Does anyone actually think that Donald Trump would make a good President?

[Redfish]

What exactly is a "living wage" ? Lets say I employ two carpenters. One is 22, single and lives with his partents, the other is 44, married and has 3 kids. They both do exactly the same work and have exactly the same skills. What the first one needs to "live" is much less than the second one. But they are doing exactly the same job and are making exactly the same contribution to my business. what would you pay them, and why?

 

[Slyhunter]

What exactly is a "living wage" ? Lets say I employ two carpenters. One is 22, single and lives with his partents, the other is 44, married and has 3 kids. They both do exactly the same work and have exactly the same skills. What the first one needs to "live" is much less than the second one. But they are doing exactly the same job and are making exactly the same contribution to my business. what would you pay them, and why?

A carpenter should make more than a living wage. Living wage should be reserved for non-skilled labor.

Living wage should be enough for ONE person to pay rent, food, utilities and vehicle expenses. Perhaps a little left over to go to college on so he can better himself. It is not meant to support a family. You want a family get a better job.

Poor people should be sterilized until they can afford to undo the procedure themselves.

 

[Flopper]

With libertarians the answer is always more deregulations. If a deregulation causes a problem in our economy its not that deregulations fault, its always all the other regulations that remain.

It's insanity. Libertarians are right about 5 things and wrong about 995 things.

Air travel was traditionally the exclusive domain of the wealthy. In 1978 a ticked from Los Angeles to New York was a couple thousand dollars in 1978 dollars. Then in 1984, Ronald Reagan deregulated air travel - now the same ticket is $175 in 2015 dollars.

Leftists hate people, especially the poor. The programs and regulation you demand ensures that only the elite enjoy the fruits of society - this is WHY you demand regulation, to put a boot to the face of those seeking to move up the ladder. Air travel, telephones, anything that the government enforced monopolies on - the poor and middle were fucked hard with no lube on. Deregulate them, and suddenly we can call and fly anytime we please.

You democrats are dedicated to putting a stop to all that, to returning us to the days when amenities were reserved for a select few.

I flew a lot in 1970's and never remember paying more than $600. However, cost of airfares are lower in general due primarily to increased competition. However, what you get for your money is a lot less. Yes, the airline get's you from point A to point B at less cost but everything surrounding air travel today is pure crap beginning with reservations, fees, non-refundable tickets, packing for security inspection, long lines at the airport for any type of service, hours wasted due to security inspections, crowed planes. smaller seats. and shit for food or nothing at all. And when there's a major problem in the system, there's not near enough employees to handle the problems.

Airlines are the buses of the 21st century..

 

[Flopper]

He has no idea how politics operate and wouldn't survive in Washington.

The president "wouldn't survive" in Washington? ...Hmm... you may get a visit from the guys in shades. I don't think presidents generally have trouble "surviving" in their capitol.

Just from a pure "political spectator" point of view... I'd like to see Trump as president and someone TRY to push him around. In my head, I can't seem to be able to imagine someone bullying Trump or pushing him around. I can see him being 'embattled' or under constant attack from the left and the media, but "pushed around" on his agenda... I'd like to see it. I think he'd make his critics look like fools, as he seems to be doing with ease so far.

I think you stated exactly why many people find Trump an attractive candidate. They want a president that will score a knockout when dealing with adversaries. The problem with this thinking is that being president is more like a game of chess than a boxing match. The real battles occur between underlings at the direction of the president. Public insults by the president shuts down negotiations and break lines of communication.

IMHO, Trump would hate being president almost as much as the public.

 

[Slyhunter]

He has no idea how politics operate and wouldn't survive in Washington.

The president "wouldn't survive" in Washington? ...Hmm... you may get a visit from the guys in shades. I don't think presidents generally have trouble "surviving" in their capitol.

