Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LMAO
I will remind you that, historically,success in business does not translate into a successful presidency. Both Hoover and Carter were successful businessmen. The former in mining and the latter in peanut farming yet turned into disastrous presidencies.

Ronald Reagan never ran a business ;)

Herbert Hoover bio. Hmm, it doesn't say anything about mining there. He got scapegoated for the great depression, some of his ideas tended towards the liberal, he actually did help to streamline and economize some government agencies in his later years. What a shame we don't have anyone trying to streamline anything these days--but that's what happens when lawyers who understand squat about business are elected to every level of government.

Jimmy Carter might have had a peanut farm, but that did not make him a top-level executive who practices looking at the big picture. He was also a naval officer for 7 years, but in that time, probably did not learn much about budgets, strategies, and so forth that higher rank officers learn. So his efforts to improve the economy fell flat, since he really did not have the economic/business experience to inform them. He also created the Dept. of Education, which has been nothing but a money sink and boondoggle ever since.

Reagan might not have been a businessman, but he did study economics in college. He also had the executive experience as CA governor before heading to the White House. So, while he did not have direct business executive experience, he actually did have the requisite skills needed to manage a large corporation. Unfortunately, he was saddled with Democrat house and senate, and they devised new laws/policies to suck up any monetary savings resulting from Reagan policies just as fast as they could write them on paper.

So you do not want to accept that the government is a big business, and runs like a business during its normal day-to-day operations. And that attitude and miscomprehension of government, multiplied by a few million, is exactly why our elected officials are overwhelmingly lawyers. Putting lawyers in charge is why laws and regulations multiply faster than anyone can keep track of--and they contain so many contradictions that it is impossible to live within the law. And economically illiterate lawyers are why the debt keeps spiraling out of control and may already have entered an exponential growth phase, in which case even the brightest financial mind in the world cannot fix it, and we are heading into major trouble.

And you seriously think that another lawyer is going to fix the problems that decades of lawyers in government have caused???

We need an executive (most likely from the business world) who understands things like increasing efficiency and cutting costs, among other skills. Trump happens to have that skill and experience set. Now, I'm under no illusions--Trump may not be able to turn this situation around, the problems may be too deep and systemic--however, if anyone is able, he is the best bet to be that person. Certainly, a lawyer whose default "solution" to every problem is to write a new law is *not* that person.

193 posted on 04/18/2016 4:04:46 AM PDT by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies ]


To: exDemMom

Hmm, it doesn’t say anything about mining there.


Perhaps a little research on your part might be in order

“He opened his own mining consulting business in 1908; by 1914, Hoover was financially secure, earning his wealth from high-salaried positions, his ownership of profitable Burmese silver mines, and royalties from writing the leading textbook on mining engineering.”
http://millercenter.org/president/biography/hoover-life-before-the-presidency

Again, you still seem to be confusing running a business
verses governing in a Constitutional Republic. Many of Trump’s “fixes” would require legislation. A business owner operates in a more dictatorial type of leadership. It’s not a slam on Trump. As a business owner, Trump has the right to fire anyone and make many of his own rules when it comes to business. A president is more limited. For example, he can fire his SOS at any time. He can’t fire, for example, Nancy Pelosi or Paul Ryan,if they don’t do what he wants them to.

Again, I still will never understand why people who otherwise support limited government think a large, expansive government will work with Trump running it


194 posted on 04/18/2016 4:52:50 AM PDT by LMAO (" I probably identify more as Democrat," Donald Trump 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: exDemMom

So you do not want to accept that the government is a big business, and runs like a business during its normal day-to-day operations. And that attitude and miscomprehension of government, multiplied by a few million, is exactly why our elected officials are overwhelmingly lawyers. Putting lawyers in charge is why laws and regulations multiply faster than anyone can keep track of—and they contain so many contradictions that it is impossible to live within the law. And economically illiterate lawyers are why the debt keeps spiraling out of control and may already have entered an exponential growth phase, in which case even the brightest financial mind in the world cannot fix it, and we are heading into major trouble.

And you seriously think that another lawyer is going to fix the problems that decades of lawyers in government have caused???

We need an executive (most likely from the business world) who understands things like increasing efficiency and cutting costs, among other skills. Trump happens to have that skill and experience set. Now, I’m under no illusions—Trump may not be able to turn this situation around, the problems may be too deep and systemic—however, if anyone is able, he is the best bet to be that person. Certainly, a lawyer whose default “solution” to every problem is to write a new law is *not* that person.


Yes. I do not accept that government is a big business for reasons that I’ve already outlined. And no, I’m not saying another lawyer is what we need. I just don’t assume that just because Trump has run a business, successfully, that he’ll be a success.

My personal belief is even if someone wanted to really fix the mess, there are too many that want to keep the status quo


195 posted on 04/18/2016 5:08:59 AM PDT by LMAO (" I probably identify more as Democrat," Donald Trump 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson