|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 2, 2016 15:32:32 GMT -5
So you are saying he cares for his employees and treats them well. I'm sorry, which of my comments was the above in response to? It had to be the one that we think it is which: racism.
|
|
|
Post by coqui900 on Mar 3, 2016 13:39:39 GMT -5
All-in on Bernie. I'm far from a liberal on a lot of issues. But the Wall Street/banking issues are completely insane. I cannot recommend going to see or reading The Big Short enough. They do ignore the government's complicity in backing Fannie Mae and the like (government funded corporations) but the main point of the movie is true.
There has been an absurd amount of bank consolidation in our economy. The big banks own a lot of things beyond just providing investment and retail banking services. They invest in commodities. It may seem like a conspiracy theory. But Goldman Sachs has been pushing the oversupply of oil resulting in cheap prices for years now. They also have a lot of "short" positions -- essentially using their analysts as a means to drive their positions. (Even though there are "firewalls" in place to prevent this. HAHAHA.)
The government allowed for deregulation to happen in the 90s. There were a lot of very strong arguments in favor of banking deregulation at the time. A lot of very smart people touted its benefits. It didn't work. It failed in the worst imaginable way possible. We footed the bill. The only rules we have in place are light at best -- the banks have to have more reserves, etc. But there is absolutely no separation of retail and investment banking. It's grotesque.
It's one thing for Wall Street to make donations. That's what rich people do. But it's another thing for a political candidate to get a paycheck from someone they're supposed to regulate. That's just preposterous.
Bernie's also shown you don't need SuperPACs to competitively raise money. Good for him. He said a lot of things 25 years ago that he's saying today. A lot of his agenda is eye-rolling because of their impossibilities. But the whole part of cracking down on Wall Street abuses (and saving our 401Ks) is what's most important to me.
And I say all of this as someone en route to a MBA in finance. That's essentially the opposite of socialism.
|
|
|
Post by coqui900 on Mar 3, 2016 13:45:30 GMT -5
And if you want to stick it to the big banks, the best way to do so is close your account and replace it with one at a credit union. I joined one a while ago and it has been great. The amount of fees I pay compared to what I shelled out to Bank of America are way less. The customer service is spectacular. The teller at the local branch knows my name. And they're also in a shared credit union network so I have access to in-network ATMs or if I'm away and have a banking issue.
Go credit union!
I really wish La Salle would set one up on campus. The only banking service is a Wells Fargo ATM, I believe. There's a $3 surcharge if you don't use Well Fargo. Trumark is a great CU and provides financial education courses for its members. That would be such a great thing for La Salle students to learn about.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 3, 2016 16:00:49 GMT -5
Many colleges have partnered with credit unions -- The "official credit union of _________" and then give students incentives to sign up.
|
|
|
Post by coqui900 on Mar 3, 2016 16:26:58 GMT -5
Many colleges have partnered with credit unions -- The "official credit union of _________" and then give students incentives to sign up. La Salle tells employees when they're hired how they can join TruMark. I think TruMark also sponsors our games? The CU I use has an online teller service at ATM machines to deposit checks and other more basic things. It would be great to see that. I HOPE OUR PRESIDENT READS THIS!
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 3, 2016 17:51:29 GMT -5
Didn't La Salle used to partner with Beneficial? I know a couple of their top guys are La Salle alums.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 3, 2016 23:26:45 GMT -5
Partnering with a credit union is much different than actually having one of their branches on campus. Our Philly peers do this, but not sure if we can support a full brick-and-mortar branch (at the Shoppes at La Salle?).
|
|
|
Post by coqui900 on Mar 4, 2016 12:40:31 GMT -5
Partnering with a credit union is much different than actually having one of their branches on campus. Our Philly peers do this, but not sure if we can support a full brick-and-mortar branch (at the Shoppes at La Salle?). Beneficial is a bank. They could get bought by one of the big companies any day. My CU has a live teller at its ATM machine. It is a human interaction like I am talking to someone over Skype. Surely we can have that.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 4, 2016 14:10:47 GMT -5
My CU has a live teller at its ATM machine. It is a human interaction like I am talking to someone over Skype. Surely we can have that. What? That's a thing?! That's so cool.
