Tag Archives: political diversions

57. Secret of Trump

16 May

(News flash: Mr. Incorruptible is now taking money from rich donors.)

As Trump started to loosen up on his various positions, I began to see him and the whole process more clearly. The secret of Trump is his ability to adapt. He observes contingencies and people’s needs and changes his approach accordingly. This has worked for his businesses and has worked in his political career so far. Adaptation in fact, is the way most enterprises do best (but alas, is not conservative).

Trump is a man devoted to success, not principles. He does throw out a few ideas, but a substantial part of every speech is concerned with various aspects of winning. He talks a lot about his winning in the polls, his number of delegates, the number of people voting for him, the states he has won, and the defeat of his enemies. He is now backing off many of his ideas suitable for the primary, and developing new ideas for the general election. So now lets see how Trump fits into the political realm.

Republican (conservative) leaders want everything to remain the same, because it is under the current (corrupt) system that they have succeeded. They do talk about some ideals, but mostly their motivation is to keep their lucrative positions,  hold on to their great wealth, and please their rich donors. They create laws that make rich people richer and if necessary, take benefits away from the general population (you and me). Republican leaders talk a lot about religion because religious people are generally more conservative and that keeps them in the party. Religion is also a diversion from questionable budgetary policies.

On the other hand, Conservative voters want things to remain the same, because they fear change. “Lets just keep doing things the same way because that is safer and new things are often hard to understand.” For some GOP voters, of course, religion is most important and they see Republicans as their champions, even though Republicans in practice, are not any more ethical or moral than Democrats, and are less Christian in terms of helping the poor.

Some Democrat leaders support the wealthy, but many genuinely promote programs to help the middle class and those in poverty. Democrat voters are more adaptable and support progressive principles, such as climate-change actions, LGBT needs, job creation, infrastructure improvements, research, support of social programs, etc.

Of course, I have over-simplified, but the main features are clear. By design or just by luck, Trump joined the Republicans because that party has a large group of fearful, traditional, and/or less-educated voters. He could present simple, forceful ideas, like building a wall and strengthening the military, that would appeal to that group.  And, of course, he can amplify the fear by talking about ISIS cutting off heads.

Now that he has achieved the nomination, he can adapt to what is necessary for the general election. He says that past ideas are only suggestions, just proposals. He is now clearly moving more towards the center and even liberal views because that adaptation is more likely to win.

So picture Trump walking along the top his giant border wall trying to stay balanced, but deviations too far to the liberal left or conservative right will make him fall off. Trump is a great adapter and that works well for businesses. But will the voters see him as principled or just opportunistic ??  And clearly, he has now abandoned his original fans.

56. Why: Not-Trump?

10 May

While millions of well-qualified people are unable to get entry-level jobs, Trump zooms into a viable candidacy, which for him is an entry-level position — the most difficult job in the world. In previous blogs, I have discussed Trump supporters and their rationale. Trump’s early success was his appeal to people with less general education and/or less political knowledge; those with prejudices against various minority groups; and those influenced by FEAR mongering. Most are looking for simple solutions (often violent) to very complex problems. The don’t accept life styles dissimilar to “American” ways. That said, I argue that most of his early supporters have these characteristics, but later supporters often simply join in with what appears to be a winner. Now I am going to provide some reasons why Trump should not have this entry-level position:
——————
He often does NOT tell the truth, or is painfully ignorant about past facts. Briefly:

His portrayal of the Iran nuclear deal is terribly false. The USA took NO money out of its treasury to give to Iran. The money belonged to Iran and was confiscated by a group of nations that supported its sanctions. The treaty was not between Iran and the USA but was developed by a group of nations including China, Russia, France, Germany, UK, etc.   He says we got nothing from this deal, which is a terrible lie. Iran lost its enriched Uranium, lost most of its bomb-making equipment, there are provisions for inspection, etc.

His “birther” (citizenship) ideas about Obama were ridiculous and proven false. He never acknowledged this or apologized.

He claims that Hillary Clinton enabled her husband to abuse women. All of this is nonsense. There was no evidence of abuse and Hillary did not encourage these actions.

There is NO evidence that Hillary committed crimes with respect to her emails — and after years of investigation nothing criminal was found.

