The Trump Presidency

Speaking of (R) governance of our "great" cuntry.
Thought i'd pass this along

Chris Savage ‏@Eclectablog 4h4 hours ago

Mich. Republicans argue the recount should stop because there is no voter fraud & that voter suppression bill is needed due to voter fraud.

you can look it up
 
MW-DQ553_trumpc_20150721175842_ZH.jpg


what a business man
 
Me Giving Trump a Chance: Pt IV

TalkPoverty.org
‏@TalkPoverty

Trump’s pick for Labor Secretary

✅opposes overtime pay for workers

✅opposes health care for low wage workers

✅wants to automate more jobs
 
57Brave said:
Speaking of (R) governance of our "great" cuntry.
Thought i'd pass this along

Chris Savage ‏@Eclectablog 4h4 hours ago

Mich. Republicans argue the recount should stop because there is no voter fraud & that voter suppression bill is needed due to voter fraud.

you can look it up
Click to expand...

How's that Wisconsin recount going?
 
thethe said:
Or we will develop relationships with less adversarial nations which seems like the plan for this administration.

The market is responding because a lower tax plan is better for business. The environment is more friendly to expansion. Now we need to see if it actually helps the middle class but so far so good for the growth of the economy. Investment into this nation will come soon and that helps everyone.
Click to expand...

Lower tax plans aren't "better for business". The market acts because it's the market. There's minimal correlation between tax rates and the market aside from more rich people using the stock market as a ponzi scheme.

Also realize that no nation aside from maybe India would have the potential to work as China does. Look at almost anything you own, odds are parts of it or all of it came from Foxconn. Foxconn essentially runs a city to manufacture goods. No one can do that.

ALso add on, you're ignoring the immediate impact. If the cost of every computer, phone, tablet, TV, Game Console, etc. jumped 100-200 bucks, the market for consumer electronics would plummet. If cheap little BS toys and games doubled in price,that market woudl be decimated. Going on a holy war with China is gonna **** us. Also add in that China is a huge buyer in the dollar.
 
sturg33 said:
I don't think you're capable of disagreeing with someone without trying to belittle them...

typical leftist
Click to expand...

That's hardly typical of any section of the spectrum; if anything, it's typically human.
 
thethe said:
Love the meltdown of the left. Their TYRANNICAL reign globally is coming to an end and they know it.
Click to expand...

It's also true that no end of the political spectrum has a monopoly on rank hyperbole, I see.
 
jpx7 said:
It's also true that no end of the political spectrum has a monopoly on rank hyperbole, I see.
Click to expand...

The controlling of speech and thought is tyranny. Just because it's wrong to hate doesn't mean we should prevent people from doing it as long as they are not inflicting real pain on others.
 
thethe said:
If person a wants to hate person b for any reason without inflicting real harm then person a has every right to feel the way they do.
Click to expand...

What, precisely, is "real harm"? Who defines it, as such?

To be clear, I'm not advocating rigorous speech- or thought-policing; but hate-speech, discriminatory activity, and the attempts to counterbalance that sort of free expression with safe-spaces, trigger-warnings, anti-discriminatory regulations, and the like, are not necessarily cut-and-dried domains, on either side. Going overboard in either direction, I think, isn't particularly helpful most of the time; I also don't think clear exaggerations like "the left's tyrannical global reign of suppression" aren't helpful, either.
 
thethe said:
If person a wants to hate person b for any reason without inflicting real harm then person a has every right to feel the way they do.
Click to expand...

People have a right to say what they want as long as they don't violate another persons civil rights.
 
jpx7 said:
What, precisely, is "real harm"? Who defines it, as such?

To be clear, I'm not advocating rigorous speech- or thought-policing; but hate-speech, discriminatory activity, and the attempts to counterbalance that sort of free expression with safe-spaces, trigger-warnings, anti-discriminatory regulations, and the like, are not necessarily cut-and-dried domains, on either side. Going overboard in either direction, I think, isn't particularly helpful most of the time; I also don't think clear exaggerations like "the left's tyrannical global reign of suppression" aren't helpful, either.
Click to expand...

Yes real harm is vague but for the most part I define it as physical harm.
 
Krgrecw said:
People have a right to say what they want as long as they don't violate another persons civil rights.
Click to expand...

Those are my feelings as well. Some may think I'm a hateful person but if you knew me or met me in real life that would the last thing you would think.
 
Ronald Klain
Verified account
‏@RonaldKlain
Donald Trump gave his Foundation's largest donor a CABINET spot yesterday. Did you see blaring headlines? Imagine if HRC had done that??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top