Why trump is Routing the Free Traders

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House Why trump is Routing the Free Traders

Viewing 26 posts - 1 through 26 (of 26 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #47649
    bnw
    Blocked

    Why Trump Is Routing the Free Traders

    Friday – July 1, 2016 at 12:30 am

    By Patrick J. Buchanan

    In Tuesday’s indictment of free trade as virtual economic treason, The Donald has really set the cat down among the pigeons.

    For, in denouncing NAFTA, the WTO, MFN for China and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, all backed by Bush I and II, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, Trump is all but calling his own party leaders dunderheads and losers.

    And he seems to be winning the argument.

    As he calls for the repudiation of “globalism” and a return to “Americanism,” a Republican Congress renders itself mute on whether it will even vote on the TPP this year.

    On trade, Bernie Sanders is closer to Trump. Even Hillary Clinton has begun to renounce a TPP she once called the “gold standard” of trade deals.

    Where have all the troubadours of free trade gone? Why do economic patriots seem ascendant? Is this like the Cold War, where the other side gets up and goes home?

    Answer. As Trump pointed out in Monessen in the Mon Valley of Pennsylvania, the returns from free trade are in, and the results are rotten.

    Since Bush I, we have run $12 trillion in trade deficits, $4 trillion with China. Once a Maoist dump, China has become the greatest manufacturing power on earth. Meanwhile, the U.S. has lost 50,000 factories and a third of its manufacturing jobs.

    Trump is going to start a “trade war,” wail the critics.

    But the damage wreaked upon U.S. industry by free traders already rivals what Arthur “Bomber” Harris did for German industry in the Ruhr.

    In recent decades, every major U.S. trade partner — China, Japan, Canada, Mexico, EU — has run annual trade surpluses at our expense. How do 40 years of trade deficits in goods, run by a nation that rarely ran one for a century before, make us stronger or wealthier?

    Or is what is best for the world now more important than what is best for America?

    And here we come to the heart of the argument.

    Washington, Hamilton, and Henry Clay, father of the “American System,” and Lincoln and every Republican president up to Eisenhower, crafted trade policies to promote manufacturing to grow the wealth of the USA.

    They were patriots not globalists.

    They knew that America’s political independence required economic independence of all other nations. They wanted to build an economy where Americans would cut their bonds to foreign lands and come to rely upon one another for the needs and necessities of their national life. They sought to make us independent, so that we could not be dragged by economic ties into the inevitable wars of the Old World.

    And they succeeded magnificently.

    Britain, which embraced free trade in the 1840s, became so reliant on imports that a few dozen German submarines almost knocked her out of World War I. Protectionist America had to come pull her chestnuts out of the fire.

    Free trade ideology is not America-made. It is an alien faith, a cargo cult, smuggled in from the old continent, the work of men Edmund Burke called “sophisters, economists, and calculators.”

    David Ricardo, James and John Stuart Mill, Richard Cobden, all chatterers and scribblers, none of whom ever built a great nation, declared free trade to be the new New Testament, the salvation of mankind.

    These men in whose souls the old faith was dying seized on a utopian belief that world government and free trade would be the salvation of mankind. The Economist magazine was founded to preach the heresy.

    Before the modern era, Americans never bought into it. But now, our elites have. And, undeniably, there are beneficiaries to free trade.

    There are first the owners, operators and shareholders of companies who, to be rid of high-wage American labor, moved production to China or Mexico or where the costs are lower and regulations near nonexistent.

    Transnational companies, their K Street lobbyists, and media that survive on their advertising dollars, are the biggest boosters of free trade, as they are the biggest beneficiaries.

    Consumers, too, at least initially, see more products down at the mall, selling at lower prices. Cheap consumer goods are the bribes free traders proffer to patriots to sell out their country and countrymen to capitalists who have no country.

    But we are not simply consumers. We are Americans. We are fellow citizens. We are neighbors. We have duties to one another.

