Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Goldman Sachs and the White House.

If you listen to fools, the mob rules.

Exactly.

The laws of economics do not understand politics, Left, Right, socialist,communist, etc. etc .

Stupid people like Democrats try to suspend those irrefutable laws of economics in the interest of "fairness", and "equality", just like no-score soccer games.

Useless dopes fall for it. Most politicians are dopes who could not cut it in the private sector....not all....but many.

We already let those dopes try...look what they did.

Because that's where the most qualified people come from.

Sorry, wrong questions and wrong answers.

Where, exactly, are the mythical people you want who have no experience but are qualified to run Commerce and the Treasury going to come from?

A politician is elected to do the bidding of the people. ( IN the general term )


Why does most politicians/presidents turn right around and sells out the American people with bad policies.

Because business pays them more, once in office.


And banks / wall street has the deepest pockets.

Keep avoiding the questions posed to you and shrieking the same tired pablum; it really is the only play you have.

4ager: sorry. I answerd your question. This is a post on GS and White House. I answerd that.

I can´t name names, who he should pick. Trump is a smart man, and ran a campaign on kicking WS and the estambliment in the face. Why is he hiring them?

Let's take this one bit, which is the truth, and with it show that you have destroyed your own "position".

A POTUS is elected to lead the nation and do so in the best interest of the people. That's what they are supposed to do.

In doing so, they are obligated to nominate people to lead each Department and Agencies who will do the best job possible again in the best interest of the people. Part of that obligation, just as it is in business, is to "hire" the best qualified candidate in the interest of the shareholders (in this instance, the shareholders are the people of the United States).

So, here are the choices:

Candidate A for Secretary of the Treasury is a graduate of the top schools of finance and business. "A" has an extensive track record of success at the top investment firms and banks in the world, with increasing levels of leadership and responsibility and is regarded within those sectors as one of the best minds in the business. "A" has also lead investment groups that have bought out failed businesses, turned them around to profitability, and made billions for their shareholders.

Candidate B for Secretary of the Treasury has degrees in liberal studies and humanities. "B" has been an academic throughout their career and is a social critic of business and capitalist economic policy, but has no experience in the sectors of finance, investments, banking, trade, or commerce. "B" has written op-eds and white papers on numerous issues.

Now, as a shareholder, which of THOSE two candidates would you want hired to run the Treasury of the United States of America? If it were a business, whether for-profit or non-profit, which of those candidates would you want hired to run the finance department?

Really? WHERE, exactly, did you answer the question about where - exactly - those mythical people who cannot have any experience or track record of success in business, finance, investments, etc., come from that would be qualified to lead Treasury or Commerce? Please quote your post on that, as I must have missed it.

There are two things that jump out at me Northman. First, the OP is an assclown. He did nothing but run Trump down along with several of his cronies. When you come on here partnered up with somebody like that, then you get labeled as another assclown.

The more I read your posts, the more you seem legit. The second thing is, you don't score points by bringing up Ron Paul. A lot of us on here originally were very much in Ron's camp. Now Ron comes off more like a bitter old hack who sees many of his ideas usurped by others. While I believe credit should be given him, he could have gotten on the Trump train and possibly be being considered for a Cabinet position. Instead he did everything he could to derail Trump's Presidency having to know that a Hillary Presidency would probably have resulted in Civil War.

I have grave concerns about GS cronies being in high level cabinet positions but unless you have something to replace the Fed with, ready-to-go, then you are going to crash the whole economy. Rand is more pragmatic than his dad to some that appears more "sold-out". It's difficult to tell whether Rand is going to be a constant critic of Trump or work with him.

I can tell you from firsthand experience that a Libertarian economy won't work. It has been tried in Kansas and the results were disasterous.

He was crucified because his senate campaign was financed by Goldman Sachs and his wife wanted an American version of the European Union.

Fact: I don't disagree, but you were on the opposite page a few months ago.

uh-oh, somebodies paying attention!

I don't like Goldman Sachs and how it manipulates things for sure. Is this guy going to listen to Trump or Goldman Sachs? He is working for Trump.

That fact is so [bleep] lost on these idiots.

It damned sure ain't you.

Do we have an answer as to where these mythical people are supposed to come from yet?

So if you want to regulate brothels, you hire an old madam?

Crickets from Northman?

Hmmm...

thats probably because you keep on shfting your position as Donalds shifts his promises LMFAO !!