He says that Mexico “sends” criminals and rapists to the USA. The Mexican government does not send any immigrants to us and most who come are simply good workers trying to support desperate relatives back home. After the immigrant attacks, he later says “He loves the Mexicans”. (Note: I do not support illegal immigration)

The attack of Islamic militants on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi and Hillary’s role, is falsely portrayed. Over two years, there were nine official investigations, none of which revealed any wrong-doing. The ambassador knew he was going to a dangerous area, but went anyway. Immediately after the attack, a variety of intelligence reports came in and Hillary’s explanations varied because our knowledge was rapidly changing. And in the end, one of the arrested terrorists admitted he was angry about the publication that was offensive to Islam. People die in wars and we really don’t know what the killers were thinking. Kevin McCarthy (a top Republican) admitted that all of the investigation was just to bring down Hillary.

Attacks by Trump (and Republicans in general) on the Clinton Foundation have been false and nothing illegal was ever found. Republicans are desperate to attack anything that Democrats do.

Trump claimed that Muslims in New Jersey celebrated in the streets on 9-11 when the Trade-Center towers were attacked. This was made-up and there is absolutely no evidence to this.
There are many other deceptions. One good source is:
http://www.ibtimes.com/list-donald-trump-lies-10-claims-gop-front-runner-immigration-muslims-kkk-dont-hold-2330265
——————–
Trump’s proposals involve numerous “flip-flops” and many are irrational and impossible. A good example is the Mexican-USA wall. It would be extremely expensive and would not stop people from coming into our country. Terrorists would have the money to come in by sea or by air. There always will be other ways for people to circumvent any barriers. Mexico cannot be forced into paying for the wall — that’s nonsense. We need the support of our neighbors in many ways and coercion of any kind would be harmful.
———————
Trump is crude and lacks the temperament to be President. A really good example is his remark about a Democratic debate intermission. Hillary came back a little late and you can see Trump thinking about this and visualizing it (in an abnormal way) and concluding that it was “disgusting”. What was he seeing in his head?  It’s scary to imagine the way his mind works.  Trump endorsed torture, including water-boarding and worse — despite the fact that R. Reagan and almost all U.S. and world leaders opposed it.
———————
Trump deals with questions and criticism, not by talking about issues or facts, but by attacking the critics, often in childish way. He lost a wonderful opportunity of support by the Pope who said it is better to build bridges than walls. He could have agreed, and said that bridges are most desirable but in some cases like national defense, walls are necessary. What kind of person reacts so negatively and does not take advantage of opportunities to gain important allies.
———————
Many have observed that Trump’s crude, bizarre, and childish behavior reflects a mental problem. He acts like someone who is sleep deprived, and how he describes his lifestyle supports this notion. He is almost 70, dob: June 14, 1946, and the borderline age for Alzheimer’s disease is 65. At his age, many people have the noticeable cognitive impairments due to this disease. (Hillary Clinton, 68, by contrast, is very sharp, accurate, and presidential.)
———————-
My Conclusion.
Trump is unfit for President for these reasons.
He is unfit because without hesitation he lies about past events to support his goals. If this is not lying then he is so poorly informed about the world that he is still unfit. He acts like a person with brain malfunctions, due to Alzheimer’s and/or lack of sleep. His methods emphasize vengeance and dangerous simple solutions to very complex problems. Every foreign-policy decision a President makes involves our relationships with other countries, our national budget, the lives of our soldiers, the support of allies, expensive and serious long-term commitments, etc., etc.  His decisions when dealing with building contractors, zoning laws, bankruptcies, firing people, TV, etc. are trivial compared to the complex presidential decisions.

Now, one could argue that he would have the support of advisors. But he would have to choose good advisors and ultimately must make the final decision. Almost any of the other candidates could do this at least fairly well, but given Trump’s bizarre behavior, who knows? He claims to be incorruptible by very rich donors, but he is already one of them. Trump claims to be supportive of non-rich people, but says that working people are paid too much, the minimum wage should not be increased, his budget plan reduces taxes for rich people, and he started out his adult life with a “small loan” from his father, of One Million Dollars. Does this sound like he will promote the middle class ?  As the primary process is concluded, he will no doubt alter some ideas, but can we trust him?

46. The Candidates 2016

26 Feb

I just watched the latest Republican debate tonight (Feb. 25, 2016) and, being a Democrat, I felt really good about the Republican self-destruction. The press and the candidates all want to complicate the issues, but the fundamentals are really clear.

An examination of written budgets and various issues have indicated, for many years, that Republicans are primarily interested in making fortunes for very rich people and corporations. This is accomplished by lowering tax rates for rich people, simplifying tax code, abolishing regulations, gaining subsidies, etc. When you simplify tax code or reduce regulations, its easier for rich people to circumvent rules. The salaried workers gain nothing because the rules are already simple and fixed for them. Republicans are unashamedly committed to blocking the progress of Democrats and Obama, even if it results in destroying our country. It is Republicans that are dysfunctional, not Congress in general.

So Republicans have a fundamental problem. They can’t be honest and say to folks: “vote for us so that we can become even richer.”

Religion is just a diversion. Under both parties, there is no restriction on beliefs or place of worship. Both parties will provide a strong military, both will follow the Supreme Court and the established law. On the question of foreign policy, both parties are saying about the same thing. But I would assert that Democratic candidates are generally more thoughtful and careful in their decision making.

Here is my brief assessment of the highest polling candidates:

TRUMP: Impulsive, over-simplifying, unthoughtful, inconsistent and unprepared. He cannot be corrupted by wealthy contributors because he is already corrupted.   He is committed to all the negative factors listed above in my second paragraph.  He is a genius at making money for himself, but how does that help the rest of us. He panders to less-educated people. (Please see my previous blogs about Trump.)

RUBIO: Definitely a good candidate for high-school class president. Not ready for prime time. He may mature and be ready for the 2020 or 2024 election, but he does have the traditional negative GOP values.

CRUZ: He reminds me of the infamous Joe McCarthy, Senator from 1947 to 1957. Or maybe he is more like Pres. Nixon who presided over a culture of dirty tricks. I can picture him telling religious folks that they should plant a seed with him for $1000 and this will be returned, through divine intervention, with a 10-fold profit.

H. CLINTON: A really brilliant women who has the right ideals and has a long list of substantial accomplishments. She is quick witted and debates really well. She would make a very good President.  All of the GOP “scandals” are nonsense and strictly political.

SANDERS: Frankly, what Sanders is saying now, I have been thinking for many years, and it is wonderful to find someone who is enthusiastic about real change.  People like me need to have hope, and Sanders says the right things. If he were to become President, he might only accomplish half of what he is proposing, but even that would be marvelous. The sad part is that he is somewhat lacking in presidential charisma, which doesn’t bother me, but it could affect his success. I voted for him because I would like to give him a chance to show what he can do.

My dream for President and Vice-President is some combination of Clinton, Sanders, and the amazing Elizabeth Warren. I would like to see all of them working to restore our country to greatness: a true democracy, where caring for its people is the main goal.

44. Is Trump a Spoiler?

14 Feb

Its Saturday, 2-13-16 and I have just seen a Republican candidate debate. This debate was probably the meanest of all their debates. The insults and accusations were flying so fast that the debate actually heated up and I swear I saw smoke emerging from my TV.  One wonders whether the GOP can survive such a disaster.

If you look at all the debates, tweets, and comments by the candidates thus far it seems that the worst agitator is the Donald. He gets very angry over different events and is most disturbed when any other candidate approaches his polling score. Other candidates are not blameless, but most of their aggressiveness is defensive.  To read more about Trump’s abuses, look at several of my previous blogs.

While pondering the debate, a funny thought emerged from the deepest realms of my brain.  Perhaps Trump is a Democrat spy who penetrated the Republican world just to cause it to fail. His utterances and attacks are so crude and bizarre that they just don’t make sense.  As I thought more and more about Trump and his destructive debate, I began to hear music and see dancing — OMG, its Hilary and Bernie dancing for joy.

43. GOP Tax Nonsense

14 Feb

Republican candidates of 2016 have promoted three main ideas for income tax rule improvement:

1. A lowered tax rate for all, but continuing the current general system.
2. Simplification of income tax code.
3. A single “flat” income tax for all.

Where details on plans have been supplied there are some variations within each plan.  All three ideas are seriously flawed and all three provide great benefits for the wealthy, which is why Republicans propose them. And they provide great benefits to their rich campaign contributors.

1. Any lowered tax rate for very rich people will result in either higher taxes for the non-rich or reduced services for them. Its always a see-saw: reducing one causes increase for the other. People at the lower end of the pay-scale pay little or no taxes at all, and so do not benefit. But lowering general tax rates always makes the rich richer.

