Can Trump really bring jobs back?

[Coronita]

[quote=flyer]
Actually, my point, flu, was that, imo, if the 80%+ of the population, which encompasses all parties, who are not in the top net worth categories in this country (another pesky little fact) are expecting any candidate to change their lives in any meaningful, bottom line way, they are SOL.

That said, if the voting masses are happy with the meaningless bones the candidates are throwing them–in exchange for their votes–they will, most likely, get what they deserve.[/quote]

Well, I’d say 80% of the population that aren’t the top income earners aren’t really screwed if they know how to manage their money well. Their fate has very little to do with what ‘rich’ people do, or what politicians do, especially in this country.

It has a lot to do with what they did with their own money when they were in their prime years earning. It has a lot to do with what they taught their kids to do with their money too, since financial education is rarely taught in the U.S.

There are plenty of solid middle class americans that will do just fine, because they manage their money just fine. This is not a lopsided country in which the wealth is concentrated in the %0.0001 of the wealthy owning 95% of the country’s wealth. If folks want to talk about wealth inequality, go to Russia, China, some of the eastern block, or the middle east, and most asian countries. People here really don’t realize how much “fairer” things are in this country relative to the rest of the world..This is not to say we don’t have structural issues, but clearly it’s not anywhere near as bad is it could be. Its just most people in this country have not really experienced extreme financial hardship to really understand what it means.

The problem is, many of the people in this country suck at money management. It’s a problem of how they spend, versus what they make. Most of the complainers about pay/job/income wouldn’t be complaining if along the way, they just took their education more seriously, or took their opportunities more seriously, or listened more to people who had a track record of investing better than them, or just didn’t spend their hard earned money on useless crap.. A small percentage of the population went through health crisis, which unfortunately in this country will probably bury you if you don’t have insurance. That is probably one of the few things that a person have very little control with. You’re just born with that. But beyond that, a lot of the financial hardships that people endure in this country were self-induced.

I’d say a good portion of the richer folks in this country would even fail miserably trying to survive if they hit a financial snag, since many of them do the exact thing same, except spend on a much larger scale.

[bearishgurl]

flyer, if you don’t mind my asking, do you intend to vote for a presidential candidate in Election 2016? You’ve repeatedly stated here on the forum that you feel both the Rep and Dem candidates are essentially frauds.

Inquiring minds and all that ….

[flyer]

BG, although I don’t want to go into detail, and as sad as I am to say this, for the first time in our lives, we will not be voting for president this time around.

We find both candidates deplorable in different ways, and, although we know many will say there is no excuse, we just cannot endorse either, and that’s as far as I want to go on this topic, other than mentioning that we also have many friends and family who are doing the same.

[Hobie]

this is really too bad.

[ltsddd]

[quote=flyer]If Americans are really concerned about their future and the future of their children, they should be very concerned that only 10% of Americans are millionaires, and around 80% of all workers (which would encompass those from both parties) earn around $50K a year.

It’s clear that the wealth gap, among all economic strata is continuing to widen in this country, and it will be interesting to see if either candidate, if elected, can change this trend going forward. If not, there should be a lot of very disappointed voters.[/quote]

The reality is that $50K/year is a lot of money in many parts of this country. One could do OK even in some part of this county. A household with two working adults making $100K/year is probably solid (upper)middle class.

The problem with most Americans is that they simply don’t know how to manage their money and their financial ignorance sometimes borderline stupidity. Talked to someone recently and found out the dude needed to replenish his emergency fund (a good thing) awhile back (a year?). So, exactly how did this guy fund his emergency fund? He did it by completely stopping participating in his company’s 401k plan. A complete idiotic move since for during that period he missed out on the generous company’s matching. Here’s the kicker, he’s a financial “adviser” for his church.

I am curious what kind of budget the Piggs are putting aside a year for expenses (including mortgage payments).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]Oh yeah, I know. Everyone is “deplorable” to HRC who isn’t a deep-enough pocketed donor to her foundation or campaign. Those deep pockets include the millions of “liberal elite” in CA. Having been a longtime local Dem activist myself for nearly nine years, no one knows this fact better than I do.

I don’t believe enough “minorities” (whatever that is supposed to mean) are being adequately polled by the major pollsters. The only “polls” which will be entirely believable are those votes which are cast for the November 8 election. You must know that many people aren’t going to speak their truth if they think they will just be chastised for it. Voting, whether by mail or in person, is private. This is the only act that will tell the tale.[/quote]

That’s pretty much bullshit. She was specific about who she finds deplorable. Racists. Xenophobes. Homophobes. Islamaphobes. Now the possibility exists that you don’t find any of these deplorable and you think the emancipation declaration was a mistake, and that slavery should still be legal. At this point, it wouldn’t surprise me. In which case, you fit in just perfectly with Trump voters.

