Why are you afraid of if the “other” party wins?

[Kbg]

We'd be going through another four years of the same someone with no qualifications, character, skills for being president.

We well MAY be the greatest country in the world. But the rest of the world cannot believe that a company so great is reduced to putting such a person as president.

Vinny

So you're saying that Biden would be running the third term of Obama?
If that were the worst case, I wouldn't be working on my emergency escape plan.

Where you going? All the ones I would go to are probably too pinko-communist for you. Do tell, I want to know where freedom nirvana is.

[Libertarian666]

We'd be going through another four years of the same someone with no qualifications, character, skills for being president.

We well MAY be the greatest country in the world. But the rest of the world cannot believe that a company so great is reduced to putting such a person as president.

Vinny

So you're saying that Biden would be running the third term of Obama?
If that were the worst case, I wouldn't be working on my emergency escape plan.

Where you going? All the ones I would go to are probably too pinko-communist for you. Do tell, I want to know where freedom nirvana is.

I have tentative plans that I don't want to share on a message board. Nothing illegal, of course.

I am willing to say that I don't know of any freedom nirvanas.

Given that, what I'm looking for is a small neutral country far from whatever insanity ensues, and which hasn't gone insane with brutal lockdowns and the like.

I have a strong preference for an English-speaking country, with Spanish in a distant second place.

I will also say that if Switzerland were an option, I'd take it even though it isn't English speaking and is in the middle of Europe. I expect that it will remain fairly safe and prosperous, but I just can't afford it.

[WiseOne]

Unfortunately, fear is a powerful campaign tactic and a good way to manipulate people. The study of evolutionary biology and neuropsychology has revealed that fear is a powerful agent that triggers our primal reptilian brains which then shunts access to the rational thinking centers of the upper neo-cortex. Fear makes us irrational. So does anger.
I'm not sure how anyone could deny that in Trump we have an angry leader who is uniquely effective at inciting fear in ways that no President in recent memory was willing or capable of doing.

Wait a sec....

Who is doing the fear mongering again?

At the start of the Trump presidency, I seem to remember that ISIS was terrorizing much of Western Europe as well as the US, while Iran and North Korea were threatening to acquire/test nuclear weapons. Those were scary things. Yes I fully recognize that Trump tried to convince everyone that illegal immigrants were coming in here primarily to commit violent crimes, which was a bit silly, and also talked a lot about the evils of free trade and globalism which frankly contributed a lot to his appeal, because he was right. But, don't you find it interesting that these issues have all somehow managed to disappear? Did that happen by magic or do you think maybe the Trump administration had something to do with it? If so, what does that tell you about who is out to create fear?

The news media are doing way more than Trump is. I don't suppose you've read the headlines recently, but aren't they pretty much all about what you should be scared of today? It's how they make their money. Nobody wants to read about puppies, sunshine and rainbows.

[glennds]

Unfortunately, fear is a powerful campaign tactic and a good way to manipulate people. The study of evolutionary biology and neuropsychology has revealed that fear is a powerful agent that triggers our primal reptilian brains which then shunts access to the rational thinking centers of the upper neo-cortex. Fear makes us irrational. So does anger.
I'm not sure how anyone could deny that in Trump we have an angry leader who is uniquely effective at inciting fear in ways that no President in recent memory was willing or capable of doing.

Wait a sec....

Who is doing the fear mongering again?

At the start of the Trump presidency, I seem to remember that ISIS was terrorizing much of Western Europe as well as the US, while Iran and North Korea were threatening to acquire/test nuclear weapons. Those were scary things. Yes I fully recognize that Trump tried to convince everyone that illegal immigrants were coming in here primarily to commit violent crimes, which was a bit silly, and also talked a lot about the evils of free trade and globalism which frankly contributed a lot to his appeal, because he was right. But, don't you find it interesting that these issues have all somehow managed to disappear? Did that happen by magic or do you think maybe the Trump administration had something to do with it? If so, what does that tell you about who is out to create fear?

The news media are doing way more than Trump is. I don't suppose you've read the headlines recently, but aren't they pretty much all about what you should be scared of today? It's how they make their money. Nobody wants to read about puppies, sunshine and rainbows.

