If American - which presidential candidate will you vote for? (Oct. Edition)

[west]

Vance is well spoken.

 

https://charlierose.com/videos/29349

 

Extremely well spoken.  And you can tell near the interview that Charlie Rose was sad about the situation, too.

 

Thanks for sharing.

[rkbabang]

Hillary on the other hand will be an unmitigated disaster on a global scale.  The best we can hope for is all out war in the middle east and a new cold war with Russia (nuclear arms race included).  The worst case would be the end of humanity (along with most of the other complex/large lifeforms on the planet).  The cockroaches will inherit the Earth.

 

Out of curiosity, do you actually live and invest based on this forecast? Considering that Hillary Clinton has a 90% (+/- 10%) chance of winning the election, are you choosing to spend your savings because death is imminent or scoping out for a fallout shelter to survive the post-apocalyptic wasteland?

 

No I don't choose to live in a post nuclear wasteland. I live in the North Eastern United States about 60miles from Boston. I won't survive the first nuclear strike. I'm obviously hoping for the best case scenario, which still isn't good with Hillary, but we all survived the first Cold War.

[vox]

Hillary on the other hand will be an unmitigated disaster on a global scale.  The best we can hope for is all out war in the middle east and a new cold war with Russia (nuclear arms race included).  The worst case would be the end of humanity (along with most of the other complex/large lifeforms on the planet).  The cockroaches will inherit the Earth.

 

Out of curiosity, do you actually live and invest based on this forecast? Considering that Hillary Clinton has a 90% (+/- 10%) chance of winning the election, are you choosing to spend your savings because death is imminent or scoping out for a fallout shelter to survive the post-apocalyptic wasteland?

 

No I don't choose to live in a post nuclear wasteland. I live in the North Eastern United States about 60miles from Boston. I won't survive the first nuclear strike. I'm obviously hoping for the best case scenario, which still isn't good with Hillary, but we all survived the first Cold War.

 

Ok. I think that you would agree that the market isn't currently pricing in "all out war in the middle east." Are you actually positioning your portfolio for that scenario?

[Investor20]

OK, if a poll does not support your thinking, there is something wrong with it. Bloomberg poll gives 2/3 united in the trade issue across parties. HC dream of open trade is a minority.

 

Fair trade means, people won't steal and pay for the goods/services.

 

Trump proposal is to use Tariffs.

 

Trump has never proposed using tariffs as a response to corporate espionage or cyber attacks. His suggestion of implementing tariffs is based on making American companies more cost competitive with their foreign counterparts. Tariffs are a completely inappropriate policy response to intellectual property theft. First, the perpetrator and sponsor of the crime is often unclear. Second, the purpose of IP theft is almost never reselling that product or service internationally, it's to consume the product if it's digital media, or to sell domestically if it's a knock-off, or to improve a company's own capabilities if it's a trade secret or industrial design, or to commit financial fraud if it's sensitive personal data.

 

Here are Donald Trump's actual remarks on cybersecurity: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-remarks-on-cybersecurity

 

You are confused between stealing passwords, identity theft, etc vs stealing of technology.  The stealing of technology is clumped by trump in unfair trade practices.  As given in the 60 minutes "The Great Brain Robbery", the National Security Agency itself is saying its a national emergency because they are stealing technologies like blue prints, plans, chemical formulas, software etc, instead of developing their own products.

 

In the 60 minutes (I provided link in this thread) an American company developed technology for Wind turbine and was stolen not by hacking, but by bribing their employee. Watch below for a preview. In this story, the wind turbine using the stolen technology was brought by US government. So, I don't exactly understand why you say they won't compete. They make a clone for much less (there is no R&D costs) and sell it right back to us.

 

http://www.cbs.com/shows/60_minutes/video/dezPcSXAPyxM2dYFKaWv1s3gjUxZXffb/preview-the-great-brain-robbery/

 

The below LA times article also talks about it:

"Still, Trump’s suggestion of a 45% tariff on Chinese imports would, by my calculations, be an appropriate level. More than 10 years ago, I began analyzing exactly how China’s state-run industries significantly undercut foreign manufacturers and found that lower labor costs accounted for only 39% of China’s price advantage. Five other unfair trade practices — the aforementioned illegal export subsidies and currency manipulation along with intellectual property theft and lax worker safety and environmental regulations — are the bigger story." (emphasis in bold added)

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-navarro-trump-trade-china-tariffs-20160721-snap-story.html

[valcont]

wow what a meltdown by a weak ,whiny ,know nothing and off course a deplorable idiot.

