MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Trump easily confirmed by the Electoral College: promises “to work hard to unite the country”
Billionaire real estate mogul Donald Trump was officially elected as the 45th U.S. president Monday, his victory confirmed by the required vote in the Electoral College. Republican Trump prevailed comfortably in the Electoral College easily dashing a long-shot push by a small movement of detractors to try to block him from gaining the White House. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThat's not very accurate, five of the faithless electors were Democrats and only two Republican, and the Republicans did not vote for Clinton.
Dec 20th, 2016 - 08:31 am - Link - Report abuse +3And I don't think the people opposing Trump were die-hard Clinton supporters at all. More like opposers of Trump were forced to support her because of the two party system.
@DT
Dec 20th, 2016 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse +3Yes, that is a good assessment.
Does it really matter? I mean, the Americans have not had a decent president since their John Tyler.
Dec 20th, 2016 - 12:39 pm - Link - Report abuse -4With all that took place prior to Obama's election, I think those who oppose Trump are being generous. No burning effigies hanging trees, however, in his first congressional speech, I think some democrat needs to jump up and yell:
Dec 20th, 2016 - 06:09 pm - Link - Report abuse +5”PUSSY GRABBER:!!!!!
He has little to no self control. The man can't even get over a bad restaurant review without tweeting his tweets to his twits. Gotta love his trumpets though, they are a consistent bunch of hypocrites.
There is no data on his actions yet. We need to what a few months for his first crisis and then his opposition can criticize. And again, more that Obama's opposition did.
It's going to be interesting watching the Army run like a hockey team......I mean, business. W send an undersized deployment to fight a war with the lack of proper equipment and too many paid the price for that ignorance. Let's see if Trump follows in that mold. I can see the Army now.
The United States Army, Inc.
The Unites States Navy, Inc.
The United States Air Force, Inc
The United States Marine Corps, LLC, a Division of USN, Inc
I bet the Secret Service are glad that Clinton lost. No more having to pass the 'throw a 100Kg Clinton sized dummy into the back of a panel van' just to get onto the WH security team!
Dec 20th, 2016 - 07:16 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Trump IS the president and we will have to see what we will see with regard to how he get's on. BUT, and there is always a but, nobody should expect him not to be his own man, whatever that may mean.
He cannot be as bad as Obumma, the biggest disappointment as a President ever and who has single-handedly put back the cause of negroes for a generation if not further.
I wonder how many Trumpets are confused about the corporate appointments of Trump. He is more establishment than Clinton.
Dec 20th, 2016 - 07:39 pm - Link - Report abuse +3The only appointments that made sense are the few military generals. He's draining the swap alright.....then refilling is the septic tank or anaeroebic bacteria.
Dec 20th, 2016 - 09:15 pm - Link - Report abuse +5Owners of fake wrestling, hockey teams, a know racist as the AG, a failure of a general in charge of the NSA. Flynn could no accept the fact that he was support and not a FORSCOM leader and his head is going to get my country up shits creek.
I'm not sure what fool claims someone here stated the Trump is NOT the president.....well, technically he is not, he the the President-Elect. ANY person who believes that he and he alone has all the answers is dangerous. Any leader who has no time for regular intelligence briefings in this day and age, yet plenty of time to tweet his twits to his trumpets over restaurant reviews, Saturday Night Live and even an 18 year old Jane Q Citizen 1st year college student for criticizing him, is dangerous and needs some cerebral shrinking.
Let's see what he does to the budget, debt and employment and inflation......more so the debt.
I care little for Obama and left to false president about to lead my country. Face it, anyone over 75 hates black people. I've never seen a septuagenarian who thinks they are equal.....never.
The USA, Inc......on the rise. Funny Elaine.....I am seeing more reports on TV, about Trump supporters already feeling sold out.
Faithless electors:
Dec 20th, 2016 - 09:52 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Here's an interesting one, Chris Suprun who seems to be having a bit of trouble with his bona fides -
http://www.wfaa.com/mb/news/local/texas-news/no-record-of-faithless-elector-chris-suprun-as-a-911-first-responder/371421191
And Bill Greene, a college teacher from a community that is 91% hispanic - McAllen, Hildalgo Co., tx - we call this “down in the valley”.
He's got a bit of a problem.
If he voted his pledge he'd be ran out if the valley but if leaves the valley - he'll be run out of texas. lol. Reap it.
@ CP
Dec 20th, 2016 - 10:08 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Yes, I am in the US for a couple of weeks and I notice a definite change in the Trumpets. They seem more upset than the Clinton supporters who are pretty much over it and resigned to what has happened.
@DT (re CFK meets Lula...)
Dec 20th, 2016 - 10:08 pm - Link - Report abuse +2At this moment, theoretically yes. Because she's still subject to the same penalty as Temer - loss of political rights for 8 years - if both have their mandates, won in 2014, declared null and void by the Supreme Electoral Court due to strong suspicion arisen (backed by the Odebrecht whistle-blowers) that their campaigns were funded by R$ 30 million, received under the counter.
Teori Zavaski ('Lavajato' judge in the SC) has announced he and his team will work through the Judiciary recess - fm now to end January - in order to analyze more than 800 transcripts of testimony, from the 77 Odebrecht executives, and in February, if all in order, they’ll be homologated; after this, Judge Moro can use them as proof (as if more were needed) to convict Lula. As this would still be a 1st instance conviction, Lula would be allowed to appeal in liberty, and for the 1st instance conviction to be reconfirmed in a 2nd instance court, could take a few more months….after which, prison.
Near the end of FHC’s first term (1995/98), in order to consolidate the “plano Real”, Congress voted to change the Constitution to allow 2 consecutive terms…nothing was said about a 3rd, alternated…should have been, but now looks like they'll probably abolish even the 2nd consecutive term, as well.
With or without a deal with Congress (if so, to ostensibly allow ‘governance’), the problem in Brazil is cultural…it’s only a matter of time before most newly-elected members of Congress would start to use their positions for self-gain.
It’s not up to the SC judges, in this case, to determine who is a defendant or not, they’ve simply ruled that a ‘defendant’ cannot be in the line of succession. Prior court instances, would be the ones doing the indicting/ convicting.
Referring to the “fake news”, represented by “datafolha” polls, they're fake in the sense that they're being published to confuse the public, despite his already being inelegible.
@ EB
Dec 21st, 2016 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse -4Still going around with your eyes shut then?
Ridiculous claim that Clintonites are 'over it'.
Try reading THEHILL if you want to see the truth. Ah, that never bothers you, the truth is what you say it is!
Mind you New York was supposed to be a 'stronghold to anchor the nation to the Dems' according to the DNC!
That worked out well.
@ChrisR
Dec 21st, 2016 - 12:23 pm - Link - Report abuse +3What is really thick is to base your opinions on reading one publication. Try getting out into the real world once in a while.
Clintonites are over it? Not from what we see from here, albeit it's a distance:
Dec 21st, 2016 - 03:17 pm - Link - Report abuse -4DC police are preparing for dealing with the massive disruptions that the Clintonasters are planning for the inauguration.
“ Trump protesters plan to open 'movement house' in Washington DC...Young organizers hope to raise funds to create ‘space for the best kinds of troublemakers’ near White House to quickly mobilize against incoming president.....” “Because his presidency is not normal at all. It’s our duty to make sure he doesn’t succeed. ”
And the televised media seem to be showing a great deal of street protest up there during the past few days.
@EB
Dec 21st, 2016 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse +2“...... and I notice a definite change in the Trumpets. They seem more upset than the Clinton supporters who are pretty much over it and resigned to what has happened.”
Well EB, allow me to disagree....I think it's just the opposite. The democrats are still so upset, that their feelings are being voiced by none other than the “impartial” NYT....
Their editorial board, just after the Electoral College officially reconfirmed Trump as president-elect , wrote in an op-ed page, that the U.S. should completely get rid of the Electoral College - essentially, because they didn't get the outcome they wanted in the run for president....
What hypocrisy.....don't suppose they would be calling for its dismantling had HRC managed what they all expected her to do...which was to win.
Not to mention the fact that First Lady Michelle Obama, after saying in 2008 “for the first time in my adult life, I’m proud of my country,” is still agonizing…. last night CBS aired her interview on Oprah, in which she declared that watching the 2016 election marked a “painful” moment in her life, saying: “You know, this past election was challenging for me as a citizen. To watch and experience. It was painful.”
And she went on to say that Trump’s election marks the end of “hope” for America and, as such, was an extremely “painful” experience for her to endure on November 8th…poor wee thing…maybe someone should send her a copy of the manual on ‘how to get over it’, issued by a group of liberal colleges, for upset students, who were weeping and unable to concentrate on their studies, or take their end of term examinations, after HRC lost…
And you think the democraps are “resigned to what has happened ?”
Doesn't look like it.
@JB You are talking about career politicians, I am talking about the voter on the street.
Dec 21st, 2016 - 04:21 pm - Link - Report abuse +2What do you think about Trump already abandoning most of his election promises? He is no longer going to 'drain the swamp' and doesn't want it mentioned anymore. Why? Because his appointments are establishment and rich billionaires. He is no longer going after Clinton because he knows there is nothing to his accusations. He is reconsidering repealing Obamacare and will keep most of it. The wall will be mostly a fence. etc. He isn't even in office and he is walking back his promises.
It is no wonder the Democrat voters are no longer that bothered.
Marti, has Tinkerbell figured out your avatar yet?
Dec 21st, 2016 - 05:05 pm - Link - Report abuse -1@chronic
Dec 21st, 2016 - 05:57 pm - Link - Report abuse -2If you are referring to the space cadet, I think he has returned to the mother ship and left no forwarding address. Then it was Tinkle or one of his clones who gave his unsolicited and unwelcome opinions on the subject.
But concerning the subject of the article, it's very clear from hearing from many people in the US with real pulses and basic powers of observation that the Left there is winding up for fairly serious obstructionism. A good friend in the California East Bay area who was/is a Clinton supporter says she so proud to see that California is going to fight tooth and nail against anything and everything that the new president tries to do (hey, she got her PhD at Uni Calif Berkley, so what do you expect?) .
I was reading today about this guy Ryan Clayton from one of the dozens of raging anti-Trump organisations (“Americans Take Action ”) and saw this from him,“This is an uprising—a new resistance starts here today, with the largest 50 state pro-democracy demonstration in American history.” Maybe he's just another nutcase, but there sure are a lot of them.
I'm planning to watch the inauguration just to see the riots. I suspect it will open some eyes that are blinded against the realities of the controversy and resistance being very much alive.
Watching this stuff from a distance is great fun. I never did like pepper gas anyway.
Any word how the investigation is proceeding into how the hackers from Bulgaria tried to fix the US election?
@JB
Dec 21st, 2016 - 06:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +2So Rousseff could still stand again because she hasn't been convicted of anything (yet), even though she's been impeached.
About the term limits, sounds like they allowed additional non-consecutive terms as an oversight. But only allowing one seems pretty harsh. How much can any president accomplish in 4 years?
And who decides whether someone, a politician or not, should be charged with a crime? Would they be easy to influence?
About Trump, I think they should get rid of the Electoral College, and I thought so before the election too when it looked as though it might enable Clinton to win. It complicates the process while making elections less fair by most measures.
As for Michelle Obama, I can understand why she'd say that. This is a man who mocks the disabled, attacks the parents of a soldier who died fighting for his country, admits to groping women against their will, and has white supremacists campaigning for him thanks to all his ambiguously and not so ambiguously racist comments. And lots of people love him for it. He has supporters chanting at his rallies, and beating up protesters for him. It says something really horrible about a lot of people in America that he still has so much support, in spite of, or because of, what he says.
It may all be academic for you if Americans become more racist or sexist, but it isn't for Michelle Obama and her daughters.
On the other hand, I think most of the protesters are angry, and I'm not expecting them to go away anytime soon. Even without seeing his policies, the people he has appointed are likely to give them plenty to protest about in the near future.
@ML
Since most of Trump's actual plans would likely end in an Argentina-style disaster, it's probably for the best that people are planning to oppose them.
@EB
Dec 21st, 2016 - 06:48 pm - Link - Report abuse +3I 'was' referring to the voter on the streets....while the NYT is reflecting the general sentiment of those who voted for HRC, and the Colleges which are 'doing all they can to comfort' their poor, disenchanted students, these people are the voters...not the politicians. I think that's pretty clear. The politicians may take every opportunity to take a swipe at Trump, to try to discredit him whenever they get a chance, but at least they know the game is over....and they lost.
Regarding Trump's 'forgetting' some of his campaign promises, I'd say that is reality setting in....
“....Because his appointments are establishment and rich billionaires.....and if HRC had got in ? who would her appointees be ? we'll never know, but quite sure she'd have to cowtow to Soros, and in some way show her 'gratitutde' to politicians who supported her, so why would those choices be any better than Trump's ? maybe what government is needing is to be run more like a business......instead of the usual inefficient and wasteful government.
As to why he's given up on going after HRC, I have my doubts that it is that simple... but let's agree to disagree on that one.
Obamacare, as it is, IS a disaster....even Bill Clinton said as much....and it will have to be overhauled...what's in it that's good, can be kept, but at the moment it is quite a different ball game to what was promised....”if you like your doctor, you can keep him....you can keep your current plan.....the premiums will go down“...all lies..or at the very best, incompetence.
Well, if you really think the democrats are ”no longer that bothered', or , are now happy, then I suppose they will eventually be supporting Trump....
Here is something to chew on for those who believe the Clintonistas are into the chill pills.
Dec 21st, 2016 - 08:57 pm - Link - Report abuse -2- The US National Park Service (why them? Don't know - but read their material) is reporting that they expect 200,000 or so protesters, which is 199,990 more than a metric handful. Let's just guess that this means “anti-Trump protesters” but of course, no proof of that.
- Several reasonable-looking news feeds are saying that there will be around 13,000 military personnel involved, though I am guessing that includes the band and the recruiters handing out balloons and key-fobs. But in the breakdown it looks like most will be either in reserve or on conspicuous duty supporting... you guessed it... security. Some of the National Guard troops will reportedly be getting sworn in as deputies so they can act in law enforcement. That's curious since the Obama government that is running this thing had said some time ago that it would honour the Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents the president or anybody else from using military personnel for domestic law enforcement, with some exceptions that don't seem to apply here. This is another place where the US gets kinda funny and loses any sort of respect that it doesn't deserve anyway: the federal government claims that the “National Guard” people belong to the states, but the federal government puts these patches on the National Guard uniforms that say US ARMY - which is sort of unambiguous - and the national government pays the salaries, training, spoons, ladders, underwear, weapons, etc for what they try to tell people are just state employees. Uh-huh, sure.
- As of US east coast time only one protest group has received a parade permit, which not surprisingly means that there is an angry bunch out there protesting the protest permit situation. Oh, and the only group group approved so far by Obama's Park Service is.... a Bikers-for-Trump organisation. WTF?
I do love a parade.
In State service the Guard is indeed exempt from PC.
Dec 21st, 2016 - 09:15 pm - Link - Report abuse -3Years ago a lot of the states had militias which were a curious quasi governmental purely amateur affair.
@ PL EB
Dec 22nd, 2016 - 12:00 pm - Link - Report abuse -3“What is really thick is to base your opinions on reading one publication”.
I don't but if I did it would be one more than you!
THEHILL supports your mates 'on the hill', in other words all the politicians in Washington, especially the Clintonites FFS!
I know you must be crying tears of blood because the female LOST and it made me PMSL now the second search warrant issued by the FBI has been made public and the hag STILL claims it wasn't her fault.
Just like you, it's always someone else, a MAN.
I hope Obumma doesn't give her a 'stay out of jail' card because somebody is bound to push for her arrest.
@ ChrisR
Dec 22nd, 2016 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse +3“I know you must be crying tears of blood because the female LOST and it made me PMSL ”
You demonstrate there how very sad you are. Your fear and hatred of women. You only opposed Clinton because she is a woman.
You should try obtaining information from a wide range or sources and you would sound so ignorant in your posts. And you do sound small-minded, bigoted and rather stupid.
OK, so the US Park Service is controlling the issuance of permits for the inauguration demonstrations and that turns out to be only for the areas controlled by the Park Service, which apparently means the grounds of the monuments and some of the better portable toilet compounds which in the eastern US are often referred to as parks. Areas of DC not under Park Service control are still available for those protests that are supposed to have, well, that depends on whose numbers you want to believe. Large semi-trailers with Berlin licence plates will evidently not be permitted, despite legal challenges from the Allahu Akbar Genital Mutilation Coalition. Meanwhile, the protesters are crying bloody murder because they can't get permits for exactly the spots from which they hope to disrupt the events. And indeed, some of the radical snowflakes, stray-centipede protectionists, and other Clintonista groups have publicly promoted disruption of the inauguration. (That's why they call them 'Democrats') . The Clintons themselves are expected to avoid the inauguration altogether and instead tour the DC Zoo, where they hope to quietly reflect upon their many sins while observing some of their more tame and civil supporters.
Dec 22nd, 2016 - 01:34 pm - Link - Report abuse -3I'm predicting lots of inauguration-related arrests, and violence incited primarily by the Left. And the sweet scents of marijuana, habitually unwashed clothing, and tear gas in the air.
Advertising during coverage of the inauguration should make hundreds of millions for the media that did their best to denigrate the pres-elect. After all, that's what representative democracy is all about.
Trump sowed hatred. Now he's reaping hatred.
Dec 22nd, 2016 - 02:49 pm - Link - Report abuse +4I'm glad Americans are still willing to stand up for their country. I just hope they keep it non-violent.
@ JB
Dec 22nd, 2016 - 03:00 pm - Link - Report abuse +2No I don't think the people who supported Clinton will support Trump. You know it doesn't work like that in the U.S. where politics is like a team sport. But the idea that they are all still weeping about the election is just not true. Save for the extremists, there are more people upset on this message board than people going about their business here in the U.S.
Going back to Trump walking back his election promises: The whole anti-Clinton rhetoric was based on her being too establishment and in with the rich 1% and Trump would be the opposite. He isn't. He is appointing people who will benefit him personally; rich and entitled. The man has no idea what it is to be President and still wants to be Executive Producer on a reality T.V. programme. His kids were caught out organising a fund raiser where they were selling access to the President. Isn't that what Clinton was accused of doing?
Politics is not the same as business. Running a country is not the same as running a business. It cannot be and never will be. So why would you want someone completely unqualified for the top job? It s a nonsense. BUT it is the choice of the U.S. voting public and they seem to have accepted it more than people outside of the U.S.
I have said it before. The system is bigger than any one President.
@DT “ I just hope they keep it non-violent.”
Dec 22nd, 2016 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse -3You know better than that. The clintonistas have practically promised violence at the inauguration. And I believe they will have it. They weren't exactly peaceful during the campaign. This inauguration is going to be the biggest bail-bonds event of the century.
@ PL EB
Dec 22nd, 2016 - 05:24 pm - Link - Report abuse -4Yes dear, of course dear, now you just keep taking the Diazepam and that will stop the howling in your head for a little while anyway.
:o)
@ML
Dec 22nd, 2016 - 06:21 pm - Link - Report abuse +3Saw Trump's tweet complaining the protests are unfair. Poor baby! He likes to dish it out but he sure can't take it. If you campaign based on hate, you get hate.
And I'm sure you'll have fun writing about them, either way. You do seem to enjoy bad news.
@ DT
Dec 23rd, 2016 - 02:37 pm - Link - Report abuse +3It is not surprising he is complaining. Most bullies are thin-skinned.
@EB
Dec 23rd, 2016 - 09:35 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Elaine, I know that running a business and a country are two different things....the main reason being that a business is about being efficient and making money, while Government, by definition, is wasteful (when not corrupt) and generates continual deficits ... making the taxpayer bail them out....that's why I said - although I know it will never happen - it might be a good idea if governments copied certain business policies from the private sector.
Today I had lunch with a friend of mine, a business owner in Pennsylvania, visiting Brazil over the Christmas/ New Year holidays...while we both agreed that Trump has his faults, and needs to take a lesson in reality, we just couldn't find anything positive to say about HRC, or the democrats ...much to the contrary....so, in view of the fact we don't share the same opinion on Trump / HRC, might be best to drop this subject.
I do however agree with your “The system is bigger than any one President”....reason why I think Trump will take a step back and behave as is expected from a POTUS....(and I'm not saying like BO, either...)
@EB
Dec 23rd, 2016 - 10:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +1True. It was interesting comparing Trump's reaction with Pence's over the Hamilton incident. I don't like Pence's politics but he reacted gracefully to a difficult situation, unlike Trump who threw a fit on Twitter, about something that didn't even affect him.
@JB
”a business is about being efficient and making money, while Government, by definition, is wasteful (when not corrupt) and generates continual deficits”
Why is government wasteful by definition? Surely they can be, but in my experience so can businesses. They are subject to different pressures, which tend to give different outcomes, but neither is perfectly efficient. And as to government being corrupt, who exactly was paying all those bribes in Brazil? Businesses such as Odebrecht, that's who.
@DT
Dec 24th, 2016 - 05:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This subject could fill a book, but to keep it short, excluding some of the Scandinavian governments, which others are models of efficiency ? governments are slow to get things done, are slow to react to adverse conditions - too much bureacracy ; they aren't particularly concerned how taxpayer money is spent - because it's not theirs ; if they produce deficits, the treasury bails them out - provided there's money in the till ; public servants rarely feel committed towards the public they are supposed to work for, and are attracted to such jobs because of the stability...Sure pressures are different, but why should 'bad spending' be tolerated in government and not in well-run private business ? why isn't the taxpayer's money respected in the same way that a shareholder's is ? Is the former's any less important than the latter's ?
Individuals who are ambitious and want to get ahead in life, presuming they are basically honest - which excludes most politicians - usually join the private sector, where their talent is recognized and rewarded.
Sure private business can be inefficient, but when it is, what usually happens ? it goes bankrupt, which has little or no impact on the population...it may affect the employees, but then again, it's up to them to see to it that they run an efficient shop.
The question that should be asked is not who is 'paying' the bribes, but who is 'demanding' them - government officials, politicians....In the PB case, the PT government installed their cronies in key positions - within PB and government - to demand bribes from the big contractors in exchange for their getting a share of the PB business. The motivation for bribery starts from the side that has the power to decide (who gets the business)...the contractors, initially, have little choice but to agree, and they build the cost into the price, so, in the end, the contractors, their executives, and the politicians all gain - all paid for by the taxpayer.
@JB
Dec 24th, 2016 - 05:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Well, it depends what you are talking about.
Compare the health care systems in the US and UK, pre-Obamacare. From what my friends in the US have said, doctors' surgeries have to employ as many people to handle the paperwork of billing all the different insurance companies, as actual doctors. Whereas in the UK, a couple of receptionists can do the job. Then consider that the insurance companies have to employ a similar number of people to sort it out on their side, and that hospitals also have to do the same. All those people contribute nothing to the care of the patients, but they still need to be paid. I think you will agree that that is not very efficient.
Most of the people I know who work in the public sector are teachers, and it certainly is not a job you take if you want to earn a lot of money. But schools don't have money to waste, they have to make do with what they are given and they are very efficient.
I work for a private company, and in my experience bad spending is tolerated as long as there is money to throw around, and worse, the people making the decisions often have little knowledge of what is really needed. Businesses only need to be as efficient as their competitors. Also they do not always spend their money wisely, for example they save money on cheap IT equipment that works poorly and wastes their employees' time, and the employees are paid much more than was saved on the equipment.
As for the bribes, you are right, the side demanding them should take more of the blame, but it's not unknown for employees of businesses to do the same as these politicians when handing out contracts. And the people running the business do not always have the well-being of the shareholders in mind, as we have seen some of them take what they can get and leave the business to fold.
@DT
Dec 24th, 2016 - 09:54 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Don't know anything about the UK health system, but it seems to me you confirm quite a bit of what I said...where government is involved, rarely do things work efficiently.
Here in Brazil, the public health care system is the pits...you go for a check-up, after waiting 6 months, and you come out sick...it's a health hazard. On the other side, the private hospitals, private health plans - with the exception of a few that are badly run and (do) go bankrupt - are run pretty well.
A few specific public sectors, in the US and the UK, such as schools may be well-run, but not so in Brazil ; in the US, public school teachers in affluent communities get well paid...especially when you consider they get summer, and winter holidays. I know this through several friends in the USA, where their childrens' teachers, in 2012, were getting US$ 80,000 plus/ year..
Well, I'm surprised to hear that your company tolerates bad spending, under any circumstances. My professional life has always been in the private sector and I've never come across any company that knowingly allowed wasteful policies. In retrospect, spending or decisions can be seen as bad, due to legitimately unforeseen surprises, but being OK as a standard policy, I thinks is nuts. If the people don't know what they're doing, you can sack them.. in government, you can't.
Being efficient is not the same as being competitive...the first is an inherent policy of any decent company, while the second relates comparatively to the market...you may run a more efficient operation than some competitor, but still go down the drain if you aren't competitive (ideas, products). The opposite is also true...you can be competitive marketwise and still fail due to an inefficient administration...obviously there are exceptions, but they can't be used as examples to generalize.
As to companies not looking after their shareholder's interests, it's then up to the investor to put his money elsewhere.
@ DT
Dec 25th, 2016 - 11:03 am - Link - Report abuse -2Considering you have such a poor opinion of the company you work for may I suggest that you start your own business?
I can assure you that putting YOUR money where YOUR mouth is will be an interesting journey.
You could always employ the PL ElaineB, she cannot make her mind up if her life depended on it and she could lend you a few grand to help you start up.
@DT
Dec 25th, 2016 - 07:30 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Just to let you know, I sent you a reply on the 'crazy cults' etc exchange, under headline “Despite Falklands issue, Argentina interested in bilateral trade with the UK”...although I forgot to address it to you, you'll know it when you see it...
@JB
Dec 26th, 2016 - 12:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That thread has closed as well now, so I will reply here:
I'm talking about the surprisingly large number of religious people in America, I think Evangelicals, and also groups like Mormons, a lot of whom have rather odd and extreme beliefs.
And the point of those things I listed is not whether they would be good or bad for society, but that they would change it, and the changes would be forced on everyone.
These people almost always vote Republican, and some of these things are included in that party's platform, and having these changes forced on them is part of what liberals are afraid of when Republicans get elected.
But to some extent it is inevitable. Every law that is passed is going to curtail someone's freedom, and people value different freedoms. And what other people do, or don't do, also affects us. So we have to come to some sort of compromise, but neither side is willing to do that any more, if they ever were.
And this 'ze' thing is just some students at Oxford? Nothing at all to do with the US. Sounds like the kind of daft thing that students do, not sure why it bothers you?
Still not sure what this public toilets thing is all about though.
Re Companies vs government, not sure why you think employing a huge number of people to do unnecessary paperwork makes the private system more efficient. The numbers tell the story: in 2014 the amount spent per person on health care in the UK was $3,935, in the US $9,403. Outcomes are slightly better in the US, in some areas, but which is more efficent?
As for companies tolerating bad spending, I don't think it's deliberate, but rather that in any big organisation the people who make the decisions are often far removed from the people who are affected by them, and who have the knowledge of what is really required. And governments nearly always have the same problem, except in tiny places like the Falklands.
@CR
I actually have been thinking about it, but I don't know what I could do.
@DT
Dec 26th, 2016 - 05:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Besides seeing Mormons in action in Brazil, 12 years ago I spent time in Salt Lake City, the heart of the Mormon empire; they treated us with utmost respect and never even 'insinuated' any of their customs upon us. Perhaps the biggest difference between our customs, is polygamy, which threatens no one…neither have I ever seen any attempt to ‘force’ their beliefs on society. As to Evangelicals, they may go round trying to lure believers in to their faith, just like the RCC does, so I don’t see them as a threat either. Some beliefs are different, but are inoffensive.
I agree that laws affect different groups in different ways, but one presumes they should benefit the majority, not minorities, in detriment of the majority. Regardless, laws that do the latter, are passed all the time, usually because the lobbyists for minorities are usually ‘louder’…it’s the ‘silent majority’ thing all over again…they aren’t particularly concerned with what goes on, until they get fed up being rubbed the wrong way.
The Student union at Oxford started off with this ‘ze’ ‘bs’, because some transgender individual(s) was referred to as ‘he’ or ’she’ by a colleague, became offended….this is the type of extreme agenda, which besides going against all that’s always been considered normal, tries to classify people who see themselves as men, or women (their gender at birth) - and who treat others equally - as homophobes, haters, racists, you name it…they got names for everyone they don’t agree with. If the LBGT communities want some of their ‘wishes’ recognized officially, so be it, but not to the point of criminalizing those who don’t agree, or don’t act accordingly. It doesn’t ‘bother’ me, as I don’t buy in to this crap, but it's sometimes annoying when they try to ram their principles down other people’s throats, as if they were advocating for the majority. If they adopted a more casual approach, people might try to take it in their stride.
Need more space pls
@Jack Bauer
Dec 26th, 2016 - 05:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Go on.
@ DT
Dec 26th, 2016 - 06:09 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Whatever you decide make sure you can survive financially more than twice your anticipated time to break even (remember as a self-employed person there are tax advantages on 'losses' when you start.
If you are not educated in business finance go and see the local chamber of commerce, they may be able to help you and will be able to give you 'start-up advice.
Now seems a good time given Brexit is coming and there will be many opportunities not available at present.