2. Republicans always love a really simple tax code because they would avoid all of the rules that prevent them from abusing the system. Ordinary workers with salaries already have a simple code and can finish their returns in a couple of hours; or can pay someone a few bucks to do it for them. On the other hand, rich people usually have complex incomes, expenses, deductions, stock trades, salaries they pay, business entertainment, IRA’s, bonuses, subsidies, etc. Rich people like fewer rules because rules limit what they can get away with. It is similar to their dislike of regulations. The more flexibility they have in preparing their taxes, the easier it is to game (cheat) the system. It takes a lot of code to cover all the possibilities. For example, there are many ways to describe what constitutes a valid “business meal expense”. Buy one of those cheap, tax code summaries and you will see all of the situations that need to be covered. I personally ran two small businesses so I understand why the tax code complexity is needed.

3. Most Republican candidates have advocated a single “flat” income tax with a rate of 10 to 15 percent for all. With that plan, rich people greatly benefit: a reduction of the 35% rate to say, 15 percent. Poor people who can barely survive on what the earn, would pay more than their current zero payment. One Republican candidate said: that’s OK because everyone should have some skin in the game — and this candidate is an avowed Christian.

Finally, why is it wrong to make the wealthy wealthier, and the poor poorer? The main reason is that over the last few decades, as the rich profited, they were more and more able to “bribe” congressmen with contributions, so that they would create tax and subsidy laws to make the wealthy even richer. Another reason is that when extremely rich banks and insurance companies failed, the ordinary tax payers had to bail them out. It is also true that most very rich people use a lot of resources such as extra policing, government services, military protection, etc. And they have accountants and lawyers to help them make even more money. Its Ok to be rich, but when some people are homeless and/or starving, the extremely rich need to give some back.

41. Politics of Fear

7 Feb

I have to begin with a most wonderful quote, from the double (1903 and 1911) Nobel Prize winning physicist, Marie Curie:
“Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less.”
See the following for this and other great Curie quotations.
           https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Marie_Curie

Republican candidates promote fear so that they can manipulate our thinking and voting. It is an old trick used by dictators throughout history.  Trump first builds up your fears by describing some terrorist acts committed by Muslims and then he says: vote for me because I will ban all Muslims from entering the country.  He also says love all police officers and that they have been unfairly disrespected. He totally disregards documented incidents of real police brutality (that you can see on film).  Like many complicated problems, the answer is to identify areas that are disfunctional and work on correcting them. Generally, we must provide recognition for good police work and censure for excessive brutality.  If our established methods are not working, then we must develop new measures.

How we deal with the horrible ISIS problem should not be based on hysterical fear, but by investigating their weaknesses and carefully planning their destruction.  War used to be easy. You defeated an opposing army by artillary, bombing, tanks, and infantry. Now you attack, and the enemy just scatters, only to return after you have gone. And attacks always kill innocent civilians, some of whom will become terrorists to avenge the deaths of their relatives and friends. Dealing with enemies like ISIS must take a new form involving coalitions of nations, local police, and militia; with the civilian population supporting the effort.  President Obama is using this strategy, and nothing has been proposed by Republicans to improve this process.

One more thing I need to say. I read about Marie Curie as young man and of course was impressed by her discovery of radium and other scientific facts. But in reading Marie Curie quotes and about her life in general, I am so impressed by how articulate she was, and by her great productive life. All of us should be concerned with understanding the world and trying to solve problems, rather than just hoping for spiritual miracles.  If Republicans really want to make America great, they should put more money for education in their proposed budgets. But then, GOP candidates actually fear education, because an informed and intelligent public will see through their deceptions.

40. Hindu NASA Astronaut

6 Feb

I just read a most amazing biography (in Wikipedia) of an American woman who is one of the most successful and productive of all USA citizens. She was born in Ohio of a Hindu Indian father and a lady with Slovenian ancestors.  She is not a Christian, and believes in a Hindu God.  Her name is Sunita Lyn “Suni” Williams, born in Euclid, Ohio, 1965.

As I read her biography I was impressed by her great success as part of USA Naval and NASA programs. She was a naval test pilot for many years, had four astronaut space missions and in the last mission was Commander of the entire international station. She has a record of nine honors and awards including space flight medals from NASA and Russia and a National Defense Service Medal (USA).

Now here is my main point, aside from my admiration for this person, I wonder how Donald Trump and other adamant Christian candidates would feel about this Hindu, not pure-white lady with a recent immigrant father. If she ran for President as a Democrat, would Trump be a “birther” for her and claim she is an Indian and not an American. If Ben Carson (who would not allow a Muslim born in America to be President), were head of NASA, would he have allowed her to be an Astronaut and commander of a space station? If an Indian person became a terrorist, would Trump try to prevent all Indians from entering our country until he figured out “what in the Hell” is going on?

This wonderful NASA astronaut recently made an amazing video of the inside of the International Space Station (htts://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doN4t5NKW-k).   It is sad that everyone in this country cannot accept and appreciate “foreigners”.

38. Trump’s Wall

30 Jan

Donald Trump advocates the building of a giant, almost 2000mile, insurmountable wall between Mexico and the USA; to be paid for by the Mexican Government. And if they don’t pay for it, he will impose tariffs or other financial sanctions to make them sorry. For some people, I have already said enough to fill them with thoughts of ridicule and laughter, but many in authority are reluctant to take on this champion of simple and impossible solutions. But in any event, I think that “Trump’s Wall” will become a sound-bite like “Fulton’s Folly” or similar; an abbreviation for absurb policies.

Here are just a few of the many criticisms for that plan that I can think of.

Any plan to prevent illegals from entering our country (a good goal) cannot be complete or perfect. There will always be ways to circumvent any wall. You can tunnel under, fly over, go by sea, cross the Candian border, hide in a truck that legally crosses the border, create false passports, and come legally but remain past your deadline. My personal plan would be to distract the border patrol with several small drones, and then use a lightweight magnesium ladder to go over the wall. Of course, you could electrify the 2000 mile wall at only a “small” expense, and what’s a few dead animals and people accidently killed.

Apparently, we don’t care about our relationship with Mexico, so we will force them to pay for “Trump’s Folly.” And of course, their cooperation regarding drug trafficking and other vital factors will be unaffected. Maybe we should set-up a Trump law like preventing all Muslims from entering our country; and apply it to all Mexicans.

How many years would it take for our Congress to build a giant 2000 mile wall. A president could not authorize an expensive project like this. It could take two or more years for Congress to approve a budget and plan, or maybe no approval at all.

I have to include one more thought about Trump.  He says that he is the candidate that cannot be bought by other rich “contributors”; and so they cannot bribe him into supporting rich people’s goals. But please wake-up: HE IS ONE OF THEM. All you have to do is look at his written budget (available on the Internet) to see that he supports lower taxes for rich folks, like him. If you would support him because he has a long history of religious good-works, get serious. He only started quoting the bible when he began his presidential campaign.

Finally, if you talk to a Trump supporter, he/she will probably say that they don’t care about all this (above) and really want to vote for him because of his straight talk and strength. Hopefully, more than half of our population does not agree. Trying to act strong and come up with simple solutions, have gotten us into two impossible wars, practically bankrupted our country, and created a whole army of angry terrorists.

37. Careful Voting

30 Jan

In several previous blogs I discussed serious political problems. In a democracy, the only way to solve such problems is to vote the offending officials and/or party out of office. In my previous Blog, 36, I promised to deal with ways to improve voting in my next blog.

It should be obvious that simply listening to what a politician promises is not sufficient for judging his/her effectiveness in office.  Listen and think carefully about what is said, but also consider:

1. Examine the history of the candidate and the party. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Try to find objective and impartial information.

2. Search the voting record for important legislation. Fortunately, we now have the wonderful internet to help us find this and other information.

3. You can find transcripts of speeches and other types of documentation. Anything stated without real evidence is suspect. Learn how to verify assertions.

4. One of the most important documents to look for are proposed budgets. You will find that the budgets will tell you what class of people will supported and who will be neglected. You must look at the written budget. Politicians have been known to tell lies about budgets that are inconsistent with what they actually stated in writing. Reading a written budget can be very informative as to actual plans.

5. If you are concerned with one political party, you must see what the other party is saying about the same issues. This is so obvious, that examples are not necessary. You must be aware of all arguments related to a policy.

