• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: The Trump Presidency Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
CapelDodger said:
I'd take account of competence as well, myself.
Click to expand...

Competence isn't an endeavor. Far be it from me to defend Bob's flights of fancy, but all he's saying is this: if I own this establishment, then its purpose is to benefit me.

There are, of course, reasons to be concerned with that view, but your particular response is off-base.
 
Trebuchet said:
That's something he "forgot" to mention to the Senate. Kind of like Sessions forgetting all about meeting with Papadopolous about Russia.
Click to expand...

How is sessions supposed to remember everyone he meets with about communicating with the russian government. That makes sense how individuals like the russian ambassador, and Papadopolous could slip through.
 
phiwum said:
Competence isn't an endeavor. Far be it from me to defend Bob's flights of fancy, but all he's saying is this: if I own this establishment, then its purpose is to benefit me.
Click to expand...
Not to continue the bobbing, but no he isn't. He's saying that if he hires a person to manage an establishment, he expects that person to cater to his every whim with regard to its management. Which is stupid.

If I hire someone to manage an establishment, I'd expect that person to fairly represent the needs of the establishment in order to help me make better decisions, not blindly obey my poor ones. I would not want them burning the place down to save on this month's heating bill, as seems de rigeur for Trumpian corporate management.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
Not to continue the bobbing, but no he isn't. He's saying that if he hires a person to manage an establishment, he expects that person to cater to his every whim with regard to its management. Which is stupid.

If I hire someone to manage an establishment, I'd expect that person to fairly represent the needs of the establishment in order to help me make better decisions, not blindly obey my poor ones. I would not want them burning the place down to save on this month's heating bill, as seems de rigeur for Trumpian corporate management.
Click to expand...

Other guy had a better notion. Of course I am hiring for expertise. But I am hiring someone to manage my business. Any decision that helps another group or person at my expense is wrong.

But my whim also matters. If I wish to make a poor decision with my property, they can take my money and accomplish it, or they can quit.
 
Last edited:
BobTheCoward said:
Other guy had a better notion. Of course I am hiring for expertise. But I am hiring someone to manage my business. Any decision that helps another group or person at my expense is wrong.

But my whim also matters. If I wish to make a poor decision with my property, they can take my money and accomplish it, or they can quit.
Click to expand...
I expect nothing different from business owners.

You make an excellent case for regulation.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Other guy had a better notion. Of course I am hiring for expertise. But I am hiring someone to manage my business. Any decision that helps another group or person at my expense is wrong.
Click to expand...

It depends on whether you're talking about the short or long term and of course there are other factors that need to be taken into account such as the legality of what you've asked them to do.

You might say that you want to kill each and every customer with your bare hands. I think your employee has a duty to try to stop you because in this case you'd be breaking the law.

Likewise if you wanted to dump toxic waste into the local water course and instead dispose of it legally (but expensively). (S)he's right not to follow your instructions even though it's at your expense fiscally.

BobTheCoward said:
But my whim also matters. If I wish to make a poor decision with my property, they can take my money and accomplish it, or they can quit.
Click to expand...

It depends. Under some jurisdictions, some employees at certain positions also have specific legal responsibilities which might curtail your whims.

All of this also only applies if you are the sole and entire owner too.

In the case of The President, he is not the sole proprietor of the United States and he is constrained by a raft of legislation.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Other guy had a better notion. Of course I am hiring for expertise. But I am hiring someone to manage my business. Any decision that helps another group or person at my expense is wrong.

But my whim also matters. If I wish to make a poor decision with my property, they can take my money and accomplish it, or they can quit.
Click to expand...


The problem with that analogy is that the United States isn't Trump's business. He's an employee.
To quote Kevin Kline's character in the movie "Dave", when he was speaking to Congress and the public, "I forgot that I was hired to do a job for you and that it was just a temp job at that. I forgot that I had two hundred and fifty million people who were paying me to make their lives a little better and I didn't live up to my part of the bargain."
 
Armitage72 said:
The problem with that analogy is that the United States isn't Trump's business. He's an employee.
To quote Kevin Kline's character in the movie "Dave", when he was speaking to Congress and the public, "I forgot that I was hired to do a job for you and that it was just a temp job at that. I forgot that I had two hundred and fifty million people who were paying me to make their lives a little better and I didn't live up to my part of the bargain."
Click to expand...

Post 3524, the one I responded to, wasn't about the president. I have made my opinions of the president very clear in other posts.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Other guy had a better notion. Of course I am hiring for expertise. But I am hiring someone to manage my business. Any decision that helps another group or person at my expense is wrong.

But my whim also matters. If I wish to make a poor decision with my property, they can take my money and accomplish it, or they can quit.
Click to expand...
If you want to run your business into the ground for your own interests, the manager is quite right to quit for theirs (reputation/track record).

But this is all nonsense, since government should absolutely not be run like a business or household to begin with.

This is where the tapatalk signature that annoys people used to be
 
Delphic Oracle said:
If you want to run your business into the ground for your own interests, the manager is quite right to quit for theirs (reputation/track record).

But this is all nonsense, since government should absolutely not be run like a business or household to begin with.

This is where the tapatalk signature that annoys people used to be
Click to expand...

The post that got this rolling talked about lawyers, CEOs, and the GOP. It did not mention government.
 
BobTheCoward said:
The post that got this rolling talked about lawyers, CEOs, and the GOP. It did not mention government.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it is the flow of the thread, but it appeared the business manager discussion was an analogy for discussing judicial nominations.

Otherwise why are we discussing business administration philosophies in this thread?

This is where the tapatalk signature that annoys people used to be
 
Delphic Oracle said:
Perhaps it is the flow of the thread, but it appeared the business manager discussion was an analogy for discussing judicial nominations.

Otherwise why are we discussing business administration philosophies in this thread?

This is where the tapatalk signature that annoys people used to be
Click to expand...

I didn't pick up on that. I will have to bow out now because I don't care about judicial nominations.
 
Armitage72 said:
The problem with that analogy is that the United States isn't Trump's business. He's an employee.
To quote Kevin Kline's character in the movie "Dave", when he was speaking to Congress and the public, "I forgot that I was hired to do a job for you and that it was just a temp job at that. I forgot that I had two hundred and fifty million people who were paying me to make their lives a little better and I didn't live up to my part of the bargain."
Click to expand...

There were certain people (including me) pointing out before he was elected that Trump has no experience being the CEO of a corporation, where he has to answer to a board of directors or stockholders. His businesses are LLCs, which means he has total say.

And that is not how the US government works.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
If you want to run your business into the ground for your own interests, the manager is quite right to quit for theirs (reputation/track record).

But this is all nonsense, since government should absolutely not be run like a business or household to begin with.

This is where the tapatalk signature that annoys people used to be
Click to expand...

Trump, of course, IS running it like a business. Like HIS businesses. Into the ground.
 
pgwenthold said:
There were certain people (including me) pointing out before he was elected that Trump has no experience being the CEO of a corporation, where he has to answer to a board of directors or stockholders. His businesses are LLCs, which means he has total say.

And that is not how the US government works.
Click to expand...

Well, presidents have no accountability to voters. Nothing in the Constitution requires them to care about voters after the election.

And it is close to sole authority. "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. "
 
Beelzebuddy said:
Not to continue the bobbing, but no he isn't. He's saying that if he hires a person to manage an establishment, he expects that person to cater to his every whim with regard to its management. Which is stupid.

If I hire someone to manage an establishment, I'd expect that person to fairly represent the needs of the establishment in order to help me make better decisions, not blindly obey my poor ones. I would not want them burning the place down to save on this month's heating bill, as seems de rigeur for Trumpian corporate management.
Click to expand...

I don't care to go into Coward exegesis, so I'll let you have this one.
 
Stacko said:
This is from November 5:


He did a copy & paste and forgot to change the city. Best people. :(
Click to expand...

He should just tweet "Thoughts and prayers to the good people of [INSERT CITY HERE] in the wake of their recent tragedy." every time something awful happens. Be a bit like the repeated Onion headline. Don't actually fill in the name of the city, though. People can do that at home.
 
BobTheCoward said:
This is the only criterion. If I own X, and I hire someone to manage X, I want managing X in my interests to be the sole endeavor.
Click to expand...

Actually, no. While dumping toxic waste at night in the bayou might save you money, and you might demand it be done, disloyalty to your commands would be in order.

On-topic ETA: The international news has Trump totally losing in his overseas trip, constantly mentioning how the US was the odd man out.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom