(07-12-2023 05:56 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Wow, just wow. It must suck to be so miserable.

I wouldn't know.

What I do know is that the Trump Brigade is showing its true "Dish it Out but Cannot Take it" colors here. You're better than that, Bartlett. I know that you are.

(07-11-2023 06:25 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(07-11-2023 06:19 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  What's not to like?

There is something fake about him. Plus he came out of thin air.

Fox machine guy

Im suspicious. Sonething is off

Yes I never heard of him before now.. But that was the same with Andrew Yang in 2020.. I'm not sure he's a Fox Machine guy..

I'm anxious to see how he does in a debate, how quick he is on his feet cause we know Trump is going to throw stuff out there to take people off their game...

He's not a career government employee or politician which intrigues me.

AM, go outside, find a dog to kick, or something. You'll feel better.

(07-11-2023 04:01 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  I pointlessly voted for Perot :\


I was still pretty young and idealistic.

Its one thing to do it when you are young. Youre just a loon if you do it now

(07-11-2023 06:19 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  What's not to like?

On China there's nothing not to like. I think we should invest in nuclear energy heavily. I agree with him that the current welfare system is a failure, but I have a feeling we don't agree on what should replace it. I'm never going to agree with eliminating unions of any kind, even the ones I'm not personally a huge fan of like the police unions are still good for their workers and my issues with police abuses could be solved by just drastically limiting qualified immunity protections. I'm seeing Reagan 2.0 and I'm thinking lets try to pretend trickle down economics has ever worked. And of course his only critique of corporations seems to be ESG and wokeism and if they kept their opinions to themselves he'd be perfectly fine with everything else they are doing to control our lives and own our politicians. I certainly agree with him on Epstein and that "Hush Money Fund" but what about congressional stock trading and using the office to enrich themselves? On the border you are willing to use the full might of the military to secure the border but can't be bothered to mention anything about far harsher penalties for those that hire illegals? If you want to "get American's back to work" it sounds like to me making sure businesses can not hire illegals and forcing them to either hire documented workers or American citizens would be a great start. Of course that would mean said businesses would have to pay workers a lot more to do that labor, which potentially hurts profit margins, which seem to be the only thing he actually cares about as a hedge fund bro.

(07-12-2023 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I agree with him that the current welfare system is a failure, but I have a feeling we don't agree on what should replace it.

Oh I don't know... Working maybe?

(07-12-2023 07:32 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(07-12-2023 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I agree with him that the current welfare system is a failure, but I have a feeling we don't agree on what should replace it.

Oh I don't know... Working maybe?

'creating incentive' = lost art

(07-12-2023 07:32 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(07-12-2023 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I agree with him that the current welfare system is a failure, but I have a feeling we don't agree on what should replace it.

Oh I don't know... Working maybe?

So you really think everyone who's getting any kind of government assistance is sitting on their arse not working? Even Fox knows that's not true. Hell Walmart is calling out the Federal government there for not raising the minimum wage since I believe 09, does Vivek support doing that along with his Put American's Back to Work plan? Highly doubt it.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/walm...recipients

(07-12-2023 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  On China there's nothing not to like. I think we should invest in nuclear energy heavily. I agree with him that the current welfare system is a failure, but I have a feeling we don't agree on what should replace it. I'm never going to agree with eliminating unions of any kind, even the ones I'm not personally a huge fan of like the police unions are still good for their workers and my issues with police abuses could be solved by just drastically limiting qualified immunity protections. I'm seeing Reagan 2.0 and I'm thinking lets try to pretend trickle down economics has ever worked. And of course his only critique of corporations seems to be ESG and wokeism and if they kept their opinions to themselves he'd be perfectly fine with everything else they are doing to control our lives and own our politicians. I certainly agree with him on Epstein and that "Hush Money Fund" but what about congressional stock trading and using the office to enrich themselves? On the border you are willing to use the full might of the military to secure the border but can't be bothered to mention anything about far harsher penalties for those that hire illegals? If you want to "get American's back to work" it sounds like to me making sure businesses can not hire illegals and forcing them to either hire documented workers or American citizens would be a great start. Of course that would mean said businesses would have to pay workers a lot more to do that labor, which potentially hurts profit margins, which seem to be the only thing he actually cares about as a hedge fund bro.

