(08-18-2015 01:29 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(08-17-2015 11:47 PM)Avant-Garde Wrote:  I'm looking forward to Trump explaining the details of his economic plan, specifically addressing evil & greedy corporations that are driven or pressured by Wall Street

What if legislation is introduced that gives corporations/companies a tax break -- no taxes or a tax deduction on revenue that is given as a profit sharing with its workers. This can be an incentive for companies looking to lower their tax profile or taxable income.

Fantastic idea, but it's SOCIALIST and therefore cannot be considered.

America's history lacks centuries of literal and figurative rape by royalty, thus corporation propaganda has managed to make anything but bald-faced greed into a sinful idea.

Conversely, SOCIALIST European countries remember that their owners are not their friends, almost by definition.

America is the best place for winners, no one holds you back, but the little guy is just considered, as Trump puts it, a loser.
There are some token programs like Social Security ( which by the way is over 98-99% efficient-- that much of money put in goes to recipients' checks) . Before that the elderly froze in pitiful desperation in far higher numbers.

No, it is not socialist. Sharing the profits of a business is capitalism. Workers work hard, the business makes a profit, they get a share of it. Slack around, the business doesn't make a profit, workers get nothing. It's an incentive to hustle, increase product quality, improve customer service. It improves morale and pride in your company/employer. Certainly not a welfare state.

The goal is to put a stop to runaway greedy corporate capitalism that abuses and takes advantage of workers. When Apple moves manufacturing to China and pays its Chinese workers $5 an hour while making $300-400 profit on an iPhone, or when Disney lays off American workers and brings in foreign workers that it pays 1/3 or 1/2 the pay, that's egregious abuse of its corporate power. This is driven by company executives pressured by Wall Street, its board, and/or activist investors who want increased profits. They want to squeeze every drop of profit from a business while the well being of its workers. 'Corporatism' was a term mentioned earlier and may be the proper term for this type of behavior.

*** On another note, Trump tweeted a couple of tweets that somewhat conflicts (or sends mixed messages) with what was stated in his immigration policy paper.

The first tweet says "I want talented people to come into this country—to work hard and to become citizens. Silicon Valley needs engineers, etc." and the second one says "When foreigners attend our great colleges & want to stay in the U.S., they should not be thrown out of our country."

These statements somewhat conflict with requiring employers to give hiring priority to Americans (and American college grads) since it can be a loophole if a foreigner attends and graduates from a US college. Personally, I think that the pool of talented American workers and college grads in STEM degrees can more than fill these positions.

I'm wondering if he's backtracking on what he stated in his immigration policy paper, of if he's trying to pander to Silicon Valley/California/Hollywood elites (who have way more money than him) because he know that California has 55 electoral college votes - the highest of all the states.

Btw, here's the actual link (instead of the bitly one above) to Trump's latest tweet in the H1B issue
http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/201...han-trump/

With all the talk about the big problems that illegal immigration brings, I'm glad that the problems with the abuse of legal immigration laws are being brought to the public or national view.

A bit of Sailer on Trump's new immigration proposal:

Quote:My hunch is that Trump read Ann Coulter’s ¡Adios, America! a few weeks before his campaign announcement and recognized that immigration skepticism had matured as a philosophy, but nobody running for president was selling it. (The central joke of Coulter’s book, one that Trump’s candidacy now makes even funnier, is that white liberals don’t realize that by amping up immigration, they are making their purported worst nightmares come true. And not just economically, but also culturally: the ostentatious Trump brand of luxury high-rises promoted by his reality TV show appearances, for example, is not one that would appeal as much in a more rooted society with more discriminating tastes. But in multicultural, globalist New York, Trump’s self-promotion over the decades has successfully made his name synonymous with that most broadly appealing value of the age, money.)

Why weren’t they?

Candidates who aren’t entertaining enough to get themselves free airtime are beholden to wealthy donors. And one of the strongest forces in the world in recent decades has also been one of the least discussed: class solidarity among billionaires.

Now, you might think that having a billion dollars would free you to indulge in a Trump-like blast of a good time telling unwelcome truths. But in reality, we largely have a highly disciplined class of the extremely rich, who gather frequently in Davos and Aspen to be informed of the latest talking points about why any resistance to them is racist.

While the rich and powerful used to gloomily plot together in secret Bilderberg confabs, the current generation finds it more effective to invite the media to their conferences on how to fight nativist bigotry (and, by the way, high wages) by flooding working-class neighborhoods with Third Worlders. Thus, billionaires and journalists have become coconspirators against the public weal. That’s a tough tag team to beat.

Over the past two months, Trump has caused a sensation by violating billionaire class solidarity by criticizing mass immigration, the single most unifying political issue for plutocrats. Last year I went through the Forbes 400 and noted the superbillionaires who had made themselves conspicuous by donating publicly to the push for more immigration, such as Bill Gates, the Koch brothers, Michael Bloomberg, Sheldon Adelson, George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, Rupert Murdoch, and the widow Jobs. And a large fraction of the other top dogs, such as Warren Buffett and Larry Ellison, had at least paid lip service to increasing immigration.

http://takimag.com/article/stumbling_upo...z3j9UQwYXQ

Bush wants to expand NSA's powers to fight evildoers.

http://www.engadget.com/2015/08/19/jeb-b...evildoers/

Go away Jeb. Please, just go away.

99,580 'Other Than Mexican' Families, Children Apprehended on Southwest Border So Far in FY 2015

The Illegal Invaders:

(08-19-2015 02:20 PM)captain_shane Wrote:  Bush wants to expand NSA's powers to fight evildoers.

http://www.engadget.com/2015/08/19/jeb-b...evildoers/

Go away Jeb. Please, just go away.

Hah - Bush 3.0 has been activated.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/candi...ck-record/

FiveThirtyEight's latest piece on Trump, noting that candidates who were ahead in the polls with numbers in the 20s at this point don't have a great track record of winning their nominations. They're painting a picture where people who ended up being the nomination generally had even bigger leads at this point.

In 2008 McCain was not doing well in the polls until very late in the process, when he then won.

In 2012 Romney led over the summer before the primaries with a similar lead to Trump, about 21%.

So this rule is far from hard and fast.

(08-19-2015 02:52 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/candi...ck-record/

FiveThirtyEight's piece on Trump, noting that candidates who were ahead in the polls with numbers in the 20s at this point don't have a great track record of winning their nominations. They're painting a picture where people who ended up being the nomination generally had even bigger leads at this point.

I think Trump's two biggest worries, or at least, what worries me the most is...

#1) He goes too far in saying something off the cuff. I hope he doesn't say something too UN-PC that destroys his campaign. I think with the McCain thing he was a goner. The way he bounced back tells me he has a lot of room to say what he wants because the people are fed up with DC. But he could still go too far, and I hope he does not.

#2) The older GOP voter base. These are the baby boomers/just younger than baby boomers, who have had it easy all their lives. They always had a good job, and others to turn to if things went sour. They bought a house and had a family by 30. They retired very comfortably by 55 or 60. Pretty much they sucked up all the advantages the greatest generation gave to them and pissed them all away and now they are done the country is bankrupt.

These people do not understand how much the Gen X and Gen Y are struggling. And they think it is just because they are "lazy" when the Gen X and Gen Y people will work longer hours for far less per COL. So they think the status quo is fine and they like their PC squeaky clean Bush and Rubio's of the world.

If we can do get a stock market correction, as expected, later this fall, maybe that will wake these morons up to problems other than their yard/golf game.

Just read thru the website for Zuckerberg's project to increase H1B visas - FWD.us

Reading thru all the BS and misleading statements in there (eg: 'FWD.us isn’t an interest group', 'Glaring achievement gaps undercut our education system.', 'America’s longstanding leadership in scientific research and technological innovation is in jeopardy') was nauseating. Like Zuck's 'Internet.org' project that only has access to 10-20 websites and not the actual internet.

I think it's fine to allow immigration of top notch talent who can create businesses that employ Americans (Sergey Brin is an immigrant, Nikola Tesla was an immigrant, etc) but this pool is just a fraction of the hundreds of thousands (now totaling millions) of bottom level foreign workers being brought in to take jobs, not create them.

I do worry - the FWD.us website lists billionaires and tech industry heavyweights, so they're likely to put up a big fight. They have some pull right now since the Obama administration has been in their pocket since Facebook was critical to Obama winning the elections.

And it seems like Trump is kowtowing to them with his latest tweets.

(08-19-2015 03:02 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  #1) He goes too far in saying something off the cuff. I hope he doesn't say something too UN-PC that destroys his campaign.

Trump's entire campaign is based around saying Un-PC things.

(08-19-2015 03:10 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

(08-19-2015 03:02 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  #1) He goes too far in saying something off the cuff. I hope he doesn't say something too UN-PC that destroys his campaign.

Trump's entire campaign is based around saying Un-PC things.

Yeah true, but there are some things that could be said that would kill his campaign. But I don't believe he's stupid enough to say them, like say Dog the Bounty Hunter and Hulk Hogan were.

(08-19-2015 03:02 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(08-19-2015 02:52 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/candi...ck-record/

FiveThirtyEight's piece on Trump, noting that candidates who were ahead in the polls with numbers in the 20s at this point don't have a great track record of winning their nominations. They're painting a picture where people who ended up being the nomination generally had even bigger leads at this point.

I think Trump's two biggest worries, or at least, what worries me the most is...

#1) He goes too far in saying something off the cuff. I hope he doesn't say something too UN-PC that destroys his campaign. I think with the McCain thing he was a goner. The way he bounced back tells me he has a lot of room to say what he wants because the people are fed up with DC. But he could still go too far, and I hope he does not.

#2) The older GOP voter base. These are the baby boomers/just younger than baby boomers, who have had it easy all their lives. They always had a good job, and others to turn to if things went sour. They bought a house and had a family by 30. They retired very comfortably by 55 or 60. Pretty much they sucked up all the advantages the greatest generation gave to them and pissed them all away and now they are done the country is bankrupt.

These people do not understand how much the Gen X and Gen Y are struggling. And they think it is just because they are "lazy" when the Gen X and Gen Y people will work longer hours for far less per COL. So they think the status quo is fine and they like their PC squeaky clean Bush and Rubio's of the world.

If we can do get a stock market correction, as expected, later this fall, maybe that will wake these morons up to problems other than their yard/golf game.

Excellent point. You mention Bush and Rubio, but I've seen a somewhat similar thing when it comes to Baby Boomer women and Hillary Clinton.

These women act like it's still 1972 and women have no foothold in the workplace and are not going to college in higher numbers than men. In other words, they're fighting a battle that's long since become irrelevant ("Women's rights!!") and don't understand we have new sets of issues to deal with.

I think this is the result of having come of age in easy economic conditions. You fight theoretical political battles -- as opposed to Gen X and Millennials, to which the political issues are pretty real and affect their everyday lives.

(08-19-2015 03:02 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  I think Trump's two biggest worries, or at least, what worries me the most is...

#1) He goes too far in saying something off the cuff. I hope he doesn't say something too UN-PC that destroys his campaign.

Only if he goes after the Israel lobby. That's career suicide in the US. And that won't happen since he has already declared his support and is well-connected with the Jewish Cosa Nostra in NYC.

(08-19-2015 03:37 PM)captain_shane Wrote:  

(08-19-2015 03:10 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

(08-19-2015 03:02 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  #1) He goes too far in saying something off the cuff. I hope he doesn't say something too UN-PC that destroys his campaign.

Trump's entire campaign is based around saying Un-PC things.

Yeah true, but there are some things that could be said that would kill his campaign. But I don't believe he's stupid enough to say them, like say Dog the Bounty Hunter and Hulk Hogan were.

"Trump drops N-Bomb, poll numbers shoot through the roof!"

I wouldn't be surprised

(08-19-2015 03:44 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(08-19-2015 03:02 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(08-19-2015 02:52 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/candi...ck-record/

FiveThirtyEight's piece on Trump, noting that candidates who were ahead in the polls with numbers in the 20s at this point don't have a great track record of winning their nominations. They're painting a picture where people who ended up being the nomination generally had even bigger leads at this point.

I think Trump's two biggest worries, or at least, what worries me the most is...

#1) He goes too far in saying something off the cuff. I hope he doesn't say something too UN-PC that destroys his campaign. I think with the McCain thing he was a goner. The way he bounced back tells me he has a lot of room to say what he wants because the people are fed up with DC. But he could still go too far, and I hope he does not.

#2) The older GOP voter base. These are the baby boomers/just younger than baby boomers, who have had it easy all their lives. They always had a good job, and others to turn to if things went sour. They bought a house and had a family by 30. They retired very comfortably by 55 or 60. Pretty much they sucked up all the advantages the greatest generation gave to them and pissed them all away and now they are done the country is bankrupt.

These people do not understand how much the Gen X and Gen Y are struggling. And they think it is just because they are "lazy" when the Gen X and Gen Y people will work longer hours for far less per COL. So they think the status quo is fine and they like their PC squeaky clean Bush and Rubio's of the world.

If we can do get a stock market correction, as expected, later this fall, maybe that will wake these morons up to problems other than their yard/golf game.

Excellent point. You mention Bush and Rubio, but I've seen a somewhat similar thing when it comes to Baby Boomer women and Hillary Clinton.

These women act like it's still 1972 and women have no foothold in the workplace and are not going to college in higher numbers than men. In other words, they're fighting a battle that's long since become irrelevant ("Women's rights!!") and don't understand we have new sets of issues to deal with.

I think this is the result of having come of age in easy economic conditions. You fight theoretical political battles -- as opposed to Gen X and Millennials, to which the political issues are pretty real and affect their everyday lives.

This is 100% true. I have women on my FB always posting shit about women "overcoming" things. My mother is one of them. She has some stupid shit on her email signature that's probably misquoted:

“The woman who follows the crowd will usually go no further than the crowd.

The woman who walks alone is likely to find herself in places no one has ever been before.”― Albert Einstein

She's in a perpetual state of victimhood. Nothing was ever her fault. If she lost her job it was because she was a woman, not because she has a shitty domineering attitude.

It drives me insane. I can't even speak to her for more than a few minutes.

Trump on CNN tonight at 9pm.

I have to admit I'm beginning to like Trump as a candidate. His success, as well as Bernie Sanders', is very encouraging.

Washington's "business as usual" seems to be falling apart. As does Hillary's campaign.

The 18-25 bracket is just stupid enough to get Sanders the nomination as well. Which bodes well for a Republican candidate.

It's basic free market vs. socialism candidacy - imagine a debate between Bernie and Trump.

I'd pay PPV for that.

Interesting article about Donald and his wife:

http://nypost.com/2015/08/16/melania-tru...-the-ages/

Quote:“We have incredible sex at least once a day,” Melania told Howard Stern that year. “Sometimes even more.” Trump boasted about how hot Melania looked in “a very small thong.”

Eat your heart out, Eleanor Roosevelt.

So who is this 5-foot-11, 35-24-35 model who would be first lady?

I can just imagine the fatties going up in arms at that particular one.

Quote:“Melania was a very quiet, thin girl who appeared not to have too much aspiration for being a model,” Jerko, now 77, tells The Post. “She struck me more like a bookworm. I never expected that she would become a world-famous beauty.”

Quote:He described the future Mrs. Trump, who moved to New York in 1996, as being determined and very professional when it came to her career.

She was a homebody, not a “party girl,” he told The Post in 2005.

“This is a woman who modeled for Camel cigarettes on a huge billboard in Times Square but stayed home all the time,” he said.

In other words, she seems like an embodiment of the type of the elegant, demure femininity that I described here. That's what I want to see in a first lady. She did take her career seriously, but it was a feminine career, not some paper pusher in an office.

Quote:“She was reserved,” the former model once said. “The first party she ever came to with me was the one she met Donald at.”

That would be a party hosted by Zampolli at the Kit Kat Club during New York Fashion Week in 1998. She was 28. He was 52.

It was love at first sight for Trump, but when the well-known womanizer tried to get Melania’s number, she refused, asking that he give her his instead.

“I am not a girl who will just give away the number to anybody,” she later told The New York Times.

According to Molnar, the model was initially “turned off” by the billionaire.

“Melania said, ‘He’s here with a woman. I am absolutely not giving him my number.’ She wouldn’t even consider it,” she recalled.

Instead, Donald gave her all of his numbers — business and home — and she called him when she returned from a modeling trip.

Interesting. Has this ever worked for any of you? If a girl tells me to give her my number I just refuse because I know it means she's not interested. I'm surprised Donald did this, from a game standpoint, but of course he's Donald Trump. He's operating in a whole different league than me.

Quote:“She’s European, and I have a sense that she’s like a lot of European women. They have that talent for standing back and letting him be up front.”

An actual woman. Perhaps she could encourage North American women to change their behavior.

Anyway, the Post is a right wing paper, but I'm seeing more and more media acceptance of Trump as a potential president, even on tabloid shows which ripped into him for being "racist" in June.

You know the old saying of what happens after they fight you.

Just more proof as to how brilliant he is - he found an EE model who likes to stay home and not ride the cock carousel and he locked it up. Probably also has an airtight prenup.

(08-19-2015 06:49 PM)Libertas Wrote:  Instead, Donald gave her all of his numbers — business and home — and she called him when she returned from a modeling trip.

Interesting. Has this ever worked for any of you? If a girl tells me to give her my

I got a BJ from 20yo virgin that refused to give her number during day game but took mine. Some girls that scare easily will do this.

It can work.

Oh they've already started bashing her. I saw an article today where some dbag that posted it said something like "Can you believe 25% of Republicans actually want THIS to be our president and first lady?? LOL".

The article had a lot of her sexier photos from modeling.

I would give my number. What's to lose? However I wouldn't do it unless she was really hot and I felt like doing some work.

Trump vs. Sanders

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-19...rges-polls

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/08/1...chor-baby/

Quote:Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump debated the use of the term “anchor baby” with a reporter at a press conference in New Hampshire on Wednesday.

Trump was asked, “You said that you have a big heart, and that you’re not mean-spirited. Are you aware that the term ‘anchor baby,’ that’s an offensive term? People find that hurtful.”

Trump responded, “You mean it’s not politically correct, and yet everybody uses it?” He then suggested the reporter give him a different term to use, to which the reporter suggested “The American-born [children] of undocumented immigrants.” Trump said in response, “I’ll use the word ‘anchor baby.'”

That's like passing a shit test.