What are some of the lessons from the Revenge Revolution? How did the expectations of the populous change following the revolution? Once could describe most changes as a benefit.

#246 Who Took Out the Donald? (Part 3)

23 Sunday Apr 2017

Posted by Jordan Abel in Gov't Policy, Lessons of Revolution, Societal Issues, Stupid Is as Stupid Does

≈ Leave a comment

First-time readers, the dialogue in this blog is set in the future (sometime after the year 2020). Each entry assumes there has been a 5th revolution in the US — the Revenge Revolution. More about Revenge Revolution and author, Entry #1. List and general description of entries to date. Annual assessment if Revolution plausible.

Note: most characters appear in a number of entries, with many entries building on previous conversations. Profile of characters. You’ll catch on quickly. Thanks for your time and interest…and comments.

Scene: Gelly, JC and Greenie having drinks with Jordan following a session in Jordan’s office. Conversation starts Entry #244.

Waiter Waiter delivers a round of drinks.

Greenie: “I have a request, please.”

JC: “And that is…?”

Greenie: “Before we get mired in more Beltway BS, I’d like to propose a toast to the Steak & Shake and the Custard Cup.”

Custard Cup Gelly: “Huh? A toast? I’ve heard of Steak & Shake…in fact I’ve eaten there…but the Custard Cup? What’s that?”

Jordan: “The Custard Cup is a mom-and-pop ice cream stand. But not just any mom-and-pop ice cream stand. It has the best…all caps on ‘THE’…best ice cream I’ve had anywhere, period.”

JC: “I agree. Even though I’m not an ice cream fan…”

Greenie: “…can you believe it, she doesn’t like ice cream.”

JC: “As I was saying, even though I’m not a big ice cream fan, the Custard Cup is king of the ice-cream hill.”

Gelly: “So where is this joint?”

Greenie: “Ice cream stand, please. Custard Cup is not a joint. The Custard Cup is a couple of blocks from where JC grew up. In fact it was well within a mile of where Jordan lived and where I lived growing up.”

Gelly: “So a neighborhood hangout, huh?”

Jordan: “More than the neighborhood.”

Greenie: “A toast to the Steak & Shake and especially the Custard Cup.”

Jordan: “Hear, hear.”

JC: “Alright, now that the sidebar is over, back to the mystery of who took out the Donald.”

Greenie: “Ya know, I think it’s the group we’d rather not think about.”

Jordan: “You mean not the Russians, not the North Koreans, and not the Mexican drug lords.”

JC: “You’re thinking inside job?”

Greenie: “I’m still not sure about the Russians but the more I think about it, the North Koreans and Mexican drug lords seem out of the picture.”

Jordan: “Why’d you drop them from the list?”

Looney Tunes Greenie: “Had the Trump Administration not acted like Looney Tunes characters, I would have left them on the list. But behavior by the Trump family…and even by some of the so-called adults on the Cabinet was so unprofessional. Bizarre is not the right word, because it was worse than bizarre. But I can’t think of the right word.””

Gelly: “You think there was an incident that tipped the scale for the CIA…or whoever the responsible inside group was?”

Greenie: “Yes, and I’m not sure the public appreciated the significance of how the event affected the country’s credibility among world leaders, friend and foe.”

JC: “What was the event?”

Greenie: “In my view, for the serious government officials who actually help protect the country, the scales tipped when the Trump Administration…the president, the Secretary of Defense and the head of the National Security Agency…I’ll ignore press secretary…all claimed that the aircraft carrier what’s-its-name was part of an armada ‘steaming’ toward North Korea when actually it was ‘steaming’ away from North Korea toward Australia.”

JC: “I agree, Greenie. That erroneous claim had to be one of the biggest screw-ups in American history. The statements were not an intentional lie to deceive the enemy, like you might have had in WWII. These guys were trying to intimidate North Korea but just did not know what was going on.”

Gelly: “That was really a ‘duh’ moment for me and I suspect many people. It’s not as if there was no way to track the aircraft carrier and what, a couple of destroyers? I mean, doesn’t the US have satellites, airplanes and even such low-tech things called radios?”

JC: “Jordan, you’ve been around these beltway guys for a while. You’ve even been in the White House. What were these guys thinking? No one checked to make sure the claim was right? You’re pronouncing to the world a major strike force is headed to North Korea and no one checks the facts? Even worse, when they did find out the mistake, no one corrected it publicly.”

Aircraft Carrier Jordan: “Must have been an interesting conversation in the Oval Office after someone pointed out the mistake. ‘Let’s see, if we just ignore telling the public we made a mistake, no one will find out. Those ships are in a big ocean. Who’s going to see them?’”

JC: “That might have worked when countries had an armada, as the Donald called it…but not in the 21^st Century. C’mon guys. Wake up.”

Greenie: “Ok, we need to ask if there was a tipping point other than the claims about the wrong-way armada. What about a series of events that might have tipped the scales?”

Turtleneck Jordan: “I suppose one could point to any number of single events or series of events demonstrating stupid-is-as-stupid-does behavior. But I think for most people, there’s usually a single incident that tips the scale.”

Greenie: “I agree. Think about relationships with other people, feelings about a restaurant…whatever. You go along and go along with a less-than-satisfactory relationship and then at some point you say to yourself, ‘Enough, already. No more.’”

Jordan: “And, I agree the wrong-way armada was probably what triggered the CIA to take action.”

JC: “Bad pun, Jordan.”

Waiter: “Would you folks like to order some food?”

#245 Trump Taken Out – Why? Follow the Money (Part 2)

16 Sunday Apr 2017

Posted by Jordan Abel in Lessons of Revolution, Societal Issues

≈ Leave a comment

Scene: Gelly, JC and Greenie having drinks with Jordan following a session in Jordan’s office. Conversation starts Entry #244.

Greenie: “Jordan, if you don’t mind, I’d like to continue the conversation we began at the office. You know lots of the ins and outs of Washington…so why did the Donald get taken out?”

Jordan: “Greenie, you’re more of an insider than I am.”

JC: “Jordan, quit stalling and just answer Greenie’s question, please.”

Gelly: “Yes, please. I’m interested, too.”

Jordan: “Simple. Well, maybe not so simple…but easy to understand. It’s the old adage of ‘Just follow the money.’”

Greenie: “You think Trump was on the take when he was president? Surely not.”

Jordan: “Unlikely he was on the take per se…like Flynn and Manafort were on the take. But Trump was up to his eyeballs in debt.”

Gelly: “I thought he was some kind of billionaire several times over. I mean with all those hotels and properties that he owned.”

JC: “I hear you Jordan. How much do you think he owed on those properties…and to whom?”

Greenie: “A lot of the stories written long before he became a presidential candidate suggest his record as a developer was questionable at best. How many times did he go bankrupt? And didn’t he stiff a bunch of major US banks?”

JC: “Why didn’t he ever release his tax returns? The excuse about being audited was sheer baloney. Besides why didn’t he release his 2016 return when he sent it in? The IRS doesn’t start any audit until you file a return.”

Gelly: “So you guys think he was heavily in debt. If so, like JC said, money owed to whom?”

Jordan: “I realize it’s a while ago but think back before the election in 2016. There was strong evidence of people involved in the transition had links to Russian banks and to the Bank of Cyprus, which was notorious at the time as a haven for laundering money.”

Cypress Bank JC: “What was that guy on the transition team who had been some high-level dude at Bank of Cyprus?”

Greenie: “That guy became what was it…Secretary of…?”

Jordan: “…Commerce. You mean Wilbur Ross?”

Greenie: “That’s the guy.”

donald-trump Gelly: “Then are you saying then that the Russians took out Trump?”

Jordan: “Not necessarily. As JC said in the office, the Russians had the Donald by the short hairs.”

Greenie: “Really, JC, such a nice girl like you. You need to clean up your language.”

