Trump gets Carrier to stay in Indiana

[dezailoooooo]

To read whole story scroll down to where presented
------------------------------------------------------------




to stay in Indiana plant instead of planned move to Mexico in 2019..It would save over 1000 jobs..possible another 1000 of those subcotractors who supply parts for main plant..not sure on that part, may have mis read.

These would be good paying jobs I believe as nost factory production jobs usually are and I commend him for his efforts.

I really don't expect a sitting POTUS to be able to run around the country putting out the employment fires but possible he could consider adding specialists , possible throgh commerce department, who would just concentrate on this...

As in this case, Carrier was/is moving because of economics, competition AND regulations...possible the regulation part a POTUS and such aids might be able to help out in ...not only a carrot could be used but also the stick..explaining that there may be high tariffs on goods coming into country from moved plants...but also relaxing penalties of bringing back to the States those profits made over seas and now parked in off shore accounts, penalties and taxes forgoes if those $ were invested in a way that new plants were built..production and subsequent increased employment would follow, not $ just distributed as bonuses and options for management and stock holders.

The article also mentions a flawed doing of the Donald, where he claimed credit for Ford not moving a Lincoln car plant to Mexico, but Ford wouldn't be able to move the plant as it was prohibited by a Union contract staying where it was..They were considering moving a particuler Lincoln model production line to Mexico only..now staying in States.

Possible just a mistake of the Donalds but then again as he has in the past , exaggeration..untruths..what wever. Possible he learned his lesson..As POTUS u are underthe microscope..every bit of passing of gas is examined and remarked on..better to say nothing if u want to hold back things and if u want to be let known..then just "the truth and nothing but the truth" would be the way to go...

For the Donald supporters..hope u noticed..though really don't believe registered with u all..a non supporter of the Donald, big time..when he does good..so be noted...In your case, he doesn't say shine so brightly..notive it , say so..call him on it. Then your posts mean so much more in credability and even in persuasion matters...Just a thought


--------------------------------------------------------
To read complete article click on link below..


www.courant.com/politics/hc-trump-utc-carrier-plant-1125-20161124-story.html

[rob base]

Make America Great Again

[dezailoooooo]

Nov 24, 2016 19:03:33 GMT -5 rob base said:

Make America Great Again

As I said...he is not my choice..believe he has the morals of a p--, and his slogan he can take it and put it where sun don't shine...I am not into slogans or chants..I hear those it reminds me of throngs raising their arms in a salute..as they did at the Donalds rallies..instead of mindless chanting "lock her up, lock her up" and he was leading  and the other chants and dissing of any who didn't kiss his butt I hear similer from the past "hail leader, hail leader "..or in the vernaculer of the country the mob were in "Sig Heil, Sig Heil".....

With all that said...when he does good I will say he did good and here , even if not successful , his activity in and trying ..for this he did good. Do I believe reason he did this was to stoke his own ego..if get a success it would be good for him? Absolutly, but if it saves the plant, 1000 jobs then thats fine with me...


Do I believe America was not great..absolutly not...


Are there problems here ? Absolutly..always have been..Problems need to be addressed..Yes. Illegals the #1 problem?  No..in fact illegals are decreasing , much less crossing now according to those who monitor such things , many going back on their own..but  the Donald does not want to admit to that fact..takes the wind out of his sails

Where he is going to get the $ for building it he doesn't know beyond increasing nations debt..Tea Party will love that one and if it's estimated to cost $25 billion u know it will probably end up costing at least $30 Billion.

.Do we need a $25 Billion fence and if built is Mexico going to pay for it..? No and No.

[rob base]

I'm Thankful that Trump is our President and not Clinton

[dezailoooooo]

Nov 24, 2016 19:55:17 GMT -5 rob base said:

I'm Thankful that Trump is our President and not Clinton

Not yet....not me but I am willing to give him a shot...still feel he is a sleeze and I wouldn't want him into my home..guess I don't have to worry there do I...


Curiouse...with no track record..having done nothing but basically say "trust me"..how come so positive and if it doesn't work out as u feel it should would u admit it and criticize the man?  Just wondering?

[Deleted]

Nov 24, 2016 19:55:17 GMT -5 rob base said:

I'm Thankful that Trump is our President and not Clinton

I'm exceedingly thankful that our President-elect is not Clinton. I can't say that I'm thankful it's Trump though.

[rob base]

Nov 24, 2016 20:48:50 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Nov 24, 2016 19:55:17 GMT -5 rob base said:

I'm Thankful that Trump is our President and not Clinton

I'm exceedingly thankful that our President-elect is not Clinton. I can't say that I'm thankful it's Trump though.

If that was my binary choice of options, than I am thankful

[Deleted]

Nov 24, 2016 21:11:48 GMT -5 rob base said:

Nov 24, 2016 20:48:50 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I'm exceedingly thankful that our President-elect is not Clinton. I can't say that I'm thankful it's Trump though.

If that was my binary choice of options, than I am thankful

Even as a binary choice... I can't get to "thankful" for him. I can get to "acceptable"... but not "thankful".

The amount of damage he's going to do, while less damage than Hillary would have done, is going to be considerable.

I do want to say "Thanks, Democrats!". Donald Trump is our next president because of you.

Last night's episode of "Survivor" reminded me of this election. It was in everyone's (except the two that tied to be voted off) best interest to come to an agreement as to who should go... and they just couldn't make the simple choice. Here, it was in everyone's best interest to NOT run Hillary as the Democratic nominee... but they just couldn't make the simple choice.

[billisonboard]

... possible the regulation part a POTUS and such aids might be able to help out in ...not only a carrot could be used but also the stick..explaining that there may be high tariffs on goods coming into country from moved plants...but also relaxing penalties of bringing back to the States those profits made over seas and now parked in off shore accounts, penalties and taxes forgoes if those $ were invested in a way that new plants were built ...

What of these does a POTUS have the powerto do unilaterally?

[Deleted]

Nov 24, 2016 22:53:37 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

... possible the regulation part a POTUS and such aids might be able to help out in ...not only a carrot could be used but also the stick..explaining that there may be high tariffs on goods coming into country from moved plants...but also relaxing penalties of bringing back to the States those profits made over seas and now parked in off shore accounts, penalties and taxes forgoes if those $ were invested in a way that new plants were built ...

What of these does a POTUS have the powerto do unilaterally?

Well... a President does "have a pen and a phone"...

[rob base]

Nov 24, 2016 22:20:14 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Nov 24, 2016 21:11:48 GMT -5 rob base said:

If that was my binary choice of options, than I am thankful

Even as a binary choice... I can't get to "thankful" for him. I can get to "acceptable"... but not "thankful".

The amount of damage he's going to do, while less damage than Hillary would have done, is going to be considerable.

I do want to say "Thanks, Democrats!". Donald Trump is our next president because of you.

Last night's episode of "Survivor" reminded me of this election. It was in everyone's (except the two that tied to be voted off) best interest to come to an agreement as to who should go... and they just couldn't make the simple choice. Here, it was in everyone's best interest to NOT run Hillary as the Democratic nominee... but they just couldn't make the simple choice.

What damage is he going to do?

[Deleted]

Nov 24, 2016 23:08:03 GMT -5 rob base said:

Nov 24, 2016 22:20:14 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Even as a binary choice... I can't get to "thankful" for him. I can get to "acceptable"... but not "thankful".

The amount of damage he's going to do, while less damage than Hillary would have done, is going to be considerable.

I do want to say "Thanks, Democrats!". Donald Trump is our next president because of you.

Last night's episode of "Survivor" reminded me of this election. It was in everyone's (except the two that tied to be voted off) best interest to come to an agreement as to who should go... and they just couldn't make the simple choice. Here, it was in everyone's best interest to NOT run Hillary as the Democratic nominee... but they just couldn't make the simple choice.

What damage is he going to do?

Continue to drive DOWN the inherent honor and integrity of the office of President, for one.

[thyme4change]

I didn't know the president unilaterally made regulatory law changes that were instantly enacted. That will be handy when talking with manufacturing plants.

[Deleted]

Nov 25, 2016 0:12:33 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I didn't know the president unilaterally made regulatory law changes that were instantly enacted. That will be handy when talking with manufacturing plants.

