Let's "Correct The Record"

Americano said:
Bringing prosperity will make America great again, for everyone. Jobs, economic optimism, increased investment, money coming back in from overseas, new businesses starting, refocusing on manufacturing and industry, increased labor participation, and working folks getting a raise once in a while.

Trump equals money in the minds of the public, and that perception alone can help create an overall climate of optimism and real, rapid growth. The day after the election, financial optimism returned, despite all the dire warnings to the contrary. People I know are starting businesses and looking to invest where before they had been cautious. You want policy: decreasing corporate tax rate, deregulating industry, reshaping the tax code, keeping American businesses in the US, repatriating assets, and a general business-friendly attitude.

As for the past, we can look back to a great time when a young man could come back from the army, open a gas station, and make enough money to buy a Ford Mustang and a small home to start his family. I think NAFTA was a big turning point in the wrong direction, as Ross Perot (and Trump) said at the time. You could argue that it has been trending downward since Nixon, the Kent State massacre, since "Made In Japan" started, or whatever year the national debt started to grow out of proportion to GDP. It's been a while by any measurement.

I know @Raoul has a problem with "old" videos that make Clintons look foolish, but here's another populist slapping around another Clinton back in the day.

Click to expand...


Even with your fairy tale version of an economic program outlined above, you already offered more in terms of an economic 'policy' than your new excuse for a president ever did. Trump never uttered as much as one clearly outlined measure of what he plans to do to 'make america great again'. All he ever says is 'I will fix that', 'I will bring back industries', 'I will create so many jobs'.
Yet you placed your trust in a man who made his money from shady construction deals, including the employment of immigrants who'd work for the minimum money offered, as opposed to Americans, who wouldn't be able to sustain themselves or their families for those wages.
And when his business plan failed - as they did repeatedly - his daddy was there to bail him out with millions of dollars.
Even if there once was that great America that you remember, this man knows nothing of it, least of all a way back there.
 
I have an idea to get back to the good America of old! You fight WWII again, and in the process destroy the manufacturing base of Western Europe, Japan, and throw in SE Asia and China as a non-WWII bonus so that they're back at their 1950s level of development.

Then when you have no manufacturing rivals and are therefore pretty much the factory for the world (no competition from those efficient Germans or Japanese!), your manufacturing worker will make outsized wages vs. the rest of the world.
 
Americano said:
I haven't said that. You asked me to describe when America was great and I provided a real example which the forum then went on to ridicule and question.

I think Trump will bring prosperity, and this will unite the country in a spirit of optimism and growth. Get past his personality and start liking the guy. He has a lot to offer.
Click to expand...
This. Forget the guy and start liking him.
 
Americano said:
Bringing prosperity will make America great again, for everyone. Jobs, economic optimism, increased investment, money coming back in from overseas, new businesses starting, refocusing on manufacturing and industry, increased labor participation, and working folks getting a raise once in a while.

Trump equals money in the minds of the public, and that perception alone can help create an overall climate of optimism and real, rapid growth. The day after the election, financial optimism returned, despite all the dire warnings to the contrary. People I know are starting businesses and looking to invest where before they had been cautious. You want policy: decreasing corporate tax rate, deregulating industry, reshaping the tax code, keeping American businesses in the US, repatriating assets, and a general business-friendly attitude.

As for the past, we can look back to a great time when a young man could come back from the army, open a gas station, and make enough money to buy a Ford Mustang and a small home to start his family. I think NAFTA was a big turning point in the wrong direction, as Ross Perot (and Trump) said at the time. You could argue that it has been trending downward since Nixon, the Kent State massacre, since "Made In Japan" started, or whatever year the national debt started to grow out of proportion to GDP. It's been a while by any measurement.

I know @Raoul has a problem with "old" videos that make Clintons look foolish, but here's another populist slapping around another Clinton back in the day.

Click to expand...


The scenario you describe is a relic of the past that will never be seen again. Manufacturing jobs coming back won't solve anything since they are heading towards robotics rather than humans. All protectionism and economic nationalism will do is make the US less competitive in a world where other states have free trade agreements. This is no longer a Leave it to Beaver world. We are in a world of complex economic interdependence where states have to create transnational deals or else be left in the dust by other states who do.

But let's assume what you're saying is true - it sounds like Bernie Sanders would be your candidate. Trump is a billionaire elite who lives in NY. He doesn't care about the middle class people he pandered to during the elections. He merely used that narrative to get enough votes to eek out an electoral college win (along with Comey and Russian help).

By supporting Trump, all you're doing is continuing to promote a system where wealthy elites do what is best for them whilst flogging the facade that their actions are in the interest of the common citizen.
 
Bernie can't be his man because he is for equal rights, minority rights, subsidised education for all etc. etc.
 
