Cameraimage cinematography festival in the bin

[majoraxis]

The equivalency is about politically motivated prosecution, which it seems the deplorable majority disagrees with you...

Now I know what party to say I am with: the Deplorable Majority... though I don't like labels because those associated with the party never live up to the standards they set for themselves. I will never be deplorable enough to live down to the low standards set by Trump... thankfully not, as Trump, by almost all accounts, including my own is not a good person...

[eatstoomuchjam]

He got less than 50% of the vote.  You're not part of any "majority."  At best, that'd be the "deplorable plurality."  Either way, you're talking pure bullshit and making false equivalencies also about political prosecutions.  You have dangerously impaired critical thinking skills and should excuse yourself from any sort of public discussion about complicated topics so that you don't continue embarrassing yourself and your country.

[majoraxis]

@eatstoomuchjamI just wanted to say how much I appreciate your responses!

I am interested increasing my critical thinking capabilities - so thank you for bearing with me!

Today I learned a new word "plurality" (the number of votes cast for a candidate who receives more than any other but does not receive an absolute majority.) without your kind tutelage I would be even further in the dark.

I really do appreciate you and I appreciate learning from your responses - these types of discussion are how we really do again become one nation under God with liberty and justice for all!

[KnightsFan]

Well I'm not sure personal attacks on each other's critical thinking skills are constructive.

 

High inflation is a difficult obstacle for an incumbent to overcome. As much as I dislike Trump, it's important to recognize that a large contribution to his loss in 2020 was economic troubles stemming from Covid. I think Biden's administration did fairly well economically, given it was Covid recovery time. Most of the world had higher inflation than the US did. But most voters don't look too closely.

Which is very unfortunate, because the Republican/Trump economic agenda is, long term, quite detrimental and also has a considerable amount of doublespeak (to use the 1984 term). We had high inflation, but it's important to note that corporate and ultra wealthy profits were record-high. The higher prices that we consumers paid went straight to rich people and corporations.

That's where we see doublespeak: a lot of Republicans say "Make America Great Again" referring to a golden age in the 1960-1980's. The highest marginal tax rate in the 1960's was 91%! It gradually fell to just 50% by 1986, at which point it was slashed in half, ushering in the extreme debt, corporate expansion, and wealth disparity that we still suffer from today, aka Reaganomics. I agree: Make America Great Again--by taxing the wealthy the way we used to, and using that to invest in roads, science, and education, to fuel the technological leadership that we had in the 60's-80's.

(Of course, it should not be inferred that I support to the social and racial policies of the 60's! I fully understand the racial undertones of MAGA as a slogan, but I do want to point out their modern economic policies are antithetical to the era that they romanticize)

 

Getting to Trump, there are a couple huge points unrelated to social politics or personality that are worrying

1. Lowering tax rates on wealthy and corporations. All historical trends show that doing so leads to higher wealth disparity, higher deficit, and fewer jobs. In Obama's 8 years, the national deficit fell from $1.42T to $0.44T. The high initial deficit was an increase in spending in response to the financial meltdown in 2008 (that was caused by deregulation). In Trump's first term, the deficit rose again up to $0.98T, even before Covid hit. Between 2009 and 2020, we had the longest period of uninterrupted economic growth in US history. The difference was that Obama grew the economy while reducing deficit while recovering from the 2nd worst economic disaster in US history, whereas Trump inherited 8 years of growth and doubled the deficit. Turns out, giving a ton of money to rich people has the effect of making them richer, nothing else--sometimes it really is that simple.

2. Placing billionaires and CEOs in key government positions, almost always ones who donated significantly to his campaign. This is an obvious conflict of interest considering they are the ones profiting off of high prices.

3. Nominating people with no experience for high positions. If you get your dream job and are hired directing the next Marvel movie. Do you hire a successful business owner, or an academy award winning cinematographer to be DoP? Maybe you think the academy favors certain movies more, and that there is politics involved in picking winners--I don't disagree. I can also guarantee you that every Oscar winner is a helluva lot better than someone who's never picked up a camera before.

