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

Post by 75j » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 4:40 AM UTC

albinofrenchy wrote: post #215

ainot wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which low-ability individuals suffer from illusory superiority High brow smack (condescension) like that and "basket of deplorables" are what America revolted against. If the liberal left was truly smart, why did they allow the president to run up more national debt than all presidents prior...combined?

> why did they allow the president to run up more national debt than all presidents prior...combined This isn't true even on the face of it; it went up from ~10 trillion to ~18 trillion. And aside from that; the national debt exploded due to the economic collapse that happened months before Obama was sworn in. The accusation is wrong on the facts and disingenuous.

Post by jack9 » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 4:40 AM UTC

akiselev wrote: post #155

semiel wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Canada has a variation on this law. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/R-4.5/page-1.html#h-...

It may look similar on the surface but Trump's proposal is nothing like the Canadian red tape reduction laws. The latter are focused on reducing the administrative burden of demonstrating regulatory compliance but it does not impact the regulations themselves except as a last resort. The vast majority of the time, compliance can be streamlined to offset the extra cost of new regulations. What Trump wants to do is cut…

Post by finiter » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 4:41 AM UTC

Dagwoodie wrote: post #477

matt4077 wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody agrees on thet, except in the very narrow definition of everyone knowing at least one regulation they'd personally abolish (the lefty choosing marijuana, the right "all of them") I've investigated the same complaint for EU law and all you can find is bizarre propaganda making ridiculous claims in bad faith – they make the regs sound absurd, but you can find out the real purpose within half a minute of googling…

Nobody has ever promoted removing all regulations, not even Republicans.

Post by randiantech » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 4:43 AM UTC

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…

Post by finiter » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 4:43 AM UTC

cyberferret wrote: post #311

trav4225 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No offense, but the overwhelming majority of them are not (IMO).

Fair enough. But then shouldn't the process me "Lets sit down and look at these, and take out the ones that are just not applicable nowadays?". This tit-for-tat style bargaining usually just ends up with both sides compromising or making rash decisions which may end up with the baby being thrown out with the bath water...