    When a factory shuts down and a town begins to die, workers are laid off. The local tax base shrinks, education and social services are cut. Folks go on unemployment and food stamps. We all pay for that.

    Wives go to work and kids come home from school to empty houses, and families break up, and move away. Social disintegration follows.

    “Creative destruction” is the antiseptic term free traders use to describe what they have done and are doing to the America we grew up in.

    Southeast of the old Steel City, in the Mon Valley of Pennsylvania, where my mother and her six brothers and her sister grew up, folks describe what happened more poignantly and graphically.

    Why Trump Is Routing the Free Traders

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #47658
    wv
    Participant

    First off, i didnt even know Pat Buchannon was still alive 🙂

    Second, i think this ‘free trade / globalization’ issue or cluster of issues is one of the most important topics of our times here on Earth.

    I would have loved to see Trump and Sanders have a conversation about it. I’d like to know where they agree and disagree on it.

    I like the fact Trump is against the Nafta/WTO stuff. Its why he’s such a wild-card. I cant stand a lot of his ideas…but this Nafta thing is HUGE. It’s what makes me think about the surreal notion that i might prefer Trump to Hillary (which isn’t saying much, but still)

    Thing is, i dont agree with his “patriotism” mentality. I dont wanna care more about one human being than another. An american life is not more valuable than a chinese life or a mexican life, or a north korean life or an Iranian life. …Cant we have policies that are good for all-lives ? Yes? No?

    w
    v
    “You’ll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race. ”
    (1919) GB Shaw

    #47669
    Zooey
    Participant

    First off, i didnt even know Pat Buchannon was still alive 🙂

    Second, i think this ‘free trade / globalization’ issue or cluster of issues is one of the most important topics of our times here on Earth.

    I would have loved to see Trump and Sanders have a conversation about it. I’d like to know where they agree and disagree on it.

    I like the fact Trump is against the Nafta/WTO stuff. Its why he’s such a wild-card. I cant stand a lot of his ideas…but this Nafta thing is HUGE. It’s what makes me think about the surreal notion that i might prefer Trump to Hillary (which isn’t saying much, but still)

    Thing is, i dont agree with his “patriotism” mentality. I dont wanna care more about one human being than another. An american life is not more valuable than a chinese life or a mexican life, or a north korean life or an Iranian life. …Cant we have policies that are good for all-lives ? Yes? No?

    w
    v
    “You’ll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race. ”
    (1919) GB Shaw

    Yes, Trump is tempting on trade.

    And he has zero chance of building a wall or deporting 11 million humans.

    But I cannot have him appointing justices. He has already said he would appoint justices who would restrict liberties. He has said he will appoint justices who are anti-abortion. And he could appoint up to 3 more justices, and roll in right wing authoritarianism for a generation. Trump is no libertarian. He’s an authoritarian.

    #47688
    wv
    Participant

    Yes, Trump is tempting on trade.

    And he has zero chance of building a wall or deporting 11 million humans.

    But I cannot have him appointing justices. He has already said he would appoint justices who would restrict liberties. He has said he will appoint justices who are anti-abortion. And he could appoint up to 3 more justices, and roll in right wing authoritarianism for a generation. Trump is no libertarian. He’s an authoritarian.

    =======================

    You swinging back to voting for Hillary, Z ?

    The Supreme Court and Federal Judge appointments ‘are’ the
    one reason I feel the pull to vote for the lesser-of-two-very-Evils…but
    …then I start thinkin about Hillary and…I’m just done with the NeoLib-NeoCons.

    Just cant do it. I dont even know if I’m being ‘rational’ but
    for the rest of my life I’m voting Green Party (or once in a blue-moon, for a Bernie type who happens to be in one of the corporate-parties.)

    w
    v

    #47691
    Zooey
    Participant

    No. I’m voting for Jill Stein (again).

    Both Clinton and Trump, ultimately, are this guy:

    #47693
    PA Ram
    Participant

    No. I’m voting for Jill Stein (again).