Americano said:
As for the past, we can look back to a great time when a young man could come back from the army, open a gas station, and make enough money to buy a Ford Mustang and a small home to start his family
Click to expand...

Gentle guitar music plays in the background
 
Americano said:
Bringing prosperity will make America great again, for everyone. Jobs, economic optimism, increased investment, money coming back in from overseas, new businesses starting, refocusing on manufacturing and industry, increased labor participation, and working folks getting a raise once in a while.

Trump equals money in the minds of the public, and that perception alone can help create an overall climate of optimism and real, rapid growth. The day after the election, financial optimism returned, despite all the dire warnings to the contrary. People I know are starting businesses and looking to invest where before they had been cautious. You want policy: decreasing corporate tax rate, deregulating industry, reshaping the tax code, keeping American businesses in the US, repatriating assets, and a general business-friendly attitude.

As for the past, we can look back to a great time when a young man could come back from the army, open a gas station, and make enough money to buy a Ford Mustang and a small home to start his family. I think NAFTA was a big turning point in the wrong direction, as Ross Perot (and Trump) said at the time. You could argue that it has been trending downward since Nixon, the Kent State massacre, since "Made In Japan" started, or whatever year the national debt started to grow out of proportion to GDP. It's been a while by any measurement.

I know @Raoul has a problem with "old" videos that make Clintons look foolish, but here's another populist slapping around another Clinton back in the day.

Click to expand...


Appreciate the response. It strikes me that your view of greatness is entirely defined by economic wealth - no more, no less. Does scientific, social and moral progress not play an important role in your view of what would make America great (again)? Do you think that is the singular motivation and core value of people who voted for Trump? Or beyond that, do you think that deep down that's how society does (or should) see the world? It doesn't really fit in with how I view the world but it seems so central to your point that it's hard to imagine any other conclusion.

What is it you think Obama did that made people be cautious about embracing their inner entrepreneur that Trump isn't doing? Does it simply boil down to populism = optimism, in your view? Is there anything that links populism to economic growth? You have the example of someone like Hitler, of course. I'm interested if there's a more positive set of examples to follow though. From what I gather you support Trump because you support what he stands for, with populism and nationalism being important elements, so presumably your belief that he will drive economic growth is based on historical evidence of the link between the two. It's implied in your post but I can't really fill in the blanks to draw the same conclusion.

Is there any part of you that thinks Trump might not be able to bring back the halcyon days you speak of? You're acting very brash about it all, but if you believe that you're so far away from what made America great back in the day, then I'm a little confused why you'd expect Trump to fix it all. You're building up Trump to be your saviour, but I don't see what he's done to earn that level of respect from you. Do you really see him as a great man, a man with the ability and mental fortitude to be everything you're building him up to be?
 
But yeah, Obama's presidency has ended with the Democratic party in tatters. The progressive faction of the party was sidelined and mocked by the centrist neoliberal mainstream. The conservative Dems like Hillary, John Kerry lost presidential elections when they were nominated. It's time for the Democrats to leave the centrist politicians behind once and for all and start nominating candidates on the state and national level that working class and middle class people can trust and get behind. I was glad that Hillary lost.

Cory Booker voted against a bill that Bernie introduced that would allow the US to import drugs from Canada. This would have drastically reduced costs to millions of Americans who cannot afford medication. Booker has received $220,000 from pharma industries in the past few years. Even Ted Cruz and Rand Paul voted in favour of the bill. But 12 Dems in the Senate, including that moron Booker, voted against it.
 
Nikhil said:
But yeah, Obama's presidency has ended with the Democratic party in tatters. The progressive faction of the party was sidelined and mocked by the centrist neoliberal mainstream. The conservative Dems like Hillary, John Kerry lost presidential elections when they were nominated. It's time for the Democrats to leave the centrist politicians behind once and for all and start nominating candidates on the state and national level that working class and middle class people can trust and get behind. I was glad that Hillary lost.

Cory Booker voted against a bill that Bernie introduced that would allow the US to import drugs from Canada. This would have drastically reduced costs to millions of Americans who cannot afford medication. Booker has received $220,000 from pharma industries in the past few years. Even Ted Cruz and Rand Paul voted in favour of the bill. But 12 Dems in the Senate, including that moron Booker, voted against it.
Click to expand...

And so did a majority of Republicans. They killed the bill, just as much as Booker.
When remembering the huge, unending list of misdeeds by centrist Dems, it's important to note exactly what the GOP does too. Enemy-of-my-enemy logic will not work.
 
berbatrick said:
And so did a majority of Republicans. They killed the bill, just as much as Booker.
When remembering the huge, unending list of misdeeds by centrist Dems, it's important to note exactly what the GOP does too. Enemy-of-my-enemy logic will not work.
Click to expand...

