Trump vs. Media on Charlottesville

Donald Trump has come under a lot of unfair fire for his “failure” to disavow white supremacy fast enough after the Charlottesville incident on August 12.  Trump was criticized for getting into it with most of the gathered media.  He was absolutely right.  He condemned terrorism, white supremacy. He’s disavowed David Duke over and over and over even as early as 1998. Continue reading “Trump vs. Media on Charlottesville”

Fundamentally Un-Transforming America

There has been a lot of talk among Conservative and Libertarian circles about this and that that legislation we need, what Trump should do, and what Congress should do.  The healthcare plan or tax reform or the border wall.  While these are important, they’re just treating the symptoms.   If we really want to bring Conservative and  Libertarian values back to our nation, and defeat the “progressive” left that aims to fundamentally transform America, we are going to go back to our own roots and remember how we became the shining city on the hill in the first place.

Continue reading “Fundamentally Un-Transforming America”

Yes Clinton won the popular vote, but…

  1. The purpose of the electoral college is to prevent majority tyranny – to keep the country from being controlled by just a few major cities with large populations.
  2. The Presidential campaigns were designed around the electoral college.  That’s why Donald Trump did not campaign in New York or California, or try to run up the score in Texas.
  3. Let’s also remember that while Clinton may have won the popular vote, she did so by running up the score in highly Socialist liberal Democrat areas such as California and New York City.  Below you will see an analysis of what I’m talking about.

Continue reading “Yes Clinton won the popular vote, but…”

Issue #3: Social Justice Warriors and the Culture of Political Correctness

Social justice is difficult to define (especially for the social justice warriors), mainly because it has exactly the meaning that progressives want it to have.  When we feel that there’s an inequity in society (fairly or unfairly), the government can force agendas that meet that narrative by ….
If I had to sum up in one sentence why Barack Obama was able to defeat Mitt Romney in 2012, my answer would be: “Romney told us what we needed to hear.  Obama told us what we wanted to hear.”
Liberals care nothing about science, logical, legal, nor economic arguments.  They make policy arguments based on emotion, and what they feel “should be.”  Conservatives, while certainly taking personal decency into account, realize that we cannot escape the facts.  Emotion is important but it does not take the place of fact.  Democrats are only interested in the so-called “appeal to pity.”  Civil rights movements in the 19th and 20th centuries (which by the way were supported way more by Republicans than Democrats) have ended slavery & segregation, given blacks and women the opportunity to vote, and have evened the playing field in that anyone from any race, gender, or background has the equal opportunity to succeed, provided they are willing to achieve the education, experience, or hard work necessary to achieve it.  Groups like Black Lives Matter would have you falsely believe that systematic racism still exists, and that if one experiences inequalities in income and success, it has to be due to some ethereal “privilege”, rather than our own choices, culture, and actions. 

On top of this, they talk a lot about rights.  By definition, rights cannot be given or taken away by any person or government.  If the government, a person, or company can give you something or give you permission to do something, then that’s called a privilege. If you want to keep what you earn, that is defined as “greed,” as if other people have the right to your stuff just because they associate it with “social justice” and declare it a “right
Most of us not going to go and insult people or call a black person the n-word.  Why?  First, I like to think that most Americans are decent and polite people, the last thing they want to do is offend someone unnecessarily.  How about instead of trying to “educate” people on intercultural communication and diversity, we just simply be good to others and simply obey the golden rule, that would be all we need.  Anyway, the second reason is that I understand that while we have freedom of speech, that doesn’t mean we can say anything without regard to the consequences.  If I insult you or say something that you find offensive or insensitive, you can choose how to react to it.  You could yell at me, end a friendship or relationship.  What you cannot do, however, is prevent me from speaking, or trying to outlaw speech simply because you find it offensive.  Case in point:  The Washington Redskins.  Now I happen to find the name greatly offensive.  I might suggest the Maryland Redskins might be more appropriate.  This came up in a discussion I had many years ago when I had replied that these are only words and that the people arguing against it (who weren’t even Native Americans themselves) were being too sensitive.  The reply was, “You’re Jewish, how would you feel if an NFL team was named the Brooklyn Rabbis?” I admit I used to think this was a semi-decent argument even though I would never say so.  Here’s how I should have approached this back then: “Well I don’t really know, I suppose I’d find it weird, I don’t think I’d be insulted.  But even if I was, then it’s my choice not to support or follow that team.”  I have a message for people who label anything they feel uncomfortable with has hate speech:  Tough! Guess what, it’s a rough world out there, and sometimes you are going to hear things that offend you.  That’s life! More and more people in our culture operate under the assumption that they have the right to not be offended. If I’m offended by something you say, do or wear, then that’s my right but we do not have the right to shut down and label others’ speech as “hate speech” just because you don’t like it.  If you feel triggered, that’s something YOU have to deal with, not the rest of us.  It’s not up to us to indulge your fairy-tale safe space puppy dog and unicorn version of reality. The fact that you feel “triggered” by anything and everything speaks to your own lack of self-worth and thin skin that you need anti-free-speech laws because you can’t come out your safe space long enough to face the real world.  When you graduate college, you will find that the world is a rough place.  While I take care not to hurt someone on purpose or unnecessarily and I don’t set out to offend anyone, I will not walk on eggshells so that you can put yourself in bubble wrap and prevent yourself from ever hearing anything that might make you even the least bit uncomfortable.  Life’s tough.  Deal with it.

Issue #1 Educate the public


I’m not going to get into a full-on critique of our education system at a state and local level, but as a professional in this field, I have to weigh in on the role of the Federal government in education: which is none at all.  We can talk about No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, Common Core, or other programs that pretend they can improve our education system simply by more Federal regulation and throwing money at the problem.  The fact is that the Federal Department of Education is itself unconstitutional by its very existence.  If you’re going to label something unconstitutional, you’d better be able to back that up:

Amendment X: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  Simply put, the Tenth Amendment, in layman’s terms, states that if not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, an authority automatically falls to the states.  Since public education is not mentioned anywhere in the U.S. Constitution or any of its twenty-seven amendments, it is officially a state issue, and only a state issue.
Yet although the Federal Government Constitutionally has no business interfering in state education, we have had several violations by the Federal Government.  They take tax money to the DOE, give pennies on the dollar back to the states where it came from, and to even get that, you need to follow the Federal government’s rules:  No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top and Common Core are unconstitutional on their very face.  Common Core is by the way NOT state-led as we’ve been led to believe.  It is designed by a panel of unelected bureaucrats hired by corporations that have a vested financial interest in over-testing our students.  The Federal government also uses DOE as a strong-arm tactic to impose their will on sovereign districts and states.  Evidently Barack Obama can dictate to state school boards that they must give in to invented social constructs regarding gender identity, or be labeled as discriminatory and not get their own tax money back. 

Education entails more than what happens inside the brick-and-mortar of a classroom, or online in the course’s Blackboard page.  It’s our duty as Americans to do the following every day:

  • Watch and listen to the news.  You’re not going to get the truth by ANY major media outlet.  Most mainstream media has a liberal bias, and even Fox News is not the reliable source it used to be.  We need to get the ideas from right, left, and middle.  Listen to Liberal (Young Turks, Huffington Post), Conservative (Conservative Review, Daily Wire, Daily Signal), AND Libertarian sources (PJTV, John Stossel) to get ALL the information.
  • Take a course or read a book to educate themselves on the Constitutional history of the United States and the Federalist Papers written by our Founding Fathers
  • Once and a while at least, make sure you write your President, Senators, Congressmen and State Legislators to voice your opinion if you differ with them on an issue, or want to express your support for upcoming legislation.

Although the Federal Government Constitutionally has no business interfering in state education, Barack Obama can apparently dictate to state school boards that they must give in to invented social constructs regarding gender identity, or be labeled as discriminatory and not get their own tax money back.The Federal Government uses their power to force-feed leftist policies like letting people use whatever bathroom they want, instituting anti-white racism in the form of social justice and white privilege. 

I believe the main problem, the reason that government is not listening to us is because they believe we’re not paying attention to them.  Therefore a politician feels free to  say and promise anything on the campaign trail in the hope that we won’t call them out on it.  In the current election, polls show that despite the fact that more Americans take Trump’s side of most issues, they still favor Clinton.  Although the vote is, not, and should not be denied to anyone, along with rights come responsibilities to educate ourselves about our history, Constitution, basic supply-side Economics, and make sure you do your research into candidates to go beyond the soundbites.  Elected officials are put into office by us, and they work for us.  So it’s our duty to give them reviews, scrutinize their work, and fire them when they don’t do their job.

I believe that most establishment politicians (both sides of the aisle) count on ignorance.  If we are unaware of the fact that taxing the wealthiest Americans even at 100% could not cover our national budget for one year (source:, then we are more likely to buy into Bernie Sanders’ argument for free college and health care, because we believe him when he says that will work.  No matter who occupies the White House or Congress, a truly educated and well-informed public is our best “inoculation” against oppressive government, because if they know that we will hold their feet to the fire, one would be surprised how much they start looking out for our interests.  Getting the money out of politics?  A nice idea, but not practical in the short term.  But not even the wealthiest campaign contributor can undo a strong, well-informed public who knows not only who to pull the lever for, but why.  News and politics are not the “in” thing, and many people avoid it because it’s a potentially controversial topic.  But if we pay more attention to who’s winning “Survivor” than who’s winning the primaries, we can not make informed decisions about who to trust with our national interest, and also in a self-feeding loop, only makes us more vulnerable to political rhetoric, making us hate politics more, and pay less attention…  So the best way to get Congress and the President to do what we want, is the threat of losing what they really want – the vote.

Here’s my “homework assignment” to you all.  Please educate yourself.  Watch the news, not just Fox News or MSNBC but an eclectic spectrum of political thought. Read a book on the Constitution, our Founding Fathers, the basic laws of Economics and History.  Below are some places to start.  In this blog in the coming weeks and months, I will pass along more sources that I have found useful.  Read them and decide for yourself.


  • Hillsdale College is a college in Michigan that takes no Federal funds, and have a variety of FREE courses on Constitution, government, history and economics.  Do yourself a favor and sign up, I think it will open your eyes.
  • Politifact and Factcheck, just like Joe Friday, looks at “just the facts, ma’am” and sorts the truth from the lies of all nationally prominent politicians.  Does your President or Senator make a claim or statement that seems wrong to you?  Here’s a place to get an unbiased analysis of their statements.
  • Article V Convention of States seeks to call a convention to help take our states back from government overreach.  Even if you decide not to participate, there are many good reading resources on this page.

I can’t understand why _____________s vote Democrat.

I have to really question why certain segments of our population, who should be very much in favor of Republican/Libertarian or against Democrats.  We’ve become so programmed to believe that the Democrats are the party of the people, I want to bring up a few issues.  I wonder why would…

(A) …blacks vote Democrat?

Most of the poorest inner cities right now, with high black populations have been run by Democrat mayors for the better part of the century.  What have they done for the African American community?  Why all the shootings?  Black on black violence?  Why are the unemployment rates for African-Americans so high?  The only thing Democrats have done for the black community are to quash job creations, keeping them on welfare, and keeping them dependent on the Democratic machine.  This is on top of the fact that it was the Democrat party that was pro-slavery, established Jim Crow laws, and opposed the Civil Rights Acts.  The first Republican president, a racist bigot named Abraham Lincoln (sarcasm noted) was anti-slave, and the KKK was formed as a reaction to Republican post-bellum occupation of the South and Reconstruction.

(B)…millennials vote Democrat?  Credit: “Wilkow Majority” at 0h42min on 8/11/16
Millennials are of course very varied in their personality and political affiliation, and are tough to peg down to ideology, but it’s no question that a vast majority would favor Democrats, especially Bernie Sanders.  But one thing I’ve noticed is that they are more anti-establishment and for innovation.  They’d rather stay at a youth hostel or Air B&B instead of a traditional hotel, or take Uber or Lyft rather than a standard taxi – in other words innovation over establishment.  They challenge the establishment and related economy, and favor free choice.  We have a media and education system which is highly liberal biased, but underneath it all, I think today’s college age people are more conservative than previous generations were at that age.  They want change, which the Democrat establishment wants to quash.  Uber is illegal in Philadelphia but the restriction was lifted for several days during the Democratic Convention.  They want to heavily tax and regulate cab companies to keep newcomers out and the cronies in.  Lyft and Uber are bucking that trend.  Sooner or later though increased tax and regulations, these startups will either be run out of business, or so regulated that they are exactly the same as established corporations anyway.
Another reason is jobs.  The minimum wage was never intended to be a full-time income to raise a family on.  Most minimum wage employees work for small employers, and a great many are high school and college kids just trying to get their first job, get some experience and earn some pocket money.  They are really eager to get work experience and better themselves.  But the minimum wage hike prices them out of these positions and costs them jobs.  Further, the massive illegal immigration due to our open borders floods the market with unskilled labor, so those teens lucky enough to get jobs will receive a lower wage not because of greedy businessmen, but they are literally being undercut and priced out by groups (ILLEGAL immigrants) who shouldn’t be here in the first place.  Democrats quash the free choices that innovative millennials want, support policies that cost millennial jobs, and yet they still are confident they’ll get that 18-30 vote.

(C)…the poor vote Democrat? 
As I have said above, illegal immigrants take low wage jobs (not JUST minimum wage) that the lower classes need in order to make ends meet.  Contrary to popular belief, immigrants do NOT simply take the jobs that Americans don’t want.  This hogwash.  The Center for Immigration Studies reports that “Thus, there really are no jobs that Americans won’t do…Many jobs often thought to be overwhelmingly immigrant (legal and illegal) are in fact majority native-born”

·        Maids and housekeepers: 51 percent native-born
·        Taxi drivers and chauffeurs: 58 percent native-born
·        Butchers and meat processors: 63 percent native-born
·        Grounds maintenance workers: 64 percent native-born
·        Construction laborers: 66 percent native-born
·        Porters, bellhops, and concierges: 72 percent native-born
·        Janitors: 73 percent native-born
SOURCE: Steven A. Camarota & Karen Zeigler, Center for Immigration Studies, Math 2013
(D) …Jews vote Democrat?

The Obama administration seems to be an apologist for Islam, and the Muslim Brotherhood.  Right now Judeo-Christian values are under attack Promotion of Islam, ignoring Israel’s needs while defending and protecting Islam at every turn.

(E) …the gay community vote Democrat?

After the tragic Orlando night club shooting, a killing that was clearly an anti-gay, ISIS-related crime, the first word out of Democrats mouths were not a pledge to go after ISIS, but to scold the American people saying that this was a gun control issue.  They are making excuse after excuse for ISIS and radical Islam.  The LGBT community consistently gets on the side of tolerance and inclusion, including the Muslim community.  These are people that think homosexuality is a sin and should be punished by death, and LGBT would be the first people that Islamist extremist groups will go after in a Shahira Laws situation. 


HIllary’s Economic Speech Part 2


Then there’s the Estate Tax, which Trump wants to eliminate altogether. If you believe that he’s as wealthy as he says, that alone would save the Trump family $4 billion. It would do nothing for 99.8 percent of Americans. So they’d get a $4 billion tax cut, and 99.8 percent of Americans get nothing.
I see what you’re doing here.  It’s the old, “tie the issue to Trump” tactic.  First the estate tax was not designed for, and run by, Donald Trump.  The estate tax is an abomination and absolutely should be repealed.  The deceased estate refers to money and property they had when they died, so it’s already been through income tax and capital gains tax.  The estate tax prevents people from taking money that they’ve already earned and paid taxes on, from passing on inheritance to their children take their money for yourself because they’re rich and they shouldn’t have it.  That is beyond sick!  And your “reasoning” for this is that so Donald Trump and the other “super rich” have a lower tax break, because you have somehow decided that the government has more claim to a person’s estate than their children.  For a person who truly claims to stand with children and the middle class, you’re sure not acting like it.  By the way, if estate tax is so good, why are you sheltering your own estate from it, can you answer that?  
And that brings us to the third question: Which candidate can you actually count on to go to bat for workers and working families?  That’s why I’ve set out a bold vision to make quality, affordable childcare available to all Americans and limit the costs to 10 percent of family income.
I’m sorry to say this but the truth must come out.  Just because something is good does not give you the go-ahead to declare it a “right” and make others pay for it.  Health care is NOT a right.  There, I said it.  If it were then you could demand health care at any time from any person free of charge.  I know some people will feel I’m being cold.  The truth will set you free but it will piss you off first.  You cannot arbitrarily define things as “rights” just because you want to do it in order to pander to the “lower class” for votes.  If you want lower-cost childcare then stop with the endless taxes and regulations.  More private agencies will open up, and the resulting competition will lower costs because unlike yourself, parents of children actually do care about the quality of their child’s care, and are smart enough to pay attention to make sure needs are being met.  The government cannot possibly accomplish this.
For example, guaranteeing equal pay won’t just increase paychecks for women – it will boost family budgets and get incomes rising across the board.  Raising the federal minimum wage won’t just put more money in the pockets of low-income families – it also means they will spend more at the businesses in their neighborhoods. 
First, the gender wage gap is a myth.  The numbers are true only if you ignore small technicalities, like men working different jobs, more hours, taking less time off, in more dangerous occupations than women.  You’re simply comparing ALL men with ALL women.  Raising the minimum wage is another one of those policies that sounds good.  Sure, more money, why not?  But Democrats are playing on pity.  If you don’t want to fix prices and labor costs, then you’re a hateful person who wants poor people to starve.  Yes I want everyone to live comfortably, but that’s up to them.  That doesn’t mean that any type of wage is a “right” and that the government can enforce it by law.  As soon as you sit down and think about this logically, and play out the scenario, you begin to see that fixing the so-called wage gap through price fixing (and what is a wage but a price paid for labor) is simply a utopian fantasy.  The government is not responsible for your wage.  If a job doesn’t pay you enough, get another one.  If you can’t, then maybe your skills need upgrading.  So go out and either return to college or gain experience, better yourself somehow and you’ll get what you’re worth. Nobody is owed $15 an hour just because they say so.  If you’re trying to raise a family on $8 per hour, then why did you have the family to begin with if you don’t have the requisite skills to earn more?  At what point do we start to take responsibility for our own actions and lifestyles?  To use the analogy again, simply jacking up wages is the cast on a broken hand, but if you really want to understand the cause of this problem, then you have to take a wider view. The cold hard reality is that no thing or no person’s labor is worth any more than the market demands.  A wage is money paid by employers in exchange for labor.  When you tell an employer that they are not “allowed” to hire someone for less than $15, then employers who would earn less than that will be priced out of jobs, and those lucky enough to get it will soon be out of work because the business can’t afford them anymore.  What this will do is put small companies out of businesses because the international giants can afford the new wage while these small businesses that you gush about so much go belly up.  The increased minimum wage has already proven disastrous in Seattle and in California.  Companies are not going to go simply eat the cost.  They’ll fire workers, reduce hours, start automating, and raising prices.  This policy sounds good and plays the pity card, but forcing anyone to pay above market value for any good or service will only hurt in the long run. 
All our lives we’ve been taught to believe that private businesses should not be running schools, and that people can’t earn a living without a government-enforced minimum wage.  The time has come to start asking ourselves why this is true!  We need to start asking tough questions. Does anyone out there believe that the government can run a business better than a private business?  Think about that one the next time you’re standing in line at the DMV or at the Post Office, or waiting for treatment at the Veterans Administration.
This is something that even the original automakers understood, way back at the beginning of the 20th century, when they decided to pay the unbelievable sum of $5 a day to autoworkers. 
And I applaud people like Henry Ford for doing so.  But what you’re forgetting is that this was a VOLUNTARY move.  Ford recognized that if he paid workers more, he’d attract a better quality employee (and thus a better product), and one that would be able to afford what he made.  It was a win-win – a smart business decision that gave Ford a competitive advantage while improving the lives of his employees.  That is NOT what you’re proposing.  You would force ALL auto manufacturers to pay employees $5 a day whether their skills and experience were worth it or not.  That would have had the opposite effect – employees would have no incentive to improve their skills or productivity, and that would have forced an increase in price or decrease in work hours (probably both), which would have made the car LESS affordable, this time not only to the Ford employees, but middle-class people everywhere.  The economy is like a Jenga tower – you pull one piece out, you meddle with one piece of it, the whole thing can collapse.
We already have millions of people working in the economy and paying $12 billion a year to Social Security even though they are undocumented.  We will level the playing field so that American workers can’t be taken advantage of because undocumented workers can be exploited by employers, which is one of the reasons we have this disconnect.
If you break into the country illegally, you are breaking the law.  You don’t deserve protection, amnesty, or a “level playing field.”  You deserve a one-way plane ticket back to where you came from.  I’m all for legal immigration. But you can’t come in here against the law and then blame US for putting you in the shadows.  I’m sick of this “feel-good, play on the heartstrings” policy, declaring someone racist because they want to defend their own border.  If someone comes into our country under false pretense then you are by definition a criminal and need to leave.  To all the people saying, “oh but those poor people they just want to make a better life.” So if someone broke into your home and stole your food because they’re out of money, does that make it okay for them to stay in your house, share a bed with your children because they have unilaterally declared sanctuary in your house?  No?  We do not have a history of open borders, and foreigners are not entitled to simply break in and stay here just because they want to.
I think there are a lot of great ideas out in America, and I want you to have a say in your government. And that means we have to get unaccountable money out of our politics, overturn Citizens United, and expand voting rights, not restrict them.
Ok finally something I can at least in theory agree with.  I’m all for removing money from politics and opening chances for third-party candidates.  However you are the definition of hypocrite on this one.  Why are you taking money from Goldman Sachs and Apple (who by the way make their phones overseas, did you know?), getting six-figure lecture fees for speeches you won’t disclose, and living in two multi-million dollar homes.  Well who said that selling government secrets to hostile nations doesn’t pay off?
Nothing for communities of color in our cities to overcome the barriers of systemic racism. Nothing to create new opportunities for young people.  
Oh stop it!  I am so sick and tired of hearing that every racial inequality has nothing to do with poor lifestyle choices, single-parent households, bad neighborhoods, and underperforming public schools.  Yes there are some bad policies (mostly in cities that have been under Democrat control for the better part of a century), but you cannot look at every discrepancy and assume that it MUST be due to some “systemic” racism or ethereal “white privilege.”  That is an old and tired argument.  Everyone has equal opportunity and while individual acts of racism will always be an unfortunate fact of life, by using the word “systemic” you’re assuming system-wide – public laws and policies that have discrimination as their intended purpose.  Those have been extinct for over fifty years!  Yes we have a terrible history in the United States when it comes to blacks, women, and Native Americans.  But the key word is “history.”  Just because your ancestors were slaves 200 years ago (at no fault of me or my ancestors) does not mean you’re owed special treatment or get to cry racism as the default reason for every single problem you face.  We get it, without the black vote you stand no chance of election.  But you’ve fed off your race baiting and their dependence long enough.  The Republicans ended slavery and opposed Jim Crow laws despite the Democrats and their offshoots (i.e. the KKK) attempts to continue them.  I realize you haven’t told anything resembling truth in the last 24 years, but don’t assume that Americans are as stupid as you’d like to believe.   
I’m going to repeat a line that Regan used after another failed economic administration. Are you better off now than you were 8 years ago?  Are you more secure financially?  Are race relations better?  Is there less violence in the streets and more rule of law?  Regardless of what you think of any other candidate, when you get in that booth in November, ask yourself has Obama done a great job?  Because what you’re going to get is four more years of Obama – or worse.

HIllary’s Economic Speech Part 1

Hillary Clinton is just the gift that keeps on giving.  I had a little fun with her DNC acceptance speech, and now I will tear apart her economic speech piece by piece.  I want to note that there are charts, graphs, and hyperlinks in this essay.  That’s because I do not want you to take my word for these things.  I believe in backing up my claims, and I want you to know the truth.  If you take my word for everything (which you shouldn’t), then don’t bother clicking on the links.  But unlike a certain Democrat presidential candidate, I believe that facts and backing up statements are good ideas.  
I realize that this is long, but please take the time to read it.  Click the links if you want but please read it, ask questions, and do your own homework.
So starting on Day One, we will work with both parties to pass the biggest investment in new, good-paying jobs since World War II. 
Ok I’m glad we started with this because whenever a Democrat uses the word “invest”, I would strongly suggest holding on tight to your wallet. When politicians say it, what they really mean is “spend more money,” which means “raising taxes.”  And don’t be foolish enough to believe that this will only affect the so-called “one percent.”  Democrats have the pattern of using the “pity” card, making arguments based only on emotion without logic, ignoring reality, and not thinking things through.  There’s nothing wrong with being happy, wanting a good job, a good home, great health coverage and low cost education.  But instead of taking logical steps to fix the problem, they prey on our emotion to patch over real issues and just fix equity of outcome.  Here’s an analogy I will use throughout this presentation: If a person comes to the doctor with a broken bone, the doctor sets it and casts it.  If that same person comes in again and again with one broken bone after another, at some point you have to take a deeper look at WHY that person has so many broken bones.  Illness?  Abuse?  And ignoring the underlying problem will only make it worse.  If we have “too much” income inequality, then we need to ask ourselves why our economic policies aren’t creating jobs, rather than simply trying to fix the results by raising the minimum wage, which is only counterproductive to the real issue.  That’s the Democrat line.  Just keep giving us more and more money and everything will be fine. No, we’re really doing well.  We just need the rich to give a little more, just ask the “super rich” for just a little bit more.  Where does it end?  We hear that again four years later, and four years after that.  Didn’t we already “invest” in roads and bridges after Obama’s stimulus plan?  Where did that money go?  The American taxpayers are not an endless money pit that you can dig into to fix your own broken promises.
We will also help cities like Detroit and Flint connect underserved neighborhoods to opportunity, expanding affordable housing, and we will repair schools and failing water systems as well. You know, I happen to think we should be ambitious: while we’re at it, let’s connect every household in America to broadband by the year 2020.  And let’s build a cleaner, more resilient power grid with enough renewable energy to power every home in our country as well.

