By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Great site here for tracking projections and polling for the Presidential, House and Senate elections over the next month. A wealth of info on each state in each race.
Firstly, is it worth that if he brings complete fiscal ruin to a country and it's people?
Secondly, I think you want to believe that Clive. All evidence in his dealings as a business to now, in terms of how he treats small business suppliers, employees and communities, that he doesn't give two sh*ts about people, least so the rust belt of America. Whilst we rarely agree on politics in general, you are too intelligent to fall for his rhetoric. He's a snake oil salesman. What do they say? Actions speak louder than words. His past actions speak volumes about his interest in the blue collar worker.
While I don't fully disagree with you, I think there is definitely more of a chance of financial ruin if Hillary gets elected. It will further crush small businesses with Democratic control AND if minimum wage goes up then our economy is f-cked.
As is usually the case the man in the middle get screwed over. I am not minted by any stretch but make a good living and I get close to 40% taken for taxes right off the top of my pay. Add to that since Obamacare has went into effect all people/companies that could afford to pay for insurance have gotten price gouged. My insurance has more than doubled in cost the past few years and my medical coverage is the worst its ever been. So you are catering to the bottom rung of society that now gets free housing, food, healthcare and welfare payments.
On the flip side I simply can't trust a buffoon like Trump as the leader of our country. He is crass and impulsive and the last thing we need is more involvement in inernational conflicts.
I am rambling a bit but it is a conundrum because I think either way I vote I am fu*ed
[Post edited 6 Oct 2016 12:25]
0
US Elections 2016 on 12:29 - Oct 6 with 3139 views
'The problem is people in the US like over here are sick of the PC bullshit and it only seems to increase his popularity. He gets called literally Hitler for saying they should enforce their borders.'
Bit hysterical. Big difference between an economic need to manage immigration and enforce border controls, which are legitimate, to building walls and slating one whole neighbouring nation as criminals couched in zenophobic and racist language designed to incite people incapable of thinking for themselves. Like Berlin 1933. It's precisely why Trump is likened to a Fascist. Once he's done a number on the Mexicans, who's next?
Otherwise, you end up with Brexit, where a majority voted for 'change' without knowing wtf that meant or the implications of undefined 'change' in their own lives and economic well being. 'Change' without definition may well turn out to be change means no more bog roll. We're led by morons, unfortunately.
Meanwhile western press are only just starting to report that Moscow believes nuclear war with the west is inevitable......
As a 50+ year old a lot of my youth was spent being drip fed the American dream. The mainstream TV and papers were regularly filled with how great the country was and how utterly superior Americans were as a race. Everything in America was bigger, better, brighter and good old Uncle Sam was the coolest dude on the globe.
Then you get older, wiser and more informed. You see more of and met more people from around the world and you realise what an absolute bunch of to$$ers a vast number of Americans are. That in fact goes for a lot of nationalities, however, it really is true for those US citizens who have never been outside of the US, have no passport and make TOWIE blondes look educated. That a country with a population of 300 million people ends up having to choose between these two is frankly laughable. In fact it would be hysterical if it were not for the fact of how much power they will have and the impact that it could have on the rest of the world.
Brian is right its the warmongering Clinton versus the doolally trump.....
Your post gives me an excuse to post this gem (check out the chorus)...
RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
US Elections 2016 on 13:17 - Oct 6 with 3090 views
Well yes. He's slated the whole population. He hasn't cited any certain demographic. So why seek to defend the indefensible? The man's a weapon. An out and out shameless racist, pond life.
I hate Clinton as much as you do but how the fck can you defend Trump and claim he's not a fascist??
Ok. But try not to step on garden rakes either. And take care when manouvering ladders too.
On a serious note, the way the US and Russia are laying on a knife edge over Syria, it will only take one or two stray missiles to bring Nato and Russia into direct conflict meaning we will be lucky to see Xmas if they carry on. Trumps January inauguration may well be redundant if things turn nuclear.
0
US Elections 2016 on 14:16 - Oct 6 with 2982 views
You are deliberately missing my point and then inaccurately quoting it back at me. Not much point in discussing anything with anyone that does that.
