Let's make fun of Trump, bash him, etc. while we can!

[Eric the Green]

(08-20-2016, 05:05 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(08-20-2016, 11:53 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: The common red / blue difference is in beliefs in how effective the government can be.  For someone embracing red beliefs, government is inefficient, corrupt and ineffective.  Tax and spend is anathema.  When in doubt, cut taxes and force the government to cut services.  If the era of the National Malaise was formative, one might be inclined to buy into this.  On the blue side, there is a belief that the government can do much good.  From the 30s through the 60s, the GIs basically ran on 'see problem solve same'.  They would not hesitate to throw large amounts of money at a problem.  Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

Another example might be the red preference for supply side stimulus and the blue preference for demand side.  Here, I might note an association between a belief system and self interest.  Even if a robber baron knows full well there is no need to make more money available for investment, he might favor supply side as he might well think that tax cuts to the wealthy is to his personal advantage.  Similarly, supposing hypothetically a time of full employment with most to all earning a living wage, someone living on main street might still favor additional demand side stimulus.  One's world view and values are absolutely effected by one's wallet.

Now, I didn't feel a need to review with Eric and Classic these basic differences between their ways of thinking.  Neither asked for clarification.  I have spoken on both sets of beliefs many a time, and they are not unrelated.  That you needed to ask implies to me that you have not been reading my stuff with any attention at all.  To some degree I'm willing to feed you US politics and economics 101, but I've found that when your perspective on things clash with common points of view you are very slow to comprehend common points of view.  Your own world view is not as objective as you seem to think.  At times you are unable to recognize or understand stuff that should be basic to those living in the United States.  I find myself repeating Jr High school level political concepts and finding you unable to acknowledge them.  I associate this with a values lock problem, and have learned to avoid interacting with you as the experience is futile.  I have better experiences with more open minded and flexible thinkers like Eric and Classic.

Well.  Slight exaggeration.

You should take more time and review the obvious differences in our ways of thinking. You should also quit stereotyping and quit sticking with the old stereotypes that you apply here. If you don't like vile stereotypes, you should probably stay away from vile stereotypes or begin to address the use of vile stereotypes as they pop up on your side. I may be wrong but I assume that you'd want the support of Republican voter wealth and all the taxes and economic growth that's associated with it during the 1T. I assume that you're not interested in going it alone following a crisis that results in a divide. Have you ever worked a shit job or two in the process of moving oneself ahead? I get the impression that most blue bloods here have never had a shit job. Who can better relate with those who are stuck in shit jobs? Hint: There are no Democratic (regular working class) voters here, I'm the closest one here to being one of them. Who's views and beliefs are closer to representing them? It ain't you, it ain't Eric and its definitely not Hilary Clinton. As I've told you before, I'm not in the market for people looking for handouts, looking to sit on a public bench while being paid, looking for government to continue advancing people based on race and gender or looking for government to continue upholding it's end of an agreement that a past government made with public sector unions and union contractors. I'm not associated with people who either hold or identify with those values.

Wrong again in your assessment of me. I indeed worked shit jobs through the 1970s, until I went off on my own as an entrepreneur in the 80s, and I converted my business to a non-profit for the 00s and today.

If you are not associated with those values, as you pejoratively describe them, you are not on board with working people. Resentment against "paying taxes for people who don't work" is the leading meme and slogan with which Republicans hook naive and gullible folks like you to be on board with their program of screwing over workers and all the people. "Advancing people based on race and gender" is the race dog whistle. It's all too obvious at this point, and I don't yet understand why people don't see through this nonsense.

But there's little doubt that a lot of people still don't. I say to you guys, pay your taxes and stop worrying about it. Climate change, wars of choice, inequality and lack of opportunity, low wages, high prices, money dominating politics; these are the things that informed and intelligent people today are concerned about; not high taxes. Get on board, and leave the 18th and 19th century behind. The train will soon leave the station and leave you standing on the (Republican) platform.

Quote:I'm not a fan of cyclical history. I'm not a fan of a theory that has an obvious flaw. A flaw that places two particular age groups of people (boomers and millennials) in prominent roles. I'm not saying marketing dollars and value played a significant role in how the theory was laid out and presented to the public. However, it sure looks a fairly strong possibility to me at this point. The basic concept may prove to be quite accurate considering we are now approaching the four score and seven years mark.

I'm a fan, but I understand why some Xers and Silents might not accept the "subordinate" role which the theory assigns to adaptive artists and reactive nomads. Their name for the latter is not too complimentary either, and they stretched the years for the idealist/prophets to include two guys that arguably are actually nomads, Lincoln and FDR.

You can't deny, however, the basic metaphysical doctrine that is at work in their scheme. There is always yin and yang, light and dark, male and female, dominant and recessive, in everything. The yang side may get the better hype, but neither is possible without the other.