Why I Will Never Abandon Trump

 

Lately there’s been a lot of talk among pundits on what it would take for Trump’s base to abandon him. For me, the answer is: nothing. I feel I must support Trump, regardless of what he does, because I fear what would happen if he got impeached. That’s not to say I don’t criticize Trump from time to time. But said criticism has no bearing on my generic support for him.

Ever since World War II, American elites have tried to build this narrative that democracy is about impersonal public policy, not power/status competition between groups. If you believe that policy is all that matters, than of course there won’t be any consequences to impeaching Trump, certainly not for his base. He’ll just be replaced by Pence, and things will go on mostly as they have before.

This is completely absurd. Trump’s base is socially vulnerable, much more so than I think any of us want to admit. Impeaching Trump would be a complete disaster. At the very least we would see a rash of suicides. The discrimination working-class white people face could intensify, especially in employment. The nihilism that’s been growing in the middle and upper middle classes for 50 years could start to spiral out of control. And that’s before we get to the rioting which, let’s be honest, would be intense.

If you don’t believe me, just look at what happened to Christians after the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage. Liberals went on a judicial jihad to persecute them. The status of Christians fell so low that the courts actually ruled that Trump’s travel ban’s prioritization of religious minorities was unconstitutional. Yes, Christians are dying en masse in Middle Eastern countries, but apparently we can’t do anything about it because, well, the First Amendment prohibits it. Go figure.

Elite coups have consequences. Politics is not a dispassionate fight over public policy, but a struggle between groups. The consequences of impeaching Trump would be just too dire for me to abandon my generic support for the man, and I don’t think there’s anything Trump could that would change that.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 230 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Joseph Eagar Member
    Joseph Eagar
    @JosephEagar

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    person any chance for a better life when those Americans decide to control the American border. That’s a massive oversimplification of the world.

    Right. The benefit of oversimplification is that it lets us harness our deepest intuitions. What it does in this case is establish a presumption in favor of allowing immigration. So, it seems reasonable to let people go and do what they want as a first approximation. Then you can start applying other constraints and see if it overcomes that presumption.

    Skeptics already try to make these arguments, and in most cases, the data tend to show that the assumptions are either incorrect or the order of magnitude of the effect is much smaller than people assume.

    I’ve always hated this argument.  Yes, in the absence of any other policy changes restricting immigration does nothing more than create inflation.  But that’s true of any full employment policy, including tax cuts.  You have to pursue multiple complementary policies.  Thus, inflationary middle-class tax cuts are paired with cuts to capital taxation.

    I don’t just want immigration restrictions.  I want immigration restrictions, tight fiscal policy, and a weakish dollar.  I want lots of economic growth in China and Germany, so we can grow our exports.  In an environment of abundant national savings and growing global demand, employers will respond to tight labor markets by amping up productivity growth.

    That’s my plan.  Studies showing that immigration restrictions by themselves don’t lead to positive outcomes are kind of beside the point.  I already knew that.

     

     

    • #181
  2. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    On some levels, I think that you’re right, @mikeh, but the oversimplification is still just that.

    Just some background, I teach history and understand that Americans greatly benefited from essentially open borders in the past when we had so few people we could not easy industrialize.  I also know all about the eugenic movement that influenced our quota system at the end of the Progressive Era.

    As I said, I think our system is stupid.

    I *also* believe in free markets as you do, but I recognize that we don’t really work in a free labor market at all.  Sooooooo, you’ve got lots of moving parts to consider that include social safety nets, exploitation of people who work outside the system,etc.  And I will admit that as free market as I am, I don’t think the “iron law of wages” is awesome as it manifests within a market with an unlimited unskilled labor supply….

    Btw, I’ve worked abroad, and I have no problem with immigrants.  At the root of your framing is xenophobia, and I think this is too simple and unfair.

    After all, the United States is not the only “company” in the world.  I am not slashing an immigrants’ tires if he wants to take a job anywhere else.  I am not sabotaging that person’s ability to change the system where he is.

    I’m just picking and choosing the people from his company–*whatever* country that may be—that have the most desired skills for MY company, the US.

    Remember, I support a skills based immigration system, so I could care less where a person is from–if he’s a foreigner–if I can’t find the right candidate for an internal promotion.

    In fact, then I’m happy to poach that employee from his home… company.

    I think there’s probably a middle ground somewhere between “open borders” and “xenophobic protectionism.”

     

    • #182
  3. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    I also think it’s important to understand @josepheagar‘s resentment.

    You are not in a great space when a good segment of employees in your company want to overthrow management like some new incarnation of Wobblies….  and we know there are real reasons for some employees to be dissatisfied.  Absolutely real.

    I say this knowing Joseph has already decided I’m his enemy simply because I’m middle class and a college professor and don’t like the president much….

    I think I could change Joseph’s mind on that point–that people are bad, bad, bad because of class affiliation–but not if he believes I really and truly don’t care if *he* dies in the streets.

    I don’t know how to walk the tightrope here, but if I’ve learned anything in the last year it’s that People believe *their* experiences… the devil with the wider picture.

    Therefore I’d like to create an immigration policy that doesn’t make some Americans feel so completely marginalized.  (That causes other problems.)

    Last,  I don’t have any idea how to do that.  None.  All I can say is I’m not just “build a wall” OR “let in the ocean”.

     

    • #183
  4. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    On some levels, I think that you’re right, @mikeh, but the oversimplification is still just that.

    Just some background, I teach history and understand that Americans greatly benefited from essentially open borders in the past when we had so few people we could not easy industrialize. I also know all about the eugenic movement that influenced our quota system at the end of the Progressive Era.

    As I said, I think our system is stupid.

    I *also* believe in free markets as you do, but I recognize that we don’t really work in a free labor market at all. Sooooooo, you’ve got lots of moving parts to consider that include social safety nets, exploitation of people who work outside the system,etc. And I will admit that as free market as I am, I don’t think the “iron law of wages” is awesome as it manifests within a market with an unlimited unskilled labor supply….

    I understand you concern, but there are several reasons why the labor supply would not be anything close to infinite. For one, cost of living increases would slow down the influx. Many more people would probably like to live in New York, but at some point it just gets too expensive.

    The effect on wages under immigration induced supply shocks has been estimated by George Borjas, an immigration skeptic, to be around 6% for high school dropouts. When the economy equilibrates, the effect on high school dropouts is about 3%. (The effect is positive in the “long run” for the middle class and slightly negative for college graduates and post graduates)

    Now, anyone would be upset by even a 5% pay cut, especially low income workers, but at least to me, this is a much smaller impact than I would expect. Low income workers are affected by supply shocks much less than one would think. I guess it has something to do with there being so many of them to begin with?

    Btw, I’ve worked abroad, and I have no problem with immigrants. At the root of your framing is xenophobia, and I think this is too simple and unfair.

    Right, you personally have no problem; I’m not talking about youI mean, almost anything we say could be qualified as too simplistic. I guess I could have spent another 5 minutes layering on caveats about all the different reasons people are biased in favor of natives and against foreigners, but as a simple fact most people are biased in favor of native workers. I guess you can call it xenophobia to give it a loaded term, but you could just as easily call it something like “human nature.”

    After all, the United States is not the only “company” in the world. I am not slashing an immigrants’ tires if he wants to take a job anywhere else. I am not sabotaging that person’s ability to change the system where he is.

    I’m just picking and choosing the people from his company–*whatever* country that may be—that have the most desired skills for MY company, the US.

    Remember, I support a skills based immigration system, so I could care less where a person is from–if he’s a foreigner–if I can’t find the right candidate for an internal promotion.

    In fact, then I’m happy to poach that employee from his home… company.

    I think there’s probably a middle ground somewhere between “open borders” and “xenophobic protectionism.”

    Right, when I’m talking about immigration skeptics in general I’m not talking about you. The company analogy is a variation on the home analogy whereby somehow by voting we can decide who other people are allowed to hire. It works fine if you personally don’t want to hire someone from another country, but it sort of breaks down when you have to evoke some kind of collective “we all decided to let a majority vote decide who we can hire.”

    • #184
  5. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Mike H (View Comment):
    For one, cost of living increases would slow down the influx. Many more people would probably like to live in New York, but at some point it just gets too expensive.

    Okay.  Here’s a good example of those many moving parts that make this question of immigration and free labor markets much more difficult than an exercise in a free labor market.

