Donald Trump will retain his role as executive producer of 'The Apprentice'

[Mehrunes]

THAT is debatable...

And building your argument simply 'spite spite spite', is a reason why its impossible to have a decent discussion with your kind of people, cause you are so into your own victim complex that you don't see anything else than 'me me me'.

Well, no, they also see "the previous working class replaced by current working class". In fact, it's only them who see such phenomenon. Must require some hardcore enlightenment.

[RickJamesLich]

Nope. Liberals think that Obama can do no wrong because he is a black man on the Democrat ticket. Just like they thought Hillary could do no wrong because she is a woman on the democrat ticket. If you are a democrat and you play ball the democrat way- then you are a god...if you are a democrat and you don't...then you are a traitor. If oyu aren't a democrat that to democrats...you just need to die off. THAT is the tolerance and the mind-set of the race baiting/gender baiting Democrat party.

Yeah that's the sad part of this whole issue. I wish they understood how hypocritical it makes them look when they don't want to extend their criticisms to their own party. Too bad they will never understand this.

[Aggrophobic]

Oh, America. You must be so proud.

[knudnat]

Producer? I guess that's fine, don't know if I'd want to see him acting on the show while he's president.

A recent poll showed that Americans were surprisingly lenient about him keeping his businesses. Some of his detractors point out that they will cause "conflict of interest" problems.

Not even producer, EXECUTIVE PRODUCER. Which basically is a credit for him be a co-creator of the show and perhaps providing money to make the show at some point. This is akin to saying Ronald Reagan should have had all his movie credits removed when he became president.

There are plenty of things to be outraged about Trump, this is a really stupid one.

[Mehrunes]

The USA and UK economy will both thrive under Trump and Brexit.

Brexit negotiations didn't even start and yet UK already is going further away from thriving.

[Nadiru]

But how does reducing regulations, minimum wages and the power of unions empower the low paid? You say he makes too much sense, but so far I see no real argument here. I am not a fan of minimum wage, but I am also highly skeptical of trickle down economics.

Okay, so I can actually field this one. For Trump's policies to work, he must take the following axioms:

1) American workers are underemployed or are unemployed.
2) For some reason or another these un/underemployed workers are not counted in the unemployment data.
3) The only reason American workers are not fully employed is due to trade intervention on behalf of China, Mexico, Germany, and Japan (there are others but those are kind of the Big Four)

By adopting policies which essentially subsidize native industrial production in the US instead of the current stance of outsourcing, Trump is attempting to get American workers who are basically invisible to the system, back into the system. To do this, he's going to harm the workforce a little bit: Unions are going to be made less good, minimum wage laws might get ratcheted down a notch, etc. If successful, the gain from putting more households back into employment (and thus taxable income) will outweigh the loss of labor protections and whatever else goes on. If the gamble doesn't pay off, the opposite will occur.

Trade intervention and slapping outsourced products with tariffs isn't trickle-down economics in any meaningful way, though. In fact it's somewhat the opposite.

[Mehrunes]

Congratulations on not responding to any of my points, but just spouting meaningless insults. Really helps to move the debate along.

Not sure what else you expected from MMO-C Brexit supporter to be honest.

[minteK917]

Okay, so I can actually field this one. For Trump's policies to work, he must take the following axioms:

1) American workers are underemployed or are unemployed.
2) For some reason or another these un/underemployed workers are not counted in the unemployment data.
3) The only reason American workers are not fully employed is due to trade intervention on behalf of China, Mexico, Germany, and Japan (there are others but those are kind of the Big Four)

By adopting policies which essentially subsidize native industrial production in the US instead of the current stance of outsourcing, Trump is attempting to get American workers who are basically invisible to the system, back into the system. To do this, he's going to harm the workforce a little bit: Unions are going to be made less good, minimum wage laws might get ratcheted down a notch, etc. If successful, the gain from putting more households back into employment (and thus taxable income) will outweigh the loss of labor protections and whatever else goes on. If the gamble doesn't pay off, the opposite will occur.

Trade intervention and slapping outsourced products with tariffs isn't trickle-down economics in any meaningful way, though. In fact it's somewhat the opposite.

