The Reign of Trump

[Hermit]

The US could not create the infrastructure or provide the people with the relevant skill sets to move the means of production from China to the US. One contractor alone, manufacturing the hardware for Apple, employs 150,000 people in China for the contracts. One of its factories has a workforce of 60,000. Where in the US would you locate it? 60,000 is more than Detroit employs in what is left of the local car industry.

It's not about moving factories from China to the US. It's about building business and industry here. We don't have to manufacture party hats and plastic whistles here in the US to have a strong manufacturing sector.

Apple's 150,000 workers make party hats and plastic whistles?

And don't pretend you don't understand what I meant with moving the means of production from China to the US. Your slimy debating techniques are wearing a bit thin.

[Forty Two]

Just what a democracy needs, an asshole autocratic manager...

I got a verbal warning for dirty shoes one day, after trudging to work in thawing sludge. Apparently I should have had the foresight to bring a spare pair with me because the company had high standards even for its non-public-facing workers - and temps like me. Actually, I think popping my soaking shoes on the radiator in an enclosed office with poor ventilation didn't go down well with the regular staff, but nobody in the room had the bottle to tell me they didn't like the smell of my feet. I also got a rollocking for 'creeping round the office' and for 'stomping about'. If they could've issued a warning for breathing wrong I'm sure I would have got one. I was only there for two weeks. Sometimes managers aren't working to a plan of 'shaking things up' and keeping everyone on their toes - they're just arseholes.

Employees can be arseholes too - including temps.

Indeed, sometimes managers are just assholes. But, a guy like Trump has a methodology. He has strategy and tactics. This guy thinks about how to get things done, to get what he wants and to achieve his goals. He knows how to push buttons to get people to work. He can use carrots, but being very generous and buying the results he needs, or he can use the stick to get the results by incentivizing people to get things done. He knows that as a manager of an organization you set the tone. There are good managers and bad managers -- defining good and bad in this context as achieving the department or organization's goals within budget and on time (or better). Being lenient and nice and "kid gloves" with one's staff can be good or bad -- if it gets the right results, then it's good. One strategy for getting the results is to get the employees working their asses off to keep their jobs. It's one philosophy some folks hold - that nobody works harder than when their life depends on it.

That's the strategy being used when he talks about canceling a multibillion dollar contract. It's tone-setting. It's a declaration that people are going to be looking at the details. Sit up and smarten up, fuckers! And, it's also setting the tone for negotiation. When Trump or Trump's representatives are coming, he wants people to know that they're not taking any shit, and that he'll happily cancel multibillion dollar endeavors if he doesn't get what he wants. That can go a long way -- if you can make people believe that you aren't going to be moved or budged, then that alone can get you big concessions. If people come into rooms with you thinking that they can get you to cave in, then everybody who comes in will be asking for concessions - you'll be constantly fighting uphill.

[Forty Two]

The US could not create the infrastructure or provide the people with the relevant skill sets to move the means of production from China to the US. One contractor alone, manufacturing the hardware for Apple, employs 150,000 people in China for the contracts. One of its factories has a workforce of 60,000. Where in the US would you locate it? 60,000 is more than Detroit employs in what is left of the local car industry.

It's not about moving factories from China to the US. It's about building business and industry here. We don't have to manufacture party hats and plastic whistles here in the US to have a strong manufacturing sector.

Apple's 150,000 workers make party hats and plastic whistles?

And don't pretend you don't understand what I meant with moving the means of production from China to the US. Your slimy debating techniques are wearing a bit thin.

Oh stop it with your fucking nonsense. "Slimy debating techniques" - fuck off.

No, they don't make whistles - but the point is that it's not about picking up factories and moving them to the US. That's mischaracterizing what needs to be done. What we need is to stop the constant loss of manufacturing and industry -- and to have some increases in heavy industry and manufacturing sectors so that we can shore up our industrial base.

[Forty Two]

Boeing can just tell Trump go fuck yourself. You can fly the old plane and hand it to the next president. It can fly fine the 4 years Trump is running things. President Al Franken can sign the deal Jan 1 of 2021.

Boeing has always been free to do that. But, they haven't. And, they won't. They're business people. They're in this game. They're not doing anyone a favor by getting a nearly $4 billion contract two build the most prestigious aircraft in the world. The one paying the money to order a product has some bit of power in the negotiations. It's not a one-way street. But, yes, either party may tell the other to fuck themselves.

[Brian Peacock]

The US could not create the infrastructure or provide the people with the relevant skill sets to move the means of production from China to the US. One contractor alone, manufacturing the hardware for Apple, employs 150,000 people in China for the contracts. One of its factories has a workforce of 60,000. Where in the US would you locate it? 60,000 is more than Detroit employs in what is left of the local car industry.

It's not about moving factories from China to the US. It's about building business and industry here. We don't have to manufacture party hats and plastic whistles here in the US to have a strong manufacturing sector.

Who are America going to sell their manufactured goods to when the greater inherent productivity costs are going to be passed to the consumer - or do you think the government can subsidise the manufacturing sector while wages and resource costs level out in the rest of the world?

LOL - how quickly the leftists become economic conservatives. That's the exact argument conservatives make against "fair trade" leftist activists, who want higher tariffs and taxes.

My political compass isn't ideologically nailed down and I get rather bored with the 'you lefties' dismissals. Seth was of the opinion that anyone who queried, challenged, or disagreed with his proclamations was a rampant ideological lefty - I'd rather talk issues.

If we expand into industries that are of the first world variety, then the US can compete just fine. And, we can also compete in the raw materials industries - power, lumber, mining and minerals -- we can also refine the shit out of petroleum (just need to let the oil companies build some new refineries) - that kind of stuff. And, we should be huge into aerospace, and space travel, and nuclear power plants and the like.

OK, but you're rather shifting the goalposts there aren't you? What about those Chinese factories with 60,000 employees churning high-volumes of high-quality components for Apple and the like at low-cost? What about cheap imported consumables, manufactured items like electronic goods, clothing, construction materials, automobiles, and what about the elephant in the room, cheap imported labour? To bring all that home is going to take more that cheaper gas, scraping the top off a few more mountains to get at low-grade coal, and chopping down a bit more forest.

I can't see many Western leaders initiating, let alone successfully implementing, the kind of long-term economic plan you're suggesting at the moment. Shareholders want to see an increase in their dividend payments by the end of the financial year, and voters want to see an increase in their wages and/or prospects before the next campaign season starts. Did Trumpeteers really think they were voting for a 20-year+ restructuring of their economy? Does Trump really think that 10 years of hardship and insecurity and 10 years of rebuilding is a price US citizens are going to pay to make America great again? Seems to me that voters mostly believed that a little business-friendly remedial tinkering with the tax code, regulation, and labour laws, and sending all the foreigners home of course, would surely salve all ills almost instantly.

I don't care what Trumpeteers thought they were voting for. I've been consistent about what I thought we needed, and I've said it many times. The US is on the cusp of forever losing manufacturing and heavy industry, and that is a death knell for a first world power. We may have passed the tipping point already. It is dangerous for the US and the world to have our only major industries be oil, coal and the military, and the rest be service and food and paper-shuffling. That's actually a recipe for massive military conflicts around the world, as our main bargaining chip is "we will kill you if you don't give us what you want."

Yeah, it's going to be hard on the American people - but that's a price you're willing to pay.

Here's a thought. The US economy is built on two things: oil transactions in dollars, and military hardware. Quite literally, an America at war is good for US business and the US economy. So where do you think Trump's first economy-boosting conflict will take place?

In the meantime, what do you think is the likelihood of Trump putting together a workable 20-year economic-regeneration plan and implementing it?

[Tero]

Trump will do some redecorating of the oval office, tweeting, golf and arm twisting a few deals for show. Nothing of significance. He will cut taxes and spend a little and add debt. Congress will tire of him in 2 years.

Ding ding ding! New election in 2020. Even Jimmy Carter or John Kerry would beat cranky old Trump, after that first bypass surgery.