Seriously?
Head over to YouTube and watch either of the Arizona Trump rallies from two days ago and listen to him recite the vividly explicit list of things that will certainly happen if Biden wins the election. The "Left" are the new proxy for the rapists and murderers that were going to flood over the border in hordes but for the Wall. Antifa will take over all your cities and suburbs. You will be living in a country more like Venezuela under permanent lockdown. Watch your 401(k)s disappear. Watch your homes crash in value. But I and only I can save you.
They actually used Village People's Macho Man as one of his intro songs.

What I think is interesting is that the new threat is not Mexicans, North Koreans, ISIS. or any foreign power. The enemy is your fellow Americans. I'm simply saying I don't think this is a healthy trend for a society.

Why do you believe Iran and N. Korea are no longer acquiring and testing nuclear weapons? Not that physical weapons are the next threat anyway, but I digress.

Just to be clear, my comments are only about the effectiveness and destructiveness of fear campaigning and the effect of triggered states on rational thinking. Yes fear is used in the media, and yes fear is used in other venues, but I'm talking about Presidential campaigning.
Not that it is a totally new concept, but the innovation being the drive to existential intensity by Trump which I have not seen in my lifetime, at least in the United States.

[vnatale]

I’m a Republican basically, more old school Reagan type. “Hey, Tip, let’s sit down and hammer this out.”

Gotta say...Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Bush1, Clinton, Bush2, Obama, Trump...it’s all been good. World hasn’t come to an end with any of them. I’ll shake the hand and be willing to compromise and make common cause with a Democrat, Libertarian, Green Party etc. It’s OK, it really is. I’ve seen a lot of this world and pretty much everyone wants the same things, food, shelter, the ability to provide for themselves and a better life for their children.

Less media in everyone’s life is a good thing. The job of the news is to make news to sell it...we should always remember that.

I fear people who are uncompromising. They normally screw things up and start wars.

I'm right there with you.
Every time is "different". Nothing in this country has ever turned out as badly as what the other side feared.

Unfortunately, fear is a powerful campaign tactic and a good way to manipulate people. The study of evolutionary biology and neuropsychology has revealed that fear is a powerful agent that triggers our primal reptilian brains which then shunts access to the rational thinking centers of the upper neo-cortex. Fear makes us irrational. So does anger.
I'm not sure how anyone could deny that in Trump we have an angry leader who is uniquely effective at inciting fear in ways that no President in recent memory was willing or capable of doing. The trend towards no-holds-barred partisanship that was ushered in by Newt Gingrich contributed to the foundation.
Amp this up with social media, MSM bias, and the proliferation of disinformation and what do you have? An irrational, triggered populace that can no longer think or engage rationally. Telltale signs are paranoia, polarized tribalism, mistrust, unwillingness to engage with the "other side". The perceived threats become not just concerning, but existential. Look around, do you see any of these signs?

As I said in another thread, almost all the political ideologies have some merit. But taken to extreme they all become absurd. When the real chaos sets in, we can only see the other ideologies in extreme, not in moderation. It's like a form of color blindness but instead of color, we cannot see gradation. The left can only be radical Marxist left. The libertarians can only be militia anarchists. The right can only be fascist populists.
Truth is, 99% of any of these groups are not nearly that extreme, but when the triggered blindness sets in we just can't see it.

Absolutely!

Vinny

[vnatale]

We'd be going through another four years of the same someone with no qualifications, character, skills for being president.

We well MAY be the greatest country in the world. But the rest of the world cannot believe that a company so great is reduced to putting such a person as president.

Vinny

So you're saying that Biden would be running the third term of Obama?
If that were the worst case, I wouldn't be working on my emergency escape plan.

Of course, a good one by Mr. Libertarian666! I tried to carefully choose my words but, of course, he found a loophole!

Vinny

[vnatale]

Unfortunately, fear is a powerful campaign tactic and a good way to manipulate people. The study of evolutionary biology and neuropsychology has revealed that fear is a powerful agent that triggers our primal reptilian brains which then shunts access to the rational thinking centers of the upper neo-cortex. Fear makes us irrational. So does anger.
I'm not sure how anyone could deny that in Trump we have an angry leader who is uniquely effective at inciting fear in ways that no President in recent memory was willing or capable of doing.