Businesses don’t exist for the sole purpose of creating jobs, they are there to build a product or service, and yes, make money doing it.  Government isn’t in the business of creating jobs, and they don’t even produce anything. 
Detroit has been under Democrat control for over half a century.  You’ve had your chance to “serve” those neighborhoods and where has it gone?  While these goals are admirable, they can be handled by free enterprise.  Detroit has been under Democrat control for over half a century.  Chicago has had a Democrat mayor since 1933, and for all but 12 years since the year 1893! Has it done any good? Even inner city blacks are waking up to this truth. Yes we need new power grids, and roads, and infrastructure, and wi-fi Internet, more affordable housing, all good ideas.  But this is a fallacy that liberals keep bringing up.  Just because something is a “good idea” does not mean that you can simply declare it a “right”, start some more unelected and unaccountable government agencies, then send the bill to the taxpayers.  Especially since when they do, there are always strings attached .  Parents out there, do you feel that you and your child’s teachers make better decisions than the Federal government?  When did we get the idea that every single problem can and should be solved by out-of-touch federal government bureaucrats who know nothing about these communities?  If you want to help the inner cities deal with poverty, then LEAVE THEM THE HECK ALONE!  For all the complaints I hear about politics as usual, the IRS, high taxes, is there anyone reading this who seriously WANTS a stronger, more intrusive government?  
And we’re going to invest $10 billion in what we’re calling “Make it in America” partnerships to support American manufacturing and recommit to scientific research that can create entire new industries.
Ah there’s that “invest” word again.  When a Democrat says “invest”, that’s when the BS meter goes off.  Answer this: Why do we need the government to take our money to tell us how to create new industries?  The light bulb, the telephone, the movie camera, and the resulting power companies – these were created by small-time inventors and entrepreneurs.  If you want American companies to invest in more jobs and research, here’s a clue – stop taxing them so much and pretending like every problem we have is solvable only by big government.  
The people taking care of our children and our parents, they deserve a good wage, good benefits, and a secure retirement.
Yes they do.  But again it’s not for the Federal Government to solve every problem and right every wrong.  Any profession that’s that important is going to be well taken care of because the free market will demand it.  Believe it or not parents DO want good education for their kids and comfortable care for their elderly parents.  Why can’t we let the free market decide?  If a private school fails, the parent pulls their kids out. If a government school fails, then you suddenly complain that they’re not funded enough.  The way to a secure retirement is to encourage private investment and allow people to invest in methods of their choice, not that the government would dictate to them.  Again, parents, don’t you think that you can make better choices for your children than the government?  Isn’t it your tax money  Don’t YOU get to decide?  Why should the government take your tax money, then gives you 50 cents on the dollar and even then, only if you follow their rules and tell you how to educate your kids?  This has nothing to do with a good wage or benefits.  The private market will take care of that.  This has to do with pandering to unions in exchange for votes.
And, it’s crucial that every American have access to the education and skills they need to get the jobs of the future.  So we will fight to make college tuition-free for the middle class and debt-free for everyone.  We will also liberate millions of people who already have student debt by making it easier to refinance and repay what you owe as a portion of your income so you don’t have to pay more than you can afford.
So if education is truly an investment, isn’t it our investment to make?  Again, playing to the heartstrings.  You’re saying that “education is good, therefore it is a right, and therefore the taxpayers should pay for it.” If you believe a college education is right for you, then you should do it.  But like any investment, the responsibility is yours.  If you truly can’t afford college, we already have Federal grant programs in place.  Otherwise it’s not the government’s cross to bear.  If you want to buy a house, does the bank charge you the price of the house or “what you can afford?”  I hate to sound cold, but again the government is not our parents and it is not there to solve our problems for us.
So here’s what we’re going to do. We will support high-quality union training programs. We will propose new tax credits to encourage more companies to offer paid apprenticeships that let you earn while you learn. We will do more, including a national campaign, to dignify skills training across the board. I think we’ve got to reverse what has become a kind of commonplace view, which is everybody needs to go to college.
So only the government and union organizations are capable of training people and growing jobs?  I got a message for you, if a company offers a paid apprenticeship, they get low-cost labor in return for field experience.  It’s a win-win.  Don’t even try to imply that we can’t train people and offer apprenticeships without your help.  We’d do much better without you and your constant departments, agencies, and regulations.  If you want to help small businesses, then leave them the hell alone!
It is also true that China and other countries have gamed the system for too long. Enforcement – particularly during the Bush administration – has been too lax.
China has gamed the system?  With yours and Bill’s help of course.  You sell secrets and favors to foreign countries in exchange for campaign contributions, and BUSH is the one being too lax?  How stupid do you think we are?
So as President, I will stand up to China and anyone else who tries to take advantage of American workers and companies. And I’m going to ramp up enforcement by appointing, for the first time, a chief trade prosecutor, I will triple the number of enforcement officers, and when countries break the rules, we won’t hesitate to impose targeted tariffs.
The same way you did during Chinagate?  I’m sorry, but after the carelessness and incompetence you displayed in Benghazi, your email scandal, and with the Russia nuclear deal, not to mention the dozens of other scandals, to even think that you’d be the least bit competent in foreign policy is beyond laughable.
Right now, thousands of Michigan companies are exporting billions of dollars of products around the world. We want them to sell even more, and create more jobs here at home. But corporations should not abandon profitable operations here in the United States to move abroad, just to give shareholders a quicker return, CEOs a bigger bonus, and unions a weaker hand to play.
As I explained above, companies are leaving for overseas because of liberal policies that think the answer to economic growth is taxes and regulations.  You tax companies into oblivion, which causes them to leave, and when they do, they’re the greedy ones?  And it’s not about bonuses to CEOs.  Their bottom line affects their stock price, and their stock price affects the millions of people (like me) who have investment in their companies through stocks and IRAs, and who are depending on that money for retirement – you know, we “common folks” who don’t have $18 million estates called “White Haven.”  The economy is a delicate balance, and you cannot just “attack one per-centers” and have no effect on all of us. Do CEOs make too much?  That’s not mine, nor anyone else’s call to make.  No product or employee’s labor is worth any more or less than the market demands.  If we really thought the Microsoft CEO was not worth his salary, then the investors and those holding interest & stock in the company would vote them out.  Executives, sports stars, and movie stars (note how you never hear complaints about the last two) make that much for the simple reason than we’re willing to pay it.  If we stopped buying their products or stopped attending their games, the market would correct itself.  What you’re proposing is a government controlled market.  I think they tried that in Russia about 100 years ago.   “I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.” – Winston Churchill
He’s made Trump ties in China and Trump suits in Mexico instead of here in Michigan.  He keeps saying it’s not possible to make these things in America anymore, and that’s just wrong.
What’s wrong is you and your big federal government politics.  Do you know why things are tough to make in America? You force companies overseas with your high taxes and regulations, then when they can’t operate profitably in the U.S. you call them greedy?  That’s insane logic:  Companies aren’t hiring enough workers, so we’ll fix the problem by taking more money from them.  How is increasing taxes actually going to create jobs?
By the way speaking of evil corporations run by greedy billionaires, Tim Cook of Apple is hosting a fundraiser for you. Where do they make their phones by the way?  If your best attack against Donald Trump comes down to where he makes his ties, then you give new meaning to the word “hypocrite”. 
We need to grow the economy and we need to make it fairer. I believe that every employee, from the CEO suite to the factory floor, contributes to a business’ success, so everybody should share in the rewards – especially those putting in long hours for little pay.  So I’m proposing a new tax credit to encourage more companies to share profits with workers. More broadly, we will fight for a more progressive, more patriotic tax code that puts American jobs first.
The problem with the word “fair” is that it’s subjective.  How do you determine what’s “fair” and what’s not?  Does the government get to make that decision?  When you really say a “more progressive tax code” what you’re really saying is “make the rich pay higher rates” (even though they already pay the most in taxes) for no other reason than that you have sat in your ivory tower and decreed that certain people are allowed to keep what they earn and others aren’t.  If you want a truly fair tax code, how about a flat tax rate for everyone?  If you truly put American jobs first, you wouldn’t be trying to figure out ways to tax corporations out of existence.  That is why Carrier moved to Mexico.  Because they couldn’t put up with the tangled web of ever-increasing taxes and regulations.  Your “logic” seems to be that since companies aren’t hiring enough American workers, we will “solve” the problem by taxing them more.  That’s like trying to fix a leak in a boat by pumping more water in.  I don’t care how rich they are, you are not entitled to other people’s money for no other reason than “they have it.”  They’ve earned it, now go out and earn it yourself.

