Since they're not loyal, could prove fatal when they do their own thing. There are many competent loyal people around him. Take care of your loyal people first. Remember that's how you got there. Additional competence can always be brought in as consultants, loyalty not so much. Business school 101 ...
Well the only way healthcare costs will be drastically reduced is to reinvest in a public health system that provides a good standard for all (Not a private system "for profit" system that is funded by public money in all sorts of ways). Then if people want and can afford to have choice of specific doctors or other things, they pay for "for profit" private system out of their own pockets. Think bigger as well (For the long term). We need to invest in the foundation of the next 100yrs. Investment in open ended science and cash in on all the BIG breakthroughs that are not even thought about at this time. This will lead to whole new currently incomprehensible new industries and the infrastructure and jobs that come with it. The creation of whole new technologies and technological breakthroughs that create industries that once again are the SOLE domain of the US and a new skilled workforce that other countries just are unable to compete with as they don't have the same advancements. (And then PROTECT these from corporations short term profit hunting and mandate they are a secured domestic resource.) Here's a large part of where any resource "royalties" went. Wars - https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...2a5dce-97ed-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html Financial crash - (Of particular interest are the government bailouts and the interest paid back to the government on the money by the banks vs the interest rate the government pays for the money the government had to borrow to fund the "bail out", rate of overnight lending and its total over the period - hinting at systemic system failure, purchase of toxic/bad "assets" onto the FEDs books, government spending to help/support the wider community that has been effected by lost jobs, housing and so on.) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/how-much-did-the-financial-crisis-cost/ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-09-14/tallying-the-full-cost-of-the-financial-crisis http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/financial-crisis-cost-gao_n_2687553 Decreased oil price results in an average saving (on fuel costs) of $800/yr for the average family/person, which represents approx an average 2% wage increase (adjusted). This then should convert to increased consumer spending.... In normal circumstances. However, there has been MASSIVE job losses, loss of businesses and a general economic slowdown as a flow on effect of the 2008 crisis. Meaning that any perceived savings due to the lower oil price are FAR surpassed by the TOTAL loss of employment for others.
I should point out that its not just R & D by itself. That is just the part to provide the future ongoing economic robustness that will maintain growth and competitiveness. Of course there will be some countries stealing. However we really need to start reassessing the whole concept of "private" property to begin with. As Tesla (cars) have mentioned, they put out their technical advances for ALL to use instead of fighting and spending time and money to "protect" IP. Musk understands that through everyone having the ability to innovate and build from others advances, the WHOLE (everyone/society/economies) advances at a much quicker rate and does not stagnate. With that growth and advancement, whole new fields open up to be financially exploited. The goal is to focus on moving forward. That's where growth, advancements, innovation and stability come from. We are still stuck in this old mind set of the class system where the haves attempt to protect what they have established as "theirs" and will resort to all sorts of tactics to ensure they personally retain their market share and profits at the DIRECT expense of everyone else. It keeps the wider society enslaved to old, stagnant ways that eventually leach the life blood out of the system. (As we are slowly starting to see right now). That doesn't mean that China should get everything that we create and innovate for free but in such a process (of open sharing), China themselves would also have to adapt and start innovating themselves to keep up to the rate of advances that the US was making. Sure, they could sit back and steal the ideas, then spend the time retooling, training and learning how the new process is applied correctly (about a 10-15yr process for most advances as they have recently demonstrated) or they could enter into the same process and innovate off everyone and for everyone, sharing advances as they have been shared with them so as to maintain competitive abilities. (There are many beside Tesla already practicing this method with great benefit for all parties) This is where things will eventually have to go in the world but I still think its awhile off yet. The established corporate system that currently benefits so well, will fight tooth and nail to protect the current system as it benefits them at the peoples expense. But it also ensures a very stagnant system that will eventually kill itself off. In the meantime, yes China will steal some advances. That's part and