Author Topic: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?  (Read 171550 times)

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8232
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1350 on: January 24, 2017, 11:16:57 AM »
Quote
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.

This means you will have no problem giving it up once your wife is past a healthy child-bearing age - right ? ;)

And that would mean all the people who are not capable of bearing children are abusing God's gift.

Or having sex while pregnant which is a special kind of fun as well.

God doesn't want you to poke the baby.  :P

deadlymonkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 389
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1351 on: January 24, 2017, 11:24:13 AM »
Quote
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.

This means you will have no problem giving it up once your wife is past a healthy child-bearing age - right ? ;)

And that would mean all the people who are not capable of bearing children are abusing God's gift.

Or having sex while pregnant which is a special kind of fun as well.

God doesn't want you to poke the baby.  :P

Well that is being generous :)

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Location: MA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1352 on: January 24, 2017, 11:32:04 AM »
Quote
1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Holy shit!

We really are doomed, aren't we. 

You mean there are living, breathing married people that only have sex if they think it will result in a baby? 

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5003
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1353 on: January 24, 2017, 11:37:04 AM »
Where would you have authority derived from?

I believe the only officially correct answer to this question in the United States is "the consent of the governed".

It's right there in the Declaration of Independence.  They borrowed it from John Locke, who specifically proposed it as the foundational principle of democracy, in contrast to the divine right of kings that previously dictated European political structures.

You only get to argue with me in this point if you also believe we should have a king instead of a president.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2017, 11:42:04 AM by sol »

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1510
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1354 on: January 24, 2017, 11:37:53 AM »
You mean there are living, breathing married people that only have sex if they think it will result in a baby?

I wonder where they land on blowjobs?
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

deadlymonkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 389
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1355 on: January 24, 2017, 11:39:18 AM »
This is reminding me of the Monty Python song "Every Sperm is sacred"

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1356 on: January 24, 2017, 11:40:13 AM »
Quote
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.

This means you will have no problem giving it up once your wife is past a healthy child-bearing age - right ? ;)

And that would mean all the people who are not capable of bearing children are abusing God's gift.

Or having sex while pregnant which is a special kind of fun as well.

And this is why super-religious people end up justifying really weird things like having multiple, much younger wives....  nothing would suck worse than only having sex like 10 times only to find out that you could've been doing it 10 times a month with absolutely no discernable consequence (other than elevated mood, better mental and physical health, deeper emotional bond with your spouse...).
Transitioning to FIRE'd albeit somewhat cautiously...

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1162
  • Age: 33
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1357 on: January 24, 2017, 11:41:39 AM »
Not to speak for others, but I would venture that what most of us have a hard time understanding is why individuals like you and Acroy think that promoting the (by your words) orders of magnitude less bad option of contraceptives is still something to be opposed when it is demonstrable that such actions drastically reduce the worldwide rate of abortion, which we all agree is much worse.

Quoting myself since I am still genuinely interested in hearing a justification for this. Not sure I ever have from a "pro-lifer," as the conversation always seems to move to other areas, as it has so far since I posted the above.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1358 on: January 24, 2017, 11:47:55 AM »
Quote
1 There is a God and He did things intentionally, purposefully (not randomly, not for no purpose)
2 God made man and woman. The purpose of human life is a) know love serve God so as to make it to heaven b) treat other humans well.
3 Human life is precious; the most valuable thing in creation
4 Sex is a big deal. It is for procreation. It also is fun (bennies! Thank You God!). If itís done only for fun, itís being abused.
5 Marriage is a big deal. Marriage legitimizes sex/procreation.

Holy shit!

We really are doomed, aren't we. 

You mean there are living, breathing married people that only have sex if they think it will result in a baby?

I think that it is important to acknowledge that acroy has a valid world view. I do not personally agree with his points or wish to apply them to my own life. However, I think he has just as much choice to apply them to his life (and with his partner in life) as the choices I make as an individual in mine. Arguing whether a specific person's world view is ok is valid only to the extent that it impacts the lives of others, and in the context of this thread to the extent that that impact is via legislation and law.

As an anecdote, this is why I think the rigorous separation of church and state are important: it is simply too challenging to be fair to multiple beliefs if the state is aligned with a single religion. Our elected officials are clearly influenced by their beliefs and will vote accordingly in most cases, and IDEALLY will also recognize that as members of government they also have a duty to respect the beliefs of others and act/vote in a secular manner (not intended to imply atheistic) in those instances. This is an imperfect solution, but far preferable in all of its messiness to state-religion alignment and the greater problems that come with that system.