Just from a pure "political spectator" point of view... I'd like to see Trump as president and someone TRY to push him around. In my head, I can't seem to be able to imagine someone bullying Trump or pushing him around. I can see him being 'embattled' or under constant attack from the left and the media, but "pushed around" on his agenda... I'd like to see it. I think he'd make his critics look like fools, as he seems to be doing with ease so far.

I think you stated exactly why many people find Trump an attractive candidate. They want a president that will score a knockout when dealing with adversaries. The problem with this thinking is that being president is more like a game of chess than a boxing match. The real battles occur between underlings at the direction of the president. Public insults by the president shuts down negotiations and break lines of communication.

IMHO, Trump would hate being president almost as much as the public.

It works for Iran.

 

[Boss]

What exactly is a "living wage" ? Lets say I employ two carpenters. One is 22, single and lives with his partents, the other is 44, married and has 3 kids. They both do exactly the same work and have exactly the same skills. What the first one needs to "live" is much less than the second one. But they are doing exactly the same job and are making exactly the same contribution to my business. what would you pay them, and why?

A carpenter should make more than a living wage. Living wage should be reserved for non-skilled labor.

Living wage should be enough for ONE person to pay rent, food, utilities and vehicle expenses. Perhaps a little left over to go to college on so he can better himself. It is not meant to support a family. You want a family get a better job.

Poor people should be sterilized until they can afford to undo the procedure themselves.

So much dumb in so few words. Why can't you just replace carpenter for an unskilled labor position and answer his question? Let's also add a few more real-life circumstances... one of them lives in Manhattan and the other lives in the Bronx. One has a special needs child to care for the other has a doberman. One has to commute a hundred miles daily in his gas-guzzler, the other bikes and lives close by. You want a 'one-size-fits-all' solution but everyone is an individual. Their circumstances (and expenses) vary greatly.

Also... how do you prevent this pandering to unskilled labor from effecting pay for skilled labor? If the burger flippers are going to be making $15 an hour, the skilled laborer making $15 an hour is surely going to demand higher pay, and rightly so.

What do you do when the unskilled labor goes out and blows their new living wage on big screen TVs and trips to the beach they finance on their credit card? Soon, they can't afford to pay rent, food, utilities and vehicle expense on their new living wage because they are living beyond their means. What then? We give them all a raise? OR maybe we just give the most irresponsible ones a raise?

You see, the problem with trying to chase a Liberal Utopian dream with the powers of government is what ultimately results... it's actually found in your last sentence.

Poor people should be sterilized until they can afford to undo the procedure themselves.

 

[Redfish]

What exactly is a "living wage" ? Lets say I employ two carpenters. One is 22, single and lives with his partents, the other is 44, married and has 3 kids. They both do exactly the same work and have exactly the same skills. What the first one needs to "live" is much less than the second one. But they are doing exactly the same job and are making exactly the same contribution to my business. what would you pay them, and why?

A carpenter should make more than a living wage. Living wage should be reserved for non-skilled labor.

Living wage should be enough for ONE person to pay rent, food, utilities and vehicle expenses. Perhaps a little left over to go to college on so he can better himself. It is not meant to support a family. You want a family get a better job.

Poor people should be sterilized until they can afford to undo the procedure themselves.

But I thought the liberal mantra was for everyone to make a "living wage". The problem is that what it takes to "live" varies greatly based on age, marital status, location, dependents, health, etc.

there is no one answer to your silly proposition.

The only answer that always works is supply and demand. Why do burger flippers get low pay? Because it takes very little skill and there are a lot of people who qualify i.e supply is very high. Why do computer programmers and brain surgeons get high pay? because those jobs take special skills and there aren't many people with those skills, i.e. the supply is very small.

Economics 101, try it.

Now, if you have low skills and want more money:
1. get more education or learn a skill
2. get a second job

 

[Boss]

He has no idea how politics operate and wouldn't survive in Washington.

