Old Folks Communicate

I’m not sure how the comedians do it, covering the malenfant’s daily doings. I guess he writes the script himself and they just laugh with the audience. Still, I find it really difficult to write too frequently about his latest idiocy, whatever it is.  The Wall thing, for example. It is my understanding that “The Wall” was dreamed up by one of his PR henchmen as a way to keep him from drifting off topic, the general topic being border security. “The Wall” was a mnemonic device used to trigger the emotions he wanted from the crowd of adoring slaves he calls his supporters.  It keeps them hating.  

So, that’s what’s been going on for the past month plus.  Oh, and a lot of people got hurt in the process, but that’s par for the course in TrumpWorld. He hurts people on the way to further enriching himself. It’s called The Art of the Deal, and he’s the chief finagler on The Deal.

But in the other world, the one in which ordinary folks occupy themselves with things other than screwing their neighbor, I am wondering what to think about that thing called social media, Facebook especially. Yeah, yeah, I know that Zuckerberg & Co. spend a lot of their time trying to sell us to his financiers, you know, the ad people who want to capture us. But there is another side to all social media. I know that Facebook is really social media for old people. But, as it turns out, that’s a good thing, not a bad one. Let me give you an example.  I’m really old, and one of the characteristics of old people is that they stop communicating. I think actually what happens is that non-old people basically stop communicating with them (us).  In the old days, when people actually took pen to hand and wrote things called letters, people would communicate periodically with friends and family.  Oh, they used the telephone also, but letters was a main medium for communication.  When I was at Stanford, lo those many decades ago, Carol (my now wifey of 63 years) and I used to actually write letters daily to one another—yes, daily. See, that sounds extreme, until you think about Facebook and the other social media. President Stupidhead writes Tweets at 4 o’clock in the morning, every morning, and then tweets all day long. See, he thinks he’s writing to someone, everyone. Actually, he’s writing to himself and his committed slaves. In those golden oldie days, we used to write, sometimes daily, to close friends or family, never to “the world”.  And many (most??) folks sign on to Facebook, or the other social media accounts, on a daily basis, and generally write something to nobody in particular.

But then, something happened. I’m guessing the something is the personal computer. Sometime in the mid-1980’s, people started getting these things called personal computers.  And almost immediately, communications media began popping up. Remember Compuserve? No? See, I told you I was old.  I began using Compuserve, as soon as it became available.  It was a precursor to Facebook, or to e-mail, or both.  You could send personal messages, or sign onto message boards.  And that began to spell the end of “letters”. Initially, it was not the case that everyone owned a PC. But slowly, the world changed and the PC (and I include here that Apple thingie—remember the Lisa??) became a standard home appliance.

No, my mom never owned one, nor did my wife’s mom. They were perhaps the last of the letter-writing generation, whereas I was/am the leading edge of “leaving the letter to join the PC world” generation. Our children and grandchildren don’t really know about letters. Actually, our grandkids don’t really know about/do e-mail. E-Mail, that’s so passé grandpa. Still, e-mail, or social media, we continue to communicate.

But then I have to take account of something that likely would not have happened as readily in the dark days of letter writing.  I have become “friends” on Facebook with a wide variety of people, who, in days gone by, I would have lost entirely. For example, I have a “friend” on Facebook, who I last saw in Jaipur India, when he was very young, maybe pre-teen, or just becoming a teen. He was the son of good Australian friends who were working and living in India at the same time we were. We met them through other friends, and then we visited them with some frequency, sometimes in Delhi, and sometimes in Jaipur.  And then we left India to return to the United States, and they left India to return to Australia. Now, you may not have noticed, but Australia and the United States are really far apart, a 13 hour flight when it is non-stop and you begin in Los Angeles.  So, under normal circumstances, we would likely have lost contact over the past 50 years.  But, because we are old, we wrote a few letters and then we established contact on social media. In this case, I did a search on Facebook and found this young man was present. And so, we became “friends”. And we communicate virtually daily. And I am amazed and thrilled virtually daily.

And so it is with dozens of people we have known over the past 70-80 years, but no longer see. We continue to “meet up” with them on social media. And it is an amazing experience for me.  We have now folks in Australia, Europe, Asia, and all parts of the US with whom we communicate on a regular basis.  And it is not that we might not have been able to do this via the old form, i.e., letters. It is, however, that we would likely have long ago lost contact as people moved and neglected to tell us. See, people still actually move about, and we are not equally good about telling our old friends.

And so I celebrate this newfangled communications system—the social media of our new world, with all its attendant risks. It remains a vital means of maintaining a circle of friends, even if you get really, really old.

So, there.

And now I guess I will have to return to President Stupidhead (dumkopf??). We have to make sure he is not going to destroy the globe today at least.

Why it Matters That Trump Lies

Listening to all the yapping about the Trump address and the subsequent meeting, in which he walked (stormed?) out because Nancy said she would not give him his wall even if he (Trump) agreed to reopen the government. But it seems to me that much of the commentary misses a main point here, about Trump’s lying.

We know, factually that Trump lies almost every time he opens his mouth (not much of an exaggeration).  Now, why is that important? Well, first, it seems useful to observe that, because of his narcissism and his abysmal ignorance, he mainly seems neither to know nor care whether he is lying. He says things because they will draw applause. I guess he learned that by acting in The Apprentice. So, he lies, or not, it matters little, to get what he wants, which is roars of approving applause.  Now, when he is speaking to a broader audience, as in his address to the Nation, that approach surely works, at least with his base. And note, please, that his base cares as little about factual accuracy as he does.  He speaks to their hatreds or fears, and that is what they want. So they roar approval.  And he really does not care a fig about the ”fact-checkers” and their insistence on demonstrating his factual inaccuracies, aka lies.  They have zero effect on him.  Because he isn’t speaking to them. He is speaking to his base, folks who already approve anything he says, even before he says it. No, the “fact-checkers” only speak to us, those who still insist on facts. And we are as much their willing audience as the Trumpies are his.  So, we have two distinct sets of communications going on, neither of which ever intersect.

But then we have a different communications process, called “meetings”. Following Trump’s address to the Nation, he met with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, and a few others, to discuss the Wall and the budget and reopening Government.  In that meeting, he asked Pelosi a simple question: If I decide to reopen the government, will you approve funding for the Wall? She said No, and he then walked out of the room.  He says the meeting was a complete waste of time, because he was not going to get his way (the Wall) regardless of what he did or said.  And apparently, that is likely the case. The democratic leadership, such as it is, seems unlikely to yield on the Wall. And it isn’t even that they don’t want border security. It is just that they think it is a broader issue than the Wall, and he doesn’t want to discuss in those broader terms.  And this is where his constant lies and his ignorance come into play.

In a “meeting” intended to discuss a problem, or some issue, one makes progress by having someone lay out the basic principles of the issue. If it is a problem, then someone must first define the problem.  Then someone must define what is known of the root causes of the problem. For example:

1. America experiences X thousand incidents annually of border-related problems

2.  America’s Borders are not secure

a.       X thousand miles of land borders have no barriers

b.      Y thousand miles of sea borders have no functional barriers

c.       Border staffing cannot cover the entire border

d.      Non-personnel technology is inadequate to cover open border area

3.       X thousand migrants are estimated to cross illegally into the US annually through the open areas

4.       Y thousand incidents of damage to property or persons resident in the US are caused each year

In other words, to discuss something as complex as border security, one needs to break down the problem. You first state some factually verifiable statement of the overall problem. And the problem statement should define the harm done to the US by that problem. Then you divide that main problem into its main causes, with accompanying data on each main cause. Then for each sub-problem, you define likely solutions (and typically there might be several possible solutions for each type of problem).  And it is highly useful to attach to each problem, and to each solution a cost factor. What is the cost to America of the problem (and the cost might be monetary, or it might be in some other category)?  Then you examine the potential solutions to each of the problems, and define both their likely effects on the problem, and the likely costs of implementing the solutions. And the costs might be one-time capital costs, and/or annual maintenance costs.

This kind of analysis is the standard approach in science and in engineering a solution to perceived problems. Sometimes, it might be the case that the solution is much more expensive than the problem. In that case, you need to hold a discussion of why you might entertain such a solution.

One observes this type of problem-solution routinely in scientific ventures (how to place a man on the moon, for example). In geopolitical terms, we can see rough approximations of such thinking in deciding how to counter geo-political threats (say Hitler’s advancing threats to all of Europe, for example). But in the case of our border security issue, we have seen no evidence of this, or any other kind of analytic process.  Instead, we observe, simple statements of a problem, accompanied by factually inaccurate (made up out of whole cloth in some cases) statements of the main/sub problem set.

Mainly, from some statements made regarding “the Wall”, it would seem that “the Wall” was invented as a rhetorical device to keep Trump on target in speaking of the broad subject of border security (which is likely more complex than Trump can grasp). By constantly speaking of “the Wall” he is given a rhetorical device that draws applause from a committed group. But the device was not ever intended to be a serious issue for technical discussions of potential solutions to whatever the perceived problem might be. It was simply a way to keep Trump from drifting off topic.

And here is where his lying comes into play. If he doesn’t actually know anything, and he says whatever might draw applause from his MAGAHeads, he will in fact get nowhere in advancing a plausible scenario for a strategic approach to Border Security. As soon as he begins tossing out his “facts” and they are known to be false, he basically brings the discussion to a halt. They cannot proceed, because they are unable to agree on the problem being addressed. And if one cannot agree on the problem statement, then it is impossible to proceed to the solution stage. 

And since Trump doesn’t actually know anything about the actual problem, it is not possible to hold strategic discussions about any large topic.  And it isn’t only this border security issue. One cannot reasonably hold a strategic discussion with Trump on virtually any topic, because he doesn’t understand almost any nationally or globally important subject, and he will simply resort to his only approach—spitting out “pseudo-facts” intended for applause. But the other people in the room know his pseudo-facts are not a reasonable definition of the issue, and so he himself causes the discussion to come to a close.

Therein lies the core of our national problem with Trump. We should not really care about how he yells at his crowd of adoring MAGAHeads, because none of that matters. But what does matter is his inability to actually hold substantive discussions with knowledgeable officials aimed at defining problems and agreeing on plausible solutions.  On that, he is as useless as the proverbial “teats on a boar”. And there America is our problem.

And So 2018 Ends, Finally

And so the year drags on into oblivion. Another big stinker in the years that Trump ruins.