 

[cwericb]

The guy just isn't that bright.

 

Wrong!

 

Quiet Donald

 

Wrong!

 

Shhhhhhhh........

[cwericb]

I'm starting to move into the camp that believes that Trump realizes he couldn't handle the job and really does not want to get elected. But in the meantime he has damaged his brand significantly.

[rkbabang]

Hillary on the other hand will be an unmitigated disaster on a global scale.  The best we can hope for is all out war in the middle east and a new cold war with Russia (nuclear arms race included).  The worst case would be the end of humanity (along with most of the other complex/large lifeforms on the planet).  The cockroaches will inherit the Earth.

 

Out of curiosity, do you actually live and invest based on this forecast? Considering that Hillary Clinton has a 90% (+/- 10%) chance of winning the election, are you choosing to spend your savings because death is imminent or scoping out for a fallout shelter to survive the post-apocalyptic wasteland?

 

No I don't choose to live in a post nuclear wasteland. I live in the North Eastern United States about 60miles from Boston. I won't survive the first nuclear strike. I'm obviously hoping for the best case scenario, which still isn't good with Hillary, but we all survived the first Cold War.

 

Ok. I think that you would agree that the market isn't currently pricing in "all out war in the middle east." Are you actually positioning your portfolio for that scenario?

 

I have been moving to cash over the last few months.  I've been fully invested for 25 years (on average I've held less than 1% cash), I now have about 20% cash and I plan to increase that over the coming months.  I've also been increasing my Fairfax position as I think they are well prepared for a down turn.  I won't invest in the military industrial complex (defense contractors, etc..).    Nothing is going to happen for a while, hell if this poll at the top of this page is any indication, not only are investors not going to panic after election day most of them are voting for her.    I expect increased tensions with Russia, especially after she takes office.  I expect in her first year she will increase the bombings, and the number of countries being bombed, in the Middle East, more troops on the ground, more violence and death in general.  She's going to try to get as much kindling together as she can and pour a bunch of kerosene on it, whether or not someone throws a spark into it and sets it alight is anyone's guess.

[Liberty]

Trump on Hillary Clinton in 2008:

 

[petec]

I'm starting to move into the camp that believes that Trump realizes he couldn't handle the job and really does not want to get elected. But in the meantime he has damaged his brand significantly.

 

Is there any evidence that he has that much humility?

[rkbabang]

I'm starting to move into the camp that believes that Trump realizes he couldn't handle the job and really does not want to get elected. But in the meantime he has damaged his brand significantly.

 

Is there any evidence that he has that much humility?

 

If only he had Hillary's sense of humility, empathy, and selflessness.  Her kindness and love of peace and humanity.

 

 

[vox]

You are confused between stealing passwords, identity theft, etc vs stealing of technology.  The stealing of technology is clumped by trump in unfair trade practices.  As given in the 60 minutes "The Great Brain Robbery", the National Security Agency itself is saying its a national emergency because they are stealing technologies like blue prints, plans, chemical formulas, software etc, instead of developing their own products.

 

In the 60 minutes (I provided link in this thread) an American company developed technology for Wind turbine and was stolen not by hacking, but by bribing their employee. Watch below for a preview. In this story, the wind turbine using the stolen technology was brought by US government. So, I don't exactly understand why you say they won't compete. They make a clone for much less (there is no R&D costs) and sell it right back to us.

 

http://www.cbs.com/shows/60_minutes/video/dezPcSXAPyxM2dYFKaWv1s3gjUxZXffb/preview-the-great-brain-robbery/

 

The below LA times article also talks about it:

"Still, Trump’s suggestion of a 45% tariff on Chinese imports would, by my calculations, be an appropriate level. More than 10 years ago, I began analyzing exactly how China’s state-run industries significantly undercut foreign manufacturers and found that lower labor costs accounted for only 39% of China’s price advantage. Five other unfair trade practices — the aforementioned illegal export subsidies and currency manipulation along with intellectual property theft and lax worker safety and environmental regulations — are the bigger story." (emphasis in bold added)

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-navarro-trump-trade-china-tariffs-20160721-snap-story.html

 

You are the one that brought up all of those issues in your original comment:

 

The question is between free trade vs fair trade.  If people are asked about fair trade, then I believe people would want that.  I posted this link earlier.

 

"U.S. companies lose about $250 billion per year through intellectual property theft, with another $114 billion lost due to cyber crime, a number that rises to $338 billion when the costs of down time due to crime are taken into account, said Alexander, the director of the National Security Agency and commander of U.S. Cyber Command, in remarks Monday at the American Enterprise Institute. " Emphasis in bold added.

 

http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/07/09/nsa-chief-cybercrime-constitutes-the-greatest-transfer-of-wealth-in-history/

 

But if you want to talk about IP theft specifically, that is fine. IP theft refers to a number of practices including patent infringement, trademark violations, copyright infringement, and trade secret theft. Tariffs are ineffective at dealing with any of these issues. There already are legal mechanisms to resolve patent infringement disputes. Items that violate trademark and copyright protections are already contraband. That leaves trade secret theft as the very narrow ground you're defending. You should be proud to know that the Foreign Economic Espionage Penalty Enhancement Act was signed into law by President Obama in 2013 sets penalties for the misappropriation of trade secrets of up to $5 million for individuals and up to three times the actual value of the trade secret for organizations. That law, in conjunction with the Theft of Trade Secrets Clarification Act signed in 2012 allows prosecutors to seek redress for violations of the statutes. On the other hand, your proposed solution of tariffs would apply not to the specific perpetrators of the theft but to all exporters of that good or service from that country.

[cwericb]

"Is there any evidence that he has that much humility?"

 

Ha ha, good point.

 

There are those who believe that Trump had no intentions of ever actually becoming president.  It began as a publicity stunt to elevate his name awareness and increase ratings for The Apprentice. But then things snowballed and he drank his own Kool aid.

 

Now as he sees his poll numbers dropping he is obviously attempting to cover his ass by trying to float the idea that the election process is "rigged" against him and that is to be his excuse for losing, because he could never tolerate being called a "loser". What guy, he is truly a piece of work.

 

I think he is going to face a reality check once this election is over. The one thing he had going for him was that he built the Trump brand into something that was polished and classy. But he has looked anything but over these past months.

 

Once this is over he is going to have to answer for some of the thing he has said and done in his past. Did I hear right that there have been 3,500 lawsuits against Trump, including numerous ones from the government he wants to lead? Wow, what a jerk!

[vox]

I have been moving to cash over the last few months.  I've been fully invested for 25 years (on average I've held less than 1% cash), I now have about 20% cash and I plan to increase that over the coming months.  I've also been increasing my Fairfax position as I think they are well prepared for a down turn.  I won't invest in the military industrial complex (defense contractors, etc..).    Nothing is going to happen for a while, hell if this poll at the top of this page is any indication, not only are investors not going to panic after election day most of them are voting for her.    I expect increased tensions with Russia, especially after she takes office.  I expect in her first year she will increase the bombings, and the number of countries being bombed, in the Middle East, more troops on the ground, more violence and death in general.  She's going to try to get as much kindling together as she can and pour a bunch of kerosene on it, whether or not someone throws a spark into it and sets it alight is anyone's guess.

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Do you have any compunctions in investing in oil?

[rkbabang]

I have been moving to cash over the last few months.  I've been fully invested for 25 years (on average I've held less than 1% cash), I now have about 20% cash and I plan to increase that over the coming months.  I've also been increasing my Fairfax position as I think they are well prepared for a down turn.  I won't invest in the military industrial complex (defense contractors, etc..).    Nothing is going to happen for a while, hell if this poll at the top of this page is any indication, not only are investors not going to panic after election day most of them are voting for her.    I expect increased tensions with Russia, especially after she takes office.  I expect in her first year she will increase the bombings, and the number of countries being bombed, in the Middle East, more troops on the ground, more violence and death in general.  She's going to try to get as much kindling together as she can and pour a bunch of kerosene on it, whether or not someone throws a spark into it and sets it alight is anyone's guess.

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Do you have any compunctions in investing in oil?

 

No, none at all.  I just doubt my ability to do so successfully.  If you mean directly in the commodity, definitely no, I've never considered commodities to be within my circle of competence.  I have been thinking about looking into some of the larger players like XOM as a relatively safe way to park some money in oil with a fair amount of downside protection.  Again, I think this will play out over years so there is some time.  I actually expect a post election rally after she wins, people are afraid of Trump and will be celebrating his defeat.  That is when I plan to raise some more cash.

