Facist bullies company!

What trade off/promises were made to the company? Will other companies make similar overtures in the future in attempts to get the same type of deal? What affect would that have?
 
cawacko said:
What trade off/promises were made to the company? Will other companies make similar overtures in the future in attempts to get the same type of deal? What affect would that have?
Click to expand...

from link:
in exchange for keeping the factory running in Indianapolis, Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence are expected to reiterate their campaign pledges to be friendlier to businesses by easing regulations and overhauling the corporate tax code, according to a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump.
Click to expand...
win/win all around

while Carrier will forfeit some $65 million a year in savings the move was supposed to generate, that’s a small price to pay to avoid the public relations damage from moving the jobs as well as a possible threat to United Technologies’ far-larger military contracting business....
Click to expand...
the art of the deal....excellent *Mr. Burns voice*

mr_burns.jpg~c200
 
possible threat to United Technologies’ far-larger military contracting business.

something we dont use enough.
 
tsuke said:
possible threat to United Technologies’ far-larger military contracting business.

something we dont use enough.
Click to expand...
it's what it takes..rad the link -it's very thorough about exchanging the business climate etc.

Also Trump can dangle de-regulations as carrots.
Whatever anyone thinks about Trump he loves to deal -and he can deal with the benefits to business -which should improve GDP for all of us.
 
cawacko said:
I'm not buying that. There was some type of deal made where this company received something. And other companies will take note.
Click to expand...
part of the deal was what tsuke posted - access to MIC contracts..read the link good brother.
There may be more then that(?) -but there are macro-economic forces that come into play as well as contracts
 
"Also Trump can dangle de-regulations as carrots." a #8
Click to expand...
A "carrot" is a "usually tapering, elongate, fleshy orange root of this plant, eaten as a vegetable" *.

So I deduce the use of the word here is simile.

Such grammatical forms are intrinsically vague, apparently deliberately so in this case.

I thought "regulations" were the purview of congress. So by what dint of plausibility would the president elect "dangle" such "carrot"?

fyi for congress to modify such regulations would require cooperation and coordination of both houses of congress.
And while the LEADERS of both houses are Republican, our senate currently requires a "super-majority" that's 60%.

And while the GOP does control a simple majority, it lacks the super-majority that would be necessary for such "carrots".

AND!!

Majority Leader McConnell (R-KY) is the one that negotiated Senator Reid out of exercising "the nuclear option".
And it is precisely that "nuclear option" the GOP would have to exercise in the senate to overrule conservative Democrat opposition.

* Excerpted from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition © 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.
 
anatta said:
it's what it takes..rad the link -it's very thorough about exchanging the business climate etc.

Also Trump can dangle de-regulations as carrots.
Whatever anyone thinks about Trump he loves to deal -and he can deal with the benefits to business -which should improve GDP for all of us.
Click to expand...

I'm really interested in seeing Trump the dealer in action. As a president he's historically unique---just not in terms of race or gender: He's a true outsider, a billionaire and a business man.

Here comes some ifs lol. If he revives the economy and brings real jobs back and everything else remains equal [no significant foreign policy mistakes or etc] there will be no getting rid of him no matter how much nonsense he Tweets.

Assuming he wants to run again. I don't know why I say that, it's just something in my gut.

Reason being, it's the old axiom, 'it's the economy stupid'.
 
cawacko said:
I'm not buying that. There was some type of deal made where this company received something. And other companies will take note.
Click to expand...

perhaps they did it to avoid the 100% tax on the value of any products they manufactured in Mexico if brought back into the US.........
 
Right said:
Yeah that's right. Always assume the worst from your fellow Republican.
Click to expand...

I ask the question because I am a republican. Liberals see headlines politicians give them and ask no questions. A republican will ask about the details of the deal and what are the future (unintended) consequences of the deal. I see nothing wrong with asking for the specifics of the deal
 
sear said:
A "carrot" is a "usually tapering, elongate, fleshy orange root of this plant, eaten as a vegetable" *.

So I deduce the use of the word here is simile.

Such grammatical forms are intrinsically vague, apparently deliberately so in this case.

I thought "regulations" were the purview of congress. So by what dint of plausibility would the president elect "dangle" such "carrot"?

fyi for congress to modify such regulations would require cooperation and coordination of both houses of congress.
And while the LEADERS of both houses are Republican, our senate currently requires a "super-majority" that's 60%.

And while the GOP does control a simple majority, it lacks the super-majority that would be necessary for such "carrots".

AND!!

Majority Leader McConnell (R-KY) is the one that negotiated Senator Reid out of exercising "the nuclear option".
And it is precisely that "nuclear option" the GOP would have to exercise in the senate to overrule conservative Democrat opposition.

* Excerpted from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition © 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.
Click to expand...

the executive runs the agencies. The Congress makes the laws and sets up the agencies ( most of the time)-
but the regulations come thru the agencies.
For ex/the EPA is demanded by Congress ( thru the Clean Waters Act) but the scope and reach of the regs are determined by the POTUS.

Trump can determine how the regs are enforced ( scope and size)
A good ex.is the recent over-reach by Obama of WOTUS in the EPA

EPA’s WOTUS Rule Only Muddies the Waters
http://www.eei.org/resourcesandmedia/energynews/Pages/EPA’s WOTUS Rule Only Muddies the Waters .aspx
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
I'm really interested in seeing Trump the dealer in action. As a president he's historically unique---just not in terms of race or gender: He's a true outsider, a billionaire and a business man.

Here comes some ifs lol. If he revives the economy and brings real jobs back and everything else remains equal [no significant foreign policy mistakes or etc] there will be no getting rid of him no matter how much nonsense he Tweets.

Assuming he wants to run again. I don't know why I say that, it's just something in my gut.

Reason being, it's the old axiom, 'it's the economy stupid'.
Click to expand...
absolutely agree.
Obama was an aspirational POTUS. Fist black man " post partisan" most transparent"- characteristics of a new deal type.

Trump is the nuts and bolts guy. the guy who is supposed to get under the hood and tune up the economy.
Do I care what my mechanic says -or what he does? If my car is running better -he's a successful mechanic
 
I have no doubt Trump utilized the entire portfolio of business the parent company has with the US Government. I am sure he also looked @ how much business the Federal Government does with Carrier. I highly doubt "promises" or "threats" were made but am equally sure a good businessman would point out his/her direction. What I mean by that is I am sure Trump spoke of lowering the Corporate Tax and building up the military, a business they are in, and looked and spoke to the whole and not the part.
I guarantee the Board of Directors at the parent company look at the whole and not part also.
So I doubt Trump made any promises but used the above scenario to get his way with Carrier. Those poor bastards had no choice being stuck between the parent company BoD and the President Elect.
Welcome to business 101. There are no dangled carrots, nor threats. Just stick with the facts of the business environment.....the other side can figure it out pretty quick.
 
#16

I'm not denying the president's executive authority.

But ours is not a monarchy. It's a democratic republic.

And while there certainly is room for executive discretion and prioritization (Obama on illegal immigrant deportations for obvious example) there are also limits.

If most of what Trump has promised Carrier to stay Stateside, is State rather than federal, then why didn't the governor (the CEO of the State) extend the offer?

I don't know which Carrier facility is at issue. Is it in Indiana? Who was that State's governor at the time the deal was negotiated? Trump's VP? Pence?
"When the picture doesn't make any sense, a piece of the puzzle is missing." psychologist Joy Browne
Click to expand...
This picture doesn't make complete sense to me. I suspect there's something else going on here.

One obvious question:
Such intervention in matters of a corporate board seems quite socialist to me.
If President Elect Trump is willing to do this kind of thing, will it be a significant feature of a 4 year Trump administration?
 
sear said:
A "carrot" is a "usually tapering, elongate, fleshy orange root of this plant, eaten as a vegetable" *.

So I deduce the use of the word here is simile.

Such grammatical forms are intrinsically vague, apparently deliberately so in this case.

I thought "regulations" were the purview of congress. So by what dint of plausibility would the president elect "dangle" such "carrot"?

fyi for congress to modify such regulations would require cooperation and coordination of both houses of congress.
And while the LEADERS of both houses are Republican, our senate currently requires a "super-majority" that's 60%.

And while the GOP does control a simple majority, it lacks the super-majority that would be necessary for such "carrots".

AND!!

Majority Leader McConnell (R-KY) is the one that negotiated Senator Reid out of exercising "the nuclear option".
And it is precisely that "nuclear option" the GOP would have to exercise in the senate to overrule conservative Democrat opposition.

* Excerpted from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition © 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.
Click to expand...

Bull shit. A great many of the governments overreaching regulations can be suspended with a simple POTUS signature. What? Fearful that none of the fear mongering propaganda will be effective once the people go back to work with wages that eliminates the Keynesian policies used by democrats for almost 100 years with the result being a shrinking labor force, a fixed poverty class of US citizens used as liberal voter base and a credit card bill approaching 20 Trillion dollars?

Example...the majority to the EPA regulations that have cost this nation millions of jobs had no congressional oversight whatsoever. Now...the projected pipeline will be another economic and labor force boom. This administration will hit the ground running. Lower taxes on the working and middle class....no Obama Care mandates (i.e., hidden taxes and wealth redistribution)....the EPA will be neutered allowing energy prices to be cheaper to the consumer.

If I wer
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top