4 Years in the future cant come soon enough lol. That gamble will never pay off, its not even feasible. His first target are destroying the lives of the very people that put him in office. Dis gona be good.

[Mehrunes]

Absolutely.

I chose to protect myself from a wing of politics that was hurting me.

So i non-maliciously, spitefully, chose to hurt them back in an act of self defence.

Spite : a malicious, usually petty, desire to harm, annoy, frustrate, or humiliate another person; bitter ill will; malice.

Your squirming about how your spite vote wasn't out of spite (not evolved into non-maliciousness) is just pathetic. Stop and don't embarrass yourself further.

[Nadiru]

4 Years in the future cant come soon enough lol. That gamble will never pay off, its not even feasible. His first target are destroying the lives of the very people that put him in office. Dis gona be good.

Well, maybe or maybe not. There are definitely arguments to be made about American unemployment stats not fully reflecting the workerbase, and it's basically a given that countries with a large vested interest in exporting to the US intervene in trade through currency revaluations relative to the USD. Trump might tunnel-vision on China (the worst offender in absolute terms) but many countries in the world do it to some extent or another.

[Mehrunes]

Unions exist to buy votes under the guise of public sector rights.

Right wing Governments understand that strong taxation supports a strong public sector.

The only way a strong taxation system can exist is to empower the private sector.

Thats why the Left is consistently accussed of being regressive. Because it is.

Right wing governments also consistently shit on worker rights, GOP being a prime example with their trickle down economy fantasy.

[drakensoul]

Right wing governments also consistently shit on worker rights, GOP being a prime example with their trickle down economy fantasy.

Trickle right into my pocket where I can stash it away from those needy food stamp people! Isn't that what you do when someone gives you more money? Hoard the majority of it for later?

[Mehrunes]

Yeah, because the democrats getting rich while giving people like you and me crumbs was a GREAT option, right?
Wanna know what the Dems brought back? Part-time jobs with no coverage. Jobs that pay you like it is 1999 and not 2016.
TEMP jobs and low skill paying jobs. Thanks Obama.

I have no clue why you're limping me with you. And thanks Obama? Congress was either split or GOP dominated during Obama's tenure and these laws were in their control. And part time jobs with no coverage, even if you managed to put them entirely on Democrat's hands, is still not as bad as things like trying to remove minimum wage or introducing trickle down economics which only works if you phrase it in context of the entire economy trickling down the drain.

[Varaben]

The South Korean president was literally in a cult where she worshipped a crazy person and followed her every command. She then fired a lot of her advisors and replaced them with fellow cult members. Kind of a different situation.

Honestly it doesn't sound very different. Or was your post sarcastic? He's putting some downright ludicrous people in his cabinet.

[RickJamesLich]

If a country, like the Scandinavian ones, have strong unions, you don't need min. wage. But sadly, the US has a hate boner for them

Unions if left unchecked can be just as corrupt as corporations. Without knowing much about the Scandinavian unions, I'm wonder if they are simply less corrupt?

For example in the US, unions have often excluded minorities. They employ practices where their newest members do the vast bulk of difficult work, but at the same time if layoffs happen, these newest members are the only ones on the chopping block. Older members are often put in positions where they do little to no work. In cases where a company cannot sustain the budget created by a union, the union will often opt to have it's youngest workers laid off as opposed to the older members taking pay cuts, even when the older member are getting paid absurd rates.

My dad for example was in a union, no joke he'd go to work for about 2 hours, come home, and sleep, and get paid for 8 hour days. As a kid I remember all sorts of stories about guys showing up to work drunk, doing dangerous things (one guy drove a golf cart up an escalator lol), you could essentially get away with a lot of things without getting fired.

Just some of the problems, I'm not saying that unions are all bad - without them many workers would have a lot less rights, and as I mentioned, corporations can be extremely brutal too. There's no easy solution here but unions can be dangerous and that's why a lot of people have an issue with them.

[BourneWolf]

Right wing governments also consistently shit on worker rights, GOP being a prime example with their trickle down economy fantasy.

Ive yet to see ANY system that in practice doesnt make the rich richer and screw the poor.

