[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[prisonermonkeys]

Or, he actually did more than imply that Jeb cannot deal with any of those without the help of his mother.

It is very poor form but so is your spin

Trump, master of Twitter that he is, would know about the 140 character limit and the ability to post multiple Tweets on a subject, given that he's done it before. So why lump ISIL, Putin and China together in one Tweet like that? For the sake of a zinger?

 

[Dotini]

I think Trump has a lot of many skeletons in the closet that haven't been exposed yet - his history of questionable business dealings & his past association with Democratic politicians & policies.

Supposedly, due to his life-long exposure to the New York tabloid press, Trump's foibles, follies and louche dealings are all well-documented.

 

[Biggles]

Supposedly, due to his life-long exposure to the New York tabloid press, Trump's foibles, follies and louche dealings are all well-documented.

I would imagine they have been - but they haven't been brought up in the nomination race so far, except to a very limited extent - mostly mentions of his business bankruptcies. Trump really hasn't been any kind of a consistent "conservative" - there must be a wealth of public statements Trump has made that would highlight that fact. I'm guessing the other candidates are waiting for the right moment - once the field thins out & they stand to gain the most.

A Canadian perspective on the US Supreme Court debacle-in-the-making:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/u-s-supreme-court-neil-macdonald-1.3447962

Of course, the Canadian Constitution was created in 1982, so lawmakers aren't constrained by dealing with issues from an 18th century perspective.

 

[A2K78]

I'm no fan of Ben Carson, but its amazing how clueless the author of this fact checker is about Carson's criticism of the Federal Reserve:

http://gazette.com/fact-check-republicans-debaters-on-high-court-economy/article/1570044

BEN CARSON: "When we have a debt of that nature, it causes the Fed to change their policy. It causes the central bank to keep the rates low, and who does that affect? Mr. Average, who used to go to the bank every Friday and put part of his check in the bank and watch it grow over three decades and be able to retire with a nice nest egg."

THE FACTS: Carson misreads how the Federal Reserve works.

The size of the U.S. government's debt, which is about $19 trillion, does not influence the Federal Reserve's interest rate policies. The Fed seeks to keep unemployment low and inflation at about 2 percent a year.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke cut the short-term interest rate the Fed controls to nearly zero in December 2008 — before Barack Obama took office — and kept it that way for seven years.

It is true that the policy has significantly lowered the interest rates on bank savings accounts, but many savers have benefited in other ways. The S&P 500 stock market index nearly tripled from March 2009, when the market bottomed during the Great Recession, through the end of 2015.

Sorry to tell you but Carson is completely right about the Fed and what these central bankers/planners have done to the economy and the average American like the scorched earth war the Fed is currently waging on savers. In fact its the Fed's irresponsible policies which have made it impossible for the average American to save a dime. The brilliant David Stockman has more on this here:

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/the-war-on-savers-and-the-200-rulers-of-world-finance/

Also while its true that the national debt doesn't influence where the Fed sets interest rates, in truth the Fed's rates does influence the ability for the United States to repay the debt. To put things in [scary]perspective, not only have the Fed's ZIRP completely distorted the market and created bubbles/mal-investments all over the place(which are currently popping, hence the current stock market route) but raising the interest rate all but guarantee that things become even more painful for the United States.

That said people should really go and educate themselves about the Federal Reserve.


@Biggles

Of course, the Canadian Constitution was created in 1982, so lawmakers aren't constrained by dealing with issues from an 18th century perspective.

I'm not too much of a fan of America's Constitution(as its a centralizers wet dream) however just because it was written in the 18th century doesn't make it irrelevant in the 21st century, let alone the century to come. Why? The goal of the Constitution was meant to restrain the role of government to basically the protection and respect for property rights. The only problem is that subsequent administrations have consistently shown a disregard for it.

That said, saying a document written 2 centuries ago is irrelevant by today's standards is like saying that documents like the Ten Commandments or Magna Carta is irrelevant in this day and age.

As for the Canadian constitution, like many modern constitutions all I see is a collectivist dream come true.

 

[Dotini]

An interesting article that might persuade that Trumpism is an inevitability.
http://www.aei.org/publication/trum...content=AEITHISWEEK&utm_campaign=Weekly021216

 

[Biggles]

That said, saying a document written 2 centuries ago is irrelevant by today's standards is like saying that documents like the Ten Commandments or Magna Carta is irrelevant in this day and age.

They're not irrelevant, but both the Ten Commandments & the Magna Carta were supplanted by "later developments".

The goal of the Constitution was meant to restrain the role of government to basically the protection and respect for property rights.

That precisely reflects an an 18th century viewpoint. It's not irrelevant in this day & age in the same way that Newtonian physics is not irrelevant in the present world, but our understanding of human rights has moved on in the same way that our understanding of the laws of physics has moved on since Newton's day.

 

[Dotini]

The constitution is the highest law in the land.

Do you want to obey the law? If not, you can change it.

To maintain the highest law and yet behave differently - to say one thing yet do another - is cognitive dissonance. Mental illness. Madness.

 

[Tornado]

They're not irrelevant, but both the Ten Commandments & the Magna Carta were supplanted by "later developments".

You mean like Amendments.

 

[Biggles]

The constitution is the highest law in the land.

Do you want to obey the law? If not, you can change it.

To maintain the highest law and yet behave differently - to say one thing yet do another - is cognitive dissonance. Mental illness. Madness.

It's the kind of cognitive dissonance that led to the Civil War.

The AEI article is interesting, but (like Trump) it seems to place a disproportionate emphasis on immigration. In reality, the most significant force in changing work opportunities for the working classes in the US would be the force of globalization - not the effect of immigrants taking the jobs of working class Americans, but the wholesale departure of industries to other parts of the globe - primarily Asia. Trump had his own branded clothing lines made in China, all while spouting off about somehow protecting American jobs from China. Other than this spouting, Trump has offered no concrete proposals for how he would do that. The cognitive dissonance is great with Mr. Trump.

 

[Dotini]

Mr Trump and Mr Sanders are imperfect vessels for the anger and discontents of the American people. Yet they are all that we have. At the moment.

 

[Sanji Himura]

...not the effect of immigrants taking the jobs of working class Americans, but the wholesale departure of industries to other parts of the globe - primarily Asia. Trump had his own branded clothing lines made in China, all while spouting off about somehow protecting American jobs from China. Other than this spouting, Trump has offered no concrete proposals for how he would do that. The cognitive dissonance is great with Mr. Trump.

Good point, but I would like to pose this question to your favored candidates, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. It is a fact that McDonalds right now (I have a video that I will post below), is developing technology to automate an entire restaurant with robots. Dollar for dollar, robots cost less to maintain than the average worker, I mean take a look at the automotive industry today compared to 50 years ago. Today it is manned with robots thanks to the unions whereas humans manned the assembly line back then. The food industry will suffer the same fate before too long if the push for unionization keeps up.

So here is the question, if Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton were to somehow be able to force American companies to hire American workers at a higher minimum wage, what is really stopping them maybe five or ten years down the line from firing all of them and going to a robotic workforce where the cost is cheaper to produce goods, maintenance to the workforce is cheaper dollar for dollar, and would be able to produce goods 24/7?

 

[CodeRedR51]

I mean take a look at the automotive industry today compared to 50 years ago. Today it is manned with robots thanks to the unions whereas humans manned the assembly line back then.

Have you even been to an automotive assembly plant? Because I have, and there are still TONS of people that work there. Good luck finding a parking space in the huge lot out front. Sure the line that carries the cars along and the chassis welders are all automated, but it's been like that for decades. Real live people still assemble the cars after welding, piece by piece.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Have you even been to an automotive assembly plant? Because I have, and there are still TONS of people that work there. Good luck finding a parking space in the huge lot out front. Sure the line that carries the cars along and the chassis welders are all automated, but it's been like that for decades. Real live people still assemble the cars after welding, piece by piece.

I didn't mean that robots completely took over the assembly line. Just that there are more robots today than there were 50 years ago, that's my point.

 

[squadops]

Building a car is a bit more complex than flipping a burger however.

 

[Joey D]

I didn't mean that robots completely took over the assembly line. Just that there are more robots today than there were 50 years ago, that's my point.

