Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Donald Trump for president?

kohai
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 11:17:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
If you haven't heard already, Donald Trump is a possible presidential candidate.

What do you guys think about this? Do you think he would make a good leader for America?

I think that he may be a good leader for the US. After all, he has demonstrated his leadership skills in his business.

Note: I understand this is April Fool's day, but this is really no prank!
1) Whatever has contradictory attributes does not exist.
2) The Biblical God has contradictory attributes.
3) Therefore, the Biblical God does not exist
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 11:32:01 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
to be fair that place is now derailed to "democracy is a hoax, anarchy is the way" just like every thread in politics turned into.

I originally thought Donald Trump would be a good candidate. I trust a businessman to run the government over a politician. Then I realized that he wanted to put tariffs on China imports. So, no, he wouldn't be a good president.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
PervRat
Posts: 963
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 11:36:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/1/2011 11:32:01 AM, darkkermit wrote:
to be fair that place is now derailed to "democracy is a hoax, anarchy is the way" just like every thread in politics turned into.

I originally thought Donald Trump would be a good candidate. I trust a businessman to run the government over a politician. Then I realized that he wanted to put tariffs on China imports. So, no, he wouldn't be a good president.

You trust a businessman over a politician? LOL Yeah, yeah, someone who takes from everyone to feed their own greed sooo has the best interests of all in their heart ... NOT!

Tariffs in China is one of the few areas I agree with Trump. It is unconscionable to import anything from a nation that practices slavery and undermines every very hard-fought human rights, labor protection and environmental law passed in the U.S.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 11:50:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/1/2011 11:36:16 AM, PervRat wrote:
At 4/1/2011 11:32:01 AM, darkkermit wrote:
to be fair that place is now derailed to "democracy is a hoax, anarchy is the way" just like every thread in politics turned into.

I originally thought Donald Trump would be a good candidate. I trust a businessman to run the government over a politician. Then I realized that he wanted to put tariffs on China imports. So, no, he wouldn't be a good president.

You trust a businessman over a politician? LOL Yeah, yeah, someone who takes from everyone to feed their own greed sooo has the best interests of all in their heart ... NOT!


That's a politician. A businessman has to provide a good or service to people in order to receive money. In order to have a successful business one has to be efficient, cut unnecessary expenditures, and maximize output while minimizing input.

The government receives money by stealing from others. They provide crap services and then state the reason they are failing is cause they don't have enough money, and then increase the debt, while improving the service only slightly. Any businessman would surely realize the problem with this, but a politician doesn't.

Tariffs in China is one of the few areas I agree with Trump. It is unconscionable to import anything from a nation that practices slavery and undermines every very hard-fought human rights, labor protection and environmental law passed in the U.S.

China has been improving on those aspects. Living conditions are worse in china then in the US, but only because we are a richer nation.

If the Chinese people want to rebel against the Chinese government for suppression of
free speech, then it will happen through creation of wealth and improved education. Not through trade tariffs.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
PervRat
Posts: 963
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 12:09:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/1/2011 11:50:45 AM, darkkermit wrote:
That's a politician. A businessman has to provide a good or service to people in order to receive money. In order to have a successful business one has to be efficient, cut unnecessary expenditures, and maximize output while minimizing input.

How many politicians pay themselves tens of millions of dollars for toppling the institution they are responsible for managing? A CEO does not provide any goods or services, but gets others to make the goods or services, pays them as little as possible, replaces them with underpaid overseas labor when possible, gets away with anything and everything they can to enrich themselves while using slivers of their wealth to buy campaigns for politicians who will help prevent them from paying for the environmental and other damages their greed engine causes. The largest and least necessary expenditure is their own paycheck, which they inflate many times faster than the actual production workers who do the actual work year after year, and extract every last dime they can out of their workers and consumers, using dirty tricks including overseas slave labor to have a profitability edge over any business even trying to do the silly thing of operating with integrity.

An HMO takes about 30% of the money it grubs from its clients for its own administrative overhead; Medicare, by comparison, only spends about 3% of the money it receives for administrative overhead. In case your math is as bad as your information, that's a government bureau ten times as efficient as is corporate counterpart.

The government receives money by stealing from others.

That's a business.

