Thank You, President Obama

[Arminius]

@uglypeoplefucking

@Arminius

@uglypeoplefucking

There is not always a positive trend after a recession. The Great Depression in the 1930’s is an example.

Either you do not know what “recession” means, or you are again using rhetoric here.

There is a business cycle. A cycle means that the parts of the cycle repeat.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cycle .

Economic waves:

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cycle .

What you see is that a positive trend follows after a recession, either directly or indirectly (depression). Recession is always a part of the business cycle, regardless how you interpret it. So it is correct to say that there is always a positive trend after a recession. We were not talking about when, whether sooner or later, … and so on.

Ok, the world keeps turning and the seasons keep changing . . . so what is your overall point? Are you saying that government policy has no impact on the behavior of the economy?

No. I am not saying that.

@I

After a recession there is always a positive trend. Duh.

@You

There is not always a positive trend after a recession.

You are wrong. Your statement is false.

That is what I am saying.

This is or should be a philosophy forum.

[James_S_Saint]

It isn’t “after the recession” until it turns positive. The only alternative is death.

[One_Liner]

These are just labels but what I think he meant was “immediately” after a recession (which can be a depression) then eventually followed by a positive trend.

[omar]

Hello UPF

If blue collar Trump supporters are victims of anything in backasswards, Republican run states like West Virginia it is not actually the great recession, but rather A) Republican policies which provide economic life-support to doomed and dying fossil fuel industries, like coal-mining, instead of working to promote industries which, as you suggest, can actually provide a future for the residents of those states.

I’m just saying that the fossil fuel industry is made up of thousands of Americans, people who are dying. Talking about the “doomed and dying fossil fuel industries” hides the plight of real people and marks as a “success” what should be marked as a failure. It is basically a “let them fail” attitude that is heartless and betrays an American voting group that has seem millions dropped on other “doomed and dying” industries to give them a chance. We cannot write off an entire state! Are you fucking kidding me?!! If you would like to see coal eliminated, then start by creating a process to do so rather than killing it in one or two administrations. It is the oath of the President, in my opinion, the least a President ought to do. If you kill off an industry without creating its replacement simultaneously, creating a crisis in the process, then that is a failure. Just as the POTUS regrets not having a plan for what would replace Gaddafi, it should also be regretful to destroy the leading industry in W. Virginia without any thought about the consequences, in fact worse because the future that you ruin will be of the people you’re supposed to protect.

And AGAIN, the political reality in such right wing states is that any move in the direction of newer industries holding the promise of future job-creation are vetoed outright in favor of artificially prolonging the slow death of older, increasingly obsolete industries, and extending the suffering of workers in those industries who are seeing their wages fall or losing their jobs, etc.

Then that should be the message, one of regret of being blocked from doing better for those affected by progress and a commitment to continue to provide alternatives and help for their transition. Like I said, just as the federal government can help veterans get a leg up on gaining employment by offering incentives to companies, so can that courtesy be extended without being limited by the individual state.

By extension, the struggling blue-collar Trump supporters are then ALSO victims of B) Their own naivety and ignorance insofar as they keep electing the state officials that prolong the slow death of the industries that employ them, while also supporting Trump, who would do the same at a federal level, extending the economic problems that have befallen places like West Virginia and the rust belt states to the rest of the country and, of course, the rest of us who live and work in that country! If my sympathy for them is somewhat half-hearted, it is because their deeply flawed political reasoning and economic short-sightedness poses a significant and extremely dangerous threat to the well-being of the rest of the country.

The thing is that the same can be said of Bernie Sanders. I am not comfortable with the populism of either candidate. Trump is a threat, and more experts are saying so on both sides of the aisle. But Donald is a symptom of a disease that has been ailing our political process for much longer. The Tea Party, the Occupy Wall Street movement, anticipated Trumpism in some ways. The demand for purity in our political system has created Trumpy. This polar view of the world that excludes any middle ground and punishes those who seek it, is a far greater threat to our political process than Trump. What has aided this political puritanism is the belief that the democracy is no longer representative, that it is geared for the benefit o the few at the expense of the many. This is why Trumpy won, even at Ted Cruz’ expense. This is a movement of delusion willing to set fire (Trump) to the whole thing (democracy as we know, or “the establishment” as they know it) and start from scratch. Republicans with their belief in small government have given shelter to some that would rather have no government. It is time that both Democrats and those conscious Republicans to explain better why America is Great Right Now for Everybody. That is a tall order if you don’t address where there is room for improvement and how it is an on-going process. Obama has to use that podium like a pulpit and show the level of commitment to victims in Flynt and W. Virginia that Larry Wilmore showed. He may not resonate, but at least he will be keeping it a 100.

And that is all I am saying. Is coal the future? No. But the people are the future. It is the job of govt. to look out for the future of all Americans. If policies that would work for coal miners have been blocked by do-nothing congress, then let’s call that a regret and not a victory, or imply that they are suicidal by voting for Trump. They are simply people who have not better choice at this point. If MY options were voting for someone who wants to shut down my plant and leave me on the street, or a guy that will keep it open, at least until there is something in its place, then what do you think will be my vote?

[uglypeoplefucking]

@omar

I’m just saying that the fossil fuel industry is made up of thousands of Americans, people who are dying. Talking about the “doomed and dying fossil fuel industries” hides the plight of real people and marks as a “success” what should be marked as a failure. It is basically a “let them fail” attitude that is heartless and betrays an American voting group that has seem millions dropped on other “doomed and dying” industries to give them a chance.

The coal industry is in terminal decline. To artificially prop up an industry in such decline has significant negative consequences. Return to my earlier encyclopedia sales example. What if, as encyclopedia sales dropped precipitously following the creation of the internet, the federal government had decided that in order to save the nation’s thousands of encyclopedia salesmen it was going to inject hundreds of millions of dollars worth of subsidies to the encyclopedia companies, and start a program of buying up unsold encyclopedias at inflated prices using taxpayer money? Nevermind the political impossibility of instituting such a program, - would that have been a good idea? Would it have done anything to actually improve the lot of the encyclopedia salesmen long term, or would it just be placing a band aid over a bullet wound? Wouldn’t it be better to let the market run its course, allow the industry to go defunct, and provide the ex-salesmen with training that might enable them to find jobs in another industry? That’s what i’m saying.

We cannot write off an entire state! Are you fucking kidding me?!! If you would like to see coal eliminated, then start by creating a process to do so rather than killing it in one or two administrations. It is the oath of the President, in my opinion, the least a President ought to do. If you kill off an industry without creating its replacement simultaneously, creating a crisis in the process, then that is a failure. Just as the POTUS regrets not having a plan for what would replace Gaddafi, it should also be regretful to destroy the leading industry in W. Virginia without any thought about the consequences, in fact worse because the future that you ruin will be of the people you’re supposed to protect.

i’m not writing off an entire state. Coal mining is not the only industry in West Virginia, and West Virginia will continue to exist even after the coal industry has finished it’s process of gradual obsolescence. And it is not the president, or any other elected official that is killing off the industry, it is an inexorable shift in the energy sources that people use. That the federal government invests in alternative energy without providing subsidies to coal companies is not an act of killing an industry, anymore than investing in internet technologies without subsidizing encyclopedias was the government killing the encyclopedia industry. Those industries died or are dying on their own. Giving them life support does nothing to promote the long term well being of the employees in those industries, it merely prolongs their suffering and diverts funds that could be used to do real good in other areas

Then that should be the message, one of regret of being blocked from doing better for those affected by progress and a commitment to continue to provide alternatives and help for their transition. Like I said, just as the federal government can help veterans get a leg up on gaining employment by offering incentives to companies, so can that courtesy be extended without being limited by the individual state.

Sure, ok. So how does that translate into it being a good idea to subsidize dying industries? i have no problem with the government creating incentives for companies to hire ex-coal workers, but i’m not sure that’s all your suggesting. By all means correct me and clarify if i am wrong, but it seems that you are faulting the president from not doing more to subsidize the coal industry.

Also, i think it bears repeating that reshaping West Virginia’s economy in order to provide it a bright economic future post-coal is a responsibility that rightfully falls on the STATE government and not the federal government - certainly not POTUS. To provide financial help to a state in serious economic distress, and social aid to the victims of that distress, is indeed a federal responsibility, but it is not for the federal government to try and make a thorough restructuring of West Virginia’s economy. And even if it were, propping up dying industries like coal-mining would decidedly NOT be a good way to go about it.

The thing is that the same can be said of Bernie Sanders. I am not comfortable with the populism of either candidate.

Neither am i. i like Bernie (he is certainly a more likable person than Trump) but there are indeed troubling similarities between the populism of the two, including proposals that involve hardline economic protectionism. i think that, of the two, Bernie is a far superior candidate (and a far superior person overall) and i could list all sorts of reasons why that is the case, but that’s probably a discussion for another thread.

Trump is a threat, and more experts are saying so on both sides of the aisle. But Donald is a symptom of a disease that has been ailing our political process for much longer. The Tea Party, the Occupy Wall Street movement, anticipated Trumpism in some ways. The demand for purity in our political system has created Trumpy. This polar view of the world that excludes any middle ground and punishes those who seek it, is a far greater threat to our political process than Trump. What has aided this political puritanism is the belief that the democracy is no longer representative, that it is geared for the benefit o the few at the expense of the many. This is why Trumpy won, even at Ted Cruz’ expense. This is a movement of delusion willing to set fire (Trump) to the whole thing (democracy as we know, or “the establishment” as they know it) and start from scratch. Republicans with their belief in small government have given shelter to some that would rather have no government. It is time that both Democrats and those conscious Republicans to explain better why America is Great Right Now for Everybody. That is a tall order if you don’t address where there is room for improvement and how it is an on-going process. Obama has to use that podium like a pulpit and show the level of commitment to victims in Flynt and W. Virginia that Larry Wilmore showed. He may not resonate, but at least he will be keeping it a 100.

i can agree with most of this. i could nit-pick at certain fragments of statements you’ve made here, but given that you’re correct overall, i don’t see any reason to do so.

And that is all I am saying. Is coal the future? No. But the people are the future. It is the job of govt. to look out for the future of all Americans. If policies that would work for coal miners have been blocked by do-nothing congress, then let’s call that a regret and not a victory, or imply that they are suicidal by voting for Trump. They are simply people who have not better choice at this point. If MY options were voting for someone who wants to shut down my plant and leave me on the street, or a guy that will keep it open, at least until there is something in its place, then what do you think will be my vote?

They are suicidal for voting for Trump. For them to do so is shortsighted and dumb. i believe the government has a real practical and ethical responsibility to come to the aid of its people when they are suffering en masse, but i also believe that people need to take personal responsibility for such decisions as who they vote for and why. Trump cannot and WILL NOT save the coal industry, he merely panders to blue collar workers facing economic distress. Moreover, he does so transparently AND in a way that is overwhelmingly ironic given that he was born wealthy, inherited a fortune from his parents, and has never worked a blue collar job in his life. Indeed, he’s never actually worked for a living at all, given that any and all the money he has earned in his life has come to him in the form of dividends, capital gains, speculative investments, and branding useless products with his last name.

[uglypeoplefucking]

@One Liner

These are just labels but what I think he meant was “immediately” after a recession (which can be a depression) then eventually followed by a positive trend.

Yes, thank you.

[Arminius]

@uglypeoplefucking

@One Liner

These are just labels but what I think he meant was “immediately” after a recession (which can be a depression) then eventually followed by a positive trend.

Yes, thank you.

The point was that you were talking about what you call “Obama’s greatest achievement in the economic recovery”, and that is no “label” but your flaw, because you have no single proof or evidence or just a tiny indicator for what you call “Obama’s greatest achievement in the economic recovery”. Therefore:

@I

After a recession there is always a positive trend. Duh.

Then:

@You

There is not always a positive trend after a recession.

And that is not true. There is always a positive trend after a recession. And there is always a negative trend after a positive trend …, … day after night …, … season after season …, … and so on. It is not so difficult to understand.

But the point to which we referred was your statement about what you call “Obama’s greatest achievement in the economic recovery”. That statemant is false resp. invalid because of the simple fact that you have no proof or evidence or just a tiny hint for it because of the other simple fact that there is always a positive trend after a recession (negative trend).

What is said about Obama can be a lie. You at least do not know whether it is a lie or not. You (like many others) can only speculate about whether “Obama’s greatest achievement in the economic recovery” is a lie or not. Therefore I said to you that here is always a positive trend after a recession, which means in this case that you just have no proof or evidence or just a tiny hint for what you call “Obama’s greatest achievement in the economic recovery”.

In other words: You do not know anything about what you call “Obama’s greatest achievement in the economic recovery”. Maybe you will know something about it in the future when historians will perhaps have found it out; but right now you really know nothing about it, because what is said about it can be a lie, and it is very probable that it is a lie, because it is easier for the people of rule, government, media, and other institutions to tell lies than to tell the truth.