Tuesday, December 06, 2016
Most People Don't Think Trump Will Be A Good President
All of these charts were made from information contained in a new Economist / YouGov Poll -- done on November 28th and 29th of a random national sample of 1,451 adults (including 1,257 registered voters. The margin of error was 3.1 points (3.2 for registered voters).
It seems that a majority of Americans doubt that Donald Trump will be a good president (41% to 59%) -- an 18 point margin. And registered voters agree by a slightly smaller 14 point margin (43% to 57%). And that is true of all groups but one. A majority of seniors (65+) had a slim majority believing he would be a good president (53% to 47%). All other ages, both genders, all races, and all incomes had a majority believing Trump would not be a good president.
Trump also doesn't compare very favorably with President Obama (see charts below). Obama is viewed as more likable by a 21 point margin. And he viewed more favorably by a 12 point margin.
Trump has claimed a landslide victory and a mandate from the election. Neither is true. The truth is that he's starting out behind, and has a long way to go before winning over a majority of Americans. I guess that shouldn't be a surprise, since he lost the popular vote by more than 2.5 million votes.
Fake News Is Not A Joke - It Is Dangerous
The picture above (by Sarah L Voisin/Washington Post) shows the police response to a report of a shooter in a restaurant in Washington, D.C. Police said 28 year old Edgar Maddison Welch had traveled fro North Carolina to the Comet Ping Pong Restaurant in Washington to "investigate" the business and expose the nefarious things that were happening there. He entered the restaurant and fired several shots into the ceiling, forcing patrons and employees to flee.
Why would he do such an insane thing? Because of fake news stories posted on social media site shortly before the election. Here's how The Washington Post describes it:
The restaurant’s owner and employees were threatened on social media in the days before the election after fake news stories circulated claiming that then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and her campaign chief were running a child sex ring from the restaurant’s backrooms. Even Michael Flynn, a retired general whom President-elect Donald Trump has tapped to advise him on national security, shared stories about another anti-Clinton conspiracy theory involving pedophilia. None of them were true. But the fake stories and threats persisted, some even aimed at children of Comet Ping Pong employees and patrons. The restaurant’s owner was forced to contact the FBI, local police, Facebook and other social-media platforms in an effort to remove the articles. . . .
But it didn’t stop the harassment, and nearby businesses have received threats as well, according to police. On Sunday, Washington Post reporters involved in this article were the target of online threats shortly after it posted.
It's a miracle that no one was physically harmed, but financial and psychological damage was done to businesses in the area and their employees (and some customers as well) -- and all because some people thought it was humorous (or an aid to Donald Trump) to post fake news stories on the internet.There is no excuse for the posting of fake news stories. We have long known, that out of our huge population, there are hundreds (if not thousands) of people that will believe nearly anything (especially if it coincides with what they want to believe, or is about some person or groups that they don't like). And there are too many of them who are willing to grab a weapon and act on that fake news by killing innocent people. And it doesn't seem to make any difference how crazy the story is -- there will be some who believe it and are willing to kill because of it.
Fake news stories are not harmless or funny -- or acceptable as a campaign tool. They are dangerous, and they must be stopped.
Trump Voters Were Scammed By A Master Con-Artist
The following post was written by Brett Arends at Market Watch:
Hey, Trumpkins — have you worked it out yet? Is the truth dawning on you, or are you still in the dark?
See if you can put it all together from the resumes of those in President-elect Donald Trump’s closest political circle so far:
Treasury secretary nominee Steven Mnuchin: Goldman Sachs.
Chief strategist Steve Bannon: Goldman Sachs.
Transition adviser Anthony Scaramucci: Goldman Sachs.
Commerce secretary nominee Wilbur Ross: Rothschild & Co.
Possible budget director Gary Cohn: Goldman Sachs.
Potential secretary of state Mitt Romney: Bain Capital.
Trump is just getting started. Check out that “swamp draining.” The whole thing is just draining before our eyes! Take that, Wall Street! Take that, “international financial cabal!”
Trumpkins, you’ve been scammed. There’s a sucker in this game — and it’s you.
And by the way, what’s the best-performing stock in the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, +0.23% since the election?
