Zero facts and nothing but parroting the worst quality right wing feeds. Also, still not anything on-topic for this list.
You say “technology may rob us all,” yet back a political figure whose actual economic policies fast-track that very outcome. Under Trump, wealth consolidation accelerated: massive tax cuts went to corporations and the ultra-wealthy, with no structural plan for middle-class revival. Tariffs were sold as populist rebalancing but were passed onto consumers, raising prices while the promised return of industrial jobs never materialized in any sustained way. If anything, his approach gutted government capacity to respond to crises while increasing military spending—classic upward wealth transfer disguised as populism. Your lament about globalism and NAFTA mirrors critiques even centrists like Krugman have admitted, but cherry-picking Krugman’s disillusionment ignores the broader context: the devastation came not just from trade deals but from how governments responded. Instead of reinvesting the gains into worker retraining, infrastructure, or regional development, politicians—yes, across parties—let financial elites capture the surplus. Trump didn’t reverse this trend; he turbocharged it. His administration systematically weakened labor protections, environmental regulations, and oversight of wealth concentration while appointing Goldman Sachs alumni to key economic posts. As for immigration and crime, the evidence doesn't support your narrative. Violent crime rates have trended down for decades and immigrants—documented or otherwise—commit crimes at lower rates than native-born citizens. The Census counting noncitizens has always been part of constitutional apportionment; it’s not a Democratic conspiracy, it’s how representative democracy functions. If that bothers you, your problem is with the Constitution, not a political party. The idea that NGOs are a front for DNC offspring is a conspiratorial red herring. USAID and similar agencies, while imperfect, operate under bipartisan oversight and fund a wide range of global programs including health initiatives, disaster relief, and democratic development. If $4.7 trillion is “untraceable,” that’s not a documented fact but an inflated, context-free talking point—often spread through misreadings of budget line items over decades. If you cheer cuts to USAID and global aid efforts, understand what you're applauding: more children without clean water, more mothers unable to access medicine, more communities left to starve after floods and droughts. These aren't abstract numbers—they're kids going blind from vitamin deficiency, infants dying from preventable diarrhea, entire generations locked into cycles of poverty and illness. That’s the real-world impact of defunding humanitarian infrastructure. It’s what Pope Francis tried to warn against: a world where cruelty is excused as efficiency, and solidarity dismissed as weakness. Supporting leaders who gut aid while boosting military budgets and shielding billionaires isn't anti-elitist—it's just punishing the poor for being born on the wrong side of a border. The suffering is real. And if we fund bombs but not bread, history will remember who made that choice. And if you cannot see this, then it's you and people like you who don't have genuine faith in their god/religion while bashing godless progressives. Ironically, you propose AI governance as a “fix” to the oligarchy, even as you fear it being controlled by billionaires. That contradiction captures the core issue: rage against elites without a coherent solution. Trump isn’t the enemy of oligarchy—he’s its current mascot. His policies, his instincts, his allies all serve the concentration of power and wealth. The middle class is a talking point, not a beneficiary. If you're serious about solutions, start by demanding transparency, fairness in taxation, real infrastructure investment, labor empowerment, and a democratic system where both parties are accountable to the public, not just donors. On this, everybody agrees. No matter party lines. But that means rejecting empty populism and looking closely at results—not just slogans and flattering feeds; to go around and pretend you know something beyond your opinion. If you can't take part in the science orientation of the list without re-posting woke work, stick to facts that are verifiable from multiple perspectives instead of blindly following the algorithm and a "leader", whose actions lead to increased deaths of children etc. for his bottom line. Also wonder: where is Ukrainian peace and all the affordability with money falling from the sky. Let us know, when tariffs materialize that for you and you can buy yourself a dinner with Jesus through meme coin purchase. On Tuesday, May 6, 2025 at 2:31:31 PM UTC+2 [email protected] wrote: > Technology may rob us all if the super rich can profit off each other > alone, and ignore the useless eaters of the middle class and poor? Like the > scifi film 2013 Elysium. That is a discussion beyond the capabilities of > this wee forum, say I. Globalism and NAFTA its a failure. for the middle > class. Even NYT economist and agiotprop Paul Krugman, declared it so a > couple of years back. Plus, the wonder-world promised by money men, Soros > and his brother Klaus Schwab never came about. Their anti-nationalist > ideology paid nothing out, like a bad slot machine that never pays. The UN > for war-a failure. The WEF/EU? A sad experiemnt that looks like it was a > means to crush the locals, by importing their own voters and enforcers. > > The Democrats did this with the open border policiy. 11.5 million illegals > in, to be counted in the US Census as residents to apportion the Dems more > congressional seats. Globally for immigration and street crime? A very bady > move, again playing immigrants directly against nationalist-leaning locals, > purposefully. > > In the US the amount of cash gone to NGO's, a wholly -owned subsidiary of > the D-party's leaders and their offspring, mean't to appear virtuous, has > caused 4.7 trillion dollars in over 12 years become untraceable. Much of > this went to USAID, which JC has lamented its closure. > > I say we can all do better. What's the fixes? Well, politically, I do have > to say (being a nutter) that AI governance is worth looking at.Yes, he he > owns the companies, would then rule the serfs via AI. But its a way > potentially of breaking oligarchs. In any case, reducing the immigration of > hostiles is a start. Deportation of hostiles is something I support. Having > US taxpayers invest a tiny portion of their income to the markets, has > made US Congressional politicians quite wealthy. So if it works for Nancy > Pelosi, and it does, , why not for the rest of us? Let us copy their > corrupt method to ensure a R.O.I.? R&D with directed goals, say on energy > and medicine is another factor. Space, yes, energy and minerals in > abundance. Blank checks, say with fusion for 70 years seems unproductive. > I'm still waiting pervoskite solar cells too. > > That's my laundry list for now, The US has long not been a republic. We're > an oligarchy, a plutocracy, properly, where the very rich get their > policies enacted for their benefit, while appearing virtuous. Typically, > via a single party. > > > > On Monday, May 5, 2025 at 12:18:32 PM EDT, PGC <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Sunday, May 4, 2025 at 10:23:07 PM UTC+2 [email protected] wrote: > > Actually, yes he is* bombastic*, and puts that in the process with > negotiations. Sometimes it even works! At the end of the day, its not > personality that we serfs live and die upon, but rather public policies. I > hold that the Starmer-Soros-Schwab-WEF-Macon-Obama- policies have worked > very, aggressively badly. In real life, planet earth. Just as Britons tend > to think differently than yanks, Comrade Xi, Putin, and the Ayatollahs > think differently than both of us. For pragmatic reasons, I'd have sided > with the previous boys IF these were good for the middle class. Sadly they > weren't. > > So, for most of us, its substance over style. One can be extremely > charming as all UK PM's ever is, but either accomplish zero (not the worst > option) or force things to go sideways. For me, to quote the late, humor > writer PJ O'Rourke, "I'm an American, I want to solve problems with > technology, not politics." An imaginary example of this might be 3D > printing. If we could print all we needed via 3D printing (Or nanotech), > then the disparities supposedly provided by socialislm, would never be > needed. Because, if we print all we need, cheap, who needs a government? > > > All you do is quote other fringe ideas when questioned. Nothing of that > benefits or feeds people now. Irrelevant. Calling Trump “substance over > style” misses the point entirely. His style—cruelty without wit, mockery > without humor—isn’t some negotiating tactic, it’s how he consolidates > power. He silences critics, not with arguments, but with smears and jeers. > That’s not leadership, that’s bullying. > > As for substance: there is no serious plan to help the middle class. > Tariffs and tax cuts are not a strategy—they're a smokescreen. Tariffs > raise prices on everyday goods, hurting working families, not billionaires. > Meanwhile, tax cuts—like those he passed in 2017—disproportionately benefit > the ultra-wealthy. Cutting government jobs and “draining the swamp” sounds > tough, but it’s just a way to slash services while funneling more money > upward. > > If you're in the middle class and supporting this, you'd better hope it > doesn’t work—because you're the one paying for it. There’s no plan for > sustainable jobs, no serious industrial policy, and no honest accounting of > how gutting agencies while ballooning defense spending to $1 trillion will > do anything but shift more burden onto you. > > > > Also, because I never miss an opportunity to promote technology as useful > to us primates, I will end this convo with today's vid by physicist Sabine > Hossenfelder regarding a somewhat improved hypothesis on why black holes > are suitable for quantum computing. Older idea, new take. > > > Technology is useful for robbing you and is out-of-topic. But the idiot > here is yours truly, as the expectation for you to focus on one thing and > discuss it, is more ludicrous than answering where the money for those tax > breaks and military spending will come from. You want to speak physics of > quantum computers? Then do the list a favor and have a single thought of > your own, an equation, a contribution, without quoting some woke expert. > Otherwise it's your usual camo of dressing up your "posts" with woke work > to fake a sophistication and/or depth that doesn't exist. Nobody cares > about our opinions, Mitch. There are billions of us and I haven't seen you > make a single point/contribution for years on this list that fits the > topic. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion visit > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/0990c75c-4964-4939-b958-db9b81e7642bn%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/0990c75c-4964-4939-b958-db9b81e7642bn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/76e3d597-4f39-4cf6-b835-2124f61c15bdn%40googlegroups.com.
