President Trump
- Thread starter Movingup
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Without all the conflict, I would actually like to know what you think the correct lessons are. If you do share, I promise I won't attack you at all. I really do want to know.
Here is my take on things. People without college degrees are really hurting, and have been for years. When the US unemployment rate hit 10% in 2009, I read that it was under 5% for people with college degrees and over 20% for those with no college. Things may be a little better now, but not enough. These people that have been so negatively affected place much blame on the federal government. For many people, that means the President.
Some of these same people (the ones that live outside the big cities) also tend to live in areas that are more white. They see the country becoming less homogeneous. They don't have exposure to other cultures (other ethnicities, other religions, non-traditional sexual identities) and have a little trepidation about it.
These people are afraid. I do not use that term as an insult.
In Trump, there is a person who reminds them of when things were more familiar. It seems like neither party is giving them any reason to have faith in them. So, they want the old, white guy to blow stuff up. What have they got to lose?
That is what I see.
This is why I have so much trouble with it. I see these people, and I want them to have happy, healthy lives. I was born in a small town in Iowa. I grew up poor. My brother is a union guy. The people who want to go back to when there were more coal jobs, back to when there were more manufacturing jobs are modern day Luddites (I use this term for its historical meaning, not as a derogatory term). The world has changed. It will continue to change. If you want to have a good career, you need to change.
The people putting their faith in Trump look like people in life rafts drinking ocean water to quench their thirst. He has never shown any concern for them. And now they think he will help them? Based on what? Based on what he says while running for President? You are going to base your vote on words rather than on actions?
I also have trouble with anyone rewarding Trump. He comes across to me as such a selfish, vile person. He bragged on Howard Stern about walking backstage at the Miss Universe pageant when the contestants weren't clothed. You want to reward a man that abuses his power to do that kind of thing? If your daughter was one of those girls, wouldn't you be upset that this dirty, old man was staring at your naked daughter when she didn't want him to? The people that voted for Trump just don't care because he hasn't done it to them. Just as they don't care about political correctness because they are not the ones that are offended by actions or words that society is trying to make unacceptable. Their fear for themselves has trumped their empathy.
I remember when a Midwest state was having an issue with gay marriage. A woman interviewed actually said that she didn't want gay marriage to be legal, but that she might feel differently if she knew a gay couple. Why would that be? There's some ability to think abstractly that is missing.
Remember when Trump said he could shoot someone and his supporters would still support him? Now, of course he was using the standard verbal tool of exaggeration to make a point. What I see in his supporters are people that would mostly not vote for him if he did that. But they will vote for a man that brags about sexual assault. They will vote for a man that bullies, insults, and shames people on a daily basis. Somewhere between that and murder they would change their vote even if his policies didn't change. For me, his behavior has already crossed that line.
There's never been a nominee of either party before in my lifetime as a voter who was so vile that I would not have voted for them if their policies matched my preferences. Trump is the exception. Many leaders (and newspapers) of his own party feel the same. It just blows my mind that there are so many people who do NOT think he is on the bad side of the line. And, no, it wasn't just him or Hillary. The Republican primary had several candidates that were not so vile.
And yes, I realize that on average society does treat people of different races differently.
Oh, no, of course it is not just black and white. I was just using that as an example. And, yes, much of white privilege is a matter of not having to deal with the negatives that other races have to deal with in this country.
Okay, how about this. What if there was some magical way that let people change their skin color, but just once. So you can change it tomorrow, but you can never change it again. Would you change yours? How many white people in the USA would change to be black? How many black people would change to be white?
When I said it earlier in the thread, the snarky asshole part of me came out. I apologize for that. I use humor [some would say I merely attempt to use humor] a lot, and sometimes it doesn't work out well.
Obviously, I am working through the cognitive dissonance that has filled my brain since the election.
I do care that others might take offense to the term. However, we still need SOME way to refer to the concept that the term is for. If I cannot use the term "white privilege" then what should I use? And aren't we now in the land of political correctness that the offendees don't like? I think when people understand what it really means, they would not be offended.
The motivations of words come from those using them. When I am being sincere, rather than snarky, I do not use the term "white privilege" to make people feel guilty. I wish more people could empathize more with others without feeling threatened. I wish I was better at it.
It now seems like we have diverged from the thread subject.
The problem I find with Dinesh is that he's often very good at attacking people for hypocrisy, as he does very well in telling the student to give up his "illicit privilege". He is basically telling the student the best way to promote actual social change is to lead by personal example. However, when you apply the same litmus test to him, his arguments completely fall apart.
For example, he likes to slam the Clintons for political corruption (more directly bribery). Yet, this comes from a guy that served time in prison after pleading guilty to a bribery charge himself. Of course, when he is at the brunt of hypocrisy like this, you see him totally downplaying what he did in comparison to those who supposedly support corruption for a living. He also says things like "we should be welcoming immigrants of the first stripe." This is a jab at "lazy" immigrants who somehow are able to extract benefit from the "safety net" that the American system provides. Being that I'm an immigrant myself, I find it beyond offensive and distasteful when someone of questionable moral quality himself, thinks himself worthy to define the standards by which this country should be admitting immigrants.
If I get to retain my personality/intellect/etc I wouldn't mind being black more than white.
And if it came with the skills to get paid millions to play basketball... no brainer.
But I understand your point for most people.
I knew someone would infer that. They are probably smarter... I was just saying I want to retain who I am and what I know because I can probably have the same or better life.
I realize skin color is still an issue but I am optimistic that the same opportunities in today's world can be had regardless.
The takeaway here is that skin color is less important than character (tm MLK)... a black person can even be president of the United States (which was awesome regardless of what you think about Barack's politics/policies/successes/failures).
I look forward to the day when people are just people.
#onespecies
#nocolorlines
Did morekaos take over your account?
What is the net of jobs leaving vs jobs starting in Cali?
I'm going to assume that we're okay... poor business climate or not, people love to live/work in the Wessayeeeeed!
tim
New member
Liar Loan said:
Without all the conflict, I would actually like to know what you think the correct lessons are. If you do share, I promise I won't attack you at all. I really do want to know.
Here is my take on things. People without college degrees are really hurting, and have been for years. When the US unemployment rate hit 10% in 2009, I read that it was under 5% for people with college degrees and over 20% for those with no college. Things may be a little better now, but not enough. These people that have been so negatively affected place much blame on the federal government. For many people, that means the President.
Some of these same people (the ones that live outside the big cities) also tend to live in areas that are more white. They see the country becoming less homogeneous. They don't have exposure to other cultures (other ethnicities, other religions, non-traditional sexual identities) and have a little trepidation about it.
These people are afraid. I do not use that term as an insult.
In Trump, there is a person who reminds them of when things were more familiar. It seems like neither party is giving them any reason to have faith in them. So, they want the old, white guy to blow stuff up. What have they got to lose?
That is what I see.
This is why I have so much trouble with it. I see these people, and I want them to have happy, healthy lives. I was born in a small town in Iowa. I grew up poor. My brother is a union guy. The people who want to go back to when there were more coal jobs, back to when there were more manufacturing jobs are modern day Luddites (I use this term for its historical meaning, not as a derogatory term). The world has changed. It will continue to change. If you want to have a good career, you need to change.
The people putting their faith in Trump look like people in life rafts drinking ocean water to quench their thirst. He has never shown any concern for them. And now they think he will help them? Based on what? Based on what he says while running for President? You are going to base your vote on words rather than on actions?
I also have trouble with anyone rewarding Trump. He comes across to me as such a selfish, vile person. He bragged on Howard Stern about walking backstage at the Miss Universe pageant when the contestants weren't clothed. You want to reward a man that abuses his power to do that kind of thing? If your daughter was one of those girls, wouldn't you be upset that this dirty, old man was staring at your naked daughter when she didn't want him to? The people that voted for Trump just don't care because he hasn't done it to them. Just as they don't care about political correctness because they are not the ones that are offended by actions or words that society is trying to make unacceptable. Their fear for themselves has trumped their empathy.
I remember when a Midwest state was having an issue with gay marriage. A woman interviewed actually said that she didn't want gay marriage to be legal, but that she might feel differently if she knew a gay couple. Why would that be? There's some ability to think abstractly that is missing.
Remember when Trump said he could shoot someone and his supporters would still support him? Now, of course he was using the standard verbal tool of exaggeration to make a point. What I see in his supporters are people that would mostly not vote for him if he did that. But they will vote for a man that brags about sexual assault. They will vote for a man that bullies, insults, and shames people on a daily basis. Somewhere between that and murder they would change their vote even if his policies didn't change. For me, his behavior has already crossed that line.
There's never been a nominee of either party before in my lifetime as a voter who was so vile that I would not have voted for them if their policies matched my preferences. Trump is the exception. Many leaders (and newspapers) of his own party feel the same. It just blows my mind that there are so many people who do NOT think he is on the bad side of the line. And, no, it wasn't just him or Hillary. The Republican primary had several candidates that were not so vile.
I'll stop you right there. It sounds like you are not describing white privilege, but rather a negative for being black. It's not all black and white.tim said:
You can't make such a statement as you don't know what others have gone through.tim said:
And yes, I realize that on average society does treat people of different races differently.
I am going to call you out on this based on how you used the term. I don't think you are being honest with us and maybe not even to yourself. I challenge you to critically think about it. It's a term that has motivations. It doesn't accomplish what you think it does. But you don't care that others might take offense to it. I hope you don't get offended for others when other motivated words are used.tim said:
aquabliss
Well-known member
Please watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9bu6CP318
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9bu6CP318
White guilt != white privilege
Being mindful of a systemic unfairness in society does not mean that one has to give up any advantages that were present. I highly encourage you to watch Peggy McIntosh's TED talk. https://youtu.be/e-BY9UEewHw
Being mindful of a systemic unfairness in society does not mean that one has to give up any advantages that were present. I highly encourage you to watch Peggy McIntosh's TED talk. https://youtu.be/e-BY9UEewHw
tim
New member
spootieho said:
Oh, no, of course it is not just black and white. I was just using that as an example. And, yes, much of white privilege is a matter of not having to deal with the negatives that other races have to deal with in this country.
spootieho said:
Okay, how about this. What if there was some magical way that let people change their skin color, but just once. So you can change it tomorrow, but you can never change it again. Would you change yours? How many white people in the USA would change to be black? How many black people would change to be white?
spootieho said:
When I said it earlier in the thread, the snarky asshole part of me came out. I apologize for that. I use humor [some would say I merely attempt to use humor] a lot, and sometimes it doesn't work out well.
Obviously, I am working through the cognitive dissonance that has filled my brain since the election.
I do care that others might take offense to the term. However, we still need SOME way to refer to the concept that the term is for. If I cannot use the term "white privilege" then what should I use? And aren't we now in the land of political correctness that the offendees don't like? I think when people understand what it really means, they would not be offended.
The motivations of words come from those using them. When I am being sincere, rather than snarky, I do not use the term "white privilege" to make people feel guilty. I wish more people could empathize more with others without feeling threatened. I wish I was better at it.
It now seems like we have diverged from the thread subject.
aquabliss said:
The problem I find with Dinesh is that he's often very good at attacking people for hypocrisy, as he does very well in telling the student to give up his "illicit privilege". He is basically telling the student the best way to promote actual social change is to lead by personal example. However, when you apply the same litmus test to him, his arguments completely fall apart.
For example, he likes to slam the Clintons for political corruption (more directly bribery). Yet, this comes from a guy that served time in prison after pleading guilty to a bribery charge himself. Of course, when he is at the brunt of hypocrisy like this, you see him totally downplaying what he did in comparison to those who supposedly support corruption for a living. He also says things like "we should be welcoming immigrants of the first stripe." This is a jab at "lazy" immigrants who somehow are able to extract benefit from the "safety net" that the American system provides. Being that I'm an immigrant myself, I find it beyond offensive and distasteful when someone of questionable moral quality himself, thinks himself worthy to define the standards by which this country should be admitting immigrants.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
tim said:
If I get to retain my personality/intellect/etc I wouldn't mind being black more than white.
