Jump to content

Other Topics Thread

Thunder98

By Thunder98
in East of the Rockies

 Share

Recommended Posts

jimmyzlc Newbie

jimmyzlc

Posted
Posted

I just don't get the idea behind our country needing such a big change. What, exactly, is so wrong with things right now that they need to be changed so D**n much? Last I checked, things are going pretty well. I mean, I guess if you want things to be 100% perfect all the time, then you'll have some beef - but you always will. Just don't get the idea behind this radical change at all. It makes no sense.

Totally agree, if your in the opinion that your life sucks economically. You have yourself to blame. Voters don't get involved until it's to late and usually have need jerk reactions after the fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Snowlover76
Snowlover76

The only sheeple are the ones who oppose Trump. Aka THE SWAMP and the globalist scum who desire a one world govt.

Snowlover76
Snowlover76

the American dream began being sold out in 1913 when the federal reserve was established   People love to go on about how this nations biggest threats are external but in reality they are internal fo

Tom
Tom

I really wonder how close the race was in PA which put Trump over the top. There were machines that were switching Trump votes to Hillary votes. I bet the real number of votes were mind boggling and

Posted Images

bud2380 Veteran

bud2380

Posted
Posted

Have you ever taken an economics course? 4% growth is not only unattainable, but you don't want that either. You realize that rapid of growth is actually bad, right? The economy is almost maxed out as it is, and that's why the Fed is about to raise interest rates. You have to control growth or it hurts an economy. But yeah, please tell me how about 4.6% unemployment, 70+ months of job creation (176K last month), and steady increases in wages is... must be so terrible. Certain sectors of our economy are not as good anymore, but that doesn't mean our country is doing bad. Welcome to economics. You all want to blame the loss of manufacturing jobs on trade, but the fact is that the decline started well before that, due to the increase in technology. What happens is, as technology improves, companies move to that to keep costs down, keep wages down, increase product, and maximize quantity supplied and profit. Welcome to modern times.

You cannot tout the unemployment rate when the labor participation rate is the lowest in decades. People are dropping out of the workforce at record numbers because they don't need to work. The government will take care of them. Sorry but that is a huge problem.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
East Dubzz Collaborator

East Dubzz

Posted
Posted

You cannot tout the unemployment rate when the labor participation rate is the lowest in decades. People are dropping out of the workforce at record numbers because they don't need to work. The government will take care of them. Sorry but that is a huge problem.

Oh I know the unemployment rate isn't the best stat to look at. But two things - one, it's much better than when he took over, so let's not complain too much. And two, saying our labor participation is low simply because the government "will take care of them" is incredibly, extremely obtuse on your part. I mean, really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
East Dubzz Collaborator

East Dubzz

Posted
Posted

Because it's the workers fault that jobs are moving overseas because of awful legislation by our govt

Give me a break. It's actually smart legislation in terms of the overall economy. As I said earlier, trade is fantastic for an economy. But you're not going to please everyone, and there are going to be some negatives. Guess it depends if you want to sit there and complain about the negatives, or look at the overall net positive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Money Proficient

Money

Posted
Posted

Give me a break. It's actually smart legislation in terms of the overall economy. As I said earlier, trade is fantastic for an economy. But you're not going to please everyone, and there are going to be some negatives. Guess it depends if you want to sit there and complain about the negatives, or look at the overall net positive.

I'm talking about raising the minimum wage and so many D**n regulations that are hurting businesses

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bud2380 Veteran

bud2380

Posted
Posted

Oh I know the unemployment rate isn't the best stat to look at. But two things - one, it's much better than when he took over, so let's not complain too much. And two, saying our labor participation is low simply because the government "will take care of them" is incredibly, extremely obtuse on your part. I mean, really?

I'd say it's more acute than obtuse. And certainly that isn't the only factor in the labor participation rate, but to ignore the fact that millions don't work because they don't have to is naive

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NEJeremy Newbie

NEJeremy

Posted
Posted

Have you ever taken an economics course? 4% growth is not only unattainable, but you don't want that either. You realize that rapid of growth is actually bad, right? The economy is almost maxed out as it is, and that's why the Fed is about to raise interest rates. You have to control growth or it hurts an economy. But yeah, please tell me how about 4.6% unemployment, 70+ months of job creation (176K last month), and steady increases in wages is... must be so terrible. Certain sectors of our economy are not as good anymore, but that doesn't mean our country is doing bad. Welcome to economics. You all want to blame the loss of manufacturing jobs on trade, but the fact is that the decline started well before that, due to the increase in technology. What happens is, as technology improves, companies move to that to keep costs down, keep wages down, increase product, and maximize quantity supplied and profit. Welcome to modern times.

Exactly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NEJeremy Newbie

NEJeremy

Posted
Posted

Someone said earlier in this thread, that Trump was upfront about everything. Huh? Again this guy lied about almost everything during the election, obviously only said things to get him elected(most politicians do although I hesitate to call him a politician), and now has already changed his tune on several things since he has been elected. I, as well as most people, have no idea what this guy is going to do in office. 

 

We've been talking about wages. Here's a great example of confusion from Trump:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jul/28/donald-trump/donald-trump-gets-full-flop-stance-minimum-wage/

 

Just last year he said the federal wage is too high. Then he said he thinks $10 is ok, but also has kind of said the states should choose it and not the federal government. My bet is he does nothing.

 

Seattle's done great so far with their $15 minimum wage it sounds like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NEJeremy Newbie

NEJeremy

Posted
Posted

https://mobile.twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/806139059638861824

 

Actual details of Carrier deal finally released:

 

1. 1253 factory jobs moving to Mexico

 

2. 730 jobs staying in Indianapolis

8:11 AM · Dec 6, 2016

 

So PENCE didn't do as good of a job saving jobs as it sounded like? $7m for 700 jobs? Sounds like a good deal for Carrier

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Grand Master

Tom

Posted
Posted

730 jobs times roughly 70k. $51 million stays in that state. Take employment tax, income tax, and sales tax on goods. Indiana is coming out way ahead on a 7mil investment.

There ya go.  I was going to post this last night but got sidetracked.  The amount of income produced by all the employees out weighs the advantage of a $7M tax benefit to a company.  On top of that, what is $7M to a state that produces 100's of millions in revenue for an entire year???  For instance, here in Chicago, the amount of wasteful spending that is done is mind boggling.  The state of Indy has had a strong economy since Pence took office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NEJeremy Newbie

NEJeremy

Posted
Posted

And Carrier really came out great. Nice chunk of change for them to only keep 1/3 of the jobs in Indiana, and the other 2/3 still going out of the country.

 

The art of the deal I guess? Trump is all over this trying to take credit, when in reality this was a Pence deal as governor. If Trump had any part of this, than he really didn't do what he claimed he was going to do during his campaign with situations like this.

Moving jobs out of the country than you're going to pay a huge tax. Keeping 1/3 of the jobs here? Here's some nice tax incentives....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
East Dubzz Collaborator

East Dubzz

Posted
Posted

730 jobs times roughly 70k. $51 million stays in that state. Take employment tax, income tax, and sales tax on goods. Indiana is coming out way ahead on a 7mil investment.

That's a rather ridiculous way to look at it. Keeping the jobs means they have a higher cost of production, which would have been cheaper and more efficient for the state of Indiana likely that way. You can't just add that up and say that's what they saved, when that's not how economics works.