TL/DR: we aren't doomed if people believe there is a god with a plan. We are doomed if elected officials make laws assuming the rapture is next Thursday, or that the view points of others are automatically invalid if they do not align with a specific set of beliefs.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1171
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1359 on: January 24, 2017, 11:54:59 AM »
Not to speak for others, but I would venture that what most of us have a hard time understanding is why individuals like you and Acroy think that promoting the (by your words) orders of magnitude less bad option of contraceptives is still something to be opposed when it is demonstrable that such actions drastically reduce the worldwide rate of abortion, which we all agree is much worse.

Quoting myself since I am still genuinely interested in hearing a justification for this. Not sure I ever have from a "pro-lifer," as the conversation always seems to move to other areas, as it has so far since I posted the above.
Very simply:

Contraception = bad
Abortion = REALLY bad

I cannot promote (bad) in attempt to reduce (REALLY bad)
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Location: MA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1360 on: January 24, 2017, 11:55:37 AM »
Quote
I think that it is important to acknowledge that acroy has a valid world view. I do not personally agree with his points or wish to apply them to my own life. However, I think he has just as much choice to apply them to his life (and with his partner in life) as the choices I make as an individual in mine. Arguing whether a specific person's world view is ok is valid only to the extent that it impacts the lives of others, and in the context of this thread to the extent that that impact is via legislation and law.

Meh, it might be a "valid world view"  but it is also my right to call this "valid world view" the dumbest thing I have ever heard.   It can be "valid" in his eyes, and if it works for him, great, but if I said that there was a giant space monster who hovered over the planet and if I did the wrong thing, it would suck me into a vortex, you are perfectly free to laugh at me.  It might make me behave in all sorts of responsible ways and make me the best person imaginable, but you are still free to laugh your ass off. 

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2262
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1361 on: January 24, 2017, 11:56:49 AM »

Since you seem to have not wanted to respond to the questions I asked above, I'd like to pose them again.

You said, "I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence."

I asked:

Even for married people who don't want to have children? What about a married woman whose life would be put in danger by a pregnancy? What about a married woman with a condition that would almost certainly produce a baby with severe illness or birth defects if she got pregnant? You really think those people should be condemned to never having sex?
"Well I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation."   - David St. Hubins, This is Spinal Tap

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1162
  • Age: 33
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1362 on: January 24, 2017, 12:01:43 PM »
Very simply:

Contraception = bad
Abortion = REALLY bad

I cannot promote (bad) in attempt to reduce (REALLY bad)

Thank you for replying. So just to be clear, in the hypothetical train scenario (pull a lever to divert a train to run over one person instead of  a busload of people), you would take no action because by pulling that lever you are now responsible for a death and doing that bad thing is still wrong even though it prevents a worse thing? There are certainly schools of ethics that might advocate that action so to be clear, I'm not trying to imply anything about you. Genuinely curious about your approach to this sort of thing.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1171
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1363 on: January 24, 2017, 12:07:00 PM »

Since you seem to have not wanted to respond to the questions I asked above, I'd like to pose them again.

You said, "I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence."

I asked:

Even for married people who don't want to have children? What about a married woman whose life would be put in danger by a pregnancy? What about a married woman with a condition that would almost certainly produce a baby with severe illness or birth defects if she got pregnant? You really think those people should be condemned to never having sex?
Let me catch up ;)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1171
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1364 on: January 24, 2017, 12:12:59 PM »
Very simply:

Contraception = bad
Abortion = REALLY bad

I cannot promote (bad) in attempt to reduce (REALLY bad)

Thank you for replying. So just to be clear, in the hypothetical train scenario (pull a lever to divert a train to run over one person instead of  a busload of people), you would take no action because by pulling that lever you are now responsible for a death and doing that bad thing is still wrong even though it prevents a worse thing? There are certainly schools of ethics that might advocate that action so to be clear, I'm not trying to imply anything about you. Genuinely curious about your approach to this sort of thing.

Above hypothetical chocie is:
(1 really bad) or (many really bad)
Of course, choose (1 really bad)

The contraception / abortion choice is presented as:
(contraception) or (abortion)
This is a false presentation. It suffers from the logical fallacy of 'Post Hoc or Faulty Causality'  http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic%20and%20Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm

The ignored 3rd choice is abstinence.

Applied to the train scenario: The best choice is to stop the train.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

waltworks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2243
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1365 on: January 24, 2017, 12:14:37 PM »

Since you seem to have not wanted to respond to the questions I asked above, I'd like to pose them again.

You said, "I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence."

I asked:

Even for married people who don't want to have children? What about a married woman whose life would be put in danger by a pregnancy? What about a married woman with a condition that would almost certainly produce a baby with severe illness or birth defects if she got pregnant? You really think those people should be condemned to never having sex?
Let me catch up ;)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No

What about people who are infertile? Past menopause?

I'm assuming you have only had sex 7 times, correct? Otherwise you're a repeat sinner...

-W

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1162
  • Age: 33
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1366 on: January 24, 2017, 12:19:04 PM »
Above hypothetical chocie is:
(1 really bad) or (many really bad)
Of course, choose (1 really bad)

The contraception / abortion choice is presented as:
(contraception) or (abortion)
This is a false presentation. It suffers from the logical fallacy of 'Post Hoc or Faulty Causality'  http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic%20and%20Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm

The ignored 3rd choice is abstinence.

Applied to the train scenario: The best choice is to stop the train.

It is not a fallacy because you are making the assumption that we can force people to be abstinent. Since we cannot, it is unequivocally true that expanding access to contraceptives reduces the number of abortions.

The train has no breaks. It weighs a million tons. Assuming you accept the ethics of choosing bad to prevent far worse, it is not fallacious to say that a small sacrifice in religious morals in the name of saving millions is logically the more ethical choice.

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1171
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1367 on: January 24, 2017, 12:22:26 PM »
Where would you have authority derived from?

I believe the only officially correct answer to this question in the United States is "the consent of the governed".

It's right there in the Declaration of Independence.  They borrowed it from John Locke, who specifically proposed it as the foundational principle of democracy, in contrast to the divine right of kings that previously dictated European political structures.

You only get to argue with me in this point if you also believe we should have a king instead of a president.

Well done!
An expanded quote:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ó That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, ó That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...."

Can God be removed from this?
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

robartsd

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 833
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1368 on: January 24, 2017, 12:24:48 PM »
Very simply:

Contraception = bad
Abortion = REALLY bad

I cannot promote (bad) in attempt to reduce (REALLY bad)
If I understand acroy correctly; he believes abortion is akin to murder and should be illegal (the unborn has rights that deserve legal protection). He also believes that contraceptives are immoral and should not be promoted with taxes (people should not be forced through taxation to promote something they believe is immoral). Acroy's beliefs seem to be consistent with my understanding of Catholic doctrine on the subject. My understanding of most other religions is that they agree with the first point; but disagree with or are less clear on the second point. I think some people in this thread misunderstand acroy's stated beliefs and project an assertion that contraceptives should be illegal from his belief that they are immoral.

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1162
  • Age: 33
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1369 on: January 24, 2017, 12:27:41 PM »
Very simply:

Contraception = bad
Abortion = REALLY bad

I cannot promote (bad) in attempt to reduce (REALLY bad)
If I understand acroy correctly; he believes abortion is akin to murder and should be illegal (the unborn has rights that deserve legal protection). He also believes that contraceptives are immoral and should not be promoted with taxes (people should not be forced through taxation to promote something they believe is immoral). Acroy's beliefs seem to be consistent with my understanding of Catholic doctrine on the subject. My understanding of most other religions is that they agree with the first point; but disagree with or are less clear on the second point. I think some people in this thread misunderstand acroy's stated beliefs and project an assertion that contraceptives should be illegal from his belief that they are immoral.

No misunderstanding here, I don't think. All I'm saying is that if saving lives is the most moral choice and should be enforced by the government, then why is using government $ to improve contraceptive access, which demonstrably reduces abortions and thus saves lives, something to be opposed?

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5890
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1370 on: January 24, 2017, 12:31:21 PM »

Since you seem to have not wanted to respond to the questions I asked above, I'd like to pose them again.

You said, "I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence."

I asked:

Even for married people who don't want to have children? What about a married woman whose life would be put in danger by a pregnancy? What about a married woman with a condition that would almost certainly produce a baby with severe illness or birth defects if she got pregnant? You really think those people should be condemned to never having sex?
Let me catch up ;)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Why the "no" to the last question?
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1171
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1371 on: January 24, 2017, 12:31:45 PM »
Above hypothetical chocie is:
(1 really bad) or (many really bad)
Of course, choose (1 really bad)

The contraception / abortion choice is presented as:
(contraception) or (abortion)
This is a false presentation. It suffers from the logical fallacy of 'Post Hoc or Faulty Causality'  http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic%20and%20Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm

The ignored 3rd choice is abstinence.

Applied to the train scenario: The best choice is to stop the train.

It is not a fallacy because you are making the assumption that we can force people to be abstinent. Since we cannot, it is unequivocally true that expanding access to contraceptives reduces the number of abortions.

