The republican solution to poverty doesn’t make any sense

[IM2]

""""" So trumpeters, where is the infrastructure that our country was promised going to come from? Trumpet is busy stealing all the funds for a worthless wall, a war he is desperately trying to start in order to save his own ass, and in the process, nothing is being returned to the country. How does it feel to be conned?"""""

Nothings being returned?
How about record employment,lower taxes,an erupting stock market.
If you dont benefit from those things you must be living under an overpass.

We don't have record employment. And lower taxes? The stock market started rising in 2009.

 

[IM2]

The best way to get out of poverty remains: 1. Stay in school. 2. Don't get pregnant, or if a male, don't get a girl pregnant. 3. Get a job, no matter how trivial the job is...at least you're working (everyone starts out at the bottom). As your job experience increases, try for better paying jobs. 3. Once you have a steady income AND can afford it, you can get married, only then have children and only as many children as you can afford. If all you can afford is one, get snipped so you don't have more, or use precautions.

The one thing I would like to add is not having children until you get into a field of work that you can use in other companies. Just because a company is paying you good enough money to get married and have kids doesn't mean that company will be around in four years. You need to have a skill set of some kind where if your company gets bought out, moves to another state or country, closes down, you still have the ability to make the same money somewhere else.

I agree with that and companies that offer technical jobs, should offer training programs so that applicants, even if not familiar with the type of work needed, can learn as long as they sign on for a pre-determined number of years to compensate for training costs and benefit the company.
The policies of a company advertising that any applicant "must" have x-number of years working in one program and another x-number of years in another, keeps people out of learning the job and ultimately benefiting the company. Teaching applicants while mandating a number of years service with the companies would be a step up for the applicant and beneficial for the company and also the applicant wouldn't come in with his/her own pre-conceived ideas about how to run the program.

It's really not the companies business to be educating people. People need to prepare themselves for the job, not expect the company to prepare them for the job. Very few places are going to pay you to learn something because a business can't make profit off a worker going to school. Businesses make profit by putting somebody to work and selling the work for a profit.

Yeah that's why companies have had training programs and CEU requirements for years.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I thought you watched CNN and Madcow?

MSNBC CNBC CNN and when I need a laugh FOX

So you believe Madcow lied about Trumps taxes?

No here we go It was ONE return cherry picked by trump AND who knows how much of those taxes he paid were refunded the following years ? And I strongly believe there's much money laundering to be exposed soon

Because of your dislike for him?

A couple of things he's done I can agree with Doing some good for small businesses , tax breaks ,although most go to the billionaires ,trying to get drug prices down BUT there is much to despise him for ,,a man the whole world looks down on rather than up to A vile human being

Which is as I say, a personal dislike for him.

I can only imagine if Hil-Liar got in and had these kind of results: unemployment hitting record lows, female and black unemployment the same, most Americans bringing home more in their paychecks, making NK anxious to work and please the US with disarmament, stock market bumpy, but sustainable, ISIS out of Iraq, less and less government dependents, mortgage loan applications at a seven year high, a reduction of illegal immigration and an increase in deportation judges, donating all salaries for doing the job, just a whole list of things. The media would be holding parades for queen Hillary. Instead, over 90% of the coverage on Trump by the MSM is negative.

 

[rightwinger]

The Republican solution to poverty is the old proverb.......Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime

But what happens when there are no more fish in the pond?

Republicans just say......not my problem

Ah...if there are no more fish in the pond then how are you going to "give" that man his fish?

Perhaps the dumbest analogy of all time, Winger!

We are a society of We the People. We can draw on our reserves of fish and make sure people do not starve

First you claim there are no fish in the pond...then you claim that we have fish "reserves"? Not only is your analogy awful, Winger...it seems to have confused you.

So which is it...no fish in the pond...or so many that we have "reserves"?

As for what made American society great? It wasn't that we gave things away...it's that we gave people the opportunity to get the things that they dreamed of! That's the gist of the "American Dream"! That's why people have been trying to get to this country for hundreds of years! Not because of handouts...but because of opportunity!

Our country is made up of many, many ponds
Collectively, we have many fish
Individual ponds may be fished out

Then you go to where the ponds are stocked.

When they do.....they see all the No Fishing signs

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The best way to get out of poverty remains: 1. Stay in school. 2. Don't get pregnant, or if a male, don't get a girl pregnant. 3. Get a job, no matter how trivial the job is...at least you're working (everyone starts out at the bottom). As your job experience increases, try for better paying jobs. 3. Once you have a steady income AND can afford it, you can get married, only then have children and only as many children as you can afford. If all you can afford is one, get snipped so you don't have more, or use precautions.

The one thing I would like to add is not having children until you get into a field of work that you can use in other companies. Just because a company is paying you good enough money to get married and have kids doesn't mean that company will be around in four years. You need to have a skill set of some kind where if your company gets bought out, moves to another state or country, closes down, you still have the ability to make the same money somewhere else.

I agree with that and companies that offer technical jobs, should offer training programs so that applicants, even if not familiar with the type of work needed, can learn as long as they sign on for a pre-determined number of years to compensate for training costs and benefit the company.
The policies of a company advertising that any applicant "must" have x-number of years working in one program and another x-number of years in another, keeps people out of learning the job and ultimately benefiting the company. Teaching applicants while mandating a number of years service with the companies would be a step up for the applicant and beneficial for the company and also the applicant wouldn't come in with his/her own pre-conceived ideas about how to run the program.

It's really not the companies business to be educating people. People need to prepare themselves for the job, not expect the company to prepare them for the job. Very few places are going to pay you to learn something because a business can't make profit off a worker going to school. Businesses make profit by putting somebody to work and selling the work for a profit.

Yeah that's why companies have had training programs and CEU requirements for years.

Well sure, if the company thinks it would benefit them in some way. But it shouldn't be expected or mandated. Plus I think most of those programs are for people who already have an advanced education, and it's merely a matter of training those people for the way the company does things.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ah...if there are no more fish in the pond then how are you going to "give" that man his fish?

Perhaps the dumbest analogy of all time, Winger!

We are a society of We the People. We can draw on our reserves of fish and make sure people do not starve

First you claim there are no fish in the pond...then you claim that we have fish "reserves"? Not only is your analogy awful, Winger...it seems to have confused you.

So which is it...no fish in the pond...or so many that we have "reserves"?

As for what made American society great? It wasn't that we gave things away...it's that we gave people the opportunity to get the things that they dreamed of! That's the gist of the "American Dream"! That's why people have been trying to get to this country for hundreds of years! Not because of handouts...but because of opportunity!

Our country is made up of many, many ponds
Collectively, we have many fish
Individual ponds may be fished out

Then you go to where the ponds are stocked.

When they do.....they see all the No Fishing signs

When they do, send them our way. We need as many workers as we can find.

 

[rightwinger]

You have a Pollyanna view of free markets
It is based on a survival of the fittest marketplace where anything goes. We have seen what happens when we allow the marketplace to police itself .......capitalists exploit the weak
You don’t want to protect intellectual property? Then let a large company with unlimited assets steal an invention you spent your life’s earnings on
You want each company or industry to build its own roads and bridges? You would have bedlam
Don’t want the government to provide police and fire? Works OK if you are a corporation and can work it into your bottom line. But what about the mom and pop store who have local hoods breaking in at night? If you catch a criminal, what do you do? Incarcerate them yourself?

You underestimate the importance of a stable monetary system. It is what makes commerce possible.

Don’t want any government? Then protect your own marketplace both at home and abroad. No courts, no protection against predatory capitalists who drive you out of business, intimidate your suppliers and customers, undercut your prices until you go out of business and then jack them up once the completion is gone

You view Capitalism as self policing......in practice, it is predatory and cut throat

Capitalists can't exploit anyone, as their success is based on demand. If individuals are demanding something and a Capitalist provides the supply, it's not exploitation. Your statement is based on confusing profit and exploitation.

Other companies copying a product would lead to more competition, which is better for all buyers. After that, it comes down to improving that product and selling it for a better price, as simply having a similar or same product is not the end goal, it's having a better product for a better price. Even then, it also depends on the individual, as some would prefer a cheaper and lower quality product, so that they may live within their means. Your oversimplification does, however, suit your understanding, that being minimal.

Their roads and bridges would have to be safe and efficient, otherwise nobody would want to travel to that location.

Businesses would simply incorporate the cost of private security into the cost of their items, or use their surplus to pay for it. Since it isn't police, they'd be half the cost, and more efficient. Not only this, but they would have to compete with the other private security businesses offering their services as well. Furthermore, private courts would be more efficient than state courts, they wouldn't submit to the will of lobbyists, otherwise their reputation would be ruined and they would receive no more customers.

Capitalists aren't predatory, they seek to maximize profit and minimize cost. This results in needing to meet the demands of their customers to the best of their ability. Furthermore, simply jacking prices up after competition is gone would result in more competitors rising up and meeting customer demands better. Not only this, but operating at a loss wouldn't eliminate competition, it would take a very long time and cost a fortune, and can't be permanent, as in order to create a permanent monopoly, they would need government help, OR permanent control of ALL resources used to build the product, AND would need to ensure that no OTHER resources can be used to build SIMILAR products.

Again you reply with Pollyanna logic depending on the inherent goodness of Capitalism.

The history of unfettered Capitalism shows a predatory institution with survival of the fittest.

While you think it results in lower prices for the consumer, it ultimately leads to monopolies that control the marketplace

Capitalism is the preferred method of economic expansion. But it needs a strong government in place to ensure a level playing field and an opportunity for small businesses to exist and prosper

I don't have to depend on anything but the drive to earn as much money as possible. I don't have to rely on inherent goodness in people, in fact, I believe the vast majority of humans are worthless trash. What I'm pointing out to you is the fact that in their drive to earn as much money as possible, the businesses are at the mercy of their consumers when the government is taken out of the equation. They have to provide a service, and they have to have a good reputation, or nobody will want to perform voluntary exchange with them. If they rip off their consumers or do something perceived as unethical by the general masses, they won't seek to conduct business with them. What you're assuming is 'goodness' is just logic.

Survival of the fittest is exactly what the masses want. Those unfit for business go under, and those who give the customers what they demand are the successful. A business only fails if nobody demands their service, and that's exactly as it should be.

Monopolies are inherently impossible without government support. Not a single monopoly has ever existed without the government helping it along, because otherwise a business would need to ALSO control every resource needed for their service, which is impossible, because no business' control reaches to every corner of the globe, or even every corner of a single state or Nation. The fact that you haven't seen me already state this fact to you, and the fact that you haven't even attempted to debunk it or acknowledge it only shows me that you have no argument against it.

No, a strong government is what strangles the economy and prevents it from operating optimally, as I've already explained to you, and you haven't attempted to argue against it. I've countered your entire argument, and you've only restated your claim, rather than counter my argument. This shows me that you have nothing left.

Consumers couldn’t care less about the business ethics of whom they buy their products from. If my business uses every dirty trick in the book to drive you out of business, they really don’t know or care.
But in the end, there will be one business to buy from, at the price they ask

That is capitalism at its core

Yes even in this government-controlled Nation, Youtube's investors started pulling their funding when they disagreed with the content. Consumers do care, and Youtube nearly went bankrupt as a solid example of just how much they care. In fact, I'm pretty sure the government is the only reason they survived the adpocalypse.

Driving another business out of business isn't a dirty tactic, as doing so requires one to provide a better service or the other to provide mediocre service. In fact, I bet the reason you didn't go into detail is because only force or coercion can be dirty tactics, and anything else is completely acceptable, as they're simply improvements upon what the business already does.

In order for a business to become the only option, with no other business rising to oppose, they would need government assistance, or full control over every resource. Without government, it is impossible, and for evidence I cite that there isn't a single business that has ever become a monopoly without government help. How about you actually attempt to counter my argument instead of ignoring it and re-stating your bogus claim?

Beating a competitor through better service is the basis of capitalism

But what if you beat them by stealing their patents, threatening their suppliers and consumers, spreading false rumors, undercutting their prices until they are forced out of business

All are acceptable in your ideal capitalism

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I thought you watched CNN and Madcow?

MSNBC CNBC CNN and when I need a laugh FOX

So you believe Madcow lied about Trumps taxes?

No here we go It was ONE return cherry picked by trump AND who knows how much of those taxes he paid were refunded the following years ? And I strongly believe there's much money laundering to be exposed soon

Pure speculation on your part.

Yes Here it is But knowing how filthy trump has been his whole life I'd say it's an educated guess

But you wont say the same for hillary....

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Capitalists can't exploit anyone, as their success is based on demand. If individuals are demanding something and a Capitalist provides the supply, it's not exploitation. Your statement is based on confusing profit and exploitation.

Other companies copying a product would lead to more competition, which is better for all buyers. After that, it comes down to improving that product and selling it for a better price, as simply having a similar or same product is not the end goal, it's having a better product for a better price. Even then, it also depends on the individual, as some would prefer a cheaper and lower quality product, so that they may live within their means. Your oversimplification does, however, suit your understanding, that being minimal.

Their roads and bridges would have to be safe and efficient, otherwise nobody would want to travel to that location.

Businesses would simply incorporate the cost of private security into the cost of their items, or use their surplus to pay for it. Since it isn't police, they'd be half the cost, and more efficient. Not only this, but they would have to compete with the other private security businesses offering their services as well. Furthermore, private courts would be more efficient than state courts, they wouldn't submit to the will of lobbyists, otherwise their reputation would be ruined and they would receive no more customers.

Capitalists aren't predatory, they seek to maximize profit and minimize cost. This results in needing to meet the demands of their customers to the best of their ability. Furthermore, simply jacking prices up after competition is gone would result in more competitors rising up and meeting customer demands better. Not only this, but operating at a loss wouldn't eliminate competition, it would take a very long time and cost a fortune, and can't be permanent, as in order to create a permanent monopoly, they would need government help, OR permanent control of ALL resources used to build the product, AND would need to ensure that no OTHER resources can be used to build SIMILAR products.

Again you reply with Pollyanna logic depending on the inherent goodness of Capitalism.

The history of unfettered Capitalism shows a predatory institution with survival of the fittest.

While you think it results in lower prices for the consumer, it ultimately leads to monopolies that control the marketplace

Capitalism is the preferred method of economic expansion. But it needs a strong government in place to ensure a level playing field and an opportunity for small businesses to exist and prosper

I don't have to depend on anything but the drive to earn as much money as possible. I don't have to rely on inherent goodness in people, in fact, I believe the vast majority of humans are worthless trash. What I'm pointing out to you is the fact that in their drive to earn as much money as possible, the businesses are at the mercy of their consumers when the government is taken out of the equation. They have to provide a service, and they have to have a good reputation, or nobody will want to perform voluntary exchange with them. If they rip off their consumers or do something perceived as unethical by the general masses, they won't seek to conduct business with them. What you're assuming is 'goodness' is just logic.

Survival of the fittest is exactly what the masses want. Those unfit for business go under, and those who give the customers what they demand are the successful. A business only fails if nobody demands their service, and that's exactly as it should be.

Monopolies are inherently impossible without government support. Not a single monopoly has ever existed without the government helping it along, because otherwise a business would need to ALSO control every resource needed for their service, which is impossible, because no business' control reaches to every corner of the globe, or even every corner of a single state or Nation. The fact that you haven't seen me already state this fact to you, and the fact that you haven't even attempted to debunk it or acknowledge it only shows me that you have no argument against it.

No, a strong government is what strangles the economy and prevents it from operating optimally, as I've already explained to you, and you haven't attempted to argue against it. I've countered your entire argument, and you've only restated your claim, rather than counter my argument. This shows me that you have nothing left.

Consumers couldn’t care less about the business ethics of whom they buy their products from. If my business uses every dirty trick in the book to drive you out of business, they really don’t know or care.
But in the end, there will be one business to buy from, at the price they ask

That is capitalism at its core

Yes even in this government-controlled Nation, Youtube's investors started pulling their funding when they disagreed with the content. Consumers do care, and Youtube nearly went bankrupt as a solid example of just how much they care. In fact, I'm pretty sure the government is the only reason they survived the adpocalypse.

Driving another business out of business isn't a dirty tactic, as doing so requires one to provide a better service or the other to provide mediocre service. In fact, I bet the reason you didn't go into detail is because only force or coercion can be dirty tactics, and anything else is completely acceptable, as they're simply improvements upon what the business already does.

In order for a business to become the only option, with no other business rising to oppose, they would need government assistance, or full control over every resource. Without government, it is impossible, and for evidence I cite that there isn't a single business that has ever become a monopoly without government help. How about you actually attempt to counter my argument instead of ignoring it and re-stating your bogus claim?

Beating a competitor through better service is the basis of capitalism

But what if you beat them by stealing their patents, threatening their suppliers and consumers, spreading false rumors, undercutting their prices until they are forced out of business

All are acceptable in your ideal capitalism

Patents shouldn't exist regardless. Threatening people would ruin a business' reputation, as it's using force and coercion, rumors can be verified. Undercutting prices can't beat out everyone, as product quality is also a factor. even if a business does this, once they stop, other competitors will rise up, and if they continue to do so, they will simply damage their own business, as they can't sustain prices. Likewise, other businesses can also undercut. Nobody can permanently stifle competition without help from the government, it isn't possible.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

""""" So trumpeters, where is the infrastructure that our country was promised going to come from? Trumpet is busy stealing all the funds for a worthless wall, a war he is desperately trying to start in order to save his own ass, and in the process, nothing is being returned to the country. How does it feel to be conned?"""""

Nothings being returned?
How about record employment,lower taxes,an erupting stock market.
If you dont benefit from those things you must be living under an overpass.

We don't have record employment. And lower taxes? The stock market started rising in 2009.

Yes we do have all those things,including record black employment.
You afraid of not being able to claim victimhood anymore?

 

[Brain357]

Think we need a strong middle class again before we can talk about tackling poverty...

 

[edward37]

MSNBC CNBC CNN and when I need a laugh FOX

So you believe Madcow lied about Trumps taxes?

No here we go It was ONE return cherry picked by trump AND who knows how much of those taxes he paid were refunded the following years ? And I strongly believe there's much money laundering to be exposed soon

Pure speculation on your part.

Yes Here it is But knowing how filthy trump has been his whole life I'd say it's an educated guess

But you wont say the same for hillary....

Trump is the worst Hillary has been chased after by republicans ,lied about for 20+ years Benghazi for 4 years?? a nothing burger? etc etc But if the schmuck would stop tweeting ,stop fn with NAFTA , keep his big mouth shut about Iran, and stop bashing anyone who has something to say about him, and apologize when often needed ,he wouldn't look so bad

 

[IM2]

MSNBC CNBC CNN and when I need a laugh FOX

So you believe Madcow lied about Trumps taxes?

No here we go It was ONE return cherry picked by trump AND who knows how much of those taxes he paid were refunded the following years ? And I strongly believe there's much money laundering to be exposed soon

Because of your dislike for him?

A couple of things he's done I can agree with Doing some good for small businesses , tax breaks ,although most go to the billionaires ,trying to get drug prices down BUT there is much to despise him for ,,a man the whole world looks down on rather than up to A vile human being

Which is as I say, a personal dislike for him.

I can only imagine if Hil-Liar got in and had these kind of results: unemployment hitting record lows, female and black unemployment the same, most Americans bringing home more in their paychecks, making NK anxious to work and please the US with disarmament, stock market bumpy, but sustainable, ISIS out of Iraq, less and less government dependents, mortgage loan applications at a seven year high, a reduction of illegal immigration and an increase in deportation judges, donating all salaries for doing the job, just a whole list of things. The media would be holding parades for queen Hillary. Instead, over 90% of the coverage on Trump by the MSM is negative.

These results are not because of Trump. And to show how ignorant you are Trump has spoken over 3,000 lies or misrepresentations yet you call Hillary a liar. If Hillary had won, republicans would be investigating every conspiracy theory told about the Clintons. And you'd be repeating them as if they were gospel. Trump has scandals out the ass, and yet we are all supposed to ignore them just to endlessly praise this motherfucker. We are going be seeing what the results of Trump policies in the next 2 years. You'll understand then what we saw now.

Trump is a vile human being.

 

[IM2]

The best way to get out of poverty remains: 1. Stay in school. 2. Don't get pregnant, or if a male, don't get a girl pregnant. 3. Get a job, no matter how trivial the job is...at least you're working (everyone starts out at the bottom). As your job experience increases, try for better paying jobs. 3. Once you have a steady income AND can afford it, you can get married, only then have children and only as many children as you can afford. If all you can afford is one, get snipped so you don't have more, or use precautions.

The one thing I would like to add is not having children until you get into a field of work that you can use in other companies. Just because a company is paying you good enough money to get married and have kids doesn't mean that company will be around in four years. You need to have a skill set of some kind where if your company gets bought out, moves to another state or country, closes down, you still have the ability to make the same money somewhere else.

I agree with that and companies that offer technical jobs, should offer training programs so that applicants, even if not familiar with the type of work needed, can learn as long as they sign on for a pre-determined number of years to compensate for training costs and benefit the company.
The policies of a company advertising that any applicant "must" have x-number of years working in one program and another x-number of years in another, keeps people out of learning the job and ultimately benefiting the company. Teaching applicants while mandating a number of years service with the companies would be a step up for the applicant and beneficial for the company and also the applicant wouldn't come in with his/her own pre-conceived ideas about how to run the program.

It's really not the companies business to be educating people. People need to prepare themselves for the job, not expect the company to prepare them for the job. Very few places are going to pay you to learn something because a business can't make profit off a worker going to school. Businesses make profit by putting somebody to work and selling the work for a profit.

Yeah that's why companies have had training programs and CEU requirements for years.

Well sure, if the company thinks it would benefit them in some way. But it shouldn't be expected or mandated. Plus I think most of those programs are for people who already have an advanced education, and it's merely a matter of training those people for the way the company does things.

Sure Ray. We should not expect or mandate anything. That's the sure answer to having an orderly and civilized society.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So you believe Madcow lied about Trumps taxes?

No here we go It was ONE return cherry picked by trump AND who knows how much of those taxes he paid were refunded the following years ? And I strongly believe there's much money laundering to be exposed soon

Because of your dislike for him?

A couple of things he's done I can agree with Doing some good for small businesses , tax breaks ,although most go to the billionaires ,trying to get drug prices down BUT there is much to despise him for ,,a man the whole world looks down on rather than up to A vile human being

Which is as I say, a personal dislike for him.

I can only imagine if Hil-Liar got in and had these kind of results: unemployment hitting record lows, female and black unemployment the same, most Americans bringing home more in their paychecks, making NK anxious to work and please the US with disarmament, stock market bumpy, but sustainable, ISIS out of Iraq, less and less government dependents, mortgage loan applications at a seven year high, a reduction of illegal immigration and an increase in deportation judges, donating all salaries for doing the job, just a whole list of things. The media would be holding parades for queen Hillary. Instead, over 90% of the coverage on Trump by the MSM is negative.

These results are not because of Trump. And to show how ignorant you are Trump has spoken over 3,000 lies or misrepresentations yet you call Hillary a liar. If Hillary had won, republicans would be investigating every conspiracy theory told about the Clintons. And you'd be repeating them as if they were gospel. Trump has scandals out the ass, and yet we are all supposed to ignore them just to endlessly praise this motherfucker. We are going be seeing what the results of Trump policies in the next 2 years. You'll understand then what we saw now.

Trump is a vile human being.

Yes, another one with a personal vendetta. Scandals? What do you call the phony Russia probe? But I guess to you, Trump's are the real McCoy and Hillary's were all made-up.

Yes, the Trump accomplishments are because of Trump. Why? Because Trump is the exact opposite of Ears. Trump is pro-business where DumBama was anti-business. Trump is doing things to help business whereas DumBama did things to make their life more miserable and expensive. So the results are showing with new jobs thanks to company investments, and expansion of American businesses.

 

[Flash]

The Democratic "solution" to poverty is to create more of it. We saw that with Obama.

This silly Left Wing idea to take money away from the people that earned the money and give it to the welfare queens has never worked out like they hoped it would.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The one thing I would like to add is not having children until you get into a field of work that you can use in other companies. Just because a company is paying you good enough money to get married and have kids doesn't mean that company will be around in four years. You need to have a skill set of some kind where if your company gets bought out, moves to another state or country, closes down, you still have the ability to make the same money somewhere else.

I agree with that and companies that offer technical jobs, should offer training programs so that applicants, even if not familiar with the type of work needed, can learn as long as they sign on for a pre-determined number of years to compensate for training costs and benefit the company.
The policies of a company advertising that any applicant "must" have x-number of years working in one program and another x-number of years in another, keeps people out of learning the job and ultimately benefiting the company. Teaching applicants while mandating a number of years service with the companies would be a step up for the applicant and beneficial for the company and also the applicant wouldn't come in with his/her own pre-conceived ideas about how to run the program.

It's really not the companies business to be educating people. People need to prepare themselves for the job, not expect the company to prepare them for the job. Very few places are going to pay you to learn something because a business can't make profit off a worker going to school. Businesses make profit by putting somebody to work and selling the work for a profit.

Yeah that's why companies have had training programs and CEU requirements for years.

Well sure, if the company thinks it would benefit them in some way. But it shouldn't be expected or mandated. Plus I think most of those programs are for people who already have an advanced education, and it's merely a matter of training those people for the way the company does things.

Sure Ray. We should not expect or mandate anything. That's the sure answer to having an orderly and civilized society.

Yes it is. When you mix the two words "government" and "force" together, look out, because you are about to lose more liberty.

I trust businesses know what's good for their business. The left thinks that business doesn't know what's good for business, but government does. It's what led to the housing bubble and collapse.

 

[edward37]

No here we go It was ONE return cherry picked by trump AND who knows how much of those taxes he paid were refunded the following years ? And I strongly believe there's much money laundering to be exposed soon

Because of your dislike for him?

A couple of things he's done I can agree with Doing some good for small businesses , tax breaks ,although most go to the billionaires ,trying to get drug prices down BUT there is much to despise him for ,,a man the whole world looks down on rather than up to A vile human being

Which is as I say, a personal dislike for him.

I can only imagine if Hil-Liar got in and had these kind of results: unemployment hitting record lows, female and black unemployment the same, most Americans bringing home more in their paychecks, making NK anxious to work and please the US with disarmament, stock market bumpy, but sustainable, ISIS out of Iraq, less and less government dependents, mortgage loan applications at a seven year high, a reduction of illegal immigration and an increase in deportation judges, donating all salaries for doing the job, just a whole list of things. The media would be holding parades for queen Hillary. Instead, over 90% of the coverage on Trump by the MSM is negative.

These results are not because of Trump. And to show how ignorant you are Trump has spoken over 3,000 lies or misrepresentations yet you call Hillary a liar. If Hillary had won, republicans would be investigating every conspiracy theory told about the Clintons. And you'd be repeating them as if they were gospel. Trump has scandals out the ass, and yet we are all supposed to ignore them just to endlessly praise this motherfucker. We are going be seeing what the results of Trump policies in the next 2 years. You'll understand then what we saw now.

Trump is a vile human being.

Yes, another one with a personal vendetta. Scandals? What do you call the phony Russia probe? But I guess to you, Trump's are the real McCoy and Hillary's were all made-up.