The president "wouldn't survive" in Washington? ...Hmm... you may get a visit from the guys in shades. I don't think presidents generally have trouble "surviving" in their capitol.

Just from a pure "political spectator" point of view... I'd like to see Trump as president and someone TRY to push him around. In my head, I can't seem to be able to imagine someone bullying Trump or pushing him around. I can see him being 'embattled' or under constant attack from the left and the media, but "pushed around" on his agenda... I'd like to see it. I think he'd make his critics look like fools, as he seems to be doing with ease so far.

I think you stated exactly why many people find Trump an attractive candidate. They want a president that will score a knockout when dealing with adversaries. The problem with this thinking is that being president is more like a game of chess than a boxing match. The real battles occur between underlings at the direction of the president. Public insults by the president shuts down negotiations and break lines of communication.

IMHO, Trump would hate being president almost as much as the public.

I disagree. I think leadership is leadership. Trump has literally made a fortune, lost it and made it back again, playing chess with his adversaries. He's not some hot head who goes off half-cocked doing things to undermine his own efforts. Yes, he can be brash and insulting but you'll notice he is not insulting toward people he may have to work with. He is brutal toward those who are irrelevant.

I think what people are liking most about Trump is that he is his own man. He doesn't have speech writers and handlers, he is not in the pocket of donors or special interests. Yeah, he says some pretty wild and crazy shit sometimes and that could be a problem for him. There is no guarantee this popularity will continue until November 2016, it may seriously drop as people start imagining him winning. For now, it's refreshing to see someone who isn't part of the "machine" in Washington, tell it like it is and speak his mind.

The way I see it, Trump could be a complete disaster as president but he could also be one of the greatest presidents we ever elected. In the past, the uncertainty might have kept me from actually pulling the lever for him... but after 8 years of Obama, I am not afraid of taking a chance. We can't do much worse.

 

[KissMy]

This is how Trump would act as President.

 

[Slyhunter]

This is how Trump would act as President.

Love ron white, maybe as secretary of state or the un.

 

[sealybobo]

The airlines were deregulated in 1978.

I heard it was Reagan who stopped the practice of government setting the prices of airline tickets. Is that wrong? Don't make me go look and find out you're wrong be sure before you say you know

It was the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978. Reagan gets credit for a lot of things he didn't do.

Firing labor instead of developing a "hard work" ethic and actually coming up with Pareto Optimal solutions?

supply and demand should set the price of labor, not some fake "living wage" bullshit. If you don't like what your labor is worth, learn some skills, go to school, take on-line classes, get a second job.

It is the not the government's role to make sure that you have enough money to pay your bills

Some day machines will do all the work. The rest of us will either own the machines or starve to death.

Or the masses will stop producing so many children. Today for a lot of us 18-40 year olds having children is not a goal. I just came from a party and of all the couple that showed up only 2 had kids. You'll see when all the good jobs went overseas and those jobs were replaced with $10 hr jobs, a lot of those people said screw having kids.

I think this is a good thing. Would it be so bad if the population were to cut in half over the next 300 years? Just look at gas consumption. Would it be bad for us to be using up only half the natural resources we do now? Humans are a parasite we multiply until we destroy the planet.

Or think about how we now overfish our waters to feed the world. Wouldn't be a problem if there weren't so many of us.

 

[Redfish]

I heard it was Reagan who stopped the practice of government setting the prices of airline tickets. Is that wrong? Don't make me go look and find out you're wrong be sure before you say you know

It was the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978. Reagan gets credit for a lot of things he didn't do.

Firing labor instead of developing a "hard work" ethic and actually coming up with Pareto Optimal solutions?

supply and demand should set the price of labor, not some fake "living wage" bullshit. If you don't like what your labor is worth, learn some skills, go to school, take on-line classes, get a second job.

It is the not the government's role to make sure that you have enough money to pay your bills

Some day machines will do all the work. The rest of us will either own the machines or starve to death.