And if it came with the skills to get paid millions to play basketball... no brainer.
But I understand your point for most people.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
WTTCHMN said:
I knew someone would infer that. They are probably smarter... I was just saying I want to retain who I am and what I know because I can probably have the same or better life.
I realize skin color is still an issue but I am optimistic that the same opportunities in today's world can be had regardless.
morekaos
Well-known member
Taaaa-daaa!!!
Trump Sees Progress in Effort to Keep Carrier Plant in U.S
President-elect Donald Trump said he?s ?making progress? in his effort to prevent Carrier from moving a factory abroad, an issue that had become a rallying cry during his campaign.
?Will know soon!? he said Thursday on Twitter, saying he was working even on Thanksgiving to keep the plant in Indiana.
http://bloom.bg/2glHxy5
Trump Sees Progress in Effort to Keep Carrier Plant in U.S
President-elect Donald Trump said he?s ?making progress? in his effort to prevent Carrier from moving a factory abroad, an issue that had become a rallying cry during his campaign.
?Will know soon!? he said Thursday on Twitter, saying he was working even on Thanksgiving to keep the plant in Indiana.
http://bloom.bg/2glHxy5
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
Movingup said:
The takeaway here is that skin color is less important than character (tm MLK)... a black person can even be president of the United States (which was awesome regardless of what you think about Barack's politics/policies/successes/failures).
I look forward to the day when people are just people.
#onespecies
#nocolorlines
morekaos
Well-known member
Delivering on making America great again
Trump to Announce Carrier Plant Will Keep Jobs in U.S
From the earliest days of his campaign, Donald J. Trump made keeping manufacturing jobs in the United States his signature economic issue, and the decision by Carrier, the big air-conditioner company, to move over 2,000 of them from Indiana to Mexico was a tailor-made talking point for him on the stump.
On Thursday, Mr. Trump and Mike Pence, Indiana?s governor and the vice president-elect, plan to appear at Carrier?s Indianapolis factory to announce a deal with the company to keep roughly 1,000 jobs in the state, according to officials with the transition team as well as Carrier.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/business/trump-to-announce-carrier-plant-will-keep-jobs-in-us.html?
Trump to Announce Carrier Plant Will Keep Jobs in U.S
From the earliest days of his campaign, Donald J. Trump made keeping manufacturing jobs in the United States his signature economic issue, and the decision by Carrier, the big air-conditioner company, to move over 2,000 of them from Indiana to Mexico was a tailor-made talking point for him on the stump.
On Thursday, Mr. Trump and Mike Pence, Indiana?s governor and the vice president-elect, plan to appear at Carrier?s Indianapolis factory to announce a deal with the company to keep roughly 1,000 jobs in the state, according to officials with the transition team as well as Carrier.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/business/trump-to-announce-carrier-plant-will-keep-jobs-in-us.html?
usctrojancpa
Well-known member
I wonder if Trump can keep jobs from leaving California? Oh wait, the People's Republic of California likes to tax its employers and income earners to death to help pay for spending happy politicians.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
USCTrojanCPA said:
Did morekaos take over your account?
What is the net of jobs leaving vs jobs starting in Cali?
I'm going to assume that we're okay... poor business climate or not, people love to live/work in the Wessayeeeeed!
You have the consider that the 1,000 jobs are being kept in Indiana with incentives from the state not the federal government, so gov. Pence could have done it at any point in the past. The reality of it is that the plant will close, but now Carrier will layoff those 1000 employees over the next couple of years, not immediately.
The new plant in Mexico can export to the EU and Latam with tax reduction and the product lines being transferred require very little skills/training to operate.
The new plant in Mexico can export to the EU and Latam with tax reduction and the product lines being transferred require very little skills/training to operate.