You didn't? Obama made several regulatory changes to Obamacare...

[thyme4change]

I thought he just asked congress to do that. I will have to go do more reading.

[mroped]

Obama made the changes only at the insistence of the Congress that was in turn pressured by their donors etc.
The president can refuse/veto a bill unless certain things are included in and ofcourse if only the Senate cannot override his veto.
Rules, Laws= legislative branch of Government= Congress

I begin to believe that people should take a basic citizenship test before being allowed to vote.

[Deleted]

Nov 25, 2016 12:53:22 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I thought he just asked congress to do that. I will have to go do more reading.

He did ask Congress to change some things, but some things he illegally changed via Executive Order.

[Deleted]

Nov 25, 2016 15:58:02 GMT -5 mroped said:

Obama made the changes only at the insistence of the Congress that was in turn pressured by their donors etc.
The president can refuse/veto a bill unless certain things are included in and ofcourse if only the Senate cannot override his veto.
Rules, Laws= legislative branch of Government= Congress

I begin to believe that people should take a basic citizenship test before being allowed to vote.

Incorrect.

I do agree with your last sentence though.

[mroped]

When it comes to changes in laws/rules, EO are a temporary patch or a short lived action.
In order to become permanent, they have to be approved by the governing legislative body which in our case is Congress.
The practice of using EO is widely spread arround the world, is not something specific to US and it works in the same manner.
EO is typicaly used for awards and so on not for permanent changes in laws.

[dondub]

 Truth is, for any Presidential Executive Order to be illegal it has to be adjudicated as such by the SCOTUS. Fact is there have been 13, 489 EO's in our history

starting with George Washington. There are probably citizens that think they are as smart as those justices that will proclaim they are all illegal, but facts and truth

seem to indicate that would be incorrect.

[Deleted]

Nov 26, 2016 13:40:03 GMT -5 dondub said:

 Truth is, for any Presidential Executive Order to be illegal it has to be adjudicated as such by the SCOTUS. Fact is there have been 13, 489 EO's in our history

starting with George Washington. There are probably citizens that think they are as smart as those justices that will proclaim they are all illegal, but facts and truth

seem to indicate that would be incorrect.

And do you understand how something gets adjudicated by SCOTUS?

First there has to be a Law or Order.
Then there has to be a person with a problem with the law/order.
Then that person has to be taken to court for being in violation of that law/order (or something relating to it).
Then the loser MUST appeal to a higher court. (if they want to continue the fight)
Then the loser MUST appeal to an even higher court. (if they want to continue the fight)
Then the loser MUST appeal to yet an even higher court. (if they want to continue the fight)
This repeats until it reaches the Supreme Court who can, at their own discretion, decide to hear the case OR NOT.

[mroped]

Getting to the SCOTUS can take years.

[OldCoyote]

Nov 25, 2016 15:58:02 GMT -5 mroped said:

Obama made the changes only at the insistence of the Congress that was in turn pressured by their donors etc.
The president can refuse/veto a bill unless certain things are included in and ofcourse if only the Senate cannot override his veto.
Rules, Laws= legislative branch of Government= Congress

I begin to believe that people should take a basic citizenship test before being allowed to vote.

That would have taken out 75% of the Hillary voters!

Since all we hear now is Trump bashing, I had to throw that in to the mix for a little more equal time!

[dezailoooooo]

Nov 27, 2016 8:51:28 GMT -5 OldCoyote said:

Nov 25, 2016 15:58:02 GMT -5 mroped said:

Obama made the changes only at the insistence of the Congress that was in turn pressured by their donors etc.
The president can refuse/veto a bill unless certain things are included in and ofcourse if only the Senate cannot override his veto.
Rules, Laws= legislative branch of Government= Congress

I begin to believe that people should take a basic citizenship test before being allowed to vote.

That would have taken out 75% of the Hillary voters!

Since all we hear now is Trump bashing, I had to throw that in to the mix for a little more equal time!

Well of course...Hillery lost..unless the recounts shows difference...so of course the Donald is open for the bashing..that he is also a sleeze doesn't hurt either..

