Trump vs Amazon
 

Amazon stocks drop 5% or 30 billion in market value after Trumps tweet

How can Trump say he support American business ?

Or is attacking amazon because of amazon owner owns the Washington post
Can you say abuse of power

Yeah, giant corporations often abuse their power.

I thought he was attacking them for not paying there fair share of taxes.

The dichotomy is amazing

I was watching Chuck Todd do a quickie new segment on the Today show this am and he was insisting it was wrong for the President to pick Winners and Losers.

While I generally agree the differences of just a few years is hysterically ironic.

How many small American business has amazon put out of business ? Thousands if not tens of thousands. In my town I have watched at least 10 businesses come and go because people just don’t shop “in real life” any more. Click and ship mentality is destroying main streets in every town in every state.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This is another one of those areas where Trump gets pretty much everything wrong. USPS wrong, taxes wrong, small business wrong.

This is all about the WaPo and just trying to create another bogeyman to rile up the base.

I can see his point somewhat. I sell my book on Amazon. They won't collect state sales tax and forward to state coffers. The states have been harping on them for a while. Other online sites like Airbnb, Uber, etc, have redesigned their programs to collect all taxes and forward to states.

I have been paying state sales tax on Amazon for a while - RI requires it

the Postal Regulatory Commission, which oversees the industry, has found that the US Postal Service makes a profit from its contract with the company.

Friends of Mr Trump in the commercial property sector have also been urging him to protect them from digital retail giants as they see shopping malls closing and rents falling,


It is unprecedented for a sitting president to single out one company for such vicious attacks,

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43606088

I dont disagree.. but why only 1 company ?

Amazon collects state taxes on direct sales. For professional sellers they have a service where the seller can provide their state tax id and Amazon will apply proper state taxes as appropriate, but the seller has to sign up for it. This does make some sense, it's not Amazon's liability to ensure the state taxes are paid by a merchant they are simply a broker for.

I've read that about half of Amazon's purchases are not direct from the fulfillment centers but are through the marketplace. There could be a good argument here than Amazon is doing more to help small business gain a wider audience then they had previously. If anything put the hurt on local retail it's likely the big box stores in the 90's and 2000's.

And the USPS can't by law enter into a corporate agreement where they don't make a profit. Seems like all the shipping companies are using them these days to finish the delivery.

Not saying Amazon is perfect but it seems like POTUS is wrong on just about every facet of his argument. Why?

Oh yes, WaPo.

how can he attack them for not paying their fair share of taxes when he just cut the corporate tax rate ..


or was it sarcasm


but Oil companies are drilling along Mining company's on public land pay only $1.50 an acre per year to do so.. bargain prices give private companies a windfall while depriving American taxpayers of a fair return from energy production.


but he goes after amazon

How's your 401(k) compared to January 2017?

"how can he attack them for not paying their fair share of taxes when he just cut the corporate tax rate ..'

Many, not you, would say the new corporate tax rate is more than fair. Your pension, I promise, is benefitting from corporations being more profitable. But if your moral compass can't get on the same page, you can donate the extra money that Trumps policies have put into your pension, by voluntarily paying higher taxes. Let us know when you get around to doing that.

"bargain prices give private companies a windfall"

Good lord man, and the private sector employees who benefit, pay the taxes that fund your salary. So that's good for you. You can't see that?

You act as if private sector employee's don't pay taxes .. Jim you have a hard time looking at the big picture .. can you tell me why Trump would attack amazon for not paying taxes after cutting their taxes or why is it good for the tax payer to allow drilling on public land for 2 dollars an acre .. Trump is abusing his power as potus and you love it and I contribute to my pension and it don't change because of the stock market .. my personal plan does and I have seen the down and the up both had very little to do with the POTUS policy's

That is good to know. On my seller statements it never shows that the buyer is paying the state sales tax to Amazon. Maybe it's buried in the Amazon fees.

Are you planning on cashing out?

Jeff,why not just answer the question?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How about the market compared to other presidents
http://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stoc...e-by-president

"You act as if private sector employee's don't pay taxes "

I have never said, or implied, that private sector employees don't pay taxes. Do you mean public sector? I have also never implied that public sector employees don't pay taxes. But they are better off when tax rates are higher, because every cent of their funding comes from taxing somebody else.

"can you tell me why Trump would attack amazon for not paying taxes "

Because he's a jerk, and he's not that smart, and obviously he tweets before he thinks, and he has no grasp of what it is, that he doesn't know. Fair enough?

"why is it good for the tax payer to allow drilling on public land for 2 dollars an acre "

Because it's better when crude is $60/barrel than $100/barrel.

"Trump is abusing his power as potus and you love it"

I love some of what he does, I hate plenty of what he does. You can't grasp that, to you it's all or nothing.

"I contribute to my pension "

And your contributions are funded by taxing someone else. And if your pensions is like the ones in CT, your contributions don't fund the benefits, so you need additional contributions from the state, which means, you need tax revenue.