The train has no breaks. It weighs a million tons. Assuming you accept the ethics of choosing bad to prevent far worse, it is not fallacious to say that a small sacrifice in religious morals in the name of saving millions is logically the more ethical choice.
No, no force involved.
Only free will, which your statement implies (million ton train with no brakes) some people do not have.
We do have free will. We are responsible for our own actions. It is hard.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1372 on: January 24, 2017, 12:33:04 PM »
Where would you have authority derived from?

I believe the only officially correct answer to this question in the United States is "the consent of the governed".

It's right there in the Declaration of Independence.  They borrowed it from John Locke, who specifically proposed it as the foundational principle of democracy, in contrast to the divine right of kings that previously dictated European political structures.

You only get to argue with me in this point if you also believe we should have a king instead of a president.

Well done!
An expanded quote:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ó That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, ó That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...."

Can God be removed from this?
Bolded part seems to do this pretty clearly. The creator part is vague: which God?

A little later in the history of our country (1796), the Treaty of Tripoli has this text:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. Treaty signed by John Adams.

radram

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 467
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1373 on: January 24, 2017, 12:34:24 PM »
Not to speak for others, but I would venture that what most of us have a hard time understanding is why individuals like you and Acroy think that promoting the (by your words) orders of magnitude less bad option of contraceptives is still something to be opposed when it is demonstrable that such actions drastically reduce the worldwide rate of abortion, which we all agree is much worse.

Quoting myself since I am still genuinely interested in hearing a justification for this. Not sure I ever have from a "pro-lifer," as the conversation always seems to move to other areas, as it has so far since I posted the above.
Very simply:

Contraception = bad
Abortion = REALLY bad

I cannot promote (bad) in attempt to reduce (REALLY bad)


But isn't that exactly what you did when you voted for Trump? It sounds like you voted Trump, not because he was what you wanted, but it was the best option available, and a way to get things closer to what you wanted. I can not see why you can not think of Trump as a great reason for birth control (sorry about that.... I couldn't help putting those 2 points together in a witty, smart ass kind of way).

My point is still dead serious.


In your own words:
I plan to hold my nose and vote Trump.
My vote will not be a vote for Trump Ė it will be a vote against the establishment. I consider myself a patriot, proud to be an American, of our history, of what we can and have achieved. I think the current Establishment system is causing (encouraging!) stagnation, bureaucracy, slowly eroding standards of education and personal responsibility, and a narrow-minded, selfish, juvenile entitlement mind-set.

Rant:
I have a severe dislike of the Establishment. The Establishment is an enormous monster mutated disgusting parasitical octopus running the country, an unholy alliance of big biz/academia/big government/high finance, doing what is right for big biz/academia/big government/high finance. I donít blame them, itís human nature. Itís the 1% doing what is best for the 1%. The Ďaverage everyday Americaní has been shamefully, comfortably apathetic towards their government for decades. How many of us know the name of our city councilmen? Mayor? State Rep? Voter turnout in local elections is something like 2-10%. This has allowed the Establishment to get away with it. It starts local and builds from there. Look at real household income, national debt, embarrassing standards of primary education at staggering cost, ridiculous and increasing cost of secondary education while grade standards decrease, entitlement programs, the ludicrous size of our military and intrusive arrogant foreign policy, etc etc etc. We have a revolving door of industry/academia/government. I see it first-hand every day in my own industry. Money/power/cush guaranteed govtí jobs/íregulatory moatí to discourage competition. Itís a nasty parasitical system.
End rant.

Hillary has promised to be more of the same.
Johnson does not have a chance.
Trump looks like a big-ass nasty 4ft 30lb monkey wrench I can toss into the well-oiled Establishment machine.

Give me a ballot with Trumpís name on it so I can lob it into DC. Iíll enjoy the sweet music of bureaucratic gears crunching and grinding, wails of despair from the major media, plaintive cries of Establishment parasites as their carefully crafted system is disrupted. The White House will look good with neon lights, extra-sized fountains and gold trim. I'll smile. I am (more or less) Michael Mooreís Point #5. http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/. I am sick of the sick system and have a pragmatic but darkly humorous attitude towards it. A LOT of us are going to show up....and check the box for Trump.

Will the Trump presidency actually change anything? For better or worse? I doubt it. In fact, I bet he slots into the system pretty smoothly and becomes part of the problem. The lights will stay on, America will not default on it's debt, no one will nuke anyone, no one will move to Canada, the only 'wars' we enter will be for oil and the military-industrial complex, illegals will continue to penetrate the borders. But at least for a while itíll be noisy and fun to watch!

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1171
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1374 on: January 24, 2017, 12:34:53 PM »

Since you seem to have not wanted to respond to the questions I asked above, I'd like to pose them again.

You said, "I adhere to the archaic notion that the only moral/ethical form of birth control is abstinence."

I asked:

Even for married people who don't want to have children? What about a married woman whose life would be put in danger by a pregnancy? What about a married woman with a condition that would almost certainly produce a baby with severe illness or birth defects if she got pregnant? You really think those people should be condemned to never having sex?
Let me catch up ;)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Why the "no" to the last question?
They can choose to have sex while accepting the risks.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Location: MA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1375 on: January 24, 2017, 12:35:31 PM »
Trump wanted his mistress to get an abortion.   


Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2262
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1376 on: January 24, 2017, 12:37:37 PM »
Trump wanted his mistress to get an abortion.

Considering all the extramarital sex he has bragged about having, my guess is that there are a few abortions in his history.
"Well I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation."   - David St. Hubins, This is Spinal Tap

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1337
  • Location: MA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1377 on: January 24, 2017, 12:37:44 PM »
Quote
Can God be removed from this?

YES! 

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5890
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1378 on: January 24, 2017, 12:46:20 PM »

A little later in the history of our country (1796), the Treaty of Tripoli has this text:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. Treaty signed by John Adams.

If you'd like to go a little further into the framers...
Two of the driving forces (Jefferson and Franklin) were Deists, while most were Presbyterian or Episcopalian.  Others were Catholic, Unitarian and Quakers. While all believed in a God in some form, overwhelmingly they agreed that the laws of the United States should be separate from the laws of any religion or church.  It was Jefferson who coined the term "separation of church and state."

These are the very same men who wrote and required the first amendment (along with the proceeding nine) to be included during ratification.

Also, article six states that :no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

acroy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1171
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Dallas TX
    • SWAMI
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1379 on: January 24, 2017, 12:50:30 PM »
But isn't that exactly what you did when you voted for Trump? It sounds like you voted Trump, not because he was what you wanted, but it was the best option available, and a way to get things closer to what you wanted. I can not see why you can not think of Trump as a great reason for birth control (sorry about that.... I couldn't help putting those 2 points together in a witty, smart ass kind of way).

My point is still dead serious.
Nice background research! So just to be clear we're discussing my personal decisions now (ad hominem), not the validity of the argument.

Explaination
Hillary = many really bad with possibility of more really bad
Trump = many really bad with possibility of fewer really bad

The choice is clear.

And, Trump is hilarious. My previous post is entertaining to read, thanks for finding it. The big-ass nasty orange monkey wrench is busy.
SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual) 1 stash, 1 DW, 7 Mini MM's...
God, Family, Country. Everything else is details.

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8232
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1380 on: January 24, 2017, 01:01:48 PM »
Where would you have authority derived from?

I believe the only officially correct answer to this question in the United States is "the consent of the governed".

It's right there in the Declaration of Independence.  They borrowed it from John Locke, who specifically proposed it as the foundational principle of democracy, in contrast to the divine right of kings that previously dictated European political structures.

You only get to argue with me in this point if you also believe we should have a king instead of a president.

Well done!
An expanded quote:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ó That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, ó That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...."

Can God be removed from this?

My mom and dad created me, in an unholy union that I try my best to never imagine.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2017, 01:03:38 PM by GuitarStv »

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5890
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1381 on: January 24, 2017, 01:17:39 PM »

Hillary = many really bad with possibility of more really bad
Trump = many really bad with possibility of fewer really bad

The choice is clear.

And, Trump is hilarious. My previous post is entertaining to read, thanks for finding it. The big-ass nasty orange monkey wrench is busy.
So by your own logic you should support the choice (birth control) which leads to the "really bad" abortion (your words).
I'm not understanding why it is any different.

ETA: your expanation that committed adults who have inherent and large risk factors should either "accept the risks" or completely abstain seems oppressive and unethical to me and leaves out the obvious "express your physical love responsbily (e.g. by using condoms)"

"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

radram

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 467
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1382 on: January 24, 2017, 01:23:07 PM »
But isn't that exactly what you did when you voted for Trump? It sounds like you voted Trump, not because he was what you wanted, but it was the best option available, and a way to get things closer to what you wanted. I can not see why you can not think of Trump as a great reason for birth control (sorry about that.... I couldn't help putting those 2 points together in a witty, smart ass kind of way).

My point is still dead serious.
Nice background research! So just to be clear we're discussing my personal decisions now (ad hominem), not the validity of the argument.