|
|
|
Post by coqui900 on Mar 4, 2016 15:28:29 GMT -5
My CU has a live teller at its ATM machine. It is a human interaction like I am talking to someone over Skype. Surely we can have that. What? That's a thing?! That's so cool. Yeah, it's really crazy. My closest CU branch is actually located in the front of a supermarket. They have a branch manager and one other staffer on duty to help with more complex transactions. Then they have a traditional ATM. And they also have an "online teller" that I use whenever I have to deposit checks and the like. It's really disarming at first but pretty cool. Someone pops up on the screen who is in a cubicle somewhere. I have to show my ID and that sort of stuff (great for identity protection) and then they talk me through my transaction. I was told the employees work out of an office in NE Philly somewhere, so they're all locally employed. My CU has bigger offices with traditional tellers but nothing near my house. I don't know if TruMark uses this but my CU is open to anyone who lives or goes to school in Philly and a few other areas. I should send an e-mail to the president in case she doesn't read this side of the board. I don't know how many times I did dumb things with banking stuff when I was an undergrad like losing my ATM card. Or I had a work study job and I'd have to go to Broad and Olney to deposit my check (since I don't think direct deposit was available yet) since that's where First Union was. It was such a pain in the ass and I'm sure a lot of kids have to navigate through Wells Fargo in case something happens. I don't know if the ATM in the Union even has a check deposit option. These online tellers really are super helpful. There's no loss to the school, unless Wells Fargo is paying a premium to operate the one ATM on-campus. Partnering up with a CU helps students (less fees, infinitely better customer service) and is also good for the community (locally operated). I think it's a win for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 4, 2016 17:06:04 GMT -5
This is wild. It's not groundbreaking or some incredible technological advancement, but the customer-service angle of it is nuts.
Are you sure you don't work for them!?!
|
|
|
Post by a10champion15 on Mar 5, 2016 16:26:22 GMT -5
I am one that doesn't align with either party. When I was 18 I immediately declared Independent. Probably somewhat influenced by my mother who is a democrat and a father who is a republican. I like some things on each side. The issue I have is Democrats think money grows on trees and Republican's social values are stuck in the 1920's.
Obama presidency wasn't bad but it wasn't great. People either absolutely hate him or love him. He did some good things with a Congress that didn't work with him. His presidency like Bush and Clintons etc. will be defined in the years to come. If I were a betting man I bet ten years from now people say he was an okay president. A clear upgrade from Bush but he wasn't Bill.
But getting back to my point...
Trump will not beat Hillary. God help this country if he does. This is Hillary Clinton's election to lose. The only positive thing about Trump is no one is in his back pocket. I also have faith he be able to hire the right guys but as the representative of this country absolutely not.
If I could choose for these parties it be Biden and Kasich. Biden isn't running for whatever reason(age probably) and Kasich is too normal for the republican party. Both are moderates in their parties and actually seem to understand there is some wiggle room with their respective conservative and liberal policies.
I thought Rubio was the most electable guy and now I question that. Didn't realize how bad he was as a senator. Kasich makes too much sense for the party. A guy that really turned the state of Ohio around and isn't a lunatic. Plus, if you want to win a key swing state he could do it. Probably the most electable guy and would have the best shot at beating Hillary.
Get the idea of Sanders out of your mind now. Getting destroyed on Super Tuesday probably killed his chances. He is not beating Clinton. Similar to Ted Cruz he is just the other side of the extreme. Sanders is definitely 100% a better human being but his policies are too extreme. As an account I can tell you right now the math does not work for his economic policies. Not even close...
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Mar 7, 2016 13:25:19 GMT -5
All-in on Bernie. I'm far from a liberal on a lot of issues. But the Wall Street/banking issues are completely insane. I cannot recommend going to see or reading The Big Short enough. They do ignore the government's complicity in backing Fannie Mae and the like (government funded corporations) but the main point of the movie is true. There has been an absurd amount of bank consolidation in our economy. The big banks own a lot of things beyond just providing investment and retail banking services. They invest in commodities. It may seem like a conspiracy theory. But Goldman Sachs has been pushing the oversupply of oil resulting in cheap prices for years now. They also have a lot of "short" positions -- essentially using their analysts as a means to drive their positions. (Even though there are "firewalls" in place to prevent this. HAHAHA.) The government allowed for deregulation to happen in the 90s. There were a lot of very strong arguments in favor of banking deregulation at the time. A lot of very smart people touted its benefits. It didn't work. It failed in the worst imaginable way possible. We footed the bill. The only rules we have in place are light at best -- the banks have to have more reserves, etc. But there is absolutely no separation of retail and investment banking. It's grotesque. It's one thing for Wall Street to make donations. That's what rich people do. But it's another thing for a political candidate to get a paycheck from someone they're supposed to regulate. That's just preposterous. Bernie's also shown you don't need SuperPACs to competitively raise money. Good for him. He said a lot of things 25 years ago that he's saying today. A lot of his agenda is eye-rolling because of their impossibilities. But the whole part of cracking down on Wall Street abuses (and saving our 401Ks) is what's most important to me. And I say all of this as someone en route to a MBA in finance. That's essentially the opposite of socialism. Bernie isn't all-in on himself. The one point he needed to make months ago is the one that still dogs Hillary on National Security violations. Bernie could have knocked her out of the race by stating "On the issues of e-mail and national security, why do you have over 100 FBI agents criminally investigating you?". Methinks Bernie is being paid millions by the Clintons to keep quiet on this. Bernie couldn't beat Trump, Cruz or Rubio.
|
|
|
Post by theneumann64 on Mar 7, 2016 13:58:04 GMT -5
All-in on Bernie. I'm far from a liberal on a lot of issues. But the Wall Street/banking issues are completely insane. I cannot recommend going to see or reading The Big Short enough. They do ignore the government's complicity in backing Fannie Mae and the like (government funded corporations) but the main point of the movie is true. There has been an absurd amount of bank consolidation in our economy. The big banks own a lot of things beyond just providing investment and retail banking services. They invest in commodities. It may seem like a conspiracy theory. But Goldman Sachs has been pushing the oversupply of oil resulting in cheap prices for years now. They also have a lot of "short" positions -- essentially using their analysts as a means to drive their positions. (Even though there are "firewalls" in place to prevent this. HAHAHA.) The government allowed for deregulation to happen in the 90s. There were a lot of very strong arguments in favor of banking deregulation at the time. A lot of very smart people touted its benefits. It didn't work. It failed in the worst imaginable way possible. We footed the bill. The only rules we have in place are light at best -- the banks have to have more reserves, etc. But there is absolutely no separation of retail and investment banking. It's grotesque. It's one thing for Wall Street to make donations. That's what rich people do. But it's another thing for a political candidate to get a paycheck from someone they're supposed to regulate. That's just preposterous. Bernie's also shown you don't need SuperPACs to competitively raise money. Good for him. He said a lot of things 25 years ago that he's saying today. A lot of his agenda is eye-rolling because of their impossibilities. But the whole part of cracking down on Wall Street abuses (and saving our 401Ks) is what's most important to me. And I say all of this as someone en route to a MBA in finance. That's essentially the opposite of socialism. Bernie isn't all-in on himself. The one point he needed to make months ago is the one that still dogs Hillary on National Security violations. Bernie could have knocked her out of the race by stating "On the issues of e-mail and national security, why do you have over 100 FBI agents criminally investigating you?". Methinks Bernie is being paid millions by the Clintons to keep quiet on this. Bernie couldn't beat Trump, Cruz or Rubio. How about every national poll that suggests Bernie (or Hillary for that matter) have fairly sizeable leads against any of those 3?
|
|
|
Post by thelasallelunatic on Mar 7, 2016 14:05:42 GMT -5
Bernie could beat all 3 Steve. The problem is, he can't beat Hillary. As sad as it is, Trump is the only guy that can beat Hillary. If the Rupublicans don't wake the fuck up, if they try and have this mutiny headed by Mitt Romney (who couldn't beat Obama even though he was levels ahead of him on policy issues), it will splinter the party and it's going to be a Democratic dominance, sad to say but true.
I'm going to ramble a little bit, and than I'll be done with the thread, and politics in general on this board. I don't want to make any enemies, but you guys are like family so just consider this a Sunday dinner conversation. Cruz and Rubio try to bring up bullshit alot Trump, like where his clothes are made, or if he supported Jimmy Carter or if he contributed to Hillary's campaign 8 years ago. Jimmy fucking Carter ran for president before many of us were born. He's irrelevant to this Presidential race. Where Trump's clothes are made is irrelevant to the presidential race. He flexibility on planned parenthood shows he is very moderate on social issues. Whether or not conservatives like myself want to acknowledge it, the country is moving left. Whether the Republican party can adjust to this left moving world is going to be whether they can sustain relevance going forward in this century. Cruz and Rubio are so out of touch with this world, with this country, they are speaking like it is 15 years ago. Those days of widespread conservative views, for better or worse, are gone. Either the GOP can adjust, or its going to get steamrolled. Trump's ability, or his record in the past to support/contribute to candidates from BOTH the Republican and Democrat, is an asset, not a detriment to Trump. Sorry for the rant.
I'm not a Trump guy. I wish he was more diplomatic and tactful. But I can see the appeal to a guy that doesn't give a shit about what he says, and how he says it. Obama just used buzz words and phrases to win 2 elections. You don't have to break down policy by policy to win elections, President Obama proved this.
Lastly, and I say this as a conservative; we need to get our shit together. Who gives a shit about gay marriage. Let it go. Abortion, I'm against it, but I'm a dude, so I have ZERO say on it. Let it go. Have your feelings on it, fine, but don't make it a major issue for the party. Make foreign policy and the economy our big platform. Make the erosion of the middle class your platform. That's the future of the Republican party. This Tea Party shit is going to kill us going forward.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 7, 2016 14:18:48 GMT -5
Bernie couldn't beat Trump, Cruz or Rubio. Except, you know, facts. www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/pres_general/I'm going to support either democratic nominee, but running Bernie would be the equivalent of a General Election massacre. He is beating opponents by almost 20 points, a fact that would serve the Senate and maybe House up on a silver platter.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,527
Likes: 6,407
|
Post by MisterD on Mar 7, 2016 14:34:12 GMT -5
Hey Steve, did you ever address my question at the bottom of the last page?
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Mar 7, 2016 17:05:23 GMT -5
Bernie isn't all-in on himself. The one point he needed to make months ago is the one that still dogs Hillary on National Security violations. Bernie could have knocked her out of the race by stating "On the issues of e-mail and national security, why do you have over 100 FBI agents criminally investigating you?". Methinks Bernie is being paid millions by the Clintons to keep quiet on this. Bernie couldn't beat Trump, Cruz or Rubio. How about every national poll that suggests Bernie (or Hillary for that matter) have fairly sizeable leads against any of those 3? I don't think the polls of right now will matter in a couple of months or more importantly in November. I don't believe the likely voters would go for Bernie. He reminds me of when Mondale lost in 49 states. He hasn't accomplished anything in 25 years in congress and really has no appeal to those over 25 years old. Bernie doesn't appeal to the working class folks who realize you can't have free education nor $15 minimum wage jobs unless he were to take all of your disposable income. Even if Hillary isn't indicted the non-partisan FBI report (probable release by June) and the bi-partisan Benghazi Committee report (probable release this month) will show even more clearly that Hillary's testimony vs. her e-mails doesn't match up which equals perjury. Even the most loyal folks in politics don't like those in their own party who blatantly lie about important issues. A crook is a crook. Just like Nixon in Watergate, Hillary will be faced with very serious charges and/or public pressure and this will put an end to her political career. Bernie will most likely be the nominee unless Biden is begged to enter the race.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 7, 2016 18:17:11 GMT -5
Bernie, a 2% boost in new voters, the democratic electorate and those scared to death by Trump and Cruz will wipe the floor with the Republican nominee.
|
|
|
Post by thelasallelunatic on Mar 7, 2016 18:39:04 GMT -5
Again, not a Trump guy, but I think he's playing to a shtick, almost like a Floyd Mayweather shtick if you will. I think all of this is an angle to get as much media coverage as possible, with the end being a shot to win the Presidential election. I think he will hammer Hillary with insults (but I think the Dems will be all over him about everything), but it could be a very ugly win for Trump over Clinton come November. That is, if the Republicans don't sabotage the Don this summer.
