Who is becoming your top Republican Presidential Candidate?

[Mike]

Isn't it strange that the two candidates that are getting the most attention are Ben Carson and Donald Trump, and neither have ever held an elected office. Makes me think that people are sick of politicians....................................

 

[flyingS]

I like what Carson has to say, I just don't think he will get elected. I think he is very real as well. We all know that it is a game, each and every politician can be bought in some form or another. Generally it is a "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" agenda trade off. Most of them will sell their soles to get what they want. I don't think politics really interest either Trump or Carson. It seems they want to do what they feel is the right thing. Right or wrong I would take that any day over the sole selling agenda pushers.

 

[Mike]

Hello Mike,
I never said or implied that we needed immigrants "to the point of taking over the electoral process." Your other statement, well, God just answered my prayer and gave me another person to pray for. Please note; when I created this post was with the sole intention of having a constructive debate and to learn about each other's political views, not to offend anyone or for things to be taken out of context.

No you didn't, and I didn't say you did, but if everyone had the erroneous mindset that we "need them to function", their numbers would eventually get us to that point. Don't you see? The Democrats look at them with a lust for more votes on the left and more to belly up at the gov't trough.

No need to pray for me. I've got my end covered.

I thought we were having a constructive debate and I'm certainly not offended. Please understand that I'm short and to the point and don't write essays for comments. The context is clear. You have gotten overly defensive. Relax, it will be OK.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Might have to change my mind on Scott Walker, he's talking wall on Canadian border.

 

[Mike]

Might have to change my mind on Scott Walker, he's talking wall on Canadian border.

I really don't think Walker has a prayer. I think he's a pretty good guy. But he doesn't have a college degree.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Might have to change my mind on Scott Walker, he's talking wall on Canadian border.

I really don't think Walker has a prayer. I think he's a pretty good guy. But he doesn't have a college degree.

He must be trying to woo Oldtimer's vote with that wall on the Canadian border. :lol: :lol:

 

[Mike]

That wall would be more useful along the river for him in case of a big flood..................

 

[mrj]

At the least, this campaign season is finally more interesting than the 'ho, hum' ones of recent years. More hope of someone outside the political insiders making a real impact, too. I sure hope it isn't all just a new twist to the 'game'. There are some good people with good ideas, so am hopeful for meaningful candidates for the actual election.

Next 'hope' for me is that if new people actually do get into the 'game', they will play it for the good of the nation, not the party, or themselves, and that they will base what is 'good' upon the tried and true Constitutional laws.

mrj

 

[sweetbasil]

While I am enjoying "The Donald's" antics and Non PC talk I am not that comfortable with the thought of him as president. I'd be leaning towards a Teddy Cruz/ Scott Walker/ Carly F as a serious contender. Just my devalued Canadian 2 cents worth.

Hi "BMR!"
Your "devalue Canadian 2 cents" are welcome! I am not a fan of Scotty nor do I believe he will be a finalist for the nomination. I am enjoying to see the support for Ted among our Ranchers.net friends.

Have a great weekend!
Sweetbasil

I think I like Scott Walker's "Blue Collar" he really stood to his convictions dealing with his state issues whether right or wrong he took a stand and defended it.
What don't you like about him?

Hello "BMR!"
I dont understand why Scott Walker wants to run when he himself has received resistant from the Republican Party on some of his contravesial cuts and he landed a 41 percent approval rating in April. I had a hard time trying to understand his ideas on the unions.
There are good things about being unionized and I believe it all depends on who is managing the unions that either make them effective or not, and actually bring a benefit to its members.

Thanks for sharing!
Sweetbasil

 

[sweetbasil]

Isn't it strange that the two candidates that are getting the most attention are Ben Carson and Donald Trump, and neither have ever held an elected office. Makes me think that people are sick of politicians....................................

I agree with you, Mike. I could say most Americans are very tired of politics, and in my humble opinion, I would like to see someone in office that can execute change and put a stop to other politicians who are trying to push their own angendas instead of what is right for our country.

Thanks for sharing!
Sweetbasil

 

[Mike]

Unions have been the prelude to every Communist, Socialist, Facist, and Nazi regime. Think about it.

The rewards from Unions come from tenure or length of time on the job, NOT productivity associated.

 

[mrj]

While I don't know the facts on the politics of Unions being prelude to all those evil regimes, it seems plausible.

I definitely believe they discourage individual excellence and rewards for it, over manipulating members and the company to grow their own power.

They succeeded, along with the moral and faith based beliefs in eliminating company abuses of workers, long ago. Today, it appears to me, that business are more often abused by unions when they dare to make changes to better production and streamlining procedures unless they give most of the benefit to the unions, both entities failing the workers to some degree or other at times.

When Unions are involved in our political races, it seems more often abusive than not, imo.

mrj

 

[Mike]

And here's Hitler's own words from his book, Mein Kampf:


"I think that I have already answered the first question adequately. In the present state of affairs I am convinced that we cannot possibly dispense with the trades unions. On the contrary, they are among the most important institutions in the economic life of the nation. Not only are they important in the sphere of social policy but also, and even more so, in the national political sphere. For when the great masses of a nation see their vital needs satisfied through a just trade unionist movement the stamina of the whole nation in its struggle for existence will be enormously reinforced thereby.

Before everything else, the trades unions are necessary as building stones for the future economic parliament, which will be made up of chambers representing the various professions and occupations."

 

[Brad S]

Well, let's distinguish unions in the private sector and public sector unions. The members of public sector unions maintain their executive control (right to vote) thus an inherent conflict of interests. Thus, voters/citizens must choose, take it or leave it, self enrichment by public employment.

Please don't call self enrichment through government employment "public service."
Self enrichment, ie "jobs" are a good thing, but the real public servant is the business operator that provides jobs for others . Btw, you know what they call businesses that unionize? Colludes. Criminal price fixers. Illegal competitors.

 

[sweetbasil]

Unions have been the prelude to every Communist, Socialist, Facist, and Nazi regime. Think about it.

The rewards from Unions come from tenure or length of time on the job, NOT productivity associated.

Hi Mike,

Thanks for sharing! Your comment above got me really thinking about unions; and Brad S made made a point that I have been considering since reading this post. As soon as I read your post, my first question came to mind "if no productivity is associated with being unionized, then why why UPS is more productive than its competitor who is non-unionized?" I have truly been thinking about this question. I have a few contacts from UPS and took advantaged of that to ask his perspective on the pros and cons of being unionized.

 

[sweetbasil]

Well, let's distinguish unions in the private sector and public sector unions. The members of public sector unions maintain their executive control (right to vote) thus an inherent conflict of interests. Thus, voters/citizens must choose, take it or leave it, self enrichment by public employment.

Please don't call self enrichment through government employment "public service."
Self enrichment, ie "jobs" are a good thing, but the real public servant is the business operator that provides jobs for others . Btw, you know what they call businesses that unionize? Colludes. Criminal price fixers. Illegal competitors.

Hello Brad S.,
Thanks for sharing! You put my thought on paper through your post, since I have been questioning the productivity of a unionized company like UPS versus others that are non-unionized. From what I know about UPS, their productivity is very good and the "union" seems to "work" for them; granted, I am sure it cost the enterprise more to have a unionized workforce and their shipping prices compare to its competitor reflect that. In the other hand, like you mentioned, I personally don't see that a program is very successful when our government gets involved, because instead of streamlining the process, they seem to add more layers of bureaucracy resulting in more costs and less efficiency. I guess these are my "two devalued cents" on my current perspective pertaining to unions.

 

[Mike]

Why FedEx Has UPS Beat

May 24, 2013 3:10 PM ET | About: FedEx Corporation (FDX), UPS
One of the greatest and most well known rivalries in America is United Parcel Service (NYSE:UPS) versus FedEx (NYSE:FDX). These two corporations are competing fiercely for customers in the transportation services industry.