Do you really think African Americans and Hispanics are lying to pollsters and claiming to support someone else and actually support Trump? Because that is the only way your claim that minorities aren’t being adequately polled works. (Unless you don’t believe in math, which given some of your claims, seems entirely possible.) I don’t know if you remember 4 years ago. But republicans across the country were “unskewing” the polls. The polls were pretty clear that Obama would win. Republicans, including some very prominent republicans were convinced otherwise. The polls ended up underestimating the Obama’s victory. So unskew, without any basis whatsoever, if it makes you feel better.[/quote]You seem to getting personal again in ascribing all of HRC’s stated “phobes” to me, SK. I honestly believe that an (unk) portion of people who are verbally “polled” (whether in person on telephonically, unless it was actually during an “exit poll”) are disinclined to speak their truth in this election. That is, not to state to the pollster that they are supporting a candidate they deplore, but instead stating to the pollster that they hadn’t yet made up their minds and so just named a candidate to get rid of the pollster. Or stated they would vote for an Independent for President. At least this would be so in polls where their names would be known to the pollster. A lot of people just want to get through their day without calling undue attention upon themselves.

I’m not entirely convinced that the numerous polls taken daily and weekly are accurate or even within a +/- 3 point margin of error for the reason that people just generally don’t want the hassle of being judged by an army of raging liberal goons, ESPECIALLY in coastal CA and ESPECIALLY if they reside near the International Border in any state. For these reasons, I believe the current polls could be grossly underestimating the number of actual Trump supporters (“closeted” or otherwise). What I did find interesting among groups of friends and relatives (3 groups of 40-80 people in 2 “flyover states” – one decidedly deep red and the other supposedly blue) was that residents of the red state were not afraid to state “Trump all the way” to whoever wanted to know and each group of +/- 40 in gatherings and a reunion I attended appeared to have 3-5 HRC supporters each. In the (supposedly) blue state, among people discussing the election who were from all over the country (but mostly “flyover states”), about 12 of the 35-40 (out of ~80) people I spoke to stated they supported HRC and the rest Trump. Of course, I didn’t talk about the election to everyone at the events, nor did I actually speak to everyone who was there and about 15-20 people in two of the events were children. The groups consisted of Caucasians, Hispanics, African Americans, Native Americans and (a few) Asians (only because there aren’t many Asians residing in those locales) and combinations thereof.

That was the result of my “personal sampling poll” of 90-100 adults of all ages in 2 states.

Methinks we’re embarking on a very interesting and exciting election season!

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Hobie]”The Economist (a pretty conservative publication)”
seriously![/quote]LOL . . .

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]You seem to getting personal again in ascribing all of HRC’s stated “phobes” to me, SK. I honestly believe that an (unk) portion of people who are verbally “polled” (whether in person on telephonically, unless it was actually during an “exit poll”) are disinclined to speak their truth in this election. That is, not to state to the pollster that they are supporting a candidate they deplore, but instead stating to the pollster that they hadn’t yet made up their minds and so just named a candidate to get rid of the pollster. Or stated they would vote for an Independent for President. At least this would be so in polls where their names would be known to the pollster. A lot of people just want to get through their day without calling undue attention upon themselves.

[/quote]

So you think people are lying in an anonymous poll, that they always have the option of not responding to? And somehow answering differently than they actual think, will somehow make the poll get finished faster?

It is personal. You know Trump is a horrendous racist, and don’t care. I think that’s deplorable.

And your personal poll really is meaningless. You’ve proved over and over again here that your personal experiences are not the same as most peoples.

I know 1 person voting for Trump. He’s a rabid and unashamed racist. So between the two of us, we’re pretty much even. Still meaningless.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=ltsdd][quote=flyer]If Americans are really concerned about their future and the future of their children, they should be very concerned that only 10% of Americans are millionaires, and around 80% of all workers (which would encompass those from both parties) earn around $50K a year.

It’s clear that the wealth gap, among all economic strata is continuing to widen in this country, and it will be interesting to see if either candidate, if elected, can change this trend going forward. If not, there should be a lot of very disappointed voters.[/quote]

The reality is that $50K/year is a lot of money in many parts of this country. One could do OK even in some part of this county. A household with two working adults making $100K/year is probably solid (upper)middle class. . . [/quote]This is true. It reminds me of all the relatives I have in “flyover country” who are/were “professionals” such as teachers, school administrators, policemen/women or civil servants married to same or other current/former “white collar” workers such as secretary/admin/insurance personnel who all successfully retired before age 62 on pensions and retirement funds they set aside while working. Even though their state/county/city/admin jobs paid lower than CA and they didn’t get COLAs (if civil service/DOD workers), they are better off financially than the vast majority of longtime CA residents are. Of course, they all paid off their large all-brick “retirement homes” situated on 1/2 to 20 AC between age 45-55, and, of course, they had far less of a mortgage to pay off than we in CA do.

I have to laugh at Trump’s comment, “I love the poorly educated,” because the “poorly educated” actually do the real work that keep this country humming along … such as truck driving, etc. I have a favorite uncle who is more like my cousin because he is just a few years older than me (will get his first SS check on 10/1 … Yay!) I stayed with him and his spouse for a few days in their well-appointed guest room on this last trip. He has a grocery pension (his spouse has a teaching pension) but he is still working FT nearly every day and is still very physically fit. He leases some of his land for cattle ranching, bales hay for neighboring ranchers and has his own herd of cattle to oversee, plus horses and dogs and a boatload of farm equipment. One morning when I was there, he decided to separate his calves from their moms to wean them. I went with him and watched him expertly herd all 18 of his calves into a 25 foot trailer and take them to another pen where he used his dogs to quickly corral them into it, away from their moms. It was a sight to behold! It took him less time to do this than it takes me to pipe up my semi-ancient desktop computer every morning and download the msgs from my two e-mail accts (not counting the spam folders). That’s with or without a cup of coffee in my hand!

When I visited him as a child, I watched him break 3 different horses at ages 12-14.

Um . . . the “poorly educated” or “high school graduates” in this country are what made it what it is today. They are the actual machinery which made America run for every American citizen and I agree with Trump in that they should be respected. Not every boomer and beyond could afford college or was even inclined to attend and it didn’t make any difference in their quality of life or quality of retirement because they lived within their means all their lives in their (flyover) home state and now, in “retirement,” have everything they want and need and often much more.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]You seem to getting personal again in ascribing all of HRC’s stated “phobes” to me, SK. I honestly believe that an (unk) portion of people who are verbally “polled” (whether in person on telephonically, unless it was actually during an “exit poll”) are disinclined to speak their truth in this election. That is, not to state to the pollster that they are supporting a candidate they deplore, but instead stating to the pollster that they hadn’t yet made up their minds and so just named a candidate to get rid of the pollster. Or stated they would vote for an Independent for President. At least this would be so in polls where their names would be known to the pollster. A lot of people just want to get through their day without calling undue attention upon themselves.

[/quote]

So you think people are lying in an anonymous poll, that they always have the option of not responding to? And somehow answering differently than they actual think, will somehow make the poll get finished faster?

It is personal. You know Trump is a horrendous racist, and don’t care. I think that’s deplorable.

And your personal poll really is meaningless. You’ve proved over and over again here that your personal experiences are not the same as most peoples.

I know 1 person voting for Trump. He’s a rabid and unashamed racist. So between the two of us, we’re pretty much even. Still meaningless.[/quote]I don’t think most of the polls are anonymous. Pollsters get names of people to call from voter registration records (registered Dems, Reps and Independents). It’s easy to get their (home) phone numbers. I’ve phone banked for Dem candidates on numerous occasions in the past and the registered voters’ landline numbers were all provided to us and they were mostly all legitimate. Most of the voters would respond to our poll or candidate/cause spiel (unless they were in the middle of dinner, etc). Of course, this was before the masses had cell phones.

Polls on street corners would be anonymous, I suppose but the pollster would see the person they attempted to poll and could try to size them up before approaching them.

Exit polls are also anonymous but not only does the pollster see the person they are attempting to poll, they KNOW they reside in a specific precinct.

I also precinct-walked many times door to door in neighborhoods all over SD County (all south of I-8) on behalf of local candidates and KNOW how people respond at their doors to political workers … depending on if our candidate was favorable to them or not. The voters approached at their homes are not always forthcoming or even informed at first. It often takes a few minutes for them to warm up to you and listen to your spiel about your candidate/cause.

Precinct walking is a great way to meet people … and you often run into friends/relatives of people you already know or who used to work in your workplace or occupation!

[bearishgurl]

Hilarious!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/13/morning_joe_panel_clinton_created_a_community_of_trump_supporters_embracing_deplorables_label.html

I really need to find out where us proud border-dwelling ladies can order those T-shirts!

[an]

[quote=flyer]BG, although I don’t want to go into detail, and as sad as I am to say this, for the first time in our lives, we will not be voting for president this time around.

We find both candidates deplorable in different ways, and, although we know many will say there is no excuse, we just cannot endorse either, and that’s as far as I want to go on this topic, other than mentioning that we also have many friends and family who are doing the same.[/quote]But don’t you think not voting will beget more of what you’re seeing this cycle? After all, if all the moderates people think and act like you and just stay at home, then we’re leaving the extreme of both party to dictate the candidates we get to vote for?

[flyer]

If enough people feel the same as we do, that’s very possible AN, but, in our opinion, in this election cycle, nothing would be worse than handing our vote to one of the current options, and that’s really all I’d care to say on that topic.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=scaredyclassic]land mines might be cheaper. a no mans zone.

bad for desert ecology tho…[/quote]

You’re right.

What proponents of the wall don’t realize is that a new highway along the border would make rugged terrain so much easier to travel.

[Anonymous]

[quote=flyer]If enough people feel the same as we do, that’s very possible AN, but, in our opinion, in this election cycle, nothing would be worse than handing our vote to one of the current options, and that’s really all I’d care to say on that topic.[/quote]

Yes, maybe you should stop there. Because you are starting to spew gibberish.

[Author]

Posts