Presidential election, 2016

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-12-2017, 02:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Myers Briggs helps to see what people may be more inclined to find important to them as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Culture/art is important to me as an ISFP and it is due to the way I think that makes it my strength. Probably not wise to consider others stupid when they may just simply think differently. Look at the car model (cognitive functions) for reference.

Just an afterthought from the end of Bob's post.

Good observation.  Another angle to look at things from.

A bit ago Warren tried to peg me as emotional in my perspective.  While I'm no Vulcan, I test out as INTP, the engineer - scientist archetype.  If he continues to try to read my stuff as emotion based, he'll continue to be unable to comprehend it.  I'm no Feeler.

[pbrower2a]

(01-12-2017, 02:45 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-11-2017, 08:04 AM)Odin Wrote:

(01-10-2017, 09:22 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(01-10-2017, 05:53 PM)Odin Wrote: Wait "supply-side theory" is a credit theory? I thought it was a claim that supply was more important than demand as a limit to economic growth, which is why it is considered BS on the left since the demand side has been dominant since the Industrial Revolution? I always hear it claimed to be a mere justification for cutting taxes on the rich.

Supply side economics is about what the consequences of supply side stimulus are, and how they differ from demand side stimulus.  For example, demand side stimulus is inflationary and supply side stimulus is deflationary, which has implications for when they are most appropriately used and how they are most appropriately coordinated with monetary policy.

The purest forms of supply side tax cuts are for everyone who pays taxes:  examples are the Bush tax rebates of 2001 and the bipartisan temporary Social Security tax cut from 2011-2012 inclusive.

The whole "for the rich" thing is a red herring that is pushed by various factions for political reasons unrelated to economic theory.  The left pushes it to try to prevent the use of supply side stimulus since they'd rather have demand side stimulus to increase the size of government.  And certain segments of "the rich", specifically investors, push the myth that it's about capital gains tax cuts because they want the right to focus the tax cuts on their taxes rather than on taxes on the general population.

Thanks!

I'm happy to see Warren put up a clean summary of his views.  I just wouldn't confuse Warren's viewpoint, however much or little merit it might have, with what you read in the main stream press or hear from politicians.  While the above is a respectable position, it is not a good match for how others talk to everyman about economics.  Few have put enough effort into economics and politics as Warren, so most reporters and politicians don't try to express the above.  Judging from the comments of some real economics guys, an awful lot of politicians and press aren't just talking down, they really believe in the everyman version of things.  In short, they haven't a clue.

There are a couple of questionable motives involved in the above.  One suggests that the left wants to increase the size of government rather than provide effective services that will please and attract voters.  I'd consider this motivation to be propaganda from the right.  This isn't to say there aren't empire builders in the federal bureaucracy.  There are.  This isn't to say that the empire building got way out of hand towards the end of the Great Society era.  Leave any party and philosophy in charge for too long and it becomes corrupt.  However, the typical blue guy has no great interest in bloating this or that bureaucracy.  They just want results.  If I were starting some sort of mythical common sense party, I'd make trimming any bloat a non-partisan goal that ought to be welcomed from both left and right.

"Supply" is no longer the problem. We can buy all the bric-a-brac from cheap-labor countries that anyone could possibly want. Does America become a better place by becoming a cheap-labor country? I doubt it. Many of us are not made to do mind-numbing toil to create stuff that simply ends up in a landfill. Humanity has won the struggle of production except in the most isolated parts of the world, and that is more a question of access to markets  than to potential productivity.

The problem in the American  economics is mal-distribution of the fruits of economic efforts. It is as if an economic elite has determined that the rest of Humanity exists solely to indulge that elite. It effectively imposes private taxes in the form of monopoly profits -- and now effectively denies us representation or even service by the Government (or seems intent on such).

Donald Trump and the Reactionary Party majorities in both Houses of Congress offer a solution to the distress that extreme inequality of economic result -- even more inequality of result. It's as if people with lung cancer are told to smoke or people with cirrhosis are told to have some more booze. Watch the GINI coefficients.

Quote:There is also a view that the nature of the deficit doesn't matter.  Some propose that the blue dislike of tax breaks for the rich is just propaganda, with no economic truth.  While this might be true in Warren's understanding of things, I disagree.  If the corporates can already get enough investment money to keep their companies afloat, if the investment class has enough money to make good investments, and extensive supply side stimulus keeps being poured into the top of the economy, the investment class ends up making bad investments, dot com stocks, housing debt, because you have to put the money somewhere.  The result is often a bubble and a bust.  Supply side stimulus can be over done, should be a part of a balanced policy.  It should not be pushed for the sake of pushing it any more than you grow a bureaucracy for the sake of bigger bureaucracies.  There come times to stop stimulating and buy down the deficit.

Sometimes the best that anyone can hope for is that deficits quit growing with respect to the population.  Sometimes, as in a war or a depression, huge deficits are inevitable.  If one has huge deficits to sponsor a speculative bubble, as under Dubya, then beware the ensuing financial panic and the economic meltdown that ensure. Any 'prosperity' that Donald Trump is likely to promote is of that type.

Quote:On an entirely different front, I posted recently about my prior exchanges with a Christian Fundamentalist.  As with many world views, his way of looking at things involved basic truths which were unquestionable.  In this case, the literal truth of the bible is a good example.  He also had blind spots which had to be maintained as otherwise his basic truths would fall.  A good example for fundamentalists is the rejection of evolution.  You just have to reject it, or one's world view collapses like a house of cards.  The amount of doublethink involved in denying evolution seems quite absurd to those with different values systems.

It is telling that Catholic schools teach evolution. The Catholic Church has enough problems keeping youth faithful, and having to support the least defensible, least relevant, and having the least moral teaching would make a shambles of objective teaching necessary to promote the success of Catholic youth in the real world.  Protestant fundamentalists may be convinced that no human suffering and no ignorance is excessive so long as people are spared the menace of Hell that awaits rationalists and others who believe 'evil'.

Doublethink is necessary for people who either choose to or are compelled to believe absurdity.  

Quote:More recently I had an exchange with a modern Communist.  Again, there were basic unquestionable principles, that revolution was the way to change cultures, that said revolutions come in a given order.  Again, we got involved in a blind spot.  To cling to classic Marx, he seemed to think he had to deny the famines that occurred under Stalin and Mao.  Again, the amount of double think and twisted logic involved was quite clear to most everyone not a Communist.  It is fairly easy to see the other guy's blind spots, sometimes impossible to perceive one's own.

I remember the fellow. I too argued with him, even using the position of the contemporary Communist Party of the USA that now recognizes Stalin as a murderous criminal. But this is where the True Believer of Eric Hoffer  comes into play: extremists are far more alike, and their cultural veneer is easy to shed. It should not surprise us too severely that he has gone from admiring Enver Hoxha to admiring Donald Trump (see Jacques Doriot, an ex-Commie who became a leader of Vichy) or that after World War II, fascist thugs became Commie thugs.  A liberal like me is far more likely to keep his culture intact but align with anyone who supports  humanistic rule of law. We are not likely to ever use gangsters to achieve our political ends.

Quote:After watching Mikebert's posts for many years, I have him pegged as having a scientific world view.  He is very much into data points and math.  I was pleased and amused watching his recent economic exchanges with Warren.  I haven't got the economic background to match Warren in the details of an mathematical economic exchange, any more than I could out Bible quote the Fundamentalist.  The core of my worldview and my areas of study center elsewhere.  However, what I saw was someone hitting one of the other guy's blind spots.  Even with two people whose view of truth was deeply involved in numbers and data, there was an inability to communicate.

When it gets to personalities and core values, there are no data points. Churchill needed no scientific study to recognize that Hitler was completely untrustworthy even if both shared respect for some traditional values. Trump isn't Hitler, and might not be able to get away with as much even if he were, but I catch patterns of behavior that scare the Hell out of me. I remember the juvenile delinquents in high school, and I knew enough to avoid them. They had nothing to teach me, and they weren't going to learn anything from me.  I enjoyed college in part because I never had to deal with them.. but could meet people who had tales to tell worth listening to.