    I agree with you *in theory* that rising costs would (eventually) dissuade some from immigrating, but since you have political leadership from people like Bill de Blasio–and there are many Bill de Blasios in many cities around the country–you also have controlled rents, redistribution of property taxes, and endless schemes for lower income housing to be married with development deals that effectively mitigate your mitigating factor.  Then there are all those artificial pay hikes to match costs of living…

    In other words, since the invisible hand is constantly nudged in whatever direction whichever politician finds the most advantageous for whichever special interest group will at that moment elect him, those natural controls can’t be considered constant.

    Get rid of subsidies, and maybe what you say makes more practical sense, but we aren’t getting rid of subsidies.

    Also, 3-5% is a giant shock for a people who already live paycheck to paycheck.  I did a quick google search to determine how many Americans do that , and the numbers are pretty insane.

    Finally, I understand you’re not calling me a nativist, but you are calling a majority of people concerned about immigration just that, which isn’t fair.  In fact, you’ve made them complicit in oppression, even though Americans themselves are not working in a free-movement labor market in which they as individuals can say they just want to pick up stakes and go to Ireland or Switzerland or Singapore or where-ever to improve their lot.

    I mean, I don’t think the endless caveats are necessary, but I think the minority–albeit a loud minority–is actually concerned only about the “foreign-ness” of immigrants in 2017.

    That doesn’t mean that I don’t think some people are mistaken about some of the impacts–both positive and negative–of immigration.

    As I said earlier, I learned this last year that people believe their own experiences, whatever the data.

    It’s been an interesting discussion though.  ;)

     

    • #185
  6. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    I mean, I don’t think the endless caveats are necessary, but I think the minority–albeit a loud minority–is actually concerned only about the “foreign-ness” of immigrants in 2017.

    That doesn’t mean that I don’t think some people are mistaken about some of the impacts–both positive and negative–of immigration.

    As I said earlier, I learned this last year that people believe their own experiences, whatever the data.

    It’s been an interesting discussion though. ?

    As an observer of these last few interactions, I say @lois-lane wins this debate hands-down since the other side is far too radical to garner much support.

    • #186
  7. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    I mean, I don’t think the endless caveats are necessary, but I think the minority–albeit a loud minority–is actually concerned only about the “foreign-ness” of immigrants in 2017.

    That doesn’t mean that I don’t think some people are mistaken about some of the impacts–both positive and negative–of immigration.

    As I said earlier, I learned this last year that people believe their own experiences, whatever the data.

    It’s been an interesting discussion though. ?

    As an observer of these last few interactions, I say @lois-lane wins this debate hands-down since the other side is far too radical to garner much support.

    lol, I think we’d have to determine what the distributions of opinion was beforehand. My guess is no one was persuaded either way from their original positions.

    • #187
  8. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    I mean, I don’t think the endless caveats are necessary, but I think the minority–albeit a loud minority–is actually concerned only about the “foreign-ness” of immigrants in 2017.

    That doesn’t mean that I don’t think some people are mistaken about some of the impacts–both positive and negative–of immigration.

    As I said earlier, I learned this last year that people believe their own experiences, whatever the data.

    It’s been an interesting discussion though. ?

    As an observer of these last few interactions, I say @lois-lane wins this debate hands-down since the other side is far too radical to garner much support.

    You’re sweet, Bob.  I never win anything.  :D

    Mike is an articulate guy.

    • #188
  9. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    I mean, I don’t think the endless caveats are necessary, but I think the minority–albeit a loud minority–is actually concerned only about the “foreign-ness” of immigrants in 2017.

    That doesn’t mean that I don’t think some people are mistaken about some of the impacts–both positive and negative–of immigration.

    As I said earlier, I learned this last year that people believe their own experiences, whatever the data.

    It’s been an interesting discussion though. ?

    As an observer of these last few interactions, I say @lois-lane wins this debate hands-down since the other side is far too radical to garner much support.

    lol, I think we’d have to determine what the distributions of opinion was beforehand. My guess is no one was persuaded either way from their original positions.

    This is probably true.  :D  Of course, if I already owned the majority….  ;)

    • #189
  10. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    I mean, I don’t think the endless caveats are necessary, but I think the minority–albeit a loud minority–is actually concerned only about the “foreign-ness” of immigrants in 2017.

    That doesn’t mean that I don’t think some people are mistaken about some of the impacts–both positive and negative–of immigration.

    As I said earlier, I learned this last year that people believe their own experiences, whatever the data.

    It’s been an interesting discussion though. ?

    As an observer of these last few interactions, I say @lois-lane wins this debate hands-down since the other side is far too radical to garner much support.

    You’re sweet, Bob. I never win anything. ?

    Mike is an articulate guy.

    Yes, a radical articulate guy.

    • #190
  11. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Mike H (View Comment):
    For one, cost of living increases would slow down the influx. Many more people would probably like to live in New York, but at some point it just gets too expensive.

    Okay. Here’s a good example of those many moving parts that make this question of immigration and free labor markets much more difficult than an exercise in a free labor market.

    I agree with you *in theory* that rising costs would (eventually) dissuade some from immigrating, but since you have political leadership from people like Bill de Blasio–and there are many Bill de Blasios in many cities around the country–you also have controlled rents, redistribution of property taxes, and endless schemes for lower income housing to be married with development deals that effectively mitigate your mitigating factor. Then there are all those artificial pay hikes to match costs of living…

    Right, but what happens when government tries to artificially lower prices? Shortages. The “artificial pay hikes” don’t compensate completely for the cost of living. Otherwise, there’d be a lot more people in those cities.

    In other words, since the invisible hand is constantly nudged in whatever direction whichever politician finds the most advantageous for whichever special interest group will at that moment elect him, those natural controls can’t be considered constant.

    Get rid of subsidies, and maybe what you say makes more practical sense, but we aren’t getting rid of subsidies.

    Also, 3-5% is a giant shock for a people who already live paycheck to paycheck. I did a quick google search to determine how many Americans do that , and the numbers are pretty insane.

    I agree, but instead of disallowing immigration, it would be less disruptive to simply compensate low skilled workers for their losses. You could even charge immigrants an entry fee in order to pay for it! Would be a million times better than the status quo.

    Finally, I understand you’re not calling me a nativist, but you are calling a majority of people concerned about immigration just that, which isn’t fair. In fact, you’ve made them complicit in oppression, even though Americans themselves are not working in a free-movement labor market in which they as individuals can say they just want to pick up stakes and go to Ireland or Switzerland or Singapore or where-ever to improve their lot.

    I mean, I don’t think the endless caveats are necessary, but I think the minority–albeit a loud minority–is actually concerned only about the “foreign-ness” of immigrants in 2017.

    Look, maybe I shouldn’t have brought it up. But it’s hard for me to ignore something that seems to be true. This isn’t something uniquely bad about Americans. Most people around the world have an inherent bias towards people from their own country. It’s human nature. It’s like saying blacks have lower average IQ as a group. It’s just something that’s true, even if we don’t like it. Maybe pointing it out is not the right way to go about changing people’s minds, but I’m not trying to change their minds right now. The people reading this and you have much more nuanced view, but you’re kidding yourself if you think you and the people you know are the norm.

    That doesn’t mean that I don’t think some people are mistaken about some of the impacts–both positive and negative–of immigration.

    As I said earlier, I learned this last year that people believe their own experiences, whatever the data.

    It’s been an interesting discussion though. ?

    One of the best discussions I’ve ever had on Ricochet. This is why I stick around.

    • #191
  12. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    I think the source or object of @josepheagar complaints might actually be the ruling elite portion of the upper middle class that, in their participation in the interactions of government and commerce, generate many of the inequities he faces in daily life. Immigration is only one piece.

    • #192
  13. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Mike H (View Comment):
    One of the best discussions I’ve ever had on Ricochet. This is why I stick around.

    That is very nice, Mike.  :D  I have lots of interesting discussions here, which is great.  It’s the only social media in which I participate.

    Anyway, I think you and I are both in agreement per the point that there needs to be a change in status quo.  I mean, no argument there.  I don’t know how many times I need to say it, but I think our current system is stupid.

    However, when you add your own financial caveats like “admission fees” charged to immigrants, which would help compensate low income workers who are American citizens for the inevitable income loss they’d experience per an expanded immigrant labor pool–however minor that loss might seem at first glance–then you’re back to some of your own original objections, which I took to be connected to creating artificial barriers for worker entry.  (An entry fee is, after all, a barrier.)

