The Trump Presidency

I posted what I posted in response to 57... Not a defense of Trump or Obama.

I agree that the Trump economy basically starts in 2018

re reading the meme I see neither the name Trump / Obama.
and not sure why one would feel compelled to bring them up.

Regardless who controls congress or the White House I don't think we can judge an economy based solely on the haves or have nots
My reading on these pages seems rather one sided
 
re reading the meme I see neither the name Trump / Obama.
and not sure why one would feel compelled to bring them up.

Regardless who controls congress or the White House I don't think we can judge an economy based solely on the haves or have nots
My reading on these pages seems rather one sided

I do recognize that posting a chart with numbers is hard for you to understand, but you may want to check again and see that my response to your meme didn't mention Trump or Obama
 
The last time I bought a yacht I hired a bunch of people to build it for me. That's how tinkle down works.

Tangential anecdote: my former wife used to work for a company that operated megayacht marinas. Basically this company came about because some real-estate slumlord billionaire was salty because there weren’t enough places for him to park his giant-ass boat. So he started a company which provided facilities and amenities for fellow giant-ass-boat-owners. Russian oligarchs, Gulf princes, Silicon Valley dip****s, Jay Z...this was the clientele.

I mean, it was a job. It was a pure, by-god trickle-down job. Granted, the company was a bad employer and shady in a dozen different ways (shouldn’t say too much, but she was an accountant and our discussions about her future there usually ended with me saying “don’t sign your name on anything”). But it was a job. Damn, though, was also a clear window into something telling about our world. We had insight into giant-ass-boat-world, insight into struggling middle-class existence (our own experience) and, through my work, insight into the magnitude of poverty and need in our own community, which is affluent by world standards. I do think it’s worth asking questions about our societal incentives, about how wealth is created and inherited, how labor is valued and how this intersects with the common good.

We, the middle-class strivers, responsible, dual-employed homeowners, had more in common with the destitute than with the massively wealthy. Hell, we had more in common with the destitute than with the people in McMansionland half a mile away. We were always one significant life event away from a massive reversal of fortune.

Parenthetically, this economic anxiety might have made me a socialist, but I somehow managed to avoid becoming a racist. So there’s that, I guess.

Also parenthetically: it’s generalization, but this was another great opportunity to observe that extremely wealthy folks behave like rich folks’ stereotypes of poor people cheating on welfare. They work the system. They cheat whenever possible. Their leverage often allows them to screw their employees and they rarely are held accountable. One of the biggest failings of our society is that we don’t even treat so-called white-collar crime like crime at all. Yet we lionize the wealthy and demonize the poor, assuming that their failure to not be poor arises from some sort of moral defect. The system is stacked to ignore or excuse theft and fraud on a massive scale while punishing (and morally judging) it harshly when it happens on the street.

So, yeah. I think society is better served by more people having affordable access to child care, health care, and education, to the tools that allow them to avoid destitution. Cry me a ****ing river if it means that someone has to build a smaller boat.
 
So, yeah. I think society is better served by more people having affordable access to child care, health care, and education, to the tools that allow them to avoid destitution. Cry me a ****ing river if it means that someone has to build a smaller boat.

Thanks for sharing that, and I largely agree. As for the quoted part, sign me up for an economic policy that starts with a 0% tax rate that increases with income. The only problem is that we don't have a political party here that has interest in that.
 
Tangential anecdote: my former wife used to work for a company that operated megayacht marinas. Basically this company came about because some real-estate slumlord billionaire was salty because there weren’t enough places for him to park his giant-ass boat. So he started a company which provided facilities and amenities for fellow giant-ass-boat-owners. Russian oligarchs, Gulf princes, Silicon Valley dip****s, Jay Z...this was the clientele.

I mean, it was a job. It was a pure, by-god trickle-down job. Granted, the company was a bad employer and shady in a dozen different ways (shouldn’t say too much, but she was an accountant and our discussions about her future there usually ended with me saying “don’t sign your name on anything”). But it was a job. Damn, though, was also a clear window into something telling about our world. We had insight into giant-ass-boat-world, insight into struggling middle-class existence (our own experience) and, through my work, insight into the magnitude of poverty and need in our own community, which is affluent by world standards. I do think it’s worth asking questions about our societal incentives, about how wealth is created and inherited, how labor is valued and how this intersects with the common good.

We, the middle-class strivers, responsible, dual-employed homeowners, had more in common with the destitute than with the massively wealthy. Hell, we had more in common with the destitute than with the people in McMansionland half a mile away. We were always one significant life event away from a massive reversal of fortune.

Parenthetically, this economic anxiety might have made me a socialist, but I somehow managed to avoid becoming a racist. So there’s that, I guess.

Also parenthetically: it’s generalization, but this was another great opportunity to observe that extremely wealthy folks behave like rich folks’ stereotypes of poor people cheating on welfare. They work the system. They cheat whenever possible. Their leverage often allows them to screw their employees and they rarely are held accountable. One of the biggest failings of our society is that we don’t even treat so-called white-collar crime like crime at all. Yet we lionize the wealthy and demonize the poor, assuming that their failure to not be poor arises from some sort of moral defect. The system is stacked to ignore or excuse theft and fraud on a massive scale while punishing (and morally judging) it harshly when it happens on the street.

So, yeah. I think society is better served by more people having affordable access to child care, health care, and education, to the tools that allow them to avoid destitution. Cry me a ****ing river if it means that someone has to build a smaller boat.

Two points come to mind:

1) We should not stereotype the super rich. Some are dumb and lucky. Others super smart and hard working. Some do great things with their wealth. Others do shameful things.

2) We should not fall into the trap of thinking the difference between being rich and being poor is due either to luck or merit. It is obviously a bit of both. Obviously. A lot of people would like to think it is mostly luck. That would justify wholesale redistribution. But it would not give due to the incredible efficiency of the system of price incentives that is at the heart of the market system. And yes markets can be imperfect. But generally they work miracles. Other people would like to think it is mostly merit. They should think about that. A lot of life is a lottery. Starting with who your parents are. What kind of genes they passed down to you. Related to the above are things like health, which can be bad even for people with very good habits. It seems to me to be heartless not to acknowledge this and to try to devise programs to help the less lucky. Even while respecting the fact that we want to design those programs to minimize the disruptions to the incentive systems that make capitalism work.
 
Last edited:
Alan Levine
‏ @alevine014
Replying to @realDonaldTrump

Mr. President. SHUT UP. Any death, whether one or 3,000 is a tragedy.

That doesn’t mean you caused it, and its not about you. Show compassion for the families.

Learn what we can so future response can improve. Honestly....
 
southpaw
‏ @nycsouthpaw
1h1 hour ago

southpaw Retweeted Donald J. Trump

He can’t do the job. It’s been clear for a long time that he can’t.

And the people conspiring to keep him in office to score another tax cut

or another judge while he piles one horror on top of another

should feel shame for the rest of their lives.
 
The Lede:

The New York Times reported that there are 12,800 unaccompanied migrant children in the Trump administration’s custody. This is up from the 2,400 in May of 2017. The highest levels ever. This high level of migrant children in custody is due to the fact the Trump administration is reducing the number of children that they are releasing to adoptive families. Nearly 500 of those children are in custody as a result of President Trump’s separation of undocumented immigrant families who crossed the southern border.



https://rantt.com/with-12800-migrant-children-detained-trump-plans-indefinite-internment/
 
Jon Favreau
‏Verified account @jonfavs
Sep 13

Jon Favreau Retweeted Donald J. Trump

A reminder that not a single Republican running for office

has pledged to hold this man accountable for anything,

or check his power in any way.
.

just sayin'
 
Last edited:
Jon Favreau
‏Verified account @jonfavs
Sep 13

Jon Favreau Retweeted Donald J. Trump

A reminder that not a single Republican running for office

has pledged to hold this man accountable for anything,

or check his power in any way.
.

just sayin'

What does that even mean
 
What does that even mean

Hmm. I would assume that your bae Justin Amash’s position would be that any candidate for office in the legislative branch has the obligation to exercise their powers of oversight concerning the executive.
 
Chait today:

There is no better symbol for the Republican Party elite in the Trump era than
Gary Cohn weighing the morality of opposing Nazism against corporate-tax-rate
cuts and choosing the latter.



http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...than-adults-in-the-room-to-control-trump.html



The Weimar era that culminated in Hitler’s triumph was bitterly polarized.
Nazis drew their heaviest support from rural areas, and they viewed
Berlin — culturally libertine, swarming with immigrants — as alien to the “real” Germany.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. I would assume that your bae Justin Amash’s position would be that any candidate for office in the legislative branch has the obligation to exercise their powers of oversight concerning the executive.

Man you have been triggered today.

Amash has consistently voted against bills.

But he's a unicorn so all good
 
[TW]1040628562506772480[/tw]

This is actual sexism... implying that these women weren't hired because of their qualifications

[TW]1041005009754894336[/TW]


The left has lost its mind
 
Man you have been triggered today.

Amash has consistently voted against bills.

But he's a unicorn so all good

Right, so when you’re saying “what does this even mean,” I’m trying to draw you a map, using your current political hero. You’re rejecting the sentiment—that the GOP has completely embraced Trumpism and is scared to try to hold him accountable—because you don’t like the source. But it’s actually a position that Amash would endorse, no?
 
I keep hearing how the economy is doing so well yet federal spending is at its highest levels ever. What conclusion should we take from this?
 
Back
Top