The thing with capitalism though is that it rewards the intelligent hard workers, whilst socialism punishes them.

Lesser of two evils for non-lazy people is definately capitalism.
Lesser of two evils for lazy people is socialism.

Im not lazy and work very, very hard.

Freeloaders dont deserve a penny of my work ethic and the Left just hands it to them on a plate.

No thanks.

[Mehrunes]

Yes and I made a choice to vote against the left.

I voted for Obummer in 2008 because unlike most of you liberals I like to think outside of the box and not stick to ONE fucking party.
This time I voted for Trump because Obama's "change" is NOT the change I was hoping for. I didn't vote for Hillary because she promised more of the same stupid shit that is Obama and then some. Hillary was the WORST candidate that you idiots could of put up but you thought that America would vote for her because she has a pussy because they voted for Obama for being black...well- if their is anything Obama taught us....is that it is better to vote by merit rather then by identity politics. Thanks for doubling the debt and creating ISIS though. Thanks Obama. Also gotta love that obamacare that nobody can afford. Thanks Dumbocrats....morons...

Obamacare is more affordable than what it replaced. And you do realize the only reason Obamacare is in the state it is is because democrats needed to reach a compromise with GOP, right? The actual solutions they wanted to introduce were much better. And if anyone in US is guilty of creating ISIS it's Bush. You know, the guy responsible for starting an illegal war of aggression under deliberately false pretenses that destabilized the region and created a power vacuum for things like ISIS to fester in.

[Nadiru]

Obamacare is more affordable than what it replaced. And you do realize the only reason Obamacare is in the state it is is because democrats needed to reach a compromise with GOP, right? The actual solutions they wanted to introduce were much better. And if anyone in US is guilty of creating ISIS it's Bush. You know, the guy responsible for starting an illegal war of aggression under deliberately false pretenses that destabilized the region and created a power vacuum for things like ISIS to fester in.

Obamacare is more affordable than what it replaced because it taxes people who weren't paying anything before, mostly poor-or-middle-income people, at that. It represented a handout to both the government and insurance companies, which should've managed to infuriate both the GOP and Democrat base but somehow the Dems just can't stay mad at Obama.

[Mehrunes]

Woah! Woah! Holy shit! Stop! You are making too much sense....liberals don't like that...they just want their money.

Yeah, because Trump voter base is nothing but pure enlightenment. Which is why some of the few major voting sectors he won in are the uneducated and the evangelicals. Nothing but sense right there.

[Kiri]

Okay, so I can actually field this one. For Trump's policies to work, he must take the following axioms:

1) American workers are underemployed or are unemployed.
2) For some reason or another these un/underemployed workers are not counted in the unemployment data.
3) The only reason American workers are not fully employed is due to trade intervention on behalf of China, Mexico, Germany, and Japan (there are others but those are kind of the Big Four)

By adopting policies which essentially subsidize native industrial production in the US instead of the current stance of outsourcing, Trump is attempting to get American workers who are basically invisible to the system, back into the system. To do this, he's going to harm the workforce a little bit: Unions are going to be made less good, minimum wage laws might get ratcheted down a notch, etc. If successful, the gain from putting more households back into employment (and thus taxable income) will outweigh the loss of labor protections and whatever else goes on. If the gamble doesn't pay off, the opposite will occur.

Trade intervention and slapping outsourced products with tariffs isn't trickle-down economics in any meaningful way, though. In fact it's somewhat the opposite.

I do get that he wants to invest heavily into infrastructure and subsidize home-grown products. But since this is, at least in the short term, reducing the tax income from low-income workers while also reducing the taxation on the rich and companies, I am not quite sure where exactly that money is coming from. And it hinders America's ability to adapt to changes in global supply and demand; full subsidiaries are not truly sustainable. I'd rather have him invest in state-sponsored re-training programs and education that artificially keep non-competitive businesses afloat. His stance on coal exemplifies that really well in my opinion.

To be honest though, and I remarked this elsewhere too, I think it is too soon to truly talk about his economic policies. So far, he said a lot of stuff, but he has already gone back on a lot of stuff. He is going to take office soon and then he will implement things which may or may not be similar to what we think right now.