Reasons I cannot vote for Trump

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=bearishgurl] Other countries reserve their best jobs for their own natives and there is nothing wrong with that. It’s as it should be.[/quote]

You would be wrong. Companies and countries that strive for excellence hire the best people.

That’s why Americans work as “experts” around for the world, more so in past decades.

The difference now is that we have globalization of education, and many foreigners are better than us so our best companies want to hire them.

For example, you have plenty of Americans working at Emirates and Etihad, some of the best airlines in the world. Americans work for big foreign oil companies, and on large infrastructure projects everywhere in the world because the natives are less qualified.

Global companies need a global workforce. Simple economics (BTW, I didn’t say that economics is everything. A social agenda is needed. But economics are necessary to build wealth).

[an]

[quote=outtamojo]This is just sickening :
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/03/16/donald-trump-just-threatened-more-violence-only-this-time-its-directed-at-the-gop/

Have we learned nothing about despots and dictators?
Plunge the country into chaos and protest with inflammatory policies, declare martial law, then there goes the Constitution we wear on our sleeves.
If the GOP had any guts at all they would expel him from the party. He could still run as an independent to represent his nut job supporters.[/quote]
+1.

But somehow, I don’t think the GOP have the cajones to do such a thing. The big question then becomes, would the independents stay home or go out to vote for Hillary and the many non-Republicans for other races.

[ltsddd]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=bearishgurl] Other countries reserve their best jobs for their own natives and there is nothing wrong with that. It’s as it should be.[/quote]

You would be wrong. Companies and countries that strive for excellence hire the best people.

That’s why Americans work as “experts” around for the world, more so in past decades.

The difference now is that we have globalization of education, and many foreigners are better than us so our best companies want to hire them.

For example, you have plenty of Americans working at Emirates and Etihad, some of the best airlines in the world. Americans work for big foreign oil companies, and on large infrastructure projects everywhere in the world because the natives are less qualified.

Global companies need a global workforce. Simple economics (BTW, I didn’t say that economics is everything. A social agenda is needed. But economics are necessary to build wealth).[/quote]

I have to agree with BG, here. In Germany, and I can only speak about germany, pecking order for cushy jobs are more or less as followed: Germans, white western europeans, eastern europeans, asians (japanese, koreans, chinese, … in that order). Unless, you’re a genius, your ethnicity is more important than your skills in getting those jobs. Foreign consultants is just an anomaly to what reality is.

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]
I’m not saying that all of the immigration allowed into the US was bad … I’m just saying that full employment for the “nativist sector” of the US population has dropped significantly in the past 20 years due to massive immigration into the country.

[/quote]

I’m reasonably sure there is no data to back this up. This isn’t a matter of opinion. This is an assertion of an actual occurrence that can be measured and tested. It hasn’t happened.

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl] And I’d like to add that Donald Trump was raised in Jamaica (Queens), NY. One of the first “real jobs” his father gave him was “managing” his many multi-story, brick behemoth, low-income rent-controlled apt buildings in Queens and Brooklyn (this was prior to the “Section 8” progam). He had to deal with this crowd as well as late rent-payers and even evictions. Even though Trump grew up in privilege and was sent to a military boarding school for HS, he has had plenty of experience in his life successfully interacting with Joe and Suzy 6p and that’s why he understands them so well.

[/quote]

His father made his fortune as a slum-lord. Donald learned how to be a slum-lord. He very well may have learned how to wield power in this position. Your characterization of his navigation of the slum-lord/tenant relationship as “successfully interacting with Joe and Suzy 6p” as well as your disdain for the poor is duly noted. That you consider this good presidential experience is truly abhorrent.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl] And I’d like to add that Donald Trump was raised in Jamaica (Queens), NY. One of the first “real jobs” his father gave him was “managing” his many multi-story, brick behemoth, low-income rent-controlled apt buildings in Queens and Brooklyn (this was prior to the “Section 8” progam). He had to deal with this crowd as well as late rent-payers and even evictions. Even though Trump grew up in privilege and was sent to a military boarding school for HS, he has had plenty of experience in his life successfully interacting with Joe and Suzy 6p and that’s why he understands them so well.[/quote]His father made his fortune as a slum-lord. Donald learned how to be a slum-lord. He very well may have learned how to wield power in this position. Your characterization of his navigation of the slum-lord/tenant relationship as “successfully interacting with Joe and Suzy 6p” as well as your disdain for the poor is duly noted. That you consider this good presidential experience is truly abhorrent.[/quote]

sk, I don’t have any “disdain” for the “poor.” I actually live amonsgt the “Joe and Suzy 6p’s” of the world and consider myself one :=D That “colloquialism” has been oft-used by many on this board to describe everyday “real people,” representative of the masses in their locality and NOT a “celebrity” or member of the “5% club.”

