"Something wonderful is going to happen"

[KLB]

Hell, I have a good 12 years or so before I start getting my money back.

 

[jamil]

This say presupposes that someone doesn't have something to lose. Or that their state of being, is so low, it can't be any worse. It's a sentiment that isn't often taken very well by the intended audience. But just for the sake of argument, let's entertain it. The question, I'd have to ask, is "what have I got to gain?" and "why would supporting him allow me to attain it?" and "what has prevented me from getting it in the first place on my own?"

I can see why people would perceive the question that way. I don't think that's the context of the statement though. It's more like, after supporting Democrats for many decades, what have they done for black people? And if you decide, not very much, then what have you to lose? If you live in inner city Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Democrats have called the shots for decades and over those decades, those communities have declined. Those policies aren't working. That's what that statement addresses. I'm not making any claims about whether people have anything to lose or not by voting for a Republican. I'm just saying that's the context intended.

 

[BugI02]

Should I expect Democrats to do things for Black people, other than defend my rights? Please tell me. I'm all ears.

You tell me. From whence comes the hatred of the Bad Orange Man? I thought it was because he wasn't doing enough for the people of Puerto Rico and the people of Baltimore and the people of [watch this space]

So it sure seems like you are of the impression that the Democrats are doing whatever you suppose Trump is not. All I've seen is Trump trying to get government out of their way if they want to do it for themselves, and try to incentivize business properly to make things in this country so that good jobs are available without 'learning to code'

 

[Kutnupe14]

I can see why people would perceive the question that way. I don't think that's the context of the statement though. It's more like, after supporting Democrats for many decades, what have they done for black people? And if you decide, not very much, then what have you to lose? If you live in inner city Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Democrats have called the shots for decades and over those decades, those communities have declined. Those policies aren't working. That's what that statement addresses. I'm not making any claims about whether people have anything to lose or not by voting for a Republican. I'm just saying that's the context intended.

Don't white people live in those places? Why are they excluded?

 

[Kutnupe14]

You tell me. From whence comes the hatred of the Bad Orange Man? I thought it was because he wasn't doing enough for the people of Puerto Rico and the people of Baltimore and the people of [watch this space]

So it sure seems like you are of the impression that the Democrats are doing whatever you suppose Trump is not. All I've seen is Trump trying to get government out of their way if they want to do it for themselves, and try to incentivize business properly to make things in this country so that good jobs are available without 'learning to code'

Get government out of whose way?

 

[jamil]

The national debt is what...$22 trillion? We could discuss how the entire amount gets paid down (taxes, printing more money, which causes inflation/hyper-inflation---another form of tax, selling off/exchanging US assets for debt (give Yosemite to the Chinese, for example. Or sell off mineral rights).

Most of those approaches are draconian. As Cheney said "Deficits don't matter". To a certain extent, that is true in prudently managed scenarios. But politics and prudence are somewhat mutually exclusive.

Cheney is an idiot. Deficits do matter because as the debt goes up, so does the payment line item in the budget. The interest on the national debt is nearly $500B for 2020. That's money that could be used for more useful things. As long as we run deficits, the debt goes higher, the interest goes higher. Of course there are some things that the government can do about that, but none of those things come without other political and financial consequences. Manageable deficits don't matter as much. And it's not so bad to have debt as a nation, but manageable debt, not absurdly impossible debt that reaches far into future generations.

 

[jamil]

Get government out of whose way?

Business owners, presumably.

 

[jamil]

Don't white people live in those places? Why are they excluded?

Of course white people live in those places too. But, we're talking about the black community as a voting bloc. It's reasonable to talk about them specifically.This question makes it sound like you're trying to play both ends.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Business owners, presumably.

It may be a misuse of pronouns, but that doesn't seem to be what the sentence implies.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Of course white people live in those places too. But, we're talking about the black community as a voting bloc. It's reasonable to talk about them specifically.This question makes it sound like you're trying to play both ends.

So white people in those places aren't worthy of being pandered too? Well, that assumes that they are subject to the same wants and needs as other people.

 

[KLB]

Cheney is an idiot. Deficits do matter because as the debt goes up, so does the payment line item in the budget. The interest on the national debt is nearly $500B for 2020. That's money that could be used for more useful things. As long as we run deficits, the debt goes higher, the interest goes higher. Of course there are some things that the government can do about that, but none of those things come without other political and financial consequences. Manageable deficits don't matter as much. And it's not so bad to have debt as a nation, but manageable debt, not absurdly impossible debt that reaches far into future generations.

The reach is infinite since there is no effort nor even desire to stop increasing the deficit.

 

[BugI02]

Don't white people live in those places? Why are they excluded?

Disingenuous. Conservatives live in California, too; but they don't have the power to change their lot. The black people in the places jamil mentioned, who have been voting en bloc for Democrats for a long time, absolutely have the power to change their lot (because they are in the majority). Whether they judge the results better or worse remains to be seen. Jump off the cliff first, build their wings on the way down

 

[Leadeye]

401K changes spook me, government taking my stocks and replacing them with a restricted government bond of some kind. I withdrew some right before the 2016 election and bought a gun with it so I could say that I at least got something for my effort.

 

[Alpo]

It's a failure of will, but more importantly it's a failure of trust

It wouldn't be terribly difficult to come up with a plan to stop digging the hole (end deficit sopending) and add a minimal surcharge onto taxes dedicated to existing debt reduction. It could be entirely retired in something like 38 years, but the boon for investors would take place long before then

The problem is, no one trusts congress to keep their hands out of any new money we allow them to have; nor can a multi-decade mechanism be envisioned to accomplish the project which couldn't be corrupted. Thus, an attempt to fix the problem won't be made until it becomes large enough to force the issue - by which time it might not be soluble without a whole lot of pain

True. All of these financial problems have solutions. We have the wherewithal. We just don't have the ....what's the word.....gumption?

 

[jamil]

So white people in those places aren't worthy of being pandered too? Well, that assumes that they are subject to the same wants and needs as other people.

Just say what you’re saying. Your deconstruction isn’t serving the purpose. We’re talking about the statement made to one group which Democrats have pandered to for years, which Trump is trying to reach. You can call them both pandering if you wish, because that’s accurate enough.

I’m not formulating for the sake of discussion what the group is. I’m talking about the group as defined. Are you saying there isn’t a social group defined by both parties wich is identified by their skin color? Because more people saying that would be a positive direction for society.

 

[Leadeye]

You sure remember something totally different than I do. In 73 the the oil embargo began a series of devastating economic dominos falling. For the first time ever unions were give wage adjustments. Unemployment was high and the markets were down. Crime was rampant. McDonalds in Noblesville had 400 applications for a single maintenance position. Yep it was a high rolling time. Not everyone did bad, but if one was starting at the bottom in late 70's or early 80's it was not until the Regan economy took off that the growth began...

I'll grant you that the oil embargoes were bad and acted like shock waves through the economy of the 70s, but the factories weren't closed and flattened like GM Guide in Anderson. Driving on Curry pike in Bloomington today you see the closed plants or their graves. Small towns all over Indiana had factories now gone.

 

[KG1]

This say presupposes that someone doesn't have something to lose. Or that their state of being, is so low, it can't be any worse. It's a sentiment that isn't often taken very well by the intended audience. But just for the sake of argument, let's entertain it. The question, I'd have to ask, is "what have I got to gain?" and "why would supporting him allow me to attain it?" and "what has prevented me from getting it in the first place on my own?"

I would agree that it takes more than just simply posing the question of "What have you got to lose?" There is no guarantee that everyone would prosper.

 

[jamil]

It may be a misuse of pronouns, but that doesn't seem to be what the sentence implies.

Are you saying black people can’t benefit from business friendly policies? You’re making this into a problem it’s not. It’s fair enough if you’re saying this is how the black community would interpret it. But then that’s where a synthesis of understanding between what is said and what is understood is necessary. And that was what I was attempting to do.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Are you saying black people can’t benefit from business friendly policies? You’re making this into a problem it’s not. It’s fair enough if you’re saying this is how the black community would interpret it. But then that’s where a synthesis of understanding between what is said and what is understood is necessary. And that was what I was attempting to do.

No, I'm saying you trying to make a sentence say something it's not. The only reason that politicians should appealing to black people for their vote, is if they believe that they don't have the same protections of their rights as anyone else. Absent that, what other reason should their be, that does not also affect non-Black voters?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Disingenuous. Conservatives live in California, too; but they don't have the power to change their lot. The black people in the places jamil mentioned, who have been voting en bloc for Democrats for a long time, absolutely have the power to change their lot (because they are in the majority). Whether they judge the results better or worse remains to be seen. Jump off the cliff first, build their wings on the way down

Conservatives observe an ideology that non-conservatives do not. Surely you aren't saying that Black people observe an ideology that non-blacks do not.