Party because the technology for robotic assembly lines didn't exist 50 years ago, or if it did it, it was too cost prohibitive. I don't think unions were the reason assembly plants became more automated, demand for the product was.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Building a car is a bit more complex than flipping a burger however.

Oh, I agree, but the Fight for $15 movement does have consequences. Most companies figure that if people are walking out for a raise, they can automate the process and cut costs. This was an "intended" consequence of Obamacare.

 

[Biggles]

Good point, but I would like to pose this question to your favored candidates, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. It is a fact that McDonalds right now (I have a video that I will post below), is developing technology to automate an entire restaurant with robots. Dollar for dollar, robots cost less to maintain than the average worker, I mean take a look at the automotive industry today compared to 50 years ago. Today it is manned with robots thanks to the unions whereas humans manned the assembly line back then. The food industry will suffer the same fate before too long if the push for unionization keeps up.

So here is the question, if Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton were to somehow be able to force American companies to hire American workers at a higher minimum wage, what is really stopping them maybe five or ten years down the line from firing all of them and going to a robotic workforce where the cost is cheaper to produce goods, maintenance to the workforce is cheaper dollar for dollar, and would be able to produce goods 24/7?

The automotive industry isn't manned by robots because of unions - it's the inevitable march of technology. But I don't know what the answer is to your central question. Clearly if the US wishes to maintain the standard of living for its citizens, education is key - which is a big part of Sanders' platform - but overall I see the slip in the relative prosperity of the middle & working class in The US (& in most other western countries) as inevitable.

Workers in western countries have enjoyed a privileged position for the last 60 or 70 years, their standard of living protected by unions, trade barriers & the primitive state of education & infrastructure in the undeveloped world. That's all changing now & the privileged position is disappearing, replaced by ferocious international competition. The ones who benefit from this are the very rich. international (0.1%) capitalist class & the workers in emerging economies like China & India who are gradually seeing their living standards increase.

The prospects for the blue collar worker in the US look bleak. I don't see any help coming from the GOP - the blather of people like Cruz & Rubio & Bush (not to mention the lack of blather of Carson) about American exceptionalism & restoring jobs & prosperity by cutting taxes & regulations is, for the most part, just a bunch of blather. And Trump is worse, because he offers no concrete proposals at all, just even more vague blather about "winning".

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Building a car is a bit more complex than flipping a burger however.

Nah, the trunk lid, doors and hood are like the buns, lettuce and tomato and the shell and drive train are the meat. See totally easy!

 

[Tornado]

Nah, the trunk lid, doors and hood are like the buns, lettuce and tomato and the shell and drive train are the meat. See totally easy!

 

[Danoff]

The automotive industry isn't manned by robots because of unions - it's the inevitable march of technology. But I don't know what the answer is to your central question. Clearly if the US wishes to maintain the standard of living for its citizens, education is key - which is a big part of Sanders' platform - but overall I see the slip in the relative prosperity of the middle & working class in The US (& in most other western countries) as inevitable.

Workers in western countries have enjoyed a privileged position for the last 60 or 70 years, their standard of living protected by unions, trade barriers & the primitive state of education & infrastructure in the undeveloped world. That's all changing now & the privileged position is disappearing, replaced by ferocious international competition. The ones who benefit from this are the very rich. international (0.1%) capitalist class & the workers in emerging economies like China & India who are gradually seeing their living standards increase.

The prospects for the blue collar worker in the US look bleak. I don't see any help coming from the GOP - the blather of people like Cruz & Rubio & Bush (not to mention the lack of blather of Carson) about American exceptionalism & restoring jobs & prosperity by cutting taxes & regulations is, for the most part, just a bunch of blather. And Trump is worse, because he offers no concrete proposals at all, just even more vague blather about "winning".

Nice thing about you Biggles is that you're consistent. When I see one of your posts I know I'm going to disagree with almost every word of it. In this case, you made it to the 4th sentence before I disagreed, but I bet if we really investigated sentence number 1 we'd find something to argue about.

Yea, outsourcing does benefit the countries we outsource to. But the US should appreciate that because it's a symptom of increasing domestic standard of living (it's also a symptom of increasing domestic government burden on the American worker, but let's focus on the positive). The correct reaction to the technological progress and the threat of people losing their jobs should never be "protect the jobs". "Blue collar workers" may need to become something more than "blue collar workers". Let's not preclude that from the realm of possibility - because isn't that what progress really looks like? The US should never make its goal "to maintain the standard of living for its citizens". Instead, the goal of the US should be to maintain human rights and justice. The rest will naturally follow (as it has for a rather long time now).

 

[Biggles]

Nice thing about you Biggles is that you're consistent. When I see one of your posts I know I'm going to disagree with almost every word of it. In this case, you made it to the 4th sentence before I disagreed, but I bet if we really investigated sentence number 1 we'd find something to argue about.

Yea, outsourcing does benefit the countries we outsource to. But the US should appreciate that because it's a symptom of increasing domestic standard of living (it's also a symptom of increasing domestic government burden on the American worker, but let's focus on the positive). The correct reaction to the technological progress and the threat of people losing their jobs should never be "protect the jobs". "Blue collar workers" may need to become something more than "blue collar workers". Let's not preclude that from the realm of possibility - because isn't that what progress really looks like? The US should never make its goal "to maintain the standard of living for its citizens". Instead, the goal of the US should be to maintain human rights and justice. The rest will naturally follow (as it has for a rather long time now).

It's ironic that you preface your post with a comment about disagreeing with me, as in this (unusual) case we seem to be in agreement. I don't say anything anywhere in my post about "protecting the jobs". I say that education is probably key or, as you put it: "Blue collar workers" may need to become something more than "blue collar workers".

What the GOP is selling to working class whites is the pretence that all that's required to restore well-paying manufacturing jobs is the lowering of corporate taxes & regulations. That's a fantasy.

 

[mustafur]

Here comes the establishment to deal with this Sanders business: https://www.rt.com/usa/332551-sanders-dnc-lobbying-money/

"Democracy"

 

[Pupik]

Oh, I agree, but the Fight for $15 movement does have consequences. Most companies figure that if people are walking out for a raise, they can automate the process and cut costs. This was an "intended" consequence of Obamacare.

I think widespread automated processes, and their continual improvements, have been going on for well over 200 years.

Employees do need to become more educated, but there's a jam in the loop when people have to spend more money than they have to get an education they probably afford in the first place. Taking out a loan is a solution, and then years later, when much of the a viable labor pool all have similar skills, the wages drop due to supply and demand. (I'm not saying that giving away college to everyone will make this scenario better, but speed up the situation.) But the erosion of the value in knowledge capital will probably only increase, and people get burned out over it...demanding changes, although like anything in government, we get a ham-fisted and complicated approach to solutions.

As the saying goes, we all need ditch diggers and the garbage man, but as jobs like that dry up due to automation, there's no telling what could happen in fifty years' time. At some point the balance between making basic ends meet, having even a modicum of jobs to go around, and not stifling innovation has to be continuously repaired.

 

[Danoff]

It's ironic that you preface your post with a comment about disagreeing with me, as in this (unusual) case we seem to be in agreement. I don't say anything anywhere in my post about "protecting the jobs". I say that education is probably key or, as you put it: "Blue collar workers" may need to become something more than "blue collar workers".

What the GOP is selling to working class whites is the pretence that all that's required to restore well-paying manufacturing jobs is the lowering of corporate taxes & regulations. That's a fantasy.

We even disagree about whether we disagree.

While the GOP may be selling fantasies, the donkeys are selling them just as fast. Education is beyond over-rated. You can't just sweep your hands and say let's burden the US worker some more (causing more outsourcing) to help them with education programs. First of all, nobody in government even knows where those education programs should focus. Second of all, how do you effectively deploy the money that you seize from that burden to fund those programs that you have no direction for? I really hate this term but it makes the most sense here so I'll use it anyway, this problem requires a "grassroots" or "ground up" solution. It is up to each individual to determine how they want to refocus their energies. You do not need to send a 50 year old automotive plant worker to school to learn how to write java applets. That plant worker can have a lucrative job as a plumber, electrician, mechanic, etc. The person they'll displace is a kid who just graduated high school and finds it tough to get a plumbing gig and has to go to school to study something else... maybe how to write java applets.

We don't need more plumbers? I beg to differ. When I need a plumber I can never pay them enough to get them to even show up. "You're not remodeling a house? Not worth my time." I use plumber as an example but there are closer jobs... like working at a power plant, especially a nuclear plant which we're not building for some reason. How about that? Let's revitalize our economy by building nuclear plants. That would be a hell of a lot more useful than spewing cash on over-funded universities.

I think widespread automated processes, and their continual improvements, have been going on for well over 200 years.

Employees do need to become more educated, but there's a jam in the loop when people have to spend more money than they have to get an education they probably afford in the first place. Taking out a loan is a solution, and then years later, when much of the a viable labor pool all have similar skills, the wages drop due to supply and demand. (I'm not saying that giving away college to everyone will make this scenario better, but speed up the situation.) But the erosion of the value in knowledge capital will probably only increase, and people get burned out over it...demanding changes, although like anything in government, we get a ham-fisted and complicated approach to solutions.

As the saying goes, we all need ditch diggers and the garbage man, but as jobs like that dry up due to automation, there's no telling what could happen in fifty years' time. At some point the balance between making basic ends meet, having even a modicum of jobs to go around, and not stifling innovation has to be continuously repaired.

See above. Actually ironically going to school to learn java applets instead of plumbing probably puts you in a more easily automated profession. Everyone wants to manhandle the displaced worker directly into where we need them, this is short sighted and why the government sucks at these sorts of things. The displaced worker should look close to their current profession for new work. Someplace they can leverage some of the skills they've learned. They'll displace someone else who will displace someone else and eventually there's someone who decides to learn something else in the first place. That's how the economy evolves. I gave a great example somewhere else on gtplanet about how blockbuster going out of business in favor of netflix results in janitors losing their jobs at blockbuster and how that eventually translates to someone landing a writing gig for a new show on netflix. It doesn't require teaching a janitor to write scripts either.

 

[Dotini]

What the GOP is selling to working class whites is the pretence that all that's required to restore well-paying manufacturing jobs is the lowering of corporate taxes & regulations. That's a fantasy.

This is a key insight. Many would agree high corporate taxation is among the reasons US jobs have been transferred abroad. But what Trump significantly adds is deportation of illegals, the Great Wall, and much more aggressive deal-making with respect to foreign trade arrangements. Trump boldly proposes putting the interests of US citizens distinctly ahead of the interests of the remainder of the world's peoples. This is the essence of nationalism and the populist fervor that he has inspired amongst a broad spectrum of Americans.

With the prospect of a 20 trillion dollar debt bubble collapsing over the US (not to mention the global debt bubble), you are probably right that it is a fantasy that well-paying jobs will ever again be widely available to middle and lower class US citizens. That is, unless Trump - or another like him - is elected and fulfills his promises.

 

[Sanji Himura]

We even disagree about whether we disagree.

While the GOP may be selling fantasies, the donkeys are selling them just as fast. Education is beyond over-rated. You can't just sweep your hands and say let's burden the US worker some more (causing more outsourcing) to help them with education programs. First of all, nobody in government even knows where those education programs should focus. Second of all, how do you effectively deploy the money that you seize from that burden to fund those programs that you have no direction for? I really hate this term but it makes the most sense here so I'll use it anyway, this problem requires a "grassroots" or "ground up" solution. It is up to each individual to determine how they want to refocus their energies. You do not need to send a 50 year old automotive plant worker to school to learn how to write java applets. That plant worker can have a lucrative job as a plumber, electrician, mechanic, etc. The person they'll displace is a kid who just graduated high school and finds it tough to get a plumbing gig and has to go to school to study something else... maybe how to write java applets.

We don't need more plumbers? I beg to differ. When I need a plumber I can never pay them enough to get them to even show up. "You're not remodeling a house? Not worth my time." I use plumber as an example but there are closer jobs... like working at a power plant, especially a nuclear plant which we're not building for some reason. How about that? Let's revitalize our economy by building nuclear plants. That would be a hell of a lot more useful than spewing cash on over-funded universities.




See above. Actually ironically going to school to learn java applets instead of plumbing probably puts you in a more easily automated profession. Everyone wants to manhandle the displaced worker directly into where we need them, this is short sighted and why the government sucks at these sorts of things. The displaced worker should look close to their current profession for new work. Someplace they can leverage some of the skills they've learned. They'll displace someone else who will displace someone else and eventually there's someone who decides to learn something else in the first place. That's how the economy evolves. I gave a great example somewhere else on gtplanet about how blockbuster going out of business in favor of netflix results in janitors losing their jobs at blockbuster and how that eventually translates to someone landing a writing gig for a new show on netflix. It doesn't require teaching a janitor to write scripts either.

Agreed. There are a lot of tech schools out there that are probably starving for students (a point that Mike Rowe brings up constantly), but they don't get them because said school doesn't carry the prestige to look good on a resume. This actually opens the door for MORE illegal immigration because if those jobs aren't actually being filled by legal citizens...

 

[Danoff]

Agreed. There are a lot of tech schools out there that are probably starving for students (a point that Mike Rowe brings up constantly), but they don't get them because said school doesn't carry the prestige to look good on a resume. This actually opens the door for MORE illegal immigration because if those jobs aren't actually being filled by legal citizens...

To your point, I hired a welder at one point to make some iron grids for my window wells. He was telling me all about how he had enough business to finally quit his office building welding job. There are so many "dirty jobs" out there that we need good people for. Socially we've stigmatized it, but when I hired a general contractor to work on my house I let him yell, curse, insult me, and put a bunch of unnecessary holes in my house because I honestly couldn't find anyone better. This guy was pretty bad... but the pickings are slim.

 

[Pupik]

Agreed. There are a lot of tech schools out there that are probably starving for students (a point that Mike Rowe brings up constantly), but they don't get them because said school doesn't carry the prestige to look good on a resume.

Some are, some aren't. Social stigmas are a funny thing in upper/middle-class or suburban neighborhoods. A young mind is likely to follow in the footsteps of the parents or peers. That said, it can also be awkward for those of differing standards...there's car mechanics who have four-year degrees but followed their bliss under the hood, but they like to keep their college diplomas on the hush-hush. The same stigmas aren't really placed on rural folks, but a product of the environment, counter-culture, or personal desire motivates a lot of career paths.

I've also met job recruiters, and they value the graduating school on a basis of name recognition (or an application does it for them), dodging those of lesser caliber. Nothing can really prepare you for that. And trade schools aren't free, either. You go into some debt or spend a small fortune acquiring the tools of the trade one way or another.

I don't think there's much any President can really do about it; between outsourcing employees (and liability), setting up shop overseas, and automation reducing certain types of jobs (if not necessarily more jobs), numbers have been in a slide for decades, although the jumps in service-based positions supplanted a lot of this.

I see this as typical politician lip service. There's no magic switch which makes anyone or any group create hundreds of thousands of jobs rapidly from whole cloth.

 

[Harry6784]

This is a key insight. Many would agree high corporate taxation is among the reasons US jobs have been transferred abroad. But what Trump significantly adds is deportation of illegals, the Great Wall, and much more aggressive deal-making with respect to foreign trade arrangements. Trump boldly proposes putting the interests of US citizens distinctly ahead of the interests of the remainder of the world's peoples. This is the essence of nationalism and the populist fervor that he has inspired amongst a broad spectrum of Americans.

With the prospect of a 20 trillion dollar debt bubble collapsing over the US (not to mention the global debt bubble), you are probably right that it is a fantasy that well-paying jobs will ever again be widely available to middle and lower class US citizens. That is, unless Trump - or another like him - is elected and fulfills his promises.

I love when I see people take out their frustration on the "corporate elite" for not "paying their fair share". Exactly what should be their "fair share"? If you took EVERY single penny from ALL 536 billionaires in the US, you couldn't even fund the federal government for ONE YEAR. [1][2]

Economy is supported by the working middle class, not the "rich". All you're doing by trying to squeeze more money out of those who provide millions of jobs to Americans is force them to look elseware for employment.

Other than this spouting, Trump The Media has offered no concrete proposals for how he would do that.

Fixed 👍

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/us-china-trade-reform

 

[huskeR32]

If you took EVERY single penny from ALL 536 billionaires in the US, you couldn't even fund the federal government for ONE YEAR.

So what?