Author Topic: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?  (Read 180614 times)

KBecks

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2650 on: March 07, 2017, 12:10:10 PM »
Yes, there will always be some bad schools.  Just like there will always be poor people.  That is life.   How can we give most kids the best chance to succeed?   Limiting them is not the way. 

waltworks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2269
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2651 on: March 07, 2017, 12:21:24 PM »
Yes, there will always be some bad schools.  Just like there will always be poor people.  That is life.   How can we give most kids the best chance to succeed?   Limiting them is not the way.

That ("there will always be some bad schools") is not relevant to the discussion, though. What we care about is the overall effect of various ways of running things, and for that we can use data.

The data currently shows charters to do *worse* or at best the same, overall, as public schools.

-W

accolay

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 475
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2652 on: March 07, 2017, 12:41:53 PM »
There are a lot of problems with charter schools. I found this article, although a little dated, interesting.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/02/28/separating-fact-from-fiction-in-21-claims-about-charter-schools/?utm_term=.65a223c031fa

BeginnerStache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 907
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2653 on: March 07, 2017, 01:06:59 PM »
Yes, there will always be some bad schools.  Just like there will always be poor people.  That is life.   How can we give most kids the best chance to succeed?   Limiting them is not the way.

Neither is providing some with a choice to move on to something that likely will be worse. Scrap the stupid voucher program and let's start focusing on arguably the most important determining factor for success in school. Improving home life and neighborhoods. More specifically poverty and racial/ethnic inequality. The current administration isn't exactly a champion for those folks. So vouchers it is. We'll just blame it on public schools and the teachers. Vicious cycle isn't it.

Tasty Pinecones

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 762
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2654 on: March 07, 2017, 01:48:14 PM »
Doesn't pertain to the schools topic but I'll just leave this here.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-and-republicans-see-a-%E2%80%98deep-state%E2%80%99-foe-barack-obama/ar-AAnXZdW

Real life turns into a bad reality TV show...

We NEED to get past the knit-picking over the tiny details that divide us. SO much we need to be working on together to get rid of this guy.

accolay

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 475
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2655 on: March 07, 2017, 01:53:40 PM »
Doesn't pertain to the schools topic but I'll just leave this here.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-and-republicans-see-a-%E2%80%98deep-state%E2%80%99-foe-barack-obama/ar-AAnXZdW
Real life turns into a bad reality TV show...
We NEED to get past the knit-picking over the tiny details that divide us. SO much we need to be working on together to get rid of this guy.

Sure. Call your representatives.

I think the picture of Obama in that article needs the cartoon balloon in response to Trumpy that says "I don't give a fuuuck!"

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 119
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2656 on: March 07, 2017, 01:57:00 PM »
Yes, there will always be some bad schools.  Just like there will always be poor people.  That is life.   How can we give most kids the best chance to succeed?   Limiting them is not the way.

As I understand it, there is no legal structure stopping anyone from attending a private school if they are admitted. Children can be home schooled.  There is already choice in the market.  It's just not subsidized by tax payers. However, the question is whether tax dollars should go to private or charter schools.  People have offered evidence that charter schools are worse than the schools you indicate are failing.  If so, what's the justification for funneling money to them?  At least with public schools, there is oversight in the elected school board.  Charter schools operate with a far lower oversight bar.

Compare and contrast with the conservative view of covering birth control via insurance.  Women are told to suck it up and pay for it themselves. "Why should my money go to your sex life?"  However, at least with birth control, it actually fulfills its medical function and there is overwhelming evidence that it works and provides a substantial public good.  Charter schools haven't met that burden, but suddenly conservatives are all about choice and having our tax dollars go to subsidize their pet religious causes.  I'd rather subsidize someone's birth control, frankly.



NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1513
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2657 on: March 08, 2017, 06:11:20 AM »
4 and 9 have my support. I'll have to think about 11 but off the cuff I think it has merit.

4: Issuing tags, collecting revenue, and using it to manage those populations has been beneficial to every area its been done before. If you love wildlife, you would support hunting.

9: Unions these days are about protecting the lazy and parasitically killing their host industry. The only think I'd change is to add an explicit ban on public employee unions.

11 does not have any merit. It requires ANY new regulation to pass the full Congress. It's just a way to have no new regulations at all ever.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 584
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2658 on: March 08, 2017, 08:10:30 AM »
4 and 9 have my support. I'll have to think about 11 but off the cuff I think it has merit.

4: Issuing tags, collecting revenue, and using it to manage those populations has been beneficial to every area its been done before. If you love wildlife, you would support hunting.

9: Unions these days are about protecting the lazy and parasitically killing their host industry. The only think I'd change is to add an explicit ban on public employee unions.

11 does not have any merit. It requires ANY new regulation to pass the full Congress. It's just a way to have no new regulations at all ever.

