My Speculation: Is Donald Trump a shill for Hillary Clinton or could America turn into the United States of Trump?

I know I have all but abandoned this blog.  Who has the time these days?  The recent news of Donald Trump throwing his hat in the ring for the Republican nomination for United States President is too hysterical not to comment on.  Below is just all my speculation and opinion.

As other people have speculated, I believe that Trump is not making a serious bid for the White House and if Hillary Clinton, for whatever reason, does not get the Democratic nomination, Donald Trump will withdraw from the race altogether.

Have you noticed Donald Trump has been way ahead in polls for the Republican primary? He has really been telling the middle class what they want to hear.  Close the borders, cut taxes on the Middle Class and raise taxes on the wealthy.  This is not what wealthy Republicans want to hear, they want to keep the borders wide open to flood the United States with cheap labor, they want the shrinking Middle Class to pay for everything with through their taxes, and they want their own taxes reduced to nothing.  It doesn't look like Trump will be getting any donations from the wealthy ultra-conservatives. but he doesn't care because he has plenty of his own money.  And if he doesn't get the nomination, he has then threatened to run as third party candidate.  I think here is where things get interesting.

Mr. Trump is a little too crass and blunt for the Republican party style and he knows it.  At some point either top GOP officials will tell him to take a hike, or perhaps at some point he will pretend to get fed up dealing with the GOP and then run as a third party candidate.

Here Mr. Trump is acting  like H. Ross Perot did for Bill Clinton.  In  1992, Perot ran as a Third Party candidate and pretty much divided the Republican vote which helped Clinton to win.   I do not believe Perot was in cahoots with the Clintons, I think he at least made a sincere bid for the White House.   For the 1996 campaign, seeing Perot as a spoiler for the Republican party, the corporate controlled media helped squash Perot's second attempt by not selling him any airtime on their networks and helping with a smear campaign.

The Clintons so desperately want to be back in the White House again and I am not sure why, but I feel that it is most likely that hey are in cahoots with Trump.  I could be wrong and Trump is really making a sincere bid for the White House,  I have to say he does tell the American public what they want to hear.  And he did have his own TV show for a while which may have added to his appeal.   Well if  my speculations are wrong,  America better get ready to change its name to "The United States of Trump."

On a side note, I recently read a book about narcissism and Trump and Charlie Sheen were given as two celebrity examples, oh boy.

The immigration reform and its potential impact on employment

A while ago, I was surfing the net to get more information about "The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013" the latest in immigration reform, and one that has been touted by the media as good one.

You know who likes this bill, Grover (I wish he could be as nice as his namesake Muppet) Norquist.  I saw an opinion piece he wrote for the British newspaper, "The Guardian."  He says that the bill will be good for the American economy.

 

Why does he like the bill? For the same reason all the Republicans like the bill (but some do pretend to hate it), because it basically opens the flood gates for immigration.   With more available people to compete for jobs, wages will go down, it is the simply law of supply and demand.  Republicans will not be happy until Americans are making the same wages as the Chinese and Indians (of India not Native Americans).  

The bill does call for more border security, but only across Mexico as many of the states that border Mexico have pleaded for.  I do not believe the bill does much for the Canadian border or any other way someone can enter this country illegally.  

In times of economic prosperity, when America has a growth economy, it makes sense to allow for immigration, but in the shrinking economy that Americans are living in, it would make sense to freeze immigration until unemployment dips below 4% or so.

Australia, which has a very strict anti-immigration policy, and no countries bordering it, currently has only 5.6 percent unemployment as opposed to America's 7.6.

Wealthy Americans will not be happy until unemployment is around 26% as in Greece which would eventually enable them to drive wages down to a fraction of what they currently are at least as low as mainland China's. 

Then why are some Republican politicians opposed to the bill?  Perhaps it is to appeal to some of their racist constituents or perhaps they just want to keep President Obama from appearing to move things forward with immigration and by doing this they make him look even more inept than he already does.