 

Plus - that's not my point anyway. But sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Madtown Mentor

Madtown

Posted
Posted

Looking at taxable income is rediculous. I can look for the exact numbers but the state of Indiana stands to collect close to 24 million a year by saving those 700 jobs for 7 million. No where did I say anything about saving anything except 50 million in income to employees?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
East Dubzz Collaborator

East Dubzz

Posted
Posted

That's irrelevant to the impact of trade deals on the economy, but that's good to hear you're doing well. Why do you think these legislators are making these deals? Because they have their head stuck in a textbook, or they realize the real world impacts of trade? You're helping prove my point here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NEJeremy Newbie

NEJeremy

Posted
Posted

I guess our new security advisor is a conspiracy theorist who likes to tweet out fake news stories about Obama funneling money to Muslim terrorists and the Clinton's are part of a sex shop among other things.  Our new head of HUD is a brain surgeon with no experience. Great picks the last couple of days. People claim because Carson lived in public housing when he was a child gives him the qualifications. However that has been proven as untrue as well by one of Carson's own childhood friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
East Dubzz Collaborator

East Dubzz

Posted
Posted

http://www.businessinsider.com/carrier-raises-prices-after-trump-deal-2016-12

 

 

 

United Technologies Corp., Carrier's parent company, said it is raising prices for its heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment by up to 5%, starting January 1.

 

It's almost like..... economics, or something?? But no way.. no way that can happen... because textbooks or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NEJeremy Newbie

NEJeremy

Posted
Posted

Mmm interesting words right from the CEO's mouth:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ceo-united-technologies-just-let-231538059.html

 

GREG HAYES: So what's good about Mexico? We have a very talented workforce in Mexico. Wages are obviously significantly lower. About 80% lower on average. But absenteeism runs about 1%. Turnover runs about 2%. Very, very dedicated workforce.

 

What does that mean? Automation. What does that mean? Fewer jobs, Hayes acknowledged.

From the transcript (emphasis added):

GREG HAYES: Right. Well, and again, if you think about what we talked about last week, we're going to make a $16 million investment in that factory in Indianapolis to automate to drive the cost down so that we can continue to be competitive. Now is it as cheap as moving to Mexico with lower cost of labor? No. But we will make that plant competitive just because we'll make the capital investments there.

JIM CRAMER: Right.

GREG HAYES: But what that ultimately means is there will be fewer jobs.

The general theme here is something we've been writing about a lot at Business Insider. Yes, low-skilled jobs are being lost to other countries, but they're also being lost to technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
East Dubzz Collaborator

East Dubzz

Posted
Posted

So, it appears my textbooks taught me something:

 

Carrier to ultimately cut some of jobs Trump saved

Most of that money will be invested in automation said to Greg Hayes, CEO of United Technologies, Carrier's corporate parent. And that automation will replace some of the jobs that were just saved.

 

 "We're going to...automate to drive the cost down so that we can continue to be competitive," he said on an interview on CNBC earlier this week. "Is it as cheap as moving to Mexico with lower cost labor? No. But we will make that plant competitive just because we'll make the capital investments there. But what that ultimately means is there will be fewer jobs."

 

 

It's almost like the things we learn in economic textbooks..... happen in real life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NEJeremy Newbie

NEJeremy

Posted
Posted

The blonde haired pumpkin once again showed last night he's completely unable to take ANY criticism from anyone. First he(reminder, the president elect) went on his favorite website to tweet an insult at the head of the union of workers of the plant he claimed he saved, when in reality only about 1/3 of the jobs were temporarily saved, thus the reason for the criticism from the union head. 

Then a short time later, unable to fight back his insecurities, he tweeted again, this time insulting the whole union he just supposedly fought for by saying if they were a better union, then Carrier wouldn't have been leaving in the first place. Thus showing, he really didn't give a crap about the workers or for that matter even apparently knows why Carrier is actually moving jobs. He only did this for the publicity and to try and boost his fragile ego. Most of those workers probably voted for him based on his campaign platform and now he's directly insulting them.

My 5 year old daughter has thicker skin than this clown, and it's a wonder why people are afraid of this guy being in charge of our nukes and our military. What's so disgusting about this is that he actually went after an average Joe US citizen with his insults, not some politician or heck even a TV show or broadway play. Predictably Trump's basket of deplorables have now gone after the head of the union with threatening emails and phone calls towards him and even his children.

What an embarrassment and we only have at least 4 years and 1 month more of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...