I was having lunch with a friend who told me that Donald Trump will be the greatest president in U.S. history.
That means he will be surpassing Lincoln. The peroration of Lincoln’s 2nd inaugural address in 1865 was:
“With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”
…a friend who told me that Donald Trump will be the greatest president in U.S. history.
Well, if there’s one thing everyone can agree on, it’s that Trump definitely seems to be the most polarizing president in U.S. history.
I know it’s easier said than done, but over the next 4 years, I hope people at least try to make an effort to remember there’s more that unites us, than divides us.
I feel that Obama was just as much polarizing, but if you disagreed with his policies, you were labeled as “Racist” even if not. People stopped talking about him due to the mislabeling. Main reason why Obama is known as the “Divider-In-Chief”. Instead of Hope, he gave us division. Instead of “Change” for the better, it was Change for the Worse.
The constant misinformation by Mainstream Media about Trump didn’t help either. Taking snippets out of context made him look worse than he was. Feeding into the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) just encouraged people to treat people on the opposite side as evil.
While I’m sure there might be someone on the Right that did the same, I only remember the Left (Far Left) ostracizing members of Trump’s administration and refusing service. However, when Whoopi Goldberg had a order turned down initially (the bakery’s boiler was down for repair, and they couldn’t fulfill the order), she assumed it was because of her politics. Ironically, her and her fellow Lefties on the View refused to allow Sylvester Stallone on their show to talk about his new season BECAUSE OF HIS POLITICS! Double Standards anyone?
@kawichris650@TimothyB It’s always seemed that, for him, the divisiveness and anger is precisely the point. No matter what one thinks of other past presidents, none of them had divisiveness as the goal.
@kawichris650@MarkDaSpark I regret to say that Goldberg spouting nonsense is not a justification for Trump. It works no better than when you were little and tried “But he hit me first!!!” on your mom.
If you insist on bringing Obama into this, what were some things he said about Republicans that were at the same level of maturity as “Gavin Newscum” or Trump’s Easter and Thanksgiving tweets?
Perhaps I object to Trump because I’m deep down a Reagan-Republican.
It may seem surprising to some that he was even friends with some of
his political foes. I remember him saying to then House Majority
Leader Thomas “Tip” O’Neil that “we may fight during the day, but that
ends at 6 o’clock”. After 6 o’clock we are just 2 Irishmen having a
beer”.
Which they did on occasion.
I think what drove his detractors nuts was that fact that he just
ignored them. Didn’t feel the need to go swinging at anyone who said
disparaging things about him. And the term “dunce”, “actor”, or
“cowboy” were pretty common things said about him. He just ignored
them.
@kawichris650@MarkDaSpark@TimothyB That’s a good summary of my instinctive distaste for him and my long-held conclusion (since his announcement in 2015) that he’s unfit for office.
@kawichris650@klezman@MarkDaSpark Is it unfair that I also hold the President of the United States to higher standards than I do to some second-rate actor?
Moments ago, Trump referred to the January 6th insurrectionists as “hostages.” Considering all of the true hostages still waiting to be released in Israel, I think it’s highly distasteful, disrespectful, and a disservice to everyone that has ever been a legitimate hostage.
I don’t believe Trump is oblivious in regards to the weight his words hold. So it’s infuriating when he repeatedly pours gasoline on the various flames he comes across, rather than attempting to extinguish them.
@kawichris650 I used to think he was oblivious. His repeated infractions have put that thought onto the trash heap. He’s clearly a verbal arsonist who thrives on keeping fear and anger at the forefront. It’s terrible for the nation, imo.
@kawichris650 It depends. Trump’s assumption is that foreign countries will lower their prices to compensate for the tariff. (Or somewhat lower them to partially compensate.) They would do that so as not to lose the US market for their products. (Or if they need imports from the US, so as not to see them cut off.) It may well work on countries without other trade options.
Walmart, for one, has warned that they have been negotiating the best deals possible for years, so there may not be much give left to protect Walmart shoppers from price increases due to tariffs.
So yes, I’d expect costs-of-living to rise. This will affect the poor much more than the affluent.
At one point Trump claimed that tariffs could bring in enough income to allow the elimination of income tax. That would enrich citizens - being most beneficial people in high tax brackets.
