Presidential Race 2016

[Chilli Dipper]

6 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Yeah, for sure!

 

It sounds like a snarky answer, but lower taxes on businesses. Specifically lower taxes on mid size and small businesses so they can focus on responding to consumer demands.

Cheaper labor is not the only reason for many businesses to move to China, it's also lower taxes and regulations. Yet, the cost of doing some things in China has almost gotten to the point that many products cost almost the same to build here in the states.

However, every time it starts to become more cost effective to build things in the USA, new regulations pop up. Ones such as the new health insurance regulations which have made it more expensive to insure employees of small companies. What started off as a good faith concept inadvertently becomes yet another reason to build or service things in China.

For instance, service and repair centers are now barely able to scrape by even in some places like rural North Carolina. It's still slightly cheaper to repair in the USA, but more taxes and or regulations could change that overnight. Shipping repair product to and back from China then storing them in a low rent facility in the USA is teetering on a thin line with the cost of hiring "minimum wage" workers anywhere in the USA.

Service is one of the main selling points behind USA made products. We need to stand behind our products, and not have people in other countries stand behind our products, right?

Also, people enjoy talking to the people in the country where things are designed or even built.

If Trump lowers taxes on mid size and small businesses and relaxes some of the regulations, then more companies will have the ability to hire more people. The reason why this will likely work now is there is a new worldwide demand for USA made products. If we can build more things and improve our quality and service even more, then we can sell much more.

As to the type of products that we make really good in the USA? Stuff that you don't build in the millions per month or week like in China. Things that are not so good to build in the USA? Things that are made in the millions per month or week.

There are many products that are designed and built to be used by 10,000 to 100,000 consumers over something like a ten year lifetime. USA is great at that. China is not so great at that, and they don't really want to be.

The only way to do grow our economy is to let our mid to small businesses grow and to hire more skilled people, and train our workers to become more skilled, once again.

This is how I read "Make America Great Again."

That could be more thought put into economic policy than Trump has ever managed. I question if he's ever made it past the slogan and "I'd get all the best people to work on it."

[Lihu]

7 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

You mean if Congress lowers taxes and reforms regulations. 

 

Yes, right.

That is if Trump can force congress to make tax reforms and make them feel like idiots until they do so.

Oh Wait, look what he did to Cruz, Rubio et al and the Republican party. He already has a track record!

[saevel25]

4 minutes ago, Lihu said:

That is if Trump can force congress to make tax reforms and make them feel like idiots until they do so. Hey, look what he did to Cruz, Rubio et al and the Republican party. He already has a track record!

Congressional approval rating is at 13.3% I'm not sure Trump can help them improve on that.  

[freshmanUTA]

28 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Colbert is a satirist. If that video you posted is satire then it's the sorriest piece of satire ever created. If you don't understand satire then you take Colbert way to seriously. 

Was there investigations, sure. Was their any charges brought against her, nope. As Greg Proops said in one of his podcasts. Besides running for president of Russia, running for president of the US is as hardball as it gets. If you are not willing to back deal, get on your knees and kiss some ass, then you don't get play the game. Anyone who thinks Trump is this bright beacon of hope better realize he's just pointing the worlds brightest flashlight in your eyes laughing his ass off. 

I'm not sure if it was intentional but you're mixing up was/were and there/their/they're. Your argument would be much harder to refute with proper grammar.

 

5 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

You mean if Congress lowers taxes and reforms regulations. 

 

Agreed. But someone's gotta push for it.

 

30 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Anyone who thinks Trump is this bright beacon of hope better realize he's just pointing the worlds brightest flashlight in your eyes laughing his ass off. 

Isn't that what ALL politicians do? I don't really think it's possible to name a politician that's not doing exactly that.

 

Look, my main concern is that this is the first election in a while that's literally two sides that just want to fight and start riots because of things the other side has done.

[Lihu]

1 minute ago, saevel25 said:

Congressional approval rating is at 13.3% I'm not sure Trump can help them improve on that.  

 

[bplewis24]

1 minute ago, freshmanUTA said:

Isn't that what ALL politicians do?

No.  And it's false equivalencies like this that allow people to rationalize their poor voting decisions and party affiliations.

[saevel25]

21 minutes ago, freshmanUTA said:

I'm not sure if it was intentional but you're mixing up was/were and there/their/they're. Your argument would be much harder to refute with proper grammar.

Proper grammar, LOL!!! 

