Election 2016

[rentdodger1]

I still don't think talking politics on message boards is healthy for the board or it's members but yesterday was such a historic day. A business man with little or no political experience is the president. The First Lady was a model with very little college, but has done nude photos. A young child running around the White House, first since the Kennedy kids. I'm not worried about Trumps lack of experience, he has enough business experience to know to surround himself with the best minds he can.

Now my last comment on politics........I hope . The protesting is sad and unnecessary, kind of like all the celebrities saying if Trumps wins they will move to Canada.... I wonder if any are packing yet. One thing it shows we are truly still a nation divided. With luck that will change in the next four years.....or eight. All we can do is hope Trump can help this country.

Putting a businessman in a political seat makes as much sense as putting a politician in a businessman's seat, does it not?

I'm all for talking politics within the communities we function in. If we can't here, we're basically doomed to talk to our dog about what we believe in.

Personally, the issue I hold above all others is environmental protection. The short-term economic gains that will be made from de-regulation of the energy sector are going to result in permanent losses to air quality, water quality, and world climate we live in. Truly saddened by what Trump intends to put forth.

Unfortunately, you are very astutely spot on.

[Phenom]

Alan supported Trump...who woulda thunk it?

[Alan]

Alan supported Trump...who woulda thunk it?

So is why I don't like politics on boards

[StevensTechU]

I think a business man or women like Trump can transition to the president pretty easily. They shouldn't be bound be previous political commitments or campaign funders. Where as a politician put in business is more likely to be out of there eliment. In my corporate life I have seen too many fresh out of school mba's put in a position of power without knowledge of business operations......rarely ended well..

As far as what issues are important to me is controlled government spending, affordable health care, controlled borders, of course environmental and a growing, healthy economy for starts.

They're simply reciprocals of one another. Both are complex positions requiring long hours, and if being a politician isn't a magic bullet for being a good businessperson, the opposite is equally true. I'm always confused by people justifying how selling tires or real estate means someone's going to be great at setting economic policy or selecting the best plan to fight ISIS. If having a businessperson with no political experience makes sense, then so does having a real estate developer be the new coach of Oregon football...

Not to say that I think businesspeople (noteworthy: that very much includes me) shouldn't hold office, but I think they should show their ability to govern by doing a great job as mayors, governors, senators or representatives.

[StevensTechU]

Alan supported Trump...who woulda thunk it?

Have more class, please.

[UOducksTK1]

The irony of people protesting because they are "fear" what Trump will do, while they vandalize, harass people/cars, burn American flags, block traffic, have hateful signs, etc...

The level of hate by Clinton supporters is scary.

I still don't think talking politics on message boards is healthy for the board or it's members but yesterday was such a historic day.

Meh, it's off topic. If people don't want to politics, they shouldn't view this board. Both sides should feel free to say their opinions.

[rentdodger1]

I still don't think talking politics on message boards is healthy for the board or it's members but yesterday was such a historic day. A business man with little or no political experience is the president. The First Lady was a model with very little college, but has done nude photos. A young child running around the White House, first since the Kennedy kids. I'm not worried about Trumps lack of experience, he has enough business experience to know to surround himself with the best minds he can.

Now my last comment on politics........I hope . The protesting is sad and unnecessary, kind of like all the celebrities saying if Trumps wins they will move to Canada.... I wonder if any are packing yet. One thing it shows we are truly still a nation divided. With luck that will change in the next four years.....or eight. All we can do is hope Trump can help this country.

Putting a businessman in a political seat makes as much sense as putting a politician in a businessman's seat, does it not?

I'm all for talking politics within the communities we function in. If we can't here, we're basically doomed to talk to our dog about what we believe in.

Personally, the issue I hold above all others is environmental protection. The short-term economic gains that will be made from de-regulation of the energy sector are going to result in permanent losses to air quality, water quality, and world climate we live in. Truly saddened by what Trump intends to put forth.

I have seen it happen on message boards before, friends be come enemies, bitter name calling and vulgarities used, members banned. This a good site with it's rules and I like it, TK allows politics is is fine with me, I will usually elect not to participate. With that said here's more participation on my part .

I think a business man or women like Trump can transition to the president pretty easily. They shouldn't be bound be previous political commitments or campaign funders. Where as a politician put in business is more likely to be out of there eliment. In my corporate life I have seen too many fresh out of school mba's put in a position of power without knowledge of business operations......rarely ended well..