    Both Clinton and Trump, ultimately, are this guy:

    Hillary might be Nero but Trump strikes me more the Caligula type.

    r

    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick

    #47702
    Zooey
    Participant

    No. I’m voting for Jill Stein (again).

    Both Clinton and Trump, ultimately, are this guy:

    Hillary might be Nero but Trump strikes me more the Caligula type.

    r

    Good observation.

    That’s what we have: Nero or Caligula.

    #47706
    wv
    Participant

    Well, it will be interesting to observe the ‘reactions’ to the new President.
    What will be the reaction/results of four years of Trump, or Hillary?
    Will they galvanize a new opposition force?
    And which one will ‘get the most done’ whatever that may be…?

    w
    v

    #47711
    PA Ram
    Participant

    Well, it will be interesting to observe the ‘reactions’ to the new President.
    What will be the reaction/results of four years of Trump, or Hillary?
    Will they galvanize a new opposition force?
    And which one will ‘get the most done’ whatever that may be…?

    w
    v

    I see Clinton as having another Obama sort of turn. There will be constant obstruction by the Republicans to almost anything she wants to do(except the bad stuff of course)and I do see her more hawkish(cause she hasn’t learned any lessons there)and I can see her suddenly signing on to the trade agreements because she’ll tell us that THIS time they’re good deals for America. So things will pretty much stay the same, except for whatever trouble she decides to stir up internationally. Maybe more hawkish in some scary places–like the Ukraine? Syria? Hope not. Just don’t know.

    Trump? Pick a day. Pick a moment. He has no real plan beyond looking for opportunities to enrich himself. I think he’ll like trade deals just fine as long as they work for him. I don’t believe a populist word that comes out of his mouth. I think he’ll just give the Republicans what they want on some things(Supreme Court Justices) and on others he’ll be at odds with them but I have no idea. Who is Trump? What is he? What does he want? All I can do is look at his con-man history and think that we won’t know until he does it. Will it be reckless? Sure. He isn’t a deep thinker about such things. Who knows what he’ll do or which direction he’ll go?

    I think his presidency will have one great theme:how does it benefit Trump? The other stuff will just be given away for others to deal with or he just won’t care or offer window dressing.

    I think four years of Trump could open the door to the most corrupt politician ever to sit in the White House. And Hillary might be a close second.

    America doesn’t win here. No matter what.

    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick

    #47714
    nittany ram
    Moderator

    I’m no longer voting for the lesser of two evils. I see the logic behind it but ultimately it results in no progress being made towards the type of country I want. I know a lot of Green Party supporters who are registered as independents or democrats – including me. But no longer. If you want a third party to eventually become relevant then you have to register for it and vote for it.

    #47716
    Billy_T
    Participant

    Trump? Pick a day. Pick a moment. He has no real plan beyond looking for opportunities to enrich himself. I think he’ll like trade deals just fine as long as they work for him. I don’t believe a populist word that comes out of his mouth. I think he’ll just give the Republicans what they want on some things(Supreme Court Justices) and on others he’ll be at odds with them but I have no idea. Who is Trump? What is he? What does he want? All I can do is look at his con-man history and think that we won’t know until he does it. Will it be reckless? Sure. He isn’t a deep thinker about such things. Who knows what he’ll do or which direction he’ll go?

    Trump, unlike Clinton, has an actual paper trail as far as owning companies with large numbers of employees. He has no history of treating them well, of caring about labor or Labor, of worrying about outsourcing jobs. He, in fact, has always outsourced most of his manufacturing jobs overseas. So all of that populist rhetoric he now expresses just isn’t backed up by his own business practices.

    Clinton has a different kind of paper trail. She has signed on to terrible trade deals and will likely do so again. She also followed American tradition by using the State Department to help destroy “the Commons” in other countries, especially in Central and South America. Though she did not start this practice, she didn’t end it or fight against it or even talk about it. She followed precedent and used the hammer of American government to smash public ownership of goods and services to the degree possible.