 

[Ernest Jones]

38 minutes ago, freshmanUTA said:

I'm not sure if it was intentional but you're mixing up was/were and there/their/they're. Your argument would be much harder to refute with proper grammar.

Lol. That's some weak sauce my friend. 

[bplewis24]

1 hour ago, Lihu said:

It sounds like a snarky answer, but lower taxes on businesses. Specifically lower taxes on mid size and small businesses so they can focus on responding to consumer demands.

Cheaper labor is not the only reason for many businesses to move to China, it's also lower taxes and regulations. Yet, the cost of doing some things in China has almost gotten to the point that many products cost the same to build or service here in the states.

However, every time it starts to become more cost effective to build things in the USA, new regulations pop up. Ones such as the new health insurance regulations which have made it more expensive to insure employees of small companies. What started off as a good faith concept inadvertently becomes yet another reason to build or service things in China.

While this conservative orthodoxy sounds good on paper, the correlation is dubious and we know that this strategy doesn't work in such a simple fashion.  If it did, Kansas would be a business mecca right now, flourishing in entrepreneurship and new business startups.  But it isn't, even though the things you suggest are the tent-poles of the platform that Governor Brownback implemented.  

The reality is that--while this can be a very complex issue on many fronts--the reasons why simply lowering taxes on businesses and deregulating (hello, GWB) don't create economic prosperity are somewhat basic.

1) Businesses often don't pay anywhere near their marginal tax rates.

2) Lowering their tax rates (which they already don't pay) doesn't show a correlation with investing in more business or relocating business.

3) There are consequences to lowering taxes and deregulation.

I don't want to write an essay about these topics, but there are a few links below that do a decent job explaining some of these items.  But fundamentally a lot of this is just logic: If companies don't pay the marginal rate, what incentive will lower tax rates offer?  If there is no correlation with business investment, what is happening with the untaxed profit?

What about considering which taxes we're going to lower?  Payroll taxes fund things like medicare and social security.  Cutting those obviously means cutting those services.  Is that going to create economic prosperity?  What other services get cut when the tax revenue begins drying up...infrastructure?  Education?  Does that create a more skilled labor force?  What if we eliminate the minimum wage (another popular doctrine in some conservative/libertarian circles), and we assume it actually does bring jobs back?  Are these low-paying jobs going to create and sustain a middle-class economy necessary for capitalism to be effective/successful?

The GOP has effectively and very successfully gotten their base to buy this con for decades now, even as it continually bears no fruit.  What I find ironic about it is that one of the primary perpetrators of this, Ronald Reagan, actually sold it while doing the opposite: raising taxes on business (he raised the corporate tax rates and capital gains rates.  He also did a lot on tax shelters through passive loss rules, but that's only tangentially related). Bottom line is that Trump doesn't know a damn thing about how to turn the economy around, and if your faith is largely in his repetition of conservative policy, you may want to reexamine it.

http://business.time.com/2012/02/23/will-a-lower-corporate-tax-rate-lure-jobs-back-to-america/

http://fortune.com/2011/04/08/lower-corporate-taxes-wont-create-more-jobs/

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/07/10/Why-State-Tax-Cuts-Aren-t-Driving-Job-Growth

 

Edited June 4, 2016 by bplewis24

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Chilli Dipper said:

That could be more thought put into economic policy than Trump has ever managed. I question if he's ever made it past the slogan and "I'd get all the best people to work on it."

On the face of it, isn't that the ideal answer?

What's a politician know about economic policy? Shouldn't he outsource that to smart people and listen to what they say?

[newtogolf]

Many businesses depend on consumers and other businesses to keep their doors open.  When you reduce taxes on businesses and provide a stable economy, businesses grow and hire more people which puts more money into the economy for other businesses to grow.  

We allowed labor costs to get out of control thanks mostly to greedy unions, the result was businesses turned to cheaper overseas labor which put people out of decent paying jobs and forced them to either be retrained at taxpayer expense, be placed on welfare or accept lower skilled and lower paying jobs.  Our government allowed this to happen in manufacturing and now it's happening in IT and engineering jobs.  

Our government has pushed for strict EPA regulations, while we may want a healthy planet, the interim cost is a significant number of bankrupt companies and loss of middle income jobs in oil, coal and related fields.   You just don't throw out new EPA laws without understanding the economic impact of those laws, especially on businesses and jobs.  

We've made a number of poor trade deals as well that allows cheap products to come into the country without reciprocal deals for American products overseas.   US companies have to jump through numerous hoops to get their products into China and other countries because of these trade deals.