As far as what issues are important to me is controlled government spending, affordable health care, controlled borders, of course environmental and a growing, healthy economy for starts.

I think most reasonable people would agree that list would be the foundation of the "Goldilocks zone" for effective federal governance.

The problem is Charlie Brown just elected Lucy to hold the football.......again.

I really hope someone can come on this forum a year from now and tell me I was wrong.

[DaDads]

I don't have to wait a year. I can tell you that now.

[FlDuckFan]

I think most reasonable people would agree that list would be the foundation of the "Goldilocks zone" for effective federal governance.

The problem is Charlie Brown just elected Lucy to hold the football.......again.

I really hope someone can come on this forum a year from now and tell me I was wrong.

I think your statement here has the potential to be wrong and is the very reason why Trump was elected. As a country we've been electing Lucy to hold the football and this time we picked someone completely different. Is there a chance he picks it up before we kick? Yes. I could be completely wrong and if I am I look forward to learning from it.

I didn't vote for Trump but, I will respect him and the office. I've never been a fan for the last 16 years of how people would disrespect the President be it Bush or Obama. The person should be respected as should the people who they serve and represent.

[StevensTechU]

A lot of what got Trump elected seems to be a collective agreement that things are broken.

Unemployment is down to 5%. Carbon emissions are slowing. More people are getting college degrees. Crime is down overall in the country. What am I missing?

There's certainly an issue with there being a shrinking middle class, but is championing de-regulation going to reverse that? That'd be a pretty peculiar stance, since the biggest gainers of that would be a lot of my clients, the owners and executives of businesses within the energy sector.

[rentdodger1]

I don't have to wait a year. I can tell you that now.

Nostradamus from Queen Creek? We'll see

[Phalanx]

A lot of what got Trump elected seems to be a collective agreement that things are broken.

Unemployment is down to 5%. Carbon emissions are slowing. More people are getting college degrees. Crime is down overall in the country. What am I missing?

There's certainly an issue with there being a shrinking middle class, but is championing de-regulation going to reverse that? That'd be a pretty peculiar stance, since the biggest gainers of that would be a lot of my clients, the owners and executives of businesses within the energy sector.

You are missing that health care costs, college costs, and housing costs are all going through the roof, rising far faster than incomes, and therefore quality of life has decreased dramatically among the unwashed masses. While spiking housing prices have driven up net worth statistics, wealth outside of one's domicile is way down, personal debt and government debt are way up. As Warren Buffett said a number of years ago, we have become a nation of sharecroppers. The banks are the landowners, and the lion's share of most folks' paychecks go to debt payments to them. You are missing that people would like to be able to keep more of the fruits of their own labor rather than giving it to governments led by cronies who all make each other millionaires off of government largesse, and that Hillary is their leader.

[StevensTechU]

You are missing that health care costs, college costs, and housing costs are all going through the roof, rising far faster than incomes, and therefore quality of life has decreased dramatically among the unwashed masses. While spiking housing prices have driven up net worth statistics, wealth outside of one's domicile is way down, personal debt and government debt are way up. As Warren Buffett said a number of years ago, we have become a nation of sharecroppers. The banks are the landowners, and the lion's share of most folks' paychecks go to debt payments to them. You are missing that people would like to be able to keep more of the fruits of their own labor rather than giving it to governments led by cronies who all make each other millionaires off of government largesse, and that Hillary is their leader.

I have to challenge you on a few points:

Are healthcare costs, college costs, and housing costs the responsibility of the federal government/President of the United States? If so, do you propose that the federal government* 1) owns the assets so as to charge what they want or 2) places more regulation on these industries so as to control prices?

Can you offer me some evidence that "quality of life has decreased dramatically"? I'm not 100% confident that I disagree, but I can also easily point to houses/televisions/beds that are bigger than ever, more people have healthcare and the quality has improved, people travel more, crime is down, etc.

People always want to keep more fruits of their labor. Self preservation is an instinct that humans and animals all share. But the facts are that taxation has decreased every decade since the 1950s, yet we get more from government than we ever have. Seems things are already trending pretty well (and also explains our explosive deficit). Shrinking middle class is a serious issue, though. Consumer protection, organized labor, fair markets are extremely important to protecting people who want to work hard and get the share they deserve; I fall short of spoon feeding people, though, and excluding people from sharing in the cost of having the great country we have.

