The message forum is an ongoing dialogue between classmates. There are no items, topics, subtopics, etc.

Forums work when people participate - so don't be bashful! Click the "Post Message" button to add your entry to the forum.

Mary Margaret Clark (Schultheis)

Thank you Mike for weighing in on this topic and pushing me to better articulate my deep-seated concerns about America's drift, over many decades, toward the incremental spread of socialism into the principles of our republican-styled government.  

I have always held the belief that a small decentralized federal government is necessary for the flourishing of individual freedoms and self-determination.  Over many decades and throughout many changes in our governing political parties, this fundamental idea of our Constitution has become derailed.  Only over the course of the last twelve years, have I come to understand how much my own political ignorance and political apathy has contributed to this state.  

When government is small and limited, undertaking onty those policies that nearly every citizen can agree on - for example -.the imposition of taxation to finance the defense of our country and the protection of lives - then a democratic republic works relatively well.  This is because the number of areas on which the majority of voters and the policy makers need to agree on is small.  Contrast this with when government authority expands unchecked into more and more areas of the citizens' daily lives - such as decisions about health care, nutrition, housing, education, and work (many of which are areas that you mentioned) - agreement among the majority of citizens becomes impractical.  

My question and serious concern is how much individual self-expression and how much self-determination can be tolerated by any central authority (democratic socialism or not) when attempting to implement some plan as overarching as, say, single-payer healthcare (Medicare for All)?  Centralized government planning necessarily supplants personal planning, and as the sphere of our personal autonomy weakens and shrinks, the scope of governmental authority expands and grows. More socialism means less democratic freedom.

It was Toqueville who said, "Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality.  But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude".  

Michael McLeod

I think if I was afraid of socialized medicine I'd want to check in with people in the countries that have it before jumping to conclusions.  

I have two friends who are studying abroad and fell seriously ill and they got much, much better care overseas than they would have in this country. (One of the countries was Scotland. It's actually a two-tier system, public and private)  The other was in the mideast. I'll think of it in a sec). And I've been reading about how those systems operate and nowhere do I see people talking about how they've been robbed of their individuality and turned into compliant robots.

Perhaps this will give you the chance to further clarify your arguments, MM. No offense but they are long on speculation and generalization, and short on specific examples to support those generalities.

I'm happy as hell to have medicare. I'm also happy my son has obamacare.

Timothy Lavelle

Why do people want change? Should they be allowed to fight for change?

Imagine what it would be like to grow up in a country that professed the importance of the American Dream while you knew every morning you woke up that that Dream did not apply to you or your children.  You might think about any sort of change that would allow movement from the status quo. 

Thank you Mike n Mike. I don't come here to 'splain socialism or to make far right conservative people comfortable. An observation: Nothing in our country is the same as it was in 1776 but we should all give the Founding Fathers control of every last thought or action we take. We should never try to find a better way though that's all they were trying to do. 

"It was good enough for Mom", why investigate change? Ask Harvey W. if what was good enough for Mom is OK now. Times actually do change. People get tired of the same old BS lies and evil treatment. 

So, I'd like to underline my earlier point and offer a business opportunity to all my classmates. I believe there will be a huge demand coming for t-shirts that say  "Donny, YOU'RE FIRED". Send business plans! 

Mary Margaret Clark (Schultheis)

Tim....no one, as far as I know, asked anyone to make "far right" conservative people feel comfortable.  An opinion was voiced by you, to which a respectful response was offered  You don't agree. That is what freedom allows....dissenting opinions and the right to express them. 

Jeanine Eilers (Decker)

Tim--you make my day!  Wish you lived closer.

Linda Weiner (Bennett)

Clasmates, 

Not fun post, but just FYI:

Mickey McClintock Ranke's spouse, Dennis, has passed to new life: 

http://www.hillfuneral.com/obituaries-services/obits-photos/811/condolences/#c4849

link to leave message for family.  

"Weiner"

Janie Albright (Blank)

Speaking of Lance Decker, Jeanine's husband, I recently posted a photo of Jeanine and Lance that I took when they visited me when their cruise ship stopped in Puerto Vallarta.  Now Lance has sent me some photos he took of us. Not to make you jealous but...

Michael McLeod

My girlfriend's daughter, Jessica, who had been working in Beijing, quit her job and got home just last night. Well that didn't happen in one fell swoop but no sense in going all the excrutiating details.  It felt like a twin homecoming to me because not only did she return but I got my girlfriend back. Denise was so preoccupied and sick with worry she had become distant -- she wasn't, as they say, herself.  I tried not to take personally but this not a thinking thing we're talking about here; it's a feeling thing. Emotions are a different animal, one that whispers scary things in your ear. My emotions, shitheads that they are, kept telling me I was losing my girlfriend. That's what it felt like though I never told her as much. Sure I'm in my 70s but hearts don't age like the rest of us does. When she called me last night telling me she'd just brought Jessica home from the airport, the tone in her voice, the aliveness, the Denise I knew was back, just snap, like that, no longer putting me in mind of a character out of Night of the Living Dead.

Her daughter's sector of Beijing was unaffected by the virus itself but on lock down like the rest of the country. The place was a ghost town. Imagine a city the size of LA - Beijing is so huge that a single sector of the city is that large - suddenly being absolutely deserted. Nobody on the streets but security cameras and monitors everywhere. Unseen robotic voices calling you out if you turn up outside without a mask.When she got in the cab to go to the airport in Beijing there was a device inside that took her temperature as a means of seeing if she was sick.  Just the dystopian psychology of it is enough to make you feel sick at heart even if you're still healthy physically. Once she settles in I may contact the newspaper down here or write it up myself. Her experience would make a good story. She has to stay home for two weeks - that's what the cdc recommends. But she took good care of herself and I'm actually grateful for all the draconian measures that China put in place to keep the virus at bay.

Meanwhile wash your hands a LOT. Best thing you can do. Maybe stash away some masks and hand sanitizers. 

More later.

Mark Schweickart

Mike -- so glad your (sort-of) stepdaughter made it home safely and in good health. We all can't help but  be thankful that our fearless leader had the foresight to trump the virus by firing his global health response team a couple of years ago. Effective downsizing, no?

Visions of pandemics only further contributes to the way our mortality seems to be ever more present in our conciousness these days. At least for me it seems to be. I suppose it is unavoidanble as we plow (stumble, limp?) into our 70's. In my case, I am especially reminded of it because of the ordeal my brother Tom is going through, battling a brain tumor.

Anyway, being in a bit of a nostalgic mood, thinking about my family and our younger days, I thought I'd share this song I did for my three youngest siblings, when the oldest of three, Barbara, turned 60 a few years ago. I am hoping my family photos from the fifties will ring a nostalgic bell for all of you other oldsters as well. There were seven siblings in my family and since there was a bit of an age gap between the 4 older and 3 younger, the older sibs referred to the younger ones collectively as "the caboose." Hence the song's tiltle.

David Mitchell

Sweet memories Mark,

Cute photos.

So, you were the third of seven? Do I have that right?

John Jackson

It’s midnight as I write this and, as I read it over, it’s way too long – insomniacs in the class of ’66, this is my gift to you - if you're inclined to read it, save it for bedtime reading tonight.

I was in Chicago with my wife last week helping our daughter with her newborn plus her two and four year olds and barely had time to tie my shoes (a potentially life-threatening-accident-waiting-to-happen situation for people our age) so I missed the political melee on this Forum last week.  But now after this week’s coronavirus developments and stock market meltdown (aren’t we all feeling really confident about our president’s reassurances and our IRA’s and 401K’s?), I have some thoughts about the economic miracle that Trump claims to have wrought.