Those former “low-income” buildings that used to belong to the Trumps are among the nicest buildings in town today! These older bldgs have much larger units in them than the newer-built buildings do and still have plenty of “rent-controlled” units. For example, a unit costing $220 monthly rent in 1977 costs only $630 month today for the same longtime tenant!

…“Fred Trump built for people like me,” says Sol Cooperman, 70, now a retired accountant who’s been in Trump Village since renting a $220 a month, two-bedroom apartment there in 1977. Today he pays just $630 a month for it. “I can afford a little decent housing. But Trump Place — who can afford that type of square footage paying $300,000, $400,000?”…

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/08/10/the-middle-class-housing-empire-donald-trump-abandoned-for-luxury-building/

I CAN tell you that the (circa 1917) Banker’s Hill (SD) apartment I rented in 1978 for $225 month now rents for $1770 month … go figure :=0 Of course, it’s likely been “remodeled” a few times since then, lol …

In short, the large “Trump Village” complex appears in the photos to be well-built, well-located and well-landscaped and far from ever being considered a “slum.”

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]
In short, the large “Trump Village” complex appears in the photos to be well-built, well-located and well-landscaped and far from ever being considered a “slum.”[/quote]

Do you think one photograph today of a trump building, built decades ago, is proof that he wasn’t a slum-lord? Fred Trump was a racist slum-lord. This idea isn’t a current invention. Woody Guthrie wrote about it more than 60 years ago.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
I’m not saying that all of the immigration allowed into the US was bad … I’m just saying that full employment for the “nativist sector” of the US population has dropped significantly in the past 20 years due to massive immigration into the country.

[/quote]

I’m reasonably sure there is no data to back this up. This isn’t a matter of opinion. This is an assertion of an actual occurrence that can be measured and tested. It hasn’t happened.[/quote]The only other reason for this phenomenon is big manufacturing plants moving to other countries, leaving the longtime “nativist” population (in some areas, there has been very little, if any, immigration over the years) chronically unemployed and stuck with homes that don’t have any resale value. We’ve seen this scenario play out repeatedly in the news along the recent “campaign trail” in rust-belt and other midwestern and southern states.

Those are the only cases where immigration has not played a part in American “nativists” losing their longtime jobs, IMO. Ironically, these coveted jobs (formerly occupied by US “nativists”) went to foreign workers in their own countries for the express purpose of “Big Manufacturing” being able to get away with paying them 1/10th (on avg) the hourly rate their American employees were getting (plus being able to eliminate benefits and pensions).

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]The only other reason for this phenomenon is big manufacturing plants moving to other countries, leaving the longtime “nativist” population (in some areas, there has been very little, if any, immigration over the years) chronically unemployed and stuck with homes that don’t have any resale value. We’ve seen this scenario play out repeatedly in the news along the recent “campaign trail” in rust-belt and other midwestern and southern states.

Those are the only cases where immigration has not played a part in American “nativists” losing their longtime jobs, IMO. Ironically, these coveted jobs (formerly occupied by US “nativists”) went to foreign workers in their own countries for the express purpose of “Big Manufacturing” being able to get away with paying them 1/10th (on avg) the hourly rate their American employees were getting (plus being able to eliminate benefits and pensions).[/quote]

Huh? What “phenomenon” are you talking about? The lack of data to support your silly claims? This isn’t the least bit responsive to what I said. If there is evidence to back up what you said, I’d love to see it. I’ve looked. There isn’t any. Stories on the news are not data.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
In short, the large “Trump Village” complex appears in the photos to be well-built, well-located and well-landscaped and far from ever being considered a “slum.”[/quote]

Do you think one photograph today of a trump building, built decades ago, is proof that he wasn’t a slum-lord? Fred Trump was a racist slum-lord. This idea isn’t a current invention. Woody Guthrie wrote about it more than 60 years ago.[/quote]sk, I’ve seen “tenement slums” in my life …. many times. I’ve seen them in Denver (they were starting to clear them out due to an “urban renewal” plan adopted by the city in the mid-late ’70’s) and I’ve seen them in Oakland … blocks and blocks of them … now razed (some due to BART track being laid). I understand “slum.” “Trump Village” most certainly is not one. If it was, it would have been razed decades ago as that land is too close-in and valuable to waste on “slums.”

And, except for a former infamous Navy Housing complex with metal trash cans and their lids chained to the sidewalk in Paradise Hills (now completely rebuilt), SD never had any “slums.” Not in Barrio Logan, not in Shelltown, not in Grant Hill, not even in Encanto or Lomita Village … or anywhere, for that matter. As a SD “native,” you are well aware of this, SK, and I’m sure you must know what a “slum” is … and isn’t.

Of course, I didn’t know Fred Trump and neither did you. I was thinking of ordering a kindle version of one of the (several) Trump family biographies currently available on Amazon. I’d be interested in learning more about the early years, when Trump and his siblings were kids.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]The only other reason for this phenomenon is big manufacturing plants moving to other countries, leaving the longtime “nativist” population (in some areas, there has been very little, if any, immigration over the years) chronically unemployed and stuck with homes that don’t have any resale value. We’ve seen this scenario play out repeatedly in the news along the recent “campaign trail” in rust-belt and other midwestern and southern states.

Those are the only cases where immigration has not played a part in American “nativists” losing their longtime jobs, IMO. Ironically, these coveted jobs (formerly occupied by US “nativists”) went to foreign workers in their own countries for the express purpose of “Big Manufacturing” being able to get away with paying them 1/10th (on avg) the hourly rate their American employees were getting (plus being able to eliminate benefits and pensions).[/quote]

Huh? What “phenomenon” are you talking about? The lack of data to support your silly claims? This isn’t the least bit responsive to what I said. If there is evidence to back up what you said, I’d love to see it. I’ve looked. There isn’t any. Stories on the news are not data.[/quote]Are you not understanding that a good portion of the US auto plants and steel plants have moved to MX or overseas and (presumably) two more Ohio steel plants will be closing at the end of this month? Have you been paying attention to the many towns on the news who have hosted rallies for the candidates and the TV cameras touring around the decimated, idle former factories with the former workers and union reps who were interviewed?

It’s been all over the airwaves for about two months now.

Maybe you’re not paying attention to the campaign trail? That’s okay, but don’t act surprised now because you may be unaware of any of this.

edit: I recently read somewhere that the avg auto worker working in for an auto mfr in MX receives $2.22 to $2.70 hr (in US dollars). I’ll try to find that piece again and post it on this thread.

[njtosd]

[quote=AN][quote=njtosd]Flu contended that white men weren’t being discriminated against because they are doing so well in corporate America. I think groups can be both discriminated against and successful – which was the point I was making.[/quote]I’m sure there are pocket discrimination. But as a whole, do you have data to back your claim that white men are being discriminated against? When, where, how, by who?[/quote]

I never claimed such a thing. Please review posts before making comments like that. What I was trying to say (and it seems pretty easy to understand . . . ) is that simply doing well is not proof that a group is not discriminated against.

[njtosd]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
I’m not saying that all of the immigration allowed into the US was bad … I’m just saying that full employment for the “nativist sector” of the US population has dropped significantly in the past 20 years due to massive immigration into the country.

[/quote]

I’m reasonably sure there is no data to back this up. This isn’t a matter of opinion. This is an assertion of an actual occurrence that can be measured and tested. It hasn’t happened.[/quote]

The data seems to show that BG’s position is not supported: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/08/26/Are-Immigrants-Really-Taking-American-Jobs

[njtosd]

[quote=flu][quote=njtosd][quote=AN][quote=njtosd]Flu – Asians are projected to become the wealthiest group in the US in coming years. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/03/15/mericans-are-transforming-the-face-of-us-wealth.html

When they do, will that mean that discrimination against Asians has stopped?[/quote]
Success of a race on average and discrimination against a race are two separate thing. Just because Asian found ways to work around the discrimination, persevere through the discrimination, and achieve financial success does not mean they’re not being discriminated against. It just mean as a group, Asian don’t spend as much energy bitching about it as working with the landscape that’s in front of them, even when there’s discrimination.[/quote]

Flu contended that white men weren’t being discriminated against because they are doing so well in corporate America. I think groups can be both discriminated against and successful – which was the point I was making.[/quote]

I didn’t say that it doesn’t happen. It doesn’t happen to the scale that people bitch about. Take Paramount for example. He (use to?) works for an aerospace company in RB, same one that some of my colleagues use to work there too.

Why on earth would he feel like he’s discriminated against when
1) There’s no H1-B in his company, since most of the work requires a security clearance
2) There’s barely any asians at his company too, and virtually none in management (I’ve checked)
3) Barely any other minorities over there (I’ve checked in the past)

Granted it went through tough times because of other reasons (consolidation of operations that led to a few folks I know moving to Maryland and Virginia) and it’s dysfunctional in the past for many reasons, but specifically what is this sort of “discrimination” he personally experience?

He’s working in the industry that has the greatest barrier to entry because due to the need for a security clearance, so that eliminates all “illegals” and all “immigrants” from a direct threat to so called job security, and since getting a security clearances takes a long time these days, it’s even a pretty big “wall” for people with U.S. citizenship. So what job threat from illegals/H1-B’s/immigrants has he or is he specifically experiencing, which is the #1 complaint among Trump worshippers. And yet, I still hear him claim he was discriminated against? So I’m curious, what specific incidence(s) of discrimination?

I suspect none specifically, it’s just he’s been listening too much to what others spew, what Trump spews, and adopted the same rhetoric as if he personally has experienced it himself.[/quote]

If Paramount is having any trouble job wise I doubt it has to do with discrimination – I’m sure his rather opinionated personality comes through.

I don’t take anything for granted. If someone says that white men are never discriminated against, I try to find data. Constitutionally, white men do not fall into a “protected class” as do women, minorities, aliens (of the immigration type) people with disabilities, etc. Therefore, it is easier to discriminate against them without facing a Constitutional challenge. Perhaps, though, that just levels the playing field.

Discrimination is everywhere everyday and it will never go away – tall, short, thin, fat, Boston accent, Southern accent, etc. etc. (I’ve heard more slams on this board directed toward the Midwest than I would have expected – most of which are inaccurate). I think somewhere on this thread I read that non asians put less academic pressure on their kids (mine would laugh . . . ) On an individual basis we all just have to overcome the obstacles that are put in front of us – whether by laws or other people.

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
In short, the large “Trump Village” complex appears in the photos to be well-built, well-located and well-landscaped and far from ever being considered a “slum.”[/quote]

Do you think one photograph today of a trump building, built decades ago, is proof that he wasn’t a slum-lord? Fred Trump was a racist slum-lord. This idea isn’t a current invention. Woody Guthrie wrote about it more than 60 years ago.[/quote]sk, I’ve seen “tenement slums” in my life …. many times. I’ve seen them in Denver (they were starting to clear them out due to an “urban renewal” plan adopted by the city in the mid-late ’70’s) and I’ve seen them in Oakland … blocks and blocks of them … now razed (some due to BART track being laid). I understand “slum.” “Trump Village” most certainly is not one. If it was, it would have been razed decades ago as that land is too close-in and valuable to waste on “slums.”

And, except for a former infamous Navy Housing complex with metal trash cans and their lids chained to the sidewalk in Paradise Hills (now completely rebuilt), SD never had any “slums.” Not in Barrio Logan, not in Shelltown, not in Grant Hill, not even in Encanto or Lomita Village … or anywhere, for that matter. As a SD “native,” you are well aware of this, SK, and I’m sure you must know what a “slum” is … and isn’t.

Of course, I didn’t know Fred Trump and neither did you. I was thinking of ordering a kindle version of one of the (several) Trump family biographies currently available on Amazon. I’d be interested in learning more about the early years, when Trump and his siblings were kids.[/quote]

I’m not sure what you’re responding to here. I said Fred Trump was a racist slum-Lord. Evidence that one of his buildings wasn’t a tenement doesn’t disprove my argument.

[Author]

Posts