    To me, this should be illegal and the people who do it should be held legally responsible. But that’s not how things are done in America right now.

    Bottom line for me: The two major-party candidates may be the most odious we’ve seen in decades. I’m beginning to think it’s not even a matter of “lesser of two evils” this time. Just different modes of evil.

    #47718
    zn
    Moderator

    I’m no longer voting for the lesser of two evils. I see the logic behind it but ultimately it results in no progress being made towards the type of country I want.

    Just tossing in my pennies to the informal poll.

    Everyone has to decide for themselves and I don’t figure I will persuade anyone.

    But my thinking is, it’s NOW and the prospect of Trump, who really is worse, in there nominating SC and federal judges (among other things) is positively dystopian. I’ve seen worse and worse is worse (Maine had a 3 candidate governors race and a Trump-style guy won with 37% of the vote. People I know said enh, what harm can he do…and, he then showed them what harm he can do).

    I will register third party after the election.

    Not the kind of thing I want to fight about because no one will convince anyone and no one has to justify their choice.

    That’s my motto. Worse IS worse.

    ….

    #47723
    Billy_T
    Participant

    ZN,

    I get the Supreme Court part. The next president likely names three or more, plus umpteen lower-court justices. And for all of Trump’s populist rhetoric, I don’t see him ever naming a single “labor-friendly” judge. Though, frankly, I don’t see Clinton doing that, either. But it may happen accidentally, as a kind of side-effect to naming “pro-choice” judges. As in, it might come along as part of the package, but it won’t be something she seeks out. Same goes for the environment, the surveillance state, incarceration, drugs and so on. We may get lucky due to an emphasis on other issues.

    #47730
    Zooey
    Participant

    Either one will cause the country to wake up the morning after with contempt of the new president in full glow. Both of these candidates are widely reviled. So the onslaught of negativity and derision will start before the inauguration. The next four years are going to be ugly.

    Either one is likely to be a one-term president (if the opposition party can put up a decent candidate…I mean, let’s not forget, as awful as Trump is considered to be even within the Republican party, voters thought Carson, Fiorina, Cruz, Rubio, and Bush were WORSE!).

    As far as what Trump will do, nobody knows. I don’t even think Trump really knows. You know, I actually have read quite a bit about Narcissistic Personality Disorder (because a couple of family members have it), and one odd thing about narcissists is that they believe whatever they are saying at the time they say it, even if it completely contradicts something they said (and believed) at an earlier time. And they can change up again completely in the future. They also have a stronger than average tendency to rationalize whatever they want at the moment. They are much more governed by their emotional needs than by intellectual principles. They bend principles at will to match their current emotional condition.

    That’s what we will get with Trump. He will be a crapshoot every single day.

    He may or may not support TPP. If he had a personal business interest in it, we could predict he would do whatever benefits him most. But his business interests aren’t really involved in “trade,” afaik. But he has stated he is opposed to it, and I imagine that is mostly due to his essentially self-centered anti-foreigner feelings, and those appear to be a constant in his life. So he will probably be opposed to that since it doesn’t benefit him directly, and he is inclined against foreigners. But, again, his “Rasputin” is going to be as important to his presidency as he is. Who is going to be his chief adviser? And how much is he going to listen to him?

    The one thing you can count on with Trump is he will do whatever HE wants. In spite of his populist rhetoric, he does not give a shit about anybody else. It will be Trumpmerica. And since his interests are not the interests of the 99%, anything he does that benefits average Americans will be by accident, not principle.

    #47731
    Zooey
    Participant

    I’m no longer voting for the lesser of two evils. I see the logic behind it but ultimately it results in no progress being made towards the type of country I want.

    Just tossing in my pennies to the informal poll.

    Everyone has to decide for themselves and I don’t figure I will persuade anyone.

    But my thinking is, it’s NOW and the prospect of Trump, who really is worse, in there nominating SC and federal judges (among other things) is positively dystopian. I’ve seen worse and worse is worse (Maine had a 3 candidate governors race and a Trump-style guy won with 37% of the vote. People I know said enh, what harm can he do…and, he then showed them what harm he can do).

