U.S. Steel CEO Says 10,000 Jobs To Be Brought Back to the US... Because Of Trump (Indiana: bankrupt, college)

[bradjl2009]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Clinton would have been a one-term president for sure. Either way we are going to have another economic downturn within the next four years, and you'd have voter fatigue regarding Democratic presidents piled on top of it.

Honestly, I think that Trump being president sets up the Democrats much better for a recovery downballot than if Clinton were president. There's a political rule which has been true since 1938 - the President's party almost-always loses seats downballot over the course of their presidency. It held for Obama, George W. Bush, Clinton, and even Reagan. 2018 might not be the equivalent of 2010, 2006, or 1994 - the Senate map for the Democrats is brutal. But if it keeps with historic trends the Democrats will pick up quite a good number of house seats, governorships, and state legislatures, setting them up well for the 2020 redistricting. If it wasn't for the Supreme Court, I'd almost say it was a worthwhile tradeoff.

I agree with you about 2018 and even 2020. The Democrats actually did gain a very small amount of House and Senate seats last month (not that it changed anything). The one talk that is getting annoying to me is hearing the talk about how the Democrats are going to have a hard time recovering after this election. I remember the same talk in 2008 after the first Obama win and when he enjoyed huge majorities in the House and Senate. How did that go? The pendulum swings back and forth often.

[gg]

Originally Posted by mbw5100

Yea, he's not in office yet, but just look at his cabinet, look at his tweeting, look at how he is dealing with foreign diplomacy. There's plenty to critique, and I think it would be ridiculous to think he is off limits until he is officially sworn in.

He is very smart to tweet. It is about the only way to actually talk to "the people" without some moronic agenda filled mess the media feeds us. I give Trump credit for just bypassing the horrible media and trying to communicate with us directly. I have very little problem with who he is surrounding him with and that would be expected. All are pretty smart, but you have the media tearing into them left and right. The funniest one is calling Bannon an anti-Semite. What a crock of crap that is. Do people know his CEO of his news outlet is Jewish? Do they know Bannon created an Israeli Breitbart? His daughters went to a primarily Jewish school. You aren't an anti-Semite if you have all that going on, but the media will do anything to bash any of these people. It is actually scaring me how far they will go. How much have they fed us and controlled us?

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by gg

He is very smart to tweet. It is about the only way to actually talk to "the people" without some moronic agenda filled mess the media feeds us. I give Trump credit for just bypassing the horrible media and trying to communicate with us directly. I have very little problem with who he is surrounding him with and that would be expected. All are pretty smart, but you have the media tearing into them left and right. The funniest one is calling Bannon an anti-Semite. What a crock of crap that is. Do people know his CEO of his news outlet is Jewish? Do they know Bannon created an Israeli Breitbart? His daughters went to a primarily Jewish school. You aren't an anti-Semite if you have all that going on, but the media will do anything to bash any of these people. It is actually scaring me how far they will go. How much have they fed us and controlled us?

The media doesn't control everyone, just those who are silly enough to believe them and everything they say.

Reality is a bunch of Dem/Libs are sore losers and they're sour for the loss and still trying to figure out where their/media sure win went wrong.

[UKyank]

Tweeting is fine; tweeting stupid or childishly written things undermines credibility. His tweeting history is about 50/50 regarding the latter.

[mbw5100]

Originally Posted by gg

He is very smart to tweet. It is about the only way to actually talk to "the people" without some moronic agenda filled mess the media feeds us. I give Trump credit for just bypassing the horrible media and trying to communicate with us directly. I have very little problem with who he is surrounding him with and that would be expected. All are pretty smart, but you have the media tearing into them left and right. The funniest one is calling Bannon an anti-Semite. What a crock of crap that is. Do people know his CEO of his news outlet is Jewish? Do they know Bannon created an Israeli Breitbart? His daughters went to a primarily Jewish school. You aren't an anti-Semite if you have all that going on, but the media will do anything to bash any of these people. It is actually scaring me how far they will go. How much have they fed us and controlled us?

His daughters went to a primarily Jewish school and his wife testified in court that, "he didn't want them going to school with Jews."

Here's the problem with Twitter: It bypasses the media, which is the only fact-checker to prevent stupid (or willfully ignorant) people from taking him at his word. Normally, it might not be such a problem. But he lies! And, he lies a lot. Like, when he tweeted about millions of illegal voters. That is, factually, not true. And yet, lots of people think it is now.

[Geeo]

Every PR person's nightmare: when your CEO goes on national television and the next day you have to send out a release to clarify what he said. Longhi kind of misspoke in that US Steel will not be hiring 10,000 people (which would increase their employment by a third, which would be impossible). What he MEANT to say was that, given more favorable conditions, it might be feasible that steel employment in this country could increase by 10,000.

Given that it takes about 650 workers today to do what 4,000 did a generation ago because of new technologies and automation in steelmaking, they'd need a whole lot of orders to reach that goal.

[BajanYankee]

Here's an interesting read. It's a Wharton (like, really, one of the hardest schools in the world to get into!) article on the effects of Bush's steel tariffs.

Overall, the job loss among steel users exceeds the 185,000 employed by steel makers, CITAC says, reinforcing the users’ conviction that the tariffs have benefited the steel makers at the expense of their customers.

“More than half a million Americans work in steel-consuming jobs,” says William Gaskin, president of the Precision Metalforming Association, which represents companies like Spring Engineering. “We cannot continue to have a trade policy that protects a few at the expense of the majority.”

Sixteen states lost at least 4,500 steel-user jobs during 2002 – led by California with almost 20,000 – helping to explain why the administration is also under pressure from Congress to roll back the tariffs. Rep. Joe Knollenberg, a Republican from Michigan, and 51 co-sponsors back a resolution calling on the President to expand the existing midterm review to include an assessment of the impact of steel tariffs on consumers.

U.S. Steel Users Claim Tariffs

President Obama's tariffs on Chinese tires had a similar effect.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Trump of course ran in large part on his business acumen. The problem is, his business record isn't great. His father was a legitimate self-made man, but Donald's choices in investments overall did worse than the general market did. Studies have suggested if put his money into an index fund in the late 1980s, he would be much richer today. He's certainly no Bill Gates or Warren Buffet. Thus there's nothing in his past as a businessman to suggest that he has any unique insights which would help the nation.

If Bill Gates is the Lebron James of the business world, then Donald Trump is more of an And 1 streetball legend like Hot Sauce. He's regarded more or less as a joke in the world of NYC real estate investment and hasn't done anything of significance in Manhattan since the 1980s. And even then the little he was able to accomplish was through his father guaranteeing loans for him.

If people truly believe that America should be "run like a business," and that an executive branch full of businessmen will rain down prosperity on ordinary Americans, then why not push Mike Bloomberg, Phil Knight, Eric Schmidt, or Paul Allen to run for President? These are all guys with exemplary business records who, to my knowledge, have not been involved in fraud lawsuits.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by UKyank

Tweeting is fine; tweeting stupid or childishly written things undermines credibility. His tweeting history is about 50/50 regarding the latter.

http://i.imgur.com/xOJZpCK.jpg



http://cdn1.theodysseyonline.com/fil...31.39%20PM.png

[Scott_Holiday]

I love how everyone thinks the guy that has bankrupted business, evaded the tax system, run casinos into the ground, exploited workers and hired illegals somehow has the right answers to make the American economy soar with good paying jobs to those left behind in the rust belt.

It's kinda like calling 1-800 gambler. The people that get you addicted to gambling are the same to help you kick the addiction