The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

[TheSker]

36 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

The guys in the Real Billionaires club have always considered him a joke. 

I'm not disagreeing with this....but I wonder how anyone outside this small circle would actually know this to be true.

[Moiraine]

16 minutes ago, TheSker said:

There are ways you can help others without it being through taxation.  And YOU get to decide where that dollar goes.

 

 

Not enough people do that to keep our society the way I think it should be, which makes it so people can make a lot of money, and there are lots of things that need to be paid for that cannot rely on something as inconsistent as voluntary giving.

[TGHusker]

4 minutes ago, NM11046 said:

I absolutely would say the same thing.  Oprah has as much a place in a Presidential race as this dude or Trump for that matter.  Id say the same thing about Mark cuban etc. 

 

I just read an interestjng article from Seattle times that talked about how corporate world and government require separate skills - will post later.  

 

It also discusses that Schultz has only voted in 11 of the last 38 elections.  So he is pretty engaged and involved in politica at all levels, this run totally fits with his passion and involvement (sarcasm)

You forgot one of these

 

And I do agree with you - it does take diff skill sets in so many ways - esp in the area of compromise and negotiation (Trump has none of those skills in spite of him putting his name on the Art of the Deal).   It also takes inspiring leadership.   I've recently have read several books about Pres Grant.  My estimation of him has grown 10 fold as a result.  He was an outsider but he was also a leader, he also didn't want to kick people (the South) when they were down (unlike the current occupant of the WH) - even though he was a strong military leader, he also compromised as needed once he got into govt - first as a cabinet member and then as President.  TR, who would later be on Mt Rushmore, said there were 3 giants in the list of presidents - Washington, Jefferson and Grant .  So, it does take a rare individual who can make it work. 

[Moiraine]

9 minutes ago, TheSker said:

I don't entirely disagree.  I'm simply saying taxation isn't the only method, and I certainly don't believe it's the most efficient.

 

 

What would be more efficient?

 

The things I think of are, hypothetically (but not so much), a state up north lets the level of their lake get too high and then releases too much water into the river and all of the Nebraska counties bordering the river are flooded for months on end and the crops and houses are destroyed.

 

What’e an efficient way to deal with things like that? People from the state up north don’t see it so they’re not really going to care.

[TGHusker]

15 minutes ago, NM11046 said:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/howard-schultz-is-above-the-political-fray-so-high-above-he-usually-doesnt-vote/?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true

 

 

Also an interesting perspective of business people running for office and why those skills often dont transfer.  

I agree wt this point from the article but then again it is a generalized statement.  Judge each person for who they are.  We've had some life long politicians on the other hand who have become President and have 'bombed'.

 

Quote

Hanauer wrote on Twitter, referring to Schultz’s candidacy, that the two disciplines require “profoundly different skills.” Business execs get to “define the goals, the culture, the terms of service, everything. If people do not comply, you fire them.” Whereas in politics, power is diffuse, “where literally no one has to do what you say, and many people actively are trying to subvert you.”

 

[deedsker]

21 minutes ago, TheSker said:

I don't entirely disagree.  I'm simply saying taxation isn't the only method, and I certainly don't believe it's the most efficient.

It may not be efficient, but it also allows resources to be pooled at a level that the public has input on. How many ineffective cancer awareness charities are there in the world? If I get cancer , how effective will my $1 trillion dollars be to the general public, if I decide that is where it should go by myself?

[schriznoeder]

21 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

I think if Ron Swanson ran as an independent, he would get a clean 18% of the vote. 

 

 

[TheSker]

20 minutes ago, deedsker said:

It may not be efficient, but it also allows resources to be pooled at a level that the public has input on. How many ineffective cancer awareness charities are there in the world? If I get cancer , how effective will my $1 trillion dollars be to the general public, if I decide that is where it should go by myself?

Is it possible your dollar could be pooled more efficiently, and at a more local level?

 

You can rather easily do a vetting process on charities.  It puts the need vetting in your hands to add to pooled money.  

 

Kinda cool, huh?

 

Among the reasons taxation is fought are government distrust and government inefficiency.

[Guy Chamberlin]

28 minutes ago, TheSker said:

I'm not disagreeing with this....but I wonder how anyone outside this small circle would actually know this to be true.

 

The bankruptcies, the casino failure (it's hard to lose money owning casinos), the lawsuits from several hundred contractors, and the 100% failure rate of the various products carrying the Trump name were well documented during the election. The unwillingness of banks to loan him money, and his post-2004 reliance on Russian investors somewhat less so, but it was still out there. New Yorkers knew him has a preening and garish celebrity who loved the media attention in a way that genuine power-brokers typically avoided. 