JC: “What else do you want to call it? It’s true.”

Gelly: “If the Russians took him out, then wouldn’t they would lose their leverage with him? Plus, maybe never get their money?”

Greenie: “Agree, except maybe they still had their leverage.”

Gelly: “I don’t get what you mean?”

Greenie: “Remember a couple of months into the term when he did 180 degree turn on the Russians? In just a few days the Russian went from good guys to bad guys…or at least that’s what the Administration wanted us to think.”

Putin Jordan: “Good point, Greenie. I’ve always been suspicious about the sudden change in attitude. And, then, within a day or so of the change in attitude, Secretary of State Tillerson is at the Kremlin and has a private, unscheduled, undocumented two-hour meeting with Putin. That meeting doesn’t smell right. How much of a bad-ass could Tillerson have been? Just a couple of years before, Putin gave Tillerson a Russian Order of Friendship medal.”

JC: “Whatever the Administration was trying to do, one thing’s for certain. Trump was like a spinning top. He changed positions constantly. We never knew where he stood…or what he was thinking.”

Gelly: “Or even if he was thinking.”

Turtleneck Jordan: “Good one Gelly.”

Greenie: “I agree Trump’s change of position on the Russians might have been a diversion. Think about the growing pressure from the investigations into Russian influence on the election. The Senate’s investigation was just starting. He had every reason to try to make Congress and the public think he was being tough on the Russians.”

JC: “Let’s say the diversionary tactic was true. But what happens if the Donald then balks at paying his debt? If he balks, then the Russians lose very little by talking him out?”

Gelly: “Seems to me that once he realized he could use the military to his advantage – look at how he puffed up his chest using the military in Syria and to threaten North Korea – maybe he thought he could intimidate the Russians as well…and then he could walk away from the debt without any consequence.”

Jordan: “I agree he might have thought he could give the proverbial finger to the Russians and walk away…but that’s not how it works.”

Waiter: “Excuse me, folks, would you care for another round of wine?”

(To be continued.)

#244 Recall When the Donald Was Taken Out

09 Sunday Apr 2017

Posted by Jordan Abel in Causes of the Revolution, Lessons of Revolution, Societal Issues

≈ 17 Comments

Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC.

Gelly: “Jordan, the dynamic duo is here to see you – JC and Greenie.”

Jordan: “Well, well, well. What a surprise. What brings you two? Pleasantries, I hope.”

JC: “Not really.”

Greenie: “Pardon the manners of my buddy. Jordan, nice to see you. Do you have a few minutes for us, please?”

Jordan: “Of course. Something happen? You guys look a bit troubled.”

Greenie: “I’m visiting JC for a few days. She offered to edit some of my articles on the cause of the Revenge Revolution.”

JC: “So last night we finish the edits, then pour a couple glasses of wine and watch a movie.”

Greenie: “But not just any movie. A classic…’Caine Mutiny.’”

Jordan: “Great movie. But so…?”

JC: “So…Jordan, does Captain Queeg’s behavior in Caine Mutiny remind you of anybody who used to be in Washington…you know, like…”

Jordan: “…like the Donald? Pardon me, president Trump.”

Greenie: “That’s what we thought too. Just that association brought back memories of the early days of the Trump Administration. Watching the characters in the White House was like watching Looney Tunes.”

Looney Tunes JC: “I’d forgotten how wacko those guys in the White House really were…starting with the Donald.”

Greenie: “Rather than looking for missing strawberries, old president Queeg was looking for 3 million, no 5 million missing votes.”

JC: “When Queeg couldn’t find the missing votes, he claimed some other bizarre event…like his phone at Queeg Tower being tapped by president Obama.”

trump-scowl Greenie: “When there was no evidence of a wiretap, he claimed the former Attorney General broke the law by doing her job and should be put in jail.”

JC: “All the time, of course Trump was denying there was any contact between his campaign and the Russians, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.”

Greenie: “Finally, Queeg appoints his wet-behind-the-ears son-in-law as executive officer in charge of the ship…and also appoints the pretty-face, but ‘not-the-brightest bulb’ daughter, as key advisor.”

Jordan: “I’d forgotten how depressing and dangerous that situation was. Queeg, the White House staff really…even many of the cabinet members had no clue. I remember thinking these guys must have been charter members of the Incompetents Club and got together at some of the club’s meetings.”

Greenie: “Queeg….I mean Trump was really dangerous. What I think was even worse – a lot of supposedly responsible people, including Republican leadership in the House and Senate….didn’t want to admit how much Queeg and staff really were out of control.”

JC: “So now you see why we’re upset?”

Jordan: “Yes, but that was some years ago.”

JC: “Jordan, didn’t you see what was really happening with Trump?”

Jordan: “I saw it. It was just hard to believe and even harder to swallow.”

Greenie: “And probably easier to pretend it wasn’t really happening.”

JC: “Greenie, in fairness to Jordan, I’d like to tell you about a conversation he and I had during the early days of Queeg’s Administration. At the time I promised not to repeat it. Jordan, is it OK if I tell her?”

Jordan: “No harm now since its history.”

Greenie: “What are you guys talking about?”

JC begins to repeat a conversation she had with Jordan in spring 2017

Jordan: “JC, what do you suggest we do about the Trump Administration? It seems out of control…and incredibly dangerous.”

JC: “You’re asking me? I thought you were one of the muckety mucks inside the Beltway. You tell me what we should do.”

Turtleneck Jordan: “Well, I really hate to say this…I mean I’d better think about it.”

JC: “Quit stammering. What are you trying to say? Spit it out.”

Jordan: “The only way this chaos in the White House is going to get resolved is by…by taking him out of office.”

JC: “You mean ‘taking him out’ the way I think you mean ‘taking him out’?”

Jordan: “Unfortunately, yes.”

JC: “Who’s going to do it?”

Jordan: “My view there are three likely players…hit people if you will.”

Putin JC: “Let me guess. One is the Russians, which seems like an obvious choice. From what I can tell, they have him by the short hairs.”

Jordan: “Such a diplomat.”

JC: “Well, it’s true. How much money does he really owe them? And what else do they have on him? Plus, Putin does not play nice. Another candidate is the North Koreans. Kim what’s his name seems as bad a Putin…maybe worse. How many family members has he killed?”

Jordan: “OK, who’s number 3?”

JC: “Mexican drug dudes. These guys are ruthless and have no compulsion about taking out family members, which unfortunately puts Melania and Baron at risk as well.”

Jordan: “The Mexicans were not on my list. You’re right, they should be.”

JC: “Then who’s your number 3…now number 4?”

Jordan: “That’s what bothers me the most.”

CIA JC: “You thinking an inside job…like someone from one of the intelligence agencies or the special ops guys in the military? Yikes, the thought of that makes me squirm.”

Jordan: “It should make you squirm. But these guys see the Donald in situations we don’t. If you listen carefully to some of the guys in the know about these agencies, they think he’s out of control. Their job is to protect the country and the Constitution, not some individual, even the president.”

Back to the current conversation

Greenie: “That must have been a sobering conversation.”

JC: “It was. But now all that’s over. To end on a more positive note, the country survived after president Queeg. Lots of turmoil and the Revenge Revolution but we survived.”

Jordan: “Yes, we did survive. Now, you know what guys? I think we could all use a glass of wine, including Gelly…and I’ll buy.”

#233 Is Revenge Revolution Still Likely? Yes, Outlook Worse. (Part 2 of 2)

07 Saturday Jan 2017

Posted by Jordan Abel in Causes of the Revolution, Gov't Policy, Lessons of Revolution, Stupid Is as Stupid Does

≈ Leave a comment

First-time readers, the blog is usually constructed as a dialogue between characters. The dialogue is set in the future (sometime after the year 2020) and assumes there has been a 5th revolution in the US — the Revenge Revolution. More about Revenge Revolution and author, Entry #1. List and general description of entries to date. Annual assessment whether Revolution plausible.

