Front Office Football Central
Page 231 of 640 « First < 131181221222223224225226227228229230 231 232233234235236237238239240241281331 > Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)
-   Off Topic (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The Trump Presidency – 2016 (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=92014)

Edward64 07-26-2018 10:46 AM
I kinda like Sessions right now re: investigation. He seems to be the only person that has said no to Trump and survived.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/26/polit...ion/index.html
Quote:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions defended Rod Rosenstein on Thursday, saying he has "the highest confidence" in him one day after House conservatives introduced a resolution to impeach the deputy attorney general overseeing the special counsel Russia investigation.

"My deputy Rod Rosenstein is highly capable. I have the highest confidence in him," Sessions said during a news conference in Boston when asked about the impeachment effort against Rosenstein.

On Wednesday, GOP Reps. Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan took aim at Rosenstein by introducing a resolution to impeach. The move escalates an ongoing feud some House Republicans have had with the Justice Department, which they have accused of withholding key information from Congress.

The resolution on its own does not mean that the House is on the verge of voting to impeach the deputy attorney general, and conservative House members agreed Thursday morning to holding off on a vote to impeach Rosenstein until after the August recess.

Sessions suggested on Thursday that Congress should focus on other issues instead of targeting his deputy.

PilotMan 07-26-2018 10:48 AM
The timing of his process to remove Rosenstein seems to me, to be tied very closely to the elections this fall.

With no word from Mueller, no update on the progress, only little bits of information coming out from the investigation. The R's are looking for a way, any way to turn the conversation and nullify the effect of the investigation continuing or running deep toward the election. They have to realize that the threat from worse news, or a linger of the investigation has more of a threat to the election, than the anger that would be felt from a forced shutdown, or forced attempt to end it. It would seem they have already set these two options against one another and are ready to move on to do what it takes to either shut down, or neuter the effect of the investigation as the election moves closer.

The timing of this is critical.

bronconick 07-26-2018 11:29 AM
Jim Jordan is working on emulating Dennis Hastert, announcing a bid to be the next Republican leader while being a pervert or enabler.

JPhillips 07-26-2018 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bronconick (Post 3212757)
Jim Jordan is working on emulating Dennis Hastert, announcing a bid to be the next Republican leader while being a pervert or enabler.

Who will be the first talking head to argue that ignoring sexual abuse makes him more qualified to be Speaker?

JPhillips 07-26-2018 03:52 PM
There will never be a "worst" statement, but this is bad. Trump talking about the trade deficit:

Quote:
"In other words, if we didn't trade, we'd save a hell of a lot of money."

NobodyHere 07-26-2018 05:25 PM
But if we don't trade, then where will Trump branded clothing be made?

Ben E Lou 07-26-2018 08:17 PM
Breaking News: Internet flips out over least surprising DJT news this month: that he knew about infamous Trump Tower meeting in advance. *shurg*

Thomkal 07-26-2018 10:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben E Lou (Post 3212808)
Breaking News: Internet flips out over least surprising DJT news this month: that he knew about infamous Trump Tower meeting in advance. *shurg*


Cohen says he'll testify to Mueller about it. Until that happens, I can't be very excited about this.



Also Avernatti says that he will represent 3 more women who had affairs with Trump and paid by AMI for their stories. One of the women became pregnant.

Edward64 07-27-2018 05:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomkal (Post 3212812)
Cohen says he'll testify to Mueller about it. Until that happens, I can't be very excited about this.

Yeah, I'll wait and not get my hopes up yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomkal (Post 3212812)
Also Avernatti says that he will represent 3 more women who had affairs with Trump and paid by AMI for their stories. One of the women became pregnant.

This should be interesting and entertaining. The dems should have hired Avernatti to do opp research before the elections.

Ksyrup 07-27-2018 06:41 AM
Given the Q&A above about tying the Daniels payment to campaign finance laws, isn't the fact that there are multiple affairs/payments potentially bad news? Seems to me it can show a pattern of him paying women off to stay quiet that has nothing to do with running for President, and everything to do with him being a celebrity scumbag husband with enough money to shut people up.

Clearly, the fact that he's had multiple affairs in and of itself isn't going to change anyone's minds at this point. If the pregnancy is true, curious if there's direct evidence he demanded an abortion. Would love to see how that is twisted by Trump fanatics.

Edward64 07-27-2018 07:38 AM
I think this shows small progress which is a good thing.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/n...troops-n895126
Quote:
North Korea turned over what are believed to be the remains of 55 U.S. service members who were killed during the Korean War of the 1950s on Friday local time, the 65th anniversary of the armistice that ended the fighting, the United States and the United Nations said.
:
The return is part of an agreement reached during the June summit between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. The transfer sets off a lengthy series of forensic examinations and tests to determine whether the remains are human and whether they are actually U.S. or allied troops who were killed in the conflict.
:
Joint U.S.-North Korea military search teams collected 229 sets of U.S. remains from 1996 to 2005. But efforts to recover and return more remains stalled for more than a decade as Washington and Pyongyang clashed over North Korea's nuclear weapons program. The United States, meanwhile, alleged that the safety of its recovery teams wasn't being guaranteed.

Edward64 07-27-2018 07:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ksyrup (Post 3212828)
Given the Q&A above about tying the Daniels payment to campaign finance laws, isn't the fact that there are multiple affairs/payments potentially bad news? Seems to me it can show a pattern of him paying women off to stay quiet that has nothing to do with running for President, and everything to do with him being a celebrity scumbag husband with enough money to shut people up.

I think your second sentence is what he will use as a defense (unless there is a smoking gun that actually ties campaign funds to payment or proof that the payments were to influence the election).

If there are other payments and they have been occurring for a while, it lends credibility that payments to Daniels/McDougal just before the election was nothing special, just part of a "celebrity scumbag husband with enough money to shut people up".

Secret tape may not add to legal jeopardy for Trump or Cohen - Chicago Tribune
Quote:
At issue is whether the payment the men are discussing was campaign-related and intended to influence the election, in which case it would likely be regarded as a contribution, or whether it was merely meant to shield the married Trump from an embarrassing revelation harmful to his personal life. Also important is whether the payment to McDougal from the Enquirer's parent company, American Media Inc., functioned as a backdoor campaign contribution or as a legitimate media company expense.

"It's a piece of evidence. It's not a smoking gun," Rick Hasen, a campaign finance law expert at the University of California, Irvine, said of the recording. "It's relevant to the investigation, and it's relevant to considering whether Trump or Cohen or AMI committed campaign finance violations, but on its own, it does not constitute proof of any violation."

He added, "It does not establish either a motive to spend illegal or unreported money in violation of the campaign finance laws, and it doesn't establish that any money was actually paid for this purpose."

Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani has said the conversation wasn't campaign-related and that Trump and Cohen didn't make a payment to buy the rights.

Atocep 07-27-2018 06:46 PM
The EU has realized what people in the US realized some time ago. You have to treat our President like a toddler.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...rce=reddit.com

Edward64 07-28-2018 12:35 PM
Hopefully Geraldo is right and there are some troubling business dealings that Mueller can go after. I don't think infidelity is that impactful, collusion would be great if it can be tied back to Trump directly, but think soft underbelly is his business.

Two thoughts:

1) If I was Trump, I would reach out to Cohen and see if he can be brought back into the fold (is it too late?)
2) If I ever have to deal with a lawyer on sensitive matters, I'll make sure I'm not being taped or ask lawyer to turn it off

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/39...robe-of-trumps
Quote:
“@MichaelCohen212 is soft underbelly of @realDonaldTrump,” Rivera tweeted on Friday. “We all have secrets-incl @POTUS- To have your secret keeper cooperating w a hostile govt agency-as Cohen is apparently doing-insures this scandal has legs & will pivot from porn stars & collusion to Trump’s business dealings.”
:
“Cohen recorded everything,” said Bryan Lanza, a former Trump campaign official. “The juiciest parts may be yet to come.”

More than 100 of Cohen’s recordings, including conversations with reporters and others discussing topics related to the president, have been seized by the government.

corbes 07-28-2018 12:44 PM
From the Dept. of Lest We Forget

Quote:
“There were three agencies, and each was like its own stovepipe. Each had its own boss, and they did not communicate,” Sabraw said at a Friday court hearing in San Diego. “What was lost in the process was the family. The parents didn’t know where the children were, and the children didn’t know where the parents were. And the government didn’t know either.”