    I will register third party after the election.

    Not the kind of thing I want to fight about because no one will convince anyone and no one has to justify their choice.

    That’s my motto. Worse IS worse.

    ….

    I watched a 5-minute video on that guy, your governor. There is no denying that he is a colossal dickhead. Just an ignorant, selfish, boorish, POS. When do you get rid of him?

    #47732
    zn
    Moderator

    I’m no longer voting for the lesser of two evils. I see the logic behind it but ultimately it results in no progress being made towards the type of country I want.

    Just tossing in my pennies to the informal poll.

    Everyone has to decide for themselves and I don’t figure I will persuade anyone.

    But my thinking is, it’s NOW and the prospect of Trump, who really is worse, in there nominating SC and federal judges (among other things) is positively dystopian. I’ve seen worse and worse is worse (Maine had a 3 candidate governors race and a Trump-style guy won with 37% of the vote. People I know said enh, what harm can he do…and, he then showed them what harm he can do).

    I will register third party after the election.

    Not the kind of thing I want to fight about because no one will convince anyone and no one has to justify their choice.

    That’s my motto. Worse IS worse.

    ….

    I watched a 5-minute video on that guy, your governor. There is no denying that he is a colossal dickhead. Just an ignorant, selfish, boorish, POS. When do you get rid of him?

    Any day.

    Well unless you mean by means within the law.

    (Note for our NSA monitors: that was just a joke. No one is proposing anything, just indulging dark humor.)

    #47734
    Billy_T
    Participant

    (Note for our NSA monitors: that was just a joke. No one is proposing anything, just indulging dark humor.)

    Laura Flanders Jeremy Scahill interview

    Though it’s too short, good interview above. It’s all about the cell phones, apparently.

    #47758
    zn
    Moderator

    The Trump trade scam

    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:14 pm by Lawrence Mishel

    The Trump trade scam

    Yesterday, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump gave a speech on trade, extensively citing EPI’s research which shows that trade deficits as a result of NAFTA and other trade deals, as well as trade with China, have cost U.S. jobs and driven down U.S. wages. It’s true that the way we have undertaken globalization has hurt the vast majority of working people in this country—a view that EPI has been articulating for years, and that we will continue to articulate well after November. However, Trump’s speech makes it seem as if globalization is solely responsible for wage suppression, and that elite Democrats are solely responsible for globalization. Missing from his tale is the role of corporations and their allies have played in pushing this agenda, and the role the party he leads has played in implementing it. After all, NAFTA never would have passed without GOP votes, as two-thirds of the House Democrats opposed it.

    Furthermore, Trump has heretofore ignored the many other intentional policies that businesses and the top 1 percent have pushed to suppress wages over the last four decades. Start with excessive unemployment due to Federal Reserve Board policies which were antagonistic to wage growth and friendly to the finance sector and bondholders. Excessive unemployment leads to less wage growth, especially for low- and middle-wage workers. Add in government austerity at the federal and state levels—which has mostly been pushed by GOP governors and legislatures—that has impeded the recovery and stunted wage growth. There’s also the decimation of collective bargaining, which is the single largest reason that middle class wages have faltered. Meanwhile, the minimum wage is now more than 25 percent below its 1968 level, even though productivity since then has more than doubled. Phasing in a $15 minimum wage would lift wages for at least a third of the workforce. The most recent example is the effort to overturn the recent raising of the overtime threshold that would help more than 12 million middle-wage salaried workers obtain overtime protections.

    Trump is absent or wrong on all these issues. He has said in the past that wages are too high. And he argues, without basis, that businesses are overregulated and overtaxed—further ingratiating himself to corporate elites and the party he now leads. Deregulation and tax cuts are have been tried and failed for the last four decades, simply enriching the rich without stimulating any growth.

    Trump’s latest take on trade is a scam. He claims to be offering a path for workers, but is actually just offering mostly empty boxes on trade. What exactly is he trying to accomplish with renegotiated trade deals? And if is he so keen to help working people, why does he then steer the discussion back toward the traditional corporate agenda of tax cuts for corporations and the rich? Some pro-worker, anti-elite populist Trump is.

    #47784
    bnw
    Blocked

    Trump’s latest take on trade is a scam. He claims to be offering a path for workers, but is actually just offering mostly empty boxes on trade. What exactly is he trying to accomplish with renegotiated trade deals? And if is he so keen to help working people, why does he then steer the discussion back toward the traditional corporate agenda of tax cuts for corporations and the rich? Some pro-worker, anti-elite populist Trump is.

    More BS. Renegotiate trade deals is a given since the history since NAFTA has been the US worker taking repeated hits to the crotch. The TPP is no different. Written by and for special interests kept secret from congress and the american people. Of course it has to be renegotiated. If better term for the US worker are not to be had then withdraw. Our economy is still supreme. Tax cuts for corporations and the rich are likely the incentives to get money held offshore to be brought back to the US for investment within the US to create jobs.

    I love the fear Trump engenders in all the know it alls who have been so wrong about him and his campaign. The fear that he isn’t owned. The fear of the broom and the antiseptic properties of sunlight scattering the establishment and their K-Street roaches brethren out of their entrenched privilege. Great stuff. True change is coming and that isn’t Hildabeast or any other democrat or republican other than Trump. When Hildabeast evades the law for the email scandal Trump will ride that hypocrisy to victory.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #47785
    Billy_T
    Participant

    But why, bnw, would you think Trump has any intention of helping working people? He has absolutely no history of doing so. None. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. He’s made his fortune from screwing them over, and outsources the vast majority of his own manufacturing jobs.

    He calls for steep tax cuts on the rich, which means he will make a fortune from his own government policies. He will personally be enriched by his actions. He calls for a top rate of 25%, which will net him millions of extra dollars a year. Plus, no more estate tax, which will net his children tens of millions extra.

    There is no evidence in the history of American economics whereby tax cuts for the rich have ever — and I mean ever — helped working people. The rich have always just kept that money and increased the gap between themselves and their workers. There is absolutely no case in our history wherein tax cuts for the rich have resulted in a decrease in the gap between rich and poor.

    Seriously, why do you have such faith in him? What has he ever done to earn your trust?

    • This reply was modified 7 years, 10 months ago by Billy_T.
    • This reply was modified 7 years, 10 months ago by Billy_T.
    #47788
    zn
    Moderator

    There is absolutely no case in our history wherein tax cuts for the rich have resulted in a decrease in the gap between rich and poor.

    Or to put that different, there is absolutely no case in our history wherein tax cuts for the rich have resulted in growth in jobs and wages.

    The wealthy invest money to make money off of money.

    This fantasy that they use it to invest or propel the economy is an old belief ranking right up there with fear of witches.

    #47789
    Billy_T
    Participant

    It is definitely the case that our current trade policies are toxic. But this has always been the American Way. It’s always been the American Way to screw over workers, because the American Way is the Capitalist Way, and the Capitalist Way is to screw workers, consumers and destroy the planet, and it’s set up to do this, and it’s set up to destroy jobs.

    Democratic Party or GOP — they both do this. The Democrats did have a short period of time in which they at least put up some resistance to the same old same old — the Keynesian Golden Age, for lack of a better term. We had our one and only Middle Class boom from 1947-1973, with FDR’s New Deal policies at least somewhat embraced and protected during that period. But after that, the Dems abandoned the working class too. And since then, neither party has cared a lick about them. There is zero evidence to support the idea that Trump and the GOP cares about workers in the slightest, and tons of evidence showing they care only about the 1%. Roughly speaking, I think the Dems care only about the richest 10%, with an emphasis on that 1% as well.

    Trump isn’t the answer. Nor is Clinton.

    #47790
    Billy_T
    Participant

    Or to put that different, there is absolutely no case in our history wherein tax cuts for the rich have resulted in growth in jobs and wages.

    The wealthy invest money to make money off of money.

    This fantasy that they use it to invest or propel the economy is an old belief ranking right up there with fear of witches.

    Very true. Again, if they could make their money without hiring a single worker, they would. They’ve been pushing for that dream since the Industrial Revolution and the first assembly lines. A lot of people never really think about it, but more people were employed before capitalism became economic hegemon. Almost everyone was their own boss, too. Capitalism came along and with automation, assembly lines and new technologies, could use ten people to do the work thousands once did, in their own local, separate, autonomous markets.

    The inevitable math of capitalism has always been to radically reduce jobs by getting more and more work out of each individual worker, along with automating their work out of existence. And capitalists always want the largest possible army of the unemployed, to suppress wages and kill leverage for workers. They buy political systems to ensure this as well.

    Where was the massive jobs program when the world economy collapsed in 2008? It never happened. Primarily because that would have given far too much leverage and power back to workers.

    Trump represents the interests of Capital. He couldn’t care less about workers.

    • This reply was modified 7 years, 10 months ago by Billy_T.
    #47792
    Billy_T
    Participant

    Another key: Our trade deals are bad primarily because they keep deregulating Capital. They offer no labor protections, or protections for the environment. This allows American corporations to ship jobs overseas, exploit workers there even more than they do here, and then sell cheap products back to Americans — still the best market in the world, though soon to be replaced by China, India and other developing nations.

    Trump tries to paint the picture of evil countries stealing our jobs, and how America is letting them all get away with murder. He demagogues about people in foreign nations supposedly taking away our jobs, when it’s really American corporations doing that, with the help of government policies. You’ll never hear Trump pointing to the real causes of declining wages, rising inequality and poverty, and so on. He just wants his supporters to focus all of their attention on helpless, powerless, impoverished people in foreign lands, and members of that same class here. He does everything he can to deflect attention from the real culprits:

    Plutocrats like himself.

    #47793
    bnw
    Blocked

    But why, bnw, would you think Trump has any intention of helping working people? He has absolutely no history of doing so. None. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. He’s made his fortune from screwing them over, and outsources the vast majority of his own manufacturing jobs.

    He calls for steep tax cuts on the rich, which means he will make a fortune from his own government policies. He will personally be enriched by his actions. He calls for a top rate of 25%, which will net him millions of extra dollars a year. Plus, no more estate tax, which will net his children tens of millions extra.

    There is no evidence in the history of American economics whereby tax cuts for the rich have ever — and I mean ever — helped working people. The rich have always just kept that money and increased the gap between themselves and their workers. There is absolutely no case in our history wherein tax cuts for the rich have resulted in a decrease in the gap between rich and poor.

    Seriously, why do you have such faith in him? What has he ever done to earn your trust?

    He hasn’t lied to me. He hasn’t enriched himself via government ‘service’. He stands for much of the Buchanan 2000 agenda which has been proven to be prescient. People have had enough.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #47826
    Billy_T
    Participant

    He hasn’t lied to me. He hasn’t enriched himself via government ‘service’. He stands for much of the Buchanan 2000 agenda which has been proven to be prescient. People have had enough.

    On the part in bold. He hasn’t been in public service yet, but he’s running for president now. He has said that, once in power, he will slash taxes on the rich and on their estates. As mentioned, this will mean tens of millions in extra money for him and his children. As in, Trump says he will do things that directly enrich himself — while failing to admit to this.

    And throughout his entire career as a businessman, he has taken advantage of numerous government programs/laws/regulations involving outsourcing jobs, making his own debt “pay,” bouncing back from his frequent bankruptcies, when the average Joe or Jane could not.

    Again, he has no history of helping working people, and every opportunity to do so. Why do you trust him to suddenly change on that issue, if he wins the White House?

Viewing 26 posts - 1 through 26 (of 26 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.