Normally, I allocate one entry every six months or so as a “sense check” whether the 5^th US revolution, aka Revenge Revolution, seems plausible by say 2020-2025. Given developments since the election of Donald Trump, and especially given recent actions and statements by the president-elect, I felt compelled to expand “sense-check” entry #232.

If you want to read no farther, my conclusion is this. A Revenge Revolution is not just a possibility, but is quickly moving to the category of “highly likely.” In addition, the US is likely to experience another president being assassinated, or at a minimum removed from office. OK, now the rationale.

Believe what you want…and I don’t care if you voted for Clinton or Trump or a 3^rd party…Trump continues to exhibit behavior that most politely can be described as bizarre and more realistically described as Howdy-Doody like, reacting as would a puppet when various inexperienced people pull the strings. There is no consistent pattern of behavior, just jerky, random motions.

Trump’s campaign promised he would effectively “drain the swamp.” Well, if you want to change the way an organization behaves, rational people know you cannot simply “blowup” the infrastructure of the organization and expect it to remain standing and operate effectively.

If you want to lead an organization through the change, you have to demonstrate leadership qualities yourself. The person trying to initiate the change cannot simply give staff members the finger, belittling the organization they work for and then expect staff members to follow proposed changes enthusiastically. Plus, if one is going to make change, then there must be a plan to follow that leads away from the current way of operating to a new way of operating. Change without a clear plan is a sure recipe for chaos.

So far, Trump has not disclosed anything remotely resembling a plan. And worse, Trump continues to demonstrate an apparent inability to develop a cohesive plan. Sending tweets does not constitute a plan. OK, so you want to cancel Obamacare. What is the replacement? The approach is not like tearing down a building before you’ve decided on plans for the new building and converting the land to a parking lot while building plans are crafted. Such an approach won’t work for making changes to health care, or EPA, or Education or any other agency.

Assessing the structure and efficiency of the CIA seems a fair goal. But if you expect support for such an assessment, why on earth would you claim that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks provide more credible information than the CIA? Such remarks not only fall in the category of “stupid is as stupid does,” but self-destructive. Such remarks can affect national security and beg for some covert operator(s) to take out “the problem”, i.e., the Donald. If you think such an idea is impossible in the US, then you’re being incredibly naïve or smoking way too much weed.

If you want the support of the military, it won’t result from merely appointing a couple of generals to your staff. If you want support of the military, would you claim to know more about field operations than generals in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere?

If the wacko rhetoric had stopped at the end of the campaign, then many in the affected agencies might have sighed and agreed to move on. But, no, the wacko behavior has not stopped. The wacko behavior continues unabated and, if anything seems to have ratcheted up. Before being briefed by the CIA, the Donald claimed to know “what no one else knows” about potential Russian hacking. Well, Donald, that means one of two things – either you’re wired to Putin or you’re stupid.

I have a friend who claims Trump is a great negotiator and incredibly smart. Trump might know how to negotiate a real estate deal, although the track record is anything but stellar. But Trump incredibly smart? That’s one of the funniest statements I’ve heard in years. The man cannot put a coherent paragraph together. I realize many Trump supporters might not care what he says, but a lot of high-powered people worldwide do.

If his words and tweets have to be interpreted by staff…as they are now…then how do critical messages get communicated to government agencies, the public and other world leaders? Why not go ahead and tell the military to launch nuclear missiles…and then sometime later have a staffer clarify the remarks by claiming that’s not what he really meant to say. Oh well, nuclear war means more new buildings are needed…and the Trump organization can build them.

Maybe flaunting social norms, ignoring the press, disregarding protocol and thumbing your nose at possible conflicts of interest feeds the Donald’s ego and makes him feel important. But, Mr. President-elect, you are setting up yourself and the country for failure. Your behavior is Richard Nixon on steroids. Nixon was able to resign. You are likely not to have that option.

Dictators in other countries might be able to bully the masses and stay in power. What’s different about the US is the number of arms held by citizens. Remember the 2^nd Amendment? And, in case you’ve forgotten, thanks to the NRA many of the arms owned by the citizens are military style and military caliber. Oops.

Some icing on the cake. Discussion of and/or Congressional attempts to overthrow the basic operations of the Federal government, including Social Security, Medicare and some form of health insurance, will add fuel to an environment that is ripe for a revolution. I find it interesting that soon after the election, I received an email from an ardent Trump supporter, asking me to sign a petition to ensure Medicare is not changed. Some Trump supporters are starting to connect the dots and apparently are not very happy. Think about this situation – if a segment of the population starts to rebel using firearms, even a small segment of the population, the local police and military will find it nearly impossible to maintain control.

As for Trump himself, while the Secret Service might be able to protect the president, Trump’s primary NY residence, Trump Tower, and other residences and properties associated with Trump will be easy targets. Even for Trump Tower, the Secret Service cannot shutdown commerce on 5^th Avenue just because Trump or some of his family is in residence. Even more challenging is how the Secret Service will prevent IED-drones from being launched from near-by Central Park or even from New Jersey. OK, so a single drone won’t bring down Trump Tower, and maybe five drones won’t…but five drones with high explosives can cause serious damage and a major fire.

Once it starts, the Revenge Revolution will not stop with taking out one key figure in government. Unfortunately, if Trump is assassinated then it is likely vice-president Pence will be taken out as well. Additional targets could be those in the Cabinet and Congress who are perceived to be destroying basic rights.

Do I hope I’m wrong with this prediction? Yes, I hope I am wrong. The segment has not been fun to write, believe me. But like it or not, what we’ve not seen in the behavior of the president-elect is any indication he understands the gravity of the job as president. Further, none of his remarks, tweets and other actions indicate a level of maturity, or even intellect, required to be the US president. A couple of days ago Vice-President Joseph Biden was quoted as telling the president-elect to “grow up.” Joe, you comment is spot on. Unfortunately, for the US, and the world, the president-elect seems incapable of growing up. And aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

#231 Lessons from Revenge Revolution: Trump’s ‘Incompetents Club’ Cabinet (Part 7 of 7)

18 Sunday Dec 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Federal Budget, Gov't Policy, Lessons of Revolution

≈ Leave a comment

Gelly: “Drone Man, nice to see you again. I thought you were headed back to your granddaughter’s tour group.”

Drone Man: “Just as I got off the elevator in your lobby she called and said there’d been a delay of an hour or so. So, Gelly, if it’s OK, I’ll take that cup of coffee you offered a few minutes ago.”

Gelly: “Of course. Come on in. Jordan and I were just taking a short break.”

Jordan: “Welcome back, Drone Man. So we have you for another hour or so, eh?”

Drone Man: “If you can put up with me.”

Jordan: “It’s tough but we’ll try.”

(Gelly brings Drone Man coffee.)

Drone Man: “Thanks for the coffee Gelly. And since I interrupted you guys, I have another favor.”

Jordan: “Which is…?”

Drone Man: “In discussing lessons learned from the Revenge Revolution, I’ve not heard much about the Trump Administration…other than some lessons about what not to do for economic and tax policies.”

Jordan: “You have a specific topic in mind?”

Drone Man: “What about the lessons learned from Trump’s selection of various cabinet positions and heads of agencies?”

Jordan: “You mean Trump’s appointments to the ‘Incompetents Club?’”

Drone Man: “C’mon. You really don’t mean the appointees were incompetent, do you? Lots of smart people.”

Gelly: “Jordan, Drone Man makes an interesting point. These were smart people. What do you mean?”

Jordan: “Would either of you hire me to manage your brain surgery?”

Drone Man: “Of course not. That would be stupid. What do you know about brain surgery?”