The economy as a whole has been healthy during the three years since Trump took office, but Trump inherited a strong economy from Obama and if you compare the stats for Trump’s three years in office to the last three tears of Obama’s it’s hard to see much of a difference.  It’s absolutely true that the economy was rocky in Obama’s first few years but he inherited an economy in the worst recession since the Great Depression and you don’t turn that around overnight.

But Obama helped to turn the economy around by making good choices, more or less (no one gets it perfectly right).  My favorite example is the bailout of GM and Chrysler who would have undoubtedly gone under, taking with them millions of jobs (if you count their suppliers) and a huge chunk of the U.S economy.  The federal government provided large infusions of cash and got in return significant (almost majority) ownership of both companies.  This was opposed by most Republicans who argued from conservative ideology that companies who make bad decisions should be made to suffer the consequences in the marketplace. But, after a few years and some really hard choices by GM and Chrysler and their unions, both companies and (most of) their jobs and their contributions to the U.S economy survived.  And, as the economy improved, rather than nationalizing GM and Chrysler (as the rightwing ideologues on Fox News predicted), the Obama administration gradually sold the stock in both companies, making a modest profit for  U.S. taxpayers.  If this is an example of creeping socialism, I'd say we need more of it.

But in large part our current prosperity stems not from Trump’s genius management of the economy but from the sugar high resulting from the personal and corporate tax cuts enacted two years ago by Trump and enthusiastically supported by the Republicans.  Aside from the problem that both cuts overwhelmingly favored the well-off and the investor class (cutting taxes for the well-off in any way they can is in the DNA of the GOP), they were unwise because tax cuts in the past have largely been reserved to stimulate the economy in times of recession.  When Trump took office the economy was healthy and the tax burden on the American public was at a 40 year low.  Trump was undoubtedly hoping to supercharge the economy (and assure his re-election) by  achieving the 3-4% growth rates he ridiculously promised his followers   Instead, the economy under Trump has grown at an average ~2.5% rate that is indistinguishable from the Obama years.  

 And the dramatic stock market rise (until this week) has been fueled in large part by increased corporate profits from the corporate tax cuts – it’s no secret that if you cut the taxes businesses pay you raise their profits and stocks are bound to go up.  And the corporate tax cuts have been totally ineffective in increasing investment here at home with, as predicted by opponents, the profits mostly going into stock buybacks and extra dividends for investors rather than new investment in plants and jobs.

But the really scary thing is that the stimulus from both of these tax cuts have an effect for a few years and then they peter out.  And tax cuts don’t come for free – we now have a trillion dollar federal deficit, unheard-of in healthy economic times.  If we have another recession (and we’re due for one, whether the coronavirus lives up to the doom and gloom predictions or not) are we going to buy our way out of it with another tax cut that will sink us (and our kids and grandkids) even deeper in debt?

And, oh, am I the only one who thinks our response to the coronavirus is being managed not to mitigate its effects, but instead to paint a rosy picture and prop up a stock market that is Trump’s chief claim to re-election?  And how do we feel about the muzzling of Anthony Fauci and other health experts with decades of experience and the requirement that all communication about the coronavirus be “managed” by Pence?   

Heck of a job, Donald!

David Mitchell

For Pete's sake  John!

My head was just about to hit the pillow when you had to go and roll this grenade under my bedroom door. 

More fun discussion for some time when I can keep my eyes open.

David Barbour

Janie, puulease! The only way to  make some of us not jealous is photos of  6 inches

of snow on the PV beach and icicles on pelican's wings.

DB

Michael McLeod

It's just astounding people can't see through the guy, John.

He'll be long gone by the time they do.

The story of his career in politics pretty much mirrors his M.O. as businessman. Lotta people left holding the bag. In this case it will be us and our children - and perhaps our children's children.

Oh and John - you put me in mind, when you mentioned writing too long, of a Mark Twain quote about the writing craft - and how difficult it can be to go back over something and narrow it down, eliminate the fluff.