"(my pension) don't change because of the stock market"

The hell it doesn't. What do you suppose the people who manage your pension, do with your contributions? Bury it in their backyard? Stuff it in their mattresses? Or do they buy stocks and, more likely, bonds? The healthier the economy, the more your pension fund grows, so the more likely there's enough money to fund your benefit. I am right on that. You are far better off is the economy is booming, than you are during a recession.

" have seen the down and the up both had very little to do with the POTUS policy's"

So why do you (and I) give Obama credit for the economic results of his 8 years?

You gotta let go of some of that bias, WDMSO. It won't kill you. Trump has massive moral flaws, he's not a good guy. But he's helping the economy.

Because the answer doesn't serve his personal agenda.

When my beliefs cannot stand up to the scrutiny of such a simple question, that's the day I re-examine what I believe.

Maybe I am taking the DJIA 'out of context', maybe if you look at it through Spence's context, it's actually down over the last 15 months.

When Trump came in, the stock market (thanks in part to Obama) was very high. It's harder to grow the stock market when it's high, and easier to grow the market after a crash.

That doesn't diminish what Obama did. But when he came in, the market had almost nowhere to go but up.

It's like golf. It's a lot easier to take 5 shots off your game when you are shooting 130, then it is when you are shooting 90.

Would it kill you to admit that he's been good for the economy? In all seriousness, what are you afraid will happen, if you are honest for 10 seconds?

I always feel that I am honest, I just have a hard time with the emperor's attire.
It's a lot easier to make the market go up by cutting corporate taxes in the middle of an expansion phase, in fact it is likely the only way to hyperinflate the market in that case.
Honestly, I feel that it will make the coming market adjustment in the next two years worse.
Who Trump will blame that on remains to be seen.

The market went up long before the GOP passed the tax overhaul.

You can also hyperinflate the market by doing what Obama did, borrowing a couple of trillion and dumping it into the market.

" feel that it will make the coming market adjustment in the next two years worse.
Who Trump will blame that on remains to be seen"

OK, so when the inevitable correction/recession occurs, none of it will be connected to anything Obama did, all of it will be Trump's fault. That's "honest"?

When the market goes on a tear for 9 years, it typically gives back at some point. If Hilary had won, we'd still be due for a correction/recession. That's the cycle. Sure, there are things presidents can do to make it more or less severe.

You are right, assuming there's a correction/recession on Trump's watch, you can bet he will place all of the blame elsewhere.

No, but for damn sure I have stop loss orders on my top holdings...the correction is coming.

We agree on one thing

"What would you have suggested he do at that point in time? Wait for things to sort themselves out?"

See, this is the dishonesty I was referring to. Both Obama and Trump took significant steps to try and help the economy. Both took risks, that as of now, appear to be working. You are concerned about the potential downside to Trump's actions, yet you have no concerns about what Obama did, because in your mind his moves were brilliant and necessary.

As of right now, the evidence shows both have helped the economy. You give credit to one, and issue dire warnings about the other. The one you give credit to, is a democrat, the one you cannot bring yourself to give credit to, is (supposedly) a Republican.

That's honest?

If the economy crashes tomorrow, all the liberals will say it's all Trump's fault (nothing to do with Obama), and all the conservative purists will say it had nothing to do with Trump. The truth is in the middle somewhere, as usual.

"Since the claim is made that all things good are due to Trump's policies, surely the converse must be true?"

Who made that claim? I have said many times, including on this thread, that the economy did well under Obama. Again, are you being honest? Who said all good things are due to Trump? Show us who said that, or admit you made it up?

"Would that be like cutting taxes and increasing the deficit in the middle of an expansion. Sure you have a short term "good" but long term?"

OK so today, you are opposed to increasing the deficit. What was your stance on increasing the deficit, from, oh, say, 2009-2016?

So you're claiming the market gains the past 12 months are evidence of Trump's fiscal sophistication even though they're about to crash.

Good one.

See here's the difference between you and me. I ask you a question, you evade (you still haven't answered). You ask me a question, I respond directly. I can respond directly, because unlike some people, my opinions are a result of critical thinking, as opposed to blind, fanatical acceptance of one party's doctrine.

Many people, regardless of party, think a correction/recession is due. That is not necessarily a rejection of Trump's policies (though people like you will obviously spin it that way when it happens). Whoever won in 2016, was going to inherit an economy that was ripe for some pain. The tax overhaul instantly made companies more profitable, thus more valuable, thus perhaps postponing the correction.

It didn't matter whether Bernie Sanders won, or Ted Cruz, or someone in between. We are ripe for a correction. I would say the same exact thing, regardless of the party of the winner of the election. Your spin, depends entirely on the party of the POTUS, that tells you whether you give the POTUS credit or blame.

End with a But ______________, typical gaslighting move.