Wait a sec....

Who is doing the fear mongering again?

At the start of the Trump presidency, I seem to remember that ISIS was terrorizing much of Western Europe as well as the US, while Iran and North Korea were threatening to acquire/test nuclear weapons. Those were scary things. Yes I fully recognize that Trump tried to convince everyone that illegal immigrants were coming in here primarily to commit violent crimes, which was a bit silly, and also talked a lot about the evils of free trade and globalism which frankly contributed a lot to his appeal, because he was right. But, don't you find it interesting that these issues have all somehow managed to disappear? Did that happen by magic or do you think maybe the Trump administration had something to do with it? If so, what does that tell you about who is out to create fear?

The news media are doing way more than Trump is. I don't suppose you've read the headlines recently, but aren't they pretty much all about what you should be scared of today? It's how they make their money. Nobody wants to read about puppies, sunshine and rainbows.

Just in the last few days I thought about Trump's intense focus on the caravan for days (weeks?) in the fall of 2018. He even sent the army at the border. Then the election happened and not a peep from him since regarding the caravan. Does anyone know what did happen with that caravan and its effect on our country?

Vinny

[vnatale]

Unfortunately, fear is a powerful campaign tactic and a good way to manipulate people. The study of evolutionary biology and neuropsychology has revealed that fear is a powerful agent that triggers our primal reptilian brains which then shunts access to the rational thinking centers of the upper neo-cortex. Fear makes us irrational. So does anger.
I'm not sure how anyone could deny that in Trump we have an angry leader who is uniquely effective at inciting fear in ways that no President in recent memory was willing or capable of doing.

Wait a sec....

Who is doing the fear mongering again?

At the start of the Trump presidency, I seem to remember that ISIS was terrorizing much of Western Europe as well as the US, while Iran and North Korea were threatening to acquire/test nuclear weapons. Those were scary things. Yes I fully recognize that Trump tried to convince everyone that illegal immigrants were coming in here primarily to commit violent crimes, which was a bit silly, and also talked a lot about the evils of free trade and globalism which frankly contributed a lot to his appeal, because he was right. But, don't you find it interesting that these issues have all somehow managed to disappear? Did that happen by magic or do you think maybe the Trump administration had something to do with it? If so, what does that tell you about who is out to create fear?

The news media are doing way more than Trump is. I don't suppose you've read the headlines recently, but aren't they pretty much all about what you should be scared of today? It's how they make their money. Nobody wants to read about puppies, sunshine and rainbows.

Seriously?
Head over to YouTube and watch either of the Arizona Trump rallies from two days ago and listen to him recite the vividly explicit list of things that will certainly happen if Biden wins the election. The "Left" are the new proxy for the rapists and murderers that were going to flood over the border in hordes but for the Wall. Antifa will take over all your cities and suburbs. You will be living in a country more like Venezuela under permanent lockdown. Watch your 401(k)s disappear. Watch your homes crash in value. But I and only I can save you.
They actually used Village People's Macho Man as one of his intro songs.

What I think is interesting is that the new threat is not Mexicans, North Koreans, ISIS. or any foreign power. The enemy is your fellow Americans. I'm simply saying I don't think this is a healthy trend for a society.

Why do you believe Iran and N. Korea are no longer acquiring and testing nuclear weapons? Not that physical weapons are the next threat anyway, but I digress.

Just to be clear, my comments are only about the effectiveness and destructiveness of fear campaigning and the effect of triggered states on rational thinking. Yes fear is used in the media, and yes fear is used in other venues, but I'm talking about Presidential campaigning.
Not that it is a totally new concept, but the innovation being the drive to existential intensity by Trump which I have not seen in my lifetime, at least in the United States.

That is because if you look up the definition of "sui generis" you will see Trump used an an example! There are SO many aspects to Trump's presidency that NONE of us have EVER seen in our lifetimes.

Vinny

[vnatale]

Head over to YouTube and watch either of the Arizona Trump rallies from two days ago and listen to him recite the vividly explicit list of things that will certainly happen if Biden wins the election. The "Left" are the new proxy for the rapists and murderers that were going to flood over the border in hordes but for the Wall. Antifa will take over all your cities and suburbs. You will be living in a country more like Venezuela under permanent lockdown. Watch your 401(k)s disappear.

