Here we go again...Everyone, the country is in a nose dive according to polling from Arkan. Thanks for your opinion. Can you add a disclaimer next time stating :The views and opinions expressed in this forum post are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any agency of the U.S. government. Examples of analysis debated within this post are only examples/opinions. They should not be utilized in real-world analytics as they are based only on very limited information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of any U.S. government entity.
Arkan wrote:First of all, Trump has begged Iran to build nukes and basically told its voters that they should not have voted for the more moderate candidate, who won partly based on their faith in his work on the nuclear agreement. If that doesn't work out, they will vote for the hardliner again and that clearly won't work out well for us.
Can you cite me this so I can read up on trump begging Iran to build nukes? Or perhaps point me to the youtube video of the press conference? I would like the one where trump says, "Iran, please build more nukes. PLEASE build more nukes!" Maybe it exists, who knows.
Arkan wrote:Second, as it turns out, removing environmental regulations is bad for the environment, and we need that to live. Also a healthy environment costs us significantly less money and death. Cancer rates even in small town used to sometimes be insanely high due to smog. The need to spend billions on water treatment plants because we pollute the rivers, beach cleanups, etc. etc. does not help either. And water treatment plants don't actually clean out a lot of things.
Currently this is your opinion as we have no relative data proving the changes he made to a few regulations have coursed a positive or negative impact on the environment. The regulations put into place cost money, so the more regulations you put into place will need manpower to enforce. This in turn will increase the cost. Secondly, think about what you just said. The cancer rate in a small town was insanely high. Well since I know you are highly educated with paper to show me after our first debate, the statistics of a small town and a person having cancer would have a chance to be at a higher rate due to the ratio of people. I tried to do a little research on small towns and smog but it was overwhelmingly overrun with 8 out of 10 of the most polluted cities in America are in California. The state that has everyone on the left saying everyone else in the US is whats wrong with the country. They can't even control their own environment, economy, and policies. The middle class is fleeing that state by over 100,000+ people a year as per U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey data. Anyways, back to the little town with smog. I am not sure where you are getting information to pinpoint it to smog and any deregulation this administration has changed. If you could cite the information from some of these small towns you claim and explain your studies it would greatly help us follow your statement. Lastly, to this point you made,On one end you are saying we are not doing enough for the environment, on the other hand you are saying we are spending too much. If water treatment plants are not fulfilling their purpose, we should address that and perhaps that might be the next reallocation of funding. I am not sure why we are blaming the trump administration on this as he did not set up the funding or construction of those treatment plants.
Arkan wrote:Third, the withering of the middle class. The upper class is not what drives the economy. Trump himself is a clear indicator of that. And deregulating Wall Street and giving it giant tax cuts is only going to make it worse. Remember when people said Clinton was just a Wall Street shill? Hah.
I do not see how you are blaming Trump for the middle class. I think it is safe to say the previous administration did nothing for the middle class and set the current course we were in for the Trump election. The first year of this administration has been a stonewalled just like Obama's was. We will have to rely on data from year two and three to definitively examine the strength of the middle class and what has benefited or is not benefiting them to make it stronger.
Arkan wrote:Fourth, the decline of education funding on every level. The teacher strikes across the country have been great, so there is some hope, but in every case they're against one specific party. And that appointment to Secretary of Education is a disaster.
Like any budget, you should only spend what you have in the budget. The problem with our long list of previous administrations and this one is that they have no sense of what a budget means. We need to stop the debt and balance the check book. We continue to ask for more and more money from something that doesn't produce it. I am not saying education is exactly where we need to trim the budget as I am not privy to the oversight of it. But if we don't have the money to spend, we need to stop saying we can spend it. That goes for every program we have. We need to rank all the programs on their necessity and value and fund them from there. Some things may not make the cut as others might need a reduction or inflation. I think this is where debates about planned parenthood and other programs come in. People do not want their tax dollars going towards the program, an ironic one as it seems. You have people who say it's my body and my choice but then want to be funded by others who say its your body your choice, pay yourself. But anyway, we need smart people who understand that we can't go negative every year. A business or myself would not survive if we kept increasing our debt without paying the bills. Someone would step in and stop providing the goods or evict me from my house for not paying up. You would think it was that simple, but we don't balance the budget because we have created a lot of entitlement programs, bloated government jobs that are not needed, and are afraid from backlash from certain groups.
Arkan wrote:I could go on and on, but the point is that certain things we actually really need are literally under attack by Trump, and when someone says we're rooting against him, that's clearly not the case. We're rooting for him to stop being so senile. It's typically not supposed to be significant when a president acts reasonable, but it always is with Trump. "He didn't aggressively attack NK? Wow! He's so Presidential!" And of course, that didn't last.
I would just say he sees a different approach to trying to get things done. Some good and some bad. My opinion on anyone criticizing his handling of NK would be someone rooting for him to fail. The progress on NK/SK being made is a good sign in my opinion currently.
Arkan wrote:It's also worth pointing out that your county went from +11 for Obama to +20 for Clinton and is the 33rd most educated county in the country. So you should be doing well locally, even if your state is a disaster. Similar to where I grew up.
I am not sure what this statement is proving. Perhaps patting yourself on the back to reaclaim you are highly educated because his county is similar to yours with a most educated stat? I would say this, which falls back to your point on the funding of education and strikes. I feel teachers need to be paid fair wages. However, I do not feel our teacher have any systems or processes in place to hold the teachers accountable for their performance like an actual private sector job would. I believe the teachers unions and tenure protect them too much from their own performance. I think we have too much opinion in school and not enough black and white. If someone is failing to teach kids appropriately and they are testing and not meeting a certain criteria, that teacher should be held accountable and either improve or get released. That is currently not the case frequently. Most teachers get let go because of budgets or breaking a policy of conduct.
Here is a recent experience from when I met with the teachers and principal of a school my children went to. I did not feel my children were getting a fair education, I did not feel the teacher was putting discretionary effort towards the children's success, and the principal felt the status queue was ok. So I pulled my kids from the school and placed them in another based off their teaching practices, approach to discipline, and approach to wanting to help students. After a year of the new school, my son in kindergarten is now reading at a level my second grader is reading based off how they taught them. Don't get me wrong, each child will learn at different rates and levels and not every child is the same. But even my second grader who admits it, has relearned new systems and is now outperforming his class. Schools should be operated in a merit based system and at the rate new teachers are applying, we should be coaching up or coaching out. Just getting accepted to teach should not be the norm.