Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OK, you are one very confused kitty, and very confused Trump supporter.
As before, when you are presented with inconvenient fact, you resort to insult as argument. Someone with logic and facts don't need to use this tactic. Someone with an agenda does. There's nothing confusing about that.
IF Donny really cared about American jobs he never would have been selling clothes made in China under his name, it's just a little too convenient that he allegedly cares now that he's entered the campaign.
Well, you have a simple choice:
A candidate who doesn't need anyone else's money who MIGHT care about American jobs.
Or another candidate who DOES need other people's money -- with those people NOT CARING A BIT about American jobs.
As someone who cares about American jobs, I think I know what choice I would make...
Agreed.
So Trump has no problem buying favors from democrats by donating to them because they'll do him favors and make him more money. He has no problem using eminent domain to make more money. But he's mad other companies are doing what they can to make more money. He's a hypocrite and two faced.
As a businessman, he takes advantage of a rigged game.
As a politician, he tells us the game is rigged.
Which is more than the other politicians do as they are bought off by special interests....
As before, when you are presented with inconvenient fact, you resort to insult as argument. Someone with logic and facts don't need to use this tactic. Someone with an agenda does. There's nothing confusing about that.
Read your own posts. In post #8 you say that the article blames free trade, and in post 11 you say that the article blames protectionism against free trade. I don't mean to insult you, but you posted two polar-opposite statements within 3 posts of each other. To say that you are confused is not an insult; it's a fact.
The last 20 years—from the changes in tax laws of Bill Clinton’s regime through the terrible and costly years of George W. Bush—have favored massive increases in corporate profits with American workers and taxpayers paying the bills and the price. It need not be this way.
In this case, you cannot really blame the company or Mexican Government. Do you want to be paid slavery wages or do you want to earn a comfortable living? The reality is that you can never compete labor cost with developing countries.
We do need a comprehensive rewrite of the tax code for all our sake. Higher taxes on hedge fund managers is not going to cut it. We need to make America investors friendly, so all these companies will create jobs here. Punishing them by not buying their products just don't cut it.
Irene Rosenfeld, the CEO of Mondelez Int'l (parent of Oreo) was paid $3.6 million in cash last year - - plus another $50 or $60 thousand in chump change for "expenses" - - plus another $15 million in benefits (things like stock options, retirement "incentives", etc.) Her total compensation package last year was over $21 million.
The next handful of executives below her made between $5 - $6 million each.
Think about it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