Being of sound mind, but an aging body, I am inclined to keep hoping for sanity to return to America. But two things keep getting in the way: Trump and Fox News. Fox News: since I don’t watch Fox News, except through the lens of a comedian, one might imagine that Fox has no effect on me. But, because Fox is watched by millions of Americans, most of whom still support Donald Trump, that affects me.

Because I am old, I have managed to survive through decades of traumatic events. Think:

The Great Depression: It began with that crash of the stock market in 1929, well before I was even a passing thought in Daisy’s mind. But its effects lingered so long and so wide that it ruined many in our family, who lost most of their limited money during the 1930’s.

World War II: yes, I was alive during all of that awful war, although I was barely aware as a human. I was 7 when the war began and 11 when it ended, old enough to remember life and events during that time.

The Cold War: well the shooting had largely stopped, but not the antagonisms, which continued to grow during that post-war period. It was almost as though the world powers could not stand peace, and had to act just this side of another suicidal war.  So, despite “peace”, world tensions continued to grow, along with the rhetoric of war.

Korea: Well, I guess we had to start shooting somewhere. This was perhaps the first of so many proxy wars. And what is a proxy war? Well, instead of shooting and bombing your enemies directly, you make believe by instead shooting and bombing people in another land, pretending to be shooting and bombing your enemies directly. It’s slightly less dangerous, unless you live in one of those “proxy countries”. Korea was one of the proxy countries. And we shot up the place pretty vigorously, until we decided to just call it off for a while.

Vietnam: we had relatively minor skirmishes until about 1968. We had been fooling around a lot in places like Eastern Europe . . . remember that Berlin Wall thing in 1949?? But largely, the guns remained silent, until . . . until what?  Well, that Cold War might have remained relatively quiet on the guns blazing thing, but the competition to gobble up space and allies never even remotely ceased. The “West” (us) and the “East” (Russia and China) spread their respective wings by forging “allies” (countries who thought like them, or countries that could be purchased through gun diplomacy).  Throughout Asia, the competition was especially intense, with China routinely flexing its muscles, supported vaguely by Russia. And, so first Korea, and then Southeast Asia, specifically Vietnam, Cambodia, et, al.   And so, after JFK had been shot and killed by an idiot armed and stupid, LBJ had to take over the reins. And then that incident. Was one of our warships stationed in the Gulf of Tonkin attacked, or did we just fake that attack? Who knows? It seemed not to matter, because it was the designated trigger.  Now, to be fair, we had been supporting South Vietnam since at least 1954, with Eisenhower’s full support in his zeal to fight the good fight in that Cold War.  But we hadn’t done much in the way of actual shooting. Then the Gulf event, and lo and behold, the guns came out blazing. I assume that LBJ thought, or was persuaded by his generals that the shooting would cease as soon we demonstrated how big and powerful we were.  Wow, were they wrong. So, the shooting began, big time, and did not quit, despite massive bombing of the north, and even bombing into neighboring countries, until we decided to just quit in disgust. Johnson had decided not to run in 1972, and Tricky Dick Nixon swept into power, along with his republican BFFs.  And Tricky Dick also thought he could win by muscle flexing.  Alas, he was as wrong as Johnson, and so, Nixon just quit and walked away—March 29, 1973 I believe.  Many now classify that even as the first time the US was actually defeated in a war.  We called it an “armistice”, like the ending of WW I. But we simply failed to gain victory, and our guns were pulled out of the conflict.

The Middle East Mess: When did that mess begin? Well, some might say it has always been a mess. For hundreds of years, the mess was contained by one or more dictatorial regimes, mostly kings. Afghanistan is a great example. That country has always been controlled by kings, or “warlords”. The Brits, after “invading” India sometime in the 1600’s, first under the guise of the East India Trading Company and then via proper military rule during the 1700s and 1800s, decided to “subdue” the surrounding countrysides—Burma, Afghanistan. They periodically sent forth armed missions. They worked at it for a while but then gave up in the mid-1840s.  Then, the Russians decided they would like to own Afghanistan, if for no other reason than to sit atop part of the olde British Empire.  So, during the late 1970s, they invaded Afghanistan.  The Brits and the Americans began resisting, even to arming and creating the Taliban, but mainly the locals resisted and a full scale armed resistance began fighting the Russians (Soviets actually), creating the Russian Vietnam War, with similar results. Finally, after almost ten years, and chaos throughout the Soviet Union, the Russians quit, as we had done in Vietnam, leaving an even bigger mess in Afghanistan than before they began.  Now, 1979 also revealed the mess in Iran, with the overthrow of the Shah (our BFF) by the religious tyrant, the Ayatollah Khomeini. Poor Jimmy Carter, tried to overcome, but Saint Ronald of Reagan began working his magic backstage in Iran, and arranged a trade of hostages for super arms. Ronnie never minded doing bidness with tyrants. Turns out it’s a republican thing—see Donald Trump. So, the mess continued throughout the Middle East, with tyrannical regimes taking hold, lots of fighting, and just an ongoing, very bloody mess.

And then 9/11—with the bombing of American cities by Saudi’s residing in Afghanistan. And that really set off the shooting throughout the Middle East, from Afghanistan all the way into the proper Middle East. The Saudi’s, of course, kept on their white gloves throughout—turns out we liked their oil too much, so we tolerated the gross hypocrisy of the Saudi kings.  And then we elected one of our dumber presidents, Bush junior, aka Shrub. Since Daddy had failed in his quest to take over Iraq (actually he succeeded by kicking Sadaam in the ass, but junior didn’t understand that).  So, junior decided to go Daddy one step beyond, and actually invaded Iraq, thereby setting off the entire Middle East mess, that continues to this day. The Taliban grew, ISIS began, and the Middle East simply fell apart into a killing field that continues to this day. And President Stupidhead’s decision to retreat in Iraq, by removing all troops is just another in a long line of presidential stupidities about the Middle East.

But even given all these traumatic messes, for the most part we have had presidential leadership that was at least sane. Yes, I disagreed with many of our presidents, specifically, Nixon, Reagan, and Bush junior. But not all the time, about everything.  I even worked for a time under Reagan, and found him exhausting. But again, not all the time every day, every minute.  With Trump, he exhausts me daily. Every time I read about him, or listen to him, I am exhausted with the sheer stupidity of his utterances.  He cannot write, I understand that. So, his moronic tweets are his only method of pseudo-written communication. In his tweets, he reveals daily that he does not think and cannot write.  I shudder in anticipation every time he approaches any subject of domestic or, god forbid, global significance.  He is utterly exhausting, and he kills any sense that sanity might some day return to the United States.

Fox News, by acting as his amplifier, simply exacerbates the basic problem of a President who is perpetually out of control and who cannot think beyond his penis, or perhaps his empty stomach.  But I am growing to understand that the daily insanity is his world. It surrounds him and has for his entire life. Why/how anyone could tolerate him at work or in his private family life is beyond me. It is clear why he is on wife #3, and why he has destroyed that third relationship. It is clear why he has destroyed multiple businesses, and that he engages routinely in scams—see Trump University. But really, almost everything he touches turns into a scam of some kind.

But, even given Fox’s role in perpetuating his crooked image, and forcing him onto the world of otherwise sane people, I confess to not understanding most of his supporters. When he said, way back when, that he could walk out onto 5^th Avenue, pull out a gun and shoot someone, and his support numbers would go up, I now believe him, but without any understanding of why that should be. That is what troubles me. Why would his numbers go up? And how does he manage to remain at 38% approval? What in heavens name does he give his supporters?  He’s a scam, way worse than Bernie Madoff. His tariffs are destroying any sanity in the world of economics, and he continues to walk away from our global responsibilities.  His border wall thing is the stuff of childhood tantrums, bearing no relationship to anything real. Even if you are a racist, you surely could not believe in the Wall.

That’s what drives me nuts. People, grown Americans, still support him. That seems nuts to me. I understand that most of his supporters are racist, but surely even they could not be getting enough of his daily stupidities to still support him.

And finally, I am drawn to the awful prospect that his supporters love him because they are like him—racist, unthinking, uncaring, bitter people who just want to blow things up. They don’t want our country to return to sanity and a civil course of national actions. They like hating “the other”. And they especially hate the “elites” (anyone not like them).  So, they will continue forever following him until he actually manages to destroy everything.  And then they will laugh, just before they die.

And that thought depresses me, as I enter my 46^th 39^th year of existence. How could this be? I don’t know Richard, but it is. And so, I have to continue to hope that the rest, the young, the restless, the thoughtful, may re-enter public life. And that sanity might someday to return and the Trumpies will go back into our collective national closets, from whence they came.  And how will this happen? Well, voting in massive numbers comes to mind. Voting in such large numbers that even threats of voter fraud from the republicans cannot quiet the vote. And even idiots in our courts like Kavanaugh, cannot withstand the logic and the fervor of America, as it seeks to return to an honest, caring civil society. So, that is my hope for America, for 2019 and beyond. Even if I don’t make it out there, that we will continue as a Nation of mostly honest people, and we will return to the world from whence we ran away. So, be kind 2019. We must prepare ourselves to reclaim our destiny.

Poppy Bush

George Herbert Walker Bush.  A one-time president who followed arguably the worst president (at the time) in modern times, St. Ronald of Reagan. I know, I know, republicans revere St. Ronnie, but republicans seem to revere anyone who promises to open the coffers of America to them.  And Ronnie knew how to open those coffers. He produced perhaps the largest deficits of our time simply by following the “Laffer Curve”, that pseudo-economic theory arguing that, if one reduces overall tax rates, overall tax revenues will rise. See, that’s why it was called the “Laffer (or Laugher)” curve. Now, to be fair, we don’t know what Poppy Bush had to do with all that Ronnie economics drivel. He never had much of a chance to demonstrate his understanding of anything real while St. Ronald of Reagan was in the catbird seat.

But Poppy did seem a portrait of sense and sensibility after 8 years of the idiot president (now, be fair, Richard. Reagan was a model of intellectual brilliance when compared with our current idiot-malenfant, Comrade Trump).

But Poppy Bush seemed at the least a thoroughly honorable man.  He served his country honorably during war time, and he seemed at the least a decent man who tried to do right by his fellow countrymen.  His legacy in the mess that is called the Middle East is at least reasonable, especially when compared with his idiot son.  He at least tried to build an international coalition, unlike Junior.  

He also raised taxes, something considered heresy after Reagan, but he was actually trying to be responsible.

