Irrelevant Trump Wingeing, and Some on the Free Market.

129445-quotes-about-can-do-attitudeYesterday, Jan Hansenn in comments proposed that we are not logical in our hopes for Trump, that others fear him, not because he may succeed but that he may damage the country, and finally that his business career is not all that successful. He also referenced sites that I consider mostly fake news, the New York Times, and Newsweek. But that’s still common, and many share the delusion (including the purveyors) that they provide real news.

I think he is wrong and Kurt Schlicter is right, categorically, that is my conclusion, and the only one that fits. My article and Colonel Schlichter’s had little to do with Trump, in fact. They were expositions of why the so-called Progressives are acting like a bunch of spoiled brats who want a do over. The thing they, and Jan, need to realize is that about 12 Noon on January 20, Donald Trump will become the 45th President of the United States. Your reservations, fears, and my hopes, in fact, all of our feelings about him are simply irrelevant. He is the President -Elect.

But what is the wonder of an age to me, is the sight of a plurality of the country, and a good percentage of the world, denying these facts. Trying to reverse a deal as done as Jodl’s signature on the surrender of Nazi Germany. It’s over, kiddies. We can argue about cabinet picks, Supreme Court justices, policies, and many other things. For the most part you, and occasionally I will lose. It’s real simple, elections have consequences, and he won. For good or bad, he will be President. Deal with it, Snowflakes.

America doesn’t do do-overs. That’s Europe’s thing, to keep voting until the elites get the answer they want. If you remember way back there in 2008, most of us thought Obama had some pretty looney ideas, but we were prepared to give him a chance, until about the time of that speech in Cairo, anyway. Speaking of damaging the country. We managed to survive, although it was tough, and I’d guess we’ll make it through the next fortnight as well.

Then we’ll see, all of us, how he does. I’m pretty confident he’ll be the best president since Reagan, and perhaps since Coolidge. But that remains to be seen, he could be a total flop, but if he can accomplish a third of what he wants to, it’s likely to become known as ‘the Roaring Teens’.

There is a reason, several really, but one salient one, why I am almost always opposed to government interference in markets. It could easily be summarized as “they do not know what they do”. Mostly we call it the law of unintended consequences. It echoes through almost every piece of legislation and regulation that the government does (see Obamacare). That’s why Coolidge was right, it is much better for the government to not do, than to do, especially if they know not what they are doing. The best thing for the workers, whether blue or white collar, for the investors, and indeed for the country, is for the government to get the hell out of the way.

That is why we were a bit disappointed with Trump’s handling of the Carrier thing. Offsetting that, though, is this: a promise is a promise.

Dan Mitchell has more on the economic thing, here. Read it and absorb it, because he, and Bastiat, are simply correct.

Advertisements

About NEO
Lineman, Electrician, Industrial Control technician, Staking Engineer, Inspector, Quality Assurance Manager, Chief Operations Officer

18 Responses to Irrelevant Trump Wingeing, and Some on the Free Market.

  1. NEO: We would be in basic agreement here, Europeans like Jan just don’t understand America, nor Americans! Nor do they want to take the time to try! And yes, I am a Brit living in America.

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      I pretty much agree, Brits do better than most, if they know their history. 🙂

      Like

      • Yes, so many Brit’s are simply ignorant of the fact (or they don’t care) that most of the founding fathers of America were of course British, and the American Constitution itself was somewhat affected by British minds and thinking!

        Liked by 2 people

        • NEO says:

          Yep, the founding fathers really had no wish to be Americans, they simply wanted the right of English freemen. That’s why the first version of our flag had the Union Jack in the canton.

          Like

    • the unit says:

      Fr. Robert is a Brit a European? “Anti-European feeling is a commonplace of British thought. Everyone has relatives in the US and Canada. Most have no one in Europe except the dead of two wars.” – Unequivocal comment by one Labour minister when British diplomats debated a future in Europe in 1949. 🙂
      http://www.historytoday.com/james-ellison/britain-more-european-it-thinks

      Liked by 1 person

      • NEO says:

        From a Labour minister! Sounds like an American, doesn’t it? The wars of the twentieth century broke most of our ties back to the continent. But, some, mostly youngin’s do identify with the continent, that had a lot to do with Brexit.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Mike says:

    “If you remember way back there in 2008, most of us thought Obama had some pretty looney ideas, but we were prepared to give him a chance, until about the time of that speech in Cairo, anyway. Speaking of damaging the country. We managed to survive, although it was tough…”
    I Do remember. (Our Survival will be determined long after I’m gone.) But I also remember identifying Obama for the Socialist he is in 2006 during the campaign. I printed out and worked over with a highlighter his ‘Blue Print for America’. I listened to his every speech… even after his election when he set the record for most televised addressed to the American Public. I saw him, and his party, for what they were then and what they are now. I did not wish to give him a chance for the very reason he has demonstrated the last 8-years. I hope he failed.
    But my protest consisted of sitting in my driveway blasting various selections from the Red Army Chorus, particularly The Internationale, for exactly one night while neighbors joined me in my drinking. That was it. My anger and despair consisted of 5-hours on Election night. The Russians didn’t hack my CD player… the next day it was over. And sadly, for the last 8-years, Obama has succeeded in capping a 100-year slide into the Socialist Swamp.
    It’s not the man, it the ideology.
    What Trump is going to do is an unknown.
    But it can’t be any worse…

    Liked by 2 people

    • NEO says:

      Yeah, pretty much my reaction, as well. Still, I could understand why so many wanted to elect a (half) black man. The real disappointment over the last six years has been the (R) congresscritters, who have been so very adept at ignoring the people who sent them to the swamp.

      I think overall he’ll be pretty good, and you surely are right – no worse! 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Jan Hanssen says:

    I don’t think you have adequately considered your position. The post yesterday asked, specifically, ” not the fear that Trump will be a failure, but the gut-wrenching, mind-numbing fear that Donald Trump will be a success.”

    You said, “that is my conclusion, and the only one that fits”.

    Does the evidence of Donald Trump’s successes and failures support this position? I do not think it does. Based on evidence it would seem that Donald Trump has been a clearly unsuccessful businessman. If the news articles I referenced are fake, how so? What in them is incorrect? Were the business ventures mentioned in the articles as failures actually successes? These are all issues that have remained unaddressed.

    Part of the reason we read your blog is to understand your reasoning for your positions, Your demographic group is being discussed, so your reasoning in particular is important. Your position is not nearly as important as your reasoning for that position.

    Like

    • NEO says:

      Really? Then you’ll have to tell me your measure of success. Yes, he’s had failures, so has just about everyone, the key is, he didn’t quit, he kept on, and I’d guess his net worth is considerably higher than what he started with. That’s my measure.

      I almost never go into my reasoning, it exists, but mostly it’s subliminal. Almost all of my readership understands me completely – both in the US and the UK. To explain how I get to where I get would be extremely tedious, and is not necessary. To understand my rationales, one simply needs to understand American and English history, and what a classical liberal is.

      Didn’t bother with the articles, to be frank, haven’t read anything in either one in years that wasn’t slanted, life’s too short to read bullcrap.

      Like

      • Jan Hanssen says:

        Generally business success is determined by beating the market. Trump never really did this.

        http://fortune.com/2015/08/20/donald-trump-index-funds/

        And there are the ways he operates, relying on branding instead of actual projects. This is highly unusual for someone claiming to be a businessman. It is not unusual for a reality tv star.

        But getting back to your reasoning, you called the news fake, but you never read the articles at all? How can you make that determination?

        And I think we can assume that most of us have a passing knowledge with history, economics, and political science, which is why we are seeking an explanation. We could follow the reasoning, do not worry about that. ; )

        Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          No, I didn’t call those specific articles fake, I said the publications they were in are unreliable – see the difference. And I wasn’t willing to take the time to try to corroborate them.

          Branding is a part of business, maybe he emphasizes it more than most, but then so did Cassatt and others.

          Fine then, I’ll look for your exposition of, say Burke. My knowledge of history is a bit more than passing.

          Probably you could, but why would I subject my readers, who I value, to such a boring post? I, too, have a brand to maintain.

          Like

        • Jan Hanssen says:

          You have every opportunity to express specific disagreements with the sources now. I am not sure why you criticize, but do not want to deal with the sources if requested.

          But moving on to something else you have said, you said “I’m pretty confident he’ll be the best president since Reagan, and perhaps since Coolidge.”

          This is about Trump. But you followed it with

          “The best thing for the workers, whether blue or white collar, for the investors, and indeed for the country, is for the government to get the hell out of the way.”

          And

          “That is why we were a bit disappointed with Trump’s handling of the Carrier thing. Offsetting that, though, is this: a promise is a promise.”

          What I find so confusing is that Trump has stated outright, several times, that he intends to use governmental tools to manipulate the market to boost US economic sectors. This is an overt part of his platform. If you are a free market supporter, Trump would the the antithesis of your position, and would hardly be a good President. If you think Trump would be a great President, you would have to believe retaliatory tariffs are a good method of dealing with trade issues.

          This seems like a major contradiction.

          Like

        • NEO says:

          Could be and might be. I don’t think so because of his cabinet picks, I think it a one off, to make a point.

          I also note that as of the first of the year, he has saved more blue collar jobs than the last administration in eight years, and he’s not president yet.

          I’m not necessarily against reasonable tariffs, for about 150 years that is where the federal government got almost all its revenue.

          Like

        • Jan Hanssen says:

          I agree Trump’s Cabinet picks do not match his claimed stances on a number of issues, but it does not change his claimed stance for the entire election cycle. He has expressed, repeatedly and rather loudly, that he intends to intervene in market operations.

          Trump is not a classical liberal by any stretch of the imagination. If Trump has saved blue collar jobs, which is not entirely clear, he has done so by biasing the market. This is not classical liberalism. Classical liberalism is opposed to tariffs at all.

          I though you considered yourself a classical liberal? I may have misunderstood, but if you are a classical liberal, how do you support market interference, and how do you consider Trump potentially a great President given that he has stated frequent and vocal opposition to your beliefs?

          On a more philosophical note, how is it you support Trump given his tendency towards the grandiose and excessive? Someone who uses a gold toilet hardly seems constrained in his passions. Unrestrained greed and indulgence seems contradictory to conservative principles? It seems unlikely that this us supported by conservatism or your religious principles?

          Like

        • NEO says:

          That’s because I, like most Americans, take Trump seriously but not literally. Nobody thinks the steel mills are coming back, least of all those who worked them, but an atmosphere conducive to enterprise is in almost everyone’s best interest. That’s what we see.

          Nothing wrong with greed, do read your Adam Smith – both books.

          Like

        • Jan Hanssen says:

          So when do you trust what Donald Trump says? He said “We are going to put American-produced steel back into the backbone of our country. This alone will create massive numbers of jobs.”

          Are you saying this is not true? He directly intervened with the Carrier situation, which you dismissed as a promise, why is this not a promise too? If these are lies, how do you trust more? How can you say he will create an “atmosphere conducive to enterprise” when he says he will impose significant tariffs? Just yesterday he criticized Toyota for building a factory in Mexico. It is not clear if he was aware Toyota was a Japanese company, but he is still, currently, threatening market retaliation. How does this create an “atmosphere conducive to enterprise”?

          As for Smith, Have you read The Theory of Moral Sentiment? You might find this scholar useful…

          https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f10a/80a86b5586f67fe34d998658a2700ea5b739.pdf

          Smith was an Aristotelian, and an Epicurean if you read between the lines, I am not sure where your position is supported at all, but if you could reference a particular section it would be useful.

          Like

  4. the unit says:

    I’m never argumentative or given to explanative remarks for my positions. I really am not knowledgeable about politics, economics, or trade issues to debate about them. I just yam what I yam. When I was young I didn’t worry about tariffs. Everything I wanted was made in the USA. I guess milk still is. Then it was delivered to my home by the milkman. And he even assisted in increasing the population so I always heard. Ah, to be American! 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s