If you need to employ people make sure you interview them thoroughly and have them checked out by the police: you do this by insisting they get a police check done before they come to an interview and bring the ORIGINAL of the report. Do NOT miss this step, you may be surprised what turns up. If anybody refuses you are better off without them, they either do not understand why you are doing it (so they are dumb) or they have something to hide, in which case you are definitely better off without them.
DO check out the likely demand for your product and/or services and listen to what people in the trade are saying about 'business', DO NOT let it known you may be a competitor as they may try to mislead you.
You and your family need to accept that you may be working long hours for two or three years and this can put a strain on relationships.
Just obvious tips and I wish you luck.
@JB
Dec 26th, 2016 - 06:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The Mormons were polite and respectful so they don't want to change society? You know liberals can be those things too right?
Do you think the law against polygamy should be changed to benefit the minority of Mormons then? (I guess Muslims in America would also benefit.) Personally I think polygamy is harmful to society the way Mormons practice it, there are groups who still do it where teenage girls are pressured into marrying older men, and teenage boys are thrown out of the group to live however they can, in order to maintain the necessary gender imbalance.
Also about those things I mentioned earlier, gay sex was banned in Utah until 2003 when the SC overturned the law. So evidently they do care what adults get up to between four walls. They are not too fond of sex education either, children are allowed to be given “minimal instruction on sexually transmitted infections and contraceptives, while encouraging abstinence from sexual activity before marriage.” Now why can't they allow comprehensive sex education, and let parents opt their children out if they object? Instead they ban it for everyone. At least they are in favour of vaccinating children.
About minorities vs majorities, I think your 'live and let live' concept is the one to aim for, rather than saying laws should always benefit the majority. We should let people do what they want, as long as it doesn't have a big impact on others.
As for the 'ze' thing, I just don't see the big deal. If someone I knew wanted me to call them that, I suppose I would do it to please them (actually I think I'd forget, but I'd try). But you're not going to be arrested and sent for reeducation if you don't. The worst thing that will happen is that some people won't like you very much, and I'm sure you can live with that.
@ChrisR
You really made people get a police check before even coming to the interview? I have never heard anyone say they had to do that to get a job.
@DT
Dec 27th, 2016 - 11:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0“You really made people get a police check before even coming to the interview?”
You need to know that I was recruiting in a time of vastly more applicants than jobs available.
I am only referring to the criminal record check which is used by many organisations to ensure they do not hire of continue to employ sex offenders. One of my businesses was a private hire taxi business and we had about 24 drivers at any one time, any of whom could drive contract work including council contracts and they insisted on seeing the check and having it done twice a year.
My other businesses didn't need the criminal check but I made it a condition of application because I found peace of mind in it. Yes, some didn't pursue it any further but that was their decision. I often wondered what I missed, a good applicant who was unused to the real world or a child molester perhaps.
It is very easy to administer, you put the clause on the advert. Those who didn't send a report with a completed application went straight in the bin.
@DT
Dec 27th, 2016 - 05:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Let me be more direct : I don't think they're out to change society, have seen no evidence of that...I said they were respectful in the sense they didn't try to indoctrinate me - if they had, I'd have told them where to get off....but if you disagree, please give me the specifics on what they've tried to “change”, worldwide, or even just nationwide.
Quite frankly, who cares if they support polygamy ? doesn't affect me. My point is, whatever customs they practise in their own communities - regarding education, sex etc - applies only in THEIR society, and, if any disagree, they can leave. Maybe you've been watching those TV shows on Mormons, focusing on what 'we' consider the not-normal aspects of their society. To outsiders, most societies may look weird.
Re majority v. minorities, how about this ? : no law should be passed with the intention of harming any group, big or small, but it's virtually impossible to please everyone, all the time; laws should aim to address society's main grievances, but without forcing the majority to adhere to “capricious” minority issues.
As to the 'ze' issue, why encourage it ? it's crazy.
Going back to the public toilet issue, it's about transgender people wanting to use either men’s or women’s bathrooms, depending on how they feel (sexually) at the moment they need to go. It’s been subject of dozens of legal battles in the US…BO tried to pass a federal law, obliging States to conform, many said NO.
DT, think you've misunderstood - I never said, nor do I believe in “employing a huge number of people to do unnecessary paperwork makes the private system more efficient”…the gist of what I’m saying, is that the private sector is more productive than government. Period.
In all of my professional life, in either large or small int'l corporations, I always had to answer to someone (boss or shareholders), and bad spending due to carelessness, or lack of due diligence, was not easily forgiven. In government, 99% don't care.
Only to toss in my mindless tywo cents. Of course a business is more efficient in a competitive environment, they have to be, the role of a business entity, as most of us know it, is to turn a profit first and make a product second and if they can eliminate the latter, they would.
Dec 27th, 2016 - 06:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The role of a government is not to produce a profit but to serve it's members of society. Unfortunately in the USA, 1/3 believe it should be serving businesses for and foremost, another 1/3 feel they should be focused on handouts to all members of society, unless they are rich.....and the final 1/3 believe the role is somewhere in between.
The last thing I want to see in my country is the label......USA, Inc. To serve men and form a more perfect union....is to establish an equal justice, insure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare of society, create a common defense. I don't see how breaking unions, because some are dearly needed, having a healthcare system that profits off the ill and infirmed, makes education unaffordable. I just cannot see my government running as a business and attaining the goals described in the preamble to our constitution.
Papa John must have a woody knowing he will never have to pay wages and benefits for the cardboard shit he sells as pizza.
I like to think I am wrong, but when you hear tweets about having a new nuclear arms race, afraid to give a press conference......just like cuntlips kirchner. He and the GOP will double the national debt in less than his four years in office.......if he makes it that far.
@JB
Dec 27th, 2016 - 07:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Maybe they didn't try to indoctrinate you, but they do actively try to spread their religion worldwide. they had 74,000 full time missionaries around the world last year, and one of their main jobs is to try to recruit people into the religion. They are quite famous for going round knocking on people's doors, similar to Jehovah's witnesses.
And do you not think passing laws in Utah counts as changing society? The laws apply to everyone living in the state, not just Mormons. Laws on education apply to all schools, not just Mormon ones. But if you want something else they have done, Mormons provided a great deal of funding and volunteers to campaign to ban gay marriage in California. Something that didn't affect them at all, but was important to other people.
As for the 'ze', I certainly wouldn't support a law requiring it to be used. But why do you care what students at one university do in their union meetings? Surely whatever customs they practice only affect them, and anyone who disagrees can leave?
I looked up your public toilet thing. Apparently one town in North Carolina made a law saying transgender people should be able to use the bathroom of the sex they identify as. So then the government of North Carolina made their own law to overrule that one, saying people must use the toilet corresponding to the gender listed on their birth certificate. This sounds like a case when common sense should be applied - a man caught in the women's toilets should not be able to get away with it by claiming to be transgender. But someone who has had hormone treatment, and dresses and lives as a particular gender should not have to use the bathroom of their original sex - surely that will cause a lot more drama and problems as they will look out of place, and could be dangerous for them, too?
Have run out of space, will write about public vs private and reply to ChrisR later...
@DT
Dec 28th, 2016 - 08:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sure I had missionaries knocking at my door, but after greeting them politely I’d tell them, politely, to “F-off”. Maybe you’ve taken what I said too literally, because quite frankly, I see them as a pain in the neck, but as a 'threat', only to idiots who allow themselves to be duped. What unreasonable laws did they pass in Utah that oblige non-Mormons to do what they don’t want to, any more than laws in States where Mormons don’t exist ?
Ok, so Mormons funded and campaigned against gay-marriage in CA...how does that make them any different , in terms of trying to push their beliefs, than those who campaigned in favour of it ? hope you’ve noticed that this type of issue, against what is ‘traditionally’ considered normal, is being plugged by minorities, who want the majority to change their habits and customs in order to accommodate theirs. It seems the minority wants the majority to change its ways, as if there were something wrong with the latter…to me there are two sexes, male and female, and the rest is…well, I really couldn’t care less ; I’m not going to lift a finger to do anything against them, or even speak out against them, provided they know how to behave in society like “responsible” adults.
As to ‘ze’, what students, or anyone else for that matter, do ‘voluntarily’, is neither here nor there…the problem starts when they try to force all others in the University to adhere to their silly rules, and act offended when the others say ‘no’.
Re the transgender bathroom issue, it is not as simple as one town in NC supporting the notion that they can use the bathroom of the sex they identify with. The State legislature overturned the local law, and then what happened ? BO’s DOJ challenged them, threatening to curtail Federal funding of NC institutions, turning it in to a nationwide struggle over an ‘invented’ civil rights issue. A clear case of an unconformed minority challenging the majority over some frivolous matter.
@JB
Dec 28th, 2016 - 11:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“...how does that make them any different , in terms of trying to push their beliefs, than those who campaigned in favour of it?”
That is exactly my point. Both sides want to push their beliefs on society, and make laws telling other people what they can and can't do. And in the past the majority were usually able to pass whatever laws they wanted, no matter how unfair. For example, the southern states in America had laws saying black and white people could not use the same schools, restaurants, public transport, public toilets, water fountains... really any facilities. If you owned a restaurant you were only allowed to serve customers of one race, by law. That was the tradition, and the majority were happy with it.
It's hardly surprising that it's mostly minorities fighting to change things, because why would the majority pass laws that are bad for them? Can you imagine the Utah government ever passing a law to ban heterosexual sex? The idea is ridiculous. But they easily passed one banning gay sex, because it only affects a minority. And removing that law would not affect the majority, or require them to do anything at all, but they still haven't done it.
As for the transgender bathroom thing, it sounds like poetic justice to me. The state overruled the town, then the federal government tried to overrule the state. If the state government had left the town alone, it would have remained a minor local issue.
About the companies vs government - which do you think is more efficient, the mostly public healthcare system in the UK, or the mostly private one in the US?
And have you ever worked for the public sector? I can imagine the government in Brazil does not run things well, but I have worked for local government in the UK, and they were certainly not wasting money - they didn't have any to waste. The government is really not throwing money around willy-nilly. This may be part of the problem, as trying to save too much can make things dearer in the long run.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!