He is criticized a lot for indifference during the building AIDs crisis. But Reagan was actually Mr. Indifference. Reagan did nothing during the building AIDS crisis (he was too busy increasing the Nation’s public debt), whereas Poppy Bush passed into law the Americans with Disabilities Act, which, while not an AIDS bill, nonetheless enabled assistance to people with AIDS. He also, on the heels of the Exxon-Valdez catastrophe, passed into law the Clean Air Act, building on public awareness of the risks to the environment from pollution.

Although he was a reasonable president, especially when compared with his predecessor St. Ronald, he was unable to build a constituency that could keep him in office and he succumbed to the Clinton charm act.  But when we examine our current status, as the joke of the universe, George H.W. Bush seems a paragon of virtue.  Actually, almost any of our preceding presidents do also. But even by comparison with his idiot son, Poppy looks pretty good.

Our standards have changed, perhaps forever. However much we might yearn for presidents in our past (oh, Barack Obama, where are you when we most need you?) we need to get on with the work at hand. And what is that work you might ask? Well, mainly, I see our main job as Americans, as limiting the long term damage done by our incompetent, dishonest, corrupt . . . oh you know—Trump.  I don’t even see impeachment as being part of that game. I think we need to let it all play out. First of all, if we impeach Trump, successfully, we get Pence. And how would that be better? Pence is even more of an idiot than Trump.  His religion so gets in the way that there is perhaps no way to even figure out if Pence is halfway intelligent.  So, no, I do not want Pence as the replacement president. I want us to suffer under Trump for two more years and then to see him voted out of office by a large vote margin. He will scream voter fraud, but he will be wrong as he is about almost all of the issues facing our country.  If the people vote to retain him in office, then I have no further hope for this Nation. We will be officially at an end.

But I do not anticipate such an outrageous election result. No, I imagine that reason will prevail and we will vote into office someone else, perhaps this time a woman of some decent intellect and moral character. Perhaps Kirsten Gillibrand, but perhaps someone else. We don’t know yet. But we must choose and choose wisely, because our nation is on borrowed time. We cannot afford another gigantic mistake like Trump. We simply no longer have the financial or emotional resources left. It is time, folks. Think, and think hard about whether we wish to see our nation continue.

What Do We Need?

The Mid-Term elections are now over and we begin the next Presidential election cycle. And you are asking, “What??? Can we not have a break from the endless campaigning?” Well, however much we need/want such a break, I do not expect one. I think the jousting for nominations has already begun. Beto anyone? Cory?? Kirsten?? Joe?? Elizabeth? Oh, and the list goes on and on. The real question to me, is will the GOP allow The Donald to run again, or will they conjure up some reason that he might consider just retiring to MaraLago. I know, I know, they never actually challenge President Stupidhead. But they really, really want to retain power. Having lost a lot in the mid-terms, they may well wish to reconsider that strategy.  Of course, they have no actual candidates, but when did that ever stop them?

But the even larger question than who will run is, what do we need as a Nation from and after the next presidential election? And are there preparations that need to be completed, or at least initiated before that event?

We have been heading slowly and now a bit faster towards a serious revolution in our Nation. And I don’t mean that everyone will get their guns and begin shooting their neighbors (although that always remains a possibility in the minds of the MAGAHeads and their NRA terrorist gangs).  Instead, I am thinking of a serious redefinition of the kind of society in which we live and wish to continue living.  I think the 2008 crash should have triggered such a redefinition, but those in charge (mainly the Obama Administration and their GOP allies) decided not to punish the bankers, but instead allowed them to escape back into their golden chambers so they might begin planning anew the next chamber of horror show for the lesser classes (me and you) throughout the Land.  Bankers generally seem never actually to learn anything from their disasters.  Sometimes, it just takes them longer to revisit them.

Just how many such disasters the Nation will tolerate is a serious question.  It always reminds me of Ms. Marie Antoinette and her last fling.

Surely we can commit to something more thoughtful, however painful for the empowered.

Our nation seems headed towards bankruptcy, that favored state for Donald J. Trump endeavors. Mainly, he seems not to understand global finance, or any finance for that matter. So, when he gets a tax bill for the wealthy passed by his compliant Congress, he has no clue what the effects will be downstream on our global financial status.  At some point, I imagine the world may well stop buying our debt and then we are screwed.

But, maybe with the next serious election stage, when we replace the Drumpf with anybody else, we will need to address some serious issues, like global finance. Here’s a beginning list of the stuff we will need to begin changing/resolving: 

1. Finance: We really do need to begin paying for what we buy. I realize that credit cards are a wonderful invention, but even my family has limits. At some stage, the bankers look at our debt and our incoming money, and would/will decide that we need to pay down on the debts. Understandably, the bankers of the world would frown if we wished to charge, say, ten million dollars to buy a nice new yacht.  But they might actually stand a better chance (however fleeting) of getting repaid such a preposterous loan from us than they are the many trillions of debt currently owed by the US Treasury. So, when I suggest that we need to begin re-examining our global financial picture, I would begin with our tax structure that seems to expect way more from the middle classes than from the mega-wealthy. I know that Reagan made believe that the “Laffer Curve” was a real thing and that it would produce huge tax revenues (it didn’t, it was a joke), we now know that the world simply doesn’t operate that way. When you cut tax rates, especially on folks with serious money, it doesn’t produce more tax revenues by folks investing those savings in our economy. Instead, it seems to flow into offshore accounts and other hideaways that the wealthy use to avoid future taxes. In other words, the rich get richer. That’s the only serious effect, well aside from that bigger deficit thing. So, we need to re-examine our basic principles of taxation, revenue and expenditures. Maybe, it would be a nice change to attract some of our smarter economists into the next administration to begin designing a new and smarter tax system. And if the mega-wealthy hate that new, more productive system, then they would be free to emigrate to, say, Saudi Arabia.