As written, perhaps. There ought to be some checks on what unelected bureaucracies, etc can do. Maybe a "2/3 majority can block new regulations within 120 days" type thing would do it.

accolay

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 475
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2659 on: March 08, 2017, 08:22:26 AM »
9: Unions these days are about protecting the lazy and parasitically killing their host industry. The only think I'd change is to add an explicit ban on public employee unions.

Said from someone probably not part of a union. Sure, there are the lazy that somehow stick around- just like private industry. I'll keep my union over being totally fucked by management.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5089
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2660 on: March 08, 2017, 08:48:51 AM »
Let's just call it what it really is. A big fat "fuck you" to the poor and hello yuge tax breaks for the rich. Republicans doing what they do best.

Hmmm, let's see.  The Republican health care bill cuts taxes on the rich, slashes benefits for the poor, and massively restricts abortion access. 

Yep, sounds like a Republican plan all right.  The same plan I've been hearing about for my entire life.

Summary of proposed AHCA provisions:
http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-comes-after-the-aca/msg1463790/#msg1463790


NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1513
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2661 on: March 08, 2017, 09:04:29 AM »
4 and 9 have my support. I'll have to think about 11 but off the cuff I think it has merit.

4: Issuing tags, collecting revenue, and using it to manage those populations has been beneficial to every area its been done before. If you love wildlife, you would support hunting.

9: Unions these days are about protecting the lazy and parasitically killing their host industry. The only think I'd change is to add an explicit ban on public employee unions.

11 does not have any merit. It requires ANY new regulation to pass the full Congress. It's just a way to have no new regulations at all ever.

As written, perhaps. There ought to be some checks on what unelected bureaucracies, etc can do. Maybe a "2/3 majority can block new regulations within 120 days" type thing would do it.

We're talking about agencies writing rules that fill in details for legislation passed by Congress. Having Congress micro-manage this stuff is a terrible idea. If they really have a problem with the way an agency writes a rule, they can pass legislation to change it.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 584
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2662 on: March 08, 2017, 09:58:14 AM »
9: Unions these days are about protecting the lazy and parasitically killing their host industry. The only think I'd change is to add an explicit ban on public employee unions.

Said from someone probably not part of a union. Sure, there are the lazy that somehow stick around- just like private industry. I'll keep my union over being totally fucked by management.

We will never agree on this. I've been a member of two unions, and deal with them all the time. One did OK. They realized they are in partnership with the company who pays the wages of those they represent. They were a trade union, which I somewhat support since they do offer quite a bit for their $$$$$/hr employees. (Ie, I don't have to train them, deal with their benefits administration, vacation, etc.) Companys can hire union or non union workers, so there's some market feedback to be reasonable.

The other would do anything it could to obstruct, even when it caused no harm to employees. Cost the company about 5 million on one incident I was involved in, and kept about 15 people from working for two weeks. I got fucked over more by union management than I ever did by corporate management. That was a union representing employees in a manufacturing plant, so there was NO feedback to make the union do the right thing.

That's why I support right to work. Want to collect dues from me? offer something worth paying for. Cost me money being assholes? I'd rather donate my dues to charity. Donate money to a state politician who directly supported shutting my industry down? No thanks.

I don't want a full on ban on private industry unions. I want to incentivize them to do the right things. That's RTW.

Public employee unions are another thing. That is such a incestuous web of conflicting interests, lack of market feedback, etc that I do support a straight ban on public employee unions.

BeginnerStache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 907
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2663 on: March 08, 2017, 10:46:05 AM »
Let's just call it what it really is. A big fat "fuck you" to the poor and hello yuge tax breaks for the rich. Republicans doing what they do best.

Hmmm, let's see.  The Republican health care bill cuts taxes on the rich, slashes benefits for the poor, and massively restricts abortion access. 

Yep, sounds like a Republican plan all right.  The same plan I've been hearing about for my entire life.

Summary of proposed AHCA provisions:
http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-comes-after-the-aca/msg1463790/#msg1463790

Yep!!

Edit: I erased my original comment because I saw the discussion on ACA thread.

KBecks

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2664 on: March 08, 2017, 12:35:53 PM »
Yes, there will always be some bad schools.  Just like there will always be poor people.  That is life.   How can we give most kids the best chance to succeed?   Limiting them is not the way.

As I understand it, there is no legal structure stopping anyone from attending a private school if they are admitted. Children can be home schooled.  There is already choice in the market.  It's just not subsidized by tax payers. However, the question is whether tax dollars should go to private or charter schools.  People have offered evidence that charter schools are worse than the schools you indicate are failing.  If so, what's the justification for funneling money to them?  At least with public schools, there is oversight in the elected school board.  Charter schools operate with a far lower oversight bar.