Very simply, Trump's previous actions as a business prove he doesn't give two sh*ts about workers. Yet, his whole say, which you said you buy, is that he cares for blue collar Americans. On what grounds do you buy this?
I've never said Clinton cares more for them. But that's not her pitch. The wider economical point I was making is that mismanaging the economy, which Trumps isolationist and protectionist approach (he keeps reiterating it) will have, will affect the blue collar worker badly. He won't be looking after them!
Anyone with half a brain shouldn't be buying Trump's pitch.
And, in all seriousness, how can you slate well respected journals, both pretty centrist and, if anything, economically right of the historical centre. You make out they are as respected as an online forum or some kids A level paper. They aren't. If you can't accept that, then you're not a particularly reasonable person.
0
US Elections 2016 on 14:29 - Oct 6 with 2948 views
While I don't fully disagree with you, I think there is definitely more of a chance of financial ruin if Hillary gets elected. It will further crush small businesses with Democratic control AND if minimum wage goes up then our economy is f-cked.
As is usually the case the man in the middle get screwed over. I am not minted by any stretch but make a good living and I get close to 40% taken for taxes right off the top of my pay. Add to that since Obamacare has went into effect all people/companies that could afford to pay for insurance have gotten price gouged. My insurance has more than doubled in cost the past few years and my medical coverage is the worst its ever been. So you are catering to the bottom rung of society that now gets free housing, food, healthcare and welfare payments.
On the flip side I simply can't trust a buffoon like Trump as the leader of our country. He is crass and impulsive and the last thing we need is more involvement in inernational conflicts.
I am rambling a bit but it is a conundrum because I think either way I vote I am fu*ed
[Post edited 6 Oct 2016 12:25]
Abolsute nonsense, mate. In my view anyway. That line about minimum wage was used by neo liberals in the UK....but we've steadily increase minimum wage - most employers in London now pay the London Living wage (much higher) - and there's been no "fcuking" of the economy whatsoever.
From your post you seem to be quite neo liberal. Fair enough.
But that does put you in quandry with this election, but, again, you are misundestanding the choice available to you. Hilary, is, traditionally, a neo liberal, but is rowing back a bit from that. Trump is the EXACT OPPOSITE! He proposing for Amercia to turn inwards, become, protectionist and isolationist. The standard of your living with drastically worsen if he actually delivered that political approach to the economy. Surely, as a neo liberal, who is against abundant welfare, as you make clear, you want businesses to be able to trade with whomever they want? Surely, you want supply of goods from all over the world?
I simply don't see how your criticism of Hilary and democratic economy policy tallies with the complaints you make about your situation.
Completely appreciate the choice is not great for Americans; I really do. But you don't seem to have grasped the consequences of a Trump win...it won't be the opposite of all the bad things you think a Hilary win will deliver. It will be far far worse than even the "bad" things you think Hilary will deliver.
You have to give it to Trump. By engaging in post truth politics most flagrantly than anyone in the history of politics, putting forward no substance to how he'll fund some policies ("they'll be the best deals you've ever seen"), he has somehow persuaded millions of Americans they'll be better off under him than Clinton.
I get people want a change. But it goes back to me first post on the thread. People seem willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It won't be out of the mild frying pan into some glorious TV show of "making America great again", it will disaster.
The comparisons, btw, with Brexit, are nonsense. I voted remain, but some families and friends i know who i hugely respect and are very intelligent voted remain. I thought there were good logical cases for both sides.
Trump/Clinton is not the same thing. Not by a million miles. There is practically no good reason (and by that I mean no good reason for all groups of the American population) why anyone should want Trump to win. American citizens need to open their eyes.
0
US Elections 2016 on 14:36 - Oct 6 with 2937 views
Abolsute nonsense, mate. In my view anyway. That line about minimum wage was used by neo liberals in the UK....but we've steadily increase minimum wage - most employers in London now pay the London Living wage (much higher) - and there's been no "fcuking" of the economy whatsoever.