So, the thing is, Portland is a disaster right now because of liberal politicians in control. So, yes, if Biden won presidency, it’s certainly possible every city would look like Portland.

I’ve read Biden’s 401k plan, and if enacted, yes, my 401k would disappear.

I’ve read Biden’s gun control plan, and if enacted, yes, my gun collection would disappear.

I’ve heard Biden discuss his plans for lockdowns and masks, and if enacted, yes, it would be awful.

So while I admit Biden probably can’t do all of the things he’s promising, if he does, I’m fucked. These are things Biden himself is claiming, not things trump is inventing.

Stipulating all you say is true....how many of those things can Biden do on his own? Does he not need the support of both parts of Congress?

I remind you that when Obama was elected the Democrats were in control of both houses of Congress. Yet he had to exert every once of his political capital to get the Affordable Care Act passed by the barest of margins.

All you name above needs to be passed by majorities in both houses. Majorities that have to be confident that their votes will not jeopardize their re-elections. How likely do you find that to happen?

Vinny

[Tortoise]

I find it amusing that the left-leaning folks here seem to be saying that the majority of the fearmongering has been coming from Trump's campaign and not Biden's.

Isn't it the Dems who've said in both 2016 and 2020 that if Trump is elected, the white supremacists lurking behind every tree will come out and wreak havoc? Isn't it the Dems who've said that if Trump is elected, his divisive rhetoric will incite new wars with foreign nations? And isn't it Biden's campaign that says if Trump is reelected, many more people will die of Covid-1984 because the American people didn't allow Biden to save their lives with his nationwide lockdown? All of that definitely sounds like fearmongering to me.

There is fearmongering on both sides. The difference seems to be that the things Trump is warning us about are real dangers (albeit sometimes exaggerated for showmanship), whereas the things the Dems are warning us about are imaginary and not supported by the evidence of Trump's first four years as President.

[doodle]

The way I look at it..One way or another the masses in society are going to eventually figure out a way to rebalance the growing inequality. In the past traditionally this was done through revolutions and people losing heads. In the 1930s revolution was averted and capitalism was saved by Roosevelt's new deal and the lucky timing of world war two for our nation. This pot has again been simmering away since the occupy and tea party movements during the last crash and that simmer occasionally reached a full boil at points in the last few months. I'm not advocating the merits of any particular solution, I'm just looking at things from a historical perspective. Things have become unbalanced and although you can make appeals to all the philosophical rights that you want, they don't really exist in a world that is governed by force when all is said and done.

[Tortoise]

The way I look at it..One way or another the masses in society are going to eventually figure out a way to rebalance the growing inequality. In the past traditionally this was done through revolutions and people losing heads. In the 1930s revolution was averted and capitalism was saved by Roosevelt's new deal and the lucky timing of world war two for our nation. This pot has again been simmering away since the occupy and tea party movements during the last crash and that simmer occasionally reached a full boil at points in the last few months.

This isn't a great uprising by the poor working class.

The majority of the Antifa/BLM thugs who've been committing most of the vandalism and violence over the past several months aren't the downtrodden and oppressed. They're mostly middle-class white kids who live in their parents' comfortable basements rent-free, playing Call of Duty by day and rioting in black bloc costumes by night. The rest of them are college students -- usually transgender English Literature majors with purple hair.

[pp4me]

I remind you that when Obama was elected the Democrats were in control of both houses of Congress. Yet he had to exert every once of his political capital to get the Affordable Care Act passed by the barest of margins.

All you name above needs to be passed by majorities in both houses. Majorities that have to be confident that their votes will not jeopardize their re-elections. How likely do you find that to happen?

Vinny

People do seem to forget that the voters have the power to stomp on the brakes two years after a presidential election if they think things are getting out of control. That's exactly what happened with the passage of ObamaCare just as you are saying. The Dems lost 63 seats in Congress giving the Reps a majority in 2010.

Same thing happened with Hillary Care which led to the successful Republican "Contract with America". I believe it was during the State of the Union speech that year that Clinton famously declared that "the era of big government is over" (it wasn't, of course).

[doodle]

The way I look at it..One way or another the masses in society are going to eventually figure out a way to rebalance the growing inequality. In the past traditionally this was done through revolutions and people losing heads. In the 1930s revolution was averted and capitalism was saved by Roosevelt's new deal and the lucky timing of world war two for our nation. This pot has again been simmering away since the occupy and tea party movements during the last crash and that simmer occasionally reached a full boil at points in the last few months.

This isn't a great uprising by the poor working class.

The majority of the Antifa/BLM thugs who've been committing most of the vandalism and violence over the past several months aren't the downtrodden and oppressed. They're mostly middle-class white kids who live in their parents' comfortable basements rent-free, playing Call of Duty by day and rioting in black bloc costumes by night. The rest of them are college students -- usually transgender English Literature majors with purple hair.

How old are you, tortoise? Old enough I hope to understand that what we are seeing bubbling up in this country is nothing new throughout the sweep of history.

https://www.economist.com/open-future ... r-plague

IN AN age of widening inequality, Walter Scheidel believes he has cracked the code on how to overcome it. In “The Great Leveler”, the Stanford professor posits that throughout history, economic inequality has only been rectified by one of the “Four Horsemen of Leveling”: warfare, revolution, state collapse and plague.

So are liberal democracies doomed to a repeat of the pattern that saw the gilded age give way to a breakdown of society? Or can they legislate a way out of the ominous cycle of brutal inequality and potential violence?

I'm in a weird position with regards to what is happening. I'm an early millennial, successful..basically semi retired. Worked hard and was very focused on achieving financial freedom. I mostly worked hard jobs however...long hours, hard work, no windfalls, alongside people who were broke or scraping by. On the one hand I earned everything I made....but I had a lot of good fortune and luck along the way. Nevertheless, despite my relatively privileged position I find myself in, i'm angry at increasing disparity in our country between the haves and have nots. I believe that the enormous wealth that our society creates is the result of the collective hard work and effort of the people of our nation. Just like a championship winning team is the collective efforts of all the players. I'm not saying that a Michael Jordan shouldn't be paid more in fact Michael Jordan's salary of $33.14 million for the 1997-98 season was more than twice as much as the combined salaries of teammates Dennis Rodman, Scottie Pippen, Ron Harper and Toni Kukoč...some might say that was excessive but that pales in comparison to our country where the bottom 50% of our nation's holds only 1% of the wealth...and the bottom 80% owning less than 10% of wealth. This is a problem.

[Xan]

to our country where the bottom 50% of our nation's holds only 1% of the wealth...and the bottom 80% owning less than 10% of wealth. This is a problem.

Can you articulate what the problem is? Unlike previous situations where there's been war or revolution or plague, the bottom 90% of society is not actually starving. As long as everyone has enough, does it matter how much the rich have?

[doodle]

to our country where the bottom 50% of our nation's holds only 1% of the wealth...and the bottom 80% owning less than 10% of wealth. This is a problem.

Can you articulate what the problem is? Unlike previous situations where there's been war or revolution or plague, the bottom 90% of society is not actually starving. As long as everyone has enough, does it matter how much the rich have?

Sounds logical....too bad humans aren't too logical. It is the disparity that matters though as that is what breeds resentment. The same thing happens on a team where one star player makes all the money and lives in a mansion while the other players live in little 2 bedroom houses. When the team keeps winning championships and the star players salary keeps rising while the other players keep making the same thing eventually they are going to hate that star player. Humans have this inbuilt mechanism for perceived fairness. They can accept some level of difference but when the differences become too great...as in 80% owning just 7% of wealth then shit hits the fan.

[doodle]

It's a weird feature of how our economy functions. Those people at the extreme ends of the distribution take the overwhelming majority of the rewards. Usain bolt is probably only a couple milliseconds faster than the slowest runner but he earns millions while the rest sleep in their mothers basements. The difference between a pga tour pro and a club pro is a few strokes. Our economy is more like a team though than an individual sport. A great player like Michael Jordan is enough to put a team over the top and win championships...the problem is how to deal with all the other players giving it their all everyday? Are they replaceable, maybe...but it's not like the success of the Chicago bulls is because Michael Jordan gave 90% of the effort and the others only contributed 10%. I don't know the best way to deal with this but if we don't and the team starts going at each other's throats they aren't going to win any more championships anymore....that's for certain. Michael Jordan can't do it by himself.

[Tortoise]

How old are you, tortoise? Old enough I hope to understand that what we are seeing bubbling up in this country is nothing new throughout the sweep of history.

I'm not a vampire, so unfortunately I'm not old enough to have witnessed the "sweep of history" first-hand.

(Seriously, though, I'm 41. I'm assuming you're 38-40 since you refer to yourself as an "early millennial"?)

Nevertheless, despite my relatively privileged position I find myself in, i'm angry at increasing disparity in our country between the haves and have nots.

You seem to have an unusual fixation on the idea of economic inequality. Marxism, I guess. That's fine.

I don't doubt that economic inequality has played a part in many revolutions past. If people's living conditions deteriorate beyond a certain point, they will become restless and seek to overthrow those whom they perceive to be their oppressors.

The Occupy Wall Street movement definitely seemed to be rooted in the idea of economic inequality. The fact that big banks and corporations were bailed out while the average person was not was indeed outrageous, so I understood the motivation. I didn't agree with a lot of the Occupy protesters' actions, but I understood their motivation.

But it seems like the protests and riots we've been seeing in the U.S. this year aren't rooted in economic inequality. They began as a reaction to supposed racial discrimination by police, then gradually broadened into a protest of traditional American culture and institutions in general. As I pointed out in my previous post, most of the rioters aren't even poor or black. They're largely middle-class white teens and 20-somethings. They don't live in squalor. They live in Mom's basement eating food from her well-stocked fridge.

I see the root of the current unrest as decadence, not economic inequality. America has become the victim of her own success. As the nation became increasingly successful, Americans gradually abandoned the core values that formed the foundation of that success. Those core values used to unify the diverse segments of our society, so as we abandoned them, friction and strife was the inevitable result. Americans no longer all agree on what's most important in human life.

[WiseOne]

Well in truth there is a large group of Americans who have seen their living standard decline. That's the real problem, not "income inequality". If you're a solid, high school educated factory worker earning a good wage and enjoying a solidly middle class standard of living with home ownership, retirement savings, college for the kids and all the rest of it, what do you care how much Bill Gates makes?

Of course, this guy is either unemployed or forced to work at McDonald's, because there aren't any factory jobs left and at age 45 or so, it's a bit much to ask him to learn software engineering. Plus he'd have to compete with all those H1b's from India who are willing to work for peanuts just for the chance to get into the US.

See anything wrong with this picture? Hint, it's not the income inequality itself, it's the factors that led to it. That's why I'm interested in Trump's worldview. He's the only candidate in either party so far who has managed to identify the real problem, which leads to real solutions that aren't the "Robin Hood" approach that everyone else takes. If they care at all, which by and large they don't.

[doodle]

Well in truth there is a large group of Americans who have seen their living standard decline. That's the real problem, not "income inequality". If you're a solid, high school educated factory worker earning a good wage and enjoying a solidly middle class standard of living with home ownership, retirement savings, college for the kids and all the rest of it, what do you care how much Bill Gates makes?

Of course, this guy is either unemployed or forced to work at McDonald's, because there aren't any factory jobs left and at age 45 or so, it's a bit much to ask him to learn software engineering. Plus he'd have to compete with all those H1b's from India who are willing to work for peanuts just for the chance to get into the US.

See anything wrong with this picture? Hint, it's not the income inequality itself, it's the factors that led to it. That's why I'm interested in Trump's worldview. He's the only candidate in either party so far who has managed to identify the real problem, which leads to real solutions that aren't the "Robin Hood" approach that everyone else takes. If they care at all, which by and large they don't.

How do we get back to that without massive inflation?

[vnatale]

Stipulating all you say is true....how many of those things can Biden do on his own? Does he not need the support of both parts of Congress?

I remind you that when Obama was elected the Democrats were in control of both houses of Congress. Yet he had to exert every once of his political capital to get the Affordable Care Act passed by the barest of margins.

All you name above needs to be passed by majorities in both houses. Majorities that have to be confident that their votes will not jeopardize their re-elections. How likely do you find that to happen?

Vinny

Vinny,

If I am tracking you correctly, your defense of Biden is that it doesn’t matter what his agenda is, doesn’t matter what he promises, doesn’t matter what plans he’s outlined, because he won’t be able to follow through anyway, so we should vote for Biden because all of our fears of what he might do, which are based on what he’s promising to do, are unjustified because he can’t do them anyway.

Is that your stance or did I misunderstand?

My stance is that just because those are his positions it is far from certain that any of them come to fruition. Am I incorrect in assuming that your stance is that if he is elected then all his positions come to fruition? That may be an exaggeration of your position. But not far if taking literally what you wrote.

Vinny

[vnatale]

My stance is that just because those are his positions it is far from certain that any of them come to fruition. Am I incorrect in assuming that your stance is that if he is elected then all his positions come to fruition? That may be an exaggeration of your position. But not far if taking literally what you wrote.

Vinny

What difference does it make? We can't predict with any accuracy what he will or won't be able to do, with or without the help of congress. So it's best not to elect someone with crazy fringe ideas that would be disastrous just in case.

For me, it's the difference between expressing / recognizing the probably reality versus expressing what might seem like a somewhat paranoid view.

Which way expressed affects the discussion.

Vinny

[Kbg]

Well in truth there is a large group of Americans who have seen their living standard decline. That's the real problem, not "income inequality". If you're a solid, high school educated factory worker earning a good wage and enjoying a solidly middle class standard of living with home ownership, retirement savings, college for the kids and all the rest of it, what do you care how much Bill Gates makes?

Of course, this guy is either unemployed or forced to work at McDonald's, because there aren't any factory jobs left and at age 45 or so, it's a bit much to ask him to learn software engineering. Plus he'd have to compete with all those H1b's from India who are willing to work for peanuts just for the chance to get into the US.

See anything wrong with this picture? Hint, it's not the income inequality itself, it's the factors that led to it. That's why I'm interested in Trump's worldview. He's the only candidate in either party so far who has managed to identify the real problem, which leads to real solutions that aren't the "Robin Hood" approach that everyone else takes. If they care at all, which by and large they don't.

WiseOne rang the bell on this observation...personally I think this is the tragedy of Trump. He was absolutely on to something in 2016 and assembled an outstanding team that could have made some excellent progress in this area. But then, well, he’s just himself. Watching him in 2016 it was apparent, and crystal clear about 6mos into 2017 that he really has zero leadership skill and a complete inability to form a team with non family members.

[doodle]

Well in truth there is a large group of Americans who have seen their living standard decline. That's the real problem, not "income inequality". If you're a solid, high school educated factory worker earning a good wage and enjoying a solidly middle class standard of living with home ownership, retirement savings, college for the kids and all the rest of it, what do you care how much Bill Gates makes?

Of course, this guy is either unemployed or forced to work at McDonald's, because there aren't any factory jobs left and at age 45 or so, it's a bit much to ask him to learn software engineering. Plus he'd have to compete with all those H1b's from India who are willing to work for peanuts just for the chance to get into the US.

See anything wrong with this picture? Hint, it's not the income inequality itself, it's the factors that led to it. That's why I'm interested in Trump's worldview. He's the only candidate in either party so far who has managed to identify the real problem, which leads to real solutions that aren't the "Robin Hood" approach that everyone else takes. If they care at all, which by and large they don't.

WiseOne rang the bell on this observation...personally I think this is the tragedy of Trump. He was absolutely on to something in 2016 and assembled an outstanding team that could have made some excellent progress in this area. But then, well, he’s just himself. Watching him in 2016 it was apparent, and crystal clear about 6mos into 2017 that he really has zero leadership skill and a complete inability to form a team with non family members.

Agree entirely. In fact, what's worse is that his personality actually undermines many of his good policy ideas. He is his own worst enemy.

[doodle]

I still don't see how we ever get back to the America of yore though. That ship has sailed I think. We are moving into unchartered waters especially with the increasing importance of the information economy and automation. Capitalism will have a lot of disruptive events to deal with over the next few decades. Hopefully moderate sane voices will prevail and we don't cut off our nose to spite our face in the process.