[Forty Two]

I definitely saw Hillary as the greater risk to get us into a military conflict in the next four years. Much higher likelihood that she will pull the trigger than Trump. Trump viewing this in dollars and cents is a good, antiwar, thing, because he is not one of the ones with his bankroll in the military industrial complex. He's going to make deals, and to use another Godfather quote "blood is a big expense."

I don't know the answer to your question about a 20 year plan. I doubt he'll put together an overt, written plan like that. But, I think he can set some things in motion. If he achieves just some of his main goals -- like GDP growth of maybe 3%, and some increase in business and industry in the US, renegotiating NAFTA, and putting the brakes on illegal immigration -- he will go down in history as a successful President. It's not an "all or nothing" prospect.

[Forty Two]

Trump will do some redecorating of the oval office, tweeting, golf and arm twisting a few deals for show. Nothing of significance. He will cut taxes and spend a little and add debt. Congress will tire of him in 2 years.

Ding ding ding! New election in 2020. Even Jimmy Carter or John Kerry would beat cranky old Trump, after that first bypass surgery.

If that's all he does, then I'll vote for his opponent in 2020. We'll see. People have underestimated him for 18 months now, and he's done nothing but prove his critics wrong.

[Jason]

It's not about moving factories from China to the US. It's about building business and industry here. We don't have to manufacture party hats and plastic whistles here in the US to have a strong manufacturing sector.

Well you can try to bully yet more nations into buying that fiasco of a warplane the F-35.. but maybe Trump will cancel that as well. What areas of manufacturing, other than aerospace, do you imagine you can build up and be competitive with the rest of the world? Automobile manufacturing perhaps?

[Scot Dutchy]

[Tyrannical]

Trump will do some redecorating of the oval office, tweeting, golf and arm twisting a few deals for show. Nothing of significance. He will cut taxes and spend a little and add debt. Congress will tire of him in 2 years.

Ding ding ding! New election in 2020. Even Jimmy Carter or John Kerry would beat cranky old Trump, after that first bypass surgery.

Lol
The carrier deal was for show. Now Ford will think twice, maybe thrice before moving what they wanted originally to to Mexico. US Steel is looking at rehiring thousands of laid off workers. Soft Bank is looking at investing billions in the US. One phone call to Taiwan and US companies are already thinking about moving manufacturing out of China. Stock market is going crazy for trump.
The Left will be dead in the US in two years, made up of only unemployable social justice warriors, greens, and muslims that would want both of them dead anyways lol

[Forty Two]

It's not about moving factories from China to the US. It's about building business and industry here. We don't have to manufacture party hats and plastic whistles here in the US to have a strong manufacturing sector.

Well you can try to bully yet more nations into buying that fiasco of a warplane the F-35.. but maybe Trump will cancel that as well. What areas of manufacturing, other than aerospace, do you imagine you can build up and be competitive with the rest of the world? Automobile manufacturing perhaps?

LOL - nobody was forced to buy the plane. I never liked the F-35, though. I was a fan of the F-22, but there were political reasons the F-35 won out. Those airplanes don't matter. Next generation fighters will have no pilots.

Yes, definitely auto manufacturing. Ford, GM and Chrysler are putting out excellent vehicles now. Oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear power plants, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, you name it -- auto manufacturing should be going full speed ahead on self-driving vehicles. The US could lead the world in robotic automobiles.

[mistermack]

What's going to happen when China says no to buying more US debt?
If they see the US putting the shutters up, why should they pay the rent for America?

[Scot Dutchy]

China owns America. Just a point.

[Forty Two]

What's going to happen when China says no to buying more US debt?

They won't buy our debt. Our debt is too high now. $20 trillion. Ridiculous.

But, China isn't buying the debt to help us. They're buying debt because they think it helps them.

If they see the US putting the shutters up, why should they pay the rent for America?

Well, the reality is that the US would be opening the shutters. Would you rather hold the debt of a company that is fiscally sound and running an active and growing operation? Or, would you rather hold the debt of a sinking ship whose capacity to do business is quickly winding down?

If china doesn't want to hold our debt when we're economically strong and vibrant, then someone else will be hungry for that debt. Friendly countries will want to hold the debt of a strong United States. Countries make tonnes of fucking cash off of holding our debt.