From your post you seem to be quite neo liberal. Fair enough.
But that does put you in quandry with this election, but, again, you are misundestanding the choice available to you. Hilary, is, traditionally, a neo liberal, but is rowing back a bit from that. Trump is the EXACT OPPOSITE! He proposing for Amercia to turn inwards, become, protectionist and isolationist. The standard of your living with drastically worsen if he actually delivered that political approach to the economy. Surely, as a neo liberal, who is against abundant welfare, as you make clear, you want businesses to be able to trade with whomever they want? Surely, you want supply of goods from all over the world?
I simply don't see how your criticism of Hilary and democratic economy policy tallies with the complaints you make about your situation.
Completely appreciate the choice is not great for Americans; I really do. But you don't seem to have grasped the consequences of a Trump win...it won't be the opposite of all the bad things you think a Hilary win will deliver. It will be far far worse than even the "bad" things you think Hilary will deliver.
You have to give it to Trump. By engaging in post truth politics most flagrantly than anyone in the history of politics, putting forward no substance to how he'll fund some policies ("they'll be the best deals you've ever seen"), he has somehow persuaded millions of Americans they'll be better off under him than Clinton.
I get people want a change. But it goes back to me first post on the thread. People seem willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It won't be out of the mild frying pan into some glorious TV show of "making America great again", it will disaster.
The comparisons, btw, with Brexit, are nonsense. I voted remain, but some families and friends i know who i hugely respect and are very intelligent voted remain. I thought there were good logical cases for both sides.
Trump/Clinton is not the same thing. Not by a million miles. There is practically no good reason (and by that I mean no good reason for all groups of the American population) why anyone should want Trump to win. American citizens need to open their eyes.
Every time a minimum wage has been increased anywhere the only effect has been to raise the income levels of those at the bottom of the pile.
Your business is not sustainable if it exists in a society where you do not pay your employees enough to actually live on because insecure workers are less efficient and it stymies overall demand in the economy
0
US Elections 2016 on 14:53 - Oct 6 with 2906 views
Every time a minimum wage has been increased anywhere the only effect has been to raise the income levels of those at the bottom of the pile.
Your business is not sustainable if it exists in a society where you do not pay your employees enough to actually live on because insecure workers are less efficient and it stymies overall demand in the economy
Not to mention it gets paid out in the form of working family tax credits anyway, subsidising employers, some might say, others will say those benefits cause higher taxes.
0
US Elections 2016 on 14:58 - Oct 6 with 2899 views
Every time a minimum wage has been increased anywhere the only effect has been to raise the income levels of those at the bottom of the pile.
Your business is not sustainable if it exists in a society where you do not pay your employees enough to actually live on because insecure workers are less efficient and it stymies overall demand in the economy
0
US Elections 2016 on 15:45 - Oct 6 with 2849 views
Oh look, it's my shadow, who appears every time I post to have a sly swipe with a flippant post without actually engaging in my compelling #content!
The impact of technology and machine thinking on the workplace is a totally different to the economic impact of minimum wages. I work in an industry that has above average salaries and today a Danish company announced they're opening an AI driven ad agency that can replace me. Tech is going to bury us all
0
US Elections 2016 on 15:47 - Oct 6 with 3750 views
And that's one of the reasons why I dislike talking politics on here. Hate who it makes me. I'm big enough to leave that unedited. Going to take a walk to cool my blood pressure and take my mind off a world that is slowly crushing me and my will to live
0
US Elections 2016 on 16:12 - Oct 6 with 3726 views
Abolsute nonsense, mate. In my view anyway. That line about minimum wage was used by neo liberals in the UK....but we've steadily increase minimum wage - most employers in London now pay the London Living wage (much higher) - and there's been no "fcuking" of the economy whatsoever.
From your post you seem to be quite neo liberal. Fair enough.
But that does put you in quandry with this election, but, again, you are misundestanding the choice available to you. Hilary, is, traditionally, a neo liberal, but is rowing back a bit from that. Trump is the EXACT OPPOSITE! He proposing for Amercia to turn inwards, become, protectionist and isolationist. The standard of your living with drastically worsen if he actually delivered that political approach to the economy. Surely, as a neo liberal, who is against abundant welfare, as you make clear, you want businesses to be able to trade with whomever they want? Surely, you want supply of goods from all over the world?
I simply don't see how your criticism of Hilary and democratic economy policy tallies with the complaints you make about your situation.
Completely appreciate the choice is not great for Americans; I really do. But you don't seem to have grasped the consequences of a Trump win...it won't be the opposite of all the bad things you think a Hilary win will deliver. It will be far far worse than even the "bad" things you think Hilary will deliver.
You have to give it to Trump. By engaging in post truth politics most flagrantly than anyone in the history of politics, putting forward no substance to how he'll fund some policies ("they'll be the best deals you've ever seen"), he has somehow persuaded millions of Americans they'll be better off under him than Clinton.
I get people want a change. But it goes back to me first post on the thread. People seem willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It won't be out of the mild frying pan into some glorious TV show of "making America great again", it will disaster.
The comparisons, btw, with Brexit, are nonsense. I voted remain, but some families and friends i know who i hugely respect and are very intelligent voted remain. I thought there were good logical cases for both sides.
Trump/Clinton is not the same thing. Not by a million miles. There is practically no good reason (and by that I mean no good reason for all groups of the American population) why anyone should want Trump to win. American citizens need to open their eyes.
Fair points as you laid out I have many doubts with Trump and as a human being I just cannot trust him to be head of our country. As far as making us isolated, I think most of what he says is empty threats. Himself his companies products are mostly made overseas.
We could never survive without significant trade with foreign countries, most of what he says in that regard is 'Merica bravado to appeal to the mindless lemmings.
My concern with Hillary is more handshakes and lacing the pockets of major corporations and driving down family owned business which is the heart of the country. This is not a proposed small increase in minimum wage. It is currently at $7.25/hour, Sanders was proposing $15/hour! Hillary isn't that far left on her stance but even if it is raised to half of that it would crush small businesses. It would be counterproductive to significantly raise minimum wage. Many Businesses would go bankrupt and those that didn't would replace humans with computers and robots.
Taking the broad view on the matter. I would prefer CLinton as she is at least a sane human being and would hope the checks and balances of congress and the senate keep things from sliding to far to the left.
Again though a terrible set of options we have here
0
US Elections 2016 on 16:20 - Oct 6 with 3717 views
Oh look, it's my shadow, who appears every time I post to have a sly swipe with a flippant post without actually engaging in my compelling #content!
The impact of technology and machine thinking on the workplace is a totally different to the economic impact of minimum wages. I work in an industry that has above average salaries and today a Danish company announced they're opening an AI driven ad agency that can replace me. Tech is going to bury us all
Calm down, I engage with you because I assume you are intelligent enough to respond. You said that higher prosperity was the only consequence of higher minimum wages. It seems self evident to me that it also encourages employers to mechanise low skill but now more expensive tasks. It surprises me that the huge number of jobs presumably eliminated in retail pass without comment while the world's eyes are fixed on steel. That's women's work for you I guess.
I thought I made a reasonable point above about foreign ownership of U.K. Debt compared to foreign currency debt, and I didn't have a dig at you about the confusion, even though you had been harsh on the previous commenter. But it was a point worth making. I've given up ad hominem attacks on anyone here, we all want the same thing. I plead guilty to pedantry. (Burn the pedant nonce!)
[Post edited 6 Oct 2016 16:21]
1
US Elections 2016 on 16:26 - Oct 6 with 3706 views
See subsequent partial apology. One reason besides the ones previously mentioned I dislike political chat is I end up betraying my drive to keep level and rational and end up blowing up. I'm under a lot of pressure at work as this has had a big effect on ad spends, and also my wife increasingly wants to move back to Ireland, and every day I see the things I believe in being trampled and squashed, which with an existing anxiety condition is a pretty shoddy combo. I'm a powderkeg and I explode in the wrong directions frequently. Sorry for being a belter
EDIT: stone me, I swear blind that was quoting MrSheed. I'm losing the plot
[Post edited 6 Oct 2016 16:30]
0
US Elections 2016 on 17:06 - Oct 6 with 3659 views
See subsequent partial apology. One reason besides the ones previously mentioned I dislike political chat is I end up betraying my drive to keep level and rational and end up blowing up. I'm under a lot of pressure at work as this has had a big effect on ad spends, and also my wife increasingly wants to move back to Ireland, and every day I see the things I believe in being trampled and squashed, which with an existing anxiety condition is a pretty shoddy combo. I'm a powderkeg and I explode in the wrong directions frequently. Sorry for being a belter
EDIT: stone me, I swear blind that was quoting MrSheed. I'm losing the plot
[Post edited 6 Oct 2016 16:30]
Sorry about your stress. I'd love to move to my house in Kerry, but I'm in harness for a decade or two yet.
0
US Elections 2016 on 17:25 - Oct 6 with 3656 views
Sorry , not having this 'the're as bad as each other' stuff. Clinton is a centrist , career politician with connections to big business, the rich etc. Trump is a woman- hating, racist who made his money due to a large inheritance. He has no coherent policies on any subject other than to pull up America's drawbridge on the rest of the world unless they pay up for their services. He is also clearly a hugely unlikeable character, an appalling speech-maker and totally lacking in common decency. His mocking of the disabled journalist was one of the most vile, hateful things I have ever seen by someone in the public eye.
[Post edited 6 Oct 2016 18:47]
2
US Elections 2016 on 19:23 - Oct 6 with 3567 views
Sorry , not having this 'the're as bad as each other' stuff. Clinton is a centrist , career politician with connections to big business, the rich etc. Trump is a woman- hating, racist who made his money due to a large inheritance. He has no coherent policies on any subject other than to pull up America's drawbridge on the rest of the world unless they pay up for their services. He is also clearly a hugely unlikeable character, an appalling speech-maker and totally lacking in common decency. His mocking of the disabled journalist was one of the most vile, hateful things I have ever seen by someone in the public eye.
[Post edited 6 Oct 2016 18:47]
But she's part of the "establishment", which seems to be worse for some.
Honestly, if there was a credible alternative, than there's lots of arguments to not vote for her. Trump should not be a credible alternative for any sane human with more than an ounce of intelligence and decency.
0
US Elections 2016 on 19:25 - Oct 6 with 3567 views
Just by chance I have just finished reading 'The Making of Donald Trump' (2016) by Pulitzer Prize winner David Cay Johnston.
He regards Trump primarily as a conman.
Some of the points he raises in his book:
1. Trump's connections to the Genovese and Gambino Mafia families.
'Beginning three years earlier, in 1978, Trump had hired mobbed-up construction firms to erect Trump Tower. Instead of building a high-rise skeleton of steel girders, Trump chose ready-mix concrete. He did so at a time when other New York developers, notably the LeFrak and Resnik families, were pleading with the FBI to free them from a mob-run concrete cartel that jacked up prices.'
2. Trump's connection to Roy Cohn, described by Johnston as 'one of the most vicious and heartless men who ever lived in America'.
'Cohn had been the chief lawyer for Senator Joseph McCarthy, whose communist witch hunts only ended when he went after the United States Army. By Trump’s account, Cohn became a business mentor and nearly a second father to him. Their steadily deepening relationship would link Trump to mob-owned construction companies at a time when other builders were begging the FBI to crack down on the Mafia. It also ensnared Trump in a jewelry tax scam and in a lawsuit that blew up in his face. In Cohn, Trump had someone who could be "vicious" on his behalf and who he said, looking back in 2005, "would brutalize for you."
3. Trump's numerous property scams - Trump has been involved in at least four developments where he has rented out his name and allows buyers who buy flats to think he is developing the property, and then claims he is nothing to do with the development.
At Trump Ocean Resort Baja Mexico (when Mexico was ok) his children were involved in the scam:
'Prospective buyers were given a frequently asked questions sheet. One question: "Tell me more about the Developers, the Trump Organization and Irongate?" Ivanka Trump told sales reception attendees that she was so impressed with the project that she was buying one of the apartments herself. She chitchatted with prospective buyers, saying that once they became neighbors she just might drop in to borrow some sugar. Her brother Donald Jr. also told prospective buyers he was buying his own pad. The Donald Trump name and the assurances of his children attracted prospective buyers aplenty. Many paid a $5,000 deposit for an "Exclusive Priority Reservation Agreement," required just to hear a sales pitch at the Grand Hyatt in downtown San Diego. That payment was fully refundable to anyone who decided not to take advantage of the opportunity. The prospect of getting in early on a transformative project, and one in which buyers might run into next-generation Trumps, was so attractive to some people that they were neither put off by nor dubious of the high-pressure sales tactics. Much later, three people who had made exclusive priority reservations complained that they were given five minutes to buy or walk. That didn’t even give them enough time to read the terms of their purchase contract, much less consult a lawyer. They signed, writing checks totaling more than $200,000. Some buyers later said they put their life’s savings into their eagerly anticipated new homes by the sea. They came to regret being so hasty and so trusting. Nearly two hundred people bought in, putting down more than $22 million in deposits in 2006, confident that the project was about to get underway and that before long they would move into their beachfront property and enjoy the security of a smart investment in a Trump-developed resort. A June 2007 newsletter notified buyers that construction was underway. The next month, the Trump Baja News reported, "our new and excited homeowners now are part of an elite group of vacation homeowners who own property developed by one of the most respected names in real estate, Donald J. Trump." Three months later, in October, when Wall Street crashed under the weight of toxic mortgages and other Baja real estate projects faltered, the same newsletter carried a message "From the desk of Ivanka Trump." Ivanka assured the buyers that their investment was sound. "Though it may be true that some of Baja’s developments could slow down, these market conditions simply do not apply to Trump Ocean Resort - or any other Trump development," she wrote. Two months later, in December 2007, the newsletter advised buyers of newly discovered geological problems afflicting the building site. A few months later, in March 2008, anxious buyers received calls or letters. Construction loans had been approved, would be funded shortly, and work would be underway. This was nine months after buyers had been told in writing that construction had already begun. Still, construction did not proceed. All of these promotions, sales pitches, and newsletter updates created the impression that Trump was the builder and the developer, words he used. The buyers later said they bought in because Trump was the developer or builder. That understanding then changed abruptly. The worst news arrived two days before Christmas 2008. What had previously been described as a partnership between "the Trump Organization, Donald J. Trump," and the other people and companies involved was described in a new way. Neither Trump nor the Trump Organization were investment partners in the Trump Ocean Resort. They were not the developers, either. They had merely licensed the use of the Trump name. The actual Baja developers, it came out later, had "obtained authority" from Trump to use his trademarked name in return for an upfront fee. Under that licensing agreement, as testimony and court papers show, Trump gave the actual developer authority to tell prospective buyers that Donald Trump was "developing" the Mexico resort, even though he later testified that he was not. The losing buyers soon filed a host of lawsuits in California, asserting fraud and collectively demanding the return of their $22 million plus lawyers’ fees and other costs.'
4. Trump's University scam. 'Owens (who retired in 2011 as chief deputy in the Texas attorney general’s consumer protection unit) also released a January 2010 letter signed by Rick Berlin, an assistant Texas attorney general, proposing that the state demand restitution for the Texans who felt swindled, as well as further penalties for deceptive and illegal conduct. In all, Berlin recommended demanding $5.4 million and a permanent order banning Trump and his fake university from ever doing business in Texas again.'
The case against Trump University in Florida was dropped after Trump made a donation to Florida attorney general Pam Bondi's campaign.
5. Trump's ripping off of workers and small businessmen who worked on his properties.
6. Trump's history of racial discrimination as a New York landlord.
7. Trump's numerous bankruptcies, including his casinos.
8. Trump's numerous lawsuits - Trump has been involved in 3,500 lawsuits.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
