Fear: Trump in the White House

[PonoBill]

I finished the book today after a 2.4 hour round trip up to Welches on Mt. Hood. A couple of reflections on the last third of the book.

1. Anyone expecting Trump to be impeached or otherwise removed from office is probably dreaming. The worst thing likely to happen is that he will perjure himself if he testifies in Meuller's investigation. In theory that might be an impeachable offense, in practice, probably not. He lies. Yes. So what. He probably didn't collude with anyone to steal the election. Undoubtedly would have if it were presented to him as an option, but if anyone did so, they probably didn't tell him, because everyone around him thinks he's so random that they wouldn't trust him with something like that.

2. Most of the people that were holding him in some kind of check, minimizing the harm, are now gone. The next two years will be a bumpy ride.

3. A lot of the people around him are as whacked and have as limited an attention span as he does.

That's about it. The book ends with "he's a fucking liar", supposedly uttered, or maybe just thought, by his attorney John Dowd who was working mightily to convince him not to testify. Dowd disputes the comment and other elements in the book. The last chapter is the only chapter I had serious doubts about. How did Woodward get this material? I can't imagine Trump's lawyers providing it. Lawyers don't do that. Not just don't--can't. Not the best ending possible unless Woodward has some cards he's not showing.

[Area 10]

The whole book is odd like that. It’s written like a novel where the narratives skip between chapters. But there are whole sections of dialogue between Trump and people he’s meeting with that are quoted apparently verbatim, as if the conversations were taped. Did he not have to get approval for these quotes? The US is so litigious that I’m surprised that I haven’t heard anything about this. Maybe Trump feels that his supporters are not going to be reading a book like this, and anyway if they do they will approve, or at least not disapprove. So better to let it wither on the vine than give it the oxygen of publicity through a court case.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the IMF warns that the consequences of Trump’s trade war with China (combined with the effects on Europe of Brexit) will make “tradeable consumer goods less affordable, harming low-income households disproportionately."

Let’s see how popular Trump is with his core voters when the consequences of his time in office start to take effect, rather than the fruits of previous administrations that they are enjoying now.

[Area 10]

And btw Donald, I like Taylor Swift at least 75% more now

[PonoBill]

I don't doubt that Woodward has referencable backups for most of the book, the Trump Whitehouse is full of leakers, and certainly many people who have left are willing to talk. The last chapter, however, is about lawyers, and very high-level ones at that. Lawyers don't talk about former clients if they want to stay lawyers.

[Area 10]

I saw this talk advertised at a UK university today:

Speaker: Dr Filip Gęsiarz (University College London)

Summary of presentation:

"Income inequality has been on a steady rise in the past few decades – a trend that is projected to continue in the foreseeable future. We know surprisingly little, however, how this situation impacts human behaviour. This talk will detail what people care about when facing inequality, and how this affects their well-being and motivation to work. I will present new experimental data showing what principles govern perception of inequality, and how this perception is biased by the individual’s position in the income distribution. Next, I will summarise a study demonstrating that human well-being and willingness to work is not only negatively affected by being worse off than others, but also by general inequality, even if it is advantageous for the individual. I will then show that this pattern generalizes to entire countries, when considering how their citizens feel about their lives when comparing themselves to citizens in other countries in the region. These findings suggest that rising levels of inequality can trigger psychological dynamics that may hurt psychological well-being an individual’s economic prospects, having broad implications for social and economic policy". 

I wonder how having a billionaire president that you see on the TV every day blabbing about how rich he is, and hanging out at his gazillion-dollar golf retreats etc affects your perceptions of your own wealth and life satisfaction.

[Quickbeam]

Let’s see how popular Trump is with his core voters when the consequences of his time in office start to take effect, rather than the fruits of previous administrations that they are enjoying now.

With the things Trump has done so far, and to still keep his base support, I’m not sure anything will deter them. If Trump’s supporters should in the future start suffering because of his policies, then I’m sure his supporters find some excuse for their own misfortune, or find someone else to blame other than Trump.

Trump once said words to the effect that he could go out in the street and shoot someone, and his base would still support him. That is the one thing he said that has a ring of truth to it.

[connector14]

And that statement of Trump's is the scary truth and proof of how low he and his supporters will go.  Nothing Trump says is a shock to anyone anymore and as long as the perception is the economy is doing well and everyone is going to benefit he will likely stay in power. I can't wait to see some change.

[eastbound]

i know republicans dont care any more--but deficits matter--gov't borrowing cant run rampant without crowding out the kinds of business investments which create decent-paying jobs--so tax cuts for the wealthy will do little ultimately but hurt trump's disaffected white working/middle class base---the very rich? they could give a damn for much beyond getting richer and paying fewer taxes--and there arent many votes among them--but they spend heavily to sway elections, and they're richer than ever, given the tax cuts and ongoing redistribution of money to them via tax policy--so watch for serious money spending to get republicans elected--in the midterms and ongoing

of course we now have what is said to be the lowest unemployment rate "in history"---yet wage gains are so tiny as to be meaningless, certainly in the face of zero real wage gains over the last 35 years

gotta wonder if trump will insult the chinese to the extent that they start selling US Treasuries. it is said that that  would hurt them as much as us, but i am not so sure about that. china holds 1.2 trillion of our debt, and the japanese hold slightly less. if china dumps a lousy quarter of its holding, the fed will lose control of US interest rates, which could move from from 2.25 (10 yr note-tho the curve is flat) to 4.25---wanna see an economy screech to a halt???  wanna see some failed US Treasury Bond auctions??

where have all the deficit hawk republicans gone? i guess not so urgent when the gov't borrows money to put directly in the pockets of the wealthy

paul ryan? deficits buster? not anymore!

oh yeah---deficits only matter when money is being spent on things like food stamps and unemployment insurance--that's when austerity is a bitter pill we all must swallow---but when we deficit fund tax cuts for the wealthy, we hear no stories of the debt burden we will leave on our grandchildren etc etc

but hey---so many crux issues for the GOP have gone by the wayside with Trump---who ever thought gop could take pride in a guy who paid off a porn star 2 days before his election, to keep quiet about an affair he had while his wife was pregnant at home--gop, the family values party

that's just one of many crux values that have been jettisoned by GOP in favor of economic policy advantages afforded them--kleptocracy is "wilding" at the moment--his base still recites "drain the swamp" at rallies---incredible

[SUP Leave]

No one is a true deficit hawk. Anyone who says they are is a liar, or is really good at ignoring the elephant in the room. Fed spending is 2/3 entitlements and no politician has the stones to deal with it.

Imagine the outcry in raising the SS age by 5 years. The party that does it will be hammered for two cycles and so it is sort of like musical chairs. The party who is sitting in the chair when the music stops (the SS money runs out) gets the prize of raising the age and that party waits at least 8 years to regain power.

This is one of the worst features of the 2 party system. Neither side will do the real dirty work because it is about winning at all costs. Either side will virtue signal and gnash teeth, but neither will touch entitlements due to the power struggle.

[connector14]

We all need to be on the same page...so to speak. Whatever the health care system offers....it should  be the same level of care and options for all. If it is not good enough for wealthy people,  then they are certainly free to seek care at their expense anywhere in the world they choose.
Social Security is basically a good program that has gotten out of hand. I believe that the benefits should go strictly to the worker that paid into the system. If I got divorced three times (and the wives each lived with me for ten years) I don't think it is fair to the system that all 3 wifes would be eligible for a chunk of MY benefits. I don't think the system can afford this,  among many other strange eligibility rules that have been created by Congress over time. I think there are many tweeks that could save the system,  but it would take some balls in Congress to do it.

[Weasels wake]

We all need to be on the same page...so to speak. Whatever the health care system offers....it should  be the same level of care and options for all. If it is not good enough for wealthy people,  then they are certainly free to seek care at their expense anywhere in the world they choose.

True, which is one of the reasons why the mandate was removed.

[eastbound]

a laughable reason at best--

as tho the mandate made it so billionaires couldnt afford to choose the healthcare they want (among best doctors and hospitals on the planet) if they had to contribute 3 or 400 a month to the system that seeks to benefit all, including working poor people

healthcare, life expectancy, innumerable other metrics like infant mortality---are crap in the us, on average, compared to other developed countries

poor americans' healthcare metrics fall in line with battle-torn developing nations in africa and asia

we have a two tiered health care system---if youre rich, we have the best in the world---if youre poor, we have among the worst in the world---on average we lag other developped countries by a long shot

it's good to be rich

but wait there's no upward mobility here anymore---so the poor will remain poor, while the rich get richer--being poor in america is very dangerous to one's health---certainly compared to other developed countries

[Bean]

...but wait there's no upward mobility here anymore---so the poor will remain poor...

Nonsense

[Area 10]

Could we have the delicious irony of climate-change-denier Trump’s Golf Course resort in Florida being trashed by an unusually strong storm? I feel sorry for everyone else in the path of it though.

[Bean]

A10, you don't think the GC will be made whole? Like it did in 2005 Irma?