Cause for (Guarded) Optimism

I must say I’m kind of looking forward to 2017. While 2016 made something of a mockery of my predictive powers, I believe there is cause for cautious optimism. I think the half of the country that viewed Mr. Trump’s victory as heralding the End of Days will at some point sober up to the fact that life more or less goes on regardless of who is sitting behind the big desk. We seem near the point where we can move from frantic hysterics to business as usual. The people who can’t will marginalize themselves into irrelevance.

The slowest postwar recovery ever seems to have finally gotten us back to something like normality, and the Fed is dipping it’s toes into a more sustainable rates policy. The markets seem to like what they see.

With the arguable exception of China, most of our enemies seem to be a motley collection of comic-opera tyrants, scruffy fanatics and socialist true believers who pose nothing like the great threats of yesteryear.

There appears to be a real possibility that we will have self-driving cars by the time my kid gets her license. I can watch baseball on my phone. I’ve been wrong before, but it seems to me that things are getting better.

Quote:

---

There appears to be a real possibility that we will have self-driving cars by the time my kid gets her license.

---

I don't see this as a cause for optimism! I prefer an admittedly flawed human over a system that is driven, or at least navigated, by technologies that are far from fail (or fool!)-proof. But then I'm not a fan of robotic machinery replacing workers, or of being connected, or of controlling anything in my home from my cell phone, either.

And I do not believe that a willingness to overlook threats to our liberty -or the liberty of Americans who don't look or believe just like the majority of those holding political power- and get back to "business as usual" is a GOOD thing. Obviously, YMMV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

There appears to be a real possibility that we will have self-driving cars by the time my kid gets her license. I can watch baseball on my phone. I’ve been wrong before, but it seems to me that things are getting better.

---

I think the concern is whether they will continue to get better, when in the face of things getting better the incoming folks are talking about changing everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaker

I think the concern is whether they will continue to get better, when in the face of things getting better the incoming folks are talking about changing everything.

---

That's always the case. There's always the belief that the latest model of savior will change everything. Whether it's making America great again, or that hopey, changey oceans receding thing. Fortunately, the political classes, for all the rhetoric, have less influence on economic, technological and cultural trends than they would have us believe.

Are we giving the sitting Prez credit for this economic recovery? I guess we have to, my rule is always "if s/he is sitting in the chair, s/he gets the credit."

But I refuse to give him credit for this stock market runup. Unless it reflects the joyousness of him being gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

Are we giving the sitting Prez credit for this economic recovery? I guess we have to, my rule is always "if s/he is sitting in the chair, s/he gets the credit."

But I refuse to give him credit for this stock market runup. Unless it reflects the joyousness of him being gone.

---

In a little over 3 weeks do we get to do the "he's not president anymore - get over it" thing :-) ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaker

In a little over 3 weeks do we get to do the "he's not president anymore - get over it" thing :-) ?

---

No, actually, that wont kick in for a while, but I will tell you that bringing it up in a second GOP term will be ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

No, actually, that wont kick in for a while, but I will tell you that bringin it up in a second GOP term is ridiculous.

---

I seem to remember it about as soon as Bush got done, but that's probably just me. Definitely way, way before 4 years in.

Updated: First I found on the forum (not exactly those words) was 06/11 - so later than I thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

Are we giving the sitting Prez credit for this economic recovery?

---

I blame George Bush.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

Are we giving the sitting Prez credit for this economic recovery? I guess we have to, my rule is always "if s/he is sitting in the chair, s/he gets the credit."

But I refuse to give him credit for this stock market runup. Unless it reflects the joyousness of him being gone.

---

I've always thought we attach far too much credit or blame to sitting presidents for whatever happens with the economy on their watch. Talking about a president's "management of the economy" seems less accurate to me than referring to how a president can sometimes influence or cajole the economy. It's almost like we view the office as a sort of sin-eater or scapegoat.

I hope I am wrong but I see civil unrest, demonstrations, etc and things going backwards in regard to education, environment, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaker

I seem to remember it about as soon as Bush got done, but that's probably just me. Definitely way, way before 4 years in.

Updated: First I found on the forum (not exactly those words) was 06/11 - so later than I thought.

---

Thats ok because I was not clear. For sure, I think that President
Obama will be blamed for lots of stuff early into the Trump reign.

Just don't bring up Obama as scapegoat beyond, oh, three years into Trump.

Remember that the begnning of the Obama reign was 2008 and all of those old posts are not accesible, they are on a previous site.

My guarded optimism is that government operations will get so messed up that many departments will have to be white boarded and rebuilt from little more than scratch. That the left and right media conflicts and the politicians that interfere with them will come to a head and a more accurate representation of the state of things will evolve. Most other optimism I can come up with is probably self-delusional.

There is a good point that what ever the Trump regime does, life will go on, but there is a new element of risk and uncertainly. Probably my daily routine and general well being will not change a lot. But on a more global sense the environment could be irreparably damaged at a much faster rate. Personal freedoms, especially for minorities, may be more limited. Deregulation of the financial sector puts us at risk of another meltdown. Big money and politics will be better bed partners. International relationships and any balance of global power could be upset and cause new conflict. A new nuclear arms race could results in global obliteration. Other than that I'm sort of optimistic it will work out. That people will stand up for what is right and just and keep the new driver inside the white lines.

I'll be curious to see what happens to Israel and the UN....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

I'll be curious to see what happens to Israel and the UN....

---

Me too, delivering a sucker punch on the way out the door will surely have repercussions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

I'll be curious to see what happens to Israel and the UN....

---

But at least relations with Russia are going to be much much better.

It's not clear to me where Trump stands on Israel. It's not clear to me where he stands on much of anything.

It does seem to me to be a pretty drastic policy reversal to in essence support pushing Israel back to the pre-1967 borders. While UN votes aren't terribly relevant, I wonder if this signals reduced diplomatic and material support for Israel if Trump was apprised beforehand. Otherwise, it's just an empty, spiteful gesture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

It's not clear to me where Trump stands on Israel. It's not clear to me where he stands on much of anything.

---

Gaslighting does that - and he is really good at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by early morning

I don't see this as a cause for optimism! I prefer an admittedly flawed human over a system that is driven, or at least navigated, by technologies that are far from fail (or fool!)-proof. But then I'm not a fan of robotic machinery replacing workers, or of being connected, or of controlling anything in my home from my cell phone, either.

And I do not believe that a willingness to overlook threats to our liberty -or the liberty of Americans who don't look or believe just like the majority of those holding political power- and get back to "business as usual" is a GOOD thing. Obviously, YMMV.

---

While I share many of your concerns I'm optimistic that self driving cars will reduce accidents, possibly significantly.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/12/2...-and-avoid-it/

Among my immediate personal concerns are what Ryan and his club are going to send to the new administration on Medicare and Social Security. I'd wager they are already working on the plan and it will come up early in 2017.

Medicare, Social Security, human rights, drug laws, the environment, alternative fuels, reproductive rights, labor laws, voting rights (and more) are all on the chopping block with this gang of jackals. But the rich will get richer, of that we can be sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogar

Among my immediate personal concerns are what Ryan and his club are going to send to the new administration on Medicare and Social Security. I'd wager they are already working on the plan and it will come up early in 2017.

---

Even Bush Jr couldn't make that happen despite his very elegant trip to the file cabinet with all the SS adminisation bonds to point out that our entire economy is basically just trust in the value of scraps of paper. Hopefully Trump will find it equally difficult to screw over virtually every person in the country.

Trump has filled his cabinet with the ruling czars of business....they're pretty good at screwing over people, so he could do it. Of course none of them will suffer and if they do the government will bail them out as they will be deemed too big to fail.

I hope you're right. It's probably not popular, but it's been one of Ryan's favorite entitlement reform plans. I can see them tying medicare into Obamacare repeal or other smoke and mirrors. It won't go down without a fight.

Based on his past statements, it's hard to believe Trump would support Ryan's grownup castor oil approach to entitlement reform. I think the most likely outcome will be for Social Security and Medicare to continue drifting toward insolvency for another four years.

They wouldn't be insolvent--at least in the foreseeable future--if the cap were removed and the oligarch class paid its fair share, like the rest of us do. Also, if the government stopped using the SS surplus as the equivalent of mad money, to fund wars and bail out the banksters, we would be even further ahead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

Based on his past statements, it's hard to believe Trump would support Ryan's grownup castor oil approach to entitlement reform. I think the most likely outcome will be for Social Security and Medicare to continue drifting toward insolvency for another four years.

---

I agree, he's going to give a lot of what people say they want, and to hell with the bottom line. He is used to filing bankruptcy when the numbers dont work for the "deal" and the federal gubmnt equivalent is to print more money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

Based on his past statements, it's hard to believe Trump would support Ryan's grownup castor oil approach to entitlement reform. I think the most likely outcome will be for Social Security and Medicare to continue drifting toward insolvency for another four years.

