[nathanbedford]

Thank you for the well considered comments respecting the timing of voicing an opinion about the decisions Donald Trump is making. I am fully aware of the aura of intimidation which exists in this forum for anyone who dares talk out of school about Donald Trump. I have received private notes even while this thread was underway expressing support for my views and acknowledging the level of intimidation which exists.

For the record, I am delighted by Donald's election, I supported him after the nomination as I promised to do because he was the only rational choice. I am pleased by much of what he has done as president elect.

But I am very wary of his trade policies even while acknowledging an emotional attachment to what he has done with Carrier air-conditioner. I do not think I like the precedent but I have to see how it plays out.

But the problem is that criticism of the Carrier deal has to be made at the time the Carrier deal is made or is reduced to a mere history lesson. Yet I have withheld criticism because I am not sure. Likewise, criticism of Trump's appointments must be made at the time, preferably before he actually appoints. As I said in a previous reply, very few in this forum held back their criticism of the potential appointment of Mitt Romney to be Secretary of State. If the rule is to be applied it should be applied across the board.

I do not know how a conservative forum retains its credibility if it gags itself at critical times when the news is breaking but I do understand that the cost of speaking one's mind is endless, and often mindless, brickbats. As I have said many times, I am not here to talk about the weather but to persuade and be persuaded concerning real matters of importance.

Thank you for your comments.

[Night Hides Not]

Regarding the Carrier deal, I find it distressing that so many commentators that call themselves "capitalists" are praising the deal. What's the difference between Carrier and the GM bailout, except for the size of the deal?

I can see the rationale for this, if it's to ameliorate the dislocations caused by globalism and trade deals that put us at a disadvantage.

IMO, the proper way to combat these disadvantages is to level the playing field for all by reducing corporate income taxes and slashing the regulatory burden. That appears to be Trump's position, and I hope that he sees that through.

[justa-hairyape]

Your principals on trade are correct. The problem is Mexico has a 10-15 % tax on corporate profits. The US has a 35 % tax on corporations. Highest in world. That trumps any other concerns.