Goldman Sachs. GS, +0.14%
Yes, really. Shares are up 24%, to $225 from $182 when the market closed on November 8. The next biggest gainer: Wall Street powerhouse JP Morgan Chase JPM, +0.02%
Half of the Dow’s gain since the election, in fact, is due to just those two Wall Street stocks. By contrast, shares of “Main Street” companies Johnson & Johnson JNJ, +0.09% Procter & Gamble PG, +0.60% and Coca-Cola KO, +0.20% are down.
According to company documents, the partners at Goldman own 30.65 million shares. Which means that the partners at Goldman Sachs, in total, are $1.3 billion richer than they were on November 8, thanks to Trump’s election.
Remember when Trump and his proxies assailed Hillary Clinton for allegedly being too close to Goldman Sachs because she gave a couple of speeches there? Trump even singled out Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein, plus other Jews, in a sinister campaign commercial that inveighed against an “international financial structure” that cheated ordinary American workers. The 2016 election is “a choice between Donald Trump and Goldman Sachs,” insisted NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden earlier this year.
What a number Trump has played on the “poorly educated.” No wonder he said he loves them.
Trumpkins are learning the hard way what happens when you buy an investment scheme from a con-artist. I’ve been writing about scam artists for more than 20 years. They always promise you the moon — that is, until your check clears.
When will these voters get it? Maybe never. Author Maria Konnivoka notes in her book The Confidence Game that many victims refuse to admit they’ve been scammed — no matter what the evidence. Indeed, she says, many just keep coming back for more. This is something I’ll bet Donald Trump knows full well, and which he’s banking on (pun intended) in 2020.
Meanwhile, give credit where credit is due. Trump is fattening the bank accounts of the elite, but he also may have saved 1,000 jobs at Carrier . If he really did, good for him. Those who opposed Trump should stop being so churlish. After all, on President Barack Obama’s watch the U.S. economy generated 8.6 million net new jobs — equal to 2,945, or about three Carrier deals, every day, including Sundays, for going on eight consecutive years. And who can forget all of those patriotic Republicans congratulating Obama for that?
Monday, December 05, 2016
Only 74% of People Voted In 2016 Election
A democracy, any democracy, depends on the participation of its citizens. That means voting in the elections that are held. It looks like a substantial portion of our population doesn't care whether we live in a democracy or not.
The charts above are from a post-election survey done by the Public Religion Research Institute between November 9th and 20th of a random sample of 1,162 adults, with a margin of error of 3.6 points.
It turns out that 74% said they voted in the presidential election. Another 6% admitted they were not eligible to vote, and a whopping 20% simply did not bother to vote -- about one out of every five people eligible to vote. With our adult population being about 245.3 million, that means about 49 million people didn't think our democracy was important enough for them to bother with voting.
And the reasons those people gave for not voting were pathetic. About 11% said they didn't vote because the election was "rigged". That's just dumb. There is no reliable information of the election being rigged.
About 36% said they didn't vote because they didn't like the candidates. Also dumb. There's never been an election in which I thought a candidate was perfect. They all have warts (because they are human). But the candidates are never equally bad. You just choose the one that you think will do the best job for the country. And there were more than two candidates to choose from, with parties representing the spectrum of political opinion -- Green Party (far left), Democratic Party (moderate left), Republican Party (right-wing), Libertarian Party (far-right-wing), and various other parties on many state ballots.
About 23% said they didn't have the time to go vote. Bull! Most states, if not all, allow early voting, and in most, employers are required to give a person enough time off to vote. This excuse is just that -- an excuse, not a reality.
About 21% said they didn't vote because they weren't registered. That may be the most pathetic excuse of all. It is easy to register to vote and there is no excuse not to do so. It can be done in person or by mail nearly every day of the year, and in some states can even be done on election day.
Another 2% said their vote doesn't count anyway. Also dumb, and untrue. And about 7% refused to give a reason for not voting. They probably understood that they really have no good reason not to vote.
I will be honest with you. People who don't vote really irritate me. Citizens have an obligation to vote. It is their civic duty. It's the price we pay for living in a democracy (a small price that costs nothing).
I can only think that those who don't bother to vote really don't care if they live in a democracy or not, and that's just sad -- and stupid.
$15 Minimum Wage Would Boost Economy & Create Jobs
Our economy is still limping along. While the rich and the corporations have rebounded from the Bush recession (and are enjoying record-breaking incomes and profits), most Americans have not. Unemployment is still too high and wages are still stagnant (meaning with inflation, workers have less buying power than before the recession). This has resulted in weak demand for goods/services, resulting in both weak GDP and job growth.
Donald Trump has promised to produce massive job creation. Unfortunately, his solution is the same old failed "trickle-down" economics that has failed for many years now -- to give huge new tax breaks to corporations (and the rich). That will pad the bank accounts of the people who don't need help, but will not boost the economy or create enough new jobs. These groups are already sitting on trillions of dollars, but not creating jobs.
That's because tax breaks do not create jobs, regardless of what Trump or the Republicans say. There is only one thing that creates new jobs or boosts the economy -- an increase in the demand for goods and services. So, how can we increase that demand? Demand is increased when the masses have money to spend. And it is decreased when the buying power of the masses decreases (which is now the case).
The easiest and fastest way to increase demand substantially would be to raise the minimum wage to a livable wage -- say $15 an hour. This would increase the financial well-being of at least a third of the population, and put upward pressure on the wages of many more Americans. That bottom third would spend that new money they make (since they are barely subsisting now), and that new spending would increase the demand for goods/services -- which would create jobs to meet that new demand, and increase the profits of the business sector as they meet that demand.
Republicans like to say that increasing the minimum wage would cost jobs and make businesses uncompetitive. Neither is true, as many studies have shown. Substantially increasing the minimum wage would be good for workers, businesses, and the economy in general. And the side benefit is that it would be good for government also, taking many people off government assistance (and reducing the deficit).
Here's what Lawrence Michel at the Economic Policy Institute had to say on November 29th about raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour:
Today, working people across the country, from fast food workers to adjunct professors, are striking and demonstrating in favor of a $15 minimum wage—the largest demonstration in the history of the Fight for $15 movement, which has invigorated the debate over raising the minimum wage and helped make a $15 minimum wage and a union the standard for people who care about an economy that works for everyone. EPI applauds this effort and urges Congress to listen to the American people and raise the minimum wage.
For some employers, policymakers, and even economists, $15 an hour sounds high. But against the backdrop of rising productivity and an increasingly educated workforce, it’s clear that raising the federal minimum wage to $15 by 2025 is a bold target but something the economy can afford. For decades, workers’ wages have been stagnant even as productivity has risen steadily. And indeed if the minimum wage had risen alongside productivity, it would be well over $15 today. The fact that it has languished at $7.25 is a reflection of deliberate policy choices to keep wages low—not the laws of economics.
We should not ask today’s low-wage workers to pay for years of policy choices made on behalf of the rich and powerful by saying that $15 an hour is “too high,” when throughout most of the country, it is barely enough to get by. A bold proposal such as $15 is needed to lift the earnings of the bottom third of the workforce, generate robust wage growth overall, and fuel economic growth.
Standing Rock Demonstrators Are Victorious (For Now)
What a difference a day makes! Yesterday, I reported that Donald Trump was supporting the Dakota Access pipeline, and that North Dakota's governor was ordering all the demonstrators to disperse or be removed this week. Things looked dark for the thousands of Native Americans who had gathered at Standing Rock to protect their sacred ground and their water (and for the thousands of friends who had joined them, including 2,000 U.S. veterans). It was looking like a showdown was looming with the 76 law enforcement agencies at the site.
All of that has now changed. On Sunday, the Army Corps of Engineers notified the demonstrators that no easement would be granted to the Dakota Access pipeline to pass through or near the Standing Rock reservation. They said they would be studying other routes for that pipeline.
The demonstrators are celebrating, and they should. Without help from the media, the courts, or the government, they stood their ground for months against the greed of Big Oil -- and they won. It's not only a victory for Native American rights, but for the free speech rights of all Americans.
We can only hope that this victory is final. The Big Oil interests might go to court to overturn the Army Corps decision -- or they may just wait for Trump to be sworn in and let him overturn it. The CEO of the company building the pipeline has said he is "100 percent sure that the pipeline will be approved by a Trump administration" regardless of what the Army Corps decides. And that might be true (since Trump has a financial interest in Phillips 66, and that company would benefit from the pipeline completion).
A great victory has been achieved at Standing Rock, but I fear the fight is not yet over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)