This is a huge gamble for Trump. It will either result in the Presidency or he will be steamrolled. However, if Sanders can pull a Democratic nomination out of his ass, than he will blitz Trump. The same electorate that got Obama elected in 2008 (young professional types right out of college, basically, my age group at the time) will get behind the Bern ten fold. If I'm Trump, and I'm not, I'd want to go to battle against Clinton. I'd want no part of Bern in a national election.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,527
Likes: 6,407
|
Post by MisterD on Mar 7, 2016 18:46:53 GMT -5
Bernie, a 2% boost in new voters, the democratic electorate and those scared to death by Trump and Cruz will wipe the floor with the Republican nominee. New voters under 25, you mean.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 7, 2016 18:57:59 GMT -5
Bernie, a 2% boost in new voters, the democratic electorate and those scared to death by Trump and Cruz will wipe the floor with the Republican nominee. New voters under 25, you mean. Not true. A lot of people 30-40 who have never cared / voted are caring / voting.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,527
Likes: 6,407
|
Post by MisterD on Mar 7, 2016 19:09:52 GMT -5
Using data to counter Steve's declaration that Sanders only appeals to people under 25 is a good way to lose the debate.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 7, 2016 19:44:57 GMT -5
Using data to counter Steve's declaration that Sanders only appeals to people under 25 is a good way to lose the debate. I'm 30, my coworkers are 29 and 36. We're all in that camp. data.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,527
Likes: 6,407
|
Post by MisterD on Mar 7, 2016 20:27:06 GMT -5
Sure, and I'm older than you, but I also know that Steve never makes definitive-yet-completely-counter-factual blanket statements and declarations. So I'm pretty much torn between "am I actually a dozen years younger than I thought" and "did my beliefs change in 2003 but I didn't know it". Rough spot, but it's the I'm currently in.
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Mar 8, 2016 10:27:04 GMT -5
Bernie, a 2% boost in new voters, the democratic electorate and those scared to death by Trump and Cruz will wipe the floor with the Republican nominee. I have to admit that I didn't think Trump would be where he is but the voters and former non-voters are angry with ObamaCare and the stagnant economy. People are angry with the establishment in both parties. Trump has the appeal of many Reagan Democrats and independents. I don't see how he can be stopped. His rallies get the most people and his speeches get the most live media coverage. He isn't being bought like the other candidates which is something most voters respect. I thought Rubio would be the candidate with Cruz as a possible VP candidate. Now it looks like it will be Trump-Kasich ticket... if the GOP wins New York and Ohio they will win rather easily in November. Hillary-McAuliffe doesn't seem appealing nor does Bernie-Kuscinich.
|
|
|
Post by theneumann64 on Mar 8, 2016 10:47:01 GMT -5
What in Gods name would make you think The Republicans will carry New York?
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Mar 8, 2016 12:05:48 GMT -5
What in Gods name would make you think The Republicans will carry New York? There are several factors involved. 1. Trump is a respected business person in NY. 2. The military veterans are more engaged in this election than at any previous time as they don't like what has happened to the VA hospitals or the way the military has been reduced. 3. The current NY Mayor is considered unfriendly toward law enforcement and NYC has become less safe since he has been elected. 4. Many businesses can't afford ObamaCare and are forced to hire less dedicated part-time workers instead of having dedicated full time employees. 5. The poor have been hardest hit since the recession and have been forced to move where the cost of living is much less.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,527
Likes: 6,407
|
Post by MisterD on Mar 8, 2016 12:06:37 GMT -5
Reagan once proposed mandatory health insurance with payroll deductions. Fucking socialist.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,527
Likes: 6,407
|
Post by MisterD on Mar 8, 2016 12:07:50 GMT -5
1. Trump is a respected business person in NY. 2. The military veterans are more engaged in this election than at any previous time as they don't like what has happened to the VA hospitals or the way the military has been reduced. 3. The current NY Mayor is considered unfriendly toward law enforcement and NYC has become less safe since he has been elected. 4. Many businesses can't afford ObamaCare and are forced to hire less dedicated part-time workers instead of having dedicated full time employees. 5. The poor have been hardest hit since the recession and have been forced to move where the cost of living is much less. Finger. On. The. Pulse. Of. New. York. City.
|
|