The direction of society lately

[bigbill]

Trump showed it was okay to be rude and openly, in his dog whistle way of speaking, say that violence in the process of achieving a goal, is acceptable. His job as president is
to behave as an adult and he has failed in spades. Granted, his wasn't the only influence but it was, and will be significant.

Whether is was "can we just shoot the protesters in the legs?" or suggesting Liz Cheney face a firing squad, Trump was bridging the gap to violence.

The evil things that we only think of or speak of in private should remain that way in a civilized society. Trump made it okay to do otherwise.

The Cheney comment is a prime example of people getting a stage to make statements, even if they're taken out of context. How many times was the firing squad shared on social media?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/cnn-contr...191309492.html

[bigbill]

The push from the corporate sector has been to roll the regulatory environment back to the pre-Roosevelt era. That's Theodore Roosevelt. The brazenness of profit-taking at the expense of individual people in this country has increased dramatically. Trump has perhaps emboldened individuals to say openly what they think in private, but his belief in the corporate transactional model for governance and thus a more thorough corporatization of government has emboldened the corporate sector to reach for those things they have always wanted to do but were constrained by fairness regulation and enforced morality by government. The corrective litigation that results very easily swamps itself and, if it ever does go anywhere, eventually meets a Supreme Court friendly to the needs of the corporate sector. It's not the money, it's the money.

Social media just spreads everything like peanut butter thinned with kerosene across a parched land waiting for a rain cloud with nothing but dry lightning in the forecast.

A little off topic, but for regulation, some outlets in fossil fuel states believe regulation is restricting the coal industry. Restrictions have been placed on further coal mining in the Powder River Basis (around Gillette, WY) and the governor is up in arms about defending the industry. The truth, there are fewer coal plants and most of the ones in service have a surplus of coal and simply have no place to put it. The state has to pivot to rare earth metals and uranium, but entire communities are built around coal strip mining. Confirmation bias drives opinion, but after January 20th, the lower demand for coal will still be the reality. FWIW, the riding north of Gillette is great. The roads are in great shape with wide shoulders and the coal is shipped out by rail, so very few trucks.

[72gmc]

Feels to me like a new version of the same old cycle of inequality > inhumanity > violence > loud vows to never do that again. Whether business executives or generic plutocrats or wannabe strongmen, the new class convinces itself that it’s far too smart to repeat past mistakes, while it repeats past mistakes.

[Too Tall]

Bill, when I was working in S. Wyoming our coal mine had a reserve pile of some 2 mil. tns. Same as it ever was.

Real facts elude me however I recall hearing that the total number of people employed mining coal was around 40,000.

Humorous statement, to lighten your load, by a local politician at a social function "Don't vote, it only encourages them".

[bigbill]

Bill, when I was working in S. Wyoming our coal mine had a reserve pile of some 2 mil. tns. Same as it ever was.

Real facts elude me however I recall hearing that the total number of people employed mining coal was around 40,000.

Humorous statement, to lighten your load, by a local politician at a social function "Don't vote, it only encourages them".

I ride around the mines north of Gillette and it's all just so pristine and clean except for the piles of coal waiting to load in the elevator. That area was open plains before the mining and as mines have to rehab the land, it's still rolling. We're buying a house in Worland, as long as people consume sugar from sugar beets, eat beef and mutton, and drink beers from Molson and Coors, we'll be fine. I still get amused by the "high country barley," it's 4,400 feet, which still keeps my HCT elevated, but I'd hardly call it high country. The nuclear plant in Kemmerer is moving along nicely and in a few years, that old coal plant will be pumping out volts and amps without greenhouse gasses. As long as the rare earth and uranium industries can outshout the coal industry, the state has a future. I wouldn't mind an uptick in oil/gas either, the companies do a good job maintaining BLM roads for my gravel bike.

[Bob Ross]

How did we get to the point where people believe it's okay to commit violence against someone they don't like. Trump is a turd, but what action did he do that made it okay for someone to attempt a headshot at a rally?