2. Infrastructure: Ok, it really is past time to reinvest in our infrastructure. That takes money, but more, it takes a serious interest in the subject of America as a place to live and a place for kids and grandkids to live. Remember President Eisenhower? Ike was actually a republican, of the old school republicans. He believed in America and wanted it to be a place in which we all would wish to live and prosper. So, he invested in creating the interstate highway system. Why was that a good idea? Well, interstate highways are a way of integrating the nation’s communities. It serves commerce, and it serves the ability and willingness of folks getting to know our country. If you have lived in your village, or county, or state your entire lives, you will be amazed by getting your car onto the Interstate highway system and driving to another state. You really cannot understand our country, or our world by visiting Disneyworld. You really need to get off your asses, and actually travel to other parts of our amazing countryside. I am fortunate. I have now at least visited all 50 states, many by car. We live in a wonderful country, and folks who live in different geographic regions may well be different from the folks who live in your home village.  But they have much the same fondness for our country as we do. Try it, you’ll like it.  But, more. Our entire national system of roads, bridges, tunnels, railways, and, yes, subways, are desperately in need of money to recharge those systems. We have bridges falling down (London bridges aside). Our systems of transport, water purification and distribution, power generation, all the systems by which we can claim 21^st century national credentials are desperate for investment. We need investments now. 

3. Education: We are at risk of becoming a nation of seriously stupid people. Our public education system used to be an engine of prosperity. It educated the masses, many of whom became the Great Middle Class, and that middle class produced America, with all its wonders.  That system has never been a perfect system. But it used to work a lot better than it does now. One of its problems is that it functions heavily on the “follow the money” principle. Because it is heavily reliant on local/county taxes for its funding, the system produces unequal school systems. The richer counties have more money, so they tend to have better-funded school systems.  So, we need to address that issue. But other problems have been growing over time, problems that we have largely ignored. And then, someone thought of the charter school solution. We think the public schools have problems, but, rather than figuring out the causes of the problems and then devising appropriate solutions, we said, “Oh, I know, let’s send our public tax dollars to private schools. We know they are better by definition” It’s called, kicking the problem downfield.  A solution only stupid people would love.  We know now, from actual evidence that charter schools do not solve the public school problems, mainly because they were not actually designed to resolve those problems. Students do not perform better at charter schools, sometimes worse. We need to stop tossing good money after bad, and instead commission studies of our public schooling system to uncover the sources of their problems. Only then can we begin to devise real solutions to the problems. 

4. Health Care: The United States is the only nation in the industrialized world that does not have a universal health care system. The reason seems obvious, however deplorable. I am uncertain whether this principle adheres on both sides of the political aisle. But, it goes something like this. If one side of the aisle devises and gets passed into law a program that later becomes wildly successful and popular, the other side of the aisle must oppose it, and spend much of its time and political capital trying to kill or reduce it.   For example, Social Security.  For example, Medicare and Medicaid. And of course, of more recent origin, the Affordable Care Act/ObamaCare.  These programs are beloved, and they cover most of the population. ObamaCare is, of course, of more recent origin and has been fought every step of the way. President Stupidhead has joined forces with Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan in an attempt to kill it.  One might ask, why would any responsible legislator oppose providing quality health care to everyone in the country?  Well, because, if it is labeled or perceived to be a Democratic program, republicans must by definition, oppose it. It has nothing to do with health care, per se.  It is all, 100%, a political decision. The opposition creates mostly false arguments as to why they oppose it. But oppose it they must.  Somehow, perhaps in our next life, we must figure out a way for Congress to act in the best interests of the American people, so as to devise a proper universal health care system, in which everyone in the country will receive health care of the same quality. The only reason for denying such a system is that those opposed do not believe that all Americans should receive health care and that, perhaps, health care is a privilege reserved to the upper income classes in the country.  

5.       Climate Change: We need to remove all stupid people from all discussions that involve science.  It is by now abundantly clear that climate change is not only occurring, but that we are rapidly approaching a catastrophic point of no return.  If our Congress cannot agree on both the nature and extent of the problem, and then on potential solutions to this problem, then not only our nation, but the entire globe is doomed and we face extinction as a species.  Think dinosaurs folks.  At least in theory, we are more intelligent than were the dinosaurs. We actually already have the beginnings of a solution, and, arguably, additional solutions can be devised. But first, we have to stop denying that there is a problem.  I realize that most solutions to climate change require that we change the way we generate power, and that some current solutions need to be shunted aside in favor of more enlightened methods. I also realize that many people, perhaps millions might be affected by such dramatic changes to the power superstructure. So, we may well need to devise economic solutions for the problem created by many folks (millions??) out of work. But devise we must, unless we are content to destroy the globe. That really is the only Plan B.