Explaination
Hillary = many really bad with possibility of more really bad
Trump = many really bad with possibility of fewer really bad

The choice is clear.

And, Trump is hilarious. My previous post is entertaining to read, thanks for finding it. The big-ass nasty orange monkey wrench is busy.

So you CAN promote bad in favor of less bad. That is why others question why favoring birth control (what you believe is a bad) in favor of having less abortions (what I believe most everyone would consider a VERY bad) is not a position you can agree with.

I agree it will be entertaining, but I am concerned it will be funny at the expense of others, many of them less fortunate than me. I like to think I am above that sort of thing, but I am human.

I thought this was funny, for example. I probably shouldn't. How the rest of the world views us will have a real impact on our ability to be prosperous in a world economy:
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/5pjfno/introduction_to_the_netherlands_for_donald_trump/



nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5890
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1383 on: January 24, 2017, 02:17:17 PM »
More "real impacts" today:

DJT has instituted a media blackout for all EPA employees, and has ordered a freeze on awarding any new contract or grants.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/trump-admin-orders-epa-contract-freeze-and-media-blackout/2017/01/24/f578db56-e271-11e6-a419-eefe8eff0835_story.html?utm_term=.31eff258f025
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

Sockigal

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1384 on: January 24, 2017, 03:02:54 PM »
More "real impacts" today:

DJT has instituted a media blackout for all EPA employees, and has ordered a freeze on awarding any new contract or grants.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/trump-admin-orders-epa-contract-freeze-and-media-blackout/2017/01/24/f578db56-e271-11e6-a419-eefe8eff0835_story.html?utm_term=.31eff258f025

This thread has been hijacked by a major religious discussion. Maybe we can lead it back on topic. When I saw this latest news about the media blackouts for the EPA, NPS, and the USDA I became very concerned. I was not aware the President had the power to tell these organizations they may not speak about anything they are doing, with national security the only real exception. Much of what the EPA, NPS and USDA do require sharing of knowledge and informing the public. It seems like something out of a different era or time for a President to try to control this information. He is obviously trying to control all information that is released from Government agencies and keep the public uninformed. I am just wondering if congress is going to set by and let this stand. It is such an overreach of power.

I haven't posted much on MMM threads, but have been a lurker for many years. I value the information and opinions discussed by an obviously very intelligent base of posters. Any opinions on this latest news? I have been mostly upset over environmental policies of the new administration as some of the impacts cannot be reversed, but this latest news has me terrified. We might not even get a chance to know what is going on before it happens. What the heck! Public information is for the public!

Inaya

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1006
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Chicago, IL
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1385 on: January 24, 2017, 03:14:07 PM »
It is my understanding that peer-reviewed articles can still be published. But without funding, we probably won't see many of those either.

From the above-linked WaPo article: ARS spokesman Christopher Bentley said the ban would not include scientific publications released through peer-reviewed professional journals.
My Cleverly Titled Journal: http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/cleverly-titled-journal/
My Cat's Facebook Page (yes, really, and I'm not above begging for likes): www.facebook.com/chicagotau
Tau now has an Instagram: www.instagram.com/chicagotau or #chicagotau
Ting referral ($25 credit!): https://zds8505smfe.ting.com/
Discover referral ($50 now and $50 after your first year!): https://refer.discover.com/s/gv3ma

scottish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 731
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1386 on: January 24, 2017, 03:44:58 PM »
Ok.   Is he going to send government handlers with any scientists presenting papers to make sure they toe the line?

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5890
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1387 on: January 24, 2017, 03:46:58 PM »
More "real impacts" today:

DJT has instituted a media blackout for all EPA employees, and has ordered a freeze on awarding any new contract or grants.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/trump-admin-orders-epa-contract-freeze-and-media-blackout/2017/01/24/f578db56-e271-11e6-a419-eefe8eff0835_story.html?utm_term=.31eff258f025

This thread has been hijacked by a major religious discussion. Maybe we can lead it back on topic. When I saw this latest news about the media blackouts for the EPA, NPS, and the USDA I became very concerned. I was not aware the President had the power to tell these organizations they may not speak about anything they are doing, with national security the only real exception. Much of what the EPA, NPS and USDA do require sharing of knowledge and informing the public. It seems like something out of a different era or time for a President to try to control this information. He is obviously trying to control all information that is released from Government agencies and keep the public uninformed. I am just wondering if congress is going to set by and let this stand. It is such an overreach of power.

I haven't posted much on MMM threads, but have been a lurker for many years. I value the information and opinions discussed by an obviously very intelligent base of posters. Any opinions on this latest news? I have been mostly upset over environmental policies of the new administration as some of the impacts cannot be reversed, but this latest news has me terrified. We might not even get a chance to know what is going on before it happens. What the heck! Public information is for the public!

In a tragic sort of way I feel like fate is screwing with me.
PM Stephen Harper placed a similar order on the governmental scientists here in Canada which Trudeau recently lifted. I can say that the effect on morale and on science were both decidedly negative, as scientists stopped sharing their findings with the public.  The reasons given for Harper's ban sound earily similar; "we're trying... to make sure what goes out reflects the priorities of the administration".
Now that the ban has been lifted in Canada and we're looking at jobs in the US we find a similar restiction has just popped up there.

Make no mistake about it, this is an attempt to control information.
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

gaja

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 653
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1388 on: January 24, 2017, 03:50:15 PM »
Ok.   Is he going to send government handlers with any scientists presenting papers to make sure they toe the line?

It will be much easier to not fund any travels, conference fees, or other costs associated with preparing, publishing, or presenting papers.
Travelling southern Norway, Iceland and the Faroes in an electric car: http://travelelectric.blogspot.no/

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5890
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1389 on: January 24, 2017, 03:52:29 PM »
From the above-linked WaPo article: ARS spokesman Christopher Bentley said the ban would not include scientific publications released through peer-reviewed professional journals.
That's good, but a valid criticism of science and scientists is that what's published in peer reviewed journals is not seen or even very comprehensible to the average layperson.  A lot of effort has been made in the past few decades for scientists to share their research more directly with teh public by writing blogs, using social media, talking to journalists and giving community-level talks open to the public.  This seems to put a stop (at least temporarily) to all of those.

When there was a similar ban here in Canada, scientists couldn't even confirm their findings to journalists when they published important studies. Everything had to go through a government spokesperson, and it was a comlpete black=box regarding what was shared and what wasn't (as well as the reasons why some communications were blocked).
"Do not confuse complexity with superiority"

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5003
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1390 on: January 24, 2017, 03:56:47 PM »
Ok.   Is he going to send government handlers with any scientists presenting papers to make sure they toe the line?

Don't worry, we've always had government handlers following us around to make sure we toe the line.  It's one of the worst parts of this job.

Usually "the line" is pretty easy.  Stick to the facts, represent your agency with dignity and professionalism, articulate your findings in language people can understand, and try not to piss people off.  The only political pressures I've felt in this job have been about internal power struggle between agencies, not national politics intervening with facts.

Some of my colleagues at other agencies were deep sixed under the Bush administration, but I haven't heard of a single instance of the executive branch interfering in federal research under Obama.  That doesn't mean it didn't happen, just that I haven't heard about it the way I used to hear about Dick Cheney sending cease and desist letters to researchers.

I think today's EPA ban will be temporary, while they figure out what leverage they have to control their communications officers, and will be lifted once they restrict access to Twitter to people who have sworn the loyalty oath or whatever.

dividendman

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 774
  • Age: 34
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1391 on: January 24, 2017, 06:01:55 PM »
If the democrats were smart and/or had any balls they would simply accuse Trump of something every other day on the house or senate floor (or some other way that gets good news coverage) that gets him mad like:
1) he's a sexual predator
2) he got less votes than Clinton
3) he has small hands, or penis, fuckit
4) say how he had sexual relations with putin
5) etc.

It doesn't have to be true, just say it. Then he'll spend four years (or less) just being mad and fighting with folks via twitter/press conferences and won't do much.

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 580
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1392 on: January 24, 2017, 06:06:39 PM »
If the democrats were smart and/or had any balls they would simply accuse Trump of something every other day on the house or senate floor (or some other way that gets good news coverage) that gets him mad like:
1) he's a sexual predator
2) he got less votes than Clinton
3) he has small hands, or penis, fuckit
4) say how he had sexual relations with putin
5) etc.

It doesn't have to be true, just say it. Then he'll spend four years (or less) just being mad and fighting with folks via twitter/press conferences and won't do much.

He'd show up all like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYLNEFY-Gnc

former player

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Location: Avalon
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1393 on: January 24, 2017, 06:53:21 PM »
If the democrats were smart and/or had any balls they would simply accuse Trump of something every other day on the house or senate floor (or some other way that gets good news coverage) that gets him mad like:
1) he's a sexual predator
2) he got less votes than Clinton
3) he has small hands, or penis, fuckit
4) say how he had sexual relations with putin
5) etc.

It doesn't have to be true, just say it. Then he'll spend four years (or less) just being mad and fighting with folks via twitter/press conferences and won't do much.
Trump spent years tweeting about Obama being born in Kenya.

