Americans Think Government Should Protect Businesses More

[Asclepias]

As he outsources his jobs overseas?

As long as the government fails to take steps to protect American jobs, businesses will continue to outsource because it is the only way they can be price competitive in the US market. Trump has clear plans to prevent more jobs from leaving and even to get some of the jobs that left to return. Clinton has no plans to try to protect American jobs.

Drumpf has no plans to stop jobs from going overseas because he knows his profit margin will drop. Clinton is for more education which will qualify americans for those upper tier jobs they are having problems filling now.

Trump has spelled out clear plans to prevent US jobs from leaving and Clinton has no economic plan at all.

No he hasnt. He is just full of hot air since that job belongs to congress.

Since when does Congress negotiate treaties? The Constitution is clear that foreign relations are the domain of the executive branch, not Congress. Since you apparently haven't been conscious for a while, Trump's plan is to impose tariffs on certain imports from Mexico to bring the cost of production for these goods manufactured there in line with the cost of production in the US, thus removing the incentive for companies like Ford to move their production facilities down there. That will save US jobs. If such tariffs has already been in place, Ford would not have made arrangements to move its small car operations to Mexico, costing Americans thousands of good paying jobs.

When did I say the congress negotiated treaties? They do have to ratify treaties. Does your deflection have a point or do you just want to post silliness?

 

[owebo]

Americans remain skeptical of so-called “free trade,” and most believe the U.S. government doesn’t do enough to protect businesses here from overseas competition. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Americans Think Government Should Protect Businesses More - Rasmussen Reports™

Trump has a plan to protect American businesses and jobs, but Clinton doesn't.

As he outsources his jobs overseas?

As long as the government fails to take steps to protect American jobs, businesses will continue to outsource because it is the only way they can be price competitive in the US market. Trump has clear plans to prevent more jobs from leaving and even to get some of the jobs that left to return. Clinton has no plans to try to protect American jobs.

How will they be price competitive with tariffs and taxes on imported goods, when the exporting country does the same and stagnation and inflation occur?

Um....inflation happened moonboy......why do you think democrats couldn't afford to do anything but force oir jobs overseas.....

 

[toomuchtime_]

As long as the government fails to take steps to protect American jobs, businesses will continue to outsource because it is the only way they can be price competitive in the US market. Trump has clear plans to prevent more jobs from leaving and even to get some of the jobs that left to return. Clinton has no plans to try to protect American jobs.

Drumpf has no plans to stop jobs from going overseas because he knows his profit margin will drop. Clinton is for more education which will qualify americans for those upper tier jobs they are having problems filling now.

Trump has spelled out clear plans to prevent US jobs from leaving and Clinton has no economic plan at all.

No he hasnt. He is just full of hot air since that job belongs to congress.

Since when does Congress negotiate treaties? The Constitution is clear that foreign relations are the domain of the executive branch, not Congress. Since you apparently haven't been conscious for a while, Trump's plan is to impose tariffs on certain imports from Mexico to bring the cost of production for these goods manufactured there in line with the cost of production in the US, thus removing the incentive for companies like Ford to move their production facilities down there. That will save US jobs. If such tariffs has already been in place, Ford would not have made arrangements to move its small car operations to Mexico, costing Americans thousands of good paying jobs.

When did I say the congress negotiated treaties? They do have to ratify treaties. Does your deflection have a point or do you just want to post silliness?

Then we are in agreement that it is up to the president to take action to protect US jobs, or in the case of Clinton, to refuse to take actions to protect American jobs.

 

[Asclepias]

To a national politician "protecting business" means doing what Big business wants and Big business wants nothing to do with anything remotely resembling protectionism. Trump claiming to want protectionism is nothing more than an empty promise, like wanting to close the barn door thirty years after the horses got out. The time for protectionist measures was long ago when all the republicans and half the democrats were hailing Friedman as the messiah of capitalism and quoting his theories as the gospel.