Compare and contrast with the conservative view of covering birth control via insurance.  Women are told to suck it up and pay for it themselves. "Why should my money go to your sex life?"  However, at least with birth control, it actually fulfills its medical function and there is overwhelming evidence that it works and provides a substantial public good.  Charter schools haven't met that burden, but suddenly conservatives are all about choice and having our tax dollars go to subsidize their pet religious causes.  I'd rather subsidize someone's birth control, frankly.


School choice is to give some alternative options to  families who do not have resources to afford private school or home school.  Duh.  The families can decide for themselves what schooling is best for their child.

BeginnerStache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 907
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2665 on: March 08, 2017, 12:39:36 PM »
Yes, there will always be some bad schools.  Just like there will always be poor people.  That is life.   How can we give most kids the best chance to succeed?   Limiting them is not the way.

As I understand it, there is no legal structure stopping anyone from attending a private school if they are admitted. Children can be home schooled.  There is already choice in the market.  It's just not subsidized by tax payers. However, the question is whether tax dollars should go to private or charter schools.  People have offered evidence that charter schools are worse than the schools you indicate are failing.  If so, what's the justification for funneling money to them?  At least with public schools, there is oversight in the elected school board.  Charter schools operate with a far lower oversight bar.

Compare and contrast with the conservative view of covering birth control via insurance.  Women are told to suck it up and pay for it themselves. "Why should my money go to your sex life?"  However, at least with birth control, it actually fulfills its medical function and there is overwhelming evidence that it works and provides a substantial public good.  Charter schools haven't met that burden, but suddenly conservatives are all about choice and having our tax dollars go to subsidize their pet religious causes.  I'd rather subsidize someone's birth control, frankly.


School choice is to give some alternative options to  families who do not have resources to afford private school or home school.  Duh.  The families can decide for themselves what schooling is best for their child.

Awesome. So they get to choose between a crappy public school or a shitty charter school. Well at least they have choices now.

waltworks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2269
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2666 on: March 08, 2017, 01:03:00 PM »
School choice is to give some alternative options to  families who do not have resources to afford private school or home school.  Duh.  The families can decide for themselves what schooling is best for their child.

If that's the goal, it would be much easier and cheaper to just give all children below the poverty line (or similar cutoff) $10k a year for any educational purpose their parents want. Hell, you could not even tie it to education and you'd probably still see massive improvements - a lot of those kids could use just things like decent food and a stable place to live.

But that sounds like welfare...

-W

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5089
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2667 on: March 08, 2017, 01:09:04 PM »
But that sounds like welfare...

School voucher programs aren't interesting to republicans because they improve the welfare of children, they're interesting to republicans because they are a way to funnel federal tax dollars to churches.

I can't believe I even have to say that out loud.  Doesn't everyone already know this?

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
  • Age: 34
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2668 on: March 08, 2017, 01:26:18 PM »
But that sounds like welfare...

School voucher programs aren't interesting to republicans because they improve the welfare of children, they're interesting to republicans because they are a way to funnel federal tax dollars to churches.

I can't believe I even have to say that out loud.  Doesn't everyone already know this?

They're also a way to provide yet another tax break to the wealthy while increasing segregation between the rich/poor, yet with the PR advantage of being able to claim they are increasing education access for all.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2669 on: March 08, 2017, 01:57:18 PM »
Also, if conservatives were actually interested in metric-based programs that improve outcomes, they would continue funding school lunch programs fully. Hungry kids don't learn well.

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 119
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2670 on: March 08, 2017, 02:16:48 PM »
But that sounds like welfare...

School voucher programs aren't interesting to republicans because they improve the welfare of children, they're interesting to republicans because they are a way to funnel federal tax dollars to churches.

I can't believe I even have to say that out loud.  Doesn't everyone already know this?

They're also a way to provide yet another tax break to the wealthy while increasing segregation between the rich/poor, yet with the PR advantage of being able to claim they are increasing education access for all.

Yup. Public education has a pile of money republicans are itching to get their hands on.  The true beneficiaries of voucher programs are the suburban middle class who can almost afford tuition at The Gospel Christian Academy for Future Homemakers and Providers private school, but then they couldn't go to Disney.  Now, with vouchers, they can undereducate their children, funnel money away from godless liberal teachers and towards people like the DeVos family, and still have money left over not to feel any lifestyle pinch. Meanwhile, 5k/year doesn't begin to cover expenses at a private school for a truly poor family. 

Again, as sol noted, Republicans don't actually have a problem with taking tax money as long as it goes to their coreligionists.  At least liberals are honest about how they want to use taxes.  And once again, Republicans don't give a crap about choice or people making their own decisions when it comes to, say, wanting a health insurance plan to not cover birth control for women they've never met.  Then it's all about how they shouldn't have to subsidize blah blah blah.  Guess what?  I don't want to subsidize a school that teaches Adam riding dinosaurs.  And subsidizing birth control provides way better outcomes than subsidizing failing charter schools and crappy private schools.  In fact, subsidizing birth control and ending the cycle of teen pregnancy and poverty is probably the single best thing we can do to improve our schools in the future.

