Skip to main content

Trump is wrong



Trump is wrong.  In his Detroit message, he offered to the American people more jobs and more wealth to all, yes all. He believes, as do the Republicans, that such a promise will gain votes and hopefully adoration of the potential voter. Moreover, it will attract to the ballot box their endorsement of his offer.  This is his promise, and I believe it is sincere.  It is possible, though it would be difficult to achieve. The promise should be a winner!  So they think.  This was the pitch of all the Republican candidates of this cycle and last; it was the promise and pledge of Romney.  Trump discussed the TPP at length*.  

How can Trump be wrong?  Those millions of people out of the workforce and the smaller number listed as unemployed (current 4.9% unemployment rate) have no belief anything will happen in their favor.  This includes even those who believe he is sincere.  However, there is another mechanism at foot. It is the notion of equity.  Those who are downtrodden by economic circumstances have come to accept their condition.  They have learned to live without income and without hope.  Their expectations are slight, with their only compensation is that those above them economically are brought down - a peg or two or three.  Cut them down to size is the message heard.  This implies any pitch that seeks to tax the rich further, reducing their take-home pay, is welcome.  

We are discussing belief versus logic.  Belief is by far a stronger human system for making decisions.

Consider your own situation.  Should your upper management tells you that we will give YOU more  if only we can give more resources and opportunity to your managers - including salary.  You don't believe it, nor do I. This is the fundamental flaw of these plans. 

Republicans opposing Trump will determine technical reasons why Trump's plans are flawed.  Democrats opponents to Trump will relax.  Their mantra of chipping away at "those with more than you" can wait it out for the November win.  Even still, some Republicans understand the Trump pitch has “have vs have not” flaws.  

If the Reps want to win, they must not advocate lowering taxes for those making a bunch too much because you, the poor, will be the winners in the end.  Too trickle-down.  If the Dems want to win, they should just stay on their message of class warfare. The more folks on food stamps and welfare, the stronger their case.  They should avoid even mentioning Keynesian economics or other extant theories. 

The Reps have one case: Ms Clinton’s dishonesty.  The Dems have two: Trump and class warfare.   I recommend those hedging their bets begin to consider hedging their hedge.

* How many of even experts the can possibly understand a piece of legislation involving 30 chapters and running 2000 pages. If passed, it will support battalions of lawyers plummeting its depths and provisions.  It is almost certainly loaded with internal conflicts.  The President indicated in a press conference last week with Singapore Prime Minister Lee that his view of the TPP was that the USA would be merely a partner in a EU-like association of Pacific trading partners and would benefit us like all the other partners.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view