4. Ignoring/denying climate change, and pursuing short term profits by consuming natural resources, rather than lead on sustainable energy sources. Ignoring climate change, energy based on carbon extracted from the ground will run out someday. We need to have a replacement before it runs out, rather than after. If we invested in R&D like we did in the 60's (again, the GOP Golden Age) we would be further along.

[Michael-Kai]

On 12/7/2024 at 9:45 PM, KnightsFan said:

Well I'm not sure personal attacks on each other's critical thinking skills are constructive.

 

High inflation is a difficult obstacle for an incumbent to overcome. As much as I dislike Trump, it's important to recognize that a large contribution to his loss in 2020 was economic troubles stemming from Covid. I think Biden's administration did fairly well economically, given it was Covid recovery time. Most of the world had higher inflation than the US did. But most voters don't look too closely.

Which is very unfortunate, because the Republican/Trump economic agenda is, long term, quite detrimental and also has a considerable amount of doublespeak (to use the 1984 term). We had high inflation, but it's important to note that corporate and ultra wealthy profits were record-high. The higher prices that we consumers paid went straight to rich people and corporations.

That's where we see doublespeak: a lot of Republicans say "Make America Great Again" referring to a golden age in the 1960-1980's. The highest marginal tax rate in the 1960's was 91%! It gradually fell to just 50% by 1986, at which point it was slashed in half, ushering in the extreme debt, corporate expansion, and wealth disparity that we still suffer from today, aka Reaganomics. I agree: Make America Great Again--by taxing the wealthy the way we used to, and using that to invest in roads, science, and education, to fuel the technological leadership that we had in the 60's-80's.

(Of course, it should not be inferred that I support to the social and racial policies of the 60's! I fully understand the racial undertones of MAGA as a slogan, but I do want to point out their modern economic policies are antithetical to the era that they romanticize)

 

Getting to Trump, there are a couple huge points unrelated to social politics or personality that are worrying

1. Lowering tax rates on wealthy and corporations. All historical trends show that doing so leads to higher wealth disparity, higher deficit, and fewer jobs. In Obama's 8 years, the national deficit fell from $1.42T to $0.44T. The high initial deficit was an increase in spending in response to the financial meltdown in 2008 (that was caused by deregulation). In Trump's first term, the deficit rose again up to $0.98T, even before Covid hit. Between 2009 and 2020, we had the longest period of uninterrupted economic growth in US history. The difference was that Obama grew the economy while reducing deficit while recovering from the 2nd worst economic disaster in US history, whereas Trump inherited 8 years of growth and doubled the deficit. Turns out, giving a ton of money to rich people has the effect of making them richer, nothing else--sometimes it really is that simple.

2. Placing billionaires and CEOs in key government positions, almost always ones who donated significantly to his campaign. This is an obvious conflict of interest considering they are the ones profiting off of high prices.

3. Nominating people with no experience for high positions. If you get your dream job and are hired directing the next Marvel movie. Do you hire a successful business owner, or an academy award winning cinematographer to be DoP? Maybe you think the academy favors certain movies more, and that there is politics involved in picking winners--I don't disagree. I can also guarantee you that every Oscar winner is a helluva lot better than someone who's never picked up a camera before.

4. Ignoring/denying climate change, and pursuing short term profits by consuming natural resources, rather than lead on sustainable energy sources. Ignoring climate change, energy based on carbon extracted from the ground will run out someday. We need to have a replacement before it runs out, rather than after. If we invested in R&D like we did in the 60's (again, the GOP Golden Age) we would be further along.

You make valid points about the economic impact of inflation and tax cuts for the wealthy. The focus on wealth disparity and the need for sustainable energy investment is key to moving forward. It's also important to remember that true progress includes uplifting marginalized communities and addressing social and racial issues that persist.