 

[Investor20]

You are confused between stealing passwords, identity theft, etc vs stealing of technology.  The stealing of technology is clumped by trump in unfair trade practices.  As given in the 60 minutes "The Great Brain Robbery", the National Security Agency itself is saying its a national emergency because they are stealing technologies like blue prints, plans, chemical formulas, software etc, instead of developing their own products.

 

In the 60 minutes (I provided link in this thread) an American company developed technology for Wind turbine and was stolen not by hacking, but by bribing their employee. Watch below for a preview. In this story, the wind turbine using the stolen technology was brought by US government. So, I don't exactly understand why you say they won't compete. They make a clone for much less (there is no R&D costs) and sell it right back to us.

 

http://www.cbs.com/shows/60_minutes/video/dezPcSXAPyxM2dYFKaWv1s3gjUxZXffb/preview-the-great-brain-robbery/

 

The below LA times article also talks about it:

"Still, Trump’s suggestion of a 45% tariff on Chinese imports would, by my calculations, be an appropriate level. More than 10 years ago, I began analyzing exactly how China’s state-run industries significantly undercut foreign manufacturers and found that lower labor costs accounted for only 39% of China’s price advantage. Five other unfair trade practices — the aforementioned illegal export subsidies and currency manipulation along with intellectual property theft and lax worker safety and environmental regulations — are the bigger story." (emphasis in bold added)

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-navarro-trump-trade-china-tariffs-20160721-snap-story.html

 

You are the one that brought up all of those issues in your original comment:

 

The question is between free trade vs fair trade.  If people are asked about fair trade, then I believe people would want that.  I posted this link earlier.

 

"U.S. companies lose about $250 billion per year through intellectual property theft, with another $114 billion lost due to cyber crime, a number that rises to $338 billion when the costs of down time due to crime are taken into account, said Alexander, the director of the National Security Agency and commander of U.S. Cyber Command, in remarks Monday at the American Enterprise Institute. " Emphasis in bold added.

 

http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/07/09/nsa-chief-cybercrime-constitutes-the-greatest-transfer-of-wealth-in-history/

 

But if you want to talk about IP theft specifically, that is fine. IP theft refers to a number of practices including patent infringement, trademark violations, copyright infringement, and trade secret theft. Tariffs are ineffective at dealing with any of these issues. There already are legal mechanisms to resolve patent infringement disputes. Items that violate trademark and copyright protections are already contraband. That leaves trade secret theft as the very narrow ground you're defending. You should be proud to know that the Foreign Economic Espionage Penalty Enhancement Act was signed into law by President Obama in 2013 sets penalties for the misappropriation of trade secrets of up to $5 million for individuals and up to three times the actual value of the trade secret for organizations. That law, in conjunction with the Theft of Trade Secrets Clarification Act signed in 2012 allows prosecutors to seek redress for violations of the statutes. On the other hand, your proposed solution of tariffs would apply not to the specific perpetrators of the theft but to all exporters of that good or service from that country.

 

Please read the reference before commenting

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-great-brain-robbery-china-cyber-espionage/

 

Few points: (John Carlin is assistant attorney general of National Security)

You are talking about individuals but it is not what John Carlin says:

John Carlin: They're targeting our private companies. And it's not a fair fight. A private company can't compete against the resources of the second largest economy in the world.

 

John Carlin: These were officers in uniform and their day job was to get up, go to work, log on, and steal from a range of American companies.

 

You are talking about American laws that are applicable in America:

 

Lesley Stahl: You know, it feels like a pinprick, your indictment. They're never going to be extradited. Is there talk of putting any sanctions on the way we did with Russia when they went into the Ukraine?

 

John Carlin: The bottom line I think has to be that we continue to increase the costs until the behavior changes. If it doesn't change, then we need to keep thinking of additional actions, whether they're trade actions or sanctions that change the behavior.

It is not small as you say:

 

"is costing U.S. corporations hundreds of billions of dollars and more than two million jobs"

 

Lesley Stahl: Do you have a number of U.S. companies that have been hit?

John Carlin: It's thousands of actually companies have been hit.

Lesley Stahl: Thousands of U.S. companies?

John Carlin: Of U.S. companies.

 

Emphasis in bold has been added.

[Jurgis]

I expect in her first year she will increase the bombings, and the number of countries being bombed, in the Middle East, more troops on the ground, more violence and death in general.  She's going to try to get as much kindling together as she can and pour a bunch of kerosene on it, whether or not someone throws a spark into it and sets it alight is anyone's guess.