We only have "a Trump spokesperson"'s word that Trump has sold his stakes in Energy Transfer Partners (the company overseeing construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline).  So why not spend the next four years demanding Trump prove that he has no financial interest in any of the companies involved in the pipeline?
Be frugal and industrious, and you will be free (Ben Franklin)

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1394 on: January 24, 2017, 07:45:39 PM »
If the democrats were smart and/or had any balls they would simply accuse Trump of something every other day on the house or senate floor (or some other way that gets good news coverage) that gets him mad like:
1) he's a sexual predator
2) he got less votes than Clinton
3) he has small hands, or penis, fuckit
4) say how he had sexual relations with putin
5) etc.

It doesn't have to be true, just say it. Then he'll spend four years (or less) just being mad and fighting with folks via twitter/press conferences and won't do much.

I think the actions of this week have shown very clearly that Trump is perfectly capable of both complaining loudly and getting shit done in fucking record time.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1162
  • Age: 33
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1395 on: January 24, 2017, 07:54:35 PM »

I think the actions of this week have shown very clearly that Trump is perfectly capable of both complaining loudly and getting shit done in fucking record time.

Source on how much more shit he's getting done than his predecessors? That's not to mention, of course, the quality, consistency, and smell of this particular shit he's taking on us all, which is obviously quite debatable.

mtnrider

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 256
  • Location: Frozen tundra in the Northeast
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1396 on: January 24, 2017, 09:27:39 PM »
Source on how much more shit he's getting done than his predecessors? That's not to mention, of course, the quality, consistency, and smell of this particular shit he's taking on us all, which is obviously quite debatable.

He can certainly sign executive orders quickly.  And issue media blackouts to federal agencies.  And put the EPA on a financial freeze.  It might not be more work on his part, but these things can have wide-reaching consequences.

It's a lot easier to tear things down than to build them up.  The second law of thermodynamics is working in your favor.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5003
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1397 on: January 24, 2017, 09:39:43 PM »
getting shit done in fucking record time.

Personally, I don't consider the hiring freeze, pay freeze, media blackout, and press conferences full of "alternative facts" to be the kinds of shit that count as getting shit done.  Those are all the opposite of getting shit done.  Those are preventing shit from getting done.

But he did do SOME stuff, like name his inauguration day "National Day of Patriotic Devotion" like we're the DPRK.  That's some straight up Kim Jong Il style bullshit right there.

Malaysia41

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2818
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Half Way Around The World
    • My mmm journal
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1398 on: January 24, 2017, 10:52:47 PM »
getting shit done in fucking record time.

Personally, I don't consider the hiring freeze, pay freeze, media blackout, and press conferences full of "alternative facts" to be the kinds of shit that count as getting shit done.  Those are all the opposite of getting shit done.  Those are preventing shit from getting done.

Also - remember - these orders that Trump is signing aren't Trump's doing. These policies were hand crafted by Pence, McConnell, Gingrich (yes I know he's not in congress anymore but its clear he's having a say), possibly Cheney, and the entire tea party entourage including 'think tanks' like the Heritage foundation. They're writing and pushing their dream policy / policy that will create liberal tears (God I hate that component of their motivation - it's so puerile). Trump is just holding the pen and *possibly* is filtering out a few items. But these are not the work of Trump.

These policies are the work of the people whose movement Trump's psychological trickery tapped into.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2017, 10:54:29 PM by Malaysia41 »
Last one to panic wins!

My Rohingya Refugee Charity (now Tax Exempt!)

I'm an enemy of POTUS, VPOTUS, and the privately funded political system that inflicted them upon us.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #1399 on: January 24, 2017, 11:13:26 PM »
getting shit done in fucking record time.

Personally, I don't consider the hiring freeze, pay freeze, media blackout, and press conferences full of "alternative facts" to be the kinds of shit that count as getting shit done.  Those are all the opposite of getting shit done.  Those are preventing shit from getting done.

But he did do SOME stuff, like name his inauguration day "National Day of Patriotic Devotion" like we're the DPRK.  That's some straight up Kim Jong Il style bullshit right there.

And approving infrastructure projects and repealing mortgage fee cuts, etc. Again, not commenting on whether these are great or poor policies, but clearly he's not afraid to get things rolling. Looks like quite a few people were caught off-guard by some of his actions; I can see why they would become defensive that he has surprised them yet again.

And yes, his inauguration day name was dumb. But he's not the first to name his inauguration day something dumb. He's not even the first to name it "National Day of Patriotic Devotion", so I guess I won't personally get my panties in a bunch over this.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM