U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-19-2017, 03:21 PM
 
Location: Florida
22,325 posts, read 9,489,425 times
Reputation: 18223

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
the problem isnt that trump is a businessman, but rather the problem is that he won an election when the people were told for two years that there was no way he could win, and that hillary was going to be president.

but remember that the president is the CEO of the country, since he runs the executive branch. and as such should have some business experience. he should have had to make a payroll, among other things.

personally i dont think trump is the one that should be in the oval office, i would have preferred someone like allan mullally, former CEO of ford and boeing. he turned those companies around, and could ahve done the same for the government as well. unfortunately he never ran for president.
The crucial aspect of the businessperson as leader argument is that some CEOs are basically dictators of their companies unless they have to strictly report and answer to their board of directors, who in turn answer to shareholders.

Trump is of the small dictator variety of CEO. Never had to report to a board, never had to form coalitions to accomplish things as a team, hired his kids (which never is a great company policy), stiffed investors and lenders, as his first allegiance was always to himself, and simply went bankrupt when it was the easiest way out.

Combine his personal divisive and confrontational policies in business with his absolute and total lack of knowledge of history, civics, the Constitution and government, and the recipe for failure of leadership is laid out pretty clearly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-19-2017, 03:57 PM
 
Location: Suburb of Chicago
20,738 posts, read 10,057,355 times
Reputation: 20219
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
We're 20 trillion in debt because American politicians won't tell the American people the truth about themselves. What is that truth?

The truth is that Americans are addicted to big government and global military hegemony. Those things are expensive, yet Conservative politicians keep telling Americans that they can have all that AND a big tax cut too. No one ever says "if you people in _________ (fill in the state) want this, then dammit, you've gotta pay for it!"

No, they say "you can have everything you want...oh and by the way, let me cut taxes on the wealthy and gut the regulatory system for my pals. Oh and BTW, let me lavish trillions on the Pentagon. If you let me do that, you'll get rich one day too! And to boot, you can keep your guns!"

That's why we're 20 trillion in debt.
Forbes has had some interesting articles on this. Between 1900 and 2015, the Federal budget had a deficit in 89 out of 116 years (77% of the time). They cited some key things that started us on this course - FDR's New Deal, LBJ's War on Poverty, and Nixon's removal of the gold standard.

All of these have led to an entitlement mentality and nanny state, which is what you're saying.

Local and Federal government won't reduce spending because they'll lose their budget if they do, they're afraid to increase taxes on the upper class and on corporations, for fear they'll move, and they continue increasing taxes on the middle class, which is shrinking.

Not to mention, there are years our citizens spend more on Israel's defense than Israeli citizens do. We send money to countries all over the world. And the Pentagon still hasn't found $8.5 TRILLION dollars they can't account for.

Nearly all money budgeted for welfare doesn't go to welfare recipients and programs, it goes toward administration of those programs.

In Chicago, half the money set aside for education goes to the union.

Spending is out of control.

People aren't saying a businessman needs to be in office because history informs us that this is something that works, they're saying this out of sheer desperation and fear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2017, 06:08 PM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
19,872 posts, read 22,792,815 times
Reputation: 7186
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
Easy. The government is very inefficient and wasteful. I worked for two federal government agencies and am currently working with Social Security now for 8 months to fix a mistake that they made. 8 MONTHS! In a private business, people loss their jobs when they screw up.

Trump is more than a businessman. He is aware of the conditions in the world. Understands economics, and most of all is a patriotic citizen that sees what is happening to a country that he loves, that has been good to him and his family. Trump wants to see others in the country have a chance to excel rather than become the 3rd world dump that Obama/Clinton and associates want in order that they alone may flourish.

It was about globalism vs nationalism, so much more than Trump being a businessman. And, as always, we have the fact that Hillary Clinton was the most morally, mentally and physically unfit candidate to ever run for office.
It's not just "government" that's inefficient and wasteful, private business is too. Why do so many people relate to the Dilbert cartoons? Because those stupid things that happen in Dilbert happen in American (and foreign) businesses throughout the world every single day - that's WHY everyone can relate to it. People read that cartoon and inevitably think "Gee he must work here!".

Despite the GOP myth, there is nothing specific about government that makes it any more wasteful or inefficient than private companies. SIZE adds complexity and inevitably confusion and waste because it becomes harder and harder to manage as that entity (whether a government OR a business) grows. The only real difference is government screw ups are easily made PUBLIC whereas private companies just sweep it under the rug, thus giving folks the impression that the company is well-run machine, when it fact it's a mess. Big companies waste tons of money every day on poorly-executed endeavors that go wrong. The fact that the firms are so large however, allows them to absorb the inefficiencies and continue to chug along. Don't confuse that ability with "being efficient" - they're not, they are just BIG.

SMALL companies are - by necessity - usually pretty efficient (otherwise they fail), but small-scale governments are often pretty efficient too. Likewise, large government becomes less so - but so too does large business. Folks who've worked for really large companies can tell you all kinds of screw-up stories, it's just that generally those stories don't hit the press because the companies are under no obligation to make them public. This gives the impression that "private business" is efficient when in fact, it's NOT.

Ken
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2017, 06:13 PM
 
29,502 posts, read 15,463,692 times
Reputation: 20038
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
No, but I'm OK with her "spots" - Trump is an INCOMPETENT MORON.