I had a response to that planned, but Thomas' and Peter's comments in posts 12 and 15 respectively already answered comprehensively and, frankly, with far less unhinged vitriol than I think I would have been able to.

I'm just happy to see VSalon's OT section is discussing politics once again...this is the only forum I've ever visited where folks (even those with opposing viewpoints) can discuss the topic intelligently and respectfully, and I've missed that these past few years!

[72gmc]

On the topic of coal in Wyoming, I still enjoy re-reading John McPhee’s “Coal Train” from time to time.

[Too Tall]

Thanks Bob, I'm glad this is back on top as well.

[zachateseverything]

A little off topic, but for regulation, some outlets in fossil fuel states believe regulation is restricting the coal industry. Restrictions have been placed on further coal mining in the Powder River Basis (around Gillette, WY) and the governor is up in arms about defending the industry. The truth, there are fewer coal plants and most of the ones in service have a surplus of coal and simply have no place to put it. The state has to pivot to rare earth metals and uranium, but entire communities are built around coal strip mining. Confirmation bias drives opinion, but after January 20th, the lower demand for coal will still be the reality. FWIW, the riding north of Gillette is great. The roads are in great shape with wide shoulders and the coal is shipped out by rail, so very few trucks.

My family is from an old coal mining town in PA. Confirmation bias is a good descriptor of the culture in places like that. When I go home, I see a lot of signs along the lines of "Trump digs coal" or even more innocent things like renewed interest in "Boilo," which is a kind of spiced moonshine that was popular when the mines were running full tilt. There are people that are desperately trying to hang onto a cultural identity tied to an extraction industry that up and left 40+ years ago. They're grasping on to anything that tells them what they want to hear. That if this person gets into office they'll reopen the mines...even though it isn't regulation that shut the mines. It was economics. The simple fact is, if you're looking to run off of fossil fuels, natural gas is much cheaper and the renewables have a lower cost per MWh of generation.

Incidentally, the bike riding in that part of PA is incredible. There are cool single track networks to explore, plenty of gravel roads, and quiet country roads with wide shoulders. It's a similar situation with motorized off-roading. If they embraced a tourism based economy they could really transform the region.

As a country, we've spent my entire lifetime prioritizing capital over labor. We've continuously justified that if we give the capital class whatever they want as far as handouts, bailouts, tax cuts, and deregulation that somehow we'll see those gains trickle down to the middle and lower class. Meanwhile we also seen huge amounts of money transferred from the bottom 85% to the top 1%, social safety nets slashed, and a general enshitification of services.

I don't think anyone deserves to be shot, but we're a country that has a lot of guns, few checks on mental health, and a seemingly infinite number of echo chambers. It's a volatile situation.

[SlowPokePete]

...somehow we'll see those gains trickle down to the middle and lower class.

trickledown
trickledow
trickledo
trickled
trickle
trickl
trick

....taken from Robert Reich.

And I'm with Bob, I just had this conversation with Jorn not long ago.

SPP

[bigbill]

I had a response to that planned, but Thomas' and Peter's comments in posts 12 and 15 respectively already answered comprehensively and, frankly, with far less unhinged vitriol than I think I would have been able to.

I'm just happy to see VSalon's OT section is discussing politics once again...this is the only forum I've ever visited where folks (even those with opposing viewpoints) can discuss the topic intelligently and respectfully, and I've missed that these past few years!

Regarding #15 , I responded with the truth regarding Cheney's firing squad in #21 . People want to believe that Trump said Cheney should face a firing squad, but it wasn't true and the journalist that was responsible apologized and made a correction. I appreciate the level of discussion here, but the discussions bring up the misinformation from both sides in the past year that the right and left cling to out of confirmation bias.

I've been out of town for a few days or I would have replied in a more timely manner.

[Bob Ross]

People want to believe that Trump said Cheney should face a firing squad, but it wasn't true

Well, that's the -- ahem -- genius of tRump's exortations: They are always so vague (if not downright nonsensical) that if you take them at face value they are entirely meaningless. So you have to make some assumptions about what he really "meant" because if you simply read the syntax there's nothing there

...except possibility.


tRump's exact quote was “Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK. Let’s see how she feels about it, you know, when the guns are trained on her face.”

Yes, he never said the actual words "firing squad"

...but where else would someone find themselves face to face with only "nine barrels"?

[bigbill]

Well, that's the -- ahem -- genius of tRump's exortations: They are always so vague (if not downright nonsensical) that if you take them at face value they are entirely meaningless. So you have to make some assumptions about what he really "meant" because if you simply read the syntax there's nothing there

...except possibility.


tRump's exact quote was “Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK. Let’s see how she feels about it, you know, when the guns are trained on her face.”

Yes, he never said the actual words "firing squad"

...but where else would someone find themselves face to face with only "nine barrels"?

Here is the quote, not the cherry picked comments out of context. I copied this from BBC.

Speaking to Carlson on Thursday night in Glendale, one of the largest cities in swing state of Arizona, Trump said: "Let's put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK? Let's see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face."
He added: "They're all war hawks when they're sitting in Washington in a nice building saying, 'Oh, gee, well let's send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy.'"

[echappist]

Here is the quote, not the cherry picked comments out of context. I copied this from BBC.

Speaking to Carlson on Thursday night in Glendale, one of the largest cities in swing state of Arizona, Trump said: "Let's put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK? Let's see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face."
He added: "They're all war hawks when they're sitting in Washington in a nice building saying, 'Oh, gee, well let's send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy.'"

As a self-confessed pedant whose daily job requires a good dose of pedantry, I agree that on the matter of this one specific quote, the statement does not appear to be directed to either a firing squad or a 9-on-1 duel.

But as any self-aware pedant should know, pedantry is useful only if it serves a greater purpose; otherwise it just comes across as petty for the sake of pettiness or a weak defense for an otherwise untenable position. What purpose is served when you take on the role of self-appointed fact checker and draw people's attention to one relatively minor mistake, when you otherwise give no attention to the dozen plus other cogent points made by various forumites? It's made all the more glaring when you drew attention to it a second time. What does it say about you that after a few days away (as you admit), that whether others have acknowledged your point is the one thing foremost in your thoughts when you re-engage in this thread? Because really, that's a bit rich coming from someone who committed numerous debating faux-pas in the past, whether on factual matters or in mischaracterizing positions of others. And now you won't relent over a pedantic point?

So yes, a few erred in citing an example of Trump's proclivity of degrading and coarsening of public discourse, but that one mischaracterization does not detract from the overall point made in post #15 above, as I contend below.

Take for instance, this exchange (as reported in this segment in PBS).

Howard Kurtz, FOX News Anchor:

Why do you words like vermin and poisoning of the blood? The press, as you know, immediately reacts to that by saying, well, that's the kind of language that Hitler and Mussolini used.

Donald Trump :

Well, that's what they say. I didn't know that, but that's what they say. Because our country is being poisoned.

Or the fact that Trump's campaign used the "finish him" line that gained popularity from the video game Mortal Kombat.



For those who didn't play Mortal Kombat growing up, its genre is that of a fighting video game (one character trying to beat the other character silly and vice versa). In a novel twist from such standard fighting video games, in this particular game franchise, when one player's character defeats another character, the victor is urged to "finish" the defeated character using so called "fatality" moves, alluding to the title of the game. This is the context of "finish him".

During the 1996 Presidential Election, it was reported that the candidates referred to each other as opponents and not as enemies. My 6th grade teacher even made it a point that one's political opponents should not be viewed as one's enemies. Now contrast this to the typical language adopted by the President Elect, who quite literally called the media at large "enemy of the people" circa 2018.

There are too many other examples to list, but some choice ones include:

*1

[Gen.] Milley may have called, but if so, he should be tried for treason.

*2

If you go after me, I’m coming after you!

*3

This is a judge that should be disbarred. This is a judge that should be out of office. This is a judge that some people say could be charged criminally for what he's doing.

And I could provide more such quotes, but you get the point.

So the general point made in post #15 above very much stands, despite your being correct on the pedantic point you repeatedly made.

You could have pushed back on dearth of empathy for the leaders of insurance companies (from people across the political spectrum); you could have pushed back against critique re: concentration of capital into the coffers of the few and the critique of the mantra of "maximizing shareholder values". Both would be more germane to the original intent of your first post. But for reasons known only to yourself, for someone who has characterized the President Elect as "turd" on more than one occasion (including in this very thread), that this pedantic point is the one you sought to focus on.

But hey, what do I know, I'm just some guy on the interwebz.

Links to quotes 1-3 above
*1
*2
*3

[vertical_doug]

Back to Healthcare and UnitedHealthcare.

Funny thing happened at Mar-a-Lago today, Trump said we have to go after the middlemen and PBMs stocks sold off. Besides Delay and Deny Insurance, UnitedHealth's other main business is PBMs, the middleman.



PBMs generate revenue through several key streams:

Rebates: PBMs negotiate rebates with drug manufacturers for formulary placement. They often retain a portion of these rebates.

Administrative fees: PBMs charge fees for processing claims and other administrative services.

Spread pricing: This involves charging plan sponsors more for drugs than what they pay pharmacies and pocketing the difference.

PBM-owned pharmacies: Many PBMs own retail and mail-order pharmacies, generating revenue when patients use these services.

DIR fees: "Direct and indirect remuneration" fees are imposed on pharmacies after a patient sale.

So when your insurance arm can no longer deny and delay, just tack fees, rebates and spreads for the drugs your insurance has to pay for.

[Too Tall]

I get all misty to recall that time in rural France when we needed urgent medical care. We finished PBP a few days earlier, Mrs. Too was in bad shape from the beating. One as on 1 call produced a home visit from a crack professional who cared for her and advised....no charge have a nice day.

FWIIW Keep up the civil talk. We here depend on that.

[bigbill]

As a self-confessed pedant whose daily job requires a good dose of pedantry, I agree that on the matter of this one specific quote, the statement does not appear to be directed to either a firing squad or a 9-on-1 duel.

But as any self-aware pedant should know, pedantry is useful only if it serves a greater purpose; otherwise it just comes across as petty for the sake of pettiness or a weak defense for an otherwise untenable position. What purpose is served when you take on the role of self-appointed fact checker and draw people's attention to one relatively minor mistake, when you otherwise give no attention to the dozen plus other cogent points made by various forumites? It's made all the more glaring when you drew attention to it a second time. What does it say about you that after a few days away (as you admit), that whether others have acknowledged your point is the one thing foremost in your thoughts when you re-engage in this thread? Because really, that's a bit rich coming from someone who committed numerous debating faux-pas in the past, whether on factual matters or in mischaracterizing positions of others. And now you won't relent over a pedantic point?

So yes, a few erred in citing an example of Trump's proclivity of degrading and coarsening of public discourse, but that one mischaracterization does not detract from the overall point made in post #15 above, as I contend below.

Take for instance, this exchange (as reported in this segment in PBS).



Or the fact that Trump's campaign used the "finish him" line that gained popularity from the video game Mortal Kombat.



For those who didn't play Mortal Kombat growing up, its genre is that of a fighting video game (one character trying to beat the other character silly and vice versa). In a novel twist from such standard fighting video games, in this particular game franchise, when one player's character defeats another character, the victor is urged to "finish" the defeated character using so called "fatality" moves, alluding to the title of the game. This is the context of "finish him".

During the 1996 Presidential Election, it was reported that the candidates referred to each other as opponents and not as enemies. My 6th grade teacher even made it a point that one's political opponents should not be viewed as one's enemies. Now contrast this to the typical language adopted by the President Elect, who quite literally called the media at large "enemy of the people" circa 2018.

There are too many other examples to list, but some choice ones include:

*1
*2
*3

And I could provide more such quotes, but you get the point.

So the general point made in post #15 above very much stands, despite your being correct on the pedantic point you repeatedly made.

You could have pushed back on dearth of empathy for the leaders of insurance companies (from people across the political spectrum); you could have pushed back against critique re: concentration of capital into the coffers of the few and the critique of the mantra of "maximizing shareholder values". Both would be more germane to the original intent of your first post. But for reasons known only to yourself, for someone who has characterized the President Elect as "turd" on more than one occasion (including in this very thread), that this pedantic point is the one you sought to focus on.

But hey, what do I know, I'm just some guy on the interwebz.

Links to quotes 1-3 above
*1
*2
*3

If you want an analysis of everything that Trump has said or been misquoted in the press, that would be a full time job. Same goes for Biden, his comments, outright lies, and misdirection would make a good grad level class. For pedantic points, I provided the link to the actual statement, and it was misused again, so I posted the actual quote. It's just an example, I could spend some time and come up with dozens, but the election is over and apparently they didn't sway enough voters.

For non-events that were largely ignored by the media and only briefly made the news, I offer President Biden's comments at the 2022 Naval Academy graduation. He claimed to had been given an appointment to the Naval Academy by: a) a Senator who was years away from taking office, b) he was beyond the age limit for an appointment, c) he was a senior at the University of Delaware, d) didn't want to compete against Roger Staubach even though Staubach was a senior that year, and e) he was never given an appointment, it was all a lie. I was there in the audience to watch my son walk across the stage and shake the president's hand. The most telling for me were all the parents getting their phones out to check his claims and the murmuring of "bullshit." He has since repeated the lie at other service academy graduations.

Back to the OP, I'm not sure where we cheapened life to the point that some would support the killing of a CEO. Where did we get the disconnect between respecting and destroying a life? According to United Healthcare, neither the shooter or his family had policies with the company. Was his behavior the result of painkillers? His back was putting him in constant pain, did the meds impact his reasoning skills leading to the murder? Is it a question of untreated mental illness? Would a sane person execute another person on the streets of NYC and then be arrested in a McDonald's in Pennsylvania?

[vertical_doug]

For non-events that were largely ignored by the media and only briefly made the news, I offer President Biden's comments at the 2022 Naval Academy graduation. He claimed to had been given an appointment to the Naval Academy by: a) a Senator who was years away from taking office, b) he was beyond the age limit for an appointment, c) he was a senior at the University of Delaware, d) didn't want to compete against Roger Staubach even though Staubach was a senior that year, and e) he was never given an appointment, it was all a lie. I was there in the audience to watch my son walk across the stage and shake the president's hand. The most telling for me were all the parents getting their phones out to check his claims and the murmuring of "bullshit." He has since repeated the lie at other service academy graduations.

Back to the OP, I'm not sure where we cheapened life to the point that some would support the killing of a CEO. Where did we get the disconnect between respecting and destroying a life? According to United Healthcare, neither the shooter or his family had policies with the company. Was his behavior the result of painkillers? His back was putting him in constant pain, did the meds impact his reasoning skills leading to the murder? Is it a question of untreated mental illness? Would a sane person execute another person on the streets of NYC and then be arrested in a McDonald's in Pennsylvania?

I think Biden was probably telling the truth in his mind. Just like AI can hallucinate, so can people. I expect he has memory issues, and was having issues back in 2022. I pity him, and have nothing but disdain for those around him who facilitated up until the Trump debate this year. It was elder abuse.

As for Luigi, I would not underestimate how complex and complete a delusion can be.

[takashi]

You are asking, as a retired sailor and father of a Marine, why violence is used as a means to an end? Why individuals might, just might, follow the example of the state, where might always makes right?


You think we have 'cheapened life' recently? And you are asking as an historian? Come on.

[thollandpe]

The coal industry was not set back on its heels by regulation, it was beaten in the marketplace by cheap (fracked) natural gas.

But deregulation we’ll get, and our atmospheric carbon level will continue to increase. Along with the calamity that brings.


https://www.insidehook.com/culture/s...limate-cartoon