Maga crowd

[bandrus1 413]

Besides the social issues, what gender blah blah blah

When exactly are we talking about trying to get back to when you use make America great again.

Like what is the model time?

[drobeski 3,061]

IMO It mostly refers to bring those jobs back that were lost by disaster agreements like NAFTA.

Not running around apologizing for who we are as a country

Insisting NATO nations pay their fair share for defense.

Strengthening our military and taking care of our vets

In a nut shell, putting our country and it's legal citizens first and not being ashamed or allowed to be shamed for doing so.

It's more of a what than a when.

[RLLD 3,455]

27 minutes ago, drobeski said:

IMO It mostly refers to bring those jobs back that were lost by disaster agreements like NAFTA.

Not running around apologizing for who we are as a country

Insisting NATO nations pay their fair share for defense.

Strengthening our military and taking care of our vets

In a nut shell, putting our country and it's legal citizens first and not being ashamed or allowed to be shamed for doing so.

It's more of a what than a when.

I can get with all of this.

I would also suggest that increasing the size of the middle class, restoring vibrancy to that segment of society.

[Reality 2,710]

39 minutes ago, drobeski said:

IMO It mostly refers to bring those jobs back that were lost by disaster agreements like NAFTA.

Not running around apologizing for who we are as a country

Insisting NATO nations pay their fair share for defense.

Strengthening our military and taking care of our vets

In a nut shell, putting our country and it's legal citizens first and not being ashamed or allowed to be shamed for doing so.

It's more of a what than a when.

Well said, agreed.

[shorepatrol 1,737]

[bandrus1 413]

15 minutes ago, Ray Lewis's Limo Driver said:

I can get with all of this.

I would also suggest that increasing the size of the middle class, restoring vibrancy to that segment of society.

A time when the corporate tax rate was more than double what it is today

[MDC 5,890]

I think the shift to a shareholder type model had a big impact. Before a company was owned by an individual / group of individuals who delivered a product and had a responsibility to labor. Today businesses are accountable only to shareholders and there are plenty of ways to improve shares that have nothing to do with delivering a better product, like cutting the workforce and moving investments around to show a better profit.

Also the move toward corporate globalization has been a huge net loss for US workers. No matter how well US workers build widgets or answer phones, there’s no way to compete with workers in China, India etc who are willing to do the same job for pennies on the dollar. That is a race to the bottom.

Fixing trade agreements and lecturing businesses that offshore isn’t going to fix these problems.

[cbfalcon 824]

1 hour ago, drobeski said:

IMO It mostly refers to bring those jobs back that were lost by disaster agreements like NAFTA.

Not running around apologizing for who we are as a country

Insisting NATO nations pay their fair share for defense.

Strengthening our military and taking care of our vets

In a nut shell, putting our country and it's legal citizens first and not being ashamed or allowed to be shamed for doing so.

It's more of a what than a when.

All of these things sound good, but they are mostly just slogans.

- Generally speaking, unemployment has been going down for a decade.

- Apologizing for who we are as a country is a spin topic. We can take turns debating whether we have to be defiant, talk shiit, can act gracious and admit faults with the knowledge that we carry the biggest stick, etc. It's all just posturing

- Insisting NATO nations pay their fair share is valid, but I don't see how making others pay more money would lead to a feeling that America has been made great again.

- Our military needed strengthening? So it was weak? There was someone that was a threat to kick our ass? In fact, if it was us against every other country in the world combined, wouldn't it be a toss up? Doing more for vets is valid, but it's not as though previous administrations were speaking out against it.

- We have always put our citizens first. Not being as tough on others as many would like doesn't negate that.

 

Basically, the MAGA movement often feels lacking in substance, and instead like a call for us to flex on everyone else in an effort to feel like badasses. That's not to say some of Trump's policies don't have substance, but those things don't as often lead to chants at rallies, etc.

[RLLD 3,455]

22 minutes ago, MDC said:

I think the shift to a shareholder type model had a big impact. Before a company was owned by an individual / group of individuals who delivered a product and had a responsibility to labor. Today businesses are accountable only to shareholders and there are plenty of ways to improve shares that have nothing to do with delivering a better product, like cutting the workforce and moving investments around to show a better profit.

Also the move toward corporate globalization has been a huge net loss for US workers. No matter how well US workers build widgets or answer phones, there’s no way to compete with workers in China, India etc who are willing to do the same job for pennies on the dollar. That is a race to the bottom.

Fixing trade agreements and lecturing businesses that offshore isn’t going to fix these problems.

While I am assiduously opposed to telling people or businesses how to handle their sh!t, I think this model has tremendous value.

 

[cbfalcon 824]

19 minutes ago, MDC said:

I think the shift to a shareholder type model had a big impact. Before a company was owned by an individual / group of individuals who delivered a product and had a responsibility to labor. Today businesses are accountable only to shareholders and there are plenty of ways to improve shares that have nothing to do with delivering a better product, like cutting the workforce and moving investments around to show a better profit.

Also the move toward corporate globalization has been a huge net loss for US workers. No matter how well US workers build widgets or answer phones, there’s no way to compete with workers in China, India etc who are willing to do the same job for pennies on the dollar. That is a race to the bottom.

Fixing trade agreements and lecturing businesses that offshore isn’t going to fix these problems.

Now this is a solid thought provoking post that makes some sense to me. It gets to the heart of what I think the MAGA spirit wants to get at, as opposed to "stop apologizing for stuff"......but in an ironic twist, the only way to fix this (that I see) is to start listening to some of these far left ideas.

[TBayXXXVII 2,113]

2 hours ago, bandrus1 said:

Besides the social issues, what gender blah blah blah

When exactly are we talking about trying to get back to when you use make America great again.

Like what is the model time?

No time model really.  A few things...

1. Eradicate the socialist agenda
2. Remove cultural ideology
3. Stop blaming others for your decisions
4. Fixing the welfare system so that it can't be used as generational life style
5. Personal accountability

Basically, everything the Left doesn't want.

 

[cbfalcon 824]

5 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

No time model really.  A few things...

1. Eradicate the socialist agenda
2. Remove cultural ideology
3. Stop blaming others for your decisions
4. Fixing the welfare system so that it can't be used as generational life style
5. Personal accountability

Basically, everything the Left doesn't want.

 

1. "Eradicate socialist agenda" is vague and just sounds like you want to kick the other sides ass instead of wanting any real improvements.

2. Honest question. Does that include removing white culture ideology?

3. This is the reason I am responding. I agree totally. But I read this a lot and I feel like both sides do it constantly, not just the left.......But there is a trick in it. The right essentially seems to argue that the left is blaming others for their place in life, and the result is the cause for those on the right not having the place in life they deserve....or something to that effect.

4. Agree

5. I agree, but this is the same as #3 in my mind.

[avoiding injuries 1,220]

I have a decent amount of friends who are from foreign countries, mainly Europe. They tell me all the time that people from their home countries are not happy with how America has changed recently. I suppose that could be looked upon both ways, but when I ask follow up questions, it all comes down to things that make America stronger and these foreign countries aren’t able to take advantage of us like they had been. 

I consider that a win for America. 

Im sure ISIS and some of the Middle East countries feel the same way. Good. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,113]

46 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

1. "Eradicate socialist agenda" is vague and just sounds like you want to kick the other sides ass instead of wanting any real improvements.

2. Honest question. Does that include removing white culture ideology?

3. This is the reason I am responding. I agree totally. But I read this a lot and I feel like both sides do it constantly, not just the left.......But there is a trick in it. The right essentially seems to argue that the left is blaming others for their place in life, and the result is the cause for those on the right not having the place in life they deserve....or something to that effect.

4. Agree

5. I agree, but this is the same as #3 in my mind.

1. You mean physically?  By force?  No, by people using common sense and logic.  Socialism has never worked in society and never will.
2. Sorry, I meant political ideology.  Meaning, ranking people by the ways they are "oppressed".  Grouping people by race.  Grouping people by gender.  Etc.  Putting people in groups and saying they should all believe the same way.
3. Both sides do do this, but the left is worse and believe bullying when you don't get what you want.
4. 
5. Yeah, sort of, but #3 was more about social issues and this one was meant more about personal.  (Yeah, after re-reading I was rather vague.  My fingers work faster than my brain sometimes.)  Graduate high school.  Practice safe sex.  Don't commit crimes.  Don't be an azzhole to others.  Treat people equally.

 

To expand....

Of course, some of these could be applied to Republican's, but for the most part, a Leftist would only agree with part of #5 and nothing else.  The Leftist agenda is where the Democrat party is moving.  It's why "Classic Liberals" are today identified as conservatives.  I am a moderate Republican but the Leftist agenda is forcing me further to the right because they're basically making "the center", non-existent.

[trumpurethra 42]

It's to stop the spread of the brown people lol. If it were truly what drodumbazz said the oompa Loompa would be pushing to bring unions back. Only thing the trumptards care about is b!tching about how the brown man takes their jobs and money.

MDC is 100% on point. All about the shareholders and capital now. People will see the light, the younger generation sees it, it is coming, workers are growing tired of corporate BS. But it probably won't happen in our lifetime. 

Probably once the crusty old fockers die off is when it will happen. A shift in importance from capital back to labor.

[Strike 3,956]

56 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

Now this is a solid thought provoking post that makes some sense to me. It gets to the heart of what I think the MAGA spirit wants to get at, as opposed to "stop apologizing for stuff"......but in an ironic twist, the only way to fix this (that I see) is to start listening to some of these far left ideas.

Specifically which far left ideas are you referring to?

[SenatorRock 708]

Slavery, duh.

[Kanil 519]

This had the makings of a great, civil thread until @trumpurethra and @SenatorRock stepped in.  Why do you guys have to sh!t on everything you touch?

[edjr 5,554]

1 minute ago, Kanil said:

This had the makings of a great, civil thread until @trumpurethra and @SenatorRock stepped in.  Why do you guys have to sh!t on everything you touch?

mental illness 

[vuduchile 1,941]

We just need to pump the brakes on the pussification of America.  

[Kanil 519]

1 minute ago, edjr said:

mental illness 

It was finally a legit, adult conversation.  I was actually thinking about the posts as people made them.  Unfortunate.

[cbfalcon 824]

12 minutes ago, Strike said:

Specifically which far left ideas are you referring to?

I haven't really thought it out in such a way as to endorse any specific ideas......

But on a general level, if we believe a problem to be that businesses have more responsibility to shareholders than they do to customers or labor, then resolving that would seemingly involve shifting the power from said shareholders back to the customer and to the labor. One way or another, it reads to me like a far left idea......call it a version of a wealth tax, or whatever.

Again, I haven't thought it through. Its a discussion. I'm open to ideas.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Basically a return to common sense.

Your gender is what you were born with. If you're the .001% with both, you pick. 

As with ANY position, you don't have to respect the person but respect the position.

Celebrities are NOT role models. Getting wasted, divorced after 4 months, etc....you're a focking side show a.k.a. a jester. Make me laugh clown and STFU.

Realize your limitations and conduct yourself accordingly. Mouthing off to cops, someone much bigger than you, or claiming you're bright enough to run the country as you offer the next in line fries with his burger. Take your lumps in life and try to learn your lessons.

Love your country for the promise it offers everyone. If you're not successful it's your own focking fault so try harder. If you don't love this country GTFO.

 

[MDC 5,890]

3 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

I haven't really thought it out in such a way as to endorse any specific ideas......

But on a general level, if we believe a problem to be that businesses have more responsibility to shareholders than they do to customers or labor, then resolving that would seemingly involve shifting the power from said shareholders back to the customer and to the labor. One way or another, it reads to me like a far left idea......call it a version of a wealth tax, or whatever.

Again, I haven't thought it through. Its a discussion. I'm open to ideas.

How about a cap on CEO compensation?

in 1965 the average CEO earned 20 times the average worker. Today CEOs earn 312 times more. It’s not too surprising that real wages have been stagnant or gone down in 30 years.

[SenatorRock 708]

16 minutes ago, Kanil said:

This had the makings of a great, civil thread until @trumpurethra and @SenatorRock stepped in.  Why do you guys have to sh!t on everything you touch?

Are you really that butt hurt over a joke?

[vuduchile 1,941]

1 minute ago, MDC said:

How about a cap on CEO compensation?

in 1965 the average CEO earned 20 times the average worker. Today CEOs earn 312 times more. It’s not too surprising that real wages have been stagnant or gone down in 30 years.

I'm not a champion of big biz, but I can't support this. Topping out anyone's salary is a disincentive.  

[cbfalcon 824]

4 minutes ago, MDC said:

How about a cap on CEO compensation?

in 1965 the average CEO earned 20 times the average worker. Today CEOs earn 312 times more. It’s not too surprising that real wages have been stagnant or gone down in 30 years.

This reads like a nice common sense idea worth at least discussing. Most would say so in a vacuum......but it's also a far left AOC type of idea I think. It is anti free market, it caps wealth in theory, redistributes that wealth to the people, etc.

 

[Kanil 519]

1 minute ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

Basically a return to common sense.

Your gender is what you were born with. If you're the .001% with both, you pick. 

As with ANY position, you don't have to respect the person but respect the position.

Celebrities are NOT role models. Getting wasted, divorced after 4 months, etc....you're a focking side show a.k.a. a jester. Make me laugh clown and STFU.

Realize your limitations and conduct yourself accordingly. Mouthing off to cops, someone much bigger than you, or claiming you're bright enough to run the country as you offer the next in line fries with his burger. Take your lumps in life and try to learn your lessons.

Love your country for the promise it offers everyone. If you're not successful it's your own focking fault so try harder. If you don't love this country GTFO.

 

I agree with most of this.

I don't care what gender someone wants to call themselves.  It makes absolutely zero difference to me.

Totally agree with respecting the position.  It's why I always try to use President Trump instead of just Trump.

Most celebs are the opposite of role models.  There are some great ones out there (Gary Sinese and Tom Hanks come to mind) but most are entitled pricks.

I somewhat agree with this point.  Not mouthing off to cops goes back to respecting the position.  I don't have a problem with standing up for what you believe in even if the other guys is much bigger.  That said, don't take a swing at the dude unless you want to get hurt.  I also don't have a problem with people criticizing our leaders (although if the criticize one guy, and applaud another for the same actions I'm gonna call them out).  Hopefully I learn my lessons from others mistakes before I make them but if you don't learn from a mistake, you deserve to repeat it.

I agree with the love your country line 100%.  I'm proud to be an American and think everyone here should be as well.  If you don't like it, move to France.

[Kanil 519]

2 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

This reads like a nice common sense idea worth at least discussing. Most would say so in a vacuum......but it's also a far left AOC type of idea I think. It is anti free market, it caps wealth in theory, redistributes that wealth to the people, etc.

This is correct.  Don't fault anyone for getting what they can.  The reason these guys are paid so much is because the people that pay them (the company board, usually) have determined they're worth it.

[MDC 5,890]

1 minute ago, vuduchile said:

I'm not a champion of big biz, but I can't support this. Topping out anyone's salary is a disincentive.  

Okay well then how about legally compelling US businesses to have X percentage of their workforce actually he American citizens to prevent offshoring of manufacturing and customer service? 

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

To be clear, I don't care if a dude wants to dress like a chick or vice versa. But as a man you can't enter the women's bathroom or compete against them. Again, common sense.

[cbfalcon 824]

5 minutes ago, MDC said:

How about a cap on CEO compensation?

in 1965 the average CEO earned 20 times the average worker. Today CEOs earn 312 times more. It’s not too surprising that real wages have been stagnant or gone down in 30 years.

