When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

[Lumpy 1]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

 

[usmbguest5318]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

 

[Lumpy 1]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Obama could have cut back on the regulations, promoted legislation that was good for business and the economy, called Carrier in the interest of American workers and gave it a shot at getting them to stick around..Maybe you could think about it instead of distracting to a different topic perhaps...

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

 

[usmbguest5318]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Obama could have cut back on the regulations, promoted legislation that was good for business and the economy, called Carrier in the interest of American workers and gave it a shot at getting them to stick around..Maybe you could think about it instead of distracting to a different topic perhaps...

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

Microeconomic level --> The only individuals to whom I give praise or blame for a firm's actions are the managers/owners of the firm under consideration/discussion.

Macroeconomic level --> Democrats and some Republicans, though not Trump and his macroeconomic policy allies/adherents, consistently have worked to remove tariffs, quotas and subsidies. They haven't been entirely successful at doing so, but they are at least moving to do so. Trump, in contrast, has repeatedly proposed imposing/increasing tariffs.

Note:

• Do not reply by remarking upon the income tax cut corporations just received. Income taxes are not a type of tax that has the effects shown above and described in the linked article you apparently are unwilling to read. They are not because they are post-operating-income decrement rather than being an an addition to production and/or operating costs and are thus not a cost of operations/production.

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Thank you.

Out of pure curiosity, what did you find impressive about my reply? I didn't construe that anything I wrote or linked in it is impressive because there isn't anything in those remarks that any high school student who mastered the macroeconomics class they may have taken would not know.

 

[Lumpy 1]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Obama could have cut back on the regulations, promoted legislation that was good for business and the economy, called Carrier in the interest of American workers and gave it a shot at getting them to stick around..Maybe you could think about it instead of distracting to a different topic perhaps...

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

Microeconomic level --> The only individuals to whom I give praise or blame for a firm's actions are the managers/owners of the firm under consideration/discussion.

Macroeconomic level --> Democrats and some Republicans, though not Trump and his macroeconomic policy allies/adherents, consistently have worked to remove tariffs, quotas and subsidies. They haven't been entirely successful at doing so, but they are at least moving to do so. Trump, in contrast, has repeatedly proposed imposing/increasing tariffs.

Note:

• Do not reply by remarking upon the income tax cut corporations just received. Income taxes are not a type of tax that has the effects shown above and described in the linked article you apparently are unwilling to read. They are not because they are post-operating-income decrement rather than being an an addition to production and/or operating costs and are thus not a cost of operations/production.

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Thank you.

Out of pure curiosity, what did you find impressive about my reply? I didn't construe that anything I wrote or linked in it is impressive because there isn't anything in those remarks that any high school student who mastered the macroeconomics class they may have taken would not know.

The actual motivations that you seem to be unaware of mostly.

 

[westwall]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

And once again, are there still jobs there? Yes. Did some jobs leave? Once again, yes. Were there going to be any jobs had trump not intervened? No. So, yet again, we have the progressives claiming that it would have been better for trump to say nothing and let ALL of the jobs leave.

 

[tigerred59]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Your bullshit propaganda? Never, never, never!!!!!!!

Tell that to the suckers who voted for the whore and who are now losing their fuckin Carrier jobs, you shit eating bitch!!

 

[tigerred59]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

And once again, are there still jobs there? Yes. Did some jobs leave? Once again, yes. Were there going to be any jobs had trump not intervened? No. So, yet again, we have the progressives claiming that it would have been better for trump to say nothing and let ALL of the jobs leave.

LOLOLOLOL....yeah, keep defending the liar in chief.

 

[westwall]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

And once again, are there still jobs there? Yes. Did some jobs leave? Once again, yes. Were there going to be any jobs had trump not intervened? No. So, yet again, we have the progressives claiming that it would have been better for trump to say nothing and let ALL of the jobs leave.

LOLOLOLOL....yeah, keep defending the liar in chief.

I presented facts. You provide insults and little else. And you wonder why people laugh at you...

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

The Corrupt Democratic Party chases employers out of our country

 

[Lumpy 1]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

And once again, are there still jobs there? Yes. Did some jobs leave? Once again, yes. Were there going to be any jobs had trump not intervened? No. So, yet again, we have the progressives claiming that it would have been better for trump to say nothing and let ALL of the jobs leave.

LOLOLOLOL....yeah, keep defending the liar in chief.

I presented facts. You provide insults and little else. And you wonder why people laugh at you...

Wow, I just checked, I didn't know Tiggers was a girl. Now it makes more sense.
.

 

[Lumpy 1]

The Corrupt Democratic Party chases employers out of our country

.. and they choose illegals and terrorist lawlessness over tax paying American citizens...

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Trump Promised He'd Save Jobs At Carrier. These Workers Were Laid Off Anyway.
President Donald J. Trump said he’d saved 1,100 jobs at a Carrier plant in Indianapolis, Indiana. But now hundreds more employees have been laid off, and they feel betrayed.

Dear Mindless Trump supporters....here's the deal....if hearing good shit from Trump without any details, without any plans....just talk...makes you fools feel empowered, than good. If getting a few bucks in your pay or some over due years ago bonus makes you love the guy even more, than good. If tough talk without one shed of backing the shit up, again makes you sleep better at night, all the better....but please please note this...Donald J Trump, your great white hope for a president, is nothing but a tweet and talk, that's it. The guys a con, a coward and a fake....but if all that makes you feel white again, in charge again, than by all means...enjoy the clown show. But do know suckers, you've been warned over and over and over and over again.....the guy still has his shit made overseas for a reason...dumb ass's!! He knows this country is going down cause he's gonna see to it...with your fuckin blessings!!

Did he save all of the jobs? No. Did he save hundreds of jobs? Yes. When will morons like you figure out that some is better than none.

and when will she ALSO accept facts that Obama betrayed Americans with the worst recession ever?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Trump Promised He'd Save Jobs At Carrier. These Workers Were Laid Off Anyway.
President Donald J. Trump said he’d saved 1,100 jobs at a Carrier plant in Indianapolis, Indiana. But now hundreds more employees have been laid off, and they feel betrayed.

Dear Mindless Trump supporters....here's the deal....if hearing good shit from Trump without any details, without any plans....just talk...makes you fools feel empowered, than good. If getting a few bucks in your pay or some over due years ago bonus makes you love the guy even more, than good. If tough talk without one shed of backing the shit up, again makes you sleep better at night, all the better....but please please note this...Donald J Trump, your great white hope for a president, is nothing but a tweet and talk, that's it. The guys a con, a coward and a fake....but if all that makes you feel white again, in charge again, than by all means...enjoy the clown show. But do know suckers, you've been warned over and over and over and over again.....the guy still has his shit made overseas for a reason...dumb ass's!! He knows this country is going down cause he's gonna see to it...with your fuckin blessings!!

The answer is never. I stopped trying to show Trumpsters the truth a long time ago. The truth and facts have no effect on them.

They'll never learn until something Bone Spur does, directly affects their lives. That's how Republicans roll. They lack empathy for others. They only care until something happens to them.

Let me guess,you hold Obama on a pedastal and dont think he is criminal who betrayed americans?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I am not really a Trump 'supporter," but I can't understand why anyone would vote for Hillary.

I could not say it any better.I also am not a Trump supporter either but god the wicked witch of the west?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

And once again, are there still jobs there? Yes. Did some jobs leave? Once again, yes. Were there going to be any jobs had trump not intervened? No. So, yet again, we have the progressives claiming that it would have been better for trump to say nothing and let ALL of the jobs leave.

LOLOLOLOL....yeah, keep defending the liar in chief.

I presented facts. You provide insults and little else. And you wonder why people laugh at you...

Its funny as hell how she can only provide insults when she is proven wrong.LOL I also love how she makes these threads and doesnt post any links to back up what she thinks is true.LOL

 

[usmbguest5318]

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Obama could have cut back on the regulations, promoted legislation that was good for business and the economy, called Carrier in the interest of American workers and gave it a shot at getting them to stick around..Maybe you could think about it instead of distracting to a different topic perhaps...

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

Microeconomic level --> The only individuals to whom I give praise or blame for a firm's actions are the managers/owners of the firm under consideration/discussion.

Macroeconomic level --> Democrats and some Republicans, though not Trump and his macroeconomic policy allies/adherents, consistently have worked to remove tariffs, quotas and subsidies. They haven't been entirely successful at doing so, but they are at least moving to do so. Trump, in contrast, has repeatedly proposed imposing/increasing tariffs.

Note:

• Do not reply by remarking upon the income tax cut corporations just received. Income taxes are not a type of tax that has the effects shown above and described in the linked article you apparently are unwilling to read. They are not because they are post-operating-income decrement rather than being an an addition to production and/or operating costs and are thus not a cost of operations/production.

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Thank you.

Out of pure curiosity, what did you find impressive about my reply? I didn't construe that anything I wrote or linked in it is impressive because there isn't anything in those remarks that any high school student who mastered the macroeconomics class they may have taken would not know.

The actual motivations that you seem to be unaware of mostly.

?? -- What are the specific motivations that come to your mind?

 

[Lumpy 1]

When will Trump supporters learn? When, when, when??????