KBecks

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2671 on: March 08, 2017, 04:48:19 PM »
I think it's a joke to assume exactly how Republicans think and feel, especially when no one seems to understand why people voted for Trump.

It seems that you are pushing your own "it's all about money and control" attitude onto the other party. 

former player

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2223
  • Location: Avalon
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2672 on: March 08, 2017, 05:22:16 PM »
I think it's a joke to assume exactly how Republicans think and feel, especially when no one seems to understand why people voted for Trump.

It seems that you are pushing your own "it's all about money and control" attitude onto the other party.
Republicans tend not to be backwards in coming forward with their views, and usually seem to attach to them a short form of their reasoning which boils down to "don't take our money, give us as much of other people's money as you can, and don't control what we do".  More nuanced and sophisticated explanations might lead to more productive discussions, so please by all means feel free to provide them.
Be frugal and industrious, and you will be free (Ben Franklin)

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2673 on: March 08, 2017, 05:28:31 PM »
I think it's a joke to assume exactly how Republicans think and feel, especially when no one seems to understand why people voted for Trump.

It seems that you are pushing your own "it's all about money and control" attitude onto the other party.
I think there may be a disconnect between voters who identify as R and  those in office actually working with legislation. It would be unfair to lump all R voters together. However, the actual legislation that is either passed, supported, or receiving serious consideration by the GOP has a pretty clear slant that is largely described pretty well by the comments above. There are some pretty notable exceptions from places like Maine and Alaska (see Murkowski on inclusion of Planned Parenthood defunding into the ACA repeal http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/320764-gop-sen-wont-vote-to-defund-planned-parenthood-casts-doubt-on-repealing).


NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1513
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2674 on: March 09, 2017, 06:57:00 AM »
I think there may be a disconnect between voters who identify as R and  those in office actually working with legislation. It would be unfair to lump all R voters together. However, the actual legislation that is either passed, supported, or receiving serious consideration by the GOP has a pretty clear slant that is largely described pretty well by the comments above. There are some pretty notable exceptions from places like Maine and Alaska (see Murkowski on inclusion of Planned Parenthood defunding into the ACA repeal http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/320764-gop-sen-wont-vote-to-defund-planned-parenthood-casts-doubt-on-repealing).

I think this is way larger in scope than the Republican party. At this point, there isn't much "voter representation" going on in elected government, full stop. I think the Democrats are a little bit better at saying the right words to their voters on policy issues, while the Republicans are better at the empty emotional appeals.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Unique User

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 339
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2675 on: March 09, 2017, 07:35:32 AM »
Yes, there will always be some bad schools.  Just like there will always be poor people.  That is life.   How can we give most kids the best chance to succeed?   Limiting them is not the way.

As I understand it, there is no legal structure stopping anyone from attending a private school if they are admitted. Children can be home schooled.  There is already choice in the market.  It's just not subsidized by tax payers. However, the question is whether tax dollars should go to private or charter schools.  People have offered evidence that charter schools are worse than the schools you indicate are failing.  If so, what's the justification for funneling money to them?  At least with public schools, there is oversight in the elected school board.  Charter schools operate with a far lower oversight bar.

Compare and contrast with the conservative view of covering birth control via insurance.  Women are told to suck it up and pay for it themselves. "Why should my money go to your sex life?"  However, at least with birth control, it actually fulfills its medical function and there is overwhelming evidence that it works and provides a substantial public good.  Charter schools haven't met that burden, but suddenly conservatives are all about choice and having our tax dollars go to subsidize their pet religious causes.  I'd rather subsidize someone's birth control, frankly.


School choice is to give some alternative options to  families who do not have resources to afford private school or home school.  Duh.  The families can decide for themselves what schooling is best for their child.

Of course families can decide for themselves what schooling is best for their child.  They just don't get tax dollars to fund whatever choice they make.  And as many studies have shown, the vouchers do not cover what the schools actually cost so they end up being a big giveaway to those that CAN afford it.  It's been a big fat failure here in NC.  Calling it School Choice is a huge misdirection, so that people can think what you wrote above.  And not pay attention to Jerry Falwell Jr. being appointed by Trump to lead a committee tasked with finding ways to deregulate education.  That and Betsy Devos crazy religious ideas make my blood run cold. 

As background - I've sent my child to private, charter and public schools across three states, the private being Catholic.  In no way would I expect federal dollars to pay for my child's education there which included mandatory mass and religious instruction.

And then I read further down in the thread - Lagom, Sol, Wexler and Glenstache stated things very well!
« Last Edit: March 09, 2017, 07:37:57 AM by Unique User »

accolay

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 475
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2676 on: March 09, 2017, 08:10:13 AM »
We will never agree on this.