[rob base]

Nov 26, 2016 23:48:40 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Nov 26, 2016 13:40:03 GMT -5 dondub said:

 Truth is, for any Presidential Executive Order to be illegal it has to be adjudicated as such by the SCOTUS. Fact is there have been 13, 489 EO's in our history

starting with George Washington. There are probably citizens that think they are as smart as those justices that will proclaim they are all illegal, but facts and truth

seem to indicate that would be incorrect.

And do you understand how something gets adjudicated by SCOTUS?

First there has to be a Law or Order.
Then there has to be a person with a problem with the law/order.
Then that person has to be taken to court for being in violation of that law/order (or something relating to it).
Then the loser MUST appeal to a higher court. (if they want to continue the fight)
Then the loser MUST appeal to an even higher court. (if they want to continue the fight)
Then the loser MUST appeal to yet an even higher court. (if they want to continue the fight)
This repeats until it reaches the Supreme Court who can, at their own discretion, decide to hear the case OR NOT.

It's not simply that a person has a "problem" with the law---they have to have been personally effected by it / done provable "harm" by the law. 

[Deleted]

Nov 27, 2016 10:19:14 GMT -5 rob base said:

Nov 26, 2016 23:48:40 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

And do you understand how something gets adjudicated by SCOTUS?

First there has to be a Law or Order.
Then there has to be a person with a problem with the law/order.
Then that person has to be taken to court for being in violation of that law/order (or something relating to it).
Then the loser MUST appeal to a higher court. (if they want to continue the fight)
Then the loser MUST appeal to an even higher court. (if they want to continue the fight)
Then the loser MUST appeal to yet an even higher court. (if they want to continue the fight)
This repeats until it reaches the Supreme Court who can, at their own discretion, decide to hear the case OR NOT.

It's not simply that a person has a "problem" with the law---they have to have been personally effected by it / done provable "harm" by the law. 

That's the next step. the whole "taken to court" thing. Did you stop reading when you got to the step you commented on?

[rob base]

Nov 27, 2016 21:38:30 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Nov 27, 2016 10:19:14 GMT -5 rob base said:

It's not simply that a person has a "problem" with the law---they have to have been personally effected by it / done provable "harm" by the law. 

That's the next step. the whole "taken to court" thing. Did you stop reading when you got to the step you commented on?

Read it fast and the way u ordered it threw me off. I would order / prioritize it differently. But "damages" is the main thing to have an actionable case

[dezailoooooo]

Latest on this move by Carrier,,,,they are staying in Indiana...no mention made of concessions given..Union was not involved in negotiations..Trump and Governor carried the ball..

Good job Mr. President elect..thats a lot of families..over a thousand that will have a happy Christmas and New Year..
-----------------------------------------------------
To read complete article click on link below

   www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-trump-carrier-1130-20161129-
story.html    


     
Stephen SingerContact Reporter


"Carrier announced Tuesday night it has reached a deal with President-elect Donald Trump to keep nearly 1,000 jobs in Indiana, though the United Technologies Corp. subsidiary provided no details.



The manufacturer of heating and cooling equipment Tweeted that it is "pleased to have reached a deal" with Trump and Vice President-elect Michael Pence, the governor of Indiana.   ''                                                                

[emma1420]

While I am happy for the individuals who are employed by this plant who will keep their jobs (and it sounds like about half will keep their jobs...between the two plants there are about 2100 jobs at stake), I am very concerned that this sets up a new precedent that is simply not sustainable.

Basically, what did the government and the state have to give away to keep those 1000 jobs in Indiana?  And if I were a CEO of another plant you better bet I'd be threatening something similar to get similar concessions regardless of whether I was going to move or not.   And why should taxpayers help subsidize private corporations this way?  Assuming of course, that Carrier isn't keeping those jobs out of the goodness of their heart (which I'm sure they are not).

[Tennesseer]

Good for the Carrier employees.  Now I wonder how much it is going to cost me for them staying in Indiana.  

Some folks complain about their tax money going to welfare recipients.  If my tax money goes to paying to have Carrier stay in Indiana, I am going to complain about it.