    Having known several people who have gone through our nonsensical system, I know about the astronomical costs already associated with getting a Green Card and then becoming a citizen.  I don’t know what happens to all that money, mind, but I’m not sure what else could be piled on top of legal immigrants.

    The whole system needs an overhaul, and I think entry to the greatest country on the planet should be about many different factors.

    As (I think?) I said before, I like the points system that Australia uses.  It’s not all about higher education either.  One of my girlfriends emigrated there a few years ago, and she told me there was a shortage in hair dressers at that time.  Australians just weren’t going to beauty school, so you got more points if that was your profession because the costs of getting a good haircut were getting crazy.   You also got points per how old you were, how much money you would bring, how many years you were planning to work, how many kids you had, etc.  Still–per my understanding of what she went through–the main thing was your primary skill and whether or not Australians needed more people with that skill set or not.  The big question was always, “What were you bringing to Australia’s table?????”  That sounds imminently practical to me.  And fair.

    The US is a nation of immigrants.  While I can concede that of course there are some xenophobic strains in this country outside of my own circles, I think that inherent characteristic impacts how Americans view people who move here in general.  As an Irish Catholic with around 40 first cousins–no joke!!!–I have family members in all kinds of different professions and class positions.  The biggest driver of resentment for them is the idea that there are laws that are just broken.

    I get that, too.  I do.

     

    • #193
  14. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    I think the source or object of @josepheagar complaints might actually be the ruling elite portion of the upper middle class that, in their participation in the interactions of government and commerce, generate many of the inequities he faces in daily life. Immigration is only one piece.

    I hear you, but Joseph didn’t make many distinctions.  I’m pretty sure on paper–despite the fact that I am an adjunct, which is a special sort of labor underclass in academia–I look pretty horrible to Joseph.  Of course, I can only go by what he wrote here, but he paints with a pretty broad brush.

    I absolutely believe that Joseph is correct when thinking the system is “rigged.”  It is.  He’s totally right.  But it’s still possible to make it work.  And many people who participate in that “rigged” system are only doing what they need to do to get along, i.e. going to the right schools, whatever.  They didn’t create the mess.  We all have to own a little part of it.

    • #194
  15. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    I think the source or object of @josepheagar complaints might actually be the ruling elite portion of the upper middle class that, in their participation in the interactions of government and commerce, generate many of the inequities he faces in daily life. Immigration is only one piece.

    I hear you, but Joseph didn’t make many distinctions. I’m pretty sure on paper–despite the fact that I am an adjunct, which is a special sort of labor underclass in academia–I look pretty horrible to Joseph. Of course, I can only go by what he wrote here, but he paints with a pretty broad brush.

    Hey! I’m an adjunct too! In physics.

     

    • #195
  16. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    I think the source or object of @josepheagar complaints might actually be the ruling elite portion of the upper middle class that, in their participation in the interactions of government and commerce, generate many of the inequities he faces in daily life. Immigration is only one piece.

    I hear you, but Joseph didn’t make many distinctions. I’m pretty sure on paper–despite the fact that I am an adjunct, which is a special sort of labor underclass in academia–I look pretty horrible to Joseph. Of course, I can only go by what he wrote here, but he paints with a pretty broad brush.

    Hey! I’m an adjunct too! In physics.

    Well, are you two not being used by the higher education establishment in much the same way we have been discussing?

    • #196
  17. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    I think the source or object of @josepheagar complaints might actually be the ruling elite portion of the upper middle class that, in their participation in the interactions of government and commerce, generate many of the inequities he faces in daily life. Immigration is only one piece.

    I hear you, but Joseph didn’t make many distinctions. I’m pretty sure on paper–despite the fact that I am an adjunct, which is a special sort of labor underclass in academia–I look pretty horrible to Joseph. Of course, I can only go by what he wrote here, but he paints with a pretty broad brush.

    Hey! I’m an adjunct too! In physics.

    Well, are you two not being used by the higher education establishment in much the same way we have been discussing?

    Oh, goodness, yes.  I wrote about this a while back.  The reactions were interesting to me.  I am all sorts of educated and could make more money waiting tables, but I got no sympathy on that front.  :D  I’ve had all sorts of jobs in my life, and–frankly–I love what I do now the most.  It’s a trade-off.  No $ but happiness.

    • #197
  18. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    I think the source or object of @josepheagar complaints might actually be the ruling elite portion of the upper middle class that, in their participation in the interactions of government and commerce, generate many of the inequities he faces in daily life. Immigration is only one piece.

    I hear you, but Joseph didn’t make many distinctions. I’m pretty sure on paper–despite the fact that I am an adjunct, which is a special sort of labor underclass in academia–I look pretty horrible to Joseph. Of course, I can only go by what he wrote here, but he paints with a pretty broad brush.

    Hey! I’m an adjunct too! In physics.

    Well, are you two not being used by the higher education establishment in much the same way we have been discussing?

    I’d like to hear you expand on this. I often wonder what a free market in higher education would look like. Luckily, I’ve secured a regular job at an Ohio State satellite campus that pays pretty decently, at least during the school year. I also teach for a community college, and that pay is ridiculously low.

    • #198
  19. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Mike H (View Comment):
    I’d like to hear you expand on this. I often wonder what a free market in higher education would look like. Luckily, I’ve secured a regular job at an Ohio State satellite campus that pays pretty decently, at least during the school year. I also teach for a community college, and that pay is ridiculously low.

    I work at a private university, which pays better, and a community college, which does not even contribute to social security per some loophole they managed to exploit, which amuses me no end.  You would find some of the comments on my piece about being an adjunct interesting.  Of course, I had the pushback of “full professors have a lot more responsibilities than adjuncts” to “get a different job” to “it’s not a free labor market, so you should just quit.”

    I found the conversation interesting.  AND someone then started a “group” for academics.

    It was all very interesting to me.

    And I doubt that many people outside of academia really have any idea about the adjunct construct.  They surely wouldn’t think their professors make less than some daycare workers, but…  Well…  I love my job.

    • #199
  20. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Joseph Eagar (View Comment):

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Yeah, that was really poorly worded. I must be fallible or something. I tried to walk it back later after I realized how bad it sounded. It would be more accurate to say that people don’t realize the unintended consequences of their actions and that they are at least partially culpable when they don’t allow someone to save themselves simply because they were born to the wrong parents.

    So sorry I missed this @joesepheagar, the curse of the last comment on a page.

    Like my aunts and uncles and some of their kids? Why should they have to suffer eternally slack labor markets (and the chronic, health-destroying stress that creates), so people from other countries can get ahead?

    I donno… no one should have to suffer. If suffering is unavoidable, what’s the least bad way to distribute it? Are you arguing suffering is worse among Americans who make $20,000 a year than non-Americans living on around a dollar a day? That might be debatable, but it’s not obvious.

    Just wait until your uncles lose their jobs, then end up in the hospital for life-threatening gastrointestional problems brought on by stress. That happened to two of mine.

    Yeah, that sounds pretty terrible. I’m sorry your family is suffering. I have a big family with a large distribution in incomes, but I can’t think of anyone who has suffered from that much stress.

    • #200
  21. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Mike H (View Comment):
    I’d like to hear you expand on this. I often wonder what a free market in higher education would look like. Luckily, I’ve secured a regular job at an Ohio State satellite campus that pays pretty decently, at least during the school year. I also teach for a community college, and that pay is ridiculously low.

    I work at a private university, which pays better, and a community college, which does not even contribute to social security per some loophole they managed to exploit, which amuses me no end. You would find some of the comments on my piece about being an adjunct interesting. Of course, I had the pushback of “full professors have a lot more responsibilities than adjuncts” to “get a different job” to “it’s not a free labor market, so you should just quit.”

    I found the conversation interesting. AND someone then started a “group” for academics.

    It was all very interesting to me.

    And I doubt that many people outside of academia really have any idea about the adjunct construct. They surely wouldn’t think their professors make less than some daycare workers, but… Well… I love my job.

    Heh, and I’m looking for the first opportunity to quit.

    • #201
  22. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Mike H (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Mike H (View Comment):
    I’d like to hear you expand on this. I often wonder what a free market in higher education would look like. Luckily, I’ve secured a regular job at an Ohio State satellite campus that pays pretty decently, at least during the school year. I also teach for a community college, and that pay is ridiculously low.

    I work at a private university, which pays better, and a community college, which does not even contribute to social security per some loophole they managed to exploit, which amuses me no end. You would find some of the comments on my piece about being an adjunct interesting. Of course, I had the pushback of “full professors have a lot more responsibilities than adjuncts” to “get a different job” to “it’s not a free labor market, so you should just quit.”

    I found the conversation interesting. AND someone then started a “group” for academics.

    It was all very interesting to me.

    And I doubt that many people outside of academia really have any idea about the adjunct construct. They surely wouldn’t think their professors make less than some daycare workers, but… Well… I love my job.

    Heh, and I’m looking for the first opportunity to quit.

    Look, man.  I get that sentiment, for sure.  Yet I have not missed a single day in several years of adjuncting. Granted… I get no sick leave and have no access to substitutes :D , so missing days would be super hard, but that’s not why I always show up.   I seriously love talking about history with kids, and I cherish the freedom I have in higher education over working in a high school.  (I’ve done that, too.)

    On the flip-side, I know that I don’t have the credentials to compete for a tenured position.  (It’s not just blue collar folk who get locked out, you see.  When it comes to academia, doors are narrow.)   

    And I’d be lying if I said I didn’t have those days in which I felt seriously… exploited.

    Perhaps this is why I have a lot of empathy for people who find their real income slowly dissolving for various reasons, whatever they believe is causing “the shrink.”

    I mean, I understand the economics.  I do!  I do!!!!

    But I also understand the feelings one has when working very, very, very hard and not feeling as if pay is ever commiserate to output.

    • #202
  23. Amy Schley Coolidge
    Amy Schley
    @AmySchley

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    But I also understand the feelings one has when working very, very, very hard and not feeling as if pay is ever commiserate to output.

    This may be the most difficult sentiment to rid oneself of — that hard work qua hard work deserves reward. It’s simple, obvious, intuitive, and absolutely wrong. :)

    • #203
  24. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    Perhaps this is why I have a lot of empathy for people who find their real income slowly dissolving for various reasons, whatever they believe is causing “the shrink.”

    I mean, I understand the economics. I do! I do!!!!

    But I also understand the feelings one has when working very, very, very hard and not feeling as if pay is ever commiserate to output.

    ‘The shrink’ has a major impact on the people described in this post as suffering and in America I think it is due to a phenomenon sometimes referred to as ‘biflation’ that makes the inflation part less hurtful and noticeable. Biflation I’m using here to describe economic conditions where mandatory or necessary costs of living are increasing while discretionary costs are declining. Some bankers or economists say that one offsets the other so the net is zero. This last may seem true for many members of the upper middle class but not so for those just scraping by. For them it is very stressful.

    • #204
  25. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Amy Schley (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    But I also understand the feelings one has when working very, very, very hard and not feeling as if pay is ever commiserate to output.

    This may be the most difficult sentiment to rid oneself of — that hard work qua hard work deserves reward. It’s simple, obvious, intuitive, and absolutely wrong. ?

    Ah, see?  I understand this intellectually, Amy.  I truly, truly do.  But it is very counter-intuitive per a culture that lauds “hard work” as the way to get ahead.

    I have tremendous sympathy/empathy for people who feel more trapped than I am–I’m not really trapped ’cause I love the cheese on which I nibble in this here academia contraption!!!–and who cannot seem to get out of the trap no matter how hard they work.

    Are there life choices attached to how one gets in the trap?  Um.  Sure.  Yes.  Absolutely.  But sometimes economic conditions change in ways that make a human being’s head spin.

    I am often sympathetic.

    • #205
  26. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    The biflation that we have is facilitated by the reserve banking system keeping interest rates near zero so that those in a position to take advantage of that prosper. But part of the ‘bi’ is the high inflation component that principally affects the low income segment that cannot take any advantage resulting from low interest rates. You probably know what the interest rate is for these people in the lower income range who carry credit card balances, somewhere between 15 and 30 per cent. I have the same credit card carrying balances for as long as 21 months with zero interest. The whole game is rigged where the severest impacts are on those who can least bear them. And this all comes from the established arrangements between the upper middle class ruling elites and the commercial interests who are essentially the same interest group.

    • #206
  27. Mike H Inactive
    Mike H
    @MikeH

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    The biflation that we have is facilitated by the reserve banking system keeping interest rates near zero so that those in a position to take advantage of that prosper. But part of the ‘bi’ is the high inflation component that principally affects the low income segment that cannot take any advantage resulting from low interest rates. You probably know what the interest rate is for these people in the lower income range who carry credit card balances, somewhere between 15 and 30 per cent. I have the same credit card carrying balances for as long as 21 months with zero interest. The whole game is rigged where the severest impacts are on those who can least bear them. And this all comes from the established arrangements between the upper middle class ruling elites and the commercial interests who are essentially the same interest group.

    Maybe, but I’d have to believe part of this is the market. People with low incomes also are people who tend to make poor choices about borrowing. And when people make poor choices about borrowing, you’re going to charge them more to borrow money.

    There’s a wealth effect for sure, but I’m not sure how much of this is “rigged” and how much of it is the nature of the market.

    • #207
  28. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    The biflation that we have is facilitated by the reserve banking system keeping interest rates near zero so that those in a position to take advantage of that prosper. But part of the ‘bi’ is the high inflation component that principally affects the low income segment that cannot take any advantage resulting from low interest rates. You probably know what the interest rate is for these people in the lower income range who carry credit card balances, somewhere between 15 and 30 per cent. I have the same credit card carrying balances for as long as 21 months with zero interest. The whole game is rigged where the severest impacts are on those who can least bear them. And this all comes from the established arrangements between the upper middle class ruling elites and the commercial interests who are essentially the same interest group.

    I mean… I get it.  When my kid was a baby, and I had more than one job, I thought it was a great idea to open a savings account for him.  I did.  It was “Money from Mommy.”  When he graduated from college, I gave him that money.  But guess what?  I would have done a lot better to have invested it elsewhere.  In the long run, the “safe” savings account earned almost no interest and lost real value per the rate of inflation.

    Now, my husband makes more money than I do, and he’s done different things with money.  (Thank goodness!  That means I can be an adjunct and eat!!!  :D )  He’s not involved in some grand conspiracy with anyone.  He, actually, came from a lower class position than I did and climbed the ladder higher on his own.

    But… yeah.

    When I looked at the money that I had carefully squirreled away when it was not easy to do, I was shattered at how little my diligence had done.  I got the message why bother.  

    There are decisions that are made at different levels of government that impact individuals in ways that are far beyond their control and have absolutely nothing to do with their work ethic, the value they add to society, or how responsible they can be.  This is what causes justified anger, and I get it, even if I am not on the same page of many of these people politically.

    • #208
  29. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Know that I am not saying there is a conspiracy involving all of the upper middle class. What I am saying is that there is collusion between those who represent us in Washington and those in ‘big’ business and Wall Street(donors)who make the decisions on how things will be done. Trump is disrupting this process and that is why he has so many enemies at these high levels in our society. The upper middle class members not involved in this collusion are nevertheless complicit if they fail to recognize the need to break it. If we like being sheep we’ll let Trump be brought down.

    • #209
  30. Amy Schley Coolidge
    Amy Schley
    @AmySchley

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    Amy Schley (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    But I also understand the feelings one has when working very, very, very hard and not feeling as if pay is ever commiserate to output.

    This may be the most difficult sentiment to rid oneself of — that hard work qua hard work deserves reward. It’s simple, obvious, intuitive, and absolutely wrong. ?

    Ah, see? I understand this intellectually, Amy. I truly, truly do. But it is very counter-intuitive per a culture that lauds “hard work” as the way to get ahead.

    I have tremendous sympathy/empathy for people who feel more trapped than I am–I’m not really trapped ’cause I love the cheese on which I nibble in this here academia contraption!!!–and who cannot seem to get out of the trap no matter how hard they work.

    Are there life choices attached to how one gets in the trap? Um. Sure. Yes. Absolutely. But sometimes economic conditions change in ways that make a human being’s head spin.

    I am often sympathetic.

    I have 185 undergraduate credit hours in two bachelor’s degrees in addition to my law degree and have yet to work a job that needs a BA, much less my JD. You don’t need calculus to realize that paying off $270K at 6.8% interest with a $38K salary just isn’t gong to work.

    Your sympathy is appreciated, but ridding myself of Marxist notions about the inherent value of effort has been more useful.

    • #210
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.