As a salesperson all of my adult life, I am stuck between two economic paradigms - the “trickle-down” economic cycle, in which the government spends little on the average American, and the “liberal agenda” economic cycle, where the government invests in itself and its citizens. And all these companies need the latter, simply because when…
As a salesperson all of my adult life, I am stuck between two economic paradigms - the “trickle-down” economic cycle, in which the government spends little on the average American, and the “liberal agenda” economic cycle, where the government invests in itself and its citizens. And all these companies need the latter, simply because when the people have no money, they can’t afford to buy their products. Wal-Mart once lamented that the squeezing of welfare dollars negatively impacted their business. And, long before Trump’s nativism caught the attention of latent racists, I decided to stick w the “liberal agenda”, cause it is good for business.
What Rick Scott did in that op-ed was a miscalculation in salesperson terms. It tears against the golden rule of business relationships that “the customer is always right.” And it is never the action of a salesperson to threaten retaliation against a customer after they drop your business; as a salesperson, you NEVER burn that bridge.
Donald Trump’s time as the figurehead that came with the votes is waning, and we all know he’s a sore loser. The Republican Party’s time as the figurehead of business MAY ALSO BE WANING, and the day when the GOP could no longer rely on that great influx of cash to finance the machine that never works may finally be here.
I don't believe that "Trickle Down Economics" and "Liberal Agenda Economics" are inherently exclusive. I think that even the Chamber of Commerce is coming round to believing this as well. Okay, I'm a moderate social liberal and I am encouraged to see that there is a sea change at the national level of the Chambers of Commerce who in this last election showed a much more bipartisan stance than they have over the past 30 years. This has been met with a great deal of consternation by the old guard but I believe that it is such actions that can bring together the so called "silent majority" of moderates whose voice has been drowned out by extreme views on either side of the political spectrum. I believe that it will be good for small and big business to have some sort of National Health Care program as in European countries so that the onus of supplying Health Insurance is not entirely on businesses. Without a healthy infrastructure we cannot have a healthy economy. We must nip corruption and waste in the bud at ALL levels of government spending especially if we are going to spend trillions to fix what ails us. We need lots of oversight as well to collect the already existent taxes that companies and individuals are evading. Government is not the problem, greed and white fear of power sharing is.
As a restaurateur I could never understand why business wasn’t behind some form of National Healthcare program. We provided health insurance for our full time employees but the cost rose so substantially each year that we were constantly searching for new coverage. The Restaurant Association used to put out ads “we don’t trust government in our healthcare “ and we would answer but to no avail “do you trust insurance companies with your healthcare?” Their rhetoric seemed to win the day. Sigh
Exactly! Businesses have no problem utilizing or "trusting" government roads and bridges, but then they fail to see how national health coverage would significantly improve their bottom line. Never made sense to me.
I'd agree for the most part but the concerted decision to run Biden for President was a surprising exception to that tendency. Idem the two terms of President Obama. Certainly, the GOP has thrown their moderates to the lions.
As a salesperson all of my adult life, I am stuck between two economic paradigms - the “trickle-down” economic cycle, in which the government spends little on the average American, and the “liberal agenda” economic cycle, where the government invests in itself and its citizens. And all these companies need the latter, simply because when the people have no money, they can’t afford to buy their products. Wal-Mart once lamented that the squeezing of welfare dollars negatively impacted their business. And, long before Trump’s nativism caught the attention of latent racists, I decided to stick w the “liberal agenda”, cause it is good for business.
What Rick Scott did in that op-ed was a miscalculation in salesperson terms. It tears against the golden rule of business relationships that “the customer is always right.” And it is never the action of a salesperson to threaten retaliation against a customer after they drop your business; as a salesperson, you NEVER burn that bridge.
Donald Trump’s time as the figurehead that came with the votes is waning, and we all know he’s a sore loser. The Republican Party’s time as the figurehead of business MAY ALSO BE WANING, and the day when the GOP could no longer rely on that great influx of cash to finance the machine that never works may finally be here.
I hope you're right. That op-ed struck me as "burning your bridges" and "biting the hand that feeds you" all wrapped in one.
Except I think it was playing to the base while knowing that Big Business will never actually abandon them. I guess time will tell.
I don't believe that "Trickle Down Economics" and "Liberal Agenda Economics" are inherently exclusive. I think that even the Chamber of Commerce is coming round to believing this as well. Okay, I'm a moderate social liberal and I am encouraged to see that there is a sea change at the national level of the Chambers of Commerce who in this last election showed a much more bipartisan stance than they have over the past 30 years. This has been met with a great deal of consternation by the old guard but I believe that it is such actions that can bring together the so called "silent majority" of moderates whose voice has been drowned out by extreme views on either side of the political spectrum. I believe that it will be good for small and big business to have some sort of National Health Care program as in European countries so that the onus of supplying Health Insurance is not entirely on businesses. Without a healthy infrastructure we cannot have a healthy economy. We must nip corruption and waste in the bud at ALL levels of government spending especially if we are going to spend trillions to fix what ails us. We need lots of oversight as well to collect the already existent taxes that companies and individuals are evading. Government is not the problem, greed and white fear of power sharing is.
As a restaurateur I could never understand why business wasn’t behind some form of National Healthcare program. We provided health insurance for our full time employees but the cost rose so substantially each year that we were constantly searching for new coverage. The Restaurant Association used to put out ads “we don’t trust government in our healthcare “ and we would answer but to no avail “do you trust insurance companies with your healthcare?” Their rhetoric seemed to win the day. Sigh
Exactly! Businesses have no problem utilizing or "trusting" government roads and bridges, but then they fail to see how national health coverage would significantly improve their bottom line. Never made sense to me.
Biden is good for Business.
yup
Working from the political center has been non-existent so far in the 2000s.
I'd agree for the most part but the concerted decision to run Biden for President was a surprising exception to that tendency. Idem the two terms of President Obama. Certainly, the GOP has thrown their moderates to the lions.
Thank you.