Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

assets.donaldjtrump.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#391

Post by josho »

noobermin wrote: post #113
knowaveragejoe wrote: post #43

Some of this sounds great - term limits on congress, a measure to reduce the revolving door effect of government officials going into lobbying. Some of it sounds ridiculous - for every new federal regulation, 2 existing regulations must be eliminated. How is that considered feasible by any rational person? It might sound great if you don't think too hard about it. The scariest things for me are the backing out of cli…

There's a lot of room to wonder about his trustworthiness given his record as a businessman, but even in this document, he doesn't address campaign finance reform. Congressional term-limits just consolidate power in the moneyed elites--the problems is not just the politicians, it's who corrupted them. If anything, this is a document to passify those moneyed interests who, unlike say Sheldon Adelson, worry about a Tru…

Trump railed against the system that allowed politicians to be bought. It turns out his solution is to term limit congress. Sounds like treating a symptom not the root cause.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#393

Post by Shivetya »

noobermin wrote: post #113
knowaveragejoe wrote: post #43

Some of this sounds great - term limits on congress, a measure to reduce the revolving door effect of government officials going into lobbying. Some of it sounds ridiculous - for every new federal regulation, 2 existing regulations must be eliminated. How is that considered feasible by any rational person? It might sound great if you don't think too hard about it. The scariest things for me are the backing out of cli…

There's a lot of room to wonder about his trustworthiness given his record as a businessman, but even in this document, he doesn't address campaign finance reform. Congressional term-limits just consolidate power in the moneyed elites--the problems is not just the politicians, it's who corrupted them. If anything, this is a document to passify those moneyed interests who, unlike say Sheldon Adelson, worry about a Tru…

Well let us be honest here. Electing politicians hasn't exactly been doing us that much good. If anything we have learned we cannot accept their word at all.

I am of the opinion that politicians corrupted themselves by selling their ability to shape the laws that govern the country and decide who is punished and who is rewarded.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#394

Post by hueving »

manicdee wrote: post #369
arcticfox wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's a little harsh. There's no first principle that the average citizen should know that says "clean coal" isn't possible. In fact, in 5-10 minutes of specifically looking at the topic I still don't see why you're mocking the concept.

Simple thermodynamics. We get energy from coal by burning it then extracting some of the heat. The waste products are basically carbon dioxide and heat. Clean coal is about capturing that carbon dioxide, which means spending energy to separate the CO2 from other gasses, then liquefy it. This sequestration process costs about 30% of the energy originally extracted from the coal. I fully support clean coal since it inc…

What you said implies that "clean coal" is indeed possible. It's just less efficient due to the capture. The GP implied that it's not a thing.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#395

Post by twblalock »

adt2bt wrote: post #3

Does anyone have an idea about the expected global response to the Secretary of the Treasury labeling China a currency manipulator?

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21709923-there-risk-trade...:

> He promises to label China a currency manipulator, but the only consequence of that would be that America would have to engage China in talks on the currency’s value, which would have no practical effect.

The downside is pissing off China, which the US needs to get along. There is no upside -- China won't change its behavior because of a label.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#396

Post by hueving »

_kst_ wrote: post #386
manicdee wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simple thermodynamics. We get energy from coal by burning it then extracting some of the heat. The waste products are basically carbon dioxide and heat. Clean coal is about capturing that carbon dioxide, which means spending energy to separate the CO2 from other gasses, then liquefy it. This sequestration process costs about 30% of the energy originally extracted from the coal. I fully support clean coal since it inc…

Some coal can be "cleaner" in the sense that it has, for example, less sulfur, and therefore creates less of certain pollutants when burned. But the real problem is the carbon, which when burned produces CO2. If you take the carbon out of coal, you don't have coal anymore.

No, "clean coal" refers to carbon capture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#397

Post by cmdrfred »

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #43

Some of this sounds great - term limits on congress, a measure to reduce the revolving door effect of government officials going into lobbying. Some of it sounds ridiculous - for every new federal regulation, 2 existing regulations must be eliminated. How is that considered feasible by any rational person? It might sound great if you don't think too hard about it. The scariest things for me are the backing out of cli…

You can find enough to pass nearly 10 via the first hit on Google.

http://www.freedomworks.org/content/19-ridiculous-federal-cr...

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#398

Post by sean_patel »

dougmany wrote: post #330

I am surprised nobody mentioned > cancel all federal funding to sanctuary cities >Some of the 31 American cities are Los Angeles (the first since 1979); Washington, D.C.; New York City (see also Illegal immigration in New York City); Jersey City; Berkeley, California; Coachella, California; Philadelphia; San Francisco; Santa Ana; San Jose; Oakland; Salt Lake City; Dallas; Houston; Detroit; Chicago; Salinas, Californi…

Despite being an independent left leaning liberal, I welcome this proposal, if they can actually implement it.

I see wide-spread exploitation of the "Sanctuary City" Law in San Francisco, especially in the Restaurants, Construction site and Janitorial jobs.

The Sanctuary Law, for those that don't know, forbids the Feds from asking employers about the immigration status of the employees / workers. This has caused 100s and 1000s of (mostly mexican and hispanic) undocumented immigrants to arrive and live in Sanctuary Cities (like San Francisco, LA, etc) and strain the local public services, while simultaneously being exploited by their employers.

Most get paid less than minimum wage (some even as low as 8$ / hour instead of the $13.75 min wage in SF), women get abused, sexually harassed etc (in restaurant jobs).

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#399

Post by pen2l »

ocschwar wrote: post #387
ben174 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can find more detail on how he plans to make Mexico pay for the wall here: https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Pay_for_the_Wall.pdf Specifically, he will threaten to disallow wire transfer of money from US to Mexico by non-citizens. Since that is a revenue source they greatly depend on, he suggests they'd rather fund the building of the wall. If they agree to fund the wall, then the ban on transfers will go away.

Well, that's one way to get all of Mexico hooked on Bitcoin.

Hah! Great point!

Now is the time for a startup to emerge that makes Bitcoin _EASY_! Easy like my-grandma-can-do-it easy. This actually finally might be the thing that makes BTC!

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#400

Post by michaelchisari »

sean_patel wrote: post #398
dougmany wrote: post #330

I am surprised nobody mentioned > cancel all federal funding to sanctuary cities >Some of the 31 American cities are Los Angeles (the first since 1979); Washington, D.C.; New York City (see also Illegal immigration in New York City); Jersey City; Berkeley, California; Coachella, California; Philadelphia; San Francisco; Santa Ana; San Jose; Oakland; Salt Lake City; Dallas; Houston; Detroit; Chicago; Salinas, Californi…

Despite being an independent left leaning liberal, I welcome this proposal, if they can actually implement it. I see wide-spread exploitation of the "Sanctuary City" Law in San Francisco, especially in the Restaurants, Construction site and Janitorial jobs. The Sanctuary Law, for those that don't know, forbids the Feds from asking employers about the immigration status of the employees / workers. This has caused 100s…

And you find that cutting federal funding entirely is a reasonable, proportional response?
Post reply on HN