parcel of the process. But it also takes time to then back engineer the technology, the processes and its skillful implementation. China was able to fast track this process and role out because we handed them the advances, taught them the implementation, application and skilled processes. That's a HUGE fast track. (As a side note, just look at China's military. They are KNOWN to have stolen stealth tech from the US. Yes its shortened their R & D process, but they still have to go through a R & D process of backwards engineering the tech to understand how to correctly apply it and then how to correctly implement it. They have the end product understanding but are missing all the little breakthroughs in learning and advancements in associated processes needed to achieve the breakthrough in the first place that come with the process of creating something. They are still a LONG way behind the US in the application of stealth for their jets). Its easy to focus on the immediate short term perceived "loss" (and there is always some), but that is overlooking the true advancements that have been made in the process of innovation that are of GREAT benefit to other areas as well that China (or others) don't get the benefit of by "stealing" the end product. In the time that China (or others) are spending to back engineer and try to get up to speed, the US is making more advances building on these advances. Start getting on a roll and the trickle down effect for associated industries needing to make breakthroughs and advancements as well (eg - manufacturing abilities and processes, material composition and application, transport, handling and so on) and suddenly large sections of the economy are making constant advances and evolving because everyone MUST innovate to be able to apply these new breakthroughs and techniques. Everyone's upgrading plant and machinery again, associated support industries are once again needed to supply these things and it spreads from sector to sector of the economy and reinvigorates it. That's the beauty of breakthroughs and innovation, it does not end, it is the investment AND the creation of the future all rolled up in one. We can't even conceptualize where we might end up if we went back to open ended investment in the sciences. Leave the goal oriented science for the "for profit" sector that builds the applications from the breakthroughs. Public funding should be purely science oriented that in turn provides the hard science breakthroughs that fuels the private industry applications that are based on these breakthroughs, that results in revenue back into the system. (This is what happened with the space race. There were breakthroughs in materials, manufacturing processes, its lead to applications for oil industry, farming, telecommunication and so many more. It really is an endless flow on effect that we don't realize where it came from 99% of the time) BUT if this course is not taken then what we can guarantee as a FACT is the continued stagnation, loss and destruction of the US economy and the working base. That is fact. To not innovate (out of fear of others "taking" it, or for some other reason) will result in the continued slow death we currently are experiencing. We can either be the leaders that innovation brings or we can try fighting it out with everyone else in an already overcrowded market place, attempting to do the same things everyone else can already do, while trying to compete with places where labor is FAR cheaper elsewhere. The ONLY way to do that will be through HEAVY domestic subsidies to pay companies to become competitive with international suppliers doing the same thing cheaper. That's just "dead" money in the long term that will require ever increasing injections to maintain and will still result in the eventual death of the industry/ies at some time in the future. Instead of spending the time and money to innovate for the future so as to transition, this process is maintaining an already dead horse that will still be dead in the future but with nothing to then replace it and being in a far, far worse financial position when the time comes and it can no longer be propped up. People are scared of the unknown. Its human nature to hold onto what has been known to work in the past but the only reason it worked so well then was because that was THEIR time of innovation, growth and change. That's now stagnating and we are picking over the bones hoping to find a small meal. Its not there, only death will eventually be found down that path.
Me think Trump has already forgot his promises by now. Now Wilbur Ross will become the Commerce Secretary. Do you guys have insight about this guy? What is his view on international trade?
Yeah, looks like that. He seems to be backing on almost all of them. But Trump fans still admit that guy fooled them.
You can have 100 world class experts around and one idiot boss. And still it we be enough to ruin the business. Logic 101.
I hope she stays. She's going to be the last real opposition to Trump, no matter who you support, but any president needs an opposition.
not sure where your logic come from. If the boss is an idiot, how did he become the boss? Is he loyal to his superiors? Or is he really smart, maybe both. Based on your logic he must be smart but your calling him an idiot. Now this is typical libtard thought process hard at work...