Tiberius Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Business decisions? Threatening corporations over their business decisions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Business decisions? Threatening corporations over their business decisions? No, we are too busy worrying about anti-Trumpers losing their minds, and what idiotic protests they might come up with to damage the nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 1, 2016 Author Share Posted December 1, 2016 Link? oh stop No Thought so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 oh stop No, really...where did threaten anyone? I haven't seen it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 He must be referring to this beat-down: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 1, 2016 Author Share Posted December 1, 2016 No, really...where did threaten anyone? I haven't seen it. He threatened them with a 35% tariff. Try paying attention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Well something needs to be done to keep money and jobs from going overseas. However this is not the best of ideas. He's using liberal tactics of punishing bad behavior vs rewarding good behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 (edited) Well something needs to be done to keep money and jobs from going overseas. However this is not the best of ideas. He's using liberal tactics of punishing bad behavior vs rewarding good behavior. Wait, you don't think politicians using the convoluted 70K page tax code for political favor is a good thing? You're not suggesting we overhaul the entire thing to make it extremely simple to business within the United States, are you? you musnt even have the audacity to think States might follow the lead? Crazy. Everybody knows corporate hostage taking and thank you tours are all the rage. Edited December 1, 2016 by B-Large Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Sucks to respond to a thread started by the unmentionable. There are two ways to look at this, did Carrier stay because of the carrot or the stick? Was the carrot the $7 million in tax breaks, and was it really a tax break, or elimination of a stupid tax that the lazy world calls a tax break? Was the stick a threat to cut back on General Dynamics DoD contracts? One of those is much worse than the other. And before you can climb back into the swampy hole that held you tight in the last six months, while we enjoyed a relative fresh breath of a discussion, you may note that in two weeks, there have been more constructive criticisms of Trump by the conservatives on this board than I have seen eight years of Obama's term. So this proves that you and your ilk are mindless drones, who can't utter a thought that isn't spoonfed by a talking head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Lybob perma-banned Gatorman returns Coincidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 He threatened them with a 35% tariff. Try paying attention Threatened who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Lybob perma-banned Gatorman returns Coincidence? When did ...lybob get the ban-hammer, and for what? I mean, I couldn't stand the guy, but seriously, for what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 When did ...lybob get the ban-hammer, and for what? I mean, I couldn't stand the guy, but seriously, for what? Viciously attacking boyst personally. It was far more than just being a chucklehead...it was in a manner that could have done him real-world damage (which is why I won't provide details.) It's a well-earned ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 1, 2016 Author Share Posted December 1, 2016 Sucks to respond to a thread started by the unmentionable. There are two ways to look at this, did Carrier stay because of the carrot or the stick? Was the carrot the $7 million in tax breaks, and was it really a tax break, or elimination of a stupid tax that the lazy world calls a tax break? Was the stick a threat to cut back on General Dynamics DoD contracts? One of those is much worse than the other. And before you can climb back into the swampy hole that held you tight in the last six months, while we enjoyed a relative fresh breath of a discussion, you may note that in two weeks, there have been more constructive criticisms of Trump by the conservatives on this board than I have seen eight years of Obama's term. So this proves that you and your ilk are mindless drones, who can't utter a thought that isn't spoonfed by a talking head. Thanks for the reply GG. So you do not see his threat against a specific business to either change their business plans or be hit by a punitive tax as a problem? That's what he did. The fact that they may have laughed in his face and demanded a tax break does not change that, IMO The tax payers are paying for his political point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 (edited) I wouldn't be so sure that this particular arrangement is the way Trump intends to go about keeping companies in the US. It may have more to do with taking the opportunity to embarrass Obama, and come through on a specific campaign promise. And yeah, I'm cool with that. Edited December 1, 2016 by HoF Watkins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Viciously attacking boyst personally. It was far more than just being a chucklehead...it was in a manner that could have done him real-world damage (which is why I won't provide details.) It's a well-earned ban. I completely missed it. I assume the offending posts must have been deleted. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Thanks for the reply GG. So you do not see his threat against a specific business to either change their business plans or be hit by a punitive tax as a problem? That's what he did. The fact that they may have laughed in his face and demanded a tax break does not change that, IMO The tax payers are paying for his political point Have the exact terms of the Carrier "deal" been made public? Hard to evaluate the deal yet. Other than that, Trump hasn't been sworn in yet, so just maybe all judgements of his performance as president should be withheld for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Thanks for the reply GG. So you do not see his threat against a specific business to either change their business plans or be hit by a punitive tax as a problem? That's what he did. The fact that they may have laughed in his face and demanded a tax break does not change that, IMO The tax payers are paying for his political point Again, what "threat" against a "specific business?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts