siliconvalley ‘I’m Here to Help,’ Trump Tells Tech Executives

[ivan134]

On 12/15/2016 at 8:37 AM, Kloaked said:

Yeah one problem we have is that the government keeps allowing these companies to swallow other companies up that are in the same business. That creates less competition.

His kids are wanting to get involved in politics, namely Ivanka I think. Ivanka is way more liberal than Donald is.

The FCC are the ones who would write up rules and regulations into a bill to pass to through congress and the president.

 

Apple are already looking into getting their devices manufactured in the US, but dunno how long it'll take since it's not something that can just happen overnight.

Letting billionaires have a field day is what the country needs. They hold a majority of the country's wealth, and them spending it would circulate the wealth.

 

What is your opinion on Trump not taking a salary and paying for his own expenses, with security being an exception? I guarantee you his vacations are going to come out of his pocket, rather than Obama taking his entire family to Hawaii which costs millions.

You didn't answer my question. A politician not taking pay is a meaningless and empty gesture that does nothing to alleviate the consequences of their bad policies (policies to come in his case). How do you feel about him appointing someone who thinks creation should be taught in school as secretary of education? How do you feel about Trump appointing something who thinks climate change isn't real and wanted to close down the department of energy (he is so dimwitted he couldn't even remember the name of the agency during a debate) as the next secretary of energy? How do you feel about Trump saying he's against the TPP then appointing someone who is pro TPP as his economic adviser? How do you feel about Trump appointing a climate change denier to head the EPA?

 

People who voted against Hillary have a point when they say they voted against her because she wants a no fly zone over Syria (although not completely since Trump has said we should use our nukes liberally) have a point. People who voted for Trump for any other reason are delusional and don't know what they're talking about.

 

I'm not even sure what that bolded sentence means. What was stopping them from spending money? Even if something was stopping them, how does billionaires spending money help any economy? 99 people buying $30,000 cars does more for the economy than a billionaire buying a $2 million Bugatti. I'm guessing you meant to say investments and not billionaires spending money. I'm also guessing you mean that they were not investing because of taxes and regulations. Question: what exactly do you think was happening during the Bush years and why do you think it will be different now?

 

I'm also curious as to how you think the economy is actually doing now. I hate Rachel Maddow because she licked Hillary's balls this election, but she did a good job here detailing the mind of a Trump supporter.

 

Edited December 20, 2016 by ivan134

[ivan134]

On 12/15/2016 at 10:15 PM, Albatross said:

Go to reddit's r/all or r/politics. They're still claiming it. Then go to Tumblr and Facebook/Twitter. Those liberals. I have no idea who you are and what you may or may not believe, but the majority of liberals believe he's going to "crush American business, big or small". Even this thread has a few examples of people who find this surprising or thought he would...

 

If his children can help him (they are only helping his transition team efforts, nothing more and he confirmed it), I don't see the problem really. I'll admit maybe you can argue that it is unorthodox or perhaps unprofessional, but it isn't like he's got Putin sitting next to him.

 

I'll probably think the same thing over the tax payer money thing (source?) that I do about Obama having eight zillion vacations that come to about 72 million. If he feels safer at his hotel (and who could blame him with how many people hate him?) then that's how it goes. Seems like a really shallow and useless thing to be complaining about, to be honest.

 

"constantly refusing"? Well not entirely true...he refused a lot of them because he doesn't believe he needs them. I don't really have an opinion on that because I don't know all the facts for why he doesn't.

 

And I don't really care about his tax returns. The same people who want him to reveal his tax returns on baseless accusations also falsely accused Mitt Romney so when we have Americans suffering, a crippling debt and a potential war to stave off? I'm thinking priorities.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

I'm not even sure why I'm laughing. That is literally one of the scariest sentences I've ever read. The only thing I can do is laugh to numb how it actually makes me feel.

[TheMidnightNarwhal]

I'm so happy he won

[Guest Kloaked]

8 hours ago, ivan134 said:

You didn't answer my question. A politician not taking pay is a meaningless and empty gesture that does nothing to alleviate the consequences of their bad policies (policies to come in his case).

That's fair.

 

8 hours ago, ivan134 said:

How do you feel about him appointing someone who thinks creation should be taught in school as secretary of education?

I heard she was also pro-common core, something that I personally think is mostly detrimental to the educational development of children just like forcing religion down their throats. However: I do think religion should be taught in schools but not in the way that you would "learn" at any kind of church. Religion is talked about in colleges all the time, but it's basically a no-no in pre-college schools for some reason. I think we should treat kids in high school like adults instead of babying them so that when they get out, they're' more likely to either seek higher education or go straight into the work force and minimize any kind of social interaction issues they may have when they find out that the world doesn't actually work the way that they've been taught.

 

But to be specific about the creation thing: as a Christian, I think it's the church's job to teach people who come in the doors of the church, or who want to know more outside of church. Schools are for education, not worship.

8 hours ago, ivan134 said:

How do you feel about Trump appointing something who thinks climate change isn't real and wanted to close down the department of energy (he is so dimwitted he couldn't even remember the name of the agency during a debate) as the next secretary of energy?

Just to be clear, I'm not disagreeing that what you're saying is bad. What I'm worried about is how these people that Trump are appointing are being smeared in the media. Mike Pence doesn't come across to me as a kill-all-the-gays type of person like HuffPo and whoever else were shouting from the rooftops whenever Trump announced him as his VP. Journalism is at an all time low with trust. We don't take WCCFTech seriously here because they put out bullshit rumors which may or may not be true, because as the saying goes: if you throw enough shit at the wall some is bound to stick, or something. Why should we take any media outlet seriously anymore? I don't take conservative outlets seriously even though I'm conservative because most of the time they are just as unforgiving and write false stories just as the leftists do.

 

So again, to be more specific, if the dude actually wants to shut down the department of energy and doesn't want to do anything about the growing pollution problem, then yes I am actually worried.

 

8 hours ago, ivan134 said:

How do you feel about Trump saying he's against the TPP then appointing someone who is pro TPP as his economic adviser? How do you feel about Trump appointing a climate change denier to head the EPA?

I think appointing someone who is pro-TPP is a good move here in that case. Trump is being bipartisan in who he is appointing, and maybe he has a game plan with all of this. I don't know. What I do know is it can't get any worse than where we were headed with Obama's plans should Clinton have won in that regard.

 

Climate change isn't something I'm fond of talking about since my profession is application development and not an earth science field. What I do know is we're getting hotter summers and winters than usual, and something something 400ppm (or something). I'm leaving all of those decisions up to the people who know more than I do about that stuff, like I do everything else, because they have more power in decision making than I do. I think people who actually study in those fields should have a bigger voice than someone who outright denies something that isn't even in their own field, much in the same way when someone swears up and down that it's impossible for me to automate their workflow when I could do it within a day.

 

A friend of mine who works in an earth science field (I can't remember which specifically) agrees that there is a problem with the climate and it's not just Earth going through a natural change. I read through a lot of his research and research that he recommended and I'm not 100% convinced, but I trust their opinion. Also, what would it hurt if we could get as much renewable energy as possible, have tighter regulation on how companies contribute to pollution, and so on? That's basically where I'm at.

 

8 hours ago, ivan134 said:

People who voted against Hillary have a point when they say they voted against her because she wants a no fly zone over Syria (although not completely since Trump has said we should use our nukes liberally) have a point. People who voted for Trump for any other reason are delusional and don't know what they're talking about.

I voted for Trump because of many reasons. He understands that we have weak cybersecurity in the states, he understands we have an economy that's doomed to collapse, and other things that any normal person understands (aside from the climate change bit obviously). Clinton would have eventually enabled a Patriot Act 2.0 of sorts, so you may as well have kissed any privacy you have left goodbye should she have won.

 

There's many reasons that someone would have voted for Trump over Hillary, and it won't all boil down to the no fly zone over Syria.

 

8 hours ago, ivan134 said:

I'm not even sure what that bolded sentence means. What was stopping them from spending money? Even if something was stopping them, how does billionaires spending money help any economy? 99 people buying $30,000 cars does more for the economy than a billionaire buying a $2 million Bugatti. I'm guessing you meant to say investments and not billionaires spending money. I'm also guessing you mean that they were not investing because of taxes and regulations. Question: what exactly do you think was happening during the Bush years and why do you think it will be different now?

Nothing is stopping them from spending money, obviously. I can't remember specifically what my point was right now, but what I do know is that there needs to be some reform to where businesses can compete better with China and other companies that have a massive presence here in the states that make it extremely hard for small businesses to grow or even stay open.

 

When I voted for Trump (if my vote was even a deciding factor just for this point) I put my job in jeopardy. The company that I work for outsources all of their manufacturing labor to China. If Trump were to somehow force companies to bring back those manufacturing jobs, I would probably be out of a job and/or the company would go under because of how much money we would lose. I asked my boss's boss (who is next in line to be CEO) before the election what a Trump presidency would look like for us, and he said it wouldn't look good. Though, he doesn't think Trump is stupid enough to just immediately force companies to bring manufacturing back or face consequences. That would be even worse for our economy here. It needs to be a slow process so we can all adjust to it, if that can even happen anyways. Either way, we're going to lose out on some profits and I may not be able to keep my job if that happens.

 

8 hours ago, ivan134 said:

I'm also curious as to how you think the economy is actually doing now. I hate Rachel Maddow because she licked Hillary's balls this election, but she did a good job here detailing the mind of a Trump supporter

I'm not an economist so I can't say for sure. I make $35,000 a year so I'm not hurting, but I'm not making bank either. What I do know is my medical insurance is higher than it was before Obamacare went into effect, my car insurance payments suck (I have to pay almost $300 or something every three months) just because I have a penis between my legs (sexism amirite?), I can't afford to move out of my parent's home just yet because of the cost of homes and apartments here, and other stuff that just suck.

 

What I do know is someone like Rachel Maddow, or anyone who makes tons of money shouldn't be talking about the economy - to be honest with you I can't watch that video because I can't even stand seeing that lesbian.

 

My opinion, though: I think the economy could be in better shape, but it's not terrible. The place where I work is open about where we're at with profits and stuff, and if you were to base our growth on how well the economy is doing then you would think the economy is in perfect condition. I just personally think the overall state of the economy is headed in the wrong direction with where my tax money is going and with how much I would have to spend if I moved out. My experience with the economy doesn't go past me buying stuff on Amazon and what I mentioned previously, so I can't say for sure.

[Albatross]

On 12/19/2016 at 9:05 PM, ivan134 said:

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

I'm not even sure why I'm laughing. That is literally one of the scariest sentences I've ever read. The only thing I can do is laugh to numb how it actually makes me feel.

What a perfectly expected childish response. You aren't the first liberal or anti-Trumper I've met to deploy the tactics of a five year old and you certainly won't be the last (though I'm not sure how you thought your response was at all intelligent), but thanks for showing me early on you are a waste of my time.

 

 

[ivan134]

29 minutes ago, Albatross said:

What a perfectly expected childish response. You aren't the first liberal or anti-Trumper I've met to deploy the tactics of a five year old and you certainly won't be the last (though I'm not sure how you thought your response was at all intelligent), but thanks for showing me early on you are a waste of my time.

 

 

Riiiiiiiight. The guy who gave non answers and doesn't understand the gravity of missing security briefings is questioning my intelligence. Funny shit. The guy who is essentially saying nepotism and conflicts of interest dont matter to him is questioning my intelligence. You're out of your league kid. Your peers are playing in the sandbox.

[Memories4K]

35 minutes ago, Albatross said:

What a perfectly expected childish response. You aren't the first liberal or anti-Trumper I've met to deploy the tactics of a five year old and you certainly won't be the last (though I'm not sure how you thought your response was at all intelligent), but thanks for showing me early on you are a waste of my time.

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Riiiiiiiight. The guy who gave non answers and doesn't understand the gravity of missing security briefings is questioning my intelligence. Funny shit. The guy who is essentially saying nepotism and conflicts of interest dont matter to him is questioning my intelligence. You're out of your league kid. Your peers are playing in the sandbox.

 

Why are you guys so edgy hahaha lmao
 

Like.

You just have this insecure NEED to look like you're somehow better than the other, WILIN'.

[Albatross]

3 hours ago, Memories4K said:

 

 

Why are you guys so edgy hahaha lmao
 

Like.

You just have this insecure NEED to look like you're somehow better than the other, WILIN'.

 

I responded to his questions and he didn't even have the decency to act like an adult and respond back, instead rage quitting on his keyboard in all caps to say he is "scared".

 

If that isn't a waste of my time or anyone else's time (and mine is sparse enough as it is) then what is?

 

3 hours ago, ivan134 said:

Riiiiiiiight. The guy who gave non answers and doesn't understand the gravity of missing security briefings is questioning my intelligence. Funny shit. The guy who is essentially saying nepotism and conflicts of interest dont matter to him is questioning my intelligence. You're out of your league kid. Your peers are playing in the sandbox.

Oh, look, child jokes from the person who just acted like one.

 

You asked me how I felt on those issues and I answered them. Did you expect me to pat your back and agree with you on everything you said? If you thought agreeing with you was how it would go or make it an "answer" or that one can only be right if they agree with you, you need to seriously grow up and pull your head out of the sand. The world doesn't fall to your whims and opinions simply because you stamp your feet like a child and respond in all caps and laughter. 

 

[ivan134]

1 minute ago, Memories4K said:

 

 

Why are you guys so edgy hahaha lmao
 

Like.

You just have this insecure NEED to look like you're somehow better than the other, WILIN'.

Retaliating to an idiot who questioned my intelligence means I'm insecure? Who exactly is the edgy one who is "above the fray"? Pot, meet kettle.

[ivan134]

3 minutes ago, Albatross said:

 

I responded to his questions and he didn't even have the decency to act like an adult and respond back, instead rage quitting on his keyboard in all caps to say he is "scared".

 

If that isn't a waste of my time or anyone else's time (and mine is sparse enough as it is) then what is?

 

Oh, look, child jokes from the person who just acted like one.

 

You asked me how I felt on those issues and I answered them. Did you expect me to pat your back and agree with you on everything you said? If you thought agreeing with you was how it would go or make it an "answer" or that one can only be right if they agree with you, you need to seriously grow up and pull your head out of the sand. The world doesn't fall to your whims and opinions simply because you stamp your feet like a child and respond in all caps and laughter. 

 

I don't even know what the hell you're taking about. That's a ridiculous amount of assumptions you have going on there. You hearing voices or something?

[Albatross]

3 hours ago, ivan134 said:

I don't even know what the hell you're taking about. That's a ridiculous amount of assumptions you have going on there. You hearing voices or something?

 

Do you not remember your previous comments? If you do, you would know exactly what I am talking about, which is your "BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA" response to my opinions (which you requested to know) and "I'm scared" comment, which was a complete and utterly childish (and shallow) response made simply because I didn't agree with you that the things you asked me about are "super horrible of Trump" or whatever else you were fishing for initially.

 

And yes, when you respond like this"BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA" and "I'm scared" I am going to ask you how you thought it was an intelligent response, but please, continuing trolling. I won't and never will take a person who responds in all caps without any other form of answer seriously or as an adult.

[SurvivorNVL]

Since we're closer to an Ayn Rand, Objectivist Government--may as well nuke Net Neutrality and all regulations surrounding the companies -and- municipalities.  Full-scale competition.  May as well have the Wild West.  

[ivan134]

4 minutes ago, Albatross said:

 

Do you not remember your previous comments? If you do, you would know exactly what I am talking about, which is your "BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA" response to my opinions (which you requested to know) and "I'm scared" comment, which was a complete and utterly childish (and shallow) response made simply because I didn't agree with you that the things you asked me about are "super horrible of Trump" or whatever else you were fishing for initially.

 

And yes, when you respond like this"BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA" and "I'm scared" I am going to ask you how you thought it was an intelligent response, but please, continuing trolling. I won't and never will take a person who responds in all caps without any other form of answer seriously or as an adult.

LOL. That was the appropriate response to someone who thinks there are legitimate reasons a president should miss security briefings. Go back and finish 2nd grade. You missed the class on critical thinking.

[Memories4K]

16 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Retaliating to an idiot who questioned my intelligence means I'm insecure? Who exactly is the edgy one who is "above the fray"? Pot, meet kettle.

THIS IS SO WILD LMAO

[SurvivorNVL]

Just now, Memories4K said:

THIS IS SO WILD LMAO

@Albatross There is a reason they're called the REGRESSIVE LEFT.

[Albatross]

3 hours ago, ivan134 said:

LOL. That was the appropriate response to someone who thinks there are legitimate reasons a president should miss security briefings. Go back and finish 2nd grade. You missed the class on critical thinking.

And here you are again, acting like a child.

 

That's not at all what I said or even suggested. I simply pointed out he's refusing some of them (not all of them like you claimed/made it seem) and that I don't know all the facts so I can't present a solid opinion on it yet. You don't know what information is in those briefings, why he refused some of them or anything else. It is insanity and ignorance to make an opinion (or expect someone else too) on a situation you don't have all the facts for and act like it is word sent from God.

 

3 hours ago, SurvivorNVL said:

@Albatross There is a reason they're called the REGRESSIVE LEFT.

You quoted someone else and @ me. Was this a mistake?

[ivan134]

2 minutes ago, SurvivorNVL said:

@Albatross There is a reason they're called the REGRESSIVE LEFT.

Error, no. Regressive left are the authoritarians with 1st world problems like safe spaces. You don't like it when people say all right wingers are racists, but if you want to start with Gross generalizations, I guarantee you won't like it.

[SurvivorNVL]

1 minute ago, Albatross said:

And here you are again, acting like a child.

 

That's not at all what I said or even suggested. I simply pointed out he's refusing some of them (not all of them like you claimed/made it seem) and that I don't know all the facts so I can't present a solid opinion on it yet. You don't know what information is in those briefings, why he refused some of them or anything else. It is insanity and ignorance to make an opinion (or expect someone else too) on a situation you don't have all the facts for and act like it is word sent from God.

 

You quoted someone else and @ me. Was this a mistake?