---

I am starting to learn that Trump's past statements are no indication of his futures statements. I think it was Bernie's platform to raise the cap, which seemed like a good solution to me but something we won't be seeing anytime soon. The conservatives have a lot of control now and I'd not rule out anything. The most likely outcome I see is four more years of drifting into insolvency, but the odds of other outcomes has significantly increased.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaneV2.0

They wouldn't be insolvent--at least in the foreseeable future--if the cap were removed and the oligarch class paid its fair share, like the rest of us do. Also, if the government stopped using the SS surplus as the equivalent of mad money, to fund wars and bail out the banksters, we would be even further ahead.

---

Removing the wage cap entirely would add about twenty years to the system's solvency, which isn't long at all in the pension world. Permanent reform would require a combination of rate increases on everybody, not just some enemies list, and benefit cuts.

http://www.bankrate.com/financing/re...cial-security/

Bernie said that raising or eliminating the cap would extend SS for 58 years. He must have a different accountant? It sure didn't come up in the debates or campaigns much and might be easy to ignore since it is a sensitive issue on both sides.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bern...l_Security.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogar

Bernie said that raising or eliminating the cap would extend SS for 58 years. He must have a different accountant? It sure didn't come up in the debates or campaigns much and might be easy to ignore since it is a sensitive issue on both sides.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bern...l_Security.htm

---

Bernie's math was questioned a number of times during the primaries.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/democrat...-up-1455726507

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/15/berni...ommentary.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b04f9b57d83008

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...th-battle.html

I think his heart was in the right place, but his decimal points were not.

But eliminating the cap and raising rates (graduated) would give us plenty of time to come up with a permanent fix. I can't understand why the Republicans in power, many of whom have more money than they could possibly spend in many lifetimes, are so damned eager to pauperize the rest of us.

You could certainly put a band-aid on it and kick it down the road for the next generation to deal with. There's plenty of precedent for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

You could certainly put a band-aid on it and kick it down the road for the next generation to deal with. There's plenty of precedent for that.

---

As opposed to just cutting them off? We need a good, solid, sustainable fix. Maybe we could do a pentagon audit and come up with some funds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaneV2.0

As opposed to just cutting them off? We need a good, solid, sustainable fix. Maybe we could do a pentagon audit and come up with some funds.

---

Perhaps cut defense spending 50% for a start, then work from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

Bernie's math was questioned a number of times during the primaries.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/democrat...-up-1455726507

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/15/berni...ommentary.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b04f9b57d83008

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...th-battle.html

I think his heart was in the right place, but his decimal points were not.

---

Probably beating a dead horse, but the links refer to his fuzzy math on health care and the economy, but I could not find anything on SS. I couldn't access the WSJ article. I did a fairly quick search on his SS and could not find an agreement of opinion disputing his SS estimates given the elimination of the cap. Although it would still face a short fall for the gen z's and millennials and would merely delaying the shortfall for a few decades. It's just a bigger band aid. But that's water under the bridge.

I would be interested in seeing the math on privatized social security which encourages investors into more risk and then a retiree simulation who starts SS in a financial meltdown like 2008. It's not an easy problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaneV2.0

As opposed to just cutting them off? We need a good, solid, sustainable fix. Maybe we could do a pentagon audit and come up with some funds.

---

I think it's a question of more gradual pain earlier as opposed to greater, more abrupt pain later. At some point, we need to recognize that people are living longer. While Trump has already voiced some opinions critical of some defense programs, I doubt there's enough that can be done there that would make a material difference.

Personally, I think we should look at what some other countries are doing or considering for their national pension systems; particularly in linking growth in benefits to growth in the wage base or GDP rather than inflation. That way your obligations are more closely aligned with the economy's ability to generate the wealth needed to pay them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

I think it's a question of more gradual pain earlier as opposed to greater, more abrupt pain later. At some point, we need to recognize that people are living longer. While Trump has already voiced some opinions critical of some defense programs, I doubt there's enough that can be done there that would make a material difference.

Personally, I think we should look at what some other countries are doing or considering for their national pension systems; particularly in linking growth in benefits to growth in the wage base or GDP rather than inflation. That way your obligations are more closely aligned with the economy's ability to generate the wealth needed to pay them.

---

I was thinking we should study other countries too. And it would be nice if we changed our goal from "making the greatest profit for a few" to "growing a sustainable economy for us all." We could start by reforming the institutional greed system that is medical "care" in this country.

Jane you make many excellent points. Things could be a lot better in this country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaneV2.0

I was thinking we should study other countries too. And it would be nice if we changed our goal from "making the greatest profit for a few" to "growing a sustainable economy for us all." We could start by reforming the institutional greed system that is medical "care" in this country.

---

+1