No living President, Secretary of State or FED Chairman endorse Trump

[kaz]

Nope, I am describing free market capitalism within the US economy, no economic isolationism, replacing multilateral trade agreements that drive US jobs to less developed countries with cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations and replacing them with bilateral trade agreements such as we had before the Clintons.

Calling it free market and saying no free trade is an oxymoron. Either we decide what business we want to engage in or the government does. That you can go out in the yard an hour a day in your prison doesn't make you a free man

No, it makes perfect sense to have a free market within the US economy and qualified trade agreements with other countries. Renegotiating trade agreements and imposing tariffs where necessary in no way limits your freedom as a businessman to move your company anyplace you choose, it simply changes the economic environment in a way that makes it unprofitable to move it to less developed countries because of cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations, or to countries that maintain an unfair competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies.

I am a pragmatist, not an ideologue, so I am more interested in practical outcomes than what is ideologically correct. Right now because of our trade imbalances, the US is selling off its assets, real estate, corporations, even technologies, to pay for our standard of living. If you had to sell off your assets to pay your bills, would you consider that a sustainable policy? Of course not, and it is not a sustainable policy for our nation, either. Redefining our trade relations will help reduce our trade deficits and prevent jobs from leaving out country and many even bring some of those jobs home, and it will allow us to come closer to living on what we earn rather than having to sell off our country to pay our bills.

Of course there will be political fallout from this change of policy. Countries that have benefited from the current trade imbalance will rage against us, but I believe Americans will be better off reducing our trade deficit and keeping our jobs at home amid all the foreign outrage than it is now.

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

The only difference is the context in which the term is used

 

[IcebergSlim]

Rumsfeld and Cheney support Trump which should tell you something.

That's a deal breaker right there....

What you'd say if they supported Hillary, right? Couldn't make the stupid that you are up. I support who I support. No one else's view would change my mind. Maybe their arguments, but that someone supports one side or another would never make me change my vote.

Then again it wouldn't for you either, Larry. You're lying. Don't you have some ugly chicks in a lounge to pick up somewhere?

Mr. 13%'s endorsement should be the Kiss of death for anyone receiving it.....

So seriously, you're arguing that who endorses or doesn't endorse someone either way would change anyone's vote? That's just stupid.

I have no idea where you get this "Larry" thing........

White polyester suit? Larry, lounges, I'll let Google explain it to you

and you would kill every one of your 23 cats to enjoy a brief taste of the kinds of women who have favored me with their attentions.

Wow, I'm humbled. Only a true ladies' man could say that on the internet

If someone tells me that the only recommendation they can provide is from Dick Cheney, I won't be hesitating.....trust me....

 

[toomuchtime_]

Calling it free market and saying no free trade is an oxymoron. Either we decide what business we want to engage in or the government does. That you can go out in the yard an hour a day in your prison doesn't make you a free man

No, it makes perfect sense to have a free market within the US economy and qualified trade agreements with other countries. Renegotiating trade agreements and imposing tariffs where necessary in no way limits your freedom as a businessman to move your company anyplace you choose, it simply changes the economic environment in a way that makes it unprofitable to move it to less developed countries because of cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations, or to countries that maintain an unfair competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies.

I am a pragmatist, not an ideologue, so I am more interested in practical outcomes than what is ideologically correct. Right now because of our trade imbalances, the US is selling off its assets, real estate, corporations, even technologies, to pay for our standard of living. If you had to sell off your assets to pay your bills, would you consider that a sustainable policy? Of course not, and it is not a sustainable policy for our nation, either. Redefining our trade relations will help reduce our trade deficits and prevent jobs from leaving out country and many even bring some of those jobs home, and it will allow us to come closer to living on what we earn rather than having to sell off our country to pay our bills.

Of course there will be political fallout from this change of policy. Countries that have benefited from the current trade imbalance will rage against us, but I believe Americans will be better off reducing our trade deficit and keeping our jobs at home amid all the foreign outrage than it is now.

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about but you lack the good sense to be quiet.

 

[kaz]

Calling it free market and saying no free trade is an oxymoron. Either we decide what business we want to engage in or the government does. That you can go out in the yard an hour a day in your prison doesn't make you a free man

No, it makes perfect sense to have a free market within the US economy and qualified trade agreements with other countries. Renegotiating trade agreements and imposing tariffs where necessary in no way limits your freedom as a businessman to move your company anyplace you choose, it simply changes the economic environment in a way that makes it unprofitable to move it to less developed countries because of cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations, or to countries that maintain an unfair competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies.

I am a pragmatist, not an ideologue, so I am more interested in practical outcomes than what is ideologically correct. Right now because of our trade imbalances, the US is selling off its assets, real estate, corporations, even technologies, to pay for our standard of living. If you had to sell off your assets to pay your bills, would you consider that a sustainable policy? Of course not, and it is not a sustainable policy for our nation, either. Redefining our trade relations will help reduce our trade deficits and prevent jobs from leaving out country and many even bring some of those jobs home, and it will allow us to come closer to living on what we earn rather than having to sell off our country to pay our bills.

Of course there will be political fallout from this change of policy. Countries that have benefited from the current trade imbalance will rage against us, but I believe Americans will be better off reducing our trade deficit and keeping our jobs at home amid all the foreign outrage than it is now.

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

Um ... competitive advantage applies to companies as well. Leave it up to a financial salesman to debate business terms. Don't you have a little old lady to get to invest in heavily loaded funds that she can't afford?

 

[IcebergSlim]

Rumsfeld and Cheney support Trump which should tell you something.

That's a deal breaker right there....

What you'd say if they supported Hillary, right? Couldn't make the stupid that you are up. I support who I support. No one else's view would change my mind. Maybe their arguments, but that someone supports one side or another would never make me change my vote.

Then again it wouldn't for you either, Larry. You're lying. Don't you have some ugly chicks in a lounge to pick up somewhere?

Mr. 13%'s endorsement should be the Kiss of death for anyone receiving it.....

So seriously, you're arguing that who endorses or doesn't endorse someone either way would change anyone's vote? That's just stupid.

I have no idea where you get this "Larry" thing........

White polyester suit? Larry, lounges, I'll let Google explain it to you

and you would kill every one of your 23 cats to enjoy a brief taste of the kinds of women who have favored me with their attentions.

Wow, I'm humbled. Only a true ladies' man could say that on the internet

White polyester suit? Larry, lounges, I'll let Google explain it to you

Have google explain Iceberg Slim to you....

 

[easyt65]

'No living President, Secretary of State or FED Chairman endorse Trump'

No DEAD President, Secretary of State or FED Chairman endorse Trump, either.

AND...?

 

[IcebergSlim]

No, it makes perfect sense to have a free market within the US economy and qualified trade agreements with other countries. Renegotiating trade agreements and imposing tariffs where necessary in no way limits your freedom as a businessman to move your company anyplace you choose, it simply changes the economic environment in a way that makes it unprofitable to move it to less developed countries because of cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations, or to countries that maintain an unfair competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies.

I am a pragmatist, not an ideologue, so I am more interested in practical outcomes than what is ideologically correct. Right now because of our trade imbalances, the US is selling off its assets, real estate, corporations, even technologies, to pay for our standard of living. If you had to sell off your assets to pay your bills, would you consider that a sustainable policy? Of course not, and it is not a sustainable policy for our nation, either. Redefining our trade relations will help reduce our trade deficits and prevent jobs from leaving out country and many even bring some of those jobs home, and it will allow us to come closer to living on what we earn rather than having to sell off our country to pay our bills.

Of course there will be political fallout from this change of policy. Countries that have benefited from the current trade imbalance will rage against us, but I believe Americans will be better off reducing our trade deficit and keeping our jobs at home amid all the foreign outrage than it is now.

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about but you lack the good sense to be quiet.

If there is a constructive criticism you can offer, I'm all ears.......

As I gain familiarity with your style, I grow increasingly skeptical that you have the onions for that job....

 

[toomuchtime_]

Calling it free market and saying no free trade is an oxymoron. Either we decide what business we want to engage in or the government does. That you can go out in the yard an hour a day in your prison doesn't make you a free man

No, it makes perfect sense to have a free market within the US economy and qualified trade agreements with other countries. Renegotiating trade agreements and imposing tariffs where necessary in no way limits your freedom as a businessman to move your company anyplace you choose, it simply changes the economic environment in a way that makes it unprofitable to move it to less developed countries because of cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations, or to countries that maintain an unfair competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies.

I am a pragmatist, not an ideologue, so I am more interested in practical outcomes than what is ideologically correct. Right now because of our trade imbalances, the US is selling off its assets, real estate, corporations, even technologies, to pay for our standard of living. If you had to sell off your assets to pay your bills, would you consider that a sustainable policy? Of course not, and it is not a sustainable policy for our nation, either. Redefining our trade relations will help reduce our trade deficits and prevent jobs from leaving out country and many even bring some of those jobs home, and it will allow us to come closer to living on what we earn rather than having to sell off our country to pay our bills.

Of course there will be political fallout from this change of policy. Countries that have benefited from the current trade imbalance will rage against us, but I believe Americans will be better off reducing our trade deficit and keeping our jobs at home amid all the foreign outrage than it is now.

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

The only difference is the context in which the term is used

 

[IcebergSlim]

No, it makes perfect sense to have a free market within the US economy and qualified trade agreements with other countries. Renegotiating trade agreements and imposing tariffs where necessary in no way limits your freedom as a businessman to move your company anyplace you choose, it simply changes the economic environment in a way that makes it unprofitable to move it to less developed countries because of cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations, or to countries that maintain an unfair competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies.

I am a pragmatist, not an ideologue, so I am more interested in practical outcomes than what is ideologically correct. Right now because of our trade imbalances, the US is selling off its assets, real estate, corporations, even technologies, to pay for our standard of living. If you had to sell off your assets to pay your bills, would you consider that a sustainable policy? Of course not, and it is not a sustainable policy for our nation, either. Redefining our trade relations will help reduce our trade deficits and prevent jobs from leaving out country and many even bring some of those jobs home, and it will allow us to come closer to living on what we earn rather than having to sell off our country to pay our bills.

Of course there will be political fallout from this change of policy. Countries that have benefited from the current trade imbalance will rage against us, but I believe Americans will be better off reducing our trade deficit and keeping our jobs at home amid all the foreign outrage than it is now.

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

Um ... competitive advantage applies to companies as well. Leave it up to a financial salesman to debate business terms. Don't you have a little old lady to get to invest in heavily loaded funds that she can't afford?

You'll excuse me if I differentiate a principle from a "descriptive term"........I've seen enough of Michael Porter to be underwhelmed....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"No living President, Secretary of State or FED Chairman endorse Trump"

No one in his right mind would endorse Trump.

 

[kaz]

No, it makes perfect sense to have a free market within the US economy and qualified trade agreements with other countries. Renegotiating trade agreements and imposing tariffs where necessary in no way limits your freedom as a businessman to move your company anyplace you choose, it simply changes the economic environment in a way that makes it unprofitable to move it to less developed countries because of cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations, or to countries that maintain an unfair competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies.

I am a pragmatist, not an ideologue, so I am more interested in practical outcomes than what is ideologically correct. Right now because of our trade imbalances, the US is selling off its assets, real estate, corporations, even technologies, to pay for our standard of living. If you had to sell off your assets to pay your bills, would you consider that a sustainable policy? Of course not, and it is not a sustainable policy for our nation, either. Redefining our trade relations will help reduce our trade deficits and prevent jobs from leaving out country and many even bring some of those jobs home, and it will allow us to come closer to living on what we earn rather than having to sell off our country to pay our bills.

Of course there will be political fallout from this change of policy. Countries that have benefited from the current trade imbalance will rage against us, but I believe Americans will be better off reducing our trade deficit and keeping our jobs at home amid all the foreign outrage than it is now.

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about but you lack the good sense to be quiet.

That's Larry! It's sad watching him fuck up even when he's right.

On the other hand, you asked the difference between two terms that mean the same thing and are just sometimes used in different contexts.

Typically, "competitive advantage" is used for a particular company. Comparative advantage is used for groups. For example, BC/BS's coverage across the country gives them a competitive advantage with large national and international corporations. India providing call centers is a comparative advantage that doesn't just apply to one company. There is a large skill base that would take significant resources for another area to develop to compete with them. But they are essentially the same

 

[westwall]

Correct me if I am wrong but no living President, Secretary of State or FED Chairman endorses Trump..

These are the people who know what the job on President is about and not one of them said Trump can do it...

Sorry this looks like evidence and we know how the Trump side just hates facts and evidence....

That's about the best endorsement I have ever heard. The Political Class has been raping this country for decades and morons like you can't seem to get it through your thick skull that they don't care about you. They only care how they can line their pockets. Why are you so dense?

 

[kaz]

"No living President, Secretary of State or FED Chairman endorse Trump"

No one in his right mind would endorse Trump.

Agreed. Ditto Hillary.

And just to be clear, so if a major bureaucrat did endorse Trump, then you would vote for him? That's what you're looking for? That's your standard?

Not mine, I'd never vote for Trump because of his anti-capitalist policies. I don't care who the bureaucrats you adore or anyone else supports

 

[IcebergSlim]

No, it makes perfect sense to have a free market within the US economy and qualified trade agreements with other countries. Renegotiating trade agreements and imposing tariffs where necessary in no way limits your freedom as a businessman to move your company anyplace you choose, it simply changes the economic environment in a way that makes it unprofitable to move it to less developed countries because of cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations, or to countries that maintain an unfair competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies.

I am a pragmatist, not an ideologue, so I am more interested in practical outcomes than what is ideologically correct. Right now because of our trade imbalances, the US is selling off its assets, real estate, corporations, even technologies, to pay for our standard of living. If you had to sell off your assets to pay your bills, would you consider that a sustainable policy? Of course not, and it is not a sustainable policy for our nation, either. Redefining our trade relations will help reduce our trade deficits and prevent jobs from leaving out country and many even bring some of those jobs home, and it will allow us to come closer to living on what we earn rather than having to sell off our country to pay our bills.

Of course there will be political fallout from this change of policy. Countries that have benefited from the current trade imbalance will rage against us, but I believe Americans will be better off reducing our trade deficit and keeping our jobs at home amid all the foreign outrage than it is now.

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about but you lack the good sense to be quiet.

That's Larry! It's sad watching him fuck up even when he's right.

On the other hand, you asked the difference between two terms that mean the same thing and are just sometimes used in different contexts.

Typically, "competitive advantage" is used for a particular company. Comparative advantage is used for groups. For example, BC/BS's coverage across the country gives them a competitive advantage with large national and international corporations. India providing call centers is a comparative advantage that doesn't just apply to one company. There is a large skill base that would take significant resources for another area to develop to compete with them. But they are essentially the same

Competitive advantage and comparative advantage are interchangeable?

You went to a state school, right?

 

[kaz]

No, it makes perfect sense to have a free market within the US economy and qualified trade agreements with other countries. Renegotiating trade agreements and imposing tariffs where necessary in no way limits your freedom as a businessman to move your company anyplace you choose, it simply changes the economic environment in a way that makes it unprofitable to move it to less developed countries because of cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations, or to countries that maintain an unfair competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies.

I am a pragmatist, not an ideologue, so I am more interested in practical outcomes than what is ideologically correct. Right now because of our trade imbalances, the US is selling off its assets, real estate, corporations, even technologies, to pay for our standard of living. If you had to sell off your assets to pay your bills, would you consider that a sustainable policy? Of course not, and it is not a sustainable policy for our nation, either. Redefining our trade relations will help reduce our trade deficits and prevent jobs from leaving out country and many even bring some of those jobs home, and it will allow us to come closer to living on what we earn rather than having to sell off our country to pay our bills.

Of course there will be political fallout from this change of policy. Countries that have benefited from the current trade imbalance will rage against us, but I believe Americans will be better off reducing our trade deficit and keeping our jobs at home amid all the foreign outrage than it is now.

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

Um ... competitive advantage applies to companies as well. Leave it up to a financial salesman to debate business terms. Don't you have a little old lady to get to invest in heavily loaded funds that she can't afford?

You'll excuse me if I differentiate a principle from a "descriptive term"........I've seen enough of Michael Porter to be underwhelmed....

Porter is the most elementary, basic principle in studying a business. It's useful as a broad tool to start looking at a company. But wow, it's like saying a measuring tape makes you a carpenter.

You really are a business novice, aren't you?

 

[kaz]

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about but you lack the good sense to be quiet.

That's Larry! It's sad watching him fuck up even when he's right.

On the other hand, you asked the difference between two terms that mean the same thing and are just sometimes used in different contexts.

Typically, "competitive advantage" is used for a particular company. Comparative advantage is used for groups. For example, BC/BS's coverage across the country gives them a competitive advantage with large national and international corporations. India providing call centers is a comparative advantage that doesn't just apply to one company. There is a large skill base that would take significant resources for another area to develop to compete with them. But they are essentially the same

Competitive advantage and comparative advantage are interchangeable?

You went to a state school, right?

I said they are "essentially" the same, that is not "interchangable." Your reading skills really are dreadful.

And you don't know what context means? You didn't even graduate from a State school, did you?

I explained the difference, now you explain the difference. That should be good for a laugh since you didn't grasp what I said

 

[sealybobo]

Correct me if I am wrong but no living President, Secretary of State or FED Chairman endorses Trump..

These are the people who know what the job on President is about and not one of them said Trump can do it...

Sorry this looks like evidence and we know how the Trump side just hates facts and evidence....

Moderates, independents and undecideds need to realize that it isn't just Democrats who don't like Trump it's half the GOP. They believe he's dangerous too. Hell, probably more than half of them wish someone else was running. The only reason any of them are voting for Trump is because they don't want Hillary. People like this tend to not show up on election day.

The problem is GOP have become masters of chaos and spin they have lost where the right way is up.... They have to understand that Trump could put a coffin nail in there party.

If Trump was voted the disfunctional congress would have to take charge and put him on a leash...

What worries me is that America was dumb enough to vote in GW Bush only 8 years after his daddy sucked his way into being a 1 term president. The GOP formula for success seems to be cry stomp and scream like a baby the entire time the opposition controls the white house and hope the ignorant public gets sick of the bickering and "blames everyone" instead of blaming the party of bad behavior.

And the GOP will be fine when people don't show up to the next midterms. That's why we will never win because we show up in general election years and think we have a mandate but all the GOP have to do is obstruct for 2 years and they win the next midterm because the people who voted for Obama were discouraged because they didn't see enough hope and change in 2 years. Well guess what? It aint gonna happen in 2 fucking years. And you have to vote out the obstructionist bums in the midterms, not reward them by not showing up.

Even Republicans will be shocked if Trump pulls it off. And why not when they aren't even going to vote for him.

George HW Bush will vote for Hillary Clinton, sources say - CNNPolitics.com

 

[IcebergSlim]

"Comparative Advantage" is a basic economic principle, usually encountered in the second week of an introductory economics class....

Do you have any idea why it is important?

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

Um ... competitive advantage applies to companies as well. Leave it up to a financial salesman to debate business terms. Don't you have a little old lady to get to invest in heavily loaded funds that she can't afford?

You'll excuse me if I differentiate a principle from a "descriptive term"..........

Porter is the most elementary, basic principle in studying a business. It's useful as a broad tool to start looking at a company. But wow, it's like saying a measuring tape makes you a carpenter.

You really are a business novice, aren't you?

You figure this shit was a mystery BEFORE 1985?


how do you get to this:

But wow, it's like saying a measuring tape makes you a carpenter.


from....

.I've seen enough of Michael Porter to be underwhelmed.

 

[easyt65]

What worries me is that America was dumb enough to vote in GW Bush only 8 years after his daddy sucked his way into being a 1 term president.

You seem to be declaring how incompetent the Bush's were yet are bragging how they will potentially vote for Hillary.

 

[kaz]

And most people would have learned the difference between competitive advantage and comparative advantage even earlier. Do you have any idea what the difference is?

One applies to sports, the other is an economic principle....

Um ... competitive advantage applies to companies as well. Leave it up to a financial salesman to debate business terms. Don't you have a little old lady to get to invest in heavily loaded funds that she can't afford?

You'll excuse me if I differentiate a principle from a "descriptive term"..........

Porter is the most elementary, basic principle in studying a business. It's useful as a broad tool to start looking at a company. But wow, it's like saying a measuring tape makes you a carpenter.

You really are a business novice, aren't you?

You figure this shit was a mystery BEFORE 1985?


how do you get to this:

But wow, it's like saying a measuring tape makes you a carpenter.


from....

.I've seen enough of Michael Porter to be underwhelmed.

Because you thought you were sharp for realizing that Porter's not the killer model. It's a basic model and you didn't know that. Everyone in business knows that.

In strategy consulting, Porter is maybe the first hour of a discussion on a three month project. It's an effective model for presenting a very, very basic overview of a situation that a company is in. It doesn't help you for shit after that. It does structure the real analysis effectively