The title sounds like a simplistic platitude from a bumper sticker but that observation doesn't obviate the truth of it.
There are many humanistic reasons for rejection of racism but they rarely penetrate the business world where the only thing which matters to them is making money. That's not necessarily a bad thing when Trump's cozying up to the Kremlin makes it far more likely America will do business with Russia rather than mindlessly continuing to provoke Putin into conflict as has been Obama's wont.
That Trump does not demonstrate the same wisdom with regard to Muslims doesn't tell us much about his business dealings but it says volumes about how much his platform is all over the place. Harassment of Russians is bad business while harassment of Muslims is good business. That makes no sense whatsoever.
Regardless of whether you voted for him, I doubt any of the regulars feel defensive regarding either of those statements. There's no need to itemize a list of his positions such that we can review at the end whether he is more likely to be a benefit or a douche as that assessment may be entertaining but it will mean precisely nothing.
As nearly as I can tell with Trump supporters of the Ithaka ilk, the support is based on doing good business and the support isn't so much driven by the secondary positions of legalized morality which have confounded the political process for decades. Therefore, we don't need to review those types of matters either.
In general, the mantra appears to be 'don't spend more than you make.' That paradigm is mandatory for personal life or they turn the dogs out but there's all manner of sophisticated economic theory which rationalizes why it's different for the state. However, none of that sweet sophistry does anything to obviate one reality: interest payments on twenty trillion in debt.
Therefore, I assume we're generally in agreement that indiscriminate spending only compounds the problem with more of the same of what we see today and twenty trillion in debt can't possibly do anything good.
The national debt went over one trillion for the first time under Reagan and, in thirty-six years since, the debt has climbed another nineteen trillion. We have heard for all that time of how there was a financial Renaissance as a result of Reagan but all we saw was a Black Friday rush like the Pentagon was buying for a singularly-violent Christmas and that's continued every day since. We hear almost every day about an insane new weapon and many of them don't even work (e.g. USS Zumwalt, multiple new littoral ships, F-35, etc, etc).
Trump has been mixed on what he will do about that. He's got an avaricious Chamber of Horrors on his Cabinet and almost all of them are corporate mercs. Likely they will do business as they always have and that business hasn't done anything good for the people on the bottom in many years.
Ed: why should it do anything good for the people on the bottom?
The tribe takes care of its own or it's just a mob and America aspires to be more than that.
Repeating a previous disclaimer: we don't expect the richie riches to give away all their money to poor people but we do expect investment in, for example, Hispanic communities and their businesses because their success is everyone's success. They pay their taxes, the boat rises, etc, etc.
It's only about doing good business.
There are many humanistic reasons for rejection of racism but they rarely penetrate the business world where the only thing which matters to them is making money. That's not necessarily a bad thing when Trump's cozying up to the Kremlin makes it far more likely America will do business with Russia rather than mindlessly continuing to provoke Putin into conflict as has been Obama's wont.
That Trump does not demonstrate the same wisdom with regard to Muslims doesn't tell us much about his business dealings but it says volumes about how much his platform is all over the place. Harassment of Russians is bad business while harassment of Muslims is good business. That makes no sense whatsoever.
Regardless of whether you voted for him, I doubt any of the regulars feel defensive regarding either of those statements. There's no need to itemize a list of his positions such that we can review at the end whether he is more likely to be a benefit or a douche as that assessment may be entertaining but it will mean precisely nothing.
As nearly as I can tell with Trump supporters of the Ithaka ilk, the support is based on doing good business and the support isn't so much driven by the secondary positions of legalized morality which have confounded the political process for decades. Therefore, we don't need to review those types of matters either.
In general, the mantra appears to be 'don't spend more than you make.' That paradigm is mandatory for personal life or they turn the dogs out but there's all manner of sophisticated economic theory which rationalizes why it's different for the state. However, none of that sweet sophistry does anything to obviate one reality: interest payments on twenty trillion in debt.
Therefore, I assume we're generally in agreement that indiscriminate spending only compounds the problem with more of the same of what we see today and twenty trillion in debt can't possibly do anything good.
The national debt went over one trillion for the first time under Reagan and, in thirty-six years since, the debt has climbed another nineteen trillion. We have heard for all that time of how there was a financial Renaissance as a result of Reagan but all we saw was a Black Friday rush like the Pentagon was buying for a singularly-violent Christmas and that's continued every day since. We hear almost every day about an insane new weapon and many of them don't even work (e.g. USS Zumwalt, multiple new littoral ships, F-35, etc, etc).
Trump has been mixed on what he will do about that. He's got an avaricious Chamber of Horrors on his Cabinet and almost all of them are corporate mercs. Likely they will do business as they always have and that business hasn't done anything good for the people on the bottom in many years.
Ed: why should it do anything good for the people on the bottom?
The tribe takes care of its own or it's just a mob and America aspires to be more than that.
Repeating a previous disclaimer: we don't expect the richie riches to give away all their money to poor people but we do expect investment in, for example, Hispanic communities and their businesses because their success is everyone's success. They pay their taxes, the boat rises, etc, etc.
It's only about doing good business.
No comments:
Post a Comment