But the thing is, the centrist Dems try to portray themselves as the "champions of the people". And then they go do shit like this in Congress. Especially Booker. He's always on TV talking about how the Dems stand with ordinary people and how he wants to do "bipartisan" work. He is trying to portray himself as the next Obama. Even Ted Cruz supported Bernie's bill, for heaven's sake. Booker is the biggest slimeball in politics. He's going to get crushed if he runs for President.
 
Nikhil said:
But the thing is, the centrist Dems try to portray themselves as the "champions of the people". And then they go do shit like this in Congress. Especially Booker. He's always on TV talking about how the Dems stand with ordinary people and how he wants to do "bipartisan" work. He is trying to portray himself as the next Obama. Even Ted Cruz supported Bernie's bill, for heaven's sake. Booker is the biggest slimeball in politics. He's going to get crushed if he runs for President.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with any of that, I posted a lot about the bill in the other thread.
All I'm saying is that if corporate interests are your problem, going from Dems to GOP is frying pan -> fire.


Though I would still give biggest slimeball to McConnell.
 
I thought that there were a lot of pharma companies in his state so he would have been voting against the interests of many of his constituents. The money he received from pharma sounds a lot, but it actually came to something like 2% of all contributions.
 
Grinner said:
I thought that there were a lot of pharma companies in his state so he would have been voting against the interests of many of his constituents. The money he received from pharma sounds a lot, but it actually came to something like 2% of all contributions.
Click to expand...

There are also many pharma companies in Kentucky. They donate heavily to Mitch McConnell but not as heavily to Rand Paul.
The libertarian voted for the amendment, the "common-sense conservative" did not.

Secondly, drugs imported from Canada are often made in the US, which means high pricing is a result of lack of govt negotiations rather than manufacturing costs. So, the pharma companies in NJ could easily sell the drugs they currently make at lower cost to compete.

Finally, he could have cited job concerns, but did not. He cited bogus safety concerns. Canadian drugs aren't unsafe. And months earlier he voted for a bill to lower safety standards in some clinical trials, when it suited his favourite industry.
 
Grinner said:
The reason a lot of US companies moved their production overseas was because they had to pay for annoying things like breaks, vacations, pensions, healthcare, maternity leave and give a minimum wage. Let's hope Trump removes all of that to make things better for working families.
Click to expand...
This is the trillion dollar question.

I've seen first hand at two global organisations (Unilever and Samsung) how the Factory set up, cost of working capital and wage bill for products as diverse as soap to smartphones compares between factories in USA vs China or indonesia.

A bar of Dove soap would cost American consumers $4.50 if made in USA vs $2 as currently made and sold from Indonesia. The latest Samsung S7 would cost $2,800 if made in USA vs the $1,200 as currently made and sold in China. A high tech Nike sports shirt can be sold for $50 because it's made on Bangladesh. A US made identical shirt would be closer to $110.

Made in USA cars, phones, TV's, clothes and food stuffs which are same quality as those currently made abroad will cost between 100% to 300% more.

I've wracked my brain searching for answers from 20 years of experience and I can't see how he will make it work.
 
Mockney said:
Sadly true. And again, if I didn't think it might kill us all, I might be sympathetic... I'm not though. At root it's still a bunch of first world white people burning down the world because they feel powerless and marginalised. Grow up.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Another thing is the snowflake tag, dreadful "insult" that apparently makes them feel better. Their man is the biggest, softest snowflake around. The slightest comment directed towards him sets off a fury. The irony is there but they don't see it.
 
Grinner said:
The 'greatness' they speak of is mostly referencing when the USA manufactured everything. That disappeared, not because of liberals, but because of greedy rich people. It amazes me that the average Trumperson can't work this out.
Click to expand...

The average Trumperson is told what to think by Fox News, hate talk radio, local Rs, etc.
 
John Stewart made a good observation about Trump voters, they've been told for years on end that the visigoths are at the door and only Trumps rhetoric matched that. How can you take Ted Cruz seriously when you genuinely think that there's a war on Christmas and Mexicans are taking over?
 
Wumminator said:
The thing is these people who voted for Trump have felt like losers their whole lives.

They've cried about Obama for so long. Everything they've been told to expect for him hasn't happened. The general world stage appreciate him. Meanwhile their own lives have gone to shit. In a world where increasing education is needed and it's not enough to simply go down the mines anymore these people have been left behind. After thinking for years it was others who were lazy and stupid for not having jobs suddenly their heavily subsidised industries have shrunk and they're worried.

The single biggest indicator for a Trump voter wasn't class , or gender. It was ignorance. Imagine knowing that. Imagine knowing that the thing that unites you and your fellow voters is lack of knowledge.