"Career politicians" have made this the richest, most powerful and successful nation in history - with levels of individual freedom unheard of in previous ages. If that's not good enough for ya' then sorry, but that's the best you are gonna get. If you disagree with that assessment, gives us an example of large nation or political system that's done a better job for it's citizens - because so far you've not come up with any answers. Trump and Alt-Right are certainly NOT the answer.

Ken
Let's round up the US population to 400 million people.

$20 trillion is $50,000 PER PERSON. So for a family of four, that is $200,000.

My guess is that is more than what 50% of the population has.

Do you have huge credit card debt?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2017, 06:35 PM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
19,872 posts, read 22,792,815 times
Reputation: 7186
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Let's round up the US population to 400 million people.

$20 trillion is $50,000 PER PERSON. So for a family of four, that is $200,000.

My guess is that is more than what 50% of the population has.

Do you have huge credit card debt?
The debt IS higher than I would like, but there are things to consider. First of all, the U.S. is not even in the top-10 countries in the world when it comes to debt to GDP levels - and this DESPITE all our commitments around the world.

Secondly, while the debt IS higher, the debt to GDP ratio (ie the equivalent of a persons debt to income) it's not the highest it's ever been. That debt to GDP was higher after WWI and again after WWII than it is today, and both times that ratio fell dramatically later. The reason for this was economic growth. If the size of the economy grows faster than the size of the debt then debt to GDP ratio falls. In each of those cases emergency situations caused a swelling of the debt. Same thing this time around - we've just emerged from a massive recession that damaged tax revenue and necessitated increased spending.

Where we go from here remains to be seen. As I said, the debt IS too high, but it's not something that can't be overcome with economic growth. Whether that happens or not remains to be seen. I would definitely like to see less spending, the question is WHERE. Personally I'd like to see more of our spending on OUR people and less on the military (Trump wants to INCREASE military spending). I'd also like to see increased taxation on the top earners. The combination of those 2 things could go a long way towards reducing the debt to GDP ratio.

Ken
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2017, 06:45 PM
 
9,701 posts, read 7,258,712 times
Reputation: 9846
It's also a stupid reasoning for Trump, because Trump is a HORRIBLE businessman. He inherited all his money and has been dogged by criminal and civil charges, and multiple bankruptcies, his whole adult life. He's a total pariah among banks, lenders and other businesses. He's really an incredibly awful businessperson. He's a bad joke in the Manhattan business community.

Also, he hasn't really been a "businessman" for 20 years. He stopped building when the banks blackballed him. He's really best known as the host of Celebrity Apprentice. It's like hiring Duck Dynasty or Honey Boo Boo for President and expecting success.

Gee, who would have thought a reality show host wasn't good at international relations or managing a West Wing cabinet. I'm shocked! When the Deplorables get their cancer surgery, I hope they ask for an "anti-establishment outsider", not a real doctor. Wanna drain that medical swamp and all!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2017, 06:50 PM
 
9,701 posts, read 7,258,712 times
Reputation: 9846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova View Post
Because TRUMP is a doer, not a talker only.
Trump has "done" absolutely nothing. He hasn't successfully accomplished a single campaign promise, which is incredible given his party dominates Washington. He couldn't ask for a more favorable environment, yet is the most failed President in history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2017, 06:51 PM
 
6,459 posts, read 3,461,270 times
Reputation: 10258
As a CPA I have always believed that someone with a strong business background would be well suited for POTUS. Trump was NOT the best for this because he lacks any political experience, as politics isn't strictly business. But when you step back and look at the country, it really is a business playing with trillions of dollars, our dollars that we work so hard for. Large businesses are complex with economic and legal issues abound. Government is no different. I have recently thought that "just" a politician has caught up to this country and weakened it. High debt, poor infrastructure, many homeless, throwing away money internationally - the business of our country isn't great, and someone with a business background (and with political background too) is the best way to run this country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2017, 06:52 PM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
19,872 posts, read 22,792,815 times
Reputation: 7186
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
It's also a stupid reasoning for Trump, because Trump is a HORRIBLE businessman. He inherited all his money and has been dogged by criminal and civil charges, and multiple bankruptcies, his whole adult life. He's a total pariah among banks, lenders and other businesses. He's really an incredibly awful businessperson. He's a bad joke in the Manhattan business community.

Also, he hasn't really been a "businessman" for 20 years. He stopped building when the banks blackballed him. He's really best known as the host of Celebrity Apprentice. It's like hiring Duck Dynasty or Honey Boo Boo for President and expecting success.

Gee, who would have thought a reality show host wasn't good at international relations or managing a West Wing cabinet. I'm shocked! When the Deplorables get their cancer surgery, I hope they ask for an "anti-establishment outsider", not a real doctor. Wanna drain that medical swamp and all!
Yup. There's a REASON Trump said "I love debt, I'm the king of debt" - in the past he's owed lenders so much money they couldn't AFFORD to let him go under and so they had to bail him out or be dragged down with him. After that they became pretty leery of doing business with him.

Donald Trump: 'I'm the king of debt' - May. 5, 2016

Ken
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2017, 06:54 PM
 
Location: SDL/PDX/RDU
4,824 posts, read 2,574,801 times
Reputation: 5604
Quote:
Originally Posted by OnOurWayHome View Post
I can see the appeal to some of having a businessperson in the WH. IF that person also has studied history and politics, will admit their knowledge gaps, and will bring in expertise in their cabinet.

trump is 0 for 3.
Good point. Even in the business world you don't put the guy in the mailroom in charge until he's he's proven some skills in other areas. Well, unless you're married to the bosses' daughter.

Make that 0 for 4.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top