+) if the image is in back of the lens

s' is (-) if the image is in front of the lens.

Now the basic  procedure in analyzing a thin lens combination is summarized here:

1) The image of the first lens (L1) is calculated as if the 2nd lens (L2) is not present.

2) The image of the first lens is treated as the object of the 2nd lens.

3) If the image of the first lens lies to the right of the 2nd lens, the image is treated as a virtual object for the 2nd lens (that is, s is negative).

4) The image of the 2nd lens is the final image of the system.

Now in pursuing the application we will use s1, s1' for lens L1 and s2, s2' for lens L2. We can refer to the diagram below:














Using the thin lens eqn. for lens L1:

1/s1 + 1/s1' = 1/15 + 1/s1' = 1/10 cm

therefore: s1' = 30 cm

e.g.: 1/ s1' = 1/15 - 1/10 = 5/150 or s1' = 150 cm/ 5

And for the 2nd lens:

1/s2 + 1/s2' = 1/f2

-> 1/ (-10 cm) + 1/s2' = 1/20 cm

or 1/s2' = 1/20 cm + 1/ 10 cm = 30 / 200 cm^-1 or s2' = 200/30 = (20/3) cm

Thus, the final image lies (20/3) cm to the right of the 2nd lens.

The lateral magnification for each lens is defined:

M1 = (-s1'/ s1) = - (30 cm/ 15 cm) = -2

M2 = (-s2'/s2) = -(20/3)cm/ -10 cm = 2/3

Then the total magnification of the lens system is:

M1 M2 = (-2)(2/3) = -4/3

So it is:

real, inverted and enlarged by 4/3 times over the object.


Again, the values used here are purely for instructional purposes, but there is no problem in generalizing the procedure for an actual, practical refracting telescope.