GOTCHA

[TheDude]

Shame I know. What Trump needs is a cabinet of losers.

 

[toomuchtime_]

If the jobs left for Mexico, Indiana would have suffered the loss of tax revenues from these families and the businesses they frequented and an increase in social services expenses that would have been greater than the cost of keeping the jobs, so this deal serves the interests of all citizens of Indiana.

All citizens of Indiana except for the other half of those workers whose jobs are still going to Mexico. Trump said 35% tariffs for Carrier if they sent jobs to Mexico. They are still sending lots of jobs to Mexico, so.........

A tariff is levied on imports, so once the tariff becomes law if Carrier tries to export products made in Mexico to the US, they will have to pay a 35% tariff on those products.

It'll never happen. Trump claims success in his Carrier dealings. He'll forget about those jobs that are still going to Mexico.

That may be your fantasy, but he has solid support in Congress for his program to keep American jobs here in America.

he's going to go to those top 360 or so companies in Mexico and hold a gun to their head when they're paying 4 an hour against 34 here in america ?

No guns, just economic incentives to manufacture anything they want to sell to America in America.

 

[eddiew37]

Shame I know. What Trump needs is a cabinet of losers.

Yeah gotta love that Bannon guy lol

 

[BULLDOG]

The $7 million incentive package Carrier Corp. will receive as part of a deal the company reached with President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence represents a departure from how tax credits are typically used in Indiana.
It's also the kind of agreement Trump slammed on the campaign trail.
The furnace manufacturer will receive $5 million in tax credits over 10 years in exchange for keeping 1,069 jobs at its Indianapolis plant, with an average wage of $30.91 hour. The company also will receive $1 million in training grants and up to $1 million in additional tax credits based on Carrier's planned $16 million investment in the west-side factory.
.
Read the story (maybe over 500 words?) -> http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/carrier-incentives-stir-debate-over-rewarding-offshoring/ar-AAl2egD?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

If the jobs left for Mexico, Indiana would have suffered the loss of tax revenues from these families and the businesses they frequented and an increase in social services expenses that would have been greater than the cost of keeping the jobs, so this deal serves the interests of all citizens of Indiana.

All citizens of Indiana except for the other half of those workers whose jobs are still going to Mexico. Trump said 35% tariffs for Carrier if they sent jobs to Mexico. They are still sending lots of jobs to Mexico, so.........

A tariff is levied on imports, so once the tariff becomes law if Carrier tries to export products made in Mexico to the US, they will have to pay a 35% tariff on those products.

It'll never happen. Trump claims success in his Carrier dealings. He'll forget about those jobs that are still going to Mexico.

That may be your fantasy, but he has solid support in Congress for his program to keep American jobs here in America.

Then why didn't he do what he said he would do, instead of bribing them to keep only some of the jobs here?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Shame I know. What Trump needs is a cabinet of losers.

Yeah gotta love that Bannon guy lol

A very talented guy who has proved his worth in the fields of finance, journalism and politics.

 

[toomuchtime_]

If the jobs left for Mexico, Indiana would have suffered the loss of tax revenues from these families and the businesses they frequented and an increase in social services expenses that would have been greater than the cost of keeping the jobs, so this deal serves the interests of all citizens of Indiana.

All citizens of Indiana except for the other half of those workers whose jobs are still going to Mexico. Trump said 35% tariffs for Carrier if they sent jobs to Mexico. They are still sending lots of jobs to Mexico, so.........

A tariff is levied on imports, so once the tariff becomes law if Carrier tries to export products made in Mexico to the US, they will have to pay a 35% tariff on those products.

It'll never happen. Trump claims success in his Carrier dealings. He'll forget about those jobs that are still going to Mexico.

That may be your fantasy, but he has solid support in Congress for his program to keep American jobs here in America.

Then why didn't he do what he said he would do, instead of bribing them to keep only some of the jobs here?

Apparently you are unaware he won't be president until Jan. 20.

 

[rightwinger]

Goldman Sachs prevails again, I'm shocked; "liberal" administrations, "conservative" administrations, all the same shyte. More societal wealth redistribution to the very top.

Surprised with Republicans taunting Hillary for even "talking" to Goldman Sachs...Trump puts them in key cabinet roles

 

[BULLDOG]

All citizens of Indiana except for the other half of those workers whose jobs are still going to Mexico. Trump said 35% tariffs for Carrier if they sent jobs to Mexico. They are still sending lots of jobs to Mexico, so.........

A tariff is levied on imports, so once the tariff becomes law if Carrier tries to export products made in Mexico to the US, they will have to pay a 35% tariff on those products.

It'll never happen. Trump claims success in his Carrier dealings. He'll forget about those jobs that are still going to Mexico.

That may be your fantasy, but he has solid support in Congress for his program to keep American jobs here in America.

Then why didn't he do what he said he would do, instead of bribing them to keep only some of the jobs here?

Apparently you are unaware he won't be president until Jan. 20.

Correct, and the move to Mexico won't be until after Jan 20. and imports from that plant will be after that. Obviously, his threat of tariffs was just bullshit.

 

[Richard-H]

Shame I know. What Trump needs is a cabinet of losers.

No. Trump should have a cabinet of working class professionals, not a cabinet of Wall St. elitists.

 

[toomuchtime_]

A tariff is levied on imports, so once the tariff becomes law if Carrier tries to export products made in Mexico to the US, they will have to pay a 35% tariff on those products.

It'll never happen. Trump claims success in his Carrier dealings. He'll forget about those jobs that are still going to Mexico.

That may be your fantasy, but he has solid support in Congress for his program to keep American jobs here in America.

Then why didn't he do what he said he would do, instead of bribing them to keep only some of the jobs here?

Apparently you are unaware he won't be president until Jan. 20.

Correct, and the move to Mexico won't be until after Jan 20. and imports from that plant will be after that. Obviously, his threat of tariffs was just bullshit.

Obviously your brain is made of bullshit. Trump has no power to levy tariffs until he becomes president.

 

[BULLDOG]

It'll never happen. Trump claims success in his Carrier dealings. He'll forget about those jobs that are still going to Mexico.

That may be your fantasy, but he has solid support in Congress for his program to keep American jobs here in America.

Then why didn't he do what he said he would do, instead of bribing them to keep only some of the jobs here?

Apparently you are unaware he won't be president until Jan. 20.

Correct, and the move to Mexico won't be until after Jan 20. and imports from that plant will be after that. Obviously, his threat of tariffs was just bullshit.

Obviously your brain is made of bullshit. Trump has no power to levy tariffs until he becomes president.

I see you are desperately trying to justify his actions. He promised Tariffs. If he intended to keep that promise, there was no need to bribe Carrier to keep a few of the jobs here. He would have just said the tariffs would be applied after his inauguration.

 

[Richard-H]

Competent at what? Sucking up all the money they can get their greedy little hands on!

Nobody has ever made a billion dollars work, productivity or contribution to society that warrants that level of wealth. It's a 'may the best thief win' economy.

Really? They've done no work at all? They are just "greedy". They have nothing to contribute to society because you have determined that they have too high a level of wealth.

OK. You've made it clear that you have a blanket distain for the rich. Enlighten us. Who should run things?

I think that everyone should work at productive jobs. That people should get paid on par with the productive value of their work. Wealth distribution would be somewhat, but not exactly even. Everyone would be an investor - kind of like 401k plans on steroids.

A good bench mark is this:

Doctors have the highest level of education, the highest level of training and provide the most valuable service of any profession. So basically anyone who is wealthier than a doctor is a thief.

That's interesting. Now please answer my question.

Who should run things? Nobody in particular and everyone in general.

So the doctor will just know when he's made enough money and distribute the excess to somebody he deems needs it? Something like that?

A keen misinterpretation of what I said....

No, I think that as company profits increase those profits should be distributed to the people who work for the company. Either as bonuses or as salary increases.

I think top executives should be barred from receiving bonuses. They should be paid fairly - in accordance with their qualification and productive work. Bonuses are for the low end workers, not for executives.

Pay in the financial sector should be heavily regulated - otherwise it's just the fox guarding the hen house.

 

[Richard-H]

That may be your fantasy, but he has solid support in Congress for his program to keep American jobs here in America.

Then why didn't he do what he said he would do, instead of bribing them to keep only some of the jobs here?

Apparently you are unaware he won't be president until Jan. 20.

Correct, and the move to Mexico won't be until after Jan 20. and imports from that plant will be after that. Obviously, his threat of tariffs was just bullshit.

Obviously your brain is made of bullshit. Trump has no power to levy tariffs until he becomes president.

I see you are desperately trying to justify his actions. He promised Tariffs. If he intended to keep that promise, there was no need to bribe Carrier to keep a few of the jobs here. He would have just said the tariffs would be applied after his inauguration.

Any valid plan to keep companies from moving overseas should be a comprehensive policy, not deals with individual companies.

Holy Shit! If this is how Trump is going to keep companies from moving this way, every company is the U.S. is going to threaten to move overseas so they can get the BIG TRUMP HANDOUT!

 

[BULLDOG]

Then why didn't he do what he said he would do, instead of bribing them to keep only some of the jobs here?

Apparently you are unaware he won't be president until Jan. 20.

Correct, and the move to Mexico won't be until after Jan 20. and imports from that plant will be after that. Obviously, his threat of tariffs was just bullshit.

Obviously your brain is made of bullshit. Trump has no power to levy tariffs until he becomes president.

I see you are desperately trying to justify his actions. He promised Tariffs. If he intended to keep that promise, there was no need to bribe Carrier to keep a few of the jobs here. He would have just said the tariffs would be applied after his inauguration.

Any valid plan to keep companies from moving overseas should be a comprehensive policy, not deals with individual companies.

Holy Shit! If this is how Trump is going to keep companies from moving this way, every company is the U.S. is going to threaten to move overseas so they can get the BIG TRUMP HANDOUT!

Hell, I might be thinking about going down there to start a business too. I wonder how long I'll have to wait before he sends me a check.

 

[Richard-H]

If Trump truly wanted to bring jobs back to the U.S. then he'd start by moving his own overseas business here.

 

[Compost]

Really? They've done no work at all? They are just "greedy". They have nothing to contribute to society because you have determined that they have too high a level of wealth.

OK. You've made it clear that you have a blanket distain for the rich. Enlighten us. Who should run things?

I think that everyone should work at productive jobs. That people should get paid on par with the productive value of their work. Wealth distribution would be somewhat, but not exactly even. Everyone would be an investor - kind of like 401k plans on steroids.

A good bench mark is this:

Doctors have the highest level of education, the highest level of training and provide the most valuable service of any profession. So basically anyone who is wealthier than a doctor is a thief.

That's interesting. Now please answer my question.

Who should run things? Nobody in particular and everyone in general.

So the doctor will just know when he's made enough money and distribute the excess to somebody he deems needs it? Something like that?

A keen misinterpretation of what I said....

No, I think that as company profits increase those profits should be distributed to the people who work for the company. Either as bonuses or as salary increases.

I think top executives should be barred from receiving bonuses. They should be paid fairly - in accordance with their qualification and productive work. Bonuses are for the low end workers, not for executives.

Pay in the financial sector should be heavily regulated - otherwise it's just the fox guarding the hen house.

Tell you what. Work yourself up to an executive position, then work to barr you and the other executives from receiving bonuses.

Meanwhile, how about some names of "good working class people" to put in the cabinet.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Really? They've done no work at all? They are just "greedy". They have nothing to contribute to society because you have determined that they have too high a level of wealth.

OK. You've made it clear that you have a blanket distain for the rich. Enlighten us. Who should run things?

I think that everyone should work at productive jobs. That people should get paid on par with the productive value of their work. Wealth distribution would be somewhat, but not exactly even. Everyone would be an investor - kind of like 401k plans on steroids.

A good bench mark is this:

Doctors have the highest level of education, the highest level of training and provide the most valuable service of any profession. So basically anyone who is wealthier than a doctor is a thief.

That's interesting. Now please answer my question.

Who should run things? Nobody in particular and everyone in general.

So the doctor will just know when he's made enough money and distribute the excess to somebody he deems needs it? Something like that?

A keen misinterpretation of what I said....

No, I think that as company profits increase those profits should be distributed to the people who work for the company. Either as bonuses or as salary increases.

I think top executives should be barred from receiving bonuses. They should be paid fairly - in accordance with their qualification and productive work. Bonuses are for the low end workers, not for executives.

Pay in the financial sector should be heavily regulated - otherwise it's just the fox guarding the hen house.

That's a recipe for failure.

 

[Richard-H]

I think that everyone should work at productive jobs. That people should get paid on par with the productive value of their work. Wealth distribution would be somewhat, but not exactly even. Everyone would be an investor - kind of like 401k plans on steroids.

A good bench mark is this:

Doctors have the highest level of education, the highest level of training and provide the most valuable service of any profession. So basically anyone who is wealthier than a doctor is a thief.

That's interesting. Now please answer my question.

Who should run things? Nobody in particular and everyone in general.

So the doctor will just know when he's made enough money and distribute the excess to somebody he deems needs it? Something like that?

A keen misinterpretation of what I said....

No, I think that as company profits increase those profits should be distributed to the people who work for the company. Either as bonuses or as salary increases.

I think top executives should be barred from receiving bonuses. They should be paid fairly - in accordance with their qualification and productive work. Bonuses are for the low end workers, not for executives.

Pay in the financial sector should be heavily regulated - otherwise it's just the fox guarding the hen house.

That's a recipe for failure.

Whose failure? The failure of people to horde massive wealth that they did not earn?

There are millions of qualified people that would be willing to work as executives for reasonable pay. In fact, before the 1980s executive compensation wasn't enormous, bonuses were for the low level workers and raises were common place. Profit sharing was common as well.

In fact what I'm calling for is wealth distribution as it was before the 1980s. That was the time the American economy really boomed.