 

Only recently did the New York Times compile the complete picture -- many of the pieces already public record -- to show Trump was a liar, a cheat, and probably criminally fraudulent:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html

 

More recently, a profile of Mark Burnett makes a good case that Donald Trump was a C-list celebrity who got a complete television makeover in order to star on The Apprentice, and it's this character that Americans elected. 

[deedsker]

4 minutes ago, TheSker said:

Is it possible your dollar could be pooled more efficiently, and at a more local level?

 

You can rather easily do a vetting process on charities.  It puts the need vetting in your hands to add to pooled money.  

 

Kinda cool, huh?

 

Among the reasons taxation is fought are government distrust and government inefficiency.

But it also gets to the nefarious level of charities. What if I have money, don’t want to be taxed, and set up my own crappy charity to serve my own purpose (think Zuckerberg)? I don’t care about the effectiveness of the dollars used and you as a citizen can go use a third-party vetting source to show how s#!tty my charity is. I have still successfully not paid taxes to benefit society in a public level of accountability AND not benefited society.

 

Charities can be a good thing, wealthy peoples use of them isn’t always beneficial as a whole.

[Moiraine]

19 minutes ago, TheSker said:

Is it possible your dollar could be pooled more efficiently, and at a more local level?

 

You can rather easily do a vetting process on charities.  It puts the need vetting in your hands to add to pooled money.  

 

Kinda cool, huh?

 

Among the reasons taxation is fought are government distrust and government inefficiency.

 

 

 

“At a more local level” does not answer the example problem I used. If Iowa pollutes the river and it affects both Nebraska and Iowa, who’s going to voluntarily pony up the $ to fix it? Probably neither. I bet Nebraska just starts polluting more.

 

The people who tend to be the most distrustful of government seem happy to trust mega corporations to not harm anyone and to police themselves. They seem happy to let the country be an oligarchy. 

[TheSker]

7 minutes ago, deedsker said:

But it also gets to the nefarious level of charities. What if I have money, don’t want to be taxed, and set up my own crappy charity to serve my own purpose (think Zuckerberg)? I don’t care about the effectiveness of the dollars used and you as a citizen can go use a third-party vetting source to show how s#!tty my charity is. I have still successfully not paid taxes to benefit society in a public level of accountability AND not benefited society.

 

Charities can be a good thing, wealthy peoples use of them isn’t always beneficial as a whole.

I'm not familiar with the charity Zuckerberg set up, so I don't know enough to speak about it.

[TheSker]

17 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

The bankruptcies, the casino failure (it's hard to lose money owning casinos), the lawsuits from several hundred contractors, and the 100% failure rate of the various products carrying the Trump name were well documented during the election. The unwillingness of banks to loan him money, and his post-2004 reliance on Russian investors somewhat less so, but it was still out there. New Yorkers knew him has a preening and garish celebrity who loved the media attention in a way that genuine power-brokers typically avoided. 

 

Only recently did the New York Times compile the complete picture -- many of the pieces already public record -- to show Trump was a liar, a cheat, and probably criminally fraudulent:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html

 

More recently, a profile of Mark Burnett makes a good case that Donald Trump was a C-list celebrity who got a complete television makeover in order to star on The Apprentice, and it's this character that Americans elected. 

That's what you think of Trump.....not an elite inner circle.

 

And just to put it out there, I don't think it was Trump's business skills that got him elected.

 

He's an entertainer/marketer.

[Ratt Mhule]

21 minutes ago, TheSker said:

Is it possible your dollar could be pooled more efficiently, and at a more local level?

 

You can rather easily do a vetting process on charities.  It puts the need vetting in your hands to add to pooled money.  

 

Kinda cool, huh?

 

Among the reasons taxation is fought are government distrust and government inefficiency.

 

The reason govt. is corrupt is because corporations and wealthy people looking to push their agenda buy out politicians.

[TheSker]

13 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

“At a more local level” does not answer the example problem I used. If Iowa pollutes the river and it affects both Nebraska and Iowa, who’s going to voluntarily pony up the $ to fix it? Probably neither. I bet Nebraska just starts polluting more.

 

The people who tend to be the most distrustful of government seem happy to trust mega corporations to not harm anyone and to police themselves. They seem happy to let the country be an oligarchy. 

An environmental example equating to social issues/income distribution?.......