 

1 minute ago, vuduchile said:

I'm not a champion of big biz, but I can't support this. Topping out anyone's salary is a disincentive.  

Just spitballing....but if the CEO wants to earn more, then the company needs to be successful enough for the employees to earn more. No? There is no cap. Make the company more valuable and let everyone benefit.

But maybe if we didn't want to tie the CEO salary to the salary of others, we could create a scale based on number of employees and percentage of profits, and that was a CEO's cap in pay? In theory, earn more profits and make more money...but that may just be a round about way of getting us back to CEOs earning 300x as much as the average employee. Unsure.

[Kanil 519]

7 minutes ago, SenatorRock said:

Are you really that butt hurt over a joke?

Maybe I'm being overly sensitive but I don't remember a post where you didn't go out of your way to insult someone. 

[edjr 5,554]

6 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

 

Just spitballing....but if the CEO wants to earn more, then the company needs to be successful enough for the employees to earn more. No? There is no cap. Make the company more valuable and let everyone benefit.

But maybe if we didn't want to tie the CEO salary to the salary of others, we could create a scale based on number of employees and percentage of profits, and that was a CEO's cap in pay? In theory, earn more profits and make more money...but that may just be a round about way of getting us back to CEOs earning 300x as much as the average employee. Unsure.

4 Co-CEOS at the new place I work. Each of them has their own private jet (company bought) they make so much money they have an entire department of 7 people that just do the CEOs finances. Gross

[MDC 5,890]

Where conversations like this break down is that the “free market” allows businesses to employ foreign workers with no labor protections who earn pennies on the dollar vs US workers, park their $ or set up shell operations in places with a low corporate tax rate (Ireland), and declare bankruptcy, laying off an entire workforce while management sails off with multimillion dollar golden parachutes.

That is your “free market.” So if tinkering with the free market is a non starter for you, get used to the US looking less like the robust middle class of the US postwar period and more like the caste system of India, cause that’s where we are headed.

[KSB2424 3,082]

It’s a slogan like Hope and Change was.  

For me it simply implies Trump is dedicated to putting Americans first.  Jobs, trade agreements, safety, world organizations, etc etc.

 

 

[vuduchile 1,941]

4 minutes ago, MDC said:

Okay well then how about legally compelling US businesses to have X percentage of their workforce actually he American citizens to prevent offshoring of manufacturing and customer service? 

I like that better.  If you're a US company, you should have some responsibility to employ US citizens.  Creating a global economy was great for corporations but not great for US citizens.  

We still need to better balance some of those lopsided trade agreements.

[edjr 5,554]

5 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

It’s a slogan like Hope and Change was.  

For me it simply implies Trump is dedicated to putting Americans first.  Jobs, trade agreements, safety, world organizations, etc etc.

 

 

 

What a concept. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,113]

1 hour ago, trumpurethra said:

It's to stop the spread of the brown people lol. If it were truly what drodumbazz said the oompa Loompa would be pushing to bring unions back. Only thing the trumptards care about is b!tching about how the brown man takes their jobs and money.

MDC is 100% on point. All about the shareholders and capital now. People will see the light, the younger generation sees it, it is coming, workers are growing tired of corporate BS. But it probably won't happen in our lifetime. 

Probably once the crusty old fockers die off is when it will happen. A shift in importance from capital back to labor.

Well, if you want to pretend that this is all true, you're free to that.

[vuduchile 1,941]

13 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

 

Just spitballing....but if the CEO wants to earn more, then the company needs to be successful enough for the employees to earn more. No? There is no cap. Make the company more valuable and let everyone benefit.

But maybe if we didn't want to tie the CEO salary to the salary of others, we could create a scale based on number of employees and percentage of profits, and that was a CEO's cap in pay? In theory, earn more profits and make more money...but that may just be a round about way of getting us back to CEOs earning 300x as much as the average employee. Unsure.

Good thoughts.  I'm just not in favor of legislating compensation of any type. Whether it be minimum wage, union scale or CEO salary, let the free market decide and allow people to be paid as much as they can negotiate.