Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Mister Sharpe]

Companies aren't civic-minded co-operative societies designed to create a happy, smiling community of participants. They're sociopaths designed to make as much money as possible while expending as little as possible. The entity you're looking for - the one that's purpose is supposed to be your welfare rather than its own - is called "government". And you're asking it to give away some of its money to the sociopaths by cutting taxes.

+1!  Americans in particular have trouble grasping this, I believe because of a residual, albeit fading, memory of the boomy 40s, 50s, and 60s when a manufacturing job was given to anyone who wanted one and patriarchal hometown industries were equated with home, income, family and a life. "Capitalism in action."  "The American Way!"  Business was virtually synonymous with public spirit (What's good for General Motors is good for the country) when actually it was just a happy economic coincidence, post WWII, of us being strong and them weak).  Technology and overseas competition have altered that dreamy scene.  And where is patriotism, let alone civic mindedness, when these companies can hire overseas for less than half what they pay Americans? Non-existent, except where it serves their own self-interest.  These issues and more are going to have to be resolved if we are to move forward as a nation. Republicans, I've observed, have problems with the inclusive notion of nation, esp: don't expect a job from the company (er, country) you should be willing to die for.

[drogulus]

     IOW jobs lead to profits. The difference IMV comes down to the efficiency of demand versus supply side economic measures to recycle savings into investment. Do you boost savings directly or do you boost incomes and investment directly? Put another way, the government usually runs deficits. What, in economic terms, are deficits for? What does government spending more than it taxes do? One answer is it does the opposite of what surpluses do, when the government takes out more dollars from the private sector than it adds. What's a surplus for? It's to reduce economic activity, to control inflation by reducing income and investment to allow prices to stabilize by reducing consumption. Since we want the economy to grow we accept an amount of inflation that fosters robust growth, but not more than that. On the other side the deficits counter what savings subtract from income. Deficit financing is usually considered the best way for government to invest in future growth.

     Keynes noted that an economy does not balance optimally and will tend to spiral down if savings are allowed to go uninvested, which he called the "paradox of thrift". If everyone saves, everyone gets poorer. Whose liabilities are the assets everyone saves? The government has them, true even when we aren't intentionally stimulating the economy. Keynes then was describing before he was prescribing. They way I like to put it is this: what we do, we can do, and what we can do, we should do under the appropriate conditions.

     Since the government will act as a swing spender, we have no alternative but to swing spend correctly. That means that in addition to the cyclical deficit swings we'll see, our efforts will be to meet our program and investment needs within the deficit window the state of the economy tells us is open. As we modify the cycle we observe how larger gap closing deficits lead not only to higher GDP but more rapid return of tax dollars to the thin air they came from. Another saying I have is "the tax always comes back", with a lag that varies, unless we want net savings in the private sector. Right now we are wanting about $19T of dollar savings among all the users, what an economy of this size needs. And that, dear reader, is also known as the national debt.

[San Antone]

The Cold Clinton Reality
Why isn't the IRS investigating the Clinton Foundation?

[Parsifal]

The Cold Clinton Reality
Why isn't the IRS investigating the Clinton Foundation?

Because it is a charity with an A rating from an independent charity auditor?  I'm guessing that's not the answer cited in the article.

[Brian]

Serious, not sarcastic, not stirring-things-up question: Is the IRS investigating the Trump Foundation? I genuinely don't remember.

There's pretty ample evidence of illegality, there. I know the NY Attorney General is investigating.

[drogulus]

The Cold Clinton Reality
Why isn't the IRS investigating the Clinton Foundation?

     They probably don't have a tax problem. In politics and philanthropy it's really amazing what you can get away with. They are both built on cronyism. So long as you steer clear of using the foundation to enrich yourself you and the foundation can feed from the same trough. And this is as true for a genuine foundation as for that thing Trump has.

[Parsifal]

I am amazed that anyone continues to believe in this correlation.

Seriously, why on earth do you think that profits lead to jobs? Profits aren't for making jobs.

Robert Reich, Clinton's labor secretary said it succinctly, rich people don't create jobs, customers create jobs. Businesses hire when there are customers to serve. The best way to create jobs is to put money in people's pockets.

[Madiel]

Robert Reich, Clinton's labor secretary said it succinctly, rich people don't create jobs, customers create jobs. Businesses hire when there are customers to serve. The best way to create jobs is to put money in people's pockets.

Yep. In lots of people's pockets. Not in the pockets of a few already-rather-rich people in the hope that they'll then spend even more.

I'm not by any means against businesses making a profit, but what's unfathomable to me is the idea that ever-bigger profits are an ever-greater good. No, a good business is one that is viable and can make money. Making even more money doesn't make it even more viable.

I think there's a lot to be said for small, local businesses because they are more likely to be genuinely engaged with a community and form part of the social fabric. But small, local businesses aren't the ones that get the ear of Republican politicians to whisper "give us even more money than we already have, and we promise to make America great again".

[zamyrabyrd]

President Obama has done or tried to do everything he said he would. The stimulus saved the country from an even deeper economic crisis. The health care bill is basically what was promised during the debates I listened to at the time. Of course it is not true that absolutely everyone could keep their existing health care plan, but that was not by design. Even before Obamacare was passed it was not uncommon for health care insurance offered by private employers to change, be canceled, or become more expensive. I consider it an overall success, despite the efforts of Congress and Republican Governors to hobble it. He didn't close Guantanamo, but no new prisoners were put in, many were removed, and Congress put up barriers to ultimately closing it. His foreign policy has protected the U.S. from large scale terror attacks, led to the elimination of bin Laden, and kept U.S. forces out of mass military intervention. I find Obama to be a man of integrity, even if there were areas where he was not successful. I expect history will judge him favorably.

Obama's true legacy is expressed by porous borders and fundamental anti-American exceptionalism. The internationalists whose policy he serves crowned him with the Nobel Peace Prize even before he did anything. The only intelligent conclusion one can draw  is that he is a puppet of the New World Order. His ignorance and bungling destabilized the Middle East while turning a blind eye to Iran's nuclear ambitions. History will see this as the global unraveling towards WWIII.

[zamyrabyrd]

However, in the weeks just after his convention, and when he was not chopping off his legs with senseless personal attacks, he made five policy speechs which were largely about the issues I outlined.
His campaign did have a policy side - but it was grossly overshawdowed by his ugly rhetoric and past which the press took and ran with at the expense of anything else.  I might add, the press's obession with Trump's rhetoric and past also allowed Clinton to spend her the last 18 months campaigning without really specifiying what she would do as president other than offering up a collection of slogans and platitudes.

I have been rethinking my own reactions to Trump's outbursts. At first I thought they were self-destructive but after what they brought to the surface, in particular, the far worse behavior of Billy-boy aided and abetted by his wife and the last issue, rigging the elections, well, heck, most of that would have remained dormant if Hillary didn't bring up "Miss Piggy" in the first debate. That was low and typically undignified of her.

The dust has already settled. There is far more evidence that Shillery Rotten is a foul mouthed harridan equal or worse than anything that might come out of "locker room talk". Project Veritas and Wikileaks came at the right time, a month or so earlier might have been better but the subject is hot right now.

Trump is not a politician, instead "what you see is what you get". Voters recognize it as a refreshing change. Politicians in order to survive have to tamp down their own individual consciences (as what happened to Pence in his trying to defend religious liberties in his state) and develop a public persona sometimes in direct opposition to their private. But the mask does become the man, eventually or the woman.

If Hillary gets elected she will not be able to conceal a most probable neurological disorder. The mask will come off one way or the other. I think there is a strong possibility for President Kaine somewhere down the road.

[Madiel]

Zamyrabyrd, you are one of those delusional people I can only meet on the internet. I'd like to say it's been fun, but that would be a lie. And we know how much you hate lying.

And foul language, too. Though you appear to have no problem with saying absolutely horrible things about people, just so long as swear words aren't used. So long as the form is right, the substance can be just as vile as you please.

[zamyrabyrd]

Zamyrabyrd, you are one of those delusional people I can only meet on the internet. I'd like to say it's been fun, but that would be a lie. And we know how much you hate lying.
And foul language, too. Though you appear to have no problem with saying absolutely horrible things about people, just so long as swear words aren't used. So long as the form is right, the substance can be just as vile as you please.

We'll see who is delusional in the end. Actions speak louder than words.

[Karl Henning]

Rigging the elections?  Really?

[Madiel]

We'll see who is delusional in the end. Actions speak louder than words.

I'm confused about which action you have in mind. Obama's introduction of the New World Order (absolutely love the capitals by the way, it makes your conspiracy sound so important!), Iran's nuclear weapons (blind eye? oh yeah, that's what all the sanctions and inspection requirements were, a blind eye), the start of World War III, your porous borders (let me tell you, lady, the guards with guns at LAX sure didn't feel porous to me), Bill Clinton luring more innocent young women, rigging elections (and apparently all the POLLS as well), or the bit where Hillary collapses due to a neurological disorder you've somehow managed to diagnose.

Which actions should I be looking out for, exactly? And have you forgotten, in your quest to condemn all disability, that you've previously had a President in a wheelchair?

EDIT: And possibly one with Marfan syndrome. Guy called Lincoln. No doubt you'd declare him not up to the job these days.

[San Antone]

More than seven-in-10 GOP insiders, 71 percent, say the polls understate Trump's support because voters don't want to admit to pollsters that they are backing the controversial Republican nominee.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-shy-voters-polls-gop-insiders-230411#ixzz4ONawrXPq

[(poco) Sforzando]

Rigging the elections?  Really?

Don't you get it? If Trump wins the elections are fair and square. If Hillary wins the elections are rigged.

http://tinyurl.com/hr3fsyx

"We may have people vote 10 times. . . . Why not? If you don't have voter ID, you can just keep voting and voting and voting."

Now I just can't wait to do this myself in two weeks. I think I'll drive around to ten local towns and keep voting and voting and voting. (That's only three times, but so what if I'm waiting two hours in line to vote? Counting ten minutes driving between towns, I should be able to vote at least six times. Five if I stop for lunch. Four-and-a-half if I just get pizza.)

Obviously I can't speak for everywhere, but let's just see what actually happens in my small Long Island town. Mind you, NY does not have voter ID, so the potential for fraud is YUGE. Be that as it may, the NY voter rolls have me registered to vote at a junior high school two miles from me. I drive down and park. I sign a book where a copy of my signature is already on file. I fill out the card with my choices. (I really miss the old-style lever voting machines, but that's something else.) I insert the card into the reader. I leave. I am at loss to know how I can repeat the same thing anywhere else in my state, but the likelihood for fraud is YUGE.

[(poco) Sforzando]

More than seven-in-10 GOP insiders, 71 percent, say the polls understate Trump's support because voters don't want to admit to pollsters that they are backing the controversial Republican nominee.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-shy-voters-polls-gop-insiders-230411#ixzz4ONawrXPq

Nothing like having the courage of your convictions.

[Karl Henning]

Nothing like having the courage of your convictions.

Nor like the reliability of anecdote.

[San Antone]

Agony of ObamaCare's Collapse Has Just Begun

Grifters-in-Chief

[(poco) Sforzando]

But the mask does become the man, eventually or the woman.

The mask will come off one way or the other.

Which is it?