WDSmart

I wasn't trying to dodge any of your questions. I'll try to answer more directly this time, If I had a hamburger stand in a capitalistic economy that did not sell enough burgers to pay the bills, I'd probably try to add other things to the menu and open up a different business. But raising the price, IMO, is not going to help. If I had a hamburger stand in a socialist economy, I would have no bills, so the number of burgers given away (not sold) wouldn't matter - except if not many people wanted them, I would probably try to do the same as above - add to the menu or do something different with my time to add to the national assets.

I'm sad to say I think you're right. I'm not even sure he'd have been sentenced to prison if he'd lost the election, but I do think he should be put there.

Yes, that is exactly the ideology of capitalism. It's based on greed. So, if you want to reward and promote greed, you can certainly do so by promoting capitalism.

I agree the USA has a spending problem. And that has resulted in a $47 trillion debt. So, revenue to start paying that off is also a problem. That's my non-accountant view of it anyway,

Yes, it's selfish to want to keep the fruits of your labor when others are in need. But that's what capitalism is all about. It would be selfless for the government to take all the fruits from those who have grown them and distribute them to everyone according to their needs. That's what socialism is all about.

I do still have hope, but I am ready to cope.

Among other things, he will impose tariffs, which will increase prices and lower taxes on the wealthy (and maybe the general public), which will keep increasing our national debt, which is now about $47 trillion.

When found guilty of 34 felony counts, and considering he's now the president-elect, I'd say one year in prison for each count would be sufficient.

No, that's certainly not the case. When the US benefits, some other country loses. That's what capitalism is all about. When energy production is high, so is pollution and the growing threat of climate change.

You say that like it’s a bad thing… but more money and easier lifestyle is what the vast majority of rational human beings on the planet aspire to. Are we supposed to instead aspire to misery? No, not misery, but more comfort for all. "More money and an easier lifestyle" are selfish goals of capitalists. More comfort for all is the goal of socialists like me.

How exactly did you come up with this conclusion? Or did Joy reed and morning joe feed you this silliness? I came to that conclusion because of what Trump has said he'll do. Of course, he might not actually do all of them—he lies a lot. But if he is able to do most of them, chaos will surely follow—and I don't mean chaos caused by rioting Democrats. I mean economic and general social chaos.

Americans (the US voters who voted for Trump) want more money and an easier lifestyle. They care about anyone else but themselves.

Find them homes!

This is perhaps the worst of Trump's promises, but certainly not unexpected from a narcissistic autocrat.

IMO, she lost because the voting citizens in my home country, the USA, were dissatisfied with their economic conditions and voted for Trump, hoping he would turn those around. He won't, and in fact, I'm sure things will become much worse over the next four years. I predict the USA will descend into complete chaos because of his upcoming actions.

I hope they don't. I hope they finish his trial by sentencing him. What happens then, I have no idea.

Well, we all will just have to wait and see what happens over the next four years. I predict Trump's presidency will end up as utter chaos and a disaster for the USA. 😞

I won't watch this because it is on X. I don't use it.

I disagree with the first part of your comment. The disasters of the governments run by Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, and Pinochet were a form of government, an autocracy. That's what brought down their countries's economies, not the fault of the economy itself. I think of a progressive as someone who is transitioning from conservatism to liberalism. A capitalist is someone who emphasizes how wealth is obtained and distributed (or used). A socialist is someone who emphasizes how the country's wealth (not the individual's wealth) is distributed. I agree that most countries have a mix of capitalism and socialism. That's called Keynesian economics. And I agree the disagreements are usually not either/or, but on what percentage of each one a particular country has. My preference would be a democracy or democratic republic with a socialist economy.

There have been successful socialist societies. American Indian tribes are one example. The reason socialism tends to fail is people tend to be selfish. Capitalism encourages this trait. Most economic systems today, including the USA, are what could be called "Keynesian economies," which are a mix of capitalism and socialism. Most everything in the USA labeled "public," like public libraries, public streets, public parks, etc., are examples of socialism. Things labeled "private" are capitalistic features, like private hospitals, private golf clubs, etc. The economic discussions are not either/or, but what percentage of each the economy will have. Sweden's and Norway's economies have more socialist features than the USA.

I like your comments, but I disagree with the general premise, or at least use the terms differently than you do. "Right-wing" and "conservative" mean the same to me. Just as "left-wing" and "liberal" mean the same. Capitalism is an economic system preferred by conservatives. Socialism is an economic system preferred by liberals. Republicans tend to be conservative, and Democrats tend to be liberals. I often say the difference between the two is the first letter of a two-letter word. Conservatives concentrate on "me," while liberals concentrate on "we." Sure, there are sociopaths on both sides, but selfishness and uncontrolled greed are signs of conservatives. I like the keys you listed and agree with them. And I think now, with a sociopath soon to be our president, we are bound for disaster.

The funding for all social programs comes from the government. And yes, NGOs do depend on government grants. These are examples of socialism. A bad economy does mean less money for social programs. I didn't say I wanted to see a bad economy. I only said economics was not my main interest. Social programs are. I retired 24 years ago at the age of 64. I'm now 78 and soon will be 79. You must be 84. For about half of my life, I was employed, but for the last half, I was self-employed. I also funded my own retirement and also rely on my monthly Social Security benefits, which, of course, I funded while working.

Yes, I agree with you that many (most?) colleges teach and practice DEI and other "woke BS." Why do you think they do that? It's because they believe those ideas and practices are best for society. From your list of courses, it looks like you were mostly interested in making money. My interest has always been in social issues, not those of the economy. I guess that's why I am a far-left liberal, a socialist, actually, and you're probably a right-wing conservative, a capitalist. Those, IMO, are the major issues in our country (USA).

I just saw something on CNN that makes me feel a little better. It seems the most significant status of people who show up in how they vote is education. The figures show that about 66% of those who voted for Harris have a college degree, as opposed to only about 33% of those who voted for Trump. Only about 40% of US citizens have a college degree. So, again, I am in a minority group of those with a college degree.

Spoken just like a whinging member of a minority group, how appropriate Yes, it does appear I am now a "member of a minority group," but not a small one. The total votes aren't in yet, but it looks now like Trump will win the general vote, but only by a few percentage points (51% to 48%?). Also, those are only the counts of those who voted, and that usually doesn't include about 100 million citizens who didn't vote. But, I agree the Republicans will be in charge of at least two of the three branches of government, and maybe even all of them. This makes me sad, and I don't at all look forward to what the USA will become in the future.