Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf] • Hacker News Board

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

#951

Post by JadeNB » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 4:39 PM UTC

dagw wrote: post #886

adamgravitis wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reducing the number, length and complexity of regulation is a valid goal, and that hasn't changed in thousands of years: "The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government." - Tacitus

Reducing the number, length and complexity of regulation is a valid goal Sure, but the priority order should be: complexity,length,number. Simply concatenating 50 regulations into one super-regulation is not a win.

> Sure, but the priority order should be: complexity,length,number.

I think that, of these three, reducing complexity is the only one to which we should directly aspire; reducing the length and number of regulations is, I think, helpful only to the extent that it reduces, or at least doesn't increase, complexity.

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

#952

Post by walshemj » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 4:52 PM UTC

_pmf_ wrote: post #905

walshemj wrote: post #898

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can see he has never held elected office Its going to require an amendment to the constitution (which takes decades) and from experience a newbie MP Congress man etc will need one entire cycle to get to grips with the system and become effective. Having inexperienced elected representatives just gives more power to the executive - which is not what I think Trump wanted.

One could argue that in the long run, this will lead to a simplification of the legislative process.

And this is a good thing how? there are technical reforms that could be a good thing ie no unrelated amendments to motions (bills) which would stop pork being added to unrelated bills.

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

#953

Post by JadeNB » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:11 PM UTC

ubernostrum wrote: post #782

postcarnival wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so what, then let's offer solutions and try to get them enacted? why all the armchair bitching on this site as if everyone is an expert just because they write code? what he did is nothing short of monumental and he WANTS to help America. If everyone is so damn smart then get involved and suggest changes. It's not like he's a fucking robot that is going to sit back and count how many marble statues he has in his gard…

Want money out of presidential politics? Make everybody run using only the presidential-campaign fund. You know, that one that you check the box on your tax return to give a couple bucks to? As for Congress, we also already have a good fix, we just never got around to passing it. Congressional politics are full of money because the districts are too large, on average. The districts are too large because in the 50 sta…

> So in 1992 a random university student discovered one of the two "forgotten" amendments and that it was still legislatively "live" -- it would take effect if enough states ratified them. He campaigned hard and got the amendment (which says any increase in salary for members of Congress doesn't take effect until after the next House election) ratified, as the 27th amendment.

A minor correction to this fascinating story: according to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seventh_Amendment_to_th...), Gregory Watson, a UT Austin student, discovered it in 1982. The significance of the year 1992 (in this connection) is that that's when it actually became part of the Constitution.

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

#954

Post by emagdnim2100 » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:22 PM UTC

RealGeek wrote: post #842

aliston wrote: post #832

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Virtually nobody making 10 million a year pays a 39% tax rate. They likely take most of their comp as stock and pay the long term capital gains rate. If they're in finance/VC, they are taking full advantage of carried interest. They have financial planners who structure their portfolio to favor low-tax investments. They form S-Corps and trust funds to defer tax liability, get paid in distributions, write off all sort…

> If you really want to go after the wealthy, you need to tax wealth, not ordinary income Trump has promised several more yuuge tax breaks and loopholes to wealthy: - Repeal alternative minimum tax - Repeal estate tax - Reduce capital gains tax - Reduce business tax rate to 15% eliminate the corporate alternative minimum tax. A wealthy individual could just make an LLC, and funnel all his money into it and enjoy the…

Making an LLC costs a few hundred bucks a year, so there's no reason any benefits would only accrue to wealthy individuals. To the extent that Trump's business tax proposals actually become law (the 15% business tax with no personal tax applied is a massive change from how it currently works), I predict a shift away from salaried employment and towards independent contracting / small business ownership. Tastes may vary on whether this is a good thing.

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

#955

Post by nommm-nommm » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:34 PM UTC

joesb wrote: post #873

elchief wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ban Western Union "send money back to family in Mexico" payments until Mexico agrees to pay for the wall: https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Pay_for_the_Wall.pdf

Do they also ban sending money to any other country where the guy in other country will send the money to Mexico?

I think you've just described money laundering.

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

#956

Post by nommm-nommm » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:43 PM UTC

johndoe90 wrote: post #893

>FIRST , cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum and order issued by President Obama. Does this mean the LGBT rights to marry will be taken back?

LGBTs didn't gain the rights to marry by executive order issued by Obama. They gained those rights largely by judicial review.

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

#957

Post by davesque » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:52 PM UTC

davesque wrote: post #770

grzm wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A significant percentage of voters in the US came to that conclusion, given the choices they had. I think it's likely pretty easy to find one of them to ask, if you're willing to listen.

Not the majority, though.

Correction, not technically the majority. He did not receive the most votes.

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

#958

Post by davesque » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:55 PM UTC

grzm wrote: post #777

davesque wrote: post #770

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the majority, though.

No candidate received a majority. Clinton (last I checked) is on pace to win a plurality of the popular vote — and that by a pretty slim margin. But that's beside the point. None of this justifies dismissing or insulting or generalizing the opinions of nearly half of the voting population. It's just not constructive. Like it or not, you live in a society with other people. We need to be able to live and work with eac…

But Trump's entire campaign was based on demonizing the other side with lies and disinformation and making unfair generalization about huge groups of people. And don't turn around and try to tell me that Clinton engaged in those kinds of tactics to the same degree. Are we just supposed to turn around and forget all of that, like none of it happened? No! That's like hoping your abusive father or husband will just suddenly start being more nice if you give him what he wants. When has that ever happened?

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

#959

Post by r_smart » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 5:57 PM UTC

postcarnival wrote: post #679

josho wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

so what, then let's offer solutions and try to get them enacted? why all the armchair bitching on this site as if everyone is an expert just because they write code? what he did is nothing short of monumental and he WANTS to help America. If everyone is so damn smart then get involved and suggest changes. It's not like he's a fucking robot that is going to sit back and count how many marble statues he has in his gard…

In the spirit of your comment, I'd like to suggest a massive income raise for elected federal officials. The leader of the free world makes something like $400k / year. If we were willing to give them more, it might reduce the temptation to take so much from lobbyists, and perhaps save us a lot of money in the long run. If I'm wrong, it won't cost much in the scheme of things anyway.

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

#960

Post by r_smart » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 6:00 PM UTC

legodt wrote: post #753

postcarnival wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so what, then let's offer solutions and try to get them enacted? why all the armchair bitching on this site as if everyone is an expert just because they write code? what he did is nothing short of monumental and he WANTS to help America. If everyone is so damn smart then get involved and suggest changes. It's not like he's a fucking robot that is going to sit back and count how many marble statues he has in his gard…

He wants to help white, cis male America. Trump has demonstrated great disdain for anybody who isn't that

Yes, for example one of the first things he talked about in his victory speech was helping out the inner cities. He must not know that there are high populations of black people in those areas.