Forum Thread

Treasury Secretary


Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 25 of 25 Prev 1 2
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Wrong, wrong, wrong. The responsibility is that of the people that know what is right and just. If the good people dont get together and present a platform that is both good and will get votes then the Trumps will prevail. Elizabeth's jibe about the alligators seems to have been okay. But the consensus on this forum about the steam rolling of Wall Street over the middle class is forget it, you cant do anythIing about it or there is no steam rolling.
    Chet, in this country the one's with the most money and biggest mouth always wins. That is part of "capitalism". Look at the selection Trump made; billionaires and naive bullies as well war mongers. As long as they make their money without paying taxes then they are happy. Why care about "global warming or pollution"; they have plenty of money to move anywhere they like and move again if they polluted another place. Just eradicate or make life difficult for anyone you don't like, just like Hitler did. Etc. It is very clear that Trump wants to be an dictator; until now he just does as he pleases and no one dares to stop him. Examples plenty: where is his tax return? What is he going to do with his "holdings"? How about his "groping" where are the 12 women (who claimed this) now? Talking, while he is not President yet, with world leaders and trying to get favors for his "business" like Argentine, Taiwan, Philipines etc. He will continue doing so; he's used to bullying/ordering people around. Forget the GOP they sold their soul to the "devil"; thus shove the Constitution under the mat, he will only use it when suited for him. He's an "me" "me" only person; thus be warned.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch, I know how the system works and it works that way because we let it and make heroes and stars out of billionaires. Democratic Party, that used to be the working people's party. Now it is the party of everything but the working people. Pence just praised Indiana for making a qualification for full benefits of medicaid be participation in a health savings account. That goes right along with "having skin in the game" and will deny people benefits because they are poor. And Dutch, all the benefits of all the European economies that you talk about go hand in hand with people looking out for other people. Typically if parents have a son or daughter that doesn't make good decisions, can't make good decisions or is in anyway incapable of taking care of themselves parents still help their children. That is the heart and soul of unionism. Those that can looking after those that can't. Unions to this day don't have the credit and respect for what they do. The Democratic Party has abandoned the working person and rejected a move back in that direction by rejecting Bernie Sanders. To go even further than that, at the beginning of this presidential campaign leading Democrats were denying that working people were having a hard time. Nobody is talking about how the Obamacare penalty could be unconstitutional for penalizing people for being poor. But that gives you an idea of how the top Democrat felt about poor people, he doesn't believe there are any poor people. The people that can need to resurrect the party of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet, You are misguided. Mr. Obama realizes there are poor people. He has empathy and compassion for them. He and / or his team didn't know how to or for whatever reason chose not to battle the high dollar insurance industry or big pharma. It is not world wherein limitations have been put on corporations and thus we have gouging. Perhaps our brilliant new leader will fix the problem. (Sarcasm)
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    TJ Wrote: Chet, You are misguided. Mr. Obama realizes there are poor people. He has empathy and compassion for them. He and / or his team didn't know how to or for whatever reason chose not to battle the high dollar insurance industry. It is not world wherein limitations have been put on corporations and thus we have gouging. Perhaps our brilliant new leader will fix the problem. (Sarcasm)

    Yes Tony, indeed Obama tried, but got railroaded on anything he wanted to improve life for the poor. He's the one who helped the GM, Chrysler, AIG industries to survive for the "workers"; quite a different story than the "Carrier" one.

    Unemployment during his term went from 12% to 4.8% as it is now, as low as it was before the crash in 2008.

    I bet under Trump the unemployment will rise instead of being lowered, because the continuing "automation" of industries as well the non-education of the "deplorables". Like Clinton said the only area you can score in is "clean energy" and infrastructure. Of course Trump is promoting "infrastructure" but won't have the money for it, looking at his "platform".

    Sorry China will of course not re-negotiate trade deals, unless they gain from it; they are not stupid and are now number "one" in the world. If we put tariffs on their goods; they will sell it to the rest of the world and not us and will slap huge tariffs on US made goods etc. Thus in my view it is simple; the "poor" here will stay the "poor" because they miss the right attitude and education to be hired in any industry; except may be in the "service' industries, like catering, grease monkey, bar keeper, Domino's, Walmart, etc.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    He and / or his team didn't know how to or for whatever reason chose not to battle the:

    high dollar insurance industry. Wall Street. Big Banks Globalization CFMA Derivatives Sky rocketing drug prices

    The Democratic Party needs to wake up and acknowledge an u fair run away economy. Everybody knows there is a wide an widening income gap. But why is there no Democratic reaction? Now all the talk is about excuses for losing to Trump.


  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    He and / or his team didn't know how to or for whatever reason chose not to battle the:

    high dollar insurance industry. Wall Street. Big Banks Globalization CFMA Derivatives Sky rocketing drug prices

    The Democratic Party needs to wake up and acknowledge an u fair run away economy. Everybody knows there is a wide an widening income gap. But why is there no Democratic reaction? Now all the talk is about excuses for losing to Trump.

    Chet, you sound exactly like Bernie; yes the Dem's threw him for the Trump alligators in his swamp ; I guess they wished now that they should have promoted Bernie; Hillary had way too many things against her; this country is not "ripe" for an woman with an lot of "baggage" in this position yet, as well don't like an "third" Bill term; they should have known better. But now we should be very happy with an Slovenian woman who only can count money and stand all day in front of the mirror in Trump's gold plated apartment.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Schmidt, Reality is that a woman will probably never be President of the United States. You saw that manifested in this past election. Early discussions about a woman getting elected president described what came to be called the Bradley effect. It was totally unacceptable to discredit any chance of a qualified woman becoming president. I think it was Chris Matthews that first identified a husband totally totally supportive of a woman for president until the voting booth curtain was closed. A woman for president supporting gun control was, is, and will be a long shot. A statistical analysis of the 16 election will support surfacing anectdotable evidence that a large number of woman Hillary supporters voted for Trump. But as I described and explained from the very beginning there were two almost insurmountable problems with defeating Trump. He had a catchy sound byte that resonated with Voters hearing about stagnated wages and the widening income gap, He promised good paying jobs and make America Great Again. Secondly he was charismatic to the voters. In the nomination process his assets were totally exposed, tried and insurmountable. Hillary's team was snowballed. They countered his good paying jobs and make America Great again with people are doing well and America is great. Eventually the campaign tried to compete with jobs and living standard but were hobbled with having to discredit Obama in order to make meaningful economic promises. They totally lost the charismatic factor although Michelle's "if he goes low, we'll go high" advice hinted at a thought out offense. But they never really could comprehend Trump's charisma. In reality any Democrat, as jaredsxtn derived from his research, would annihilate Trump. If they had read and paid any attention to the emails I sent they might have beat Trump. You presented ample evidence to support Hillary's justification to be President. But Trump plowed on in what should have been a no excuse Democratic victory. As it now unfolds, the majority still don't get it. People are hurting, everything could be better but it is still denied.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    You said it all Chet.

    Sadly the Dems have no real idea why they lost because they are just Republical lites. No comprehension st all they lost because they forgot about the very people that should be their biggest supporters. No comprehension that people like DWS, Donna Brazile and Nance Pelosi don't care about those people that could have made them winners.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Dishonesty from the treasury secretary ? No way.

    mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politi...

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I guarantee that Trump's government will be the most dishonest in history; Nixon will be an Saint compared to this.

    If you have an Bannon, Priebus, your son in law, Ryan, Spycer and some other clowns, then you know the result. Hitler would be proud of them.