As the end of a letter to a friend, Twain famously wrote: "I'm sorry this letter is so long. I didn't have time to make it shorter." 

James Hamilton, M. D.

Well, perhaps we conservatives are not as "woke" since we are not smart enough to realize that President Trump is so very bad for America and President Obama was the best America ever had. I guess we should just crawl back into that "basket of deplorables" and let socialism prevail. Of course, there will only be a limited amount of socialism since it obviously could never expand into other areas of life in the USA! That would never happen - right?

Did I keep this short enough? 

Jim 

David Mitchell

Personally Mike,

I loved his espression "I spent the coldest Winter of my life, one summer in San Francsico".

--------------------------

Geting back to John's point about saving the Auto industry....

(to begin with, I also think Bush II handled the eonomic collapse poorly. But I'll come back to that)

As for Barack's part in this; 

I am not so sure we should have saved Detroit. After years of Board Room bad decisons and genarations of internal inefficiency and lack of innovation, all we seemed to have done is to perpetuate this group of good ole boys and their lack of innovative thinking. Of course I do get the fact that we risked temporary unemployment on a painful scale, but I doubt it would have taken long before new money would have stepped in and reformed much of the auto industry, albeit with a number of "parts" sold off and spin-offs here and there. Detroit has fought innovation so hard, I specualte that new blood would have launched us into a new era of improvements, from better design and safety, to better fuel economy, and even better employee/managment relations (like the Japanese). Change is painful over the short run. But lack of change can be slow death, or at least stagnation.

I don't recall ever reading accounts of the government stepping in to save the gas light manufacturers, or the buggy whip makers, when "change" left them behind. 

As for Bush. I recall an article in the Wall Street Journal about 2007, describing a meeting between Bush economists and a group of Wall Street leaders. The meeting was about trying to reduce the growing risk of "derivatives" - that awful creation of Wall Street gamblers. Instead of placing some limits on the use of this (complicated and unethical) trading mechansim, the Bush officials admitted not fully even being abe to understand what derivatives were, and went away from the meeting giving even more freedom for Wall Street to use them. Nice work guys!

It was less than a year later that the bubble burst on Wall Street (as a result of both the mortgage bubble, AND the derivatives market. Bush had a major role in that lack of regulation - leading to the collapse.

Before we get on my comments on Barack's role in this, I have to comment about where this mortgage nightmare began. I believe it was during the reign of His Majesty "Taco Bill" (Clinton) when his extension and reinforcemet of the "Community Reinvestment Act" (an idea with good intentions, but ridiculous elements - help people buy homes easier in poor economic conditions), and the decison by his new Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), one Andrew Cuomo (now Governor of NY.), who allowed the use of the new mortgage standards, basically doing away with any common sense qualificatinos for a residential mortgage application. I was in the mortgage business in Columbus at the time and watched these new "No Doc - No Income" loans come into prominence. ("No-Doc" = no documnetation, or no written proof of job or income - at all!. A recipe for disaster!). We jokingly called them "Liars Loans". I began to get nervous about it all and left the business in 2002, well before the crisis.    

And while I'm throwing blame around like a fire hose out of control, Let's not forget that one of the "pushers" behind the Clinton easy mortgage movement was Texas Republican Phil Gramm, who it is alledged, profited greatly from his banking friends for the favor of his support in this new way of doing business. (BTW, it is said that Republican Senator Phil Gramm made more money of his lobbying friends while passing less effective legistalation than almost anyone in his time in office - ranking him up close to Senator John Kerry in that noteworth category). You will recall Senator Phil Gramm is the one who called Americans a bunch of cry babies during the great recession of 2008, and for that statement, John McCain fired him as his campaiagn manager.

But back to my main objection to Presidnet Obama. 

He stepped into office in the midst of the worst economic mess in our life times.  He had a clear mandate (a mandate I doubt would have found any resistance even from Conservatives) to clean up the Wall Street "gambling halls" and the "Easy Money" mortgage market. He had every right and much legal precident to both fine the big banks, and serve prison sentences on the Wall Street perpertrators for their criminal activities - for example;

John Mack - Morgan Stanley

Lloyd Blanfein - Goldman Sachs 

Richard Fuld - Lehman Brothers

Ken Lewis - Bank of America

Jamie Diamond - JP Morgan Chase

And many of their top executives. Oh heck, lets throw in Kathleen Corbett of Standard and Poor's rating agency - and the list could go on, an on, and on. 

Instead of indictments and prison terms, these people were personally untouched. Rather, the government sought (and won) huge cash penalties from these banks. But according to legal experts, this is a strange legal precidnet - not going after the perpetrators personally.

The reason given was that the Obama administration used as it's guidelines, an obscure memorandum that was writen some time before while the author served as a young Deputy Attorney General. The memo is often referred to under two nicknmaes - "The Holder Memorandum", or the "Too Big To Jail" memorandum.  Yes, that would be Eric Holder, Obama's Attorney General. 

Many consider this one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in our recent history. I tend to agree. 

David Mitchell

John and Mike,

I tried my best to make it longer - honest I did!

Timothy Lavelle

Jim,

I tnink if I was a MAGA guy I would feel like my man was getting picked on, so I understand why your last post seems as angry (well, angry for a more calm guy like you) as I have seen you write.

If possible, to clarify...yes there are differences between Dems and the GOP. It is not those things that have seperated us.

When we were kids and things were easier...we'd see a TV show with a "bad sheriff" and we could decide quickly the solution to the problem. I do not recall any kid saying, "That the sheriff for me boy!"

We played cowboys, and before we got toy guns for Christmas, we just pointed the index finger forward and our thumbs were the hammer. We would point and say "pshoo" or some other imagined bullet sound. But Jim, remember that therecwould lways be one kid who you would shoot who would turn sideways and say "You missed". That kid was a cheater. 

It's not your platform - all platforms are advertisements for undecided voters - it is simply the guy many of us see as a cheater, a bad sherriff that we dislike so strongly.

But don't worry. A guy as lucky as Trump is not likely to be beaten by the current Keystone players on t'other side. 

Michael Boulware

Wow! Mary Margaret, you certainly have a marvelous way of explaining your thoughts. Obviously, we have different political views. Isn't it great that we live in a free society, where we can express our feelings and viewpoints, and still be great friends?  I hope our next president has the ability to "reach across the aisle" and get something accomplished.

Michael McLeod

I agree with you, Mike, about how great it is that most of us can be civil. And I wish you would talk to Dr. Jim about that because he has clearly gone off the reservation. A veritable firebrand! Positively petulant! This is a side of you we haven't seen before, Jim, and I, for one, am alarmed. GET AHOLD OF YOURSELF, MAN! CALM DOWN! 

James Hamilton, M. D.

Folks,

Bull said it correctly that we are all friends here and that should be our overriding theme, regardless of our political beliefs.

And Tim was also spot on that what we say here on political topics is mainly to help persuade those who may be undecided voters to agree with our leanings.

As for my "anger", I consider it more of my way of expressing sarcasm with a fair amount of fear when I see pure hatred expressed by the media against those with whom they disagree. All elected officials do good and bad things in our own minds. But a reasonable press should at least acknowledge some of the good things and,certainly, should not blame every world wide catastrophe that occurs on whoever is in office. That kind of "spin" is unworthy of responsible journalism.

We all know that the next 8 months or so leading up to the election are going to be brutal. Let us strive not to allow that brutality to overtake our discussions on this Forum. That does not mean we must avoid the topics but just not attack each other.

Jim (all calmed down!)

Michael McLeod

Agreed, Dr. J. 

No sense in us going all Aaron Burr on each other. 

James Hamilton, M. D.

Mike, 

Definitely! Old Arron already got the drop on one Hamilton! 

Jim 

Michael McLeod

He was a real jerk, by all accounts.

John Maxwell