Or the masses will stop producing so many children. Today for a lot of us 18-40 year olds having children is not a goal. I just came from a party and of all the couple that showed up only 2 had kids. You'll see when all the good jobs went overseas and those jobs were replaced with $10 hr jobs, a lot of those people said screw having kids.

I think this is a good thing. Would it be so bad if the population were to cut in half over the next 300 years? Just look at gas consumption. Would it be bad for us to be using up only half the natural resources we do now? Humans are a parasite we multiply until we destroy the planet.

Or think about how we now overfish our waters to feed the world. Wouldn't be a problem if there weren't so many of us.

you almost make sense. overpopulation of our planet is a real problem. Unfortunately the only people reducing their birth rate are whites in europe and the US.

not having good jobs does not prevent screwing, in fact just the opposite is true.

 

[sealybobo]

It was the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978. Reagan gets credit for a lot of things he didn't do.

Firing labor instead of developing a "hard work" ethic and actually coming up with Pareto Optimal solutions?

supply and demand should set the price of labor, not some fake "living wage" bullshit. If you don't like what your labor is worth, learn some skills, go to school, take on-line classes, get a second job.

It is the not the government's role to make sure that you have enough money to pay your bills

Some day machines will do all the work. The rest of us will either own the machines or starve to death.

Or the masses will stop producing so many children. Today for a lot of us 18-40 year olds having children is not a goal. I just came from a party and of all the couple that showed up only 2 had kids. You'll see when all the good jobs went overseas and those jobs were replaced with $10 hr jobs, a lot of those people said screw having kids.

I think this is a good thing. Would it be so bad if the population were to cut in half over the next 300 years? Just look at gas consumption. Would it be bad for us to be using up only half the natural resources we do now? Humans are a parasite we multiply until we destroy the planet.

Or think about how we now overfish our waters to feed the world. Wouldn't be a problem if there weren't so many of us.

you almost make sense. overpopulation of our planet is a real problem. Unfortunately the only people reducing their birth rate are whites in europe and the US.

not having good jobs does not prevent screwing, in fact just the opposite is true.

I know. That's why we need to encourage young girls who are sexually active implant iud's in their vaginas until they are ready to have children. They are 95% effective over 10 years. Imagine if all the unplanned and unwanted kids were never born.

Keep in mind I wouldn't have been born because I was an accident.

One problem we would face is not having enough workers to fill all the jobs but we would figure that out.

The sad truth is capitalism needs ditch diggers so they like the poor having kids. Imagine if all those poor single women with 4 kids didn't have those kids. How different would their lives be? How much better would society be? How much lower would crime be?

 

[Care4all]

My answer is no, I do not believe for a nano second that he would actually be a good President of the United States.

 

[Flopper]

He has no idea how politics operate and wouldn't survive in Washington.

The president "wouldn't survive" in Washington? ...Hmm... you may get a visit from the guys in shades. I don't think presidents generally have trouble "surviving" in their capitol.

Just from a pure "political spectator" point of view... I'd like to see Trump as president and someone TRY to push him around. In my head, I can't seem to be able to imagine someone bullying Trump or pushing him around. I can see him being 'embattled' or under constant attack from the left and the media, but "pushed around" on his agenda... I'd like to see it. I think he'd make his critics look like fools, as he seems to be doing with ease so far.

I think you stated exactly why many people find Trump an attractive candidate. They want a president that will score a knockout when dealing with adversaries. The problem with this thinking is that being president is more like a game of chess than a boxing match. The real battles occur between underlings at the direction of the president. Public insults by the president shuts down negotiations and break lines of communication.

IMHO, Trump would hate being president almost as much as the public.

I disagree. I think leadership is leadership. Trump has literally made a fortune, lost it and made it back again, playing chess with his adversaries. He's not some hot head who goes off half-cocked doing things to undermine his own efforts. Yes, he can be brash and insulting but you'll notice he is not insulting toward people he may have to work with. He is brutal toward those who are irrelevant.

I think what people are liking most about Trump is that he is his own man. He doesn't have speech writers and handlers, he is not in the pocket of donors or special interests. Yeah, he says some pretty wild and crazy shit sometimes and that could be a problem for him. There is no guarantee this popularity will continue until November 2016, it may seriously drop as people start imagining him winning. For now, it's refreshing to see someone who isn't part of the "machine" in Washington, tell it like it is and speak his mind.

The way I see it, Trump could be a complete disaster as president but he could also be one of the greatest presidents we ever elected. In the past, the uncertainty might have kept me from actually pulling the lever for him... but after 8 years of Obama, I am not afraid of taking a chance. We can't do much worse.

Yes, saying wild crazy shit would be a problem because the president speaks for the nation.

Remember it takes only the president and secretary of defense to launch nuclear missiles. When the voters elect a president they are literally placing their lives in his hands.

Once Trump's opposition really takes him seriously and starts dissecting his crazy remarks and insults, he won't stand a chance. Right now Democrats certainly want him in the race, if for no other reason than to make Trump the face of the Republican party.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

What qualities does Donald Trump have that would make him a good President?

He's anti-gridlock; he appears to have no tolerance for not getting things done but thats the nature of business management. If you don't get things done you're fired.

More importantly, he's hard to pin down as a Democrat or Republican based on his positions.

 

[Flopper]

Firing labor instead of developing a "hard work" ethic and actually coming up with Pareto Optimal solutions?

supply and demand should set the price of labor, not some fake "living wage" bullshit. If you don't like what your labor is worth, learn some skills, go to school, take on-line classes, get a second job.

It is the not the government's role to make sure that you have enough money to pay your bills

Some day machines will do all the work. The rest of us will either own the machines or starve to death.

Or the masses will stop producing so many children. Today for a lot of us 18-40 year olds having children is not a goal. I just came from a party and of all the couple that showed up only 2 had kids. You'll see when all the good jobs went overseas and those jobs were replaced with $10 hr jobs, a lot of those people said screw having kids.

I think this is a good thing. Would it be so bad if the population were to cut in half over the next 300 years? Just look at gas consumption. Would it be bad for us to be using up only half the natural resources we do now? Humans are a parasite we multiply until we destroy the planet.

Or think about how we now overfish our waters to feed the world. Wouldn't be a problem if there weren't so many of us.

you almost make sense. overpopulation of our planet is a real problem. Unfortunately the only people reducing their birth rate are whites in europe and the US.

not having good jobs does not prevent screwing, in fact just the opposite is true.

I know. That's why we need to encourage young girls who are sexually active implant iud's in their vaginas until they are ready to have children. They are 95% effective over 10 years. Imagine if all the unplanned and unwanted kids were never born.

Keep in mind I wouldn't have been born because I was an accident.

One problem we would face is not having enough workers to fill all the jobs but we would figure that out.

The sad truth is capitalism needs ditch diggers so they like the poor having kids. Imagine if all those poor single women with 4 kids didn't have those kids. How different would their lives be? How much better would society be? How much lower would crime be?

It sounds like a good idea, so it's not going to happen.

 

[dcraelin]

Teach a parrot to squawk "supply and demand, supply and demand" and you've got yourself an economist.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The sad truth is capitalism needs ditch diggers

shows how stupid a liberal is- right? In the beginning 97% of Americans were ditch digging farmers and now after 200 years of capitalism only 3% are framers , and, they are framers with huge equipment so do almost no ditch digging by hand!!

 

[danielpalos]

The sad truth is capitalism needs ditch diggers

shows how stupid a liberal is- right? In the beginning 97% of Americans were ditch digging farmers and now after 200 years of capitalism only 3% are framers , and, they are framers with huge equipment so do almost no ditch digging by hand!!

Yes, FDR's brand of Socialism helped accomplish that.