Trump

[snaff]

One more instance of copying: the slogan “Make America Great Again” which they’ve made the theme of the conference:



The problem also being that the slogan is meaningless if you don’t say when “again” refers back to:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... ns/491993/

Any time would be good given that living standards have been in continual decline throughout the lifetime of most people.

[gumboot]

Hilary: “When was America Great?”. “I think it’s pretty great right now. We have a strong economy, more people have healthcare than ever before, gay marriage is now legal, we have renewed relations with Cuba, got Iran to agree to end its nuclear weapons program, and are respected around the world. It’s not perfect, there is still work to be done. Which of us do you think is best qualified to do that?”

A lot of that it would not be wise to say in the U.S.. There are too many people, with votes that count, who are against it.

[funkstar]

Any time would be good given that living standards have been in continual decline throughout the lifetime of most people.

You don't really believe that, surely?

[snaff]

Any time would be good given that living standards have been in continual decline throughout the lifetime of most people.

You don't really believe that, surely?

That's Wikipedia, not even infowars.com.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_ ... es#Current

[Dio]

Any time would be good given that living standards have been in continual decline throughout the lifetime of most people.

You don't really believe that, surely?

And if you think that graph doesn't really match up with your experience compare the age that our parents bought houses, or retired at, with what we're likely to.

[gumboot]

That's because back in the cave-man days they died much younger!

[gravy]

Any time would be good given that living standards have been in continual decline throughout the lifetime of most people.

You don't really believe that, surely?

That's Wikipedia, not even infowars.com.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_ ... es#Current

That's the median income for the US; a country exceptional in its awful gap between the well off and poor. Mean income looks a lot better but that's an issue with their society having a serious problem.

You're taking the worst case and trying to apply that to the world. Which is nonsense.

[snaff]

That's the median income for the US; a country exceptional in its awful gap between the well off and poor. Mean income looks a lot better but that's an issue with their society having a serious problem.

You're taking the worst case and trying to apply that to the world. Which is nonsense.

The question is why slogans like 'make America great again' may resonate with Trump supporters which I think that addresses. It suggests a legitimate reason why people want a 'none of the above' candidate that's more fitting than the narrative that they are all stupid and racist.

Mean income is skewed upwards by a small proportion of high earners.

[KlaxonCow]

On that graph, at least as far as it extends to only 2011, folks are still doing better than they were doing in the early '90s.

The end point is not the lowest point on the graph. Even if it does look to be on a downward path - why does this graph cut off at 2011, by the way? - it's only heading back to roughly where it was in the early '90s.

It shows a decline from the heady days of the early 2000s, true, but the overall pattern here is more sinusoidal - more "boom and bust"-y - for the median income.

What's obscene here - and I'm sure was the original reason for plotting this graph to highlight it - is the massive inequality between how well the country's doing overall, compared to how well the average chump is faring. Now, that's the real story of the graph, as the country goes from strength to strength, but this just isn't seen in the median income at all. The rich keep getting richer, the average person just treads water. So the disparity grows.

But, not to trivialise this growing inequality in the slightest as it really needs addressing (or, indeed, you end up with anti-establishment votes for Brexit, Trump, Corbyn / Sanders, fascists, etc. so the rich are stupid not to address this, for their own sakes, as these things will also bite them on the arse just as much as everyone else), looking at the blue line is really the politics of envy.

How are folks doing, in comparison to how they were doing yesterday? Not how are they doing in comparison to the fact that Gates and Zuckerberg are absolutely minted.

Opportunity costs are not real losses. They are just "not gains", if you see what I mean.

[pogo]

The question is why slogans like 'make America great again' may resonate with Trump supporters which I think that addresses. It suggests a legitimate reason why people want a 'none of the above' candidate that's more fitting than the narrative that they are all stupid and racist.

Mean income is skewed upwards by a small proportion of high earners.

Yes, or at least one reason Trump has such appeal is that a large sector of the US population has been left behind for decades, while almost all the benefits of growth have gone to the top 1%, even the top 0.1%. It’s not just income but things that we take for granted like universal healthcare, education are unaffordable or at least ruinously expensive for many Americans.

Trump appeals to them, but his solutions are completely wrong. Rather than going after the rich, like himself, asking them to pay more and levelling out the playing field much more so growth is shared around, he is going after people with dark skins who have nothing to do with it, with largely unworkable policies.

He did not invent this strategy, it‘s been the strategy of Republicans for decades. Their priorities are driven by their donors, and most of their money comes from billionaires, so they want tax cuts and less regulations for rich people. But they can’t win with just 1% of the vote, so they combine these with socially conservative policies, portraying tax cuts also as in the interest of ordinary Americans.

And this explains Trump, as they have been lied to by Republicans down the years. The Republicans certainly delivered tax cuts for the rich, and some expensive wars. But they were utterly ineffective at delivering things that matter to ordinary people, such as better standards of living for them. Trump is a reaction to this, even though he is not the solution either to their problems.

[gravy]

That's the median income for the US; a country exceptional in its awful gap between the well off and poor. Mean income looks a lot better but that's an issue with their society having a serious problem.

You're taking the worst case and trying to apply that to the world. Which is nonsense.

The question is why slogans like 'make America great again' may resonate with Trump supporters which I think that addresses. It suggests a legitimate reason why people want a 'none of the above' candidate that's more fitting than the narrative that they are all stupid and racist.

Mean income is skewed upwards by a small proportion of high earners.

I'm more taking issue with your claim 'most people'. Outside of the US microcosm that's not true.

But the skewing of mean income by high earners is my point; it's indicative of poor wealth redistribution rather than overall lack of wealth.

It's a serious issue for the US.

But Trump's not going to do anything other than widen that gap and to be honest it's hard to view anyone who'd think he'd be an answer to that as uniformed at best. I mean he's not a socialist is he?

His appeal isn't a mystery. It's not hard to garner support if you've no moral boundaries and will say anything to get it.

Catchphrases are useful even if they're ultimately meaningless and Make America Great again plays as much to some people's actual living conditions as it does to tendency to feel things used to be better irrespective of the facts

[Dio]

But Trump's not going to do anything other than widen that gap and to be honest it's hard to view anyone who'd think he'd be an answer to that as uniformed at best. I mean he's not a socialist is he?

But see also Brexit and Sunderland (or North Tyneside where I live). No immigration of note, and the biggest employers in the area are Nissan and the public sector, plenty to lose from Brexit and nothing obvious to gain, with the Brexit parties like UKIP solidly right-wing, small government types.

And of course the classic red/blue map of the US, where almost exclusively the Democrats are voted for by states with a surplus of tax over federal spend, and the Republicans by states where there is overall inward investment from government.

People are rubbish at voting in their own interests.

[merman]

Trump's star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame got its own little border wall.

And there are serious doubts as to whether the speechwriter blamed for the plagiarism even exists.

[KlaxonCow]

[PFVA]

He builds that massive wall and people start going by sea. It's not that hard. And what do they do? Fence the coasts? Get tons of coast guard boats to control all of the sea? And get who to pay for that?