‘Deleted’ families: What went wrong with Trump’s family-separation effort - The Washington Post

JPhillips 07-30-2018 08:21 AM
Giuliani is now saying that collusion isn't a crime.

The pee tape is real.

QuikSand 07-30-2018 09:02 AM
It's patently obvious where the goalposts eventually land, right? At some point the MAGA message will simply shift to "as long as the Russians, whom we were working with of course, didn't actually go into the voting machines and change votes, then there's nothing wrong with what we did together to alter the US election." And 40% of America, and a theoretically valid Electoral College majority, will effectively agree that we have always been at war with Eastasia.

PilotMan 07-30-2018 09:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuikSand (Post 3213041)
It's patently obvious where the goalposts eventually land, right? At some point the MAGA message will simply shift to "as long as the Russians, whom we were working with of course, didn't actually go into the voting machines and change votes, then there's nothing wrong with what we did together to alter the US election." And 40% of America, and a theoretically valid Electoral College majority, will effectively agree that we have always been at war with Eastasia.


+1000

Edward64 07-30-2018 10:08 AM
Had to read more. He may be right but that's not the full story.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/30/polit...ntv/index.html
Quote:
The President has repeatedly denied that there was any collusion between his campaign and Moscow. But he has made a similar argument to that of Giuliani's, telling The New York Times in December that "There is no collusion, and even if there was, it's not a crime."

At a CNN town hall in April, former FBI Director James Comey, whom Trump fired, said collusion "is not actually a thing that exists under the federal laws of the United States."

Instead, Comey continued, the question is whether any Americans conspired with a foreign government to commit crimes against the US, which is a crime.
:
And speaking to CNN in May, Carrie Cordero, a CNN legal analyst and an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, said collusion isn't a crime "in the literal sense" but that there could be related criminal violations in colluding, such as receiving foreign money in a political campaign or assisting with or being an accessory to computer hacking.

No evidence has publicly emerged that the Trump campaign has engaged in these activities, though Mueller's investigation is ongoing.

corbes 07-30-2018 10:21 AM
Let's review.


Quote:
If collusion has no legal meaning in the context of the Russia investigation, then “why has the word … captured everyone’s attention?” What’s more, how did a word with no legal relevance to the case become so associated with the Trump-Russia allegations?

* * *

[Backstory omitted] prompted me do some digging on the intellectual history of the word “collusion” in the context of L’Affaire Russe, how it got injected into the bloodstream of the conversation, and how it has come to so dominate discussion of Trump-Russia matters that the president can simply tweet “NO COLLUSION!” to convey a huge amount of meaning to his supporters and opponents alike. How did the word “collusion” get introduced into the public lexicon? And who is initially responsible for introducing it? The answer, it turns out, goes back to July of 2016 at the Democratic National Convention.

On July 22, 2016, Wikileaks released more than 19,000 emails from top members of the Democratic National Committee. Two days after the release, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager Robby Mook told CNN that, according to “experts,” Russian state actors had stolen the emails from the DNC and were releasing them through Wikileaks “for the purpose of actually helping Donald Trump.”

Mook did not use the word “collusion,” but the press, in reporting his comments, did. Within the hour, in an article timestamped at 9:55 a.m., the Washington Examiner reported that Paul Manafort and Donald Trump Jr, had responded to Mook’s allegations and “vigorously denied any kind of collusion between Trump Sr. and the Russian president.” (To be clear, Manafort denied “any ties” between Putin and the Trump campaign, and Donald Trump Jr. criticized Mook for “lie after lie.” Neither one of them mentioned “collusion.”) Ninety minutes later, at 11:27 a.m., ABC News repeated what it termed Mook’s “allegation of collusion between the campaign and Russia.” And three hours later, at approximately 12:35 p.m., Bernie Sanders’s campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, told CNN’s Jake Tapper, “If there was some kind of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence or Russian hackers, that clearly has to be dealt with.”

From there it was off to the races. Over the next two weeks, the word “collusion” was used hundreds of times by politicians like Martin O’Malley and media personalities such as Trevor Noah.

The term caught on, I think, because it captured the general suspicion that the campaign was somehow in on the hack or knowingly benefiting from it while carefully eliding the fact that no tangible evidence had yet emerged tying the Trump campaign to the Kremlin. (Remember that news of the Trump Tower meeting and other contacts between the campaign and Russian actors had not yet become public.)

After this initial spurt, the collusion frenzy tapered off. Through August and September the word appeared only sporadically in the press, as other stories edged out the Trump-Russia narrative for dominance in the campaign. But when Wikileaks published more than 50,000 emails from Clinton’s campaign chairman in October of 2016, the term had a renaissance of sorts.

The popularity of the term continued to wax and wane throughout the final months of 2016. When a big story would break about Trump, the campaign, or Clinton’s emails, the word “collusion” would appear in headlines. Not every story described the relationship as collusion. Some referred to it as “ties” with Russia. Others questioned whether Trump was “coordinating” with Putin. Collusion had not yet become the de facto term to describe the Russia connection. But it was very much in the mix.

On Dec. 9, 2016, the Washington Post reported that the CIA had concluded that Russia intervened in the 2016 election in order to aid the Trump campaign. Although the Post did not mention the word “collusion” in its article, other media outlets such as the Economist, the Guardian, and CNN included the term when they picked up the story. After that day, the use of the word “collusion” spiked dramatically. It became the universally accepted term to describe any potential relationship between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia. Even the individuals under investigation bought into the use of the word. In July of 2017, for example, Jared Kushner told reporters “Let me be very clear: I did not collude with Russia.” And in September of 2017, Donald Trump Jr. testified before Senate investigators “I did not collude with any foreign government.”

It’s probably here to stay, despite its being a legal non sequitur.


Where the Heck Did the Term “Collusion” Come From? - Lawfare


More context:

Quote:
No impeachment myth is quite as inaccurate and tenacious as the notion that an impeachment inquiry must wait until evidence emerges that the president has committed a crime. This argument has been explicitly made by unembarrassed Trumpists such as Ed Rogers in the Washington Post. More importantly, it is the implicit argument underlying the obsessive commentatory over whether President Trump has committed a crime, like obstructing justice or striking a quid pro quo with Russia.

Impeaching Trump: Four Eternal Myths - Lawfare

corbes 07-30-2018 10:23 AM
Quote:
The problem with dwelling too much on the covert forms of collaboration, which we have come to call “collusion,” is that doing so risks letting Trump at least a little bit off the hook for what is not meaningfully disputed: that the president publicly, knowingly, and repeatedly (if only tacitly) collaborated with a foreign power’s intelligence effort to interfere in the presidential election of the country he now leads. Focusing on covert collusion risks putting the lines of propriety, acceptable candidate behavior, and even (let’s be frank) patriotism in such a place where openly encouraging foreign dictators to hack your domestic opponent’s emails falls on the tolerable side. It risks accepting that all is okay with the Trump-Russia relationship unless some secret or illegal additional element actually involves illicit contacts between the campaign and Russian operatives.

The Wall Begins to Crumble: Notes on Collusion - Lawfare

NobodyHere 07-30-2018 11:50 AM
Rand Paul buckles again

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3...-for-kavanaugh

JPhillips 07-30-2018 11:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuikSand (Post 3213041)
It's patently obvious where the goalposts eventually land, right? At some point the MAGA message will simply shift to "as long as the Russians, whom we were working with of course, didn't actually go into the voting machines and change votes, then there's nothing wrong with what we did together to alter the US election." And 40% of America, and a theoretically valid Electoral College majority, will effectively agree that we have always been at war with Eastasia.

I'm in FL this week and the primary commercials are just wild. The GOP ads are little more than arguing who is more like Trump. This is true not just for House races, but state races too. Politics have always been tribal, but I've never seen anything like how the GOP has identified with Trump.

RainMaker 07-30-2018 04:15 PM
Another round of tax cuts for the rich.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/30/u...cuts-rich.html

jct32 07-30-2018 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3213067)
I'm in FL this week and the primary commercials are just wild. The GOP ads are little more than arguing who is more like Trump. This is true not just for House races, but state races too. Politics have always been tribal, but I've never seen anything like how the GOP has identified with Trump.

I vote mostly R. We had our primaries about a month ago. There were guys who said stuff like this. "Vote for me so we can support Trump" That was an automatic disqualifier for me.

JPhillips 07-30-2018 04:45 PM
I'm so old I remember when changing laws through presidential fiat was tyranny.

JPhillips 07-30-2018 05:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3213067)
I'm in FL this week and the primary commercials are just wild. The GOP ads are little more than arguing who is more like Trump. This is true not just for House races, but state races too. Politics have always been tribal, but I've never seen anything like how the GOP has identified with Trump.

I just saw my favorite, an ad for a Commissioner of Agriculture whose first priority is Promoting the Trump Agenda.

RainMaker 07-30-2018 06:15 PM
There is a weird cult-like aspect to his support. I mean people have always been passionate about politicians but the part about trusting them over your family and friends is bizarre.

RainMaker 07-30-2018 06:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3213106)
I just saw my favorite, an ad for a Commissioner of Agriculture whose first priority is Promoting the Trump Agenda.

The agenda that has been so disastrous to their industry they have to offer up billions in welfare for farmers.

Atocep 07-30-2018 08:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 3213110)
The agenda that has been so disastrous to their industry they have to offer up billions in welfare for farmers.

And they'll still vote for him.

Radii 07-30-2018 09:29 PM
https://slate.com/business/2018/07/s...ly-argues.html

"Conservative Think-Tanker Accidentally Argues That Single Payer Could Save Americans $2 Trillion"

lungs 07-30-2018 10:19 PM
The rumors I've heard is that dairy will receive $0.75 per hundred lbs of milk produced in 2018. If this is in fact true, I'll be in line to collect $20,000 for the 2 million pounds of milk my farm produced before ceasing production. Had I continued this year at full capacity, using those same numbers I would have received over $100,000.

USDA also revised and extended an insurance program that guaranteed collecting a payout. I've collected over $10,000 already on that because they use my production levels from 2011-13 as a baseline. While we didn't intentionally do this (honest), the rules stated that we still had to be milking cows when we signed up. We signed up on May 30th, and the cows left on May 31st. I'll be eligible to collect the rest of this year.

And then we should get a little payout in the fall for a slightly below average crop year in 2017. Usually that's more than $10k. Some years we get nothing, some years we get something. I won't count this one against Trump.

So, as you can see, my medium sized farming operation stands to take in quite a few handouts from the government this year. Do I regret selling? Not at all. I projected to lose $250,000 this year and that was before Trump's tariff games sunk the milk price some more. I think my dad says it best, government assistance for farmers is usually just enough to keep them dumb enough to keep producing. That's talking about the less than financially astute farmers who are not too worried about eating a few hundred grand of their equity (or are even aware they are burning it). Farming is a disease and many will think everything is just fine and keep plugging away until that banker finally pulls the plug on them.

These government handouts will unfortunately only delay the inevitable for many farmers that should probably call it quits.

QuikSand 07-31-2018 07:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radii (Post 3213121)
https://slate.com/business/2018/07/s...ly-argues.html

"Conservative Think-Tanker Accidentally Argues That Single Payer Could Save Americans $2 Trillion"

A fascinating case of battling headlines. If you want evidence that tribal thinking isn't just a plight of the lower classes and under-educated, here you go. The math behind this honestly isn't hard... but getting away from the message that you have decide in advance that you support... that's really hard.

albionmoonlight 07-31-2018 09:05 AM
EDITOR: We need a pic of Manafort that makes it looks like he just ate an innocent toddler's soul.

STAFF: Got it!

Kodos 07-31-2018 09:23 AM
It does have a certain Hannibal Lecter feel to it.

Ksyrup 07-31-2018 09:29 AM
That's one of my favorite games - matching pics with headlines with news source.

cuervo72 07-31-2018 09:50 PM
Seems to make the yearly rounds, but the first I've heard of it. Reactions are, of course, amusing.

Resurfaced Mike Pence Opinion Piece About 'Mulan' Reminds Us Just How Messed Up He Really Is

JPhillips 08-01-2018 07:40 AM
Jeff Flake may be doing something.

He's in Africa now on vacation, meaning that Mcconnell's plan to push judge nominations through by keeping the Senate in session in August isn't working. Flake is on Judiciary, so without him the committee can't pass any nominations without Dem votes.

It's unclear whether he's coming back soon or if he's staying away for the whole month, but it appears that calls to actually do something are being answered.

Butter 08-01-2018 07:45 AM
Does vacation count as doing something?

JPhillips 08-01-2018 08:00 AM
It does if he's purposefully keeping the Judiciary committee from passing on nominations.

