I agree with him on border security, although not in the bombastic way he describes it, but it is important for a country to have defined borders and control of them
I agree with him on taxation, the current tax code is overly complicated and the high tax rates for wealthier people don't make up for the fact that the overall tax code still heavily benefits corporations or people who are executives of them. It would be beneficial to both growth and fairness if 1, we could all understand who actually pays what, 2, the overall tax burden was lower.
I agree with him on infrastructure. It is embarrassingly outdated.
I agree about his America first policy, although I think the reasons America does some things externally is really for America's benefit, he seems to think that things such as NATO are really for the benefit of everyone else, when in reality there is a reason America heavily subsidizes such a union.
I disagree on healthcare, vehemently. I think the only viable system is a government mandated and public funded system, still with a private sector, but at a minimum there should be a public option. I think he may believe this too, but again being a fart in the wind as someone said, he is now a free marketer it seems.
I disagree partially on immigration. Many of his supporters look at immigration as a purely racial and cultural issue of us and them. I do agree that immigration needs to be better controlled, but welcome even more immigration than is currently LEGALLY allowed. Too many people are ignorant to the fact that there is a reason we have let poor uneducated South Americans in the country so easily, the country needs them. It actually makes the standard of living better for legal residents and citizens. Supermarket prices would triple if every illegal alien was suddenly deported. A third of Americans already hardly afford their own food. America needs to implement a Canadian immigration model, where its hard to get in unless your invited, but very easy to come if they decided they have a need for you or your trade.
I disagree with him partially on regulation. I think regulations are too tough on small businesses, I see that with my own business. With my background in accounting, finance, and business in general, I would be totally in over my head. Large corporations already have too much influence and lawyers, in my opinion they should be on a very tight leash and face stiff penalties for breaking the rules.
I disagree with his energy policy. This idea that IF we are not sure that humans are responsible for ruining the earth , then we shouldn't act until we are sure, is the most selfish argument I've ever heard. There is enough evidence to take climate change seriously, and take measures even if they are only precautionary. We are okay with wasting trillions on fighter jets and bombs that go unused for a decade than we have to be billions again to dispose of them. But we are not okay with potentially wasting money to attempt to potentially save the earth from destruction. I would gladly pay for that insurance policy even if we are wrong and never needed it. On top of that, regardless of climate change I believe our air and water should be clean, and nature preserved.
I'm sure there are many more issues but those are some of the ones that are hot right now.
I agree with him on taxation, the current tax code is overly complicated and the high tax rates for wealthier people don't make up for the fact that the overall tax code still heavily benefits corporations or people who are executives of them. It would be beneficial to both growth and fairness if 1, we could all understand who actually pays what, 2, the overall tax burden was lower.
I agree with him on infrastructure. It is embarrassingly outdated.
I agree about his America first policy, although I think the reasons America does some things externally is really for America's benefit, he seems to think that things such as NATO are really for the benefit of everyone else, when in reality there is a reason America heavily subsidizes such a union.
I disagree on healthcare, vehemently. I think the only viable system is a government mandated and public funded system, still with a private sector, but at a minimum there should be a public option. I think he may believe this too, but again being a fart in the wind as someone said, he is now a free marketer it seems.
I disagree partially on immigration. Many of his supporters look at immigration as a purely racial and cultural issue of us and them. I do agree that immigration needs to be better controlled, but welcome even more immigration than is currently LEGALLY allowed. Too many people are ignorant to the fact that there is a reason we have let poor uneducated South Americans in the country so easily, the country needs them. It actually makes the standard of living better for legal residents and citizens. Supermarket prices would triple if every illegal alien was suddenly deported. A third of Americans already hardly afford their own food. America needs to implement a Canadian immigration model, where its hard to get in unless your invited, but very easy to come if they decided they have a need for you or your trade.
I disagree with him partially on regulation. I think regulations are too tough on small businesses, I see that with my own business. With my background in accounting, finance, and business in general, I would be totally in over my head. Large corporations already have too much influence and lawyers, in my opinion they should be on a very tight leash and face stiff penalties for breaking the rules.
I disagree with his energy policy. This idea that IF we are not sure that humans are responsible for ruining the earth , then we shouldn't act until we are sure, is the most selfish argument I've ever heard. There is enough evidence to take climate change seriously, and take measures even if they are only precautionary. We are okay with wasting trillions on fighter jets and bombs that go unused for a decade than we have to be billions again to dispose of them. But we are not okay with potentially wasting money to attempt to potentially save the earth from destruction. I would gladly pay for that insurance policy even if we are wrong and never needed it. On top of that, regardless of climate change I believe our air and water should be clean, and nature preserved.
I'm sure there are many more issues but those are some of the ones that are hot right now.
Originally posted by Soldier of Macedon
View Post
Comment