Donald Trump shows the arrogance, the hurt feelings, and the cruelty of people that I wish that I might never see again. But now the juvenile delinquent who has simply gotten elderly is now the all-powerful leader of the world's greatest military power and in command of the biggest economic enterprise to have ever existed -- the federal Government.

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-12-2017, 03:18 AM)taramarie Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 03:05 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 02:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Myers Briggs helps to see what people may be more inclined to find important to them as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Culture/art is important to me as an ISFP and it is due to the way I think that makes it my strength. Probably not wise to consider others stupid when they may just simply think differently. Look at the car model (cognitive functions) for reference.

Just an afterthought from the end of Bob's post.

Good observation.  Another angle to look at things from.

A bit ago Warren tried to peg me as emotional in my perspective.  While I'm no Vulcan, I test out as INTP, the engineer - scientist archetype.  If he continues to try to read my stuff as emotion based, he'll continue to be unable to comprehend it.  I'm no Feeler.

Yeah it would be more appropriate to peg me as "emotional" given my type. But then again I do not see why it is supposed to be a big no no to feel emotions and base some ideas off of observations from that angle. It seems closed minded which I prefer to avoid. It avoids a whole other perspective which may have some good points. We can see things that some others just cannot comprehend and are shamed for it. If we want to run the world like robots get robots for the job. We are human and should not shame others for sharing emotional perspectives. It is what makes us human. Never loose touch with the human condition. Yes, spoken like a true "feeler" artist.

I think the world was built for more machine like "thinker" people. Not us feelers. We get trampled on and shamed for being the way we are. It is just the way I think and I cannot help that.

I definitely agree with a common Myers Briggs assumption that teams of people ought to have a decent mix of types.  Sure, you might want more Thinkers on your team if the job is to write software, or more Feeler types if the company interacts heavily with the public, but even then you want some opposites around.  The most brainy of engineer teams ought to have a few people people mixed in to keep the train on the rails.

Is a political forum like this one a tilted environment where the Thinkers might bully the Feelers, and the human element in understanding how the cycles work isn't always taken into proper consideration?  I don't know.  I won't push the point.  I'm just kind of pleased to have you around, though.

[Warren Dew]

(01-12-2017, 03:05 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 02:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Myers Briggs helps to see what people may be more inclined to find important to them as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Culture/art is important to me as an ISFP and it is due to the way I think that makes it my strength. Probably not wise to consider others stupid when they may just simply think differently. Look at the car model (cognitive functions) for reference.

Just an afterthought from the end of Bob's post.

Good observation.  Another angle to look at things from.

A bit ago Warren tried to peg me as emotional in my perspective.  While I'm no Vulcan, I test out as INTP, the engineer - scientist archetype.  If he continues to try to read my stuff as emotion based, he'll continue to be unable to comprehend it.  I'm no Feeler.

Throwing about your distortions of my positions again, I see.  "Cultural" is not the same as "emotional", and it was you, not me, who first said you thought people's viewpoints were controlled by the cultural background.

[Odin]

(01-12-2017, 03:05 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 02:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Myers Briggs helps to see what people may be more inclined to find important to them as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Culture/art is important to me as an ISFP and it is due to the way I think that makes it my strength. Probably not wise to consider others stupid when they may just simply think differently. Look at the car model (cognitive functions) for reference.

Just an afterthought from the end of Bob's post.

Good observation.  Another angle to look at things from.

A bit ago Warren tried to peg me as emotional in my perspective.  While I'm no Vulcan, I test out as INTP, the engineer - scientist archetype.  If he continues to try to read my stuff as emotion based, he'll continue to be unable to comprehend it.  I'm no Feeler.

To be perfectly fair, thinking-dominant types (INTP, ISTP, ENTJ, ESTJ) can actually be very irrational and not realize it because they tend to be in denial of and repress their Feeling, which then comes out in ways which are unconscious. The techie who thinks he is super-rational and logical and is completely unaware of his own emotionally-driven assumptions has become a common stereotype.

[Odin]

(01-12-2017, 03:18 AM)taramarie Wrote: Yeah it would be more appropriate to peg me as "emotional" given my type. But then again I do not see why it is supposed to be a big no no to feel emotions and base some ideas off of observations from that angle. It seems closed minded which I prefer to avoid. It avoids a whole other perspective which may have some good points. We can see things that some others just cannot comprehend and are shamed for it. If we want to run the world like robots get robots for the job. We are human and should not shame others for sharing emotional perspectives. It is what makes us human. Never loose touch with the human condition. Yes, spoken like a true "feeler" artist.

I think the world was built for more machine like "thinker" people. Not us feelers. We get trampled on and shamed for being the way we are. It is just the way I think and I cannot help that.

People forget that "logic" and "reason" can be used to justify anything, including genocide and other atrocities. Here in the US empathy for others has been increasingly demonized on the Right and that is terrifying. "Bleeding-heart liberal" was a common right-wing slur I heard growing up, and right-wing Millennials now constantly make snide remarks like claiming that left-wingers put "feels before reals".

[SomeGuy]

Yup, there goes Odin, talking about his "feelings" again. 

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-12-2017, 07:39 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 03:05 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 02:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Myers Briggs helps to see what people may be more inclined to find important to them as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Culture/art is important to me as an ISFP and it is due to the way I think that makes it my strength. Probably not wise to consider others stupid when they may just simply think differently. Look at the car model (cognitive functions) for reference.

Just an afterthought from the end of Bob's post.

Good observation.  Another angle to look at things from.

A bit ago Warren tried to peg me as emotional in my perspective.  While I'm no Vulcan, I test out as INTP, the engineer - scientist archetype.  If he continues to try to read my stuff as emotion based, he'll continue to be unable to comprehend it.  I'm no Feeler.

Throwing about your distortions of my positions again, I see.  "Cultural" is not the same as "emotional", and it was you, not me, who first said you thought people's viewpoints were controlled by the cultural background.

(01-09-2017, 03:30 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I don't think "all the rest of" you are just going by your feelings; I only think that, now, of Bob since he basically said that's how he operates.

At some point somebody flip flopped my position.  Yes, I see cultures as important.  However, again, I will use the word 'culture' in referring to many types of thought systems...  religious, political, scientific, economic, regional, racial, whatever.  Different things are important to different people.  Quite often this leads to premises of how the world works that an individual cannot question or perceive of as false.  There are also blind spots, really bogus 'factual' assumptions that must be maintained lest an individuals basic premises become unsustainable.  I find it interesting to watch conversations break down in such a way that somebody's blind spot is clearly engaged.

However you got the impression that I was emotional in my arguments, it's a misperception.  I might have misworded something.  Try to find it if you like.  However, I think of myself as INTP.

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-12-2017, 07:54 AM)Odin Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 03:05 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 02:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Myers Briggs helps to see what people may be more inclined to find important to them as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Culture/art is important to me as an ISFP and it is due to the way I think that makes it my strength. Probably not wise to consider others stupid when they may just simply think differently. Look at the car model (cognitive functions) for reference.

Just an afterthought from the end of Bob's post.

Good observation.  Another angle to look at things from.

A bit ago Warren tried to peg me as emotional in my perspective.  While I'm no Vulcan, I test out as INTP, the engineer - scientist archetype.  If he continues to try to read my stuff as emotion based, he'll continue to be unable to comprehend it.  I'm no Feeler.

To be perfectly fair, thinking-dominant types (INTP, ISTP, ENTJ, ESTJ) can actually be very irrational and not realize it because they tend to be in denial of and repress their Feeling, which then comes out in ways which are unconscious. The techie who thinks he is super-rational and logical and is completely unaware of his own emotionally-driven assumptions has become a common stereotype.

I have considerable respect for reason, logic, math and similar systems.  However, garbage in garbage out.  If one starts with an assumption that the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is factual, logic and reason can take you all sorts of awful places. Marx made all sorts of wonderful observations about the capitalist system, but assumed somewhere along the line that replacing one elite ruling class with another would solve the problem of a too powerful elite ruling class. Hey, I'm awfully fond of Thomas Jefferson's self-evident truths, but I try to remember that any set of basic premises that underly a political, religious or economic system can lead one far astray if one doesn't double check one's premises and logic against reality regularly.

[SomeGuy]

(01-12-2017, 02:20 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 08:16 AM)SomeGuy Wrote: Yup, there goes Odin, talking about his "feelings" again. 

You just proved his point that he is quite correct that we are demonized. We speak truth too. It is just that some other types do not understand it because that is not the way that they think. You guys need us. Best to listen to podcasts on this subject to gain some insight on why we need each other and not just dominant "thinker" types. Otherwise you are just running by the mouth without research to back you up.

Thank you, tara, I knew I could rely on you. 

[Warren Dew]

(01-12-2017, 10:18 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 07:39 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 03:05 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 02:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Myers Briggs helps to see what people may be more inclined to find important to them as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Culture/art is important to me as an ISFP and it is due to the way I think that makes it my strength. Probably not wise to consider others stupid when they may just simply think differently. Look at the car model (cognitive functions) for reference.

Just an afterthought from the end of Bob's post.

Good observation.  Another angle to look at things from.

A bit ago Warren tried to peg me as emotional in my perspective.  While I'm no Vulcan, I test out as INTP, the engineer - scientist archetype.  If he continues to try to read my stuff as emotion based, he'll continue to be unable to comprehend it.  I'm no Feeler.

Throwing about your distortions of my positions again, I see.  "Cultural" is not the same as "emotional", and it was you, not me, who first said you thought people's viewpoints were controlled by the cultural background.

(01-09-2017, 03:30 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I don't think "all the rest of" you are just going by your feelings; I only think that, now, of Bob since he basically said that's how he operates.

At some point somebody flip flopped my position.  Yes, I see cultures as important.  However, again, I will use the word 'culture' in referring to many types of thought systems...  religious, political, scientific, economic, regional, racial, whatever.  Different things are important to different people.  Quite often this leads to premises of how the world works that an individual cannot question or perceive of as false.  There are also blind spots, really bogus 'factual' assumptions that must be maintained lest an individuals basic premises become unsustainable.  I find it interesting to watch conversations break down in such a way that somebody's blind spot is clearly engaged.

I notice you carefully cherry picked by snipping the context for my second quote.  With context:

(01-09-2017, 03:30 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(01-09-2017, 08:28 AM)Odin Wrote:

(01-09-2017, 01:27 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(01-08-2017, 07:32 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I like to think my own way of looking at the world is well thought out, logical, based on lessons from history, common sense and developed on reasonable teachings of my culture.  I also like to think that everybody thinks their values are such, well thought out, logical, based on lessons from history, common sense and developed on reasonable teachings of their cultures.

Your mistake is in assuming it's all about culture for everyone, just because it happens to be so for you.  In fact, most of the conservatives here are libertarian leaning, and base our reasoning not on culture but on facts and proven economic theory.  Assuming that it's a clash of cultures may be why you go wrong so much.

I find it hilarious when Libertarians think they and only they have "facts" and "proven economic theory" and think all the rest of us are just going by our feels, it reeks of projection, and Libertarians tend to be exactly the kind of technically-oriented types that have little self-awareness of their own feelings and THINK they are super-logical and rational.

I don't think "all the rest of" you are just going by your feelings; I only think that, now, of Bob since he basically said that's how he operates.  I judge each person individually, which is part of that libertarian preference for facts and logic.

You said culture, I said culture, Odin used the phrase "going by ... feels" for culture, and I responded to Odin using his terminology, since using the other person's terminology can often help with communication.