The economy hasn't collapsed because the US Government printed tons of cash and grew significantly to make up for the loss of jobs it destroyed, all at taxpayer expense.  TSA and Obama Care are just two of numerous examples of why government shouldn't mess with the private sector.  

I'm not saying to give businesses a free ride when it comes to taxes but we need to stop viewing them as the enemy.  

[Chilli Dipper]

14 minutes ago, iacas said:

On the face of it, isn't that the ideal answer?

What's a politician know about economic policy? Shouldn't he outsource that to smart people and listen to what they say?

I'd hope to see a candidate has the good judgment to surround himself with the best people, then be expect him to be capable of articulating what those people are telling him to the public at large.

When there are reports that Trump has surrounded himself with a skeleton campaign staff of yes-men who can't stop fighting amongst themselves, that makes me doubt his ability to identify the best people to advise him on policy. When he's posting nonsensical charts of unverifiable data on Twitter to demonstrate what a terrible job the Obama administration has done, that makes me doubt whether he understands the issues. When he's reduced to rambling, contradicting himself, and complaining that the media is rigged when a reporter asks him on how he'll do the things he's promising, that makes me doubt whether he's listening to the people around him. When he only says "I," and never "my team" or "my advisors" when he does attempt to go into detail about his platform, that makes me doubt that he values their input.

Hillary Clinton may talk like she doesn't say anything that wasn't first approved by committee, but she makes me believe she knows what she's talking about. Donald Trump talks like he's doing everything he can to avoid revealing that he doesn't.

[newtogolf]

2 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

I'd hope to see a candidate has the good judgment to surround himself with the best people, then be expect him to be capable of articulating what those people are telling him to the public at large.

When there are reports that Trump has surrounded himself with a skeleton campaign staff of yes-men who can't stop fighting amongst themselves, that makes me doubt his ability to identify the best people to advise him on policy. When he's posting nonsensical charts of unverifiable data on Twitter to demonstrate what a terrible job the Obama administration has done, that makes me doubt whether he understands the issues. When he's reduced to rambling, contradicting himself, and complaining that the media is rigged when a reporter asks him on how he'll do the things he's promising, that makes me doubt whether he's listening to the people around him. When he only says "I," and never "my team" or "my advisors" when he does attempt to go into detail about his platform, that makes me doubt that he values their input.

Hillary Clinton may talk like she doesn't say anything that wasn't first approved by committee, but she makes me believe she knows what she's talking about. Donald Trump talks like he's doing everything he can to avoid revealing that he doesn't.

How much money has Hillary made in her life and how much has Trump made?  You don't attain the wealth Trump has without surrounding yourself with a great team of people.  You don't run businesses the size of his without great teams that you entrust to make major decisions.  

His team isn't running for POTUS, he is, so that's why he speaks in the first person.  

Frankly it doesn't matter what he says or does because he doesn't represent your political beliefs.  You use this nonsensical stuff to discredit him because no matter how he acted you wouldn't vote for him.  

Talk about being owned by Corporate America, here is who paid Hillary off;

Here’s how much Hillary Clinton was paid for her 2013-2015 speeches:

• 4/18/2013, Morgan Stanley, Washington, DC: $225,000
• 4/24/2013, Deutsche Bank, Washington, DC: $225,000
• 4/24/2013, National Multi Housing Council, Dallas, Texas: $225,000
• 4/30/2013, Fidelity Investments, Naples, Fla.: $225,000
• 5/8/2013, Gap Inc., San Francisco, Calif.: $225,000
• 5/14/2013, Apollo Management Holdings LP, New York, NY: $225,000
• 5/16/2013, Itau BBA USA Securities, New York, NY: $225,000
• 5/21/2013, Vexizon Communications Inc., Washington, DC: $225,000
• 5/29/2013, Sanford C. Bernstein and Co. LLC, New York, NY: $225,000
• 6/4/2013, The Goldman Sachs Group, Palmetto Bluffs, SC: $225,000
• 6/6/2013, Spencer Stuart, New York, NY: $225,000
• 6/16/2013, Society for Human Resource Management, Chicago, Ill.: $285,000
• 6/17/2013, Economic Club of Grand Rapids, Grand Rapids, Mich.: $225,000
• 6/20/2013, Boston Consulting Group Inc., Boston, Mass.: $225,000
• 6/20/2013, Let’s Talk Entertainment Inc., Toronto, Canada: $250,000
• 6/24/2013, American Jewish University, Universal City, Calif.: $225,000
• 6/24/2013, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Company LP, Palos Verdes, Calif.:$225,000
• 7/11/2013, UBS Wealth Management, New York, NY: $225,000
• 8/7/2013, Global Business Travel Association, San Diego, Calif.: $225,000
• 8/12/2013, National Association of Chain Drug Stores, Las Vegas, Nev.: $225,000
• 9/18/2013, American Society for Clinical Pathology, Chicago, Ill.: $225,000
• 9/19/2013, American Society of Travel Agents Inc., Miami, Fla.: $225,000
• 10/4/2013, Long Island Association, Long Island, NY: $225,000
• 10/15/2013, National Association of Convenience Stores, Atlanta, Ga.: $265,000
• 10/23/2013, SAP Global Marketing Inc., New York, NY: $225,000
• 10/24/2013, Accenture, New York, NY: $225,000
• 10/24/2013, The Goldman Sachs Group, New York, NY: $225,000
• 10/27/2013, Beth El Synagogue, Minneapolis, Minn.: $225,000
• 10/28/2013, Jewish United Fund/Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, Chicago, Ill.: $400,000
• 10/29/2013, The Goldman Sachs Group, Tuscon, Ariz.: $225,000
• 11/4/2013, Mase Productions Inc., Orlando, Fla.: $225,000
• 11/4/2013, London Drugs Ltd., Mississauga, Canada: $225,000
• 11/6/2013, Beaumont Health System, Troy, Mich.: $305,000
• 11/7/2013, Golden Tree Asset Management, New York, NY: $275,000
• 11/9/2013, National Association of Realtors, San Francisco, Calif.: $225,000
• 11/13/2013, Mediacorp Canada Inc., Toronto, Canada: $225,000
• 11/13/2013, Bank of America, Bluffton, SC: $225,000
• 11/14/2013, CB Richard Ellis Inc., New York, NY: $250,000
• 11/18/2013, CIIE Group, Naples, Fla.: $225,000
• 11/18/2013, Press Ganey, Orlando, Fla.: $225,000
• 11/21/2013, U.S. Green Building Council, Philadelphia, Pa.: $225,000
• 01/06/2014, GE, Boca Raton, Fla.: $225,500
• 01/27/2014, National Automobile Dealers Association, New Orleans, La.:$325,500
• 01/27/2014, Premier Health Alliance, Miami, Fla.: $225,500
• 02/06/2014, Salesforce.com, Las Vegas, Nev.: $225,500
• 02/17/2014, Novo Nordisk A/S, Mexico City, Mexico: $125,000
• 02/26/2014, Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society, Orlando, Fla.: $225,500
• 02/27/2014, A&E Television Networks, New York, NY: $280,000
• 03/04/2014, Association of Corporate Counsel – Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif.: $225,500
• 03/05/2014, The Vancouver Board of Trade, Vancouver, Canada: $275,500
• 03/06/2014, tinePublic Inc., Calgary, Canada: $225,500
• 03/13/2014, Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, Orlando, Fla.:$225,500
• 03/13/2014, Drug Chemical and Associated Technologies, New York, NY:$250,000
• 03/18/2014, Xerox Corporation, New York, NY: $225,000
• 03/18/2014, Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal, Montreal, Canada:$275,000
• 03/24/2014, Academic Partnerships, Dallas, Texas: $225,500
• 04/08/2014, Market° Inc., San Francisco, Calif.: $225,500
• 04/08/2014, World Affairs Council, Portland, Ore.: $250,500
• 04/10/2014, Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries Inc., Las Vegas, Nev.:$225,500
• 04/10/2014, Lees Talk Entertainment, San Jose, Calif.: $265,000
• 04/11/2014, California Medical Association (via satellite), San Diego, Calif.:$100,000
• 05/06/2014, National Council for Behavioral Healthcare, Washington, DC:$225,500
• 06/02/2014, International Deli-Dairy-Bakery Association, Denver, Colo.: $225,500
• 06/02/2014, Lees Talk Entertainment, Denver, Colo.: $265,000
• 06/10/2014, United Fresh Produce Association, Chicago, Ill.: $225,000
• 06/16/2014, tinePublic Inc., Toronto, Canada: $150,000
• 06/18/2014, tinePublic Inc., Edmonton, Canada: $100,000
• 06/20/2014, Innovation Arts and Entertainment, Austin, Texas: $150,000
• 06/25/2014, Biotechnology Industry Organization, San Diego, Calif.: $335,000
• 06/25/2014, Innovation Arts and Entertainment, San Francisco, Calif.: $150,000
• 06/26/2014, GTCR, Chicago, Ill.: $280,000
• 07/22/2014, Knewton Inc., San Francisco, Calif.: $225,500
• 07/26/2014, Ameriprise, Boston, Mass.: $225,500
• 07/29/2014, Coming Inc., Coming, NY: $225,500
• 08/28/2014, Nexenta Systems Inc., San Francisco, Calif.: $300,000
• 08/28/2014, Cisco, Las Vegas, Nev.: $325,000
• 09/04/2014, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, San Diego, Calif.: $225,500
• 09/15/2014, Caridovascular Research Foundation, Washington, DC: $275,000
• 10/02/2014, Commercial Real Estate Women Network, Miami Beach, Fla.:$225,500
• 10/06/2014, Canada 2020, Ottawa, Canada: $215,500
• 10/07/2014, Deutsche Bank AG, New York, NY: $280,000
• 10/08/2014, Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed), Chicago, Ill.:$265,000
• 10/13/2014, Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers, Colorado Springs, Colo.:$225,500
• 10/14/2014, Salesforce.com, San Francisco, Calif.: $225,500
• 10/14/2014, Qualcomm Incorporated, San Diego, Calif.: $335,000
• 12/04/2014, Massachusetts Conference for Women, Boston, Mass.: $205,500
• 01/21/2015, tinePublic Inc., Winnipeg, Canada: $262,000
• 01/21/2015, tinePublic Inc., Saskatoon, Canada: $262,500
• 01/22/2015, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Whistler, Canada: $150,000
• 02/24/2015, Watermark Silicon Valley Conference for Women, Santa Clara, Calif.:$225,500
• 03/11/2015, eBay Inc., San Jose, Calif.: $315,000
• 03/19/2015, American Camping Association, Atlantic City, NJ: $260,000