We are in Cold War II, this time the enemy is China not Russia, and the war will be fought economically rather than militarily. So we need economic policies designed to win that war. Nuclear is the only non-fossil energy source currently available at sufficient scale to make a difference. I'm already on record as favoring replacing our current health and welfare system with Bismarck health care and either Friedman's negative income tax or the Boortz-Linder prebate/prefund. I oppose unions for government workers, since they are basically negotiating with politicians who depend on their votes for their jobs, but I'm skeptical about the political reality of eliminating them. Maybe do it piecemeal, by eliminating some elements at a time. As far as, "trickle down," that is a gross mischaracterization by people who did not understand supply side economics. As for places where it has worked, take a look at western Europe; they have moved their tax systems massively toward supply side principles, and seem very happy with the results. As far as illegal immigration, the first thing we need is rational immigration laws and policies. I'd be happy starting with Canada's points-based merit system. The problem with placing the burden on employers is that the systems available to check out prospective employees do not work. As far as profit margins, they will be what they need to be to keep companies in business. The impacts of higher wages for employees will be higher prices, laid off employees, or moving overseas.

(07-12-2023 07:46 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-12-2023 07:32 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(07-12-2023 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I agree with him that the current welfare system is a failure, but I have a feeling we don't agree on what should replace it.

Oh I don't know... Working maybe?

So you really think everyone who's getting any kind of government assistance is sitting on their arse not working? Even Fox knows that's not true. Hell Walmart is calling out the Federal government there for not raising the minimum wage since I believe 09, does Vivek support doing that along with his Put American's Back to Work plan? Highly doubt it.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/walm...recipients

You do realize welfare is very contemporary? What exactly do you think people did 100 years ago? They worked or they starved. And please spare me the stupid ass fox business opinions.

(07-12-2023 07:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  As far as profit margins, they will be what they need to be to keep companies in business. The impacts of higher wages for employees will be higher prices, laid off employees, or moving overseas.

You act like I've not been a part of budgeting and forecasting for companies both large and small. The idea that we set budgets anywhere close to "what they need to be to keep the company in business" is comedy. At my last job my bonus was tied to us meeting or exceeding budgeted EBITA. Our company had the best year it ever had in 2020, then doubled revenue and Net Income in 2021. 2022 we basically were right in line with revenue of 2021 and a little lower on Net Income, but still the second best year the company had ever had by miles, because our labor costs were higher due to actually properly staffing for the volume we had added. Those numbers were considered a crisis by our parent company and we ended up laying off people over it. We were nowhere close to going out of business, by any objective measurement other than the insanely unreasonable budget not supported by our pipeline that was shoved down our throat by our parent company CEO we had a tremendous year, and that was the result. This is the actual ugly reality of capitalism, no reasonable person thinks making a profit is bad, but plenty of reasonable people could look at a company that was 4 times more profitable than it was 3 years prior feeling the need to lay off people because it didn't meet an unreachable budget number is bad.

(07-12-2023 08:14 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-12-2023 07:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  As far as profit margins, they will be what they need to be to keep companies in business. The impacts of higher wages for employees will be higher prices, laid off employees, or moving overseas.

You act like I've not been a part of budgeting and forecasting for companies both large and small. The idea that we set budgets anywhere close to "what they need to be to keep the company in business" is comedy. At my last job my bonus was tied to us meeting or exceeding budgeted EBITA. Our company had the best year it ever had in 2020, then doubled revenue and Net Income in 2021. 2022 we basically were right in line with revenue of 2021 and a little lower on Net Income, but still the second best year the company had ever had by miles, because our labor costs were higher due to actually properly staffing for the volume we had added. Those numbers were considered a crisis by our parent company and we ended up laying off people over it. We were nowhere close to going out of business, by any objective measurement other than the insanely unreasonable budget not supported by our pipeline that was shoved down our throat by our parent company CEO we had a tremendous year, and that was the result. This is the actual ugly reality of capitalism, no reasonable person thinks making a profit is bad, but plenty of reasonable people could look at a company that was 4 times more profitable than it was 3 years prior feeling the need to lay off people because it didn't meet an unreachable budget number is bad.

I think you are misunderstanding my comment, so I will clarify. By what is needed to keep the company in business, I don't mean break-even. I mean a sufficient profit to allow the company to remain active in capital markets and competitive in the global marketplace.

(06-16-2023 08:41 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-16-2023 08:14 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-16-2023 07:45 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I'm going to listen to Vivek a little more. I know there are going to be a whole lot of areas we will never agree, but he's the only of the GOP candidates who seems to have any interesting thoughts and ideas outside of the standard GOP talking points that I'd never vote for. He's the only GOP candidate that I think has any understanding and concrete thoughts on AI, I'm interested to hear more about what he thinks about AI's impact on jobs and if he thinks there's a way to ensure AI doesn't eliminate millions of workers without causing us to fall behind to the point that China and others can lap us in this area. I would probably be willing to vote for someone I disagree with on pretty much everything else if I believe they are equipped to handle what's coming rapidly with AI.

You don't think President Daisy, who can't seem to walk 20 feet without stumbling or speak 20 words without losing his train of thought.. at the.. ya know the thing.. come on man.. I'm serious...

Or his VP are equipped to handle AI, I mean look at the bang up job they've done in every aspect of this administration.

Biden sucks, Copmala sucks. About the best things I can say about the Biden presidency is I think the Biden FTC has done more good things on anti-trust enforcement than Obama's, and that NLRB has done more to help unions than Obama's. Not as good on those things as I'd like, but way better than recent Dem administrations, and obviously better than GOP ones who don't support unions at all and unfortunately don't seem to care about anti trust enforcement.

What have they done on anti-trust?

(06-18-2023 09:15 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(06-18-2023 06:58 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  That guy speaks honestly and with finess. He makes great arguments about Trumps illegal arrest and the politization of our law enforcement. It reeks of the gestapo methods in Germany and every despotic nation today. You can find such actions in Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, etc and etc and all of them are Banana Republics. Russia can be added to that with my apologies to Comrade Todor.

If the Demons win the presidency you can kiss the old USA goodbye and be sure to have a current passport because you're gonna need it. If you notice, no one immigrates to these countries everyone wants to leave and yet the idiots who have it made here are always bitching about it but Schiff they're not stupid to leave.

I'm liking this guy more than DS and even Trump. I wish that he was Black though he might have gotten the Black votes only because of him being Black. That's how the Blacks roll.

It didn't work in Michigan in the 2020 Senate race. Though he did get slightly more of the black vote than usual.

And he can closer to winning the state than Trump. Probably won the election except for the fake mail in ballots. Trump probably still would have lost.

(06-15-2023 09:48 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-15-2023 07:31 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-15-2023 02:21 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-14-2023 03:46 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Yeah. Not that I was ever a fan of his, but at one point I thought he was genuine, stupid, but genuine. Till he let them pee all over him (and all his loyal followers) twice even. Got no use for sell outs and turn coats.
Sold you guys out for a little bit of power (and probably some cash).

And a nice lake house.

With the power he had at the end of both primaries to essentially destroy the Dem party if he were just purely selling out for goodies you'd sell out for a lot more than a lake house. That's my problem with the "selling out for power and personal gain" theory, not that I believe he or anyone is above doing it, just that you'd have to be a moron to sell out that much power and influence for as little as he appears to have gotten out of his capitulation.

Given that doing so in either 2016 or 2020 would have guaranteed victories for Donald Trump, that would almost certainly destroyed any credibility that he had with his base. Yes he had a lot of power, but using it would very likely have destroyed the basis for that power.

I don't think Bernie is stupid, but I do think he is extremely dishonest.

He thought the USSR was nirvana in the 70s. He's a socialist in America. He's stupid.

(07-12-2023 07:46 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-12-2023 07:32 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(07-12-2023 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I agree with him that the current welfare system is a failure, but I have a feeling we don't agree on what should replace it.

Oh I don't know... Working maybe?

So you really think everyone who's getting any kind of government assistance is sitting on their arse not working? Even Fox knows that's not true. Hell Walmart is calling out the Federal government there for not raising the minimum wage since I believe 09, does Vivek support doing that along with his Put American's Back to Work plan? Highly doubt it.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/walm...recipients

65 million recipients in 2022. Over half of those between the ages of 18-64 didn't work in that calendar year. Every one of those has a unique story, I'm sure.

(07-12-2023 09:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-16-2023 08:41 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-16-2023 08:14 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(06-16-2023 07:45 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I'm going to listen to Vivek a little more. I know there are going to be a whole lot of areas we will never agree, but he's the only of the GOP candidates who seems to have any interesting thoughts and ideas outside of the standard GOP talking points that I'd never vote for. He's the only GOP candidate that I think has any understanding and concrete thoughts on AI, I'm interested to hear more about what he thinks about AI's impact on jobs and if he thinks there's a way to ensure AI doesn't eliminate millions of workers without causing us to fall behind to the point that China and others can lap us in this area. I would probably be willing to vote for someone I disagree with on pretty much everything else if I believe they are equipped to handle what's coming rapidly with AI.

You don't think President Daisy, who can't seem to walk 20 feet without stumbling or speak 20 words without losing his train of thought.. at the.. ya know the thing.. come on man.. I'm serious...

Or his VP are equipped to handle AI, I mean look at the bang up job they've done in every aspect of this administration.

Biden sucks, Copmala sucks. About the best things I can say about the Biden presidency is I think the Biden FTC has done more good things on anti-trust enforcement than Obama's, and that NLRB has done more to help unions than Obama's. Not as good on those things as I'd like, but way better than recent Dem administrations, and obviously better than GOP ones who don't support unions at all and unfortunately don't seem to care about anti trust enforcement.

What have they done on anti-trust?

I'll start with the first even semblance of attempting to stop airline mergers in decades. Prior to deregulation in the 1970's you had I believe 12 firms controlling 80% of the routes, now despite all the talk of increasing competition by deregulating that industry you now have 4 firms controlling like 90% of all domestic routes. They've fought against American and Jet Blue's alliance, and the Jet Blue-Spirit Merger, and stopped the Frontier-Spirit Merger. Huge break from where the Obama administration was on this when just under his watch you had the following.

Republic Airways / Midwest Airlines 6/23/2009 7/31/2009 Republic Airways
Republic Airways / Frontier Airlines 8/14/2009 10/1/2009 Republic Airways
Delta Air Lines / Northwest Airlines 4/14/2008 12/31/2009 Delta Air Lines
Pinnacle Airlines / Mesaba Airlines 7/1/2010 7/1/2010 Pinnacle Airlines / Mesaba Airlines
United Airlines / Continental Airlines 5/3/2010 10/1/2010 United Airlines
SkyWest / Atlantic Southeast Airlines / ExpressJet Airlines 8/4/2010 11/15/2010 SkyWest / SureJet
Southwest Airlines / AirTran Airways 9/27/2010 5/2/2011 Southwest Airlines
US Airways / American Airlines 2/14/2013 12/9/2013 American Airlines
Atlas Air / Southern Air 1/19/2016 4/7/2016 Atlas Air Worldwide
FedEx / TNT Express 4/27/2015 5/25/2016 FedEx
Alaska Airlines / Virgin America 4/4/2016 12/14/2016 Alaska Airlines

The Obama administration allowed more airline consolidation than any other administration. Had the Biden administration allowed 2 of the few remaining alternatives to the Big 4 to merge it would have been horrible for consumers. This is a good start, I'd argue you need to break up the big 4 and have a lot more competition back in the airline industry, but keeping the few value airlines separate is a good thing.

https://www.airlines.org/dataset/u-s-air...uisitions/

(07-12-2023 08:42 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-12-2023 08:14 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-12-2023 07:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  As far as profit margins, they will be what they need to be to keep companies in business. The impacts of higher wages for employees will be higher prices, laid off employees, or moving overseas.

You act like I've not been a part of budgeting and forecasting for companies both large and small. The idea that we set budgets anywhere close to "what they need to be to keep the company in business" is comedy. At my last job my bonus was tied to us meeting or exceeding budgeted EBITA. Our company had the best year it ever had in 2020, then doubled revenue and Net Income in 2021. 2022 we basically were right in line with revenue of 2021 and a little lower on Net Income, but still the second best year the company had ever had by miles, because our labor costs were higher due to actually properly staffing for the volume we had added. Those numbers were considered a crisis by our parent company and we ended up laying off people over it. We were nowhere close to going out of business, by any objective measurement other than the insanely unreasonable budget not supported by our pipeline that was shoved down our throat by our parent company CEO we had a tremendous year, and that was the result. This is the actual ugly reality of capitalism, no reasonable person thinks making a profit is bad, but plenty of reasonable people could look at a company that was 4 times more profitable than it was 3 years prior feeling the need to lay off people because it didn't meet an unreachable budget number is bad.

I think you are misunderstanding my comment, so I will clarify. By what is needed to keep the company in business, I don't mean break-even. I mean a sufficient profit to allow the company to remain active in capital markets and competitive in the global marketplace.

No I understand the comment just fine, and there would be plenty of ways from offering credits/incentives to keeping jobs here (the carrot) to saying that the federal government will no longer contract with companies that have a majority or a certain % of their workforce outside of the United States (the stick). Honestly it should be the position of the Federal Government that anything they buy should be from vendors that make it in the United States unless it's absolutely not possible like currently with semi conductors. Our defense contractors don't even currently produce most of the equipment in this country, that's insanity without us buying their sh*t they would go out of business we should absolutely demand we aren't buying anything from you Raytheon unless it's made in America.

(07-11-2023 09:53 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Good questions, Mike. Will any republican have the guts to ask them?

It's not that they don't have the guts. They'd rather ask one question and then go on a monologue for the remainder of their 5 minuets.

(07-12-2023 11:12 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(07-11-2023 09:53 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Good questions, Mike. Will any republican have the guts to ask them?

It's not that they don't have the guts. They'd rather ask one question and then go on a monologue for the remainder of their 5 minuets.

And Jim Jordan is the worst. I keep thinking, "Dude, there's an obvious follow-up question. Instead of launching a monologue, ask it."