If you were actually concerned about that characterization of your position, you would take it up with Odin.  But no, you'd rather snip context to try to mischaracterize my position and win an argument with me.  Typical.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-12-2017, 02:14 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 08:02 AM)Odin Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 03:18 AM)taramarie Wrote: Yeah it would be more appropriate to peg me as "emotional" given my type. But then again I do not see why it is supposed to be a big no no to feel emotions and base some ideas off of observations from that angle. It seems closed minded which I prefer to avoid. It avoids a whole other perspective which may have some good points. We can see things that some others just cannot comprehend and are shamed for it. If we want to run the world like robots get robots for the job. We are human and should not shame others for sharing emotional perspectives. It is what makes us human. Never loose touch with the human condition. Yes, spoken like a true "feeler" artist.

I think the world was built for more machine like "thinker" people. Not us feelers. We get trampled on and shamed for being the way we are. It is just the way I think and I cannot help that.

People forget that "logic" and "reason" can be used to justify anything, including genocide and other atrocities. Here in the US empathy for others has been increasingly demonized on the Right and that is terrifying. "Bleeding-heart liberal" was a common right-wing slur I heard growing up, and right-wing Millennials now constantly make snide remarks like claiming that left-wingers put "feels before reals".

"People forget that "logic" and "reason" can be used to justify anything, including genocide and other atrocities." Exactly. They need us to know whether it feels right or not. I agree with all of your posts on this. I am curious. What was your result from the test? Have you taken it?

[Classic-Xer]

(01-12-2017, 03:05 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 02:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Myers Briggs helps to see what people may be more inclined to find important to them as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Culture/art is important to me as an ISFP and it is due to the way I think that makes it my strength. Probably not wise to consider others stupid when they may just simply think differently. Look at the car model (cognitive functions) for reference.

Just an afterthought from the end of Bob's post.

Good observation.  Another angle to look at things from.

A bit ago Warren tried to peg me as emotional in my perspective.  While I'm no Vulcan, I test out as INTP, the engineer - scientist archetype.  If he continues to try to read my stuff as emotion based, he'll continue to be unable to comprehend it.  I'm no Feeler. 

We'll see about that in time. I'm not much of a feeler myself.

[Classic-Xer]

(01-12-2017, 05:46 PM)taramarie Wrote: If an argument cannot be won probably best to drop it. Ugh with the pointless bickering. Probably does not matter what someone thinks if they are not important in your life.

Which argument? Which thread? Which category? Which people?

[gabrielle]

(01-10-2017, 04:47 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Some Xers have a very limited view of music, because they are too confined to their own time, which lacks inspiration.  Do not wish to argue that point.

Because on a deeper level, you know that's not really true?  Geez, you should realize that by now after everything I and others have shown you on the music threads.  I know you liked some of it.

It is certainly true that if someone limits their appreciation of music to the pop/rock songs of their youth they are missing out on a great deal that would educate and enhance their sensibilities and improve their experience of life.  This would be true of Boomers and their 2T youth as much as any one else.  

I know that some Gen Xers on here have negative views of the Awakening.  A rather Puritanical condemnation of what they perceive as excesses of the era.  People like to blame their elders when they're unhappy with their world.  Ironic that certain people who tout individualism and self sufficiency and pulling up the bootstraps seem to do the most whining about this.

[Danilynn]

Pulling up bootstraps:

Yeah, I understand this and do it daily.

I've worked 2 and 3 jobs at a time my whole life. I still work 2 jobs.

I haven't been able and none of my Xer friends either to go out together because all of us are working like this. See we are taking care of our parents AND our kids.

SO if we seem a bit bitchy, it's because we are tired. Some of us are tired and doing all this while fighting life altering medical stuff. Some of us are just dead inside from exhaustion. I'm tired. I'm exhausted. And I know I'll drop dead working.

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-12-2017, 05:46 PM)taramarie Wrote: If an argument cannot be won probably best to drop it. Ugh with the pointless bickering. Probably does not matter what someone thinks if they are not important in your life.

Lots of common sense in that, especially from a Feeler's point of view.  Thing is, this place is loaded with extreme partisans.  An extreme partisan almost has to promote his world view and values and it is nearly impossible to significantly change the world views and values of an extreme partisan.  A feeler may not be able to get how important it can be for some thinkers to defend their system of thought.

Now, I've long since given up on convincing Eric of the low value of using astrology to acquire objective facts.  I barely even tried to convince the fundamentalist that the Bible was not Absolute Truth.  Such efforts would qualify as Mission Impossible attempts at moving immovable objects.  However, to an occultist or a fundamentalist, such discussions are anything but pointless.  These are near the core of their being.  If part of what we're doing here is arguing the merits of our world views, if we drop arguments that go no where, that defeats the purpose of much of the conversation that goes on here.  Thinkers gotta bump thoughts against each other.  Think of us as like rams during rutting season.  That's what we do.

There are multiple believers in borrow and spend trickle down here.  Belief in borrow and spend trickle down is in many respects no different from belief in the Bible or the Stars.  As with many types of world views, the believer will have unshakable pillars and blind spots.  Under my scheme of understanding how humans think, arguments involving borrow and spend trickle down and the opposing blue economics schemes might well be unresolvable, and they aren't going to go away.  They are at the core of the red / blue clash.  This clash has been going on since before there have been T4T web forums, and shows no sign of abating.  Warren has spent a lot of time researching his perspective, and can defend it as well as the fundamentalist could defend prejudice against homosexuals.  He is putting new twists in the tornado, which might or might not benefit from more twists.

I'm for the most part backing out of the economic discussion, in part from the wisdom you expressed above.  Mikebert can work the hard math aspect far better than I.  There are lots of other blue folk taking up the discussion at the more intuitive level.  I've not much to add, though I don't want it forgotten that excessive supply side stimulus can lead to bubbles and financial collapses.

Granted, the latest example involving my supposed feeling based perspective is pointless bickering, but if one is clashing on central principle things are apt to leak over into the silly stuff.

Meanwhile, the discussion is giving me an excuse to review my angle on world views, as if I need an excuse...  

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-13-2017, 06:06 AM)gabrielle Wrote:

(01-10-2017, 04:47 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Some Xers have a very limited view of music, because they are too confined to their own time, which lacks inspiration.  Do not wish to argue that point.

Because on a deeper level, you know that's not really true?  Geez, you should realize that by now after everything I and others have shown you on the music threads.  I know you liked some of it.

It is certainly true that if someone limits their appreciation of music to the pop/rock songs of their youth they are missing out on a great deal that would educate and enhance their sensibilities and improve their experience of life.  This would be true of Boomers and their 2T youth as much as any one else.  

I know that some Gen Xers on here have negative views of the Awakening.  A rather Puritanical condemnation of what they perceive as excesses of the era.  People like to blame their elders when they're unhappy with their world.  Ironic that certain people who tout individualism and self sufficiency and pulling up the bootstraps seem to do the most whining about this.

I've long noted the shifts in styles of music over the 20th Century and continuing on into the 21st.  There seem to be decade long periods as styles of music had their dominant years, Sousa marches, blues, jazz, swing, the early bouncy 50s rock, then the increasingly divergent schools of rock since.

Part of it is developing technology.  Guitars, synth keyboards, effects processors and amplification can make rich sounds with just a few musicians. Big bands and orchestras might no longer be necessary.  Part of is is technique, with the accents and complex rhythms of newer styles attracting young audiences to the detriment of older styles.  Part of it is music echoing the soul and spirit of the times.  You play the blues when the world is blue, and rock when the world needs to be rocked.  

To some people, the world might always be blue.  To others, the world might always need to be rocked.  It is natural that different people will be drawn to different periods, styles and messages.

