From the Right
The other day I was talking to a supporter of the President.
We disagreed on a lot of things. I asked him to work with me and compose
a letter voicing what he was saying to me. Here is what he wrote,
admittedly with my help putting his sometimes incoherent thoughts into words.
Jack: I can’t
agree with your constant attacks on President Trump in your blog. Let’s
look at the facts. You may say that everyone is entitled to their
opinion, but not to their own set of facts. Well I happen to believe that
my set of facts is more accurate than those you, and a lot of mainstream
newspapers and TV commentators, believe.
First of all, even though
Donald Trump didn’t get a majority of the votes cast, he did win the Electoral
College vote in 2016 so there is no question as to his Presidential
legitimacy. If some voters were misled by material on TV and the
internet which was planted there by Russia, it really didn’t differ greatly
from the untruthful material posted by some Americans of different political
persuasions. It’s sad that campaigns are run at that level,
regardless of who is doing the posting. Dirt will be flung,
regardless of who throws it. In any event, no one has even come
close to proving that what the Russians were doing was in cooperation with the
Republican Party or the Trump organization. Yet that is what the
Special Prosecutor is spending millions of tax dollars to try to come up
with. Other things he has come up with, such as the Manafort
and Ryan indictments, clearly indicate faith put in the wrong people by Donald
Trump, but there have been such mistakes in many recent administrations, and no
one made a big deal about them, as the Democrats and the media are doing today.
There were firings and that was that. Furthermore, Special
Prosecutor Mueller is going far, far beyond what he was supposed to be doing
when he investigates such people, and that includes Michael Cohen, who even if
he has been involved in wrongdoing, should not be the subject of Mueller’
probe, which he is, despite it being “delegated” by a compliant Acting Attorney
General to the Southern District of New York.
The tax reform bill is
truly a great accomplishment of the Administration. Most workers are
already getting an increase in their take home pay. True, the
wealthy and corporations have received benefits as well, but that will be
channeled back into the economy, creating more jobs. And the
President, even aside from this, has reduced unemployment. That’s an
unarguable fact!
As for health care, the
Affordable Care Act only served to make a bad situation
worse. People with health insurance with which they were satisfied
were conned into purchasing policies they could not afford. People
who didn’t want to buy insurance were penalized. Employers were shackled with another costly responsibility. The only ones who truly
benefited were people on Medicaid who didn’t have to pay for their
coverage. If it’s free, of course you’d like it. But nothing is
free. The taxpayer ultimately foots the bill and that bill, it has
been repeatedly shown, is higher when the government gets involved than when it
is done through the private sector. This is the direction the
President is attempting to lead us over the next two and a half years.
When the President talks
about tariffs and our coming out on the short end of the stick when trading
with other countries, he is thinking about the American worker. To
him, that is the bottom line. If American jobs are lost to foreign
workers, it doesn’t matter that we ultimately come out ahead in our county’s
bank accounts or through the sale of our technology, which may be the
case. To him, it’s jobs that count and he knows that. NAFTA is
a good example. Show me an American worker who is in love with it.
You and the media often
attack the reduction in government regulations. Well, businesses can
operate more efficiently when government is on their side and not putting
obstacles in their way. If a business does something improper, there
are plenty of legal avenues where redress can be sought. A few bad
apples don’t justify throwing away the barrel, which is what excessive
regulations have accomplished. Trump is fixing this. And the United
States has become a leader in petroleum production. Pipelines and fracking,
long fought by regulators but encouraged by the President, have made that possible. And the same goes for other businesses.
As for foreign affairs,
North Korea and even Iran now know that we mean business and are not taking us
for patsies as we plan negotiations with both. And when Syrian
despot Assad crossed a red line, unlike Barack Obama, we bombed his country. Many
Democrats even believed that was the right thing to do! When the President took steps to move the
American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, he sent a message to the Palestinians
saying they had better get serious about negotiating with Israel and get rid of
Hamas or they will see their dream of a State of their own drifting further and
further away.
Finally, many personal
attacks have been made on the President as being a womanizer. Many
Presidents have been subject to similar criticism, however, only recently has
that been fair game for the media. Bill Clinton and Jack Kennedy are
good examples. Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower and even
overweight Grover Cleveland played around and no one really
cared. I will agree with attacks on the President’s sexual
behavior only when it affects the manner in which he carries out the duties of
the Presidency. And I don’t see that happening.
I ask you one thing,
Jack. Give the man credit for what he is accomplishing despite the
opposition, often covert, of those entrenched in the maze of government
bureaucracy politely referred to as a swamp. The President is doing his
best to make America great. Please help him.
So what do you think, folks?
JL
Tariffs, Schmariffs, Not the Solution
Economic Thoughts from a Non-economist
So
our President threatens China with 100 billion dollars in tariffs. This moron (ex-Secretary of State Tillerson had
it right) glosses over the fact, or possibly doesn’t even know, that when we do
that, the hundred billion dollars, while paid to our Treasury Department by the
importers of “stuff” from China, is passed on by price increases to whomever in
this country they sell their “stuff.” That could be anyone who manufactures
things from steel and aluminum from China and folks who buy clothing,
electronics, appliances and other “stuff” made in China.
Dollar
Stores, where most of the merchandise is “stuff” imported from China, will perhaps
have to become Dollar and a Half Stores.
Look at the number of “made in China” labels the next time you are in
any retail outlet. Bottom line is that
that 100 billion dollars in tariff money will be paid into our Treasury
Department, not by China, but by the American consumer. Trump’s tariff won’t hurt China. Rather, it will hurt the American consumer
upon whom it will amount to a Federal sales tax designed to pull in 100 billion
dollars. It appears that our President
is either unaware of this or too dumb to understand it.
I think he is under the illusion that because of their tariff-inflated higher prices, the imported goods will not be purchased and goods made in the United States will be purchased instead. Supposedly, this will create unemployment in China, hurt their economy and result in job creation here. Nice try … but not so.
I think he is under the illusion that because of their tariff-inflated higher prices, the imported goods will not be purchased and goods made in the United States will be purchased instead. Supposedly, this will create unemployment in China, hurt their economy and result in job creation here. Nice try … but not so.
The
trouble with that is that because of our workers’ higher standard of living, most
stuff made here will still be more expensive than the Chinese stuff, even with
the tariff added to the price. Of course,
American goods might conceivably be cheaper if we automated our manufacturing to
the extent whereby there would be just a few employees left here working in
this country with a lot of robots performing tasks formerly done by salaried workers. That would lower prices on stuff made here. But
this would create so much American unemployment, unfortunately, that consumers here
would not have the jobs nor the money to be able to afford anything, regardless
of any tariff which may or may not be involved.
(This may happen anyway as automated manufacturing grows.) While this lack of consumption might
temporarily cause prices to drop for the few remaining Americans who had jobs
producing American-made goods, whatever they spend would not be sufficient to
keep our economy growing. Then,
everything would grind to a halt as we entered a tariff-fueled depression.
Not
even considered by the President is that China is not going to accept such
tariffs without retaliating with ones of their own. And these would severely impact the income of
Americans, mostly in the agricultural areas of the Midwest, whose livelihood is
based on exporting to China, who would look for another source from which to
buy, for example, their soy beans, our major export to China.
That's a lot of soybeans they're buying from us! (See if you can find the typo on this graph)
And these folks, many of whom voted for Trump,
will begin to wonder why the bottom has fallen out of their soy bean market. Or they might
be just gullible enough to blame it on Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or Nancy
Pelosi. Fox is still busy attacking them
and wondering why their wrongdoings aren’t being investigated with the vigor
which Special Prosecutor Mueller is proceeding. (The answer to that is that their ethical shortcomings, whatever they may be, are dwarfed by the smelly sludge surrounding the man in the White House.) But getting back to trade ....Historically, there have been many who advocated the kind of blind protectionism of which President Trump seems to be a champion. They have included Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot, both of whom ran for President. Even Hillary Clinton took protectionist positions designed to cater to her union supporters. It's an easy, but often insincere, position to take. In fact, in reviewing some of my own letters, I have sometimes, usually too hastily, leaned in that direction. But in the end, America's corporate structure wielded enough power to keep protectionism in the background and wisely plant the United States firmly in the camp of globalization of trade.
Politics aside, the real answer is that a finely tuned world economy, where everyone trades with everyone else, with each country’s economy exporting what it does best and importing what others do better, works out well for all participants. A little bit of government subsidy here and there and an occasional minor tariff to smooth things out can work wonders with such globalization. It’s not so simple as the President sees it, but that’s what advisors are for. And of course, advisors who always agree with you are of no value. Advisors who make different suggestions aren’t any good either when the President, out of ignorance, agrees with all of them.
Jack Lippman
Who's Going to Hell?
The
other evening, I heard Michael Avenatti (Stormy Daniels’ lawyer) comment during
one of his many TV appearances that he was “shocked” by the quality of legal
representation President Trump has in regard to his client’s case as well as
for the President’s involvement with Special Prosecutor Mueller’s
investigation, in which he is peripherally involved. One would suspect that a successful
businessman, now President of the United States, would have representation by top
legal experts with heavy experience in these kinds of matters. According to Avenatti, this is just not the
case. He has made comments implying that while he is “playing chess,” Trump’s
lawyers are playing “tic tac toe” in representing him.
(Personally, I believe the President's horrid choice of lawyers is based on his conception of the lawyers as people who can figure out ways for you to do illegal things legally. He has no concept of justice, honesty and no respect for the law. That's his problem.)
(Personally, I believe the President's horrid choice of lawyers is based on his conception of the lawyers as people who can figure out ways for you to do illegal things legally. He has no concept of justice, honesty and no respect for the law. That's his problem.)
This
observation of Avenatti's is not unlike my oft-stated puzzlement about how a man of such
limited intellectual ability managed to be successful in the New York City real
estate world, where some of the most clever, shrewdest and sometimes dishonest
operators are encountered on a daily basis.
From what I’ve seen from him as President, he lacks the ability to have
been competitive in that arena. Yet he
was.
Someday
the story will be written of how Donald Trump’s road to success was paved. From his initial funding by his successful
(and bigoted) father, through his career as a real estate developer, casino and
hotel operator, TV personality, reality show impresario and licensor of his
name to others, to his ascension to the Presidency of the United States, there
is much yet to be written. There
probably are dozens of competitors in each of the fields in which he has worked
who are far superior to him in knowledge and business skills and who can
out-negotiate him with one hand tied behind their backs. Of the seventeen who
vied for the Republican Presidential nomination, he was clearly the least
qualified for the job. A blind man could
see that! Yet, he prevailed there as he
has prevailed elsewhere. The reasons why
will someday be written about. But not
today. And certainly not by me. And it will be a best seller!
But
quite simply, Donald Trump is going down.
How do I know? I’ve increased my
viewing time on Fox and I can sense the feeling of panic spreading throughout
their organization. Even Laura Ingraham seems to be cracking, mouthing unsupportable ideas every time she talks. Today’s Fox line is that the appointment of
a Special Prosecutor is unconstitutional. Along with the President, they are
being backed into a corner where they can no longer scream about Hillary
Clinton’s emails or Benghazi or the evils of Obamacare. They are beginning to realize that facts just
cannot be denied. They know the judge
who signed off on the Justice Department seizure of records at Trump’s lawyer’s
New York offices only did so because there were good and totally legal reasons
to do so. They know life-long Republican
Robert Mueller has probably already found out enough to bring down the
President. Whether he will go that far is another question, however.
Trump’s
screaming at everyone in the Department of Justice (Sessions, Rosenbaum,
Mueller) is an indication of his own panic.
Some Republicans are now becoming reluctant to apologize for him. They don’t want to go down with him when his
presidency collapses. Paul Ryan is
walking away from him, with family responsibility as his excuse. Mitch
McConnell is still wearing his blinders, but they will be coming loose shortly. And EPA Secretary Pruitt, who is far to the
right of Trump, is practicing being President in his EPA environment, hoping to
become a right wing alternative to an ultimately impeached President who will
drag his Vice-President along with him into the recesses of history.
Trump’s
Russian connections, probably through Deutsche Bank financing, their effect
upon the 2016 election, the payoffs engineered by his fixer, lawyer Michael
Cohen, his lifetime of not paying bills, bankruptcies and browbeating people, and his pathological
womanizing will all come together to bring him down, abandoned by the
Republican Party, and probably Melania and Ivanka as well. It will almost equal the final scene of
Mozart’s Don Giovanni.
If,
however, I am wrong, the only explanation can be that democracy in America no
longer works. That about 40% of the
American people are firmly locked into Trump’s simplistic and ultimately
unworkable solutions to their problems while the Republicans gleefully give tax breaks to the already wealthy
and destroy regulations put in place to protect the American people, is a very sad commentary on the state of our
nation. It suggests that as the curtain descends, we and not Donald Trump might be the ones going to Hell. But I don’t think I am wrong.
All, however, is not a bed of roses. I feel that if the 2016 Presidential Election were held today, the results would be the same. Trump's base in crucial states remains. They ignore economics and they ignore anything that isn't on Fox. Hence, the only solution rests in Democrats taking over the House in 2018 and coming close to taking over the Senate. That will change things. It will somewhat level the playing field for the 2020 Presidential election. Hopefully, the evil, the bigoted, the gullible and the just plain stupid people who comprise Trump's base will be neutralized with the G.O.P. given back to real Republicans. They will lick their wounds, imposed from the right, attempt to regroup ... but be unable to hold off the Democrats.
JL
All, however, is not a bed of roses. I feel that if the 2016 Presidential Election were held today, the results would be the same. Trump's base in crucial states remains. They ignore economics and they ignore anything that isn't on Fox. Hence, the only solution rests in Democrats taking over the House in 2018 and coming close to taking over the Senate. That will change things. It will somewhat level the playing field for the 2020 Presidential election. Hopefully, the evil, the bigoted, the gullible and the just plain stupid people who comprise Trump's base will be neutralized with the G.O.P. given back to real Republicans. They will lick their wounds, imposed from the right, attempt to regroup ... but be unable to hold off the Democrats.
JL
Regulating the Internet
It is evident that the world of information technology encompassing such giants as Facebook, Google, Amazon and thousands of other players has reached a crossroads. Their excesses have been reported in the media and included in recent blog postings here. The signs at that crossroads point in two directions. One is toward the European approach to the problem which features increased government regulation. (The prior posting on this blog described one idea for us in this direction.) The other is the traditional American approach of unregulated freedom for the Silicon Valleys of the world. This position is championed by of all countries, China! But we know, of course, that their position of a lack of formal regulation of the internet, allowing their theivery of technology to take place, occurs in a society where total regulation of everything else actually exists, so it's a no brainer to disbelieve them.
JL
HOW TO BE ALERTED TO
FUTURE BLOG POSTINGS.
Many readers of this blog are alerted by Email
every time a new posting appears. If you wish to be added to that
Email list, just let me know by sending me an email at Riart1@aol.com.
HOW TO CONTACT ME or CONTRIBUTE MATERIAL TO JACKSPOTPOURRI.com
Just send it to me by email at Riart1@aol.com. YOU ALSO
CAN SEND ME YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO BE PUBLISHED IN THIS BLOG AS WELL AS YOUR
COMMENTS AT THAT ADDRESS. (Comments can also be made by clicking on the
"Post a Comment" link at the blog's end.)
MOBILE DEVICE ACCESS.
DID YOU KNOW THAT www.jackspotpourri.com IS ALSO
AVAILABLE ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICES IN A MODIFIED, EASY-TO-READ, FORMAT?
HOW TO VIEW OLDER POSTINGS.
To view older postings on this blog, just click on the
appropriate date in the “Blog Archive” midway down the column off to the right,
or scroll down until you see the “Older Posts” notation at the very
bottom of this posting. The “Search Box” in the
right side of the posting also may be helpful in locating a posting topic for
which you are looking.
HOW TO FORWARD
POSTINGS.
To send this posting to a friend, or enemy for
that matter, whom you think might be interested in it, just click on the
envelope with the arrow on the "Comments" line directly below,
enabling you to send them an Email providing a link directly to this posting.
You might also want to let me know their Email
address so that they may be alerted to future postings.
Jack Lippman
No comments:
Post a Comment