Meh.

I hear the same about unions from an occasional complaining coworker. Then you ask them if they ever went to a meeting, voted in their union rep elections or had any union activity. Response is always the same: 100% no.

I feel it's about the same as those who complain about "Big Government" but somehow don't realize they're the ones who continue to vote in representatives who go against their best interests.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1513
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2677 on: March 09, 2017, 10:31:05 AM »
I'm just going to leave this here ...

The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2678 on: March 09, 2017, 10:54:00 AM »
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/donald-trump-compromise-poll/index.html

New effect of Trump presidency: more people are talking politics regularly with friends and family. And 70% of those polled wish that Democrats would compromise with the Trump administration to pass bills (aligning with similar numbers of respondents hoping for bi-partisan support of legislation. )
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5089
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2679 on: March 09, 2017, 11:00:15 AM »
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/donald-trump-compromise-poll/index.html

New effect of Trump presidency: more people are talking politics regularly with friends and family. And 70% of those polled wish that Democrats would compromise with the Trump administration to pass bills (aligning with similar numbers of respondents hoping for bi-partisan support of legislation. )

Funny that you failed to mention that poll says that more people want trunp to compromise with democrats than want democrats to compromise with trump.  Your post suggests you do not think that these are the same thing.

You also cited "more people are talking" as if it was a good thing, despite the article highlighting that most people find this increased discussion stressful and are actively trying to find ways to cut back.

I swear MM, it's like every time you post you are deliberately trying to twist the truth.  At first i thought you were just a die hard partisan hack with a distorted world view, but now I'm leaning towards mischievous troll who is actively trying to degrade the forums by clouding our honest discussions with deliberately false information.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2017, 11:08:05 AM by sol »

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3608
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2680 on: March 09, 2017, 11:02:57 AM »
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/donald-trump-compromise-poll/index.html

New effect of Trump presidency: more people are talking politics regularly with friends and family. And 70% of those polled wish that Democrats would compromise with the Trump administration to pass bills (aligning with similar numbers of respondents hoping for bi-partisan support of legislation. )

It's worth noting that more people surveyed indicated that they want Trump to compromise than wanting Democrats to compromise.

Rounding one number up, the other down, and changing "they'd like President Donald Trump to attempt to reach bipartisan compromise on bills" to a generic "hoping for bi-partisan support of legislation" is misleading at best.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2681 on: March 09, 2017, 12:00:17 PM »
Almost as misleading as asserting that numbers that are well within the margin of error are importantly different...
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3608
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2682 on: March 09, 2017, 12:30:16 PM »
Almost as misleading as asserting that numbers that are well within the margin of error are importantly different...

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

Also straw-man, since nobody has claimed that the numbers were "importantly different" - we just pointed out that you're posting misleading information.

gaja

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 706
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2683 on: March 09, 2017, 01:13:40 PM »
9: Unions these days are about protecting the lazy and parasitically killing their host industry. The only think I'd change is to add an explicit ban on public employee unions.

Said from someone probably not part of a union. Sure, there are the lazy that somehow stick around- just like private industry. I'll keep my union over being totally fucked by management.

We will never agree on this. I've been a member of two unions, and deal with them all the time. One did OK. They realized they are in partnership with the company who pays the wages of those they represent. They were a trade union, which I somewhat support since they do offer quite a bit for their $$$$$/hr employees. (Ie, I don't have to train them, deal with their benefits administration, vacation, etc.) Companys can hire union or non union workers, so there's some market feedback to be reasonable.

The other would do anything it could to obstruct, even when it caused no harm to employees. Cost the company about 5 million on one incident I was involved in, and kept about 15 people from working for two weeks. I got fucked over more by union management than I ever did by corporate management. That was a union representing employees in a manufacturing plant, so there was NO feedback to make the union do the right thing.

That's why I support right to work. Want to collect dues from me? offer something worth paying for. Cost me money being assholes? I'd rather donate my dues to charity. Donate money to a state politician who directly supported shutting my industry down? No thanks.

I don't want a full on ban on private industry unions. I want to incentivize them to do the right things. That's RTW.

Public employee unions are another thing. That is such a incestuous web of conflicting interests, lack of market feedback, etc that I do support a straight ban on public employee unions.

According to Amnesty:
Quote
Under international law, all workers have a human right to organize and to bargain collectively. These rights are an essential foundation to the realization of other rights, and are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, as well as conventions adopted by the International Labor Organization.

My union has negotiated very good insurance rates for me*, and offers very good seminars and workshops with interesting topics. They also take care of the salary negotiations for me, a process I dislike intensely and am happy to pay someone else to do. The one time I had something that looked like it could become a conflict, I got free legal advice (telling me to just let it go).  I work in the public sector, and I think there are 3-4 large ones, and a dozen or so smaller unions to choose between. I don't agree with 100% of the politics of my union, but the last time I looked at the alternatives they scored among the top three on all my criteria, and were best on value for money. My union has not been part of a strike. Ever. That is one of the reasons I chose them over the next best alternative.