Lathum 08-01-2018 08:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuervo72 (Post 3213203)
Seems to make the yearly rounds, but the first I've heard of it. Reactions are, of course, amusing.

Resurfaced Mike Pence Opinion Piece About 'Mulan' Reminds Us Just How Messed Up He Really Is

This is insane

whomario 08-01-2018 10:12 AM
Somebody woke up in a sweat today ...



http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...ssia-probe?amp

JPhillips 08-01-2018 03:23 PM
What the flippity fuck?

ISiddiqui 08-01-2018 03:32 PM
Solitary confinement? What is he, a child who was brought over the border by his parents?

Thomkal 08-01-2018 06:48 PM
Not just the start of the Manafort trial that set off Trump's twitter-fest this morning:


https://abcnews.go.com/US/special-co...ry?id=56973384

bbgunn 08-01-2018 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs (Post 3213122)
The rumors I've heard is that dairy will receive $0.75 per hundred lbs of milk produced in 2018. If this is in fact true, I'll be in line to collect $20,000 for the 2 million pounds of milk my farm produced before ceasing production. Had I continued this year at full capacity, using those same numbers I would have received over $100,000.

USDA also revised and extended an insurance program that guaranteed collecting a payout. I've collected over $10,000 already on that because they use my production levels from 2011-13 as a baseline. While we didn't intentionally do this (honest), the rules stated that we still had to be milking cows when we signed up. We signed up on May 30th, and the cows left on May 31st. I'll be eligible to collect the rest of this year.

And then we should get a little payout in the fall for a slightly below average crop year in 2017. Usually that's more than $10k. Some years we get nothing, some years we get something. I won't count this one against Trump.

So, as you can see, my medium sized farming operation stands to take in quite a few handouts from the government this year. Do I regret selling? Not at all. I projected to lose $250,000 this year and that was before Trump's tariff games sunk the milk price some more. I think my dad says it best, government assistance for farmers is usually just enough to keep them dumb enough to keep producing. That's talking about the less than financially astute farmers who are not too worried about eating a few hundred grand of their equity (or are even aware they are burning it). Farming is a disease and many will think everything is just fine and keep plugging away until that banker finally pulls the plug on them.

These government handouts will unfortunately only delay the inevitable for many farmers that should probably call it quits.

Just wanted to say thank you for your insight, lungs. I like hearing how Trump policies actually affect people in their areas of life around the country.

RainMaker 08-02-2018 03:06 PM


miked 08-02-2018 03:37 PM
Because employers are keeping the extras to stuff in their pockets and line the pockets of shareholders?

Marc Vaughan 08-02-2018 03:39 PM
Hardly a puzzle - most 'new' jobs are poorly paid and the employers see employees as easily replaced so don't give raises, simply hiring new staff as other people leave.

The government isn't raising minimum wage so the tax cuts have just lead to higher profits and share buy-backs, workers as expected in most cases have been unaffected unless they own shares.

Corporations are run for profit, if they are to give back to society and support the region that they are based in then they need to be pushed to pay fair salaries, give workers protections and have taxes enforced upon them - something which doesn't appear to be a priority of politicians... instead they increase the deflationary aspects of wages by weakening unions and healthcare provisions further in the hope of strengthening their political advantage.

CU Tiger 08-02-2018 03:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan (Post 3213398)
Hardly a puzzle - most 'new' jobs are poorly paid and the employers see employees as easily replaced so don't give raises, simply hiring new staff as other people leave.

The government isn't raising minimum wage so the tax cuts have just lead to higher profits and share buy-backs, workers as expected in most cases have been unaffected unless they own shares.

Corporations are run for profit, if they are to give back to society and support the region that they are based in then they need to be pushed to pay fair salaries, give workers protections and have taxes enforced upon them - something which doesn't appear to be a priority of politicians... instead they increase the deflationary aspects of wages by weakening unions and healthcare provisions further in the hope of strengthening their political advantage.


Hogwash.


Every industry I know is dieing for good workers. Good companies value and pay their employees. If you work for a company that doesnt(royal you not specific) then quit and go somewhere that does.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:08 PM.
Page 231 of 640 « First < 131181221222223224225226227228229230 231 232233234235236237238239240241281331 > Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.