(November 16, 2016 at 7:00 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: How  the fuck do I get so cynical ????????????????????????

It happens to the best of us.

Upon reflection;

whether you call it resist, or subvert, or sabotage, it is VITALLY important that directives and initiatives that Team Trump launches that are DOOMED to failure must be allowed to proceed unmolested. The only thing to worry about is that Democrats be totally and obviously absolved of any association with cooking up the scheme in the first place and then TT adopting it prior to its subsequent implosion.

And the converse:

It is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE anything that might actually work, especially in regards to increasing labor participation rates in lower income demographics, anything impinging on improving neighborhood safety in inner cities, and ESPECIALLY anything that might serve to push up entry level job pay levels higher than minimum wage, like reducing the pool of workers at that level by more effective schooling, or heating up the economy, must be fought tooth and nail lest people get funny ideas like things are getting better.

(November 16, 2016 at 8:23 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: Upon reflection;

whether you call it resist, or subvert, or sabotage, it is VITALLY important that directives and initiatives that Team Trump launches that are DOOMED to failure must be allowed to proceed unmolested.  The only thing to worry about is that Democrats be totally and obviously absolved of any association with cooking up the scheme in the first place and then TT adopting it prior to its subsequent implosion.

And the converse:

It is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE anything that might actually work, especially in regards to increasing labor participation rates in lower income demographics, anything impinging on improving neighborhood safety in inner cities, and ESPECIALLY anything that might serve to push up entry level job pay levels higher than minimum wage, like reducing the pool of workers at that level by more effective schooling, or heating up the economy, must be fought tooth and nail lest people get funny ideas like things are getting better.

That sounds like what the Republicans did to Obama, sacrificing the nations welfare just because they didn't like one man. I have nothing personal against Trump. Asshole is as asshole does. If I thought he was going to go in there and do the right thing, I'm game. I even like one idea that he had about using the money we spend giving aid to other countries to bolster our Social Security fund. But it's the bad stuff that I will resist.

(November 17, 2016 at 8:01 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: I even like one idea that he had about using the money we spend giving aid to other countries to bolster our Social Security fund.  But it's the bad stuff that I will resist.

Have you actually thought that through? First, look at how little that actually is. In comparison to general spendings. 35 billions divided between 140 countries.

https://howmuch.net/articles/countries-s...ve-from-us

What do you think you could actually bolster with that sum? Secondly it's usually tied to another thing Trump used to run on. Keeping them all out. The less money goes into foreign aid, the more these countries struggle, the more people won't have a chance for a future and turn into migrants, refugees even.

It's one of the classical populous demands where people don't question the claim. Ah, keep it all to ourselves and everything will be peachy. Nothing could be further from the truth because it's usually only a fraction of overall spendings.

(November 16, 2016 at 8:23 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: whether you call it resist, or subvert, or sabotage, it is VITALLY important that directives and initiatives that Team Trump launches that are DOOMED to failure must be allowed to proceed unmolested.

Can the Democrats afford that risk? Prior to November 8th, Trump's presidential campaign was doomed to failure.

(November 17, 2016 at 8:52 am)abaris Wrote: It's one of the classical populous demands where people don't question the claim. Ah, keep it all to ourselves and everything will be peachy. Nothing could be further from the truth because it's usually only a fraction of overall spendings.

I think it's a throwback.  I suppose the notion would be more compelling if we lived in self sufficient and isolated fiefdoms, where the problems of our neighbors didn't become our own problems in short order.  When we really -had- so little that we might not be able to spare a fraction of a penny on a dollar.

As it stands, though, the amount we might spend on, say, one person in the safety net -here- gives us returns elsewhere that are orders of magnitude greater....and ofc, we can absorb the loss in the aggregate and still provide that one person with the net. One months worth of food stamps in the US carries the same value as digging a well and electrifying a village in BFE, for example, lol. For the cost of sending all of my kids on a field trip, a school full of children in BFE could be vaccinated. If this sort of outreach, prestige building, and lifesaving foreign aide isn't worth those fractions of a penny on a dollar that I will never miss...I don't know what is. It;s certainly a hell of alot cheaper than dealing with it when they show up at my doorstep, thirsty, hungry, and sick.

(November 17, 2016 at 8:52 am)abaris Wrote:

(November 17, 2016 at 8:01 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: I even like one idea that he had about using the money we spend giving aid to other countries to bolster our Social Security fund.  But it's the bad stuff that I will resist.

Have you actually thought that through? First, look at how little that actually is. In comparison to general spendings. 35 billions divided between 140 countries.

https://howmuch.net/articles/countries-s...ve-from-us

What do you think you could actually bolster with that sum? Secondly it's usually tied to another thing Trump used to run on. Keeping them all out. The less money goes into foreign aid, the more these countries struggle, the more people won't have a chance for a future and turn into migrants, refugees even.

It's one of the classical populous demands where people don't question the claim. Ah, keep it all to ourselves and everything will be peachy. Nothing could be further from the truth because it's usually only a fraction of overall spendings.

I was saying that I agree with that one point he made, but by no means will I defend Trump. The point, or any point he may have made, does not absolve him from his shortcomings.

I could reply to your post, but that would take this way off topic. Maybe we could discuss (not argue) the topic of foreign aid in another thread.