 

But will you feel any accountability for spreading doom and gloom if it doesn't happen?

[Jurgis]

I think he is going to face a reality check once this election is over.

 

Not really. Like some people predict, he will likely start TV station/show/whatever for the following that he has. It's likely generate tons of money too, since people love this crap.

[rkbabang]

I expect in her first year she will increase the bombings, and the number of countries being bombed, in the Middle East, more troops on the ground, more violence and death in general.  She's going to try to get as much kindling together as she can and pour a bunch of kerosene on it, whether or not someone throws a spark into it and sets it alight is anyone's guess.

 

But will you feel any accountability for spreading doom and gloom if it doesn't happen?

 

I don't exactly have a large enough following to move the needle.  Considering what is going on with this election  (the press spreading Trump=Hitler fears, the hate a lot of people other than me have for Hillary, etc), me spreading doom and gloom is like a drop of water in an ocean.  Also, I do hope I'm wrong.

 

[rkbabang]

I think he is going to face a reality check once this election is over.

 

Not really. Like some people predict, he will likely start TV station/show/whatever for the following that he has. It's likely generate tons of money too, since people love this crap.

 

I agree. I am one of the people who thinks he started this run for president as a publicity stunt and never dreamed he'd win the primaries.  He'll never admit that, so we will never know for sure, but even if/when he loses the election his little stunt worked out much better than he could ever have imagined.  He'll write a book, do more reality shows, etc.  He'll make out nicely.

 

[DooDiligence]

I expect in her first year she will increase the bombings, and the number of countries being bombed, in the Middle East, more troops on the ground, more violence and death in general.  She's going to try to get as much kindling together as she can and pour a bunch of kerosene on it, whether or not someone throws a spark into it and sets it alight is anyone's guess.

 

But will you feel any accountability for spreading doom and gloom if it doesn't happen?

 

There's no sense of personal responsibility with these types.

 

Hate, anger & divisiveness are the tools of the trade.

 

They'll blame the hammer after the thumb gets hit...

[DooDiligence]

I think he is going to face a reality check once this election is over.

 

Not really. Like some people predict, he will likely start TV station/show/whatever for the following that he has. It's likely generate tons of money too, since people love this crap.

 

I agree. I am one of the people who thinks he started this run for president as a publicity stunt and never dreamed he'd win the primaries.  He'll never admit that, so we will never know for sure, but even if/when he loses the election his little stunt worked out much better than he could ever have imagined.  He'll write a book, do more reality shows, etc.  He'll make out nicely.

 

I agree; this may actually propel him towards legitimate success.

 

I hope he developes an incurable case of @55 cancer that pain meds won't touch...

[Jurgis]

I expect in her first year she will increase the bombings, and the number of countries being bombed, in the Middle East, more troops on the ground, more violence and death in general.  She's going to try to get as much kindling together as she can and pour a bunch of kerosene on it, whether or not someone throws a spark into it and sets it alight is anyone's guess.

 

But will you feel any accountability for spreading doom and gloom if it doesn't happen?

 

I don't exactly have a large enough following to move the needle.  Considering what is going on with this election  (the press spreading Trump=Hitler fears, the hate a lot of people other than me have for Hillary, etc), me spreading doom and gloom is like a drop of water in an ocean.  Also, I do hope I'm wrong.

 

OK. I hope you are wrong too. :) Thanks.

[valcont]

I don't exactly have a large enough following to move the needle.  Considering what is going on with this election  (the press spreading Trump=Hitler fears, the hate a lot of people other than me have for Hillary, etc), me spreading doom and gloom is like a drop of water in an ocean.  Also, I do hope I'm wrong.

 

Ever heard the phrase "Better to be roughly right than precisely wrong" . I suspect its the latter in your case.

[rkbabang]

 

There's no sense of personal responsibility with these types.

 

Hate, anger & divisiveness are the tools of the trade.

 

They'll blame the hammer after the thumb gets hit...

 

I hope he developes an incurable case of @55 cancer that pain meds won't touch...

 

 

Great juxtaposition. You couldn't make this stuff up.

I do hate Hillary, but I hate Trump as well.  Looking on this election without a horse in the race I see much more hate directed at Trump, by the very people who feel morally superior to Trump supporters and accuse them of being filled with hate.  It is a wonderful display of hypocrisy to sit back and watch.  Yes, Trump supporters are a pretty ignorant lot, but they have nothing on the left when it comes to hate.