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

And once again, are there still jobs there? Yes. Did some jobs leave? Once again, yes. Were there going to be any jobs had trump not intervened? No. So, yet again, we have the progressives claiming that it would have been better for trump to say nothing and let ALL of the jobs leave.

LOLOLOLOL....yeah, keep defending the liar in chief.

I presented facts. You provide insults and little else. And you wonder why people laugh at you...

Its funny as hell how she can only provide insults when she is proven wrong.LOL I also love how she makes these threads and doesnt post any links to back up what she thinks is true.LOL

Eh, I like Tiggers, she's more fun than most lefty's but...

.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

Inasmuch as Trump voters are adults and the overwhelming majority of them didn't over the course of at least a K-12 education learn a multitude of things -- among them the ways and means of sound/cogent critical thinking -- that, had they learned them, would have put them in good stead for seeing that Trump's rhetoric is but BS, it's plausible but improbably that they will, at any point subsequent to now, learn those things.

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Obama could have cut back on the regulations, promoted legislation that was good for business and the economy, called Carrier in the interest of American workers and gave it a shot at getting them to stick around..Maybe you could think about it instead of distracting to a different topic perhaps...

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

Microeconomic level --> The only individuals to whom I give praise or blame for a firm's actions are the managers/owners of the firm under consideration/discussion.

Macroeconomic level --> Democrats and some Republicans, though not Trump and his macroeconomic policy allies/adherents, consistently have worked to remove tariffs, quotas and subsidies. They haven't been entirely successful at doing so, but they are at least moving to do so. Trump, in contrast, has repeatedly proposed imposing/increasing tariffs.

Note:

• Do not reply by remarking upon the income tax cut corporations just received. Income taxes are not a type of tax that has the effects shown above and described in the linked article you apparently are unwilling to read. They are not because they are post-operating-income decrement rather than being an an addition to production and/or operating costs and are thus not a cost of operations/production.

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Thank you.

Out of pure curiosity, what did you find impressive about my reply? I didn't construe that anything I wrote or linked in it is impressive because there isn't anything in those remarks that any high school student who mastered the macroeconomics class they may have taken would not know.

The actual motivations that you seem to be unaware of mostly.

?? -- What are the specific motivations that come to your mind?

You gave up already... mmm

.. consider it a brain teaser...

 

[usmbguest5318]

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

Sooo do you ever wonder why Obama failed in the first place to save these hard working Americans jobs?

As far as I know Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?..

Carrier had already committed and built facilities in Mexico and Obama had done diddly squat about it....

What, exactly, is it that a POTUS might do about a firm's commitments to build facilities anywhere on the planet?

What does your non-hypocritical or biased, "sound/cogent critical thinking" think about that?

One thing a POTUS should not do is interfere in the free conduct of trade. S/he should not because the means of doing so consist of imposing either subsidies (anything that lowers a firm's operating/production costs; tax incentives are one form of them), quotas, or tariffs (anything that increases a firm's operating/production costs; fees and taxes), and none is a good thing for an economy because of the deadweight loss and over allocation of resources the produce. (Click the link; read the content there.)

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Obama could have cut back on the regulations, promoted legislation that was good for business and the economy, called Carrier in the interest of American workers and gave it a shot at getting them to stick around..Maybe you could think about it instead of distracting to a different topic perhaps...

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

You must think Democrats are pretty chickenshit to be blaming Trump when they refused to take responsibility in the first place, huh?

Microeconomic level --> The only individuals to whom I give praise or blame for a firm's actions are the managers/owners of the firm under consideration/discussion.

Macroeconomic level --> Democrats and some Republicans, though not Trump and his macroeconomic policy allies/adherents, consistently have worked to remove tariffs, quotas and subsidies. They haven't been entirely successful at doing so, but they are at least moving to do so. Trump, in contrast, has repeatedly proposed imposing/increasing tariffs.

Note:

• Do not reply by remarking upon the income tax cut corporations just received. Income taxes are not a type of tax that has the effects shown above and described in the linked article you apparently are unwilling to read. They are not because they are post-operating-income decrement rather than being an an addition to production and/or operating costs and are thus not a cost of operations/production.

Eh, I'm not in the mood to think that much... but I'm impressed.

Thank you.

Out of pure curiosity, what did you find impressive about my reply? I didn't construe that anything I wrote or linked in it is impressive because there isn't anything in those remarks that any high school student who mastered the macroeconomics class they may have taken would not know.

The actual motivations that you seem to be unaware of mostly.

?? -- What are the specific motivations that come to your mind?

You gave up already... mmm

.. consider it a brain teaser...

Gave up? I never attempted to identify what be the motivations you think be extant. Why would I or anyone do otherwise when you are the best person to identify what is in your mind?