Trump tweets

[Butch]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

 

Perhaps you see the contradiction in your posts, submitted only 5 m8 utes apart

A chapter 13 personal bankruptcy and a chapter 11 company reorganization bankruptcy are as different as bananas and okra. Donald Trump has never declared bankruptcy.

[waitforufo]

6 minutes ago, Butch said:

Do any of you realize who pays corporate taxes? You do, for corporations it is just the cost of doing business, it gets passed on to the consumer. If corporations want to avoid that cost, they simply do their business in another country.

I have made this point on science forums more than once.  Sure they write a bigger check to government but they get that money from their consumers in the middle class.  Those that argue against this point must know it is true, but they don't care, because they simply want more tax revenue for the government.  

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, Butch said:

Donald Trump has never declared bankruptcy.

Is it really much better when the only reason that’s true is because he got bailed out by a rich friend?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/business/stephen-bollenbach-dead.html

[John Cuthber]

Just now, Butch said:

A chapter 13 personal bankruptcy and a chapter 11 company reorganization bankruptcy are as different as bananas and okra. Donald Trump has never declared bankruptcy.

OK, so a bankruptcy is  a bankruptcy, but a bankruptcy isn't.
The bankruptcy he declared wasn't a bankruptcy. 

Glad you clarified that.
Perhaps you can explain which of them is the one that makes you look like a competent businessman.

(Do you think anyone is still taking you seriously)
 

1 minute ago, waitforufo said:

but they get that money from their consumers in the middle class. 

Are all the consumers middle class in your world?
 

[Butch]

7 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

He is the Big Boy.

He just snatched the government for himself (and his rich friends).

That's why he's destroying regulatory legislation.

We will have to wait and see if that is true, however we still need to seek statesman, not politicians to take the reins.

[waitforufo]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

Is it really much better when the only reason that’s true is because he got bailed out by a rich friend?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/business/stephen-bollenbach-dead.html

It's nice to have friends.

[iNow]

And a rich daddy. Gosh, it’s almost as if he’s not a good businessman. 

[Butch]

2 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

OK, so a bankruptcy is  a bankruptcy, but a bankruptcy isn't.
The bankruptcy he declared wasn't a bankruptcy. 

Glad you clarified that.
Perhaps you can explain which of them is the one that makes you look like a competent businessman.

(Do you think anyone is still taking you seriously)
 

Are all the consumers middle class in your world?
 

You need to do some studying...

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

Is it really much better when the only reason that’s true is because he got bailed out by a rich friend?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/business/stephen-bollenbach-dead.html

Yeah, I think I said something about that earlier, I guess he should have gone to big brother.

[waitforufo]

11 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

He is the Big Boy.

He just snatched the government for himself (and his rich friends).

That's why he's destroying regulatory legislation.

Legislation is supposed to come from the legislature not some bunch of regulatory bureaucrats that no one voted for.    

[John Cuthber]

1 minute ago, Butch said:

You need to do some studying...

I would; but you forgot the explanation that I might study.

Which sort of bankruptcy should I be looking for when I'm choosing a businessman to run the world's biggest economy?

Just now, waitforufo said:

Legislation is supposed to come from the legislature not some bunch of regulatory bureaucrats that no one voted for.    

It did.

The hint is in the name.

[waitforufo]

2 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

It did.

The hint is in the name.

Please tell me which law passed by Congress and signed by a President that was destroyed by Trump.  

[Butch]

8 minutes ago, Butch said:

Glad you clarified that.
Perhaps you can explain which of them is the one that makes you look like a competent businessman.

A reorganizational bankruptcy, holds off creditors while a business tries to recover... It is a difficult, but usually wise business decision. It is done in the private sector, not via big brother and if it is successful the creditors are satisfied. It is better for everyone than locking the doors and walking away.

Study: Lee Iacoca and Chrysler Corp.

17 minutes ago, waitforufo said:

I have made this point on science forums more than once.  Sure they write a bigger check to government but they get that money from their consumers in the middle class.  Those that argue against this point must know it is true, but they don't care, because they simply want more tax revenue for the government.  

They get that money from anyone who buys their products. Business tax is a hidden tax, it is a tax on the consumer... All consumers! 

If it we're eliminated and replaced by a sales tax, how would you feel about paying it?

16 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Which sort of bankruptcy should I be looking for when I'm choosing a businessman to run the world's biggest economy?

Definitely chapter 11, reference Lee Iacoca.

Edited November 6, 2017 by Butch

[waitforufo]

23 minutes ago, iNow said:

And a rich daddy. Gosh, it’s almost as if he’s not a good businessman. 

What's wrong with having a rich daddy?  Lot's of democrats in Congress did or do.  Ever hear of the Kennedy's   

[Butch]

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

We have already pointed out that he changes his story more often than some folk change their socks.

If he believes one thing  on odd numbered days and another thing on even numbered ones, doesn't that show he's just swaying in the breeze of public opinion?

 

It shows that you are swaying in the breeze, if you see a story, check your facts, educate yourself... Don't just go along with popular opinion... I am not saying change your opinions, just don't be a blind follower.

Trump could be a complete disaster! I just think he was the best option at the time and I hope it shows a change in the attitudes of Americans when we choose our elected officials.

Edited November 6, 2017 by Butch

[Phi for All]

I think his tweets distract from the fact that nothing is getting done. It was bad when Congress was fighting to deny a black president his goals, and now I fear Trump's goals are all done in the dark, and his tweets and outrageousness are just a distraction. He spouts carpetbagger weasel crap about some complicated issue that gets attention, and with the other hand he removes protections for consumers. I find it odd he removed a law that requires ISPs to take reasonable measures to protect your data just months before the Equifax data breaches were announced.

Trump is a horrible businessman but a master magician who has learned the art of distraction. He says outrageous shit and we stop demanding he explain his mountainous conflicts of interest. He rails against the NFL and we stop questioning his praise of the violence done by his supporters. Distract and plunder.

[iNow]

I never claimed there was anything wrong with having a rich dad to get you started or a rich friend to bail you out of personal bankruptcy.

I was obviously challenging the claim Butch made about Trumps business skills. Evidence suggests those skills are lacking on nearly every business metric. It’s part of the reason US banks wouldn’t lend to him and he had to get in bed with Russia  

It’s pathetic how many people accept the marketing spin and fictional narrative of his without critical thought. 

[swansont]

13 hours ago, Butch said:

 By the way Trump is a great believer in science benefitting the world, I think we will see some great things, if he can get them through the hill.

!

Moderator Note

You are going to have to start backing up your claims. How about starting with this one. Make your case.

 

[Butch]

On 11/7/2017 at 6:40 AM, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

You are going to have to start backing up your claims. How about starting with this one. Make your case.

 

He is not knowledgeable when it comes to science, for example... He wants to establish a moon base in preparation for a manned Mars mission. I know his thinking on a Mars mission is wrong, however he has a knack for finding the right people. He has expressed the feeling that American technology is helping the planet as a whole. When he left the Paris Accord he stated that American technology produces the most efficient and cleanest facilities on Earth and this technology is being shared even in the third world.

I think he was right in leaving the Accord, this country is more than willing to help them who help themselves, we should not be held to help those who are not.

Most of the naysayers are focused on climate change... I believe climate change is happening, I also believe the U.S. is leading the world in reducing pollution. That said, if man had never appeared on Earth, the climate would still be changing and I don't think there really is a lot we can do about it... Even if we could turn on a machine that would regulate the climate, I don't think we should play around with such things... We are not gods.

Here is a quote from a Trump interview you can find it all over the web... Spun many different ways.

"Perhaps the best use of our limited financial resources should be in dealing with making sure that every person in the world has clean water. Perhaps we should focus on eliminating lingering diseases around the world like malaria. Perhaps we should focus on efforts to increase food production to keep pace with an ever-growing world population. Perhaps we should be focused on developing energy sources and power production that alleviates the need for dependence on fossil fuels. We must decide on how best to proceed so that we can make lives better, safer and more prosperous."

Sounds like science to me.

Edited November 9, 2017 by Butch

[Strange]

10 minutes ago, Butch said:

When he left the Paris Accord he stated that American technology produces the most efficient and cleanest facilities on Earth and this technology is being shared even in the third world.

And you believed him?

11 minutes ago, Butch said:

I think he was right in leaving the Accord, this country is more than willing to help them who help themselves, we should not be held to help those who are not.

By abandoning the agreement, the US will not be helping anyone. (But will, of course, benefit from the work that all the other countries do to meet the goals.)

I'm not sure what you/Trump think the agreement is about. It almost sounds like you think it is about the US bailing out other countries, or something. In fact it is about all countries doing their bit. The US is now, I believe, the only country that has refused to agree to do their best to reduce the effects of climate change. Luckily, industry and many states are more intelligent, and have a better grasp of the science, than Trump and his anti-science cronies.

[Phi for All]

36 minutes ago, Butch said:

I think he was right in leaving the Accord, this country is more than willing to help them who help themselves, we should not be held to help those who are not.

This is another thing his tweets do, they cause his supporters to ignore fact-checking. It's VERY important to check everything he tweets for accuracy. He misrepresents a great deal in his tweets, and passes ignorance along like candy.

[Arete]

41 minutes ago, Butch said:

Sounds like science to me.

Any President who supports the completely debunked Wakefield link between the MMR vaccine and autism is not pro science. 

Any president who wants to increase graduate student income tax burden by 400% is not pro science.

Any president who wants to decimate science funding is not pro science.

Any president who dissolves the DoJ National commission on forensic science is not pro science.

Any president blocks public access to scientific data is no pro science. 

Trump is the most anti science president in recent history. His own party and appropriations committee openly defies him to support science. 

[iNow]

47 minutes ago, Strange said:

he US is now, I believe, the only country that has refused to agree to do their best to reduce the effects of climate change.

Correct.

Even Syria now... Syria of Bashir al-Assad, "I use sarin gas and barrel bombs to murder my own people is massive numbers" fame... aka: the ONLY other holdout on this agreement other than the US now under Trump... has agreed and joined the Paris climate agreement. The US is the ONLY one left. 'Merca! It's got electrolytes.

[John Cuthber]

7 hours ago, Butch said:

however he has a knack for finding the right people.

LOL

7 hours ago, Butch said:

"Perhaps the best use of our limited financial resources should be in dealing with making sure that every person in the world has clean water. Perhaps we should focus on eliminating lingering diseases around the world like malaria. Perhaps we should focus on efforts to increase food production to keep pace with an ever-growing world population. Perhaps we should be focused on developing energy sources and power production that alleviates the need for dependence on fossil fuels. We must decide on how best to proceed so that we can make lives better, safer and more prosperous."

Sounds like science to me.

It would be; now, where's the evidence that he's actually doing any of it?

The fact is he is hindering research in so many fields

[Arete]

1 minute ago, John Cuthber said:

It would be; now, where's the evidence that he's actually doing any of it? 

$7.7 billion (22%) proposed cut to the NIH

$1.2 billion (17%) proposed cut to the CDC

That's a pretty huge, steamy crap on the whole "eliminating diseases" flippancy. 

[Silvestru]

8 hours ago, Butch said:

Sounds like science to me.

Saddest comment I have seen on this forum. That's how propaganda weeds the irrational folk from the rational. Sounds like science to me.... 

Spoiler