I learned about banned unions in school; those were horror stories from Germany in the 1930s and 40s. But hey, what do I know, maybe unions in the US are completely different from what I'm used to. In Norway, more than 50 % of the working population is member of a union (80 % of the public employees). The numbers in Denmark and Sweden are even higher, since paid sick leave is connected to union membership. Of course you can choose to not be a member, you will still have all the same rights and the same pay (if you are a good negotiator). But should the fan become full of shit, you don't have the insurance that the union represents.


*They even managed to negotiate it retroactively; we had diability insurance that paid a lump sum if you got permanent disability. For a higher cost, we could have gotten the better one, which startet to pay out monthly when you have been too sick to work for 12 months, but we decided to save that money. When DH had been sick for 18 months, we got a letter in the mail from the union that they had renegotiated the terms, and everyone was upgraded to the better version free of cost. If someone filled the terms, they would start getting money transfers as soon as the new terms were approved. One month later, we had the first payment in the bank.
Travelling southern Norway, Iceland and the Faroes in an electric car: http://travelelectric.blogspot.no/

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 584
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2684 on: March 09, 2017, 02:12:46 PM »
We will never agree on this.

Meh.

I hear the same about unions from an occasional complaining coworker. Then you ask them if they ever went to a meeting, voted in their union rep elections or had any union activity. Response is always the same: 100% no.

I feel it's about the same as those who complain about "Big Government" but somehow don't realize they're the ones who continue to vote in representatives who go against their best interests.

Can't say it's '100% no' anymore. I attended meetings, or at least the ones where they didn't change the location at the last minute and only tell their pets where. I voted in every election.

If you want to be in your union, go for it. I want a choice.

gaja

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 706
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2685 on: March 09, 2017, 02:26:14 PM »
We will never agree on this.

Meh.

I hear the same about unions from an occasional complaining coworker. Then you ask them if they ever went to a meeting, voted in their union rep elections or had any union activity. Response is always the same: 100% no.

I feel it's about the same as those who complain about "Big Government" but somehow don't realize they're the ones who continue to vote in representatives who go against their best interests.

Can't say it's '100% no' anymore. I attended meetings, or at least the ones where they didn't change the location at the last minute and only tell their pets where. I voted in every election.

If you want to be in your union, go for it. I want a choice.

Where is the logic in saying you want a choice, but you want to deny me my choice (ban unions for public employees)?
Travelling southern Norway, Iceland and the Faroes in an electric car: http://travelelectric.blogspot.no/

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 584
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2686 on: March 09, 2017, 02:30:03 PM »
9: Unions these days are about protecting the lazy and parasitically killing their host industry. The only think I'd change is to add an explicit ban on public employee unions.

Said from someone probably not part of a union. Sure, there are the lazy that somehow stick around- just like private industry. I'll keep my union over being totally fucked by management.

We will never agree on this. I've been a member of two unions, and deal with them all the time. One did OK. They realized they are in partnership with the company who pays the wages of those they represent. They were a trade union, which I somewhat support since they do offer quite a bit for their $$$$$/hr employees. (Ie, I don't have to train them, deal with their benefits administration, vacation, etc.) Companys can hire union or non union workers, so there's some market feedback to be reasonable.

The other would do anything it could to obstruct, even when it caused no harm to employees. Cost the company about 5 million on one incident I was involved in, and kept about 15 people from working for two weeks. I got fucked over more by union management than I ever did by corporate management. That was a union representing employees in a manufacturing plant, so there was NO feedback to make the union do the right thing.

That's why I support right to work. Want to collect dues from me? offer something worth paying for. Cost me money being assholes? I'd rather donate my dues to charity. Donate money to a state politician who directly supported shutting my industry down? No thanks.

I don't want a full on ban on private industry unions. I want to incentivize them to do the right things. That's RTW.

Public employee unions are another thing. That is such a incestuous web of conflicting interests, lack of market feedback, etc that I do support a straight ban on public employee unions.

According to Amnesty:
Quote
Under international law, all workers have a human right to organize and to bargain collectively. These rights are an essential foundation to the realization of other rights, and are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, as well as conventions adopted by the International Labor Organization.

My union has negotiated very good insurance rates for me*, and offers very good seminars and workshops with interesting topics. They also take care of the salary negotiations for me, a process I dislike intensely and am happy to pay someone else to do. The one time I had something that looked like it could become a conflict, I got free legal advice (telling me to just let it go).  I work in the public sector, and I think there are 3-4 large ones, and a dozen or so smaller unions to choose between. I don't agree with 100% of the politics of my union, but the last time I looked at the alternatives they scored among the top three on all my criteria, and were best on value for money. My union has not been part of a strike. Ever. That is one of the reasons I chose them over the next best alternative.

I learned about banned unions in school; those were horror stories from Germany in the 1930s and 40s. But hey, what do I know, maybe unions in the US are completely different from what I'm used to. In Norway, more than 50 % of the working population is member of a union (80 % of the public employees). The numbers in Denmark and Sweden are even higher, since paid sick leave is connected to union membership. Of course you can choose to not be a member, you will still have all the same rights and the same pay (if you are a good negotiator). But should the fan become full of shit, you don't have the insurance that the union represents.


*They even managed to negotiate it retroactively; we had diability insurance that paid a lump sum if you got permanent disability. For a higher cost, we could have gotten the better one, which startet to pay out monthly when you have been too sick to work for 12 months, but we decided to save that money. When DH had been sick for 18 months, we got a letter in the mail from the union that they had renegotiated the terms, and everyone was upgraded to the better version free of cost. If someone filled the terms, they would start getting money transfers as soon as the new terms were approved. One month later, we had the first payment in the bank.

This will be my last reply on this topic so I don't derail the thread.

If we're going to trade anecdotes, I can tell you about how the unions I deal with now try to trade favorable outcomes on grievances for their favorites for unfavorable ones for the people who the shop steward doesn't like.  I can tell you how, when I was a member, there was a short-term spike in the price of the engineering wood product we made... it was temporary, not going to last. Management asked the union, can we switch this crew from this manufacturing line (similar product, but the line can't do both. different size panels, etc) over to the un-used line that makes the high margin stuff. We were going to be furloughed for 2 weeks because the run for the stuff we made was done. Would they allow it without putting it out to bid? NOPE. I didn't get paid for two weeks, the company missed ~4.8 million in sales... for no real reason.


I think you hit on the fundamental difference between US unions and yours - choice!  You can shop for your union. We can't. If you work at boeing? You're in the IAM. No choice.


Quote
Where is the logic in saying you want a choice, but you want to deny me my choice (ban unions for public employees)?


FDR says it best.  but basically, the government is not the same thing as a private employer. FDR didn't support banning them outright, and I'm sure they won't ever be. But I sure want to see what PEU's have become get reformed. Those jackals have looted my states treasury, and despite Oregon's revenue/capita being in the top 5 or 6 in the nation, while incomes are in the bottom 25... all our governor wants to do is talk about raising taxes.

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2013/aug/13/scott-walker/Did-FDR-oppose-collective-bargaining-for-governmen/
« Last Edit: March 09, 2017, 02:40:36 PM by ncornilsen »

bacchi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2687 on: March 09, 2017, 02:57:15 PM »
From the President who won the biggest electoral win since Reagan, and also won the popular vote, and also has evidence that Obama wiretapped his phones but won't give anyone said evidence, we now have his EPA head claiming that the primary cause of global warming is definitely not CO2. He found 3 scientists and 19 oil and gas executives to back him up.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/scott-pruitt-global-warming-human/index.html

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2688 on: March 09, 2017, 03:28:21 PM »
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/donald-trump-compromise-poll/index.html

New effect of Trump presidency: more people are talking politics regularly with friends and family. And 70% of those polled wish that Democrats would compromise with the Trump administration to pass bills (aligning with similar numbers of respondents hoping for bi-partisan support of legislation. )

It's worth noting that more people surveyed indicated that they want Trump to compromise than wanting Democrats to compromise.

Rounding one number up, the other down, and changing "they'd like President Donald Trump to attempt to reach bipartisan compromise on bills" to a generic "hoping for bi-partisan support of legislation" is misleading at best.
The numbers are well within the margin of error. One can't accurately say that "More people" want one option or the other; one can say that the overwhelming majority of wish for compromise and not party-line obstruction of the POTUS. Which is what I found intersting considering many of his current proposals.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

bacchi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2689 on: March 09, 2017, 03:45:54 PM »
The numbers are well within the margin of error. One can't accurately say that "More people" want one option or the other; one can say that the overwhelming majority of wish for compromise and not party-line obstruction of the POTUS. Which is what I found intersting considering many of his current proposals.

Wrong. The overwhelming majority wish for compromise and for Trump to make bipartisan deals with the Democrats.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2690 on: March 09, 2017, 03:56:26 PM »
The numbers are well within the margin of error. One can't accurately say that "More people" want one option or the other; one can say that the overwhelming majority of wish for compromise and not party-line obstruction of the POTUS. Which is what I found intersting considering many of his current proposals.

Wrong. The overwhelming majority wish for compromise and for Trump to make bipartisan deals with the Democrats.


Yes; for Democrats to compromise with Trump, and for  "Trump to attempt to reach bipartisan compromise on bills he tries to get through Congress."
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

bacchi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2691 on: March 09, 2017, 04:00:48 PM »
The numbers are well within the margin of error. One can't accurately say that "More people" want one option or the other; one can say that the overwhelming majority of wish for compromise and not party-line obstruction of the POTUS. Which is what I found intersting considering many of his current proposals.

Wrong. The overwhelming majority wish for compromise and for Trump to make bipartisan deals with the Democrats.


Yes; for Democrats to compromise with Trump, and for  "Trump to attempt to reach bipartisan compromise on bills he tries to get through Congress."

Exactly. Now why didn't you write that in the first place?

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2692 on: March 09, 2017, 04:05:14 PM »
The numbers are well within the margin of error. One can't accurately say that "More people" want one option or the other; one can say that the overwhelming majority of wish for compromise and not party-line obstruction of the POTUS. Which is what I found intersting considering many of his current proposals.

Wrong. The overwhelming majority wish for compromise and for Trump to make bipartisan deals with the Democrats.


Yes; for Democrats to compromise with Trump, and for  "Trump to attempt to reach bipartisan compromise on bills he tries to get through Congress."

Exactly. Now why didn't you write that in the first place?

So, where is the room to compromise on things like:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/861 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/899

Meeting in the middle on this is still beyond the pale.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2693 on: March 09, 2017, 04:05:51 PM »
They are substantially the same thing. I'm sorry if you didnt like the wording of "bi partisan support of legislation" versus " reach bipartisan compromise on bills he tries to get through Congress."
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

PDXTabs

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 99
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Portland, OR
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2694 on: March 09, 2017, 04:11:44 PM »
Short term we are seeing a stronger US dollar. Medium term if we get a border adjustment tax and infrastructure spending we will see an even stronger dollar.

Long term it may or may not be a mess (immigration, tax cuts, nepotism, oligarchy, etc).

I'm taking my dollars and buying stocks, Euros, and Pounds. Since I eventually want to relocate to Europe it may actually work out for me.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2695 on: March 09, 2017, 04:11:49 PM »
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/donald-trump-compromise-poll/index.html

New effect of Trump presidency: more people are talking politics regularly with friends and family. And 70% of those polled wish that Democrats would compromise with the Trump administration to pass bills (aligning with similar numbers of respondents hoping for bi-partisan support of legislation. )

Funny that you failed to mention that poll says that more people want trunp to compromise with democrats than want democrats to compromise with trump.  Your post suggests you do not think that these are the same thing.

You also cited "more people are talking" as if it was a good thing, despite the article highlighting that most people find this increased discussion stressful and are actively trying to find ways to cut back.

I swear MM, it's like every time you post you are deliberately trying to twist the truth.  At first i thought you were just a die hard partisan hack with a distorted world view, but now I'm leaning towards mischievous troll who is actively trying to degrade the forums by clouding our honest discussions with deliberately false information.
What the hell are you trolling about? I posted a link to a cnn poll; I made no value judgements on political discourse.  If you colored that part of my post, that is your own bias, and a clear reaction to differing views from your own which you seem to imagine is some sort of attack on the forum.

If you think CNN polls are false news, then please argue that; most rational people feel they are a legitimate news source, if not perfectly bias free. As such, I  doubt many people would agree with your assertion this is "false information."
« Last Edit: March 09, 2017, 04:17:58 PM by Metric Mouse »
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

bacchi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2696 on: March 09, 2017, 04:14:26 PM »
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/donald-trump-compromise-poll/index.html

New effect of Trump presidency: more people are talking politics regularly with friends and family. And 73% of those polled wish that Trump would get bipartisan support to pass bills (aligning with similar numbers of respondents hoping for compromise with new legislation.)

bacchi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2697 on: March 09, 2017, 04:17:24 PM »
Yes; for Democrats to compromise with Trump, and for  "Trump to attempt to reach bipartisan compromise on bills he tries to get through Congress."

Exactly. Now why didn't you write that in the first place?

So, where is the room to compromise on things like:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/861 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/899

Meeting in the middle on this is still beyond the pale.

Well, the poll stated that 69% wanted the Democrats to try to compromise with the President. Obviously, that won't happen a lot, especially in extreme cases.

That said, there are always crazy bills filed each session. It's time to worry when the committee takes them seriously.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2698 on: March 09, 2017, 04:17:34 PM »
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/border-crossings-huge-drop-trump-tough-talk/index.html

Cnn reports that illegal southwest border crossings fell 40% last month, a steep drop compared to seasonal averages that normally see a 10% - 20% uptick in illegal crossing numbers.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

bacchi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2699 on: March 09, 2017, 04:19:24 PM »
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/border-crossings-huge-drop-trump-tough-talk/index.html

Cnn reports that illegal southwest border crossings fell 40% last month, a steep drop compared to seasonal averages that normally see a 10% - 20% uptick in illegal crossing numbers.

Does this mean an actual, physical, wall isn't needed?