He is his own man and cannot be bought out.-that's a huge leap of faith for this clown.
I was working on a point by point answer to all you questions this morning and had about an hours worth of time invested so far. Then that little thing happened over in the Supreme Court thread and I decided that I needed to get away for awhile. So I come back tonight to complete the effort and as I am rereading your questions I see the above and determine that its not worth all the time as you are not really interested in what I have to say regarding Trump.
So I will just leave it where it sits. Yes, I can back up everything I said with good references, but no one really cares. So why bother.
No bad feelings towards you. Just ain't worth the time for things people have already made up their minds over.
Just casinos in Atlantic City. I don't think anyone did well in AC. It was doomed before starting.-begs the question: Why did this business genius invest in a failing industry?
Its a lot more than just real estate deals. He builds things, big things that must have a budget, employ many people, coordinate resources, work properly and last. - wasn't aware he was in construction? Does he actually run the construction, or just finance it?
No one running understands finance and global trade better than he does. He understands that currency manipulation is the problem that it is. It is a way to violate trade agreements and have tariffs without having tariffs. He understands what corporate inversion is and wants to stop it. He is against the TPP, the only repub against it. He has a plan to repatriate the at least $2 trillion dollars in cash sitting offshore and get it back and put it to work. It belongs to the corporations and can be invested without government strings. How about a real $2 Trillion dollar stimulus to our economy that comes not from the gov, but the private sector ? Imagine what that would do for our economy. Sure would generate a lot of jobs, and wages that pay taxes to finance other things. We would grow our way out of this mess very quickly. -if it's not being invested now, where would the investment opportunities magically appear for the repatriated funds?
This would certainly stimulate domestic manufacturing. Our domestic market is so big that we don't need to export what we make in order to prosper. We can consume what we make and keep recirculating our own money through our economy, keeping it here. Energy independence also keeps our money at home and working for us instead of our enemies who will use it to destroy us given the opportunity. -this calls for the elimination of all our free trade agreements. Sounds socialist.
And Trump does not invest in equities aka the stock market. -really? nothing held in stocks? He is not beholden to the Wall Street powers. Real estate is just that, tangible assets, not paper certificates that are only worth what they are printed on. Its a whole different world than Wall Street. It deals more with Main Street. He is his own man and cannot be bought out.-that's a huge leap of faith for this clown. I have believed that he was serious since day one and is doing this for the good of our country and for no other reason. I don't doubt he's for real, just think he is one of the worst candidates for the job to ever come down the pike. He has no other reasons to do this. He needs no other reasons to do this.-wasn't his other reality show failing?
Its kinda funny how there are only about 3 or 4 people here who even believe that Trump is a real candidate who will serve if elected.
All the rest of you think he is just running to suit his ego and advance his brand, believing he will drop out of the race as soon as he has to actually spend money and go quietly into the night and commenting about the spectacle as if rubbernecking at a head on collision on an Interstate.
Carry on.
I think most believe he will serve if elected, but speaking for myself anyway I think that he will be:
Its kinda funny how there are only about 3 or 4 people here who even believe that Trump is a real candidate who will serve if elected.
All the rest of you think he is just running to suit his ego and advance his brand, believing he will drop out of the race as soon as he has to actually spend money and go quietly into the night and commenting about the spectacle as if rubbernecking at a head on collision on an Interstate.
Oh yes because I have never met a rude, obnoxious or patronizingly condescending liberal before.
The word "conservative" was nowhere in my post. It was simply a statement about how "not politically correct" just means mannerless.
And, it's obvious that the biggest impediment the nation faces is the insistence on framing our lives like we're still at a high school football team with a Home and Away team, and they must fight to the death.
We need to move past the way of living where, to feel good about ones' self, it means being superior to another. Winning conflict means that we need to generate conflict, even if it's not in our real best interests.
So, when we try to figure out the economics of our nation, instead of working together folks insist on framing it as liberal or conservative, starting a battle before it's begun and eliminating the possibility of compromise.
Personally, as I've pointed out repeatedly, I'm in the middle. Neither Dem nor Repub. Show me a good idea and I'll espouse it. But, there are plenty of folks who can't do that.
Those aren't properties that are unique to businesses. When there's no accountability or responsibility you end up with corruption, both in government and business. It's a failure in ethics.
PS: And it applies to all institutions from the largest to the smallest. Government, business, churches, families.
Well we do agree on something !
There is no one enforcing accountability or responsibility in the US government and hasn't been for a very long time, hence the widespread corruption. There is only one person running who is not afraid to do some enforcing and is able to because he has not been corrupted or already owned by the system he seeks to run.
Ta' . Oh and someone that owes nothing to the patronage system that is the root of our corruption ... political hacks ...
Not at all talking about making a profit of any kind. Wasn't even in my thought process. Its about accountability and responsibility. The ability to fire someone if they are unable to do their job or incompetent, wasteful or disregard the law. (...)
Those aren't properties that are unique to businesses. When there's no accountability or responsibility you end up with corruption, both in government and business. It's a failure in ethics.
PS: And it applies to all institutions from the largest to the smallest. Government, business, churches, families.
Depends on what you consider being run like a business. I'm all in favour of government making a small profit to fund priorities, maintain a bit of surplus in case of unexpected expenses, unexpected revenue drop, and a rainy-day fund. Yes I said small profit, I'm generally anti huge profit for government or business. So yes to responsible decision making.
Run like a business could also mean screw everyone who works for you, your suppliers, and maybe even the world economy. I'm not in favour of that. Government here seems to want to sell off any and all assets for short term gains in an effort to try to get elected again. That's a very business-like strategy in the current global economy. If they can make the bottom line look better, even if it costs the populace a lot more in the long run, well that's business, eh? They also (all parties) get into some dodgy public-private partnerships where money for large works comes from both the tax base and from private investment. They almost always negotiate really bad deals, lose control over the outcomes, and end up covering private cost overruns. In actuality it is a form of deficit spending but instead of floating a bond that you eventually pay off, you give private industry profits for perpetuity. For example Melbourne has large toll roads run by private business. Instead of paying off the construction, the populace/shareholders/citizens end up paying tolls forever. It's business but bad business. And don't get me started on the corruption that enters into things when the government sees their role to support their cronies (business, labour unions or whoever).
So I'd be far more impressed with the Republican platform if they had demonstrated that trickle down economics could lead to increased tax revenue. Instead they showed it leads to blowing out the debt.
Not at all talking about making a profit of any kind. Wasn't even in my thought process. Its about accountability and responsibility. The ability to fire someone if they are unable to do their job or incompetent, wasteful or disregard the law. Eliminating duplication of work. Modernizing business systems and responsible bidding.
To my knowledge not one person has been fired at the VA for any of the stuff that has been discovered. Records have been falsified and people are dead as a result. Thesuicide hotline goes to voice mail WTF ? This has to end.
Yes I know about toll roads having run a truck stop on the Ohio Turnpike for 5 years. I've watched Kasich go back and forth over keeping it as is, leasing it and just outright selling it. So far, it is still a quasi government agency. It just depends on who is suing it, whether its a government enterprise or a private one. The original notes were paid off about 20 years ago. Then they decided to add a 3rd lane to both sides between Youngstown and Toledo and rebuild all of the rest stops such as where I worked and took out new bonds for that purpose.
On the last thought. The Democrat version of trickle down from the government isn't working very well either.
Uh, I do. And lots of others also. Business has some specific goals. Government has some too. They are very different and take very different methodologies to accomplish. We certainly can fire people in government, but there are reasons why it may be pragmatic to make that more difficult than in the private sector. I also don't want the group that is responsible for our health and welfare to be looking to maximize profits and cut corners for expediency.
As someone who has supported a loved one through more than year of chemotherapy, I agree about 300%. Quality heath care has absolutely nothing to do with profit.
As someone who is a licensed medical professional and who has gone through 3 years of chemo costing well over $2 mil, I'll just say that it is not all that simple. Private for profit insurance covered my care for an incurable Stage IV cancer. Aetna was supportive and did not question or object to any of the care I received. I am grateful to say the least. If I had got sick under Obamacare, I would be dead today.
While we may disagree on a lot of things I wish nothing but the best for you and P.
If political experience is the only criteria, then yes, this is true.
I still don't buy that only a politician can be POTUS though. It is politicians who got us into all this trouble in the first place.
This is the 21st Century and these are times never seen before. Time for a paradigm shift. Who says that the government can't or shouldn't be run like a business ? Bad people need to be fired. Can't move forward and improve on things without doing that. It is impossible. Politicians just ask people to resign, they don't say "you're fired", cuz they are afraid to. Its part of the DNA ...
Depends on what you consider being run like a business. I'm all in favour of government making a small profit to fund priorities, maintain a bit of surplus in case of unexpected expenses, unexpected revenue drop, and a rainy-day fund. Yes I said small profit, I'm generally anti huge profit for government or business. So yes to responsible decision making.
Run like a business could also mean screw everyone who works for you, your suppliers, and maybe even the world economy. I'm not in favour of that. Government here seems to want to sell off any and all assets for short term gains in an effort to try to get elected again. That's a very business-like strategy in the current global economy. If they can make the bottom line look better, even if it costs the populace a lot more in the long run, well that's business, eh? They also (all parties) get into some dodgy public-private partnerships where money for large works comes from both the tax base and from private investment. They almost always negotiate really bad deals, lose control over the outcomes, and end up covering private cost overruns. In actuality it is a form of deficit spending but instead of floating a bond that you eventually pay off, you give private industry profits for perpetuity. For example Melbourne has large toll roads run by private business. Instead of paying off the construction, the populace/shareholders/citizens end up paying tolls forever. It's business but bad business. And don't get me started on the corruption that enters into things when the government sees their role to support their cronies (business, labour unions or whoever).
So I'd be far more impressed with the Republican platform if they had demonstrated that trickle down economics could lead to increased tax revenue. Instead they showed it leads to blowing out the debt.