Total: $21,667,000

[Chilli Dipper]

11 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

How much money has Hillary made in her life and how much has Trump made?  You don't attain the wealth Trump has without surrounding yourself with a great team of people.  You don't run businesses the size of his without great teams that you entrust to make major decisions.  

His team isn't running for POTUS, he is, so that's why he speaks in the first person.  

Frankly it doesn't matter what he says or does because he doesn't represent your political beliefs.  You use this nonsensical stuff to discredit him because no matter how he acted you wouldn't vote for him.  

If the only criteria for becoming president was net worth, Bill Gates or Warren Buffett would be the leader of the free world right now. (Clinton supporters, by the way.)

Trump's campaign chairman has said in interviews that his candidate isn't interested in performing all of the duties of the presidency, and will hand off all of the responsibilities he doesn't want personally to other people. If that's what a Trump presidency is going to be like, I care about who those people might be, and what they stand for.

[newtogolf]

3 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

If the only criteria for becoming president was net worth, Bill Gates or Warren Buffett would be the leader of the free world right now. (Clinton supporters, by the way.)

Again you ignore the main point and like Hillary answer what you want.  You claim Trump doesn't know how to work with teams or trust his teams.  I mentioned his net worth and the size of his corporations to point out that he's forced to utilize teams and trust them.  He's much more of a team player than Hillary is reported to be.  

[Chilli Dipper]

1 minute ago, newtogolf said:

Again you ignore the main point and like Hillary answer what you want.  You claim Trump doesn't know how to work with teams or trust his teams.  I mentioned his net worth and the size of his corporations to point out that he's forced to utilize teams and trust them.  He's much more of a team player than Hillary is reported to be.  

His companies aren't publicly traded. He doesn't answer to shareholders. He doesn't have to deal with a board of directors who may have differing ideas of how the business should be run. The only person that matters in Donald Trump's empire is Donald Trump.

[freshmanUTA]

2 hours ago, saevel25 said:

Proper grammar, LOL!!! 

 

;)

 

1 hour ago, Ernest Jones said:

Lol. That's some weak sauce my friend. 

I wasn't trying to argue with him, I was just saying that. Haha

[newtogolf]

5 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

His companies aren't publicly traded. He doesn't answer to shareholders. He doesn't have to deal with a board of directors who may have differing ideas of how the business should be run. The only person that matters in Donald Trump's empire is Donald Trump.

So you think he makes every decision on his own for every business he owns.  You also believe he doesn't have a board of directors or executive management team that he works with and expects to run different divisions within his organization?   You don't know much about running a business the size of Trumps if you honestly believe this.