US Politics: flaking out and coming uncorked

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, theguyfromtheVale said:

Except in the case of the American Civil War, where somehow, the losers have managed to hold on to their Lost Cause idiocy for well over a century now.

The biggest difference between post-Civil War America and post-WW2 Germany is that the latter was actually willing to confront the crimes they committed and learn and grow from that introspection. The former still hasn’t, some 152 years later.

[Mexal]

1 hour ago, James Arryn said:

Hearing a lot of pretty scary military chatter. Something might be up.

edit: like really weird carrier group activity/directions heading towards hot area.

Anything to do with Trump's visit to Asia?

[Lord of Rhinos]

Sure, some people vote based on faulty ideas.  Trump promised a better health plan and so far hasn't delivered it.  However, that article never states why she voted for Trump beyond saying she thought he'd shake up Washington. It sounds like health care wasn't a big part of her reason for voting.

[OldGimletEye]

On 10/26/2017 at 3:03 PM, Lord of Rhinos said:

The "voting against their own interests!" canard is always condescending bullshit.  It's a sociopathic view of the world that thinks economic interests are the only interests people should care about.  It is obviously hypocritical in that people that use it never apply it to their own party.  If they did we'd get think pieces about why rich people keep voting against their economic interests by voting for democrats. It's condescending to tell other people what their best interests are when clearly they are the best judge of that.

If some guy or gal says "I’m voting Republican cause I care about other stuff", then fair enough. 

But, I don’t think that is what lot of Republicans actually say. In fact, it would seem than many of them just go around spewing the nonsense the Republican elites tell them. That’s at least my experience.

And often, iI don’t even get mad when I hear Mr. Average Republican Guy going around spewing nonsense, on economic matters. I get most people have to spend a lot of time at work doing whatever they do and then have to raise families and don’t have a lot of time to get into economic policy details.

But, the elites, within the Republican party sure do spew a ton of bullshit, which Mr. Average Republican Guy just repeats.

I think were almost out of the worst recession since the Great Depression. But, it lasted way, way, to long, because of the repeated effing nonsense that came out of the Republican elite class. The suffering caused by was not necessary. We should have known what to do. Instead, we got hamstrung by years of effing Republican nonsense. And now, even after, all the crap, we are seriously facing the nomination of people like Kevin Warsh to the Fed, an effing clown that just got about everything wrong. Just sends me high and to the right. And fact is, at least in my experience, Mr. Average Republican Guy just repeated the nonsense he was told by Republican elites.

I hope posterity learns the proper lessons, from the last little fiasco, and knows what to do when it happens again. But, it probably won’t because of Republican/conservative crap pushed by the elites in that party.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

2 minutes ago, Lord of Rhinos said:

Sure, some people vote based on faulty ideas.  Trump promised a better health plan and so far hasn't delivered it.  However, that article never states why she voted for Trump beyond saying she thought he'd shake up Washington. It sounds like health care wasn't a big part of her reason for voting.

But she has a potentially deadly chronic medical condition. If she's not at the very least considering health care as an issue that effects her vote, then why the fuck is she even voting? This goes so far past "low information voter". This is potentially a suicidal vote for this woman.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

On 10/25/2017 at 4:02 AM, Rippounet said:

Clinton did underperform compared to Obama

There were a lot of non-policy difference between Obama and Clinton. In fact, policy goals were one of the smaller difference between them.

9 hours ago, Morpheus said:

I have heard a lot of "Trump even makes me miss Bush" or some variation. Bush's mere stupidity is seen as quaint compared to Trump's unique combination of ignorance and hateful malice; Cheney is the one deserving of your ire according to this view. As if Bush bears no responsibilty for the war crimes or the unending propaganda and jingoism which turned "Support the troops!" into a slogan to stifle dissent.

Nothing Trump's done is as bad as the Iraq War. Yet.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Well, I think it might blow up in their faces for sure.  Not sure what will actually happen.  The lobbying going on right now for various things is intense.  And it may just be further rothification - which is a time value of money play at heart.  But I wonder if they are just betting that the vast majority don't take advantage of 401(k)s at anywhere near the rate that they should, and the $18K of deferral is out of reach for most people anyhow.

I think that's right.  At the end of the day, the question is whether you pay tax now and invest after tax dollars, or if you pay no tax now, and invest pre tax dollars and then pay tax later.  How it comes out for you will depend on your bracket, rates at the different times (both because of income levels and law changes) and the time value of the deferral.  The discount rate on the deferral is a really interesting question - and a mismatch between the government's discount rate versus an investor's is even more interesting.  

I agree that they're probably banking on people not contributing as much as they should, and that the game plan is most likely to roll out the reform plan at the last minute like they tried with Obamacare repeal. I imagine the majority of people contributing to 401k plans won't notice much of a difference until it affects their employer match. 

However, it just seems to me that this change would hit households in the lower 6-figure range especially hard, or households nearing retirement who are focusing on making catch-up contributions. That's the part that seems like bad politics to me, because that group of people are guaranteed voters and they have some amount of clout with their elected representatives (not as much as the billionaires, but more than the couple scraping by a few bucks an hour over minimum wage).

I agree that the discount rate consists of numerous variables that are way above my pay grade in calculating an investment strategy for anyone besides myself, and obviously the fact that we don't have the actual reform bill to base calculations off of is a further complicating factor; it just struck me yesterday when considering the political  implications of actually getting the bill passed, and based on what we know about the outline of the plan wrt the proposed number of tax brackets, there's a real possibility that they could structure reform in such a way that would really fuck over retirees, which would probably be a death knell to any tax reform proposal.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

11 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

Nothing Trump's done is as bad as the Iraq War. Yet.

 

/You'll see. You'll see.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

47 minutes ago, Lord of Rhinos said:

Sure, some people vote based on faulty ideas.  Trump promised a better health plan and so far hasn't delivered it.  However, that article never states why she voted for Trump beyond saying she thought he'd shake up Washington. It sounds like health care wasn't a big part of her reason for voting.

Healthcare was very much a secondary issue for Trump voters (separated from Republican voters). Their main issues were race, immigration and blowing up D.C.

[OldGimletEye]

On 10/26/2017 at 4:26 PM, The Great Unwashed said:

I agree that the discount rate consists of numerous variables that are way above my pay grade in calculating an investment strategy for anyone besides myself, and obviously the fact that we don't have the actual reform bill to base calculations off of is a further complicating factor; it just struck me yesterday when considering the political  implications of actually getting the bill passed, and based on what we know about the outline of the plan wrt the proposed number of tax brackets, there's a real possibility that they could structure reform in such a way that would really fuck over retirees, which would probably be a death knell to any tax reform proposal.

For a pretty comprehensible read on discount rates (or stochastic discount factors) at a reasonably advanced level:

https://www.amazon.com/Asset-Pricing-John-H-Cochrane/dp/0691121370

Too bad, Cochrane fuckin' blew it on so many questions over the last ten years.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

This NPR podcast is the most amazing example of hypocrisy I’ve ever seen. There are three establishment Republicans pretending to be outsiders and they’re attacking the establishment for pretending to be something they’re not to protect their seats. It’s amazing.

Also, their reactions to the callers is a perfect example of people hearing what they want to hear instead of what’s actually being said. So many callers said they were Republicans for their who life, but didn’t vote for Trump because they hate his and the panelists kept responding in one form or another with, “that caller sounds like they’d be a Trump voter.” It’s absolutely stunning.

[OldGimletEye]

On 10/26/2017 at 4:38 PM, Tywin et al. said:

This NPR podcast is the most amazing example of hypocrisy I’ve ever seen. There are three establishment Republicans pretending to be outsiders and they’re attacking the establishment for pretending to be something they’re not to protect their seats. It’s amazing.

I've been really busy with work as of late, and so I'm a tad behind the news cycle. But, last I recall Marsha Blackburn was trying to run against the "establishment" by declaring her undying luuuurve for the Orange Swamp Thing. Just effing LOL.

I think a convincing way to be against the "Republican Establishment" is just to say the Republican Party needs a blow torch and a gallon of jet fuel taken to it badly.

[Rippounet]

2 hours ago, Lord of Rhinos said:

You're talking about margins.  If Barack Obama's first election was people excited about a "radical" and Hilary was a centrist than we know the difference between the two is about 4.5 million votes.  The difference between "radical" Trump and establishment Romney was 2 million.  I'd say the obvious conclusion is that America has two partisan voting blocks that will vote for their party no matter what and each of them have a roughly 10% fringe that will be effected by how energizing a candidate is.

But then, we are in agreement that the margins may be what makes the difference.

I think there's a solid case to be made with the Republican Party at least, where the extremists are increasingly taking control. Just look at what Flake has to say about it these days for instance.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jeff-flake-to-win-gop-primary-must-back-trump

Quote

The bottom line is if I were to run a campaign that I can could be proud of and where I didn’t have to cozy up to the President and his positions or his behavior, I could not win in a Republican primary. That’s the bottom line. It’s not that you have just to be with the President on policy. You can’t question his behavior and still be a Republican in good standing, apparently, in a Republican primary

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/24/politics/jeff-flake-retirement-arizona/index.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/01/politics/jeff-flake-trump/index.html

The Democratic Party is as yet a different story. In several ways, Clinton's defeat can be described as an anomaly, and it's possible that Trump's victory will ensure that it won't happen again.
But that is not a certainty.

56 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

There were a lot of non-policy difference between Obama and Clinton. In fact, policy goals were one of the smaller difference between them.

Yes.
But imho, Obama's policy goals sounded way more ambitious during his campaign. With the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to say that Clinton and him shared common goals. I don't think it was that obvious in 2008 though.

2 hours ago, Lord of Rhinos said:

The "voting against their own interests!" canard is always condescending bullshit.  It's a sociopathic view of the world that thinks economic interests are the only interests people should care about.

The problem isn't voting against their economic interests per se. The problem is i) not realizing it and ii) complaining about being "ignored" and looking for scapegoats.

[Larry of the Lawn]

I heard on NPR yesterday that even if the 401k tax issue is overall revenue neutral in the long run, the tax upfront could be a big psychological disincentive to save.  

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 minute ago, larrytheimp said:

I heard on NPR yesterday that even if the 401k tax issue is overall revenue neutral in the long run, the tax upfront could be a big psychological disincentive to save.  

Invest in ALPO futures, peeples. It's what's for dinner (TM)

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

From the Weinstein thread:

Quote

The story, by now, reads as familiar. Summer Zervos got her big break appearing on a network television show. This was 2007, and Zervos was a young woman from Orange County, California, eager to take the next step in her career. But then her role on the show ended.

She reached out to the man behind the show, a man who was rich and powerful and connected. She wanted another job. She wanted advice. And he was happy to meet with her. He invited her to his office, in New York.

When she arrived, she says the man immediately kissed her on the mouth. It made her uncomfortable, but she rationalized it. Maybe this is just how he greets people, she thought. He told her she was great, she was smart, she was attractive. He said he would love to work with her more. When the meeting was over, she remembers, he kissed her on the mouth again.

Time passed. The powerful man called Zervos to say he was coming to the West Coast. They made plans to meet at the Beverly Hills Hotel and go out to dinner. When Zervos arrived, she was brought to the man’s bungalow. She says he immediately began kissing her, open-mouthed. She pulled away. He asked her to come sit next to him. She did so. He began kissing her again, and grabbed her breast. She moved across the room. He followed her, embraced her, and rubbed his crotch against her.

The details of Zervos’s legal complaint are familiar to anyone who has followed the Harvey Weinstein scandal. All the elements are there: the power imbalance. The putatively professional meetings that are actually settings for sexual assault. The older man trading on the connections he can offer, the plum jobs he controls, to pressure a younger woman into sex.

But Summer Zervos’s story isn’t about Harvey Weinstein. It’s about Donald J. Trump.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/26/16526922/harvey-weinstein-donald-trump-sexual-harassment

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

56 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I've been really busy with work as of late, and so I'm a tad behind the news cycle. But, last I recall Marsha Blackburn was trying to run against the "establishment" by declaring her undying luuuurve for the Orange Swamp Thing. Just effing LOL.

I think a convincing way to be against the "Republican Establishment" is just to say the Republican Party needs a blow torch and a gallon of jet fuel taken to it badly.

Yeah, it's pretty common to see. The handful of Republicans with some dignity bailed, and the rest changed to Trumpites and most of them are faking it. 

[all swedes are racist]

jesus smokes, gwb's body count is in the millions, to say nothing of his policies on abortion/global gag rule, stem cell research, and some of y'all are trying to claim he's not porpusefully cruel because he wouldn't have been mean on twitter...

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

23 minutes ago, r'hllor's redrum lobster said:

jesus smokes, gwb's body count is in the millions, to say nothing of his policies on abortion/global gag rule, stem cell research, and some of y'all are trying to claim he's not porpusefully cruel because he wouldn't have been mean on twitter...

Millions? I'm no DUBYA fan, but that seems a bit high.

[Larry of the Lawn]

24 minutes ago, r'hllor's redrum lobster said:

jesus smokes, gwb's body count is in the millions, to say nothing of his policies on abortion/global gag rule, stem cell research, and some of y'all are trying to claim he's not porpusefully cruel because he wouldn't have been mean on twitter...

Yeah he's like that asshole you know that is 'real nice' so no one calls them an asshole.