Not only that but you don't have the majority you wanted. You won and that was amazing but you know deep down there is a hell of a lot more supporters of the other side. The turn out yesterday was pitiful. There are worldwide protests against your man. 3 million more people voted for the opposition.

So yeah they're losing again. Which is why they're so vocal about winning. Much like their god emporer it is more important to be seen as feeling good than actual feeling good. Most of their happiness is derived from "liberal tears".

It's hilarious and sad.
Click to expand...

Fantastic point. And one that isn't made nearly enough.
 
sammsky1 said:
bar of Dove soap would cost American consumers $4.50 if made in USA vs $2 as currently made and sold from Indonesia. The latest Samsung S7 would cost $2,800 if made in USA vs the $1,200 as currently made and sold in China. A high tech Nike sports shirt can be sold for $50 because it's made on Bangladesh. A US made identical shirt would be closer to $110.
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, do you know what percentage of those prices are built in profit?
 
"It is a notorious fact that the monarchs of Europe and the Pope of Rome are at this very moment plotting our destruction.." A Texas newspaper 1855 in support of the Know Nothings movement

"Every device of treachery, every artifice known to the secret cabals of the international gold ring are being used to deal a blow to the prosperity of the people and the financial and commercial independence of the country" US People's Party Manifesto 1895

"This must be a the product of a great conspiracy on a scale so immense as to dwarf any other venture in the history of man" Joseph McCarthy 1951

"There is a style of mind....which I call the paranoid style because no other word evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness and conspiratorial fantasy I have in mind" Historian Richard Hofstadter 1964

"One day US workers will wake up and realise that their jobs and factory towns have been sacrificed - to save the bacon of the investment community" Pat Buchanan 2000

Looks like it's been around quite a while.
 
Grinner said:
The reason a lot of US companies moved their production overseas was because they had to pay for annoying things like breaks, vacations, pensions, healthcare, maternity leave and give a minimum wage. Let's hope Trump removes all of that to make things better for working families.
Click to expand...
Moving to a third world country has only one motive ... profit. For some industries the reason is not only profit like the chemical plants, some people are hypocrites when for example they cry about the environment and have chemical plants moving from the US with restrict environment laws to Mexico with no laws or laws not enforced, so the pollution moved out the country to another and the greens are happy with their great victory not acknowledging that move is way worse to the environment. Like the oil production, don't create pollution in my hometown but its okay if you do it in another country.
 
Americano said:
I think Trump will bring prosperity, and this will unite the country in a spirit of optimism and growth. Get past his personality and start liking the guy. He has a lot to offer.
Click to expand...
Probably one of the most hilarious things I've read on here. How's that even supposed to work?
 
Carolina Red said:
That's quite a profit margin!

So the prices could technically be a bit lower, but aren't because the companies want to maintain those percentages?
Click to expand...
because they are being driven by shareholder expectations from Wall Street and other national stock markets

Its all interconnected ....
 
sammsky1 said:
because they are being driven by shareholder expectations from Wall Street and other national stock markets

Its all interconnected ....
Click to expand...
Quite right.

For the record, the US has famously tried high protection tariffs before to boost the national economy... It was called the American System and it was in the 1820s-1830s. It didn't work then.
 
Carolina Red said:
Quite right.

For the record, the US has famously tried high protection tariffs before to boost the national economy... It was called the American System and it was in the 1820s-1830s. It didn't work then.
Click to expand...

It worked great for colonial Europe though.
I definitely don't know enough to decide which is the more comparable situation (US has the military dominance and industrial dominance of colonial Europe, but so much production has already shifted overseas unlike in the 1800s)
 
Carolina Red said:
That's quite a profit margin!

So the prices could technically be a bit lower, but aren't because the companies want to maintain those percentages?
Click to expand...

Not only do they want to, they are legally obliged to make as much profit as possible for the shareholders. The whole point of a corporation is to make money for the shareholders. In fact where I come from it is possible to sue the board of a company for decisions that clearly lack the ambition to make profit (edit: if you're a shareholder of said company that is of course)
 
Javi said:
Not only do they want to, they are legally obliged to make as much profit as possible for the shareholders. The whole point of a corporation is to make money for the shareholders. In fact where I come from it is possible to sue the board of a company for decisions that clearly lack the ambition to make profit (edit: if you're a shareholder of said company that is of course)
Click to expand...

And those shareholders include funds that are supposed to pay all of our pensions. Only we're all living longer and the funds aren't doing as well as we hoped, so the shareholders need more and more value from their investment to keep us fed and watered in our old age.
 
Javi said:
Not only do they want to, they are legally obliged to make as much profit as possible for the shareholders. The whole point of a corporation is to make money for the shareholders.
Click to expand...
The fundamental dilemma of capitalism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.