Page 2 of 4 [ 59 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,461
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

08 May 2017, 6:39 pm

Drake wrote:
Oh, on topic, he didn't take a salary for being president.


Then where is his current salary coming from exactly, perhaps a source to confirm this would be appropriate.


_________________
We won't go back.


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,091
Location: temperate zone

08 May 2017, 6:55 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Drake wrote:
Oh, on topic, he didn't take a salary for being president.


Then where is his current salary coming from exactly, perhaps a source to confirm this would be appropriate.

He's a billionaire. He doesnt need a salary.



Campin_Cat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 25,953
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.

08 May 2017, 7:05 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Drake wrote:
Oh, on topic, he didn't take a salary for being president.

Then where is his current salary coming from exactly, perhaps a source to confirm this would be appropriate.

Well, for ONE, I imagine the interest on his bank accounts, ALONE, would choke a horse. As for a source: It's common knowledge----Google it.....




_________________
White female; age 59; diagnosed Aspie.
I use caps for emphasis----I'm NOT angry or shouting. I use caps like others use italics, underline, or bold.
"What we know is a drop; what we don't know, is an ocean." (Sir Isaac Newton)


The_Blonde_Alien
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 863
Location: Puerto Rico

08 May 2017, 7:24 pm

Campin_Cat wrote:
The_Blonde_Alien wrote:
Campin_Cat wrote:
He kept Carrier Air Conditioners from moving to Mexico----thus, saving about 1,000 (+/-) jobs.

Why is it that the butthurt SJW's don't mention things like that? I mean if they are so "objective" and "accepting" then why don't they bother mention some of the positives about Trump!?

Cuz that would take the focus off of their belly-aching----they want the only thing that people hear, to be "WAAAAAAAH, Trump is soooooo HORRIBLE!!"----and, talking about him saving jobs, doesn't help their case.



And the worst part about thit is that they usually resort to terrorism! Is it just me or did ISIS brainwashed them?


_________________
Quote:
Never put off till tomorrow what you can do today

-Thomas Jefferson


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,461
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

08 May 2017, 7:37 pm

Campin_Cat wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Drake wrote:
Oh, on topic, he didn't take a salary for being president.

Then where is his current salary coming from exactly, perhaps a source to confirm this would be appropriate.

Well, for ONE, I imagine the interest on his bank accounts, ALONE, would choke a horse. As for a source: It's common knowledge----Google it.....



He said that, but it would seem he wasn't able to turn it down
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/after-pledging-donate-salary-trump-declines-release-proof-n732466
he's said he will donate the money, but haven't heard if he actually has done so yet, though not sure what sort of causes he'd be donating the money to.


_________________
We won't go back.


Campin_Cat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 25,953
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.

09 May 2017, 9:03 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
Campin_Cat wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Drake wrote:
Oh, on topic, he didn't take a salary for being president.

Then where is his current salary coming from exactly, perhaps a source to confirm this would be appropriate.

Well, for ONE, I imagine the interest on his bank accounts, ALONE, would choke a horse. As for a source: It's common knowledge----Google it.....

He said that, but it would seem he wasn't able to turn it down
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/after-pledging-donate-salary-trump-declines-release-proof-n732466
he's said he will donate the money, but haven't heard if he actually has done so yet, though not sure what sort of causes he'd be donating the money to.

From your own article:

NBC News wrote:
The Constitution, however, requires that the president receive a salary, and that it not be reduced during his term.

So, I was wrong for thinking he wasn't taking a salary.

As for him not divulging to whom he's donated his salary----or, IF he has donated: Unless there's a law that says he MUST divulge, he hasn't done anything wrong, IMO.





_________________
White female; age 59; diagnosed Aspie.
I use caps for emphasis----I'm NOT angry or shouting. I use caps like others use italics, underline, or bold.
"What we know is a drop; what we don't know, is an ocean." (Sir Isaac Newton)


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

09 May 2017, 11:05 am

The_Blonde_Alien wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
Not to derail this thread, but are you serious?

I'm genuinely interested to know what you find inspiring about her.

As far as I can see, Clinton is a politician in the worst sense of the word.

And if you'll read the article I linked to in my thread about "understanding obama-trump voters" you'll see that there is some compelling research to suggest that the dems will never regain power if they cling to Clinton style policies.


Jacoby wrote:
Hillary inspired only opposition, she had a knack for it.



Campin_Cat wrote:
I agree with the others----Hillary was in no way, shape, or form, "inspirational"! !


Wow I can't believe a lot of people here got upset when Walrus said that Hilary was "ispriational". It feels good to know that I am not the only one who felt suspicious about Hilary's motives. :D


See, we can find common ground when we try!! !
:D


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

09 May 2017, 11:18 am

The_Blonde_Alien wrote:
Campin_Cat wrote:
He kept Carrier Air Conditioners from moving to Mexico----thus, saving about 1,000 (+/-) jobs.


Why is it that the butthurt SJW's don't mention things like that? I mean if they are so "objective" and "accepting" then why don't they bother mention some of the positives about Trump!?


See, he didn't really save those jobs.

I did industrial automation for 20 years before I went back to school to become a professional SJW.

Here's what's gonna happen.... Since they cannot move those jobs, they'll just automate them out of existence. I've seen it and helped do it many times.

It's like those textile mill jobs you occasionally hear about coming back to American. Those mills that got off-shored in the 90's employed hundreds of people. The new mills that are coming back are fully automated and employ a few dozen techs--people with at least an Associates of Science degree.

The days of good blue collar jobs for high school grads are over and they are NEVER coming back.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


SpreadsheetMaster
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

Joined: 3 Apr 2017
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 129
Location: Seattle WA

09 May 2017, 11:21 am

... I've got nothing. He withdrew from TPP but basically wants to do all the same things, just while not calling it the TPP.



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

09 May 2017, 11:34 am

SpreadsheetMaster wrote:
... I've got nothing. He withdrew from TPP but basically wants to do all the same things, just while not calling it the TPP.


Well, that's not necessarily a bad thing. One of the goals of TPP was to block China from dominating Asia economically. That still needs to happen one way or another.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,461
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

09 May 2017, 12:14 pm

Campin_Cat wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Campin_Cat wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Drake wrote:
Oh, on topic, he didn't take a salary for being president.

Then where is his current salary coming from exactly, perhaps a source to confirm this would be appropriate.

Well, for ONE, I imagine the interest on his bank accounts, ALONE, would choke a horse. As for a source: It's common knowledge----Google it.....

He said that, but it would seem he wasn't able to turn it down
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/after-pledging-donate-salary-trump-declines-release-proof-n732466
he's said he will donate the money, but haven't heard if he actually has done so yet, though not sure what sort of causes he'd be donating the money to.

From your own article:

NBC News wrote:
The Constitution, however, requires that the president receive a salary, and that it not be reduced during his term.

So, I was wrong for thinking he wasn't taking a salary.

As for him not divulging to whom he's donated his salary----or, IF he has donated: Unless there's a law that says he MUST divulge, he hasn't done anything wrong, IMO.


True, however if he does not divulge then there is no way of knowing if he's really donating it, or if that was a lie just to make him look good to his supporters. Might not be 'wrong' not to divulge, but if he wants people to be certain he is in fact donating the money it would probably be in his best interest to prove it.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,461
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

09 May 2017, 12:17 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
The_Blonde_Alien wrote:
Campin_Cat wrote:
He kept Carrier Air Conditioners from moving to Mexico----thus, saving about 1,000 (+/-) jobs.


Why is it that the butthurt SJW's don't mention things like that? I mean if they are so "objective" and "accepting" then why don't they bother mention some of the positives about Trump!?


See, he didn't really save those jobs.

I did industrial automation for 20 years before I went back to school to become a professional SJW.

Here's what's gonna happen.... Since they cannot move those jobs, they'll just automate them out of existence. I've seen it and helped do it many times.

It's like those textile mill jobs you occasionally hear about coming back to American. Those mills that got off-shored in the 90's employed hundreds of people. The new mills that are coming back are fully automated and employ a few dozen techs--people with at least an Associates of Science degree.

The days of good blue collar jobs for high school grads are over and they are NEVER coming back.

That's a good point...bring back the factories, give the jobs to automated robots then smile and wave at all the supporters who actually believe you have brought jobs back for them and are some kind of job hero.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,461
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

09 May 2017, 12:24 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
SpreadsheetMaster wrote:
... I've got nothing. He withdrew from TPP but basically wants to do all the same things, just while not calling it the TPP.


Well, that's not necessarily a bad thing. One of the goals of TPP was to block China from dominating Asia economically. That still needs to happen one way or another.


I don't get it why is that our business...unless china is doing something terribly internationally illegal to do it that somehow binds us to take action due to international agreements. I mean what is the concern if China dominates Asia economically exactly?


_________________
We won't go back.


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

09 May 2017, 1:09 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
SpreadsheetMaster wrote:
... I've got nothing. He withdrew from TPP but basically wants to do all the same things, just while not calling it the TPP.


Well, that's not necessarily a bad thing. One of the goals of TPP was to block China from dominating Asia economically. That still needs to happen one way or another.


I don't get it why is that our business...unless china is doing something terribly internationally illegal to do it that somehow binds us to take action due to international agreements. I mean what is the concern if China dominates Asia economically exactly?


As I stated in another thread, the Chinese are anti-democratic, authoritarian, and have a terrible record on human rights. A strong China is bad for everyone including us in the long run. Also, all things being equal, even if china was run by benevolent unicorns, I'd rather see wealth from Asian trade come to America.

Global trade is not bad, it is the uneven distribution of wealth that is hurting most Americans, and than is a matter of public policy that can be changed.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

09 May 2017, 1:35 pm

He put a stop to the illegal societal security administration gun ban and appointed a good replacement Supreme Court judge.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,461
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

09 May 2017, 3:24 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
SpreadsheetMaster wrote:
... I've got nothing. He withdrew from TPP but basically wants to do all the same things, just while not calling it the TPP.


Well, that's not necessarily a bad thing. One of the goals of TPP was to block China from dominating Asia economically. That still needs to happen one way or another.


I don't get it why is that our business...unless china is doing something terribly internationally illegal to do it that somehow binds us to take action due to international agreements. I mean what is the concern if China dominates Asia economically exactly?


As I stated in another thread, the Chinese are anti-democratic, authoritarian, and have a terrible record on human rights. A strong China is bad for everyone including us in the long run. Also, all things being equal, even if china was run by benevolent unicorns, I'd rather see wealth from Asian trade come to America.

Global trade is not bad, it is the uneven distribution of wealth that is hurting most Americans, and than is a matter of public policy that can be changed.


Well how would blocking them gaining more economic success help with any of that? And what exactly can the U.S do to even accomplish that anyways?...funnel money into other asian countries in an effort to help them catch up? ban any good from china coming to the U.S until they quit improving their economy? neither of those seem like very good ideas in the long run.

At least North Korea isn't economically dominating Asia....


_________________
We won't go back.