6. Be aware of subtle innuendoes: sly remarks stated without evidence. A current example is all the innuendo about the citizenship of a candidate who was born in Canada.

7. Be aware of political assertions that will manipulate you by creating fear. Governmental actions must be based on facts and careful assessments, not on impulsive reactions to fear. Repeating over and over descriptions of minor acts of terrorism creates unnesesary fears. Currently, in the USA, deaths due to “terrorists” are very much fewer than those caused by common criminals and deranged people. Real, serious threats exist in the world, but exaggeration does not help to deal with them. Sometimes a rapid response is not possible or effective.

8. A past president or other official may not be responsible for events taking place while he/she is in office. This is a very difficult issue, which often leads to incorrect interpretations. A common example is that a president does not make any major laws, that is the role of Congress.

9. I have noticed many blatant and obvious lies. I recall commentators altering critical words just presented in a political video a few minutes before. If a commentator makes a lot of these malicious alterations, then he/she is not to be trusted. A common example is: a candidate may say that he wants to raise taxes for rich people, but lower them for all others. The commentator says the he advocates raising taxes (period) — not the “whole” truth.

10. Examine the logic of a politicians arguments. For example, a rich candidate cannot be bought by others, true, but he/she may already have undesirable intentions. How did he become so rich? Did he act morally and ethically, or just profitably. Does an ability to make a personal fortune, translate to the extreme complexities of running a nation.

11. Regarding national policies, it is OK to look at how other nations have dealt with the same situations. Why not, we are great, but not perfect. In any endeavor, it is important to learn and adapt. Many people and nations have failed because of rigid and unadaptive thinking.

12. What are the goals of a candidate? An abstraction like “let’s make our nation great again” really says nothing. Will it be great for all the people or just certain categories of people?

Finally, I am fully aware of the fact that very bright people already know all this, and others will find these principles to be tedious, boring, and/or a waste of time. My only hope is that a few of you may dig a little deeper into the really important process of voting effectively. It is the only way to solve some of our most serious national problems.

36. Capitalism Corrupted

25 Jan

The current Republican candidates represent an advanced stage of a transformation taking place in the USA; and many other countries. This transformation is an erosion of intelligent thinking and action; replaced by crude manipulations of the citizens designed to benefit the extremely wealthy “royalty class”. The Republican candidates try to manipulate voters by making them more fearful, by providing dangerous simple solutions to important problems, by lying about historical events, and by blaming scapegoats for our problems. They all do most of this, but admittedly, one of them is so crude and offensive that he stands out from the others. He shows what this harmful changing system can ultimately lead to.

How did this erosion take place?  It is, in fact, a kind of evolution. For the past hundred years or so, there have been dramatic changes in the Earth’s population of humans.  The factors that have developed and changed include: technology in general, the Internet, powerful weapons, increased communication among all of Earth’s citizens, consumer goods, etc.  In this recent period of human history, an evolutionary process took place. Clever persons learned how to make fortunes and became better and better at doing this. After a certain level of extreme wealth was achieved, wealth was further enhanced by, in effect, “bribing” government officials (like Congressmen) to make favorable laws. The process is similar to biological evolution where the fittest (often the most intelligent) survive and grow stronger. Favorable laws for rich people include: lower tax rates, unfair subsidies, and tax loopholes, which allow income to be hidden or taxed at a low rate.  Tax simplification is an agenda of the GOP, but it only helps rich people by allowing more tax loopholes.  Lower taxes for one group will always result in higher taxes for others, or fewer services.

What are the dangers of a powerful royalty class? Simply put, as more money is shifted upward, the number of desperate poor people increases. Desperate people commit more crimes and eventually resort to violent revolution. The “Arab Spring” illustrates what can happen when an extremely rich and clever group run a country. But even if a revolution never occurs, it is simply reasonable and fair, that more average citizens should enjoy prosperity, not just the wealthy. After all, wealthy people use all the rest of us for the enjoyment of their money. We provide the military, police, firemen, construction workers for their houses, repairmen, garbage men, maids, cooks, doctors, therapists, accountants, and so forth — all necessary for the enjoyment of wealth.

Personally, I do believe in capitalism, but a version that is appropriately limited to benefit all of the citizens. I have owned two small businesses. My concern is with extreme wealth, not with prosperity resulting from hard work and innovation. Capitalism in the USA can be reformed by careful voting (please see my next blog).