Performance and Operations

The last reported annual revenue of UPS was an impressive $54.42 billion. FedEx, on the other hand, "only" notched $43.86 billion. At first glance, one is likely to think that UPS is the more dominant of the two companies. But with further examination, something quite phenomenal can be seen. Despite the fact that UPS made $10 billion dollars more in revenue than FedEx, the latter company still manages to bring in a greater profit. The net income reported by FedEx was $1.80 billion compared with $874 million for UPS. This, without a doubt, shows that FedEx is providing greater value to shareholders. Hence FedEx's earnings per share of 5.71 compared with the humbling 0.90 for UPS.

In the past 10 years, UPS has seen net income jumping around somewhat unpredictably. It has fallen and risen numerous times, and currently seems to be spiraling downward. FedEx, on the other hand, took only one tumble around 2008-2009, and has otherwise experienced consistent and impressive growth, which seems to be a pattern that is currently active for the company.

 

[mrj]

Does anyone know if, or which, of these companies is working for the US Postal Service? I'm pretty sure UPS is, but have heard that Fed Ex forced govt. to also 'share the wealth' of the work load with their company, too. That could be a sort of 'captive supply' of work which the company wouldn't have to make an effort to get. Wonder how it is all working out, for the businesses, post office, and taxpayers!

mrj

 

[Mike]

ANYONE can contract with the Post Office for delivering the mail. I had an old friend that delivered mail in bulk from one town to another because he won the bid. He used his farm/ranch truck and enclosed a cattle trailer for those deliveries which took from 3:00 A.M. until 7:00 A.M. 6 days per week.

https://about.usps.com/suppliers/becoming/contract-delivery-service.htm

 

[sweetbasil]

Why FedEx Has UPS Beat

May 24, 2013 3:10 PM ET | About: FedEx Corporation (FDX), UPS
One of the greatest and most well known rivalries in America is United Parcel Service (NYSE:UPS) versus FedEx (NYSE:FDX). These two corporations are competing fiercely for customers in the transportation services industry.

Performance and Operations

The last reported annual revenue of UPS was an impressive $54.42 billion. FedEx, on the other hand, "only" notched $43.86 billion. At first glance, one is likely to think that UPS is the more dominant of the two companies. But with further examination, something quite phenomenal can be seen. Despite the fact that UPS made $10 billion dollars more in revenue than FedEx, the latter company still manages to bring in a greater profit. The net income reported by FedEx was $1.80 billion compared with $874 million for UPS. This, without a doubt, shows that FedEx is providing greater value to shareholders. Hence FedEx's earnings per share of 5.71 compared with the humbling 0.90 for UPS.

In the past 10 years, UPS has seen net income jumping around somewhat unpredictably. It has fallen and risen numerous times, and currently seems to be spiraling downward. FedEx, on the other hand, took only one tumble around 2008-2009, and has otherwise experienced consistent and impressive growth, which seems to be a pattern that is currently active for the company.

Hi Mike,
Thanks for sharing. I am not surprise to see the numbers you have shared about these companies' revenues. I had the opportunity to participate in the small parcel contract negotiations for my former employer. From my experience, even leadership was concerned about FedEx ability to really execute, but the FedEx manager is a true sales person along with its leadership. FedEx promised the moon, the stars, and threw in Jupiter as a bonus. UPS is not easy to negotiate with; they are very strong on their pricing; I got a sensed that they strongly believe in the quality of their services, and see no "need" to push for cutting their prices. I rarely had any issues with UPS executing our volume, but a lot with FedEx. I don't believe FedEx will be able to keep up with the increased in volume; they actually failed terribly in 2013 during our peak season, and UPS stepped in and helped us. The retail industry is struggling and they are after the $, just as my former employer and I don't see that FedEx will be able to continue to undercut its competitor.