The policy and politics of Trumpism

NationalTitles17

Super Moderator
May 25, 2003
17,071
6,479
253
Mountainous Northern California
I realize you're being a bit snarky, but be sure to read the subsequent post and don't misinterpret a link to the WSJ as me advocating laissez-faire.
Sarcastic is my prefered adjective. Ignoring that and using snarky instead is a microaggression. ;)

I lean toward laissez-faire but pragmatic enough to understand that minimal regulations are needed to help prevent fraud and the like. I don't agree with Trump on trade, mainly because free trade always leads to great things Even when not for every single person, overall the results are great unless you happen to be one of the people adversely effected and don't have the ability to adapt to something better (not always a failure of the person). Protectionism was the precursor to the Boston Tea Party.

I didn't misinterpret and didn't really expect you to believe in the free market, though by and large you should more than you seem to. Same for the protectionist populist republicans.

The free market will never be perfect, but the freest markets in world history have made the USA the richest country in world history. Pretty good track record. And before we go there, no, crony capitalism isn't the free market.
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,072
976
128
I [am] pragmatic enough to understand that minimal regulations are needed to help prevent fraud and the like.
I think this is where most reasonable people fall; the differences lie in the definition of "minimal." I'll take net neutrality as an example, since Trump's team has foolishly indicated a desire to reverse course on this.

1) ISPs like Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, and others have slowly instituted data caps on all customers. Both on mobile and at home.
2) They also have policies where certain kinds of internet traffic are exempt from these data caps. They tend to favor traffic from websites and programming that are owned by the ISP. AT&T owns DirecTV, and streaming its programming on their network doesn't count toward one's data cap. T-mobile has agreements with music and video services that pay the ISP to be exempt from its data caps. If AT&T is allowed to continue unchallenged, then expect Comcast, which owns NBC, to start prioritizing its networking over others.
3) This kind of vertical lock-in to a single company's internet access and networking is hugely anti-competitive. It violates the core tenet of an open internet which is that we, the users and consumers, should determine who wins and loses in this market of information, not the internet monopoly you happen to live beneath.
4) Left unregulated, the business incentive is to continue these undoubtedly profitable anti-consumer practices. What happens when Comcast decides you need to get your news from NBC only, and restricts user traffic to the NYT or WSJ? At that point it's no longer just anti-competitive, it's anti-democratic.

Now, I realize ISPs are a largely monopolistic enterprise, and most people oppose unregulated monopolies. I bring it up because I think it's an incredibly important issue, and because Trump has flipped 180 degrees on his view of ISPs like AT&T (specifically their enormous and pending Time Warner merger) since the election.

But I would make the same argument for financial regulation. Fraud like we recently saw with Wells Fargo, to me, underscores the need for more oversight with regard to financial institutions. When their calculated business mistakes can lead the country into recession -- a consequence from which these CEOs and high-level decision-makers are largely immune -- I don't feel a laissez-faire approach is acceptable. Don't get me wrong: I think competition is among the best motivators for progress and achievement, and the marketplace usually does this well. But I also think regulation is necessary in cases where the Venn diagram of business success and consumer benefit don't overlap.
 

selmaborntidefan

Hall of Fame
Mar 31, 2000
21,503
1,503
273
50
Wishing I was somewhere close to Duluth with a sli
You know, a lot of people say one thing on the campaign trail and then another once they're elected.

I'd think anyone who voted for Carter, Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43, or Obama would understand that and accept it.

(I'm sure it happened before, but I'm not that old).

He said one thing before you had sex and another afterward. Happens all the time.

She said she was on the pill, oops, she lied, and you're on the hook for it.


Happens every hour of human existence.
 

CullmanTide

Hall of Fame
Jan 7, 2008
6,086
1
46
Cullman, Al
Ha ha...woof!

I'm just enjoying reading the rebuttal posts to Charmin's OP.

In reality....nothing to defend....Trump is backing up his campaign platform, regardless of those picking nits..

The guy's a workaholic....I hope he stays healthy is all I can say! :p
He certainly isn't sitting home waiting for others to provide for him.
 

dvldog

Hall of Fame
Sep 20, 2005
6,382
27
58
68
Virginia
Trump meeting with Al Gore to discuss climate change......

I thought Trump was a Republican...what the heck is going on?!?!?
He's probably getting tips on the internet from the master.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Tide1986

Suspended
Nov 22, 2008
15,670
0
0
Birmingham, AL
Regarding the 35% tariff, I'd like to see someone compare and contrast such a tariff (to incentivize the retention and creation of onshore jobs) with a carbon tax (to incentivize the creation and use of alternative energy sources).
 

Wilson Monroe

1st Team
Jul 19, 2016
517
0
0
Trump was a Democrat for far too long to fully expect him to go to a completely Conservative platform. I expect that he will use some of the old version of moderate Democrat policies (before they swung really far into left field) for some of his policies. I'm all for creating jobs and saving the ones we have. There will be a lot of mistakes made along the way for sure, but thankful that someone is at least trying. 95 million out of the labor force is unsustainable.

I noticed another story that I admittedly did not read, speaking of things that are shameful in government. Said that Social Security benefits were going to be slashed. I saved it to read later really hoping that was just hyperbole. Taking people's money that they paid in their entire working life infuriates me to no end.
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,072
976
128
I noticed another story that I admittedly did not read, speaking of things that are shameful in government. Said that Social Security benefits were going to be slashed. I saved it to read later really hoping that was just hyperbole. Taking people's money that they paid in their entire working life infuriates me to no end.
Paul Ryan has wanted to gut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid for a very long time. He was never coy about this. And now he probably can.
 

Bamaro

Hall of Fame
Oct 19, 2001
22,152
1,617
173
Jacksonville, Md USA
Paul Ryan has wanted to gut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid for a very long time. He was never coy about this. And now he probably can.
They either have to cut benefits, raise revenues or both. They need to decide and act soon. And smoke and mirrors like trickle-down will not help.
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,072
976
128
They either have to cut benefits, raise revenues or both. They need to decide and act soon. And smoke and mirrors like trickle-down will not help.
Undoubtedly. But the plan just presented cuts pretty much every benefit. And by continuing to exempt capital gains and dividends from providing funds to SS, it transfers the majority of the cost to normal Americans who gain most of their income through payroll, and away from the very wealthy. Not that this should surprise anyone.
 

Latest threads

TideFansStore.com - Get your gear!

Purchases made through our TideFansStore.com link may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.