President Obama is behind giving Visas to highly-skilled foreigners in order to help grow the economy, but I think this also hurts opportunities for American citizens.  If we had a strict anti-immigration policy, companies would be forced to pay to train Americans to fill the jobs they need.  This would benefit the American worker who would gain a useful skill set and make him employable as well in demand in the workforce.  It would also benefit the college or institution that has to train him.  The only one that looses out is the company that has to pay for the training.  It is much easier and cheaper to import foreign laborers that already have the skill sets that American companies need.  It is even cheaper if the company can off-shore the jobs altogether.

And then there is the issue of security.  While America has always been a country made great by immigrants who have left their oppressive countries to be free in the USA, the times have changed greatly.  While immigrants love to come here to enjoy a higher quality of life, there is much hate and envy of the United States.  We have to make sure that at all entry points,not just the borders, that we are not letting in foreign terrorists.  Any immigration reform act should have strict provisions for this, but of course it does not.

In summary I think we should keep the doors to immigrants closed as much as possible until our economy makes a full recovery.  I think that it is awful that there are liberal groups pushing for both lax immigration and raising the minimum wage, because the influx of cheap labor, especially in hard economic times, would only keep wages down.

 

Is it one party time?

If you  are like me, you have Republican friends who are still in a state of shock, still sitting or standing around with their mouths open.  They were sure that President Obama was going to be another one-term wonder like Jimmy Carter, absolutely sure.  How could the American people not see what a mess President Obama's evil socialist agenda has made of their country? Of course it had nothing to do with George W. Bush's economic agenda that brought the economy down shortly before President Obama took office in 2008.

Well, the American people are not that stupid after all, but there are enough pockets of stupid people around to allow for the Republicans to retain control of the House of Representatives, you can't win them all.  And of course, they still have the agenda of not taxing the wealthy under any circumstances, another battle looms over this issue and I hope Preisdent Obama will be able to make some headway on this problem over the next four years, but I am doubtful.

Your Republican friends are probably also, saying stuff like, "Well, I guess we are going to have a one party system now, only Democrats, the GOP is kaputsky!"   I was surprised to hear this from a couple of different friends on a couple of occasions, therefore I am wondering if they are quoting someone else from Fox News or another right-wing media source. 

You can respond to this statement by saying that there is plenty of room for two parties, there will be the Democrats as always, and new Socialist party, won't that be great?  Then watch your Republican friends' faces go beet red with anger.

This of course will be a hollow victory for us if President Obama cannot now turn the  tide and get the rich to pay their fair share of taxes and regulate a more fair system of trade in order to turn the American economy around. And then if Obama fails, your Republican friends are going to turn to you and say,"See, I told you so...."

My baby boomer retirement conspiracy theory...

Could it be possible that Republicans want Barack Obama to win?  Could it be that the wealthy powers-that-be know that the American economy is not salvageable in the immediate future and they want to see a Democrat in the White House for at least another four years to prove to Americans that the Democrats are incompetent and they cannot run this country?

I have a theory involving the dreaded baby boomers and the upcoming massive retirement that we are going to see probably coming around 2017 or sooner.  At least by 2017 there will be so many of them retired that there is bound to be some impact on the economy. 

I myself believe (and I bet the top 1% of earners believe this as well) that the economy will continue to flounder for quite some time.  There is no point in getting a Republican in the White House because then the blame will be put back on the Republicans for the perpetually sagging economy.

Now if the Republicans win the 2016 election, and at least the employment situation recovers thanks to the retiring boomers, they will look like they have solved the employment crisis and due to their diligence and good economic policy. America is making a comeback thanks to them.  Of course all the time it will really be the retiring baby boomers we will have to thank and not the Republicans. 

However, the baby bommer retirement may not be enough to open up the job market.  Automation has been and will continue to eliminate jobs probably more quickly than off-shoring will.  I already see that a lot companies are not replacing retirees because there are now more efficient ways of doing buisness mainly thanks to computers, the Internet, and the Information Technology revolution. 

I have also conisdered the possibility that the ecomomy is being deliberately screwed with in order to keep employment costs down.  The goal of the wealthy always seems to be to increase the labor supply to make labor costs go down. 

There is no way to tell if any of my theories are correct until we get to 2017, but whatever the outcome is it will be interesting to see what kind of impact the baby boomer retirement will have.