Jordan: “Then stupid is as stupid does.. Why nominate a brain surgeon to be head of HUD (Housing and Urban Development). Just because he lived in public housing as a kid, doesn’t mean he knows how to manage the agency. The same applies to any number of Trump’s appointments – EPA, DOE, Interior…and the list goes on. Zero knowledge of the agency they were to manage.”

Drone Man: “Look, Trump was trying to ‘drain the swamp.’ He needed to appoint people who were not connected to the agency.”

Jordan: “If you’re going to drain the swamp, don’t you think you should put someone who knows something about swamps?”

Gelly: “But didn’t Trump claim that people who knew the swamp were the problem? Therefore, why appoint them?”

Drone Man: “Keep poking him, Gelly.”

Jordan: “My view is Trump was focused on the wrong target.”

Gelly: “Well, then who’s to blame for the swamp if it’s not the bureaucrats at the agencies?”

Jordan: “A group that few people really think about as a core problem – Congress. Oh, yes, people think some members of Congress are too self-centered and non-responsive.”

Gelly: “What about voters? People keep electing the same congressional rep. There’s very little turnover.”

Jordan: “I agree voters share part of the blame. But, unlike legislators in Congress, voters can’t make laws. Voters cannot determine what money the Federal government will spend. And that fact seems to be where Trump completely missed the boat. The Federal agencies do not authorize their budget. All spending bills are initiated in the House, not by the agency.”

Gelly: “So you’re saying the agencies really manage the money that Congress authorizes, right?”

Jordan: “Exactly. If you listened to Trump, who apparently had never read the Constitution and sleep-walked through his 8^th-grade civics class, you’d think EPA, Defense, Education, Interior, Transportation and all the other agencies just ran around printing money willy-nilly. Someone forgot to tell the Donald, if you want to change what goes on in Washington, you better start with the place that approves the spending…Congress.”

Gelly: “I must missing something. If the heads of agencies are really just managers, why were the Trump appointments so bad? I mean most of his appointments were business people and former military generals. Don’t these guys know how to manage?”

Drone Man: “She’s spot on, Jordan. What’s the issue with my man’s appointments…I mean Trump’s appointments?”

Jordan: “Like I said earlier, if you’re going to manage a complex task…like brain surgery…you should know something about the subject matter.”

Gelly: “This discussion all seems abstract to me. You have a specific example?”

Jordan: “Yes, Trump put ideologues in management positions. Few of the appointees had real-world experience in the field they were supposed to manage…and some had no management experience whatsoever. That same approach…ideologues managing areas where they had little experience…is what ruined one of the world’s best companies.”

Drone Man: “Based on you past, you must be talking about another general…General Motors?”

Jordan: “In the early 1980’s when Roger B. Smith took over as chairman, he too claimed he wanted to ‘drain the swamp,’ although he used different words. Like Trump he focused on cost, cost, and cost. He chose to pursue seemingly easy, high-profile targets, including shafting some long-time vendors.”

Gelly: “But isn’t that just the way good businesses operate?”

Jordan: “Not really. Trump’s record as a businessman is not very good. Why GM was so remarkably successful for so many decades was not because it focused primarily on cost.”

Drone Man: “What did Smith do that was so wrong? I still don’t understand.”

Jordan: “His approach to generating profits was wrong. Smith put a bunch of bean counters in staff positions that had nothing to do with finance. Their job was to generate more profits, primarily by cutting cost and then cutting more cost.”

Gelly: “That sounds like the approach Trump and heads of agencies took. Keep cutting cost.”

Drone Man: “What’s wrong with cutting cost? All large organizations have fat, especially the government. You sound like some screaming liberal…or even worse some academic.”

Jordan: “And you sound like Trump with his immature tweets.”

Gelly: “Now children, let’s behave.”

Jordan: “Yes, mother. Anyway, in Smith’s obsession with profits, he forgot one thing…sustained profits are not generated from cutting costs. Sustained profits, and not just for GM but for any company, are generated from selling more product, whether cars and trucks or computers or shirts and sweaters. No organization can sustain itself without generating revenue.”

Gelly: “So what really happened at General Motors when Roger Smith was chairman? Is that the person who people called ‘Squeaky’?”

Jordan: “During Squeaky’s reign…I mean Smith’s reign in the 1980’s, GM lost 10 points of market share. Let put that in perspective. If annual car and truck sales are say 15 million units, then GM no longer produced and sold 1,500,000 sales units every single year.”

Drone Man: “Each year? That seems like a huge number…and lots of money down the drain.”

Jordan: “At the time it was the equivalent of about six (6) large assembly plants with thousands and thousands of people and suppliers. 1.5 million is more cars and truck than sold in the US by Chrysler, Honda, Toyota at the time and bunch of other manufacturers.”

Gelly: “Well, if GM lost those sales in the 1980’s, did the slide continue in the 1990’s?”

Jordan: “That’s the problem, once a slide like that starts, it’s very hard to stop. GM eventually declared bankruptcy. Before it started to rebound in about 2014, GM share was only about 1/3 of what it was just before Smith took over.”

Drone Man: “That’s amazing. They lost 2/3 of their market share?”

Jordan: “Just about 2/3, yes.”

Drone Man: “So, if sales and revenue decline, all those cuts in expenses mean nothing. If the revenue falls, then profit also falls and the organization does not come out ahead…and in the end can be worse off.”

Jordan: “Interesting dilemma, huh? I’m not saying you shouldn’t look for ways to cut cost, but people need to understand what generates revenue…and it’s not from cutting cost.”

Gelly: “For the government, revenue is from taxes. So, if the economy continues to stall or even sink, or people are not as productive and make less money, then the long-term effects are like what happened to GM. That doesn’t seem very appealing.”

Drone Man: “I’d never really connected the dots between the skills of the cabinet members and the possible effect on the country. It’s really important to have the right people in the right job.”

Jordan: “As I asked earlier, would you hire me to manage your brain surgery?”

Drone Man: “When I think about Trump’s picks for cabinet posts, most of them were ideologues opposed to the fundamental purpose of the agency. No wonder there were so many problems.”

Jordan: “No different from Roger Smith chosing people in GM who were focused on cutting cost and not generating revenue. As most of Trump’s cabinet didn’t understand government, most of Smith’s picks didn’t really understand the car business.”

Gelly: “And Trump selected people who were focused on destroying the very agency they were supposed to lead. Rather than making the agency better, they wanted to destroy it.”

Drone Man: “Unfortunately, the result for the country was about the same as GM…except rather than going bankrupt the US had the Revenge Revolution.”

Jordan: “Now you see why I called Trump’s cabinet the ‘Incompetent’s Club.’ They might have been smart in one field but they were like Larry, Moe and Curly in their government jobs.”

Drone Man: “And with that bit of wisdom, I need to disappear…this time for good. Gelly, Jordan, it’s been swell.”

#230 Post Revenge Revolution Lessons — Republican Economics – 3-Card Monte (Part 6)

11 Sunday Dec 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Economics, Lessons of Revolution

≈ Leave a comment

Gelly: “I’m headed to the break room. Jordan, your cup’s mostly full. Drone Man, would you like more coffee?

Drone Man: “Gelly, how ‘bout a stiff drink instead? All this talk about who ran up the debt is bothering me. Actually, coffee would be great. Thanks.”

(Drone Man and Jordan each check phones until Gelly returns with coffee.)

Drone Man: “Thanks. Gelly, you’re very kind…unlike your buddy here.”

Jordan: “C’mon, Drone Man, don’t take all this discussion personally.”

Drone Man: “How else can I take it? Your attacking my fundamental beliefs. On top of that I voted for Trump. I’m still asking myself why.”

Jordan: “So you made a mistake and voted for the Trumpster. Yes, the Trump administration was an absolute disaster. Look, we all make mistakes.”

Jordan: “But I should have known better. I let ideology override good, objective analysis.”

Gelly: “Are we getting sidetracked? I thought this conversation was to be about economic policy.”

Drone Man: “My fault. It’s hard to admit that you’ve been spouting the wrong line for so long. OK, Jordan, show me that chart you were talking about.”

Jordan: “You mean the chart with US debt as a percent of GDP?”

Drone Man: “Yes. The debt percentage is what you were pounding into me a few minutes ago. Really should look at the chart but I’m afraid to.”

Jordan: “Here’s the chart.”

Drone Man: “How do I interpret this chart?”

Greenie: “May I try to explain this. Doing so will make sure I understand.”

Jordan: “Good idea. Go ahead.”

Gelly: “When calculating the percentage, the numerator is total outstanding debt and the denominator is gross domestic product, aka GDP, for the year.”

Drone Man: “Gelly, don’t confuse me. Have you turned into some kind of math whiz? Numerator, denominator.”

Gelly: “You know, Drone Man, total government debt outstanding at the end of the year divided by the GDP for the year. That gives you the percentage debt to GDP.”

Drone Man: “Debt for the year or total debt? Makes a big difference.”

Gelly: “Total debt. You know, like the sum of how much you owe on credit cards, car loans, mortgage, and whatever else. Right, Jordan?”

Jordan: “You got it. Keep going.”

Gelly: “So if total debt goes up during the year but GDP grows even faster, then the percentage decreases. The percent also declines if the country pays off some of the debt.”

Drone Man: “OK, so the chart shows some percentage – ‘a’ divided by ‘b’. Debt divided by GDP. But even if percentage declines, the amount of debt can go up, right? More debt is bad. Where’s the chart of total debt?”

Jordan: “Tell me why you think more debt by itself is automatically bad.”

Drone Man: “It just is. My gut tells me it is.”

Jordan: “Let’s say you’re a banker. What do bankers do?”

Drone Man: “They take your deposits…and they lend money to other people or businesses.”

Jordan: “Well, Mr. Banker, you have two customers who want to borrow $100,000,000.”

Drone Man: “OK, I’m the banker…and it must be a big bank. Who are the two customers?”

Jordan: “Say Gelly is one…and the other is Warren Buffett.”

Drone Man: “No offense, Gelly, but you don’t make the cut for the 100 mil. But Buffett? He gets the loan.”

Gelly: “I’m not offended, Drone Man, but why lend $100,000,000 to Warren Buffett?”

Drone Man: “Simple. He’s got enough income and assets to pay back the bank. Paying back $100 mil and he wouldn’t even break a sweat.”

Jordan: “So, as long as someone has enough income or assets to pay back the note, having debt is OK?”

Drone Man: “Sure. I’d lend Buffett $500,000,000 in a heartbeat. He’s really no risk.”

Jordan: “If you’d lend to Mr. Buffett, then why are you concerned about lending to the US government? The US government is actually a better credit risk than Buffett – he can’t print money and the US Treasury can.”

Drone Man: “Why are you always trying to trap me with these arguments? Besides the US government has been reckless in running up the debt. Buffett’s been very careful and very conservative financially. That’s why there should be a conservative in the White House.”

Jordan: “Let’s go back to what we talked about earlier and see which administrations have been reckless in running up the debt.”

Drone Man: “A few minutes ago (Entry #229), you tried to tell me Reagan ran up the debt. But look at your chart. At the end of Reagan’s term debt as a percent of GDP was only about 50%. At the end of Obama’s term it was about 110%. That proves Obama was reckless and the cause of all the debt problems. Just look at your own data. See?”

Jordan: “Let’s look at this bar chart. It’s the same data as the line chart but formatted differently. The bars represent the relative increase in debt as a percent of GDP for every president since Carter. The height of the bar represents how much more debt as a percent GDP was there at the end of an administration compared to debt at the beginning of an administration.”

Drone Man: “Before we go farther, what’s this ‘relative increase’ stuff you’re talking about? Another way of distorting the truth?”

Jordan: “Drone Man, do you think I would lie to you?”

Drone Man: “No, but I just want to make sure I understand. Gelly, tell me what he’s talking about. I can understand you.”

Gelly: “Think of ‘relative increase’ like this. Your mother makes a pie. You and your brother each get a slice that equals 25%, or ¼ of the pie. Then your brother asks for more and your mother gives him another slice, another ¼ of the pie. You object. Your mother says she only gave him another 25% or ¼ of the pie, and for you to be quiet.”

Drone Man: “She’s wrong. He didn’t get just 25% more. He got twice as much as I did. He got 100% more than I did.”

Gelly: “Now you understand the term ‘relative increase.’ Your brother’s relative increase was not 25% but 100%.”

Drone Man: “Ok. I got it. Thanks Gelly. Back to your bar chart. If I’m reading the first bar correctly, under Carter debt as a percent of GDP declined.”

Gelly: “That’s correct.”

Drone Man: “Then under Reagan, the relative increase in debt as a percent of GDP was about 60%. You said that before but I didn’t believe it.”

Jordan: “If you add Bush 41 to Reagan and compare against when Reagan took office, then debt went up more than 100%. You can’t just add up the bars since you have to compare end of Bush 41 against end of Carter’s term.”

Drone Man: “Why hasn’t anyone ever told me this? I’ve always been lead to believe that Reagan was a fiscal conservative. He spent money like a drunken sailor.”

Gelly: “Careful. My nephew is a sailor.”

Drone Man: “Look at the Clinton years. Debt went down. Under Bush 43 it shot up again. Why?”

Jordan: “Bush implemented tax cuts biased toward higher incomes. The tax cuts didn’t help middle and lower-income families and the economy really didn’t grow fast enough to offset the loss in revenue from tax cuts. Now you know why professional economists keep saying that trickle-down economics doesn’t work. Bush 41 called it ‘voodoo economics.’ I think of trickle down, or supply-side economics, more as a 3-card money game. You think you should win but only the shills win. You always seem to lose.”

Drone Man: “This chart is awful!”

Jordan: “What’s awful about it, Drone Man?”

Drone Man: “I’ve been bamboozled all these years. Are you sure these numbers are right?”

Jordan: “Yep.”

Drone Man: “OK, then I confess. I’ve been wrong a long time about the Republicans’ economic policy. Tax cuts concentrated at the top aren’t the silver bullet for economic growth.”

Gelly: “Want a refill Drone Man?

Drone Man: “No I gotta go and get back to my niece’s tour group. I hate to say this, guys, but thanks for the lesson in economics. And the lesson for me — no more Republican 3-card monte games.”

(To be continued)

#229 Post Revenge Revolution: Lessons Learned – Economic Policy Fundamentals: Taxes (Part 5)

04 Sunday Dec 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Economics, Federal Budget, Gov't Policy, Lessons of Revolution

≈ 2 Comments

Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC, start of work day. (Conversation starts Entry #225)

Jordan: “Gelly, whenever you’re ready let’s continue the discussions about lessons learned from the Revenge Revolution. We’re supposed to talk about economic policy.”

Gelly: “We can start as soon as a friend of yours arrives.”

Jordan: “What? Friend visiting? There are no meetings scheduled now.”

Gelly: “Drone Man just called and asked if he could stop by. He should be by shortly. Is that OK?”

Jordan: “Of course. Besides, he and I have periodic conversations about economic policy. Interested to see if he’s changed his position since the Revenge Revolution.”

Gelly: “Speaking of Mr. Drone Man.”

Drone Man: “Gelly, Jordan, nice to see you.”

Jordan: “Nice to see you Drone Man. What brings you to the DC, or the Swamp as the Trumpsters called it?”

Drone Man: “Probably still a swamp, even after Trump. I’m here because my granddaughter had a field trip to Washington and she wanted me to be a chaperone. I’ve got a couple of free hours and thought it might be fun to stop by and chat.”

Jordan: “Your timing is perfect. Gelly and I have been discussing lessons learned from the Revenge Revolution. Next on the list is economic policy — taxes.”

Drone Man: “May I participate? I’ll try to be polite.”

Gelly: “So, Jordan, you were going to explain some of the fundamentals of good economic policy, starting with taxes.”

Drone Man: “Gelly, all you need to know about economic policy is two words. You don’t need to know anything else. The two words are ‘tax cuts.’”

Jordan: “Forever the Trumpster, despite all that went wrong under that administration. Let’s take Drone Man’s two-word policy and see if it works.”

Drone Man: “Of course tax cuts work. Tax cuts always work. Talking to you liberals is so frustrating. Why don’t you admit we’re right!”

Gelly: “Oh boys, I thought this was supposed to be a civilized conversation.”

Jordan: “You’re right Gelly. Here’s the premise for why tax cuts supposedly work. The tax rate on the wealthiest in the US is too high. By lowering the tax rate, the wealthiest will invest more money and create jobs for those with middle and lower incomes.”

Gelly: “You mean like the benefits of tax cuts for the rich somehow trickle down to the rest of us?”

Jordan: “Yes, that’s the theory. It’s also what Bush 41 called voodoo economics.”

Drone Man: “Cut the editorializing and keep to the theory, please.”

Jordan: “The added investment associated with the tax cuts would create more jobs, which in turn would create more taxes and the added taxes from the middle and lower-income families would more than offset tax cuts for the wealthier. Did I explain the theory about right Drone Man?”

Drone Man: “Close enough.”

Gelly: “I have what’s probably a really dumb question.”

Jordan: “I’m sure the question is not dumb. Fire away.”

Gelly: “Once taxes are cut, then the wealthy people are supposed to invest the extra money. But where do they invest it?”

Drone Man: “More factories to make more goods. They hire more people. That’s where all the extra jobs come from…and then the extra tax revenue flows back to the government. It’s so easy to understand.”

Gelly: “Here’s what I don’t understand. If middle and lower-income people only have a little bit more money to spend…or maybe no more money to spend after the tax cuts…then who’s going to buy all the extra products the new factories make?”

Jordan: “Good question. How ‘bout that Drone Man?”

Drone Man: “What’s not to understand?”

Gelly: “Let me ask the question this way. Drone Man, if you owned a business, under what conditions would you invest and expand the business?”

Drone Man: “I’d expand when I thought demand for the company’s products was going to exceed production capacity.”

Gelly: “Would you expand if customers could not afford to buy more of your products?”

Drone Man: “Of course not. That would be stupid. The idea of ‘build it and they will come’ only happens in the movies. What was the name of that movie about some baseball diamond in a cornfield?”

Gelly: “You mean ‘Field of Dreams’?”

Drone Man: “That’s the one. ‘Field of Dreams.’ No business can operate like that.”

Gelly: “Jordon also mentioned ‘Field of Dreams’ to me.”

Drone Man: “At least we agree on something.”

Gelly: “If I understand both of you correctly, business owners, even if they have more personal income…say through a tax cut…aren’t going to expand their business unless…”

Drone Man: “…unless demand is going to increase and outstrip capacity. Why can’t you guys understand this?”

Gelly: “Then why would a tax cut that disproportionately favors the wealthy cause these owners to make more…what do the accountants call it, capital investments? Why wouldn’t the business owners just put the money in the bank or the stock market? Tell me what I’m missing?”

Jordan: “Now Drone Man, tell Gelly what’s wrong with her logic?”

Drone Man: “OK, so the wealthy probably won’t increase capital spending and instead purchase bonds or stocks.”

Gelly: “Here’s another dumb question. Why wouldn’t putting more money in the pockets of middle and lower-income families create more demand than giving more money to the wealthy? It seems logical the lower and middle-income people would spend most of the extra money. Then the additional spending would create extra demand and allow the wealthy business owners to build more factories…and make even more money?”

Jordan: “Gelly, how much someone spends of an extra dollar received is called the marginal propensity to consume, or MPC.”

Gelly: “You said to remember the letters MPC. So I assume this MPC, or marginal propensity to consume, is higher for lower and middle-income families? If someone who doesn’t have much money gets $1,000, they’ll spend most of it. To someone who’s rich, $1,000 is probably a rounding error and they won’t spend it, right?”

Jordan: “You got it. Now Drone Man, what about Gelly’s analysis? Wouldn’t the economy be better off if the tax cuts or government spending were directed at people who would spend the money and help the economy grow rather than people who will put the money in stocks or bonds?”

Drone Man: “OK Gelly, you’re right…I mean you might be right. I mean, no you’re not right. Tax cuts for the wealthy have proved to be a way to sustain growth in the economy.”

Jordan: “Really? You have some hard evidence?”

Drone Man: “Look at what Reagan did. He cut taxes and the economy grew.”

Jordan: “What if I said Clinton raised taxes and the economy grew even more? Plus there was a budget surplus under Clinton and a huge deficit under Reagan. In fact under Reagan…and Bush 41/43… growth in the deficit as a percent of GDP was proportionately much higher than under Obama. In fact, under the so-called fiscally conservative Reagan-like Republicans, the debt as a percent of GDP increased more than 150%. The increase would have been much higher if Clinton hadn’t had a budget surplus and lowered debt as a percent of GDP. Here, let me dig out a chart and show you.”

Drone Man: “I don’t need to see your phony chart based on made-up data. You have your facts, I have mine.”

Jordan: “Excuse me, Drone Man? You’re claiming data about the deficit and GDP are fabricated? You think the there are multiple sets of economic data?”

Drone Man: “What I know is what I know…and I know I’m right. I don’t need some liberals so-called economic data. It’s always biased. Why did I stop by here?”

(To be continued)

#228 Post Revenge Revolution: Lessons Learned — Presidential Physical, Mental Exams (Part 4)

27 Sunday Nov 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Lessons of Revolution, Societal Issues

≈ Leave a comment

Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC, start of work day. (Conversation starts Entry #225)

Gelly: “Jordan, could we hold off the discussion about lessons learned re economic policy decisions and the Revenge Revolution?

Jordan: “Sure, but why?”

Gelly: “Something about presidential elections has bothered me for a long time.”

Jordan: “Such as?”

Gelly: “Why aren’t presidential candidates subject to an impartial, rigorous physical exam…and mental exam? I mean. Given the responsibilities of the president you’d think…”

Jordan: “…excuse me but let me back up. Did you say presidential candidates should be subject to a rigorous physical and mental exam?”

Gelly: “Yes, and here’s why.”

Jordan: “But there’s already a provision in the Constitution to address your concern. If something happens to the president, the vice president takes over.”

Gelly: “I understand. If the president dies, there is a clear line of succession. A dead president makes it easy. I think everyone supports the VP as successor.”

Jordan: “Then what is the issue?”

Gelly: “Really, the issue is when the president is not dead but mentally incapacitated. There are no clear rules so the line of succession does not necessarily apply.”

Jordan: “You have an example?”

Gelly: “Ronald Reagan, toward the end of the second term…and probably earlier…showed signs of Alzheimer’s. Nancy Reagan tried to mask the problem. And credit to her, I think she did a good job.”

Jordan: “You’re getting on thin ice discussing mental acuity. How are you…rather how are we the public…going to measure mental acuity?”

Gelly: “You know I’m not a psychiatrist or any kind of medical doctor. But there must be some tests for early-stage dementia — Alzheimer’s or whatever.”

Jordan: “Reagan was president in the 1980’s. Your example is what more than 30 years ago?”

Gelly: “We have a more recent case…at least I think so.”

Jordan: “If I do a quick review of presidents since Reagan, the only one who seems to qualify as one of your ‘dementia candidates’ is Donald Trump.”

Gelly: “You’re right. And here’s my logic. First, his father, Fred Trump, had Alzheimer’s. I read that in his obituary in the NY Times. (trump-fred-obituary-nyt) Not sure if Trump’s mother had Alzheimer’s.”

Jordan: “From what I’ve read, the chances of having Alzheimer’s are greater if one parent has Alzheimer’s. Even higher likelihood with two. But still, even with two parents that’s not a guarantee. What else?”

Gelly: “Look at his pattern of behavior – before the campaign, during the campaign and after becoming president. Each period he exhibited an inability or unwillingness to concentrate and/or study.”

Jordan: “C’mon, a number of people have trouble concentrating or studying.”

Gelly: “True. But those people are not running for president…or elected president.”

Jordan: “What are you basing your conclusion on?”

Gelly: “To me the most striking behavior was how Trump’s position on an issue seemed to reflect ideas of the last person he talked to. Trump would proclaim one position then change his position after talking to someone with a different view. Then he might change again after talking to someone else. No one knew which Donald Trump was going to show up. Just listen to some of the White House staffers talk about the chaos that was created by the inconsistency of positions.”

Jordan: “Maybe that behavior is characteristic of a person who changes as he or she studies the issue. What else?”

Gelly: “Jordan, quit being so PC. What was equally scary was his seeming inability to comprehend complex issues. When presented with complex problems, he was like a deer-in-the-headlights – frozen.”

Jordan: “Many of his supporters thought Trump was able to simplify issues that others made complicated.”

Gelly: “People who thought that way either didn’t understand reality or didn’t want to face facts about Trump’s mental capacity.”

Jordan: “What else?”

Gelly: “Trump could not stand any criticism…so thin-skinned. Complex issues could not be openly discussed and decided because the ‘decider-in-chief’ relied on either ‘gut feel’ or the last person’s opinion rather than objective analysis. When someone challenged Trump’s opinion, he would often act like a bully, openly humiliating the person…sometimes even on Twitter. You cannot run an organization like that, let alone a country.”

Jordan: “Maybe his management style was bad but do you think that behavior is a symptom of dementia?”

Gelly: “What I know is this. The kind of behavior Trump exhibited…not just once but consistently over time…put the US and many countries at great risk. The behavior seemed to be outside the bounds of what I’ve read most psychiatrists consider ‘normal,’ with ‘normal’ constituting a very wide band.”

Jordan: “Well, there’s little doubt that some of his erratic behavior contributed to the Revenge Revolution. Not the only cause, obviously, but certainly a major factor. Is the lesson that we should take away — presidential candidates need to receive a thorough and objective physical and mental exam?”

Gelly: “Yes. Ideally the exam would be private and before the candidate made any public announcement. So if the exam suggested potential problems, the candidate could consider not announcing.”

Jordan: “Gelly, your idea is thought-provoking. A great next step would be to get people talking about the mental health of the president. Won’t be easy but it might catch hold. Now, can we get back to lessons learned from economic policy decisions?”

To be continued)

#227 Post Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 3)

19 Saturday Nov 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Causes of the Revolution, Lessons of Revolution, Stupid Is as Stupid Does

≈ Leave a comment

Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC, start of work day. (Conversation starts Entry #225))

Gelly: “Jordan, what was that word you just used? Some kind of ‘tocracy’?”

Jordan: “Kasistocracy. Means government run by unsuitable people or a government that is unsuitable.”

Gelly: “Are you suggesting the Trump Administration was a…say that word again.”

Jordan: “Kas-is-toc-racy.”

Gelly: “Yes, the Trump Administration was a kasistocracy. Is that what you you’re implying?”

Jordan: “That’s not just my assessment. Many people in the US feel that way as do many US allies.”

Gelly: “I admit many actions by the Trump Administration at the beginning were a bit unusual.”

Jordan: “Gelly, you’ve gone from being blunt a few minutes ago to being Ms. Diplomat. You think the actions were just ‘a bit unusual’?”

Gelly: “OK, I’ll be less PC. The actions, starting with the Trump Transition Team, were stupid.”

Jordan: “Now, at least Trump is getting the same treatment I get from you and JC.”

Gelly: “Whoever was advising Trump, and likely Trump himself, had no clue about the breadth and depth of the task that needed to be done before Inauguration Day.”

Jordan: “The turnover of staff made it worse. The coup de gras…maybe the coup de gras of stupidity…was the VP-elect Mike Pence, who was supposed to be heading the transition team full-time, deciding to remain governor of Indiana until just before Inauguration Day.”

Gelly: “Pence deserved the ‘Stupid Is as Stupid Does’ award for that move. He reminded me Goofy. What was he thinking?”

Jordan: “Unfortunately, the Trump Administration dug itself a hole so deep before Inauguration Day it was never able to recover. It’s not as if the Obama Administration and others inside the Beltway didn’t try to help. Most of the people and many of the ideas were just ignored. Instead, I think most of the appointments were more like Trump lap dogs.”

Gelly: “The Trump kasistocracy…I love that word…increased frustration among voters, especially those who thought Trump was going to change Washington in a good way. So voter frustration increased…and voila, the Revenge Revolution…and Trump was fired.”

Jordan: “What’s the lesson from the Trump Administration so a kasistocracy does not happen again?”

Gelly: “Maybe the US needs to drop the Electoral College and go to a system where the presidential candidate with the majority of votes is declared the winner.”

Jordan: “Think that would prevent a kasistocracy?”

Gelly: “I don’t know. But in the span of 16 years there were two presidents elected who did not win the popular vote – Bush 43 and Trump. Do you know the last time that happened before Bush 43?”

Jordan: “As a matter of fact, I do. In 1888, Benjamin Harrison beat Grover Cleveland. It happened a couple of other times before 1888.”

Gelly: “Harrison to Bush 43 was 112 years. Then Bush to Trump was 16 years.”

Jordan: “If presidents were elected based on popular vote, I think that would quell some of the frustration of the side that garners the most votes but ends up losing the election.”

Gelly: “Agreed. However, I’ll bet people could live with the Electoral College if the quality of the candidates improved.”

Jordan: “The lesson might really be – improve the quality of the candidates. If so, then how?”

Gelly: “This might sound naïve but educating the public about issues would be a great start.”

Jordan: “As part of that plan, what about eliminating private funding of presidential elections? Let the Federal government fund presidential elections.”

Gelly: “Wouldn’t public funding be contrary to the Citizens United case?”

Jordan: “Yes, but we are post Revenge Revolution and have a new Congress…well, mostly new. Let Congress pass a bill to have the Federal government fund presidential elections. I can’t think of any Constitutional issues that can’t be addressed.”

Gelly: “If there is Federal funding, there should be an increase in the number of debates. And the debates should be about real issues. If public debates were increased and public advertising decreased, then the candidates could speak in more depth about issues. If they phrased an answer awkwardly or even made a mistake, they could correct the mistake in a subsequent debate. A minor slip now gets blown way out of proportion.”

Jordan: “Along those lines but a bit more esoteric, is the need to eliminate false equivalency.”

Gelly: “False equivalency meaning…”

Jordan: “When groups, and even the media, claim that two opposing positions on an issue should be considered equally legitimate.”

Gelly: “You mean like global warming?”

Jordan: “Good example. And like certain tax policies. There are other examples as well.”

Gelly: “What needs to be done to eliminate, or reduce, false equivalency?”

Jordan: “Both sides need to be challenged to provide evidence to support their position.”

Gelly: “So, for global warming the people who claim global warming has been caused by the effects of the industrial revolution, or at least made worse by the Industrial Revolution, they could use such data as the rate of increase in mean temperature per year over the last 125-150 years and/or the slope of CO2 concentration over the same period. The increase in the slope of both those curves indicates a major change has occurred.”

Jordan: “Compare that data set to those who claim global warming is a hoax perpetuated by 3,000+ scientists, a hoax by the Chinese or some other sinister group. Where are the data to support the argument? None exists.”