@kawichris650@TimothyB It doesn’t quite work that way either.
Tariffs are not paid by countries, they’re paid by those importing the good from places subject to tariffs. If the company producing the good is also the importer then they have some ability to absorb the tariffs but the costs get passed along to consumers. They don’t hurt foreign governments except indirectly via taxes and whatnot, and they can hurt foreign companies and also domestic companies who source goods from foreign countries.
The end result is what Tim said, though - our cost of living will rise. The government will take in more money, but lowering income taxes during a time of massive deficits and debt is unwise. If those tariffs can reduce the deficit and debt then that seems like something with a long term benefit even if there’s short term pain.
The real test for people being rational will be whether they think the economy is “great” when prices for all sorts of goods go up 10-30% and inflation is unlike anything we’ve seen since the 1970s.
@kawichris650@klezman@TimothyB While I won’t quibble with any of your analyses, I believe you are making an implicit assumption that Trump cares about, or even considers, economics in making his pronouncements. His priorities are to keep all attention focused on him and feed red meat to his base.
@davirom It was the obvious “Now, all I know about magnets is this: Give me a glass of water, let me drop it on the magnets, that’s the end of the magnets”
@davirom@kawichris650@TimothyB I figured you are more than aware of the difference but I have this issue where I strive for precision and clarity. Sometimes it’s annoying (to me and to others).
Yes, you’re right, of course, that it’s not actually monetary inflation that makes prices go up. But as we’ve seen in the last nearly 5 years post-COVID, the general population doesn’t understand that and all they see is “bacon more expensive” and apparently blame the president.
I was having lunch with a friend who told me that Donald Trump will be the greatest president in U.S. history.
That means he will be surpassing Lincoln. The peroration of Lincoln’s 2nd inaugural address in 1865 was:
“With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”
How does President Trump’s address compare?
@TimothyB
Well, if there’s one thing everyone can agree on, it’s that Trump definitely seems to be the most polarizing president in U.S. history.
I know it’s easier said than done, but over the next 4 years, I hope people at least try to make an effort to remember there’s more that unites us, than divides us.
@kawichris650 I hope so, but in his book “Originals”, Adam Grant quotes Sigmund Freud:
“It is precisely the minute differences in people who are otherwise alike that form the basis of feelings of strangeness and hostility between them.”
(A quoted quote! How can I go for one more level of indirection? This was in chapter 5 in the section “The Narcissism of Small Differences”)
@kawichris650 @TimothyB
I feel that Obama was just as much polarizing, but if you disagreed with his policies, you were labeled as “Racist” even if not. People stopped talking about him due to the mislabeling. Main reason why Obama is known as the “Divider-In-Chief”. Instead of Hope, he gave us division. Instead of “Change” for the better, it was Change for the Worse.
The constant misinformation by Mainstream Media about Trump didn’t help either. Taking snippets out of context made him look worse than he was. Feeding into the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) just encouraged people to treat people on the opposite side as evil.
While I’m sure there might be someone on the Right that did the same, I only remember the Left (Far Left) ostracizing members of Trump’s administration and refusing service. However, when Whoopi Goldberg had a order turned down initially (the bakery’s boiler was down for repair, and they couldn’t fulfill the order), she assumed it was because of her politics. Ironically, her and her fellow Lefties on the View refused to allow Sylvester Stallone on their show to talk about his new season BECAUSE OF HIS POLITICS! Double Standards anyone?
@kawichris650 @TimothyB It’s always seemed that, for him, the divisiveness and anger is precisely the point. No matter what one thinks of other past presidents, none of them had divisiveness as the goal.
@kawichris650 @MarkDaSpark I regret to say that Goldberg spouting nonsense is not a justification for Trump. It works no better than when you were little and tried “But he hit me first!!!” on your mom.
If you insist on bringing Obama into this, what were some things he said about Republicans that were at the same level of maturity as “Gavin Newscum” or Trump’s Easter and Thanksgiving tweets?
Perhaps I object to Trump because I’m deep down a Reagan-Republican.
Here’s a quote I just found at https://thelexicans.wordpress.com/2024/09/04/reagan-memories/
Can you imagine that about Trump?
@kawichris650 @MarkDaSpark @TimothyB That’s a good summary of my instinctive distaste for him and my long-held conclusion (since his announcement in 2015) that he’s unfit for office.
@kawichris650 @klezman @MarkDaSpark Is it unfair that I also hold the President of the United States to higher standards than I do to some second-rate actor?
@kawichris650 @MarkDaSpark @TimothyB More than fair, imo.
I hate having to tell my kids that the President of the USA is not a good person and the like.
Moments ago, Trump referred to the January 6th insurrectionists as “hostages.”
Considering all of the true hostages still waiting to be released in Israel, I think it’s highly distasteful, disrespectful, and a disservice to everyone that has ever been a legitimate hostage.
I don’t believe Trump is oblivious in regards to the weight his words hold. So it’s infuriating when he repeatedly pours gasoline on the various flames he comes across, rather than attempting to extinguish them.
@kawichris650 I used to think he was oblivious. His repeated infractions have put that thought onto the trash heap. He’s clearly a verbal arsonist who thrives on keeping fear and anger at the forefront. It’s terrible for the nation, imo.
In the inauguration speech tonight, Trump said he would “tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens.”
That sounds great and all, but how can that truly be the end result?
Please correct me if I’m mistaken, but here’s my basic understanding of the circumstances…
A: To offset the taxes and tariffs, foreign countries will simply raise prices to keep their bottom line the same.
B: Which means the entire United States population will end up paying MORE for products imported here.
C: So in the end, the money from the taxes and tariffs enriches the U.S. government, NOT the citizens.
It really seems like a roundabout way for the government to take more money from the population, while avoiding any backlash of raising taxes.
@kawichris650 It depends. Trump’s assumption is that foreign countries will lower their prices to compensate for the tariff. (Or somewhat lower them to partially compensate.) They would do that so as not to lose the US market for their products. (Or if they need imports from the US, so as not to see them cut off.) It may well work on countries without other trade options.
Walmart, for one, has warned that they have been negotiating the best deals possible for years, so there may not be much give left to protect Walmart shoppers from price increases due to tariffs.
So yes, I’d expect costs-of-living to rise. This will affect the poor much more than the affluent.
At one point Trump claimed that tariffs could bring in enough income to allow the elimination of income tax. That would enrich citizens - being most beneficial people in high tax brackets.
@kawichris650 @TimothyB It doesn’t quite work that way either.
Tariffs are not paid by countries, they’re paid by those importing the good from places subject to tariffs. If the company producing the good is also the importer then they have some ability to absorb the tariffs but the costs get passed along to consumers. They don’t hurt foreign governments except indirectly via taxes and whatnot, and they can hurt foreign companies and also domestic companies who source goods from foreign countries.
The end result is what Tim said, though - our cost of living will rise. The government will take in more money, but lowering income taxes during a time of massive deficits and debt is unwise. If those tariffs can reduce the deficit and debt then that seems like something with a long term benefit even if there’s short term pain.
The real test for people being rational will be whether they think the economy is “great” when prices for all sorts of goods go up 10-30% and inflation is unlike anything we’ve seen since the 1970s.
@kawichris650 @klezman @TimothyB While I won’t quibble with any of your analyses, I believe you are making an implicit assumption that Trump cares about, or even considers, economics in making his pronouncements. His priorities are to keep all attention focused on him and feed red meat to his base.
@klezman Yes, to be more correct I should have said “foreign producers will lower”.
By the way, I used “cost of living” rather than “inflation” since Rob called you on that the last time this topic came up.
@kawichris650 There’s a decent overview of tariffs here:
https://dornsife.usc.edu/news/stories/tariffs-explained-by-economics-professor-trade-expert/
@davirom What?!? Next you will be telling me that magnets are still magnets, even if they get wet!
@TimothyB I tried to look it up, but other than the obvious, I don’t get the reference?
@davirom It was the obvious “Now, all I know about magnets is this: Give me a glass of water, let me drop it on the magnets, that’s the end of the magnets”
@davirom @kawichris650 @TimothyB I figured you are more than aware of the difference but I have this issue where I strive for precision and clarity. Sometimes it’s annoying (to me and to others).
Yes, you’re right, of course, that it’s not actually monetary inflation that makes prices go up. But as we’ve seen in the last nearly 5 years post-COVID, the general population doesn’t understand that and all they see is “bacon more expensive” and apparently blame the president.