President Trump

[Fast Eddie B]

1) I watched part of last night's rally. My the embers of my slowly growing optimism over Trump's presidency were quite liberally doused.

2) There must be a logical fallacy that encompasses "Person X did it. Therefore>bad". Saw this with Bush and Obama both. Seeing it now with Trump. He negotiated a settlement that did seem to keep some jobs in the U.S. But,"Trump did it. Therefore>bad". Of course, if he did too little to keep jobs in the U.S., that would have been criticized as well.

What happened to "Credit where credit is due"?

 

[Belz...]

1) I watched part of last night's rally. My the embers of my slowly growing optimism over Trump's presidency were quite liberally doused.

2) There must be a logical fallacy that encompasses "Person X did it. Therefore>bad". Saw this with Bush and Obama both. Seeing it now with Trump. He negotiated a settlement that did seem to keep some jobs in the U.S. But,"Trump did it. Therefore>bad". Of course, if he did too little to keep jobs in the U.S., that would have been criticized as well.

What happened to "Credit where credit is due"?

Didn't they show that the jobs wouldn't only stay through 2017?

 

[Stacko]

Didn't they show that the jobs wouldn't only stay through 2017?

Every President seems to open the gate a deal like this right after an election. He said he'd save jobs and he did it; the details, $7 million price tag in tax cuts and 1,300 jobs still leaving versus 800 saved, however bad are unimportant right now compared to the optics of keeping the jobs. If he keeps cutting these kind of deals, you should get very concerned very quickly.

 

[Spindrift]

1) I watched part of last night's rally. My the embers of my slowly growing optimism over Trump's presidency were quite liberally doused.

2) There must be a logical fallacy that encompasses "Person X did it. Therefore>bad". Saw this with Bush and Obama both. Seeing it now with Trump. He negotiated a settlement that did seem to keep some jobs in the U.S. But,"Trump did it. Therefore>bad". Of course, if he did too little to keep jobs in the U.S., that would have been criticized as well.

What happened to "Credit where credit is due"?

He gets credit for lousy negotiating then. $7 million for 1000 jobs for maybe 2 years is not a good deal for Indiana, but then it's good PR to start for Trump and when the jobs do leave in a few years, it will not be mentioned.

 

[Belz...]

I can't view Youtube right now, but did anyone here see the (CNN?) interview with the Trump supporters post-election and post-cabinet selections? The cognitive dissonance there is quite interesting.

 

[Spindrift]

I can't view Youtube right now, but did anyone here see the (CNN?) interview with the Trump supporters post-election and post-cabinet selections? The cognitive dissonance there is quite interesting.

Cognitive dissonance seems to be the key to Trump's appeal.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

He gets credit for lousy negotiating then. $7 million for 1000 jobs for maybe 2 years is not a good deal for Indiana, but then it's good PR to start for Trump and when the jobs do leave in a few years, it will not be mentioned.

Then again, the deal will put money in the hands of the 1,000 employees, with all the downstream effects that entails. Including sales tax paid on purchases. That $7 million does not just disappear. Analogous to public works projects. I have a feeling if Obama had done the deal and labeled the $7 million as "stimulus", the left would be applauding it.

But it's Trump, therefor bad out of hand.

Reminds me of Bush getting prescription drug coverage - something you'd think the left would applaud. But it was Bush, so fault had to be found.

 

[Stacko]

I can't view Youtube right now, but did anyone here see the (CNN?) interview with the Trump supporters post-election and post-cabinet selections? The cognitive dissonance there is quite interesting.

This comment sums it up quite well.

“Do I think it’s really gonna happen? Nah,” he laughed. “But better Trump’s swamp than Obama’s swamp. At least he’s gonna get us something.”

You can't overestimate how many people saw Obama as distributing for blacks and immigrants and not for whites.

 

[Belz...]

This comment sums it up quite well.

This election is depressing.

 

[NoahFence]

1) I watched part of last night's rally. My the embers of my slowly growing optimism over Trump's presidency were quite liberally doused.

2) There must be a logical fallacy that encompasses "Person X did it. Therefore>bad". Saw this with Bush and Obama both. Seeing it now with Trump. He negotiated a settlement that did seem to keep some jobs in the U.S. But,"Trump did it. Therefore>bad". Of course, if he did too little to keep jobs in the U.S., that would have been criticized as well.

What happened to "Credit where credit is due"?

Wouldn't something good have to happen in order to give credit?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Cognitive dissonance seems to be the key to Trump's appeal.

I have a collection of saying to put on protest signs I've never had the nuts to actually deploy.

I'm adding this.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

1) I watched part of last night's rally. My the embers of my slowly growing optimism over Trump's presidency were quite liberally doused.

2) There must be a logical fallacy that encompasses "Person X did it. Therefore>bad". Saw this with Bush and Obama both. Seeing it now with Trump. He negotiated a settlement that did seem to keep some jobs in the U.S. But,"Trump did it. Therefore>bad". Of course, if he did too little to keep jobs in the U.S., that would have been criticized as well.

What happened to "Credit where credit is due"?

A thousand jobs is a mayor's victory not a president's.
http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder-business/ci_29743286/report-longmont-added-1-685-jobs-2015-most

 

[acbytesla]

1) I watched part of last night's rally. My the embers of my slowly growing optimism over Trump's presidency were quite liberally doused.

2) There must be a logical fallacy that encompasses "Person X did it. Therefore>bad". Saw this with Bush and Obama both. Seeing it now with Trump. He negotiated a settlement that did seem to keep some jobs in the U.S. But,"Trump did it. Therefore>bad". Of course, if he did too little to keep jobs in the U.S., that would have been criticized as well.

What happened to "Credit where credit is due"?

Because he DIDN'T actually DO what he promised. He didn't wave the stick, only the carrot. It proved that he was full of crap. He didn't save all the jobs Carrier was moving to Mexico, he save about half and only for a year. And he didn't do it be ,being tough. No, he did it by bribing Carrier. He bribed them with money from OTHER taxpayers. It was the very definition of weak.

His deal was EXCORIATED from the Right as well.

 

[sunmaster14]

Nice for you then. $17 an hour is worthless to you, but not everybody. It buys a loaf of bread, a gallon of milk, a big jar of peanut butter and a dozen eggs, plus maybe some cookies as treats, ramen noodles or a good multivitamin. Not worth it to you, I get it, but significant for subsistence-level folks trying make ends meet. It may be it's just as well that they get the $17 that is so trivial to you. You avoid the insult of making $17 pre-tax; they get a genuine hope of advancing through the ranks.

Go Dreamers. If Congress would just pass this bill, they would instantly pick up support from young Latinos. But I fear that increasingly hateful rhetoric from constituents will keep Congress from acting. Maybe it is time to cut trade ties, impose stiff tariffs, to hunt down the illegal immigrants, inter them and send many back, even those with U.S. citizen children. Maybe there's an advantages to aggressively deport ALL Mexicans. We could pull personnel from fighting ISIS, the better to focus on fighting illegal immigration.

Maybe it's because I know so many households with mixed-status residents that I get caught up in sentimentally. Send the Mexicans to stop ISIS - that may be one strategy. The Armed Force say they can use the help.

I think you've totally lost the thread of the conversation. My point had to do with an argument about whether some people might prefer exchanging money for leisure time. Which is kind of an obvious point, but some people here don't seem to understand it.

 

[sunmaster14]

Sunmaster's privilege is showing.

Privilege is irrelevant to the discussion, but would it make you feel any better if I told you I've earned that privilege, by, for example, working hard in the past and being frugal?

 

[sunmaster14]

Ok, so in conclusion if the law makes your hourly earnings lower, you will respond by making them lower still.

Sounds pretty irrational to me.

Wow. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt though and assume you haven't really thought about it deeply enough. Have you ever bought a ticket to go to a 2 hour long movie? Shouldn't you have been working instead? You could have had more money at the end. Hell, you would have been better off staying at home and watching paint dry according to your logic.

That explains a lot.

There are millions like me. Which is the point.

 

[acbytesla]

Then again, the deal will put money in the hands of the 1,000 employees, with all the downstream effects that entails. Including sales tax paid on purchases. That $7 million does not just disappear. Analogous to public works projects. I have a feeling if Obama had done the deal and labeled the $7 million as "stimulus", the left would be applauding it.

But it's Trump, therefor bad out of hand.

Reminds me of Bush getting prescription drug coverage - something you'd think the left would applaud. But it was Bush, so fault had to be found.

NO, its nothing like that. The devil is in the details. Here are just a few of the problems with that bill.


1. Excessive payments provided to managed care plans;
2. Premium increases on about 3 percent of the highest income elderly and disabled for Supplemental Medical Insurance;
3. A cumbersome and costly appeals process for patients who object to practices of drug plans.
4. They blocked Medicare's ability to negotiate directly with the drug companies costing hundreds of billions.

There were many more problems with that bill than this. I'm all for the part where Medicare covers prescription drugs but the way they did it was an abomination that was a boon for the drug companies. The stranglehold that the medical industry has on our government is a disgrace and is debilitating to our economy.

 

[Belz...]

Wow.

Oh, this is going to be good. Every argument that starts with that word is delicious.

Have you ever bought a ticket to go to a 2 hour long movie? Shouldn't you have been working instead? You could have had more money at the end. Hell, you would have been better off staying at home and watching paint dry according to your logic.

That makes absolutely no sense. The only thing I said is that you were responding to a lower income by lowering your income further, and I called it irrational. The above has absolutely no relation to what I said.

There are millions like me.

Maybe you live a bit too comfortably.

 

[Spindrift]

Then again, the deal will put money in the hands of the 1,000 employees, with all the downstream effects that entails. Including sales tax paid on purchases. That $7 million does not just disappear. Analogous to public works projects. I have a feeling if Obama had done the deal and labeled the $7 million as "stimulus", the left would be applauding it.

But it's Trump, therefor bad out of hand.

Reminds me of Bush getting prescription drug coverage - something you'd think the left would applaud. But it was Bush, so fault had to be found.

1000 people who know their job is only safe for a year. Not going to purchase much beyond essentials. And that $7 million has to be made up somewhere. 1000 working class people are not going to incur an additional $7 million in taxes in one year. So a net loss to the state of Indiana. If Trump continues making deals like this, the US is bound to be as successful as his Atlantic City casinos.

 

[sunmaster14]

1000 people who know their job is only safe for a year. Not going to purchase much beyond essentials. And that $7 million has to be made up somewhere. 1000 working class people are not going to incur an additional $7 million in taxes in one year. So a net loss to the state of Indiana. If Trump continues making deals like this, the US is bound to be as successful as his Atlantic City casinos.

It's $7 million over 10 years, so the net present value is less than $7 million. Furthermore, they're tax breaks, not all of which will necessarily be used or be extra (such is the nature of tax breaks). So the expected net present value of $7 million in tax breaks over 10 years might be only $3 million. It will be interesting to see how Carrier's parent company reports the benefit in its financial statements.

As to the benefit for Indiana, consider the difference between 1,000 making a good salary (and paying income taxes on that salary and sales taxes on the consumption that follows) and 1,000 people unemployed and on the dole, collecting unemployment benefits, and possibly welfare and Medicaid. I can't imagine that giving $7 million in tax breaks in this case isn't a great deal for Indiana.