My music library borrows from lots of eras, Sousa, Joplin, Louis Armstrong, Glenn Miller, Bernstein, Peter Paul & Mary, the Beatles, Bette Middler, and many others.  As I get older, I've been paying less attention to new stuff.  Still, occasionally a song sounds through the fog.  My young nieces and nephew lead me to purchase Frozen, and I'll too often pull up iTunes to play Let it Go.  A while ago, as a former nerd, born to a time before nerds had their own chick, I bought Firework.  I don't know if it's an accident or a message, but the newer songs that have drawn my appreciation tend to echo a theme of breaking out of one's cocoon, of exploding into a sense of fulfillment.  I'm not sure how much that's me, or how much it is in the youngsters too.

Yes, perhaps one might grow by having a more diverse music library.  However, to some extent, for many, music might best match where one's soul is already at rather than being a tool for expanding the soul.

[Odin]

(01-12-2017, 02:14 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 08:02 AM)Odin Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 03:18 AM)taramarie Wrote: Yeah it would be more appropriate to peg me as "emotional" given my type. But then again I do not see why it is supposed to be a big no no to feel emotions and base some ideas off of observations from that angle. It seems closed minded which I prefer to avoid. It avoids a whole other perspective which may have some good points. We can see things that some others just cannot comprehend and are shamed for it. If we want to run the world like robots get robots for the job. We are human and should not shame others for sharing emotional perspectives. It is what makes us human. Never loose touch with the human condition. Yes, spoken like a true "feeler" artist.

I think the world was built for more machine like "thinker" people. Not us feelers. We get trampled on and shamed for being the way we are. It is just the way I think and I cannot help that.

People forget that "logic" and "reason" can be used to justify anything, including genocide and other atrocities. Here in the US empathy for others has been increasingly demonized on the Right and that is terrifying. "Bleeding-heart liberal" was a common right-wing slur I heard growing up, and right-wing Millennials now constantly make snide remarks like claiming that left-wingers put "feels before reals".

"People forget that "logic" and "reason" can be used to justify anything, including genocide and other atrocities." Exactly. They need us to know whether it feels right or not. I agree with all of your posts on this. I am curious. What was your result from the test? Have you taken it?

I'm an INFJ.

[Odin]

(01-12-2017, 12:25 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 07:54 AM)Odin Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 03:05 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-12-2017, 02:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Myers Briggs helps to see what people may be more inclined to find important to them as well as their strengths and weaknesses. Culture/art is important to me as an ISFP and it is due to the way I think that makes it my strength. Probably not wise to consider others stupid when they may just simply think differently. Look at the car model (cognitive functions) for reference.

Just an afterthought from the end of Bob's post.

Good observation.  Another angle to look at things from.

A bit ago Warren tried to peg me as emotional in my perspective.  While I'm no Vulcan, I test out as INTP, the engineer - scientist archetype.  If he continues to try to read my stuff as emotion based, he'll continue to be unable to comprehend it.  I'm no Feeler.

To be perfectly fair, thinking-dominant types (INTP, ISTP, ENTJ, ESTJ) can actually be very irrational and not realize it because they tend to be in denial of and repress their Feeling, which then comes out in ways which are unconscious. The techie who thinks he is super-rational and logical and is completely unaware of his own emotionally-driven assumptions has become a common stereotype.

I have considerable respect for reason, logic, math and similar systems.  However, garbage in garbage out.  If one starts with an assumption that the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is factual, logic and reason can take you all sorts of awful places.  Marx made all sorts of wonderful observations about the capitalist system, but assumed somewhere along the line that replacing one elite ruling class with another would solve the problem of a too powerful elite ruling class.  Hey, I'm awfully fond of Thomas Jefferson's self-evident truths, but I try to remember that any set of basic premises that underly a political, religious or economic system can lead one far astray if one doesn't double check one's premises and logic against reality regularly.

To me the problem is when people's nice, neat "logical", "rational" ideas start getting in the way of the lives of actual human beings. Libertarians and doctrinaire Marxist-Leninists are good examples of this. Architects, urban planners, and sociologists with grand plans of utopian social engineering also run into this problem, it's one of the reasons the GIs Great Society projects went off the rails.