Yes, the Trump accomplishments are because of Trump. Why? Because Trump is the exact opposite of Ears. Trump is pro-business where DumBama was anti-business. Trump is doing things to help business whereas DumBama did things to make their life more miserable and expensive. So the results are showing with new jobs thanks to company investments, and expansion of American businesses.

You speak of new jobs as if Trump will even come close to breaking Obamas record of 75 straight months with 6 digit gains

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So you believe Madcow lied about Trumps taxes?

No here we go It was ONE return cherry picked by trump AND who knows how much of those taxes he paid were refunded the following years ? And I strongly believe there's much money laundering to be exposed soon

Because of your dislike for him?

A couple of things he's done I can agree with Doing some good for small businesses , tax breaks ,although most go to the billionaires ,trying to get drug prices down BUT there is much to despise him for ,,a man the whole world looks down on rather than up to A vile human being

Which is as I say, a personal dislike for him.

I can only imagine if Hil-Liar got in and had these kind of results: unemployment hitting record lows, female and black unemployment the same, most Americans bringing home more in their paychecks, making NK anxious to work and please the US with disarmament, stock market bumpy, but sustainable, ISIS out of Iraq, less and less government dependents, mortgage loan applications at a seven year high, a reduction of illegal immigration and an increase in deportation judges, donating all salaries for doing the job, just a whole list of things. The media would be holding parades for queen Hillary. Instead, over 90% of the coverage on Trump by the MSM is negative.

These results are not because of Trump. And to show how ignorant you are Trump has spoken over 3,000 lies or misrepresentations yet you call Hillary a liar. If Hillary had won, republicans would be investigating every conspiracy theory told about the Clintons. And you'd be repeating them as if they were gospel. Trump has scandals out the ass, and yet we are all supposed to ignore them just to endlessly praise this motherfucker. We are going be seeing what the results of Trump policies in the next 2 years. You'll understand then what we saw now.

Trump is a vile human being.

So you're going to claim barrack the magic negro finally after eight years miraculously brought black unemployment down a year after leaving office?

Do you realize how laughable that scenario is?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Because of your dislike for him?

A couple of things he's done I can agree with Doing some good for small businesses , tax breaks ,although most go to the billionaires ,trying to get drug prices down BUT there is much to despise him for ,,a man the whole world looks down on rather than up to A vile human being

Which is as I say, a personal dislike for him.

I can only imagine if Hil-Liar got in and had these kind of results: unemployment hitting record lows, female and black unemployment the same, most Americans bringing home more in their paychecks, making NK anxious to work and please the US with disarmament, stock market bumpy, but sustainable, ISIS out of Iraq, less and less government dependents, mortgage loan applications at a seven year high, a reduction of illegal immigration and an increase in deportation judges, donating all salaries for doing the job, just a whole list of things. The media would be holding parades for queen Hillary. Instead, over 90% of the coverage on Trump by the MSM is negative.

These results are not because of Trump. And to show how ignorant you are Trump has spoken over 3,000 lies or misrepresentations yet you call Hillary a liar. If Hillary had won, republicans would be investigating every conspiracy theory told about the Clintons. And you'd be repeating them as if they were gospel. Trump has scandals out the ass, and yet we are all supposed to ignore them just to endlessly praise this motherfucker. We are going be seeing what the results of Trump policies in the next 2 years. You'll understand then what we saw now.

Trump is a vile human being.

Yes, another one with a personal vendetta. Scandals? What do you call the phony Russia probe? But I guess to you, Trump's are the real McCoy and Hillary's were all made-up.

Yes, the Trump accomplishments are because of Trump. Why? Because Trump is the exact opposite of Ears. Trump is pro-business where DumBama was anti-business. Trump is doing things to help business whereas DumBama did things to make their life more miserable and expensive. So the results are showing with new jobs thanks to company investments, and expansion of American businesses.

You speak of new jobs as if Trump will even come close to breaking Obamas record of 75 straight months with 6 digit gains

That would be impossible because DumBama started from the very bottom; the only way to go was up. Trump started in the middle.

And let me remind you that Presidents don't create jobs. Private industry creates jobs. All a President or any representative can do is assist by making job creation easier or harder on the job creators.