For those that move their headquarters overseas to avoid paying their fair share of taxes, they’re going to have to pay a new exit tax.  We should also add a new tax on multi-millionaires, crack down on tax gaming by corporations and close the carried interest loophole
As I said above, they moved overseas because you keep piling on regulation after tax after regulation.  So how are you going to fix this?  Tax them more?  That will make them leave even faster!  You cannot regulate private enterprise where it’s “allowed” to do business.  I think these jobs should come home too but the harder you press down, the MORE jobs will go overseas, not less. 
And then there is Trump’s tax plan. He would give trillions in tax cuts to big corporations, millionaires, and Wall Street money managers. That would explode our national debt and eventually lead to massive cuts in priorities like education, healthcare, and environmental protection.
Take a look at the graph above from the Pew Research center using actual IRS data.  Do you still think the rich “aren’t paying enough?”  I put together the below tables using data from the IRS.  It’s right there for anyone to find.  What I ask voters to do is to please look up the facts, don’t take ANYONE’S word for it.  Look up the facts, educate yourself on reality.  And realize that if something smells bad, there’s probably a reason for it.
 Income bracket
Taxable income
All returns, total
$100,000 under $200,000
$200,000 under $500,000
$500,000 under $1,000,000
$1,000,000 under $1,500,000
$1,500,000 under $2,000,000
$2,000,000 under $5,000,000
$5,000,000 under $10,000,000
$10,000,000 or more
Income range
Income ($M)
% of all taxable income
% of tax paid
Under $100K

As you can see, the effective rate (and this is just from income tax) INCREASES as the income bracket goes up.  The rich already pay a higher amount, but you would have the top incomes pay a higher rate just because you’ve somehow decided that they’re “too rich, and need to give back until you’ve decreed that the distribution is ‘fair.