Jobs are still leaving and Trump has proposed clear plans to stop them from leaving and to bring some of the jobs back. Clinton has no plans to try to prevent more jobs from leaving, in fact, Clinton has no economic plan at all.

I have yet to see any of Drumpfs claims as something "clear". Usually he just talks loud and avoids specifics. Sure sign he is full of shit.

If you have been conscious the last several weeks you've seen his plans. Why pretend you haven't? Is it because you understand Clinton has no economic plan at all?

I havent seen anything of his that is sensible or true. Now Clinton has a great economic plan. Educate people to get better jobs.

That's slogan, not a plan. Clinton has lots and lots of slogans, but no actual economic plan.

I agree Drumpf has lots of slogans. He uses them to gain more illiterate supporters. He never has anything solid to talk about. his economic plan is to "make merica great again".

 

[toomuchtime_]

Jobs are still leaving and Trump has proposed clear plans to stop them from leaving and to bring some of the jobs back. Clinton has no plans to try to prevent more jobs from leaving, in fact, Clinton has no economic plan at all.

I have yet to see any of Drumpfs claims as something "clear". Usually he just talks loud and avoids specifics. Sure sign he is full of shit.

If you have been conscious the last several weeks you've seen his plans. Why pretend you haven't? Is it because you understand Clinton has no economic plan at all?

I havent seen anything of his that is sensible or true. Now Clinton has a great economic plan. Educate people to get better jobs.

That's slogan, not a plan. Clinton has lots and lots of slogans, but no actual economic plan.

I agree Drumpf has lots of slogans. He uses them to gain more illiterate supporters. He never has anything solid to talk about. his economic plan is to "make merica great again".

In other words, you have no interest in the issues.

 

[Asclepias]

Drumpf has no plans to stop jobs from going overseas because he knows his profit margin will drop. Clinton is for more education which will qualify americans for those upper tier jobs they are having problems filling now.

Trump has spelled out clear plans to prevent US jobs from leaving and Clinton has no economic plan at all.

No he hasnt. He is just full of hot air since that job belongs to congress.

Since when does Congress negotiate treaties? The Constitution is clear that foreign relations are the domain of the executive branch, not Congress. Since you apparently haven't been conscious for a while, Trump's plan is to impose tariffs on certain imports from Mexico to bring the cost of production for these goods manufactured there in line with the cost of production in the US, thus removing the incentive for companies like Ford to move their production facilities down there. That will save US jobs. If such tariffs has already been in place, Ford would not have made arrangements to move its small car operations to Mexico, costing Americans thousands of good paying jobs.

When did I say the congress negotiated treaties? They do have to ratify treaties. Does your deflection have a point or do you just want to post silliness?

Then we are in agreement that it is up to the president to take action to protect US jobs, or in the case of Clinton, to refuse to take actions to protect American jobs.

We are in agreement on that point but as I pointed out earlier Drumpf has a conflict of interest. He would lose money. Only someone lacking intellect would believe Drumpf is going to hurt his bottom line. However, I'm sure the next slogan he comes up with will pacify the illiterates.

 

[Asclepias]

I have yet to see any of Drumpfs claims as something "clear". Usually he just talks loud and avoids specifics. Sure sign he is full of shit.

If you have been conscious the last several weeks you've seen his plans. Why pretend you haven't? Is it because you understand Clinton has no economic plan at all?

I havent seen anything of his that is sensible or true. Now Clinton has a great economic plan. Educate people to get better jobs.

That's slogan, not a plan. Clinton has lots and lots of slogans, but no actual economic plan.

I agree Drumpf has lots of slogans. He uses them to gain more illiterate supporters. He never has anything solid to talk about. his economic plan is to "make merica great again".

In other words, you have no interest in the issues.

I have interest in the issues. Drumpf refuses to talk about them so I wont be voting for him.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Trump has spelled out clear plans to prevent US jobs from leaving and Clinton has no economic plan at all.

No he hasnt. He is just full of hot air since that job belongs to congress.

Since when does Congress negotiate treaties? The Constitution is clear that foreign relations are the domain of the executive branch, not Congress. Since you apparently haven't been conscious for a while, Trump's plan is to impose tariffs on certain imports from Mexico to bring the cost of production for these goods manufactured there in line with the cost of production in the US, thus removing the incentive for companies like Ford to move their production facilities down there. That will save US jobs. If such tariffs has already been in place, Ford would not have made arrangements to move its small car operations to Mexico, costing Americans thousands of good paying jobs.

When did I say the congress negotiated treaties? They do have to ratify treaties. Does your deflection have a point or do you just want to post silliness?

Then we are in agreement that it is up to the president to take action to protect US jobs, or in the case of Clinton, to refuse to take actions to protect American jobs.

We are in agreement on that point but as I pointed out earlier Drumpf has a conflict of interest. He would lose money. Only someone lacking intellect would believe Drumpf is going to hurt his bottom line. However, I'm sure the next slogan he comes up with will pacify the illiterates.

Obviously, you like Clinton, don't understand the difference between a slogan and a plan. Exactly which business do you imagine Trump would lose money if the levies taxes on some imports to save American jobs?

 

[toomuchtime_]

If you have been conscious the last several weeks you've seen his plans. Why pretend you haven't? Is it because you understand Clinton has no economic plan at all?

I havent seen anything of his that is sensible or true. Now Clinton has a great economic plan. Educate people to get better jobs.

That's slogan, not a plan. Clinton has lots and lots of slogans, but no actual economic plan.

I agree Drumpf has lots of slogans. He uses them to gain more illiterate supporters. He never has anything solid to talk about. his economic plan is to "make merica great again".

In other words, you have no interest in the issues.

I have interest in the issues. Drumpf refuses to talk about them so I wont be voting for him.

No, you won't be voting for him because you have no interest in the issues. Every one of your posts is a personal attack on Trump instead of a substantive argument on the issue.

 

[Asclepias]

No he hasnt. He is just full of hot air since that job belongs to congress.

Since when does Congress negotiate treaties? The Constitution is clear that foreign relations are the domain of the executive branch, not Congress. Since you apparently haven't been conscious for a while, Trump's plan is to impose tariffs on certain imports from Mexico to bring the cost of production for these goods manufactured there in line with the cost of production in the US, thus removing the incentive for companies like Ford to move their production facilities down there. That will save US jobs. If such tariffs has already been in place, Ford would not have made arrangements to move its small car operations to Mexico, costing Americans thousands of good paying jobs.

When did I say the congress negotiated treaties? They do have to ratify treaties. Does your deflection have a point or do you just want to post silliness?

Then we are in agreement that it is up to the president to take action to protect US jobs, or in the case of Clinton, to refuse to take actions to protect American jobs.

We are in agreement on that point but as I pointed out earlier Drumpf has a conflict of interest. He would lose money. Only someone lacking intellect would believe Drumpf is going to hurt his bottom line. However, I'm sure the next slogan he comes up with will pacify the illiterates.

Obviously, you like Clinton, don't understand the difference between a slogan and a plan. Exactly which business do you imagine Trump would lose money if the levies taxes on some imports to save American jobs?

No I dont like Clinton at all. She is just a much better option than Drumpf. All of Drumps business would lose money if he actually brought jobs back to the US. Why do you think he outsources his jobs now?

 

[Asclepias]

I havent seen anything of his that is sensible or true. Now Clinton has a great economic plan. Educate people to get better jobs.

That's slogan, not a plan. Clinton has lots and lots of slogans, but no actual economic plan.

I agree Drumpf has lots of slogans. He uses them to gain more illiterate supporters. He never has anything solid to talk about. his economic plan is to "make merica great again".

In other words, you have no interest in the issues.

I have interest in the issues. Drumpf refuses to talk about them so I wont be voting for him.

No, you won't be voting for him because you have no interest in the issues. Every one of your posts is a personal attack on Trump instead of a substantive argument on the issue.

I dont know Drumpf personally. Its kind of hard to argue with someone that wont define what he is going to do. All he does is talk shit and never answers questions about specifics.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Since when does Congress negotiate treaties? The Constitution is clear that foreign relations are the domain of the executive branch, not Congress. Since you apparently haven't been conscious for a while, Trump's plan is to impose tariffs on certain imports from Mexico to bring the cost of production for these goods manufactured there in line with the cost of production in the US, thus removing the incentive for companies like Ford to move their production facilities down there. That will save US jobs. If such tariffs has already been in place, Ford would not have made arrangements to move its small car operations to Mexico, costing Americans thousands of good paying jobs.

When did I say the congress negotiated treaties? They do have to ratify treaties. Does your deflection have a point or do you just want to post silliness?

Then we are in agreement that it is up to the president to take action to protect US jobs, or in the case of Clinton, to refuse to take actions to protect American jobs.

We are in agreement on that point but as I pointed out earlier Drumpf has a conflict of interest. He would lose money. Only someone lacking intellect would believe Drumpf is going to hurt his bottom line. However, I'm sure the next slogan he comes up with will pacify the illiterates.

Obviously, you like Clinton, don't understand the difference between a slogan and a plan. Exactly which business do you imagine Trump would lose money if the levies taxes on some imports to save American jobs?

No I dont like Clinton at all. She is just a much better option than Drumpf. All of Drumps business would lose money if he actually brought jobs back to the US. Why do you think he outsources his jobs now?

If he is currently outsourcing any business, it is because he is competing against foreign made goods. You see, you express no interest in the issue, only in trashing Trump.

 

[Asclepias]

When did I say the congress negotiated treaties? They do have to ratify treaties. Does your deflection have a point or do you just want to post silliness?

Then we are in agreement that it is up to the president to take action to protect US jobs, or in the case of Clinton, to refuse to take actions to protect American jobs.

We are in agreement on that point but as I pointed out earlier Drumpf has a conflict of interest. He would lose money. Only someone lacking intellect would believe Drumpf is going to hurt his bottom line. However, I'm sure the next slogan he comes up with will pacify the illiterates.

Obviously, you like Clinton, don't understand the difference between a slogan and a plan. Exactly which business do you imagine Trump would lose money if the levies taxes on some imports to save American jobs?

No I dont like Clinton at all. She is just a much better option than Drumpf. All of Drumps business would lose money if he actually brought jobs back to the US. Why do you think he outsources his jobs now?

If he is currently outsourcing any business, it is because he is competing against foreign made goods. You see, you express no interest in the issue, only in trashing Trump.

If? I guess you arent fully aware of the issues and must be a Drumpf supporter. Typical lack of information on your part.

 

[toomuchtime_]

That's slogan, not a plan. Clinton has lots and lots of slogans, but no actual economic plan.

I agree Drumpf has lots of slogans. He uses them to gain more illiterate supporters. He never has anything solid to talk about. his economic plan is to "make merica great again".

In other words, you have no interest in the issues.

I have interest in the issues. Drumpf refuses to talk about them so I wont be voting for him.

No, you won't be voting for him because you have no interest in the issues. Every one of your posts is a personal attack on Trump instead of a substantive argument on the issue.

I dont know Drumpf personally. Its kind of hard to argue with someone that wont define what he is going to do. All he does is talk shit and never answers questions about specifics.

Even as you typed that you knew it wasn't true. He has said he will levy tariffs on some imported goods to make them as expensive as US made goods so there will be no reason for companies to move out. I have repeated it a few times and you just argued you don't think he will do it, so you know perfectly well what his plans are. Whether you like Clinton or not, clearly you are trying to defend her lack of any economic policy.

 

[Asclepias]

I agree Drumpf has lots of slogans. He uses them to gain more illiterate supporters. He never has anything solid to talk about. his economic plan is to "make merica great again".

In other words, you have no interest in the issues.

I have interest in the issues. Drumpf refuses to talk about them so I wont be voting for him.

No, you won't be voting for him because you have no interest in the issues. Every one of your posts is a personal attack on Trump instead of a substantive argument on the issue.

I dont know Drumpf personally. Its kind of hard to argue with someone that wont define what he is going to do. All he does is talk shit and never answers questions about specifics.

Even as you typed that you knew it wasn't true. He has said he will levy tariffs on some imported goods to make them as expensive as US made goods so there will be no reason for companies to move out. I have repeated it a few times and you just argued you don't think he will do it, so you know perfectly well what his plans are. Whether you like Clinton or not, clearly you are trying to defend her lack of any economic policy.

Its amazing you Drumpf supporters think what you just said is specific. Which goods? How is he defining as expensive and what makes him think they wont do the same to our goods? See? You Drumpf supporters always fall for slogans. Practically everyone can see that.

 

[toomuchtime_]

In other words, you have no interest in the issues.

I have interest in the issues. Drumpf refuses to talk about them so I wont be voting for him.

No, you won't be voting for him because you have no interest in the issues. Every one of your posts is a personal attack on Trump instead of a substantive argument on the issue.

I dont know Drumpf personally. Its kind of hard to argue with someone that wont define what he is going to do. All he does is talk shit and never answers questions about specifics.

Even as you typed that you knew it wasn't true. He has said he will levy tariffs on some imported goods to make them as expensive as US made goods so there will be no reason for companies to move out. I have repeated it a few times and you just argued you don't think he will do it, so you know perfectly well what his plans are. Whether you like Clinton or not, clearly you are trying to defend her lack of any economic policy.

Its amazing you Drumpf supporters think what you just said is specific. Which goods? How is he defining as expensive and what makes him think they wont do the same to our goods? See? You Drumpf supporters always fall for slogans. Practically everyone can see that.

 

[toomuchtime_]

In other words, you have no interest in the issues.

I have interest in the issues. Drumpf refuses to talk about them so I wont be voting for him.

No, you won't be voting for him because you have no interest in the issues. Every one of your posts is a personal attack on Trump instead of a substantive argument on the issue.

I dont know Drumpf personally. Its kind of hard to argue with someone that wont define what he is going to do. All he does is talk shit and never answers questions about specifics.

Even as you typed that you knew it wasn't true. He has said he will levy tariffs on some imported goods to make them as expensive as US made goods so there will be no reason for companies to move out. I have repeated it a few times and you just argued you don't think he will do it, so you know perfectly well what his plans are. Whether you like Clinton or not, clearly you are trying to defend her lack of any economic policy.

Its amazing you Drumpf supporters think what you just said is specific. Which goods? How is he defining as expensive and what makes him think they wont do the same to our goods? See? You Drumpf supporters always fall for slogans. Practically everyone can see that.

What they can see is that again you show you have no interest in the issue. Trump has a clear plan to save American jobs and Clinton doesn't, and what's more she clearly has no interest in trying to save American jobs. She no economic policy at all.

 

[Asclepias]

I have interest in the issues. Drumpf refuses to talk about them so I wont be voting for him.

No, you won't be voting for him because you have no interest in the issues. Every one of your posts is a personal attack on Trump instead of a substantive argument on the issue.

I dont know Drumpf personally. Its kind of hard to argue with someone that wont define what he is going to do. All he does is talk shit and never answers questions about specifics.

Even as you typed that you knew it wasn't true. He has said he will levy tariffs on some imported goods to make them as expensive as US made goods so there will be no reason for companies to move out. I have repeated it a few times and you just argued you don't think he will do it, so you know perfectly well what his plans are. Whether you like Clinton or not, clearly you are trying to defend her lack of any economic policy.

Its amazing you Drumpf supporters think what you just said is specific. Which goods? How is he defining as expensive and what makes him think they wont do the same to our goods? See? You Drumpf supporters always fall for slogans. Practically everyone can see that.

What they can see is that again you show you have no interest in the issue. Trump has a clear plan to save American jobs and Clinton doesn't, and what's more she clearly has no interest in trying to save American jobs. She no economic policy at all.

You deflected which means you know Drumpf has only slogans and no specifics. Thanks for playing.

 

[toomuchtime_]

No, you won't be voting for him because you have no interest in the issues. Every one of your posts is a personal attack on Trump instead of a substantive argument on the issue.

I dont know Drumpf personally. Its kind of hard to argue with someone that wont define what he is going to do. All he does is talk shit and never answers questions about specifics.

Even as you typed that you knew it wasn't true. He has said he will levy tariffs on some imported goods to make them as expensive as US made goods so there will be no reason for companies to move out. I have repeated it a few times and you just argued you don't think he will do it, so you know perfectly well what his plans are. Whether you like Clinton or not, clearly you are trying to defend her lack of any economic policy.

Its amazing you Drumpf supporters think what you just said is specific. Which goods? How is he defining as expensive and what makes him think they wont do the same to our goods? See? You Drumpf supporters always fall for slogans. Practically everyone can see that.

What they can see is that again you show you have no interest in the issue. Trump has a clear plan to save American jobs and Clinton doesn't, and what's more she clearly has no interest in trying to save American jobs. She no economic policy at all.

You deflected which means you know Drumpf has only slogans and no specifics. Thanks for playing.

There is no deflection. Your question were so stupid I didn't bother to respond. If you were at all interested in the issue, you would understand that if the object is to prevent imports from selling for less than US made goods, those goods that directly competed with US goods and were cheaper because of lower labor costs or government subsidies or a lack of environmental regulations, etc., would be taxed to the point where their selling price in the US was about the same as goods manufactured here.

There is absolutely no substance to Clinton's campaign, not on this issue or on any other issue. She has no policies, just empty slogans like stronger together while trashing anyone who doesn't agree with her or build bridges not walls.

 

[Londoner]

American Capitalism, for all its anti-government bluster, has long been parasitic on the state sector.

Subsidies, bailouts, infrastructure, easy money through the Fed discount window, patent protection, the legal system which protects private property and ensures the smooth functioning of contractual agreements. And wha about the fact that computer, Internet, and satellite technology came out of the cold war defense budget - and so did Eisenhower's interstate system, which enables the flow of goods and consumers to market.

If the state didn't exist capitalism would invent it so that it had a mechanism to socialize its costs and cover its losses. Donald Trump had six bankruptcies - he was bailed out by big government each time.

Everything from middle eastern oil field to global shipping lanes are protected and safe guarded by big government. The modern southwest, with all its thriving profit centers, wouldn't exist with out big government's multi-trillion dollar effort to build the Hoover Dam and harness the Colorado tributary.

And what about aero technology? Boeing was subsidized heavily through the defense budget. Study the lobbying industrial complex: big government is where our most successful corporations go to get real money, and their investments fail (like Trump's 6 bankruptcies) big government absorbs the loss.

The Reagan Revolution started with a promise of free markets and fiscal responsibility, and it ended with the Titans of Capitalism - Wall Street - being bailed out by the Bush/Paulson TARP.

One the MANY reasons the American Government is in so much debt is because the market has turned it into one of its bogus holdings, a ghost corporation that absorbs losses.

Don't bother talking to talk radio Republicans or Trump supporters about the level of dependency American Capital has on the state. They've been strategically fooled into thinking the State is only a hindrance. The majority have not read one research paper that explains the complicated relationship between capitalism and government. These people get their information from Limbaugh and Levin et al. If they ever found out the truth about how much people like Trump depend on government, they'd realize that they are useful idiots.

This is why Trump's most concentrated level of support comes from people with little to no college education.

God help us.