Gelly: “So you’re saying why should the naysayers get any airtime until they have some evidence, right?”

Jordan: “The naysayers can get airtime but the media need to be relentless in prodding the quacks to provide evidence. No allowing midnight tweets, including the president’s tweets, to be considered credible evidence.”

Gelly: “OK, then what about tax policy? Deciding which arguments about appropriate tax policy seems less clear.”

Jordan: “I agree that there is no hard evidence on some issues. But for other issues there are lots of solid data.”

Gelly: “Such as?”

Jordan: “Take trickle-down economics, or as Bush 41 called it, ‘voodoo economics.’ Bush 41 was spot on. There is no credible evidence of any country experiencing sustained economic growth based on trickle-down economics. Concentrating tax cuts with the rich does not trickle down and create significant job growth. Tax cuts for the rich concentrates wealth and can make the country poorer, not richer.”

Gelly: “Really? There’s no supporting evidence for trickle-down economics?”

Jordan: “Think about the theory? Give more money to the rich and they will magically create jobs. Why would they? No reasonable company or CEO is going to expand a facility or build a new facility without the prospect of an increase in demand. People need more income if they’re going to increase demand for goods and services. The only time trickle-down economics works — ‘build it and they will come’ — is in the movie, ‘Field of Dreams.’”

Gelly: “You need to tell me more. This is an important lesson.”

Jordan: “Let’s take a break but remember the letters MPC.”

(To be continued)

#226 Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 2)

14 Monday Nov 2016

Posted by Jordan Abel in Causes of the Revolution, Lessons of Revolution

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Lessons of Revolution

Scene: Jordan’s office, Washington, DC, start of work day. (Conversation starts Entry #225)

Gelly: “Jordan, ready to get back to work?”

Jordan: “All set. So far, we’ve discussed two lessons learned from the Revenge Revolution: (i) politicians need to act more rationally, and not act like Larry, Moe and Curley; (ii) people have a right to vote. No more suppressing rights of eligible voters. What’s next on your list of lessons?”

Gelly: “People started to understand the Constitution. That might sound silly but…”

Jordan: “That’s an interesting point. Any examples?”

Gelly: “One that stands out for me is the difference between the perception of the power of the president and the power granted in the Constitution. No question the president has enormous power to make change, but the power is much more limited than many people think…or at least used to think.”

Jordan: “Be more specific, please.”

Gelly: “To me what’s laughable…and in a way tragic…is how many Trump supporters in 2016 kept claiming that if Clinton were elected president, she would somehow overturn the 2^nd Amendment and take away all their toys, I mean guns.”

Jordan: “What was their rationale? How was she going to overturn the 2^nd Amendment?”

Gelly: “That’s the laughable part. I guess she was going to wave some magic wand.”

Jordan: “Like the wicked witch of the West?”

Gelly: “Presidents can’t run around an issue some Executive Order overturning part of the Constitution. Overturning an Amendment is nearly impossible. Did the Trumpsters ever listen in school? They should have learned the fundamentals of the Constitution in 7^th or 8^th grade.”

Jordan: “What else is on your list?”

Gelly: “Let’s stick with Trump. I think he realized…although it was some time after he took office…that the government does not operate like a business, and especially a family controlled business.”

Jordan: “You mean the CEO can’t just go around mandating that money should be spent on this project or to build that wall…or whatever? And do you mean that people in government aren’t just good little soldiers and jump up, salute and carry out the CEO’s orders?”

Gelly: “That realization must have been a shock to his system, and many of his supporters. Didn’t they understand that expenditures for the Federal Government are initiated and passed by the House? Not the White House but the House of Representatives. Clearly, the Donald was not used having someone else decide if, when and how much money could be spent on a particular project.”

Jordan: “Probably the only time someone put him on a tight budget was after he declared bankruptcy and the lenders forced him.”

Gelly: “Here’s another one that must have been a shock to Trump and many supporters. Being president is not the same as being on a TV show. Other than a few direct reports, the president can’t hire or fire anyone. Even many of the direct reports have to be approved by the Senate.”

Jordan: “You think he understood the many of the limitations of the presidency…let’s call them operational limitations?”

Gelly: “He probably had some vague idea but let’s not forget that the Donald had no…as in zero…experience in any key management role other than a family controlled business.”

Jordan: “You’re right. And even very large family controlled organizations are tiny compared to the Federal government. Government is a different game and Federal government is vastly more complicated.”

Gelly: “So the post-Revenge Revolution lesson is a simple one that I think people are starting to understand. The lesson is…”

Jordan: “…let me try. When candidates make bold claims during a campaign, the voting public needs to probe the candidate to understand how and why he or she will be successful in implementing the claim. No more getting away with just arm waving and lots of vague statements.”

Gelly: “Good boy, Jordan. Want a rawhide treat?”

Jordan: “Why do you and JC harass me?”

Gelly: “You’re such an easy target. Seriously, here’s another lesson — economics. Wanna guess what the lesson is?”

Jordan: “Claims for creating jobs, implementing tax cuts, reducing the deficit…and whatever else…make sure the approach is realistic and the numbers add up.”

Gelly: “Exactly. Let’s start with Trump’s claim to bring back manufacturing jobs so the under-employed or unemployed workers in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and elsewhere could work again. I mean really. What a crock.”

Jordan: “C’mon. You’re being too hard on Trump. All politicians shade the truth, a least a bit.”

Gelly: “His claims about reclaiming old-line manufacturing were not little bitty exaggerations but ‘pants-on-fire’ lies. It took a while for the Trumpsters to realize the old-line manufacturing jobs were gone…not just shifted to Mexico or China…but gone forever.”

Jordan: “I agree. The type of jobs in manufacturing are radically different from 20-30 years ago.”

Gelly: “Recently, my younger sister asked me to help chaperone her daughter’s class field trip to an auto assembly plant. I said yes because I thought it might be fun. Besides, it was for my niece.”

Jordan: “And…?”

Gelly: “The assembly plant is a different world from what I remember as a kid when our class visited an assembly plant. Rather than a bunch of people, which is what we saw, now there are a bunch of robots. Robots seemed to being doing most everything. There were some people…but not very many.”

Jordan: “And you know what? The robots don’t take lunch breaks, restroom breaks or vacations, or require healthcare benefits. Plus, using the robots improves consistency and overall quality.”

Gelly: “Has every manufacturing segment replaced people with robots?”

Jordan: “In varying degrees. And the number of robots and capabilities of robots is only going to increase.”

Gelly: “Then where did Trump think the old-line manufacturing people were going to work – making buggies and buggy whips?”

Jordan: “Who knows what he thought? But this we do know. The Trumpsters got very frustrated when the jobs didn’t come back.”

Gelly: “And just like they were a driving force in electing Trump. The old-line manufacturing guys were a driving force in leading the Revenge Revolution.”

Jordan: “Are you saying the Trump Administration was a kakistocracy?”

usrevolution5

~ USA Headed for a 5th Revolution! Why?

Category Archives: Lessons of Revolution

#246 Who Took Out the Donald? (Part 3)

#245 Trump Taken Out – Why? Follow the Money (Part 2)

#244 Recall When the Donald Was Taken Out

#233 Is Revenge Revolution Still Likely? Yes, Outlook Worse. (Part 2 of 2)

#231 Lessons from Revenge Revolution: Trump’s ‘Incompetents Club’ Cabinet (Part 7 of 7)

#230 Post Revenge Revolution Lessons — Republican Economics – 3-Card Monte (Part 6)

#229 Post Revenge Revolution: Lessons Learned – Economic Policy Fundamentals: Taxes (Part 5)

#228 Post Revenge Revolution: Lessons Learned — Presidential Physical, Mental Exams (Part 4)

#227 Post Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 3)

#226 Revenge Revolution: Some Lessons Learned (Part 2)