6. Population Migration: Why do people migrate to other lands?  By migrating in the numbers seen in recent decades, the migrating folks create a backlash of anger and fear, mostly fear among the receiving populations. But, we all know that it is not simply economics that drives the migrants to uproot themselves and move to other, possibly hostile lands.  My grandparents migrated for largely economic reasons. But those were simpler times. Now, folks move for economics, yes, but often to avoid being murdered by gangs, thuggish religious enterprises, and just downright murderous despotic regimes (think Saudi Arabia, and virtually all of the Middle East).  There seem to be two kinds of solutions: 1) allow the populations to flow hither and yon, as dictated by the whims of the folks being murdered; or 2) attempt to fix the problems that cause folks to want/need to migrate.  We seem increasingly to hate solution #1, and are seemingly incompetent at #2. If we cannot all join forces internationally (at least among the theoretically civilized nations) to advance one solution or another, preferably #2, then we face permanent War as a natural state for our world. Now, it is true that many people actually like states of war. They allow planes to bomb places, and create splendid vistas of pure firepower. But eventually, we will also destroy the world by accident. Maybe it is true that we really are just dinosaurs in disguise. 

There are other problems to be resolved by the next administration, unless we re-elect Donald Trump. In that case, I assume we have opted to continue destroying the world, so nothing else matters. 

Maybe we are smarter than that??? Fond hope springs eternal.

Lying in America

I continue to wonder about the continued support for Trump and his minions.  How, after two years of very public demonstrations of his complete incompetence, and psychological imbalances, could any thinking adult decide to vote for someone who is on the side of the Trumpies?  To be fair, he wasn’t on the ballot literally, but he has kept on announcing that a vote for some republican is in fact a vote for him, so he literally placed himself on the ballot psychologically.  If you vote for Bryan Kemp, or Ted Cruz, you are voting FOR Donald Trump.  I wonder whether he inserted himself in the race to elect the dead pimp –see Nevada?

Now, it simply is not the case that people just do not know/understand who Donald Trump is, and what his strengths and weaknesses are. We have been bombarded by him. By one count, he has told ten lies per day since being inaugurated. And the lies are not subtle things that one needs to uncover through research. They practically scream (LIE) at you, every time he opens his mouth. So, people know, and, apparently do not care.  But how can that be?? The latest outrage was the altered video of the Acosta interaction with the White House intern. That it was altered is beyond any doubt. Whether Trump set up the encounter in advance so as to get rid of Acosta is at least a reasonable supposition.  But here again, everyone saw the original encounter, with the White House intern being the intruder on the space of Acosta, not the reverse. It is clear that she was the intruder, not him. And everyone saw that. So, how/why he would concoct such a preposterous story, which everyone knows is a lie, is beyond belief. He and his White House thugs seem no longer to care whether everyone knows they are lying.  It is as though lying is now the acceptable form of communication. It no longer matters whether he and his thugs are lying. People no longer expect the truth. 

I am reminded of the Brexit process, during which Nigel Farage proclaimed on his buses/ trucks/billboards, that the National Health Service would receive hundreds of millions of pounds after Brexit. Then, almost immediately following the Bexit vote, he came out and said, “well yes, but we didn’t really mean that”. So, he conned the voters, now they know he conned them, but there is no recourse. He pays no penalty.

But then what kind of universe have we just entered? Apparently, now, it is ok for anyone to lie at any time, and it does not matter. And, also, it apparently doesn’t matter whether the matter being lied about is important, or trivial.  So, now, it is ok for anyone to lie about anything and there are no consequences. That now is our world. And, because I observe that Trump supporters, the many millions of MAGA-Heads, do not care whether Trump is lying to them, that they similarly will not care if anyone else lies to them. Suppose, for example, that the Bank of America decides that, to get people to invest with them, they tell people, “well, if you place your funds with us, we will pay you 2% above anyone else.” And then, when you place your funds with them, they can say, well, sorry, but we really didn’t mean that.  And we would be ok with that, right??  Or, if your local highway patrolman stops your car and says, “ well I decided you were going 20 MPH above the speed limit, so I’m ticketing you for that amount (helps his work performance record, don’t you know). And you scream, “Hell no, I wasn’t going 20 MPH above the speed limit”. And he’s lying, but you have no way of proving that he’s lying, so you’re now ok with that, correct??

And if President Stupidhead decides to declare War on, say, Mexico, and he concocts a lie, then you’re ok with us going to WAR with Mexico, right??

So, that is the world in which we now find ourselves. Anyone can lie about anything, and it’s ok. Why we may even laugh about it all. And you’re all ok with such a world, right????

Awfulness in America

So what are we to think or do, aside from actually voting to rid our nation of the nationalists/fascists/Nazis among us, including the ones sitting in Congress—see Steve King?   The awful events keep escalating, seemingly following Trump’s awful rhetoric. His speeches seem to be getting increasingly violent, and the violence that follows seems increasingly worse—horrific even.  The synagogue shootings are so despicable it is hard to put it into simple words.  And the acts all seem to be acts of domestic terrorism. But when our president declares himself to be a Nationalist, should we expect less? The central issue in his proclamation, of course, is what does Trump mean when he says he is a “nationalist”? His detractors, myself included, tend to be drawn to one of the extreme meanings—that related to Nazism and Nazi Germany, circa 1930s and 1940s. Nationalism can, of course, be simpler, implying an identity with our Nation, as distinct from other nations.  But Trump has chosen again and again to employ racial dog whistles about “horseshit nations”, Mexican rapists and murderers, and now the caravan strolling its way through Central America, and headed in our direction. The fact that Trump has promised to deploy thousands (how many seems in doubt) of troops to prevent their entry, and is suggesting that they shoot to kill should anyone throw rocks, all seems way beyond a simple preference for one’s nation. It speaks instead to the type of Nationalism displayed during the 1930s and 1940s in Nazi Germany. That interpretation is amply supported by actual Nazi and KKK groups that come out in support of Trump, and which he seems to enjoy urging them to act out their fantasies.

So, when someone sends out pipe bombs, or enters a Jewish synagogue to shoot people, or enters a Kroeger’s grocery to shoot black folks, one can reasonably tie such acts to the Trump MAGA band wagon.

Trump has always promoted violent approaches (see “Lock her up”) as opposed to rational argumentation.  Mainly I think his rhetoric is drawn to violence because, a) his hordes of thuggish followers seem delighted to engage in violent fantasies and acts, and b) his rhetorical skills seem lacking in the extreme. We know that Trump is a few brain cells under the idiot level. But we don’t really know about all of his followers/supporters. We know, of course, that the ones carrying torches and wearing KKK hats, or sporting the Nazi swastika, are likely beyond any hope of returning to the American dream. For whatever reasons, they seem lost in their own devilish universe, where most of America is viewed as “the enemy”.  

But surely there are other supporters who are not of the extremist perspective, and who might return to America and the ideals of our Great Nation.  I am told that, if we continue to simply brand them as evildoers, or idiots, then by insulting them, we lose them forever.

But, how I keep wondering, might they return to what I view as sanity? Because, supporting Trump is supporting a potentially terrorist regime, one that seems aimed at destroying the comity that characterized our nation pre-Trump.  Maybe I am stretching it to speak of pre-Trump “comity”.  But, having lived through the 1930s and into the 21^st century so far, it occurs to me that, whatever the rhetoric employed by Trump, we are not yet in the 1850-1860 America period of self-destruction. Yes, we have racism. Yes, we have Antisemitism. And yes, we definitely have anti-immigrant sentiments.  Americans seem vaguely oblivious to our own heritage. 

In my case, my grandparents on both sides came over from Europe during the 1890s, one side from Scotland, and the other from Austria and Latvia.  Neither set had any serious money. In fact, that is why they came here, to improve their lives economically.  In neither case, did they possess serious academic qualifications.  One grandpa decorated china by hand painting. The other grandpa was a serious carpenter, who began building houses after his arrival.  Neither made a fortune after their arrival. They made enough money to maintain a middle class lifestyle. Now, to be sure, they were all white Europeans. So, perhaps they were “acceptable” immigrants, as distinct from the rapists and murderers who come from "shithole" countries, or invade our space from the South.  Still, when they came, we were largely a welcoming society. As our Statuesque Lady in the harbor suggests (“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”) we at one time actually welcomed immigrants.  Now, apparently, according to our president, unless you are coming from Norway, or Sweden, you would not be white enough to be welcomed.

It now seems clear that Trump simply derives his power from his rhetoric of fear. If he can make his hordes fearful enough, they will stay by his side. Evidently, if you don’t scare your followers, they might continue to think, and Trump doesn’t want any of that thinking stuff.  Since he is incapable of anything resembling rational thought, he certainly doesn’t want any of his followers engaging in thinking.  Thinking tends to promote scenarios of alternate universes, and he wants only one universe—the one he inhabits and, for the moment, rules.

But, how might we even attempt to engage folks who have been infected with the MAGA virus?  I would exclude, of course, the torch bearers, and Swastikadets.  For the others, and however difficult, I suggest that there are likely issues on which we might agree with the folks who voted with Trump.  For example, not everyone who voted for Trump wants our public tax money given to private charter schools, thereby depriving public schools of needed tax dollars.  And not everyone wants our air to return to the days of 1950 Los Angeles.  And, likely not everyone really wants off shore drilling just off the coast of Nags Head.

The hot button issues such as abortion, gays, and immigrants might be considered issues too tender to address, but that still leaves dozens of just ordinary policy discussions one might have with people of MAGA-color.  It is on those cool-button issues that one could reach agreements, or at the least agree to disagree civilly. Then, because we are treating each other in a sane fashion—no yelling, curse words, or nasty labels—we might begin to build the bridges needed to allow folks to return to a civilized society, and maybe even to vote in their own best interests.

The current rhetoric being used by the president continues to be worrisome, since he keeps suggesting that he could not possibly lose influence (read, lose GOP Congressional seats) unless evil-doers were perpetrating illegal acts of election fraud.  I do worry what might happen if the GOPers actually lose influence in both houses. Are we on the brink of a Civil War? Well, maybe not, but the thought has at least crossed my mind. All those torch bearers are heavily armed one assumes.  Hopefully, our military actually is neutral politically and will not cross the barriers into civil conflict.  I would like to think that the 101^st Airborne is on the side of rationality and would oppose any armed torch bearers.

So, aside from simply voting, we might all begin to think of civic engagement with our neighbors, at least the ones who still appear to be rational.  It couldn’t hurt. But do vote. Please????