[Phalanx]

You are missing that health care costs, college costs, and housing costs are all going through the roof, rising far faster than incomes, and therefore quality of life has decreased dramatically among the unwashed masses. While spiking housing prices have driven up net worth statistics, wealth outside of one's domicile is way down, personal debt and government debt are way up. As Warren Buffett said a number of years ago, we have become a nation of sharecroppers. The banks are the landowners, and the lion's share of most folks' paychecks go to debt payments to them. You are missing that people would like to be able to keep more of the fruits of their own labor rather than giving it to governments led by cronies who all make each other millionaires off of government largesse, and that Hillary is their leader.

I have to challenge you on a few points:

Are healthcare costs, college costs, and housing costs the responsibility of the federal government/President of the United States? If so, do you propose that the federal government* 1) owns the assets so as to charge what they want or 2) places more regulation on these industries so as to control prices?

Can you offer me some evidence that "quality of life has decreased dramatically"? I'm not 100% confident that I disagree, but I can also easily point to houses/televisions/beds that are bigger than ever, more people have healthcare and the quality has improved, people travel more, crime is down, etc.

People always want to keep more fruits of their labor. Self preservation is an instinct that humans and animals all share. But the facts are that taxation has decreased every decade since the 1950s, yet we get more from government than we ever have. Seems things are already trending pretty well (and also explains our explosive deficit). Shrinking middle class is a serious issue, though. Consumer protection, organized labor, fair markets are extremely important to protecting people who want to work hard and get the share they deserve; I fall short of spoon feeding people, though, and excluding people from sharing in the cost of having the great country we have.

I have to be honest: I don't have the time or inclination to have a big discussion about the country, role of government, and taxes with you. My own views are pretty libertarian, and while I don't view health care as a function of government, government has injected itself into the healthcare equation such that it has become the president's responsibility that the costs are skyrocketing. Everything in that industry is being controlled, from prices to supply.

I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that taxation is decreasing, but I see a pointless semantic argument on the horizon that i would rather avoid. Inflation is a tax, and government policies that spike housing prices, college prices, and health care prices are also taxes. It saves time simply to look at wealth statistics and realize that the majority of Americans are growing poorer, while government steadily grows. Some would like to arrest this trend.

[Alan]

You are missing that health care costs, college costs, and housing costs are all going through the roof, rising far faster than incomes, and therefore quality of life has decreased dramatically among the unwashed masses. While spiking housing prices have driven up net worth statistics, wealth outside of one's domicile is way down, personal debt and government debt are way up. As Warren Buffett said a number of years ago, we have become a nation of sharecroppers. The banks are the landowners, and the lion's share of most folks' paychecks go to debt payments to them. You are missing that people would like to be able to keep more of the fruits of their own labor rather than giving it to governments led by cronies who all make each other millionaires off of government largesse, and that Hillary is their leader.

I have to challenge you on a few points:

Are healthcare costs, college costs, and housing costs the responsibility of the federal government/President of the United States? If so, do you propose that the federal government* 1) owns the assets so as to charge what they want or 2) places more regulation on these industries so as to control prices?

Can you offer me some evidence that "quality of life has decreased dramatically"? I'm not 100% confident that I disagree, but I can also easily point to houses/televisions/beds that are bigger than ever, more people have healthcare and the quality has improved, people travel more, crime is down, etc.

People always want to keep more fruits of their labor. Self preservation is an instinct that humans and animals all share. But the facts are that taxation has decreased every decade since the 1950s, yet we get more from government than we ever have. Seems things are already trending pretty well (and also explains our explosive deficit). Shrinking middle class is a serious issue, though. Consumer protection, organized labor, fair markets are extremely important to protecting people who want to work hard and get the share they deserve; I fall short of spoon feeding people, though, and excluding people from sharing in the cost of having the great country we have.

I have to be honest: I don't have the time or inclination to have a big discussion about the country, role of government, and taxes with you. My own views are pretty libertarian, and while I don't view health care as a function of government, government has injected itself into the healthcare equation such that it has become the president's responsibility that the costs are skyrocketing. Everything in that industry is being controlled, from prices to supply.

I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that taxation is decreasing, but I see a pointless semantic argument on the horizon that i would rather avoid. Inflation is a tax, and government policies that spike housing prices, college prices, and health care prices are also taxes. It saves time simply to look at wealth statistics and realize that the majority of Americans are growing poorer, while government steadily grows. Some would like to arrest this trend.

Who would of thunk?