They provide crap services and then state the reason they are failing is cause they don't have enough money,

That's a business.

and then increase the debt, while improving the service only slightly. Any businessman would surely realize the problem with this, but a politician doesn't.

ORLY? How many mega-banks failed on Wall Street? Every argument you make is completely baseless when checked on reality.

The debt has been increased because politicians bought elections for Republicans who then slash taxes while continuing to increase spending that favors corporations. Government services were much bigger under Clinton and we still had a budget surplus.

Tariffs in China is one of the few areas I agree with Trump. It is unconscionable to import anything from a nation that practices slavery and undermines every very hard-fought human rights, labor protection and environmental law passed in the U.S.

China has been improving on those aspects. Living conditions are worse in china then in the US, but only because we are a richer nation.

China has not been improving on these aspects, only on making the jade curtain more opaque. Living conditions are not better in the U.S. because we are a richer nation, living conditions are better because we have the Emancipation Proclamation prohibiting slavery in the U.S., and labor and environmental laws to protect our own people. We fought very hard for those, but with the blessings of the previous Republican administration, large businesses circumvent every single one of those laws by exporting work to China.

If the Chinese people want to rebel against the Chinese government for suppression of
free speech, then it will happen through creation of wealth and improved education. Not through trade tariffs.

The Chinese people cannot create wealth, hundreds of thousands or perhaps even millions (exact number is not known) are forced to work for no pay at all through their laogai prison labor camps.

Reagan tried the reward human rights violations through free trade thing, it failed completely. Only when the Democrats overrode Reagan and enacted tough economic sanctions against South Africa, and other nations followed the U.S.' lead, did apartheid finally come to an end. China has absolutely no motive to end its bad behavior when it gets richer and more powerful by exploiting is own people for its own profit and that of American CEOs.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 1:06:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Bad candidate.
Anarchy sucks.
Libertarianism will never happen in America.
Ayn Rand's world is to utopian for the real world.
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 3:22:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/1/2011 1:06:48 PM, comoncents wrote:
Bad candidate.

Yeah.

Anarchy sucks.

You've never read a book by any prominent anarchists. Don't even try to deny it.

Libertarianism will never happen in America.

Never? Really? The 17th century Pennsylvania Quakers would beg to differ. "Never" is an awfully strong word. The human race is going to be around for quite a while. Lots can happen.

Ayn Rand's world is to utopian for the real world.

Herpa derp, I can recite what my professors and the talking heads in the media told me.

Cool story, bro.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/2/2011 11:54:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/1/2011 3:22:53 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 4/1/2011 1:06:48 PM, comoncents wrote:
Bad candidate.

Yeah.

Anarchy sucks.

You've never read a book by any prominent anarchists. Don't even try to deny it.


It does not work. I have spent time in Latin American countries and have seen anarchism not working. Private security does not work, spontaneous order does not exist in some places, and Anarchy, does in fact, suck.

If you can tell me where you have traveled, than I could see your points better. Where have you been? Have you been to poor countries? Have you seen anything beyond the United States (Canada) and surrounding territories? Have you been to Cuba, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico and Africa?
Before you claim that a system of government works, you need to see different cultures. You will find that Libertarianism does not work in places with no government order. Democracy is not universal. Aspects of socialism works for many people. A unguarded free market is dangerous.

Libertarianism will never happen in America.

Never? Really? The 17th century Pennsylvania Quakers would beg to differ. "Never" is an awfully strong word. The human race is going to be around for quite a while. Lots can happen.


In a religious world, Libertarianism may have a better chance; but in the real world, no. Free markets cannot be allowed to run completely free. A completely free market will never work.

Ayn Rand's world is to utopian for the real world.

Herpa derp, I can recite what my professors and the talking heads in the media told me.


That is great. I am glad you have professors and talking heads, but after traveling the world; it is all utopian nonsense. Her theories may wok in select places, but you fail to include culture diversity. These concepts will never work in the real world. That is why it is in fiction books!

Cool story, bro.

I have read "The Road To Serfdom," and many other books on free markets, libertarianism, and even anarchism. I like Milton Friedman's concepts the best, but I have found that much sounds great in books. Books are books, and real life is real. I was a completely free market guy, but see the damaging effects of a completely unaccounted for free market.

Thanks for the talk.