Oh, no.  I quoted you both because you're arguing with a legitimately regressive person.  You'll go nowhere.  It's like trying to move an immovable object--you'll exert effort, but nothing comes to fruition.

[SurvivorNVL]

Just now, ivan134 said:

Error, no. Regressive left are the authoritarians with 1st world problems like safe spaces. You don't like it when people say all right wingers are racists, but if you want to start with Gross generalizations, I guarantee you won't like it.

You're pretty regressive, and this thread is guaranteed to be locked soon.  I don't mind if people call Right-Wingers racist.  The majority aren't.  Though the vast majority of Leftists as of today are rapidly adhering to authoritarianism and mockery, as well as the ever ending march toward "absolute equality".  But I get to watch them spazz for the next four years.  I'm content.

[ivan134]

2 minutes ago, Albatross said:

And here you are again, acting like a child.

 

That's not at all what I said or even suggested. I simply pointed out he's refusing some of them (not all of them like you claimed/made it seem) and that I don't know all the facts so I can't present a solid opinion on it yet. You don't know what information is in those briefings, why he refused some of them or anything else. It is insanity and ignorance to make an opinion (or expect someone else too) on a situation you don't have all the facts for and act like it is word sent from God.

 

You quoted someone else and @ me. Was this a mistake?

I'm a Catholic turned atheist. God is a myth so I'm not worried about that.

 

I don't know what is in the briefings? Neither does Trump when he doesn't go to them. These excuses are hilarious. I can only imagine if you would feel the same way if Obama missed any of them.

[ivan134]

1 minute ago, SurvivorNVL said:

You're pretty regressive, and this thread is guaranteed to be locked soon.  I don't mind if people call Right-Wingers racist.  The majority aren't.  Though the vast majority of Leftists as of today are rapidly adhering to authoritarianism and mockery, as well as the ever ending march toward "absolute equality".  But I get to watch them spazz for the next four years.  I'm content.

Elaborate on what makes me regressive.

[Albatross]

 

3 hours ago, ivan134 said:

I'm a Catholic turned atheist. God is a myth so I'm not worried about that.

 

I don't know what is in the briefings? Neither does Trump when he doesn't go to them. These excuses are hilarious. I can only imagine if you would feel the same way if Obama missed any of them.

 

Right, happy trolling pal. Maybe one day you'll pull up your big boy pants.

 

3 hours ago, SurvivorNVL said:

Oh, no.  I quoted you both because you're arguing with a legitimately regressive person.  You'll go nowhere.  It's like trying to move an immovable object--you'll exert effort, but nothing comes to fruition.

 

Oh! Okay, sorry for the misunderstanding on my part. I got that when he responded to me in all caps laughter over questions he asked me (I guess he really meant "repeat my opinions" not "what are your opinions?"). He isn't the first person to act like that that I have encountered though, so I know how it usually ends and know not to waste my time.

 

I advise you to ignore him. He's shown he's incapable of proper and adult discussion and doesn't deserve anyone's time and efforts.

[Memories4K]

4 minutes ago, SurvivorNVL said:

Oh, no.  I quoted you both because you're arguing with a legitimately regressive person.  You'll go nowhere.  It's like trying to move an immovable object--you'll exert effort, but nothing comes to fruition.

Why'd you tag them in a reply to me then? hahaha

1 minute ago, ivan134 said:

I'm a Catholic turned atheist. God is a myth so I'm not worried about that.

 

I don't know what is in the briefings? Neither does Trump when he doesn't go to them. These excuses are hilarious. I can only imagine if you would feel the same way if Obama missed any of them.

Dunning-Kruger is so real here, is this a joke? hahaha

[SurvivorNVL]

1 minute ago, ivan134 said:

Elaborate on what makes me regressive.

You are approaching conversations with others on a high horse.  You even admitted up above to having no response beyond laughing when someone produces an opinion, and reasoning - instead of refuting it and giving an actual logical argument, you went right toward, "HAHA<continues on>".  We can just use that one quote, you followed onward with insulting their intelligence and advising them to go back to a class on critical thinking, instead of approaching the topic with someone else's viewpoint in mind and trying to see from outside, you went right to, "HAHAHAHA".  Or maybe you did, and immediately discarded it?  

Regardless - regressive's have a good point to life, funnily enough.  They show people why in the 20th century--they were thrown from helicopters.

[SurvivorNVL]

1 minute ago, Memories4K said:

Why'd you tag them in a reply to me then? hahaha

Dunning-Kruger is so real here, is this a joke? hahaha

Because like it or not - you're apart of this conversation, Mr. Anime Avatar-man-woman.