Doomed Dems

So Donald Trump will be the Republican committee (;-)) for the presidency. And Trump will, probably, be elected US president. Why? Because people want change, and they did not get it. Instead they got more of the drift down, after the reign of the teleprompter reading president. Average family income is DOWN $4,000 since (“Bill”) Clinton’s last year as president. According to a FOX News poll, 64% of Americans blame Wall Street. Meanwhile in a vast report in the New York Times, Obama celebrates, in May 2016, the alliance he said he made with Wall Street in 2008.

Obama Can Make All The Excuses He Wants: He Gave Money To TBTF Banks, Not To We The People. And Here Is The Result Of This Wall Street President.

Obama Can Make All The Excuses He Wants: He Gave Money To TBTF Banks, Not To We The People. And Here Is The Result Of This Wall Street President.

Corporate profits have been rising, and wages have been declining. The following graph is from the FRED (Federal Reserve Economic Data). Since the mid 1970s, wages have gone down 7% while corporate profits went up 7%. The average board member of an S&P 500 company works 250 hours, and gets $250,000 (more than $800 an hour).

Wages Are Going Down, Because Pluto Profits Are Going Up. And Other Pluto Policies

Wages Are Going Down, Because Pluto Profits Are Going Up. And Other Pluto Policies

[Profits and Wages are as function of GDP above. Wages in red, corporate profits in blue. Notice the huge jump of corporate profits after Obama became president, and while he and the demonic Dems had total control of the US Congress, and the US Senate. Obama and his Dems can accuse the Republicans all they want, they are accusing reality. The reality is that they, and not the Republicans, did it.]

Warren Buffet is a hero, for many Americans. He bought Heinz (using money from Brazil’s 3G Capital: did you hear about corruption in Brazil?), and fired 600 workers. Then Buffet merged Heinz with Kraft, and another 2,500 workers got the axe. Buffet made ten billion dollars out of these two operations, 3,000 workers lost their livelihood. However, trust him, Buffet will give it all back, after he is dead (so he clamors to all MSM propaganda outfits, which religiously repeat that, as if it were the word of god).

But back to our other hero, the one who feels unappreciated. President Bush called Candidate Obama, and told him to come inside the White House, to take his orders from Secretary of the Treasury Paulson. Obama, feeling honored, obeyed, and did just like Paulson (ex-CEO of Goldman Sachs, and a possibly brain damaged professional football player) told him to do.

Now Obama feels underappreciated, although he should be appreciated, he insists, because he exhibited such great “bipartisan”.

But that is precisely the point: Americans are starting to appreciate less Wall Street and its servants. Americans are getting tired of “bipartisanship”: half professional politician, half Wall Street. Soon average Americans will even see that multigenerational Harvard families are the problem. It feels to them increasingly like a conspiracy is going on, just like Trump says, again and again:”the system is wrong, I know, I was part of it”. And you know what? It is.

“I know a lot of Americans are angry about the economy, and for good cause,” Hillary Clinton said, February 11, 2016. “Americans haven’t had a raise in 15 years.”

So why not Trump? After all, the great leaders of the Democratic Party are often incomprehensibly wealthy (with fortunes in the hundreds of millions of dollars: the Clintons, Pelosis, Feinsteins, Bowles, etc.). And their financiers, those who tend to finance them and are explicit supporters, are among the planet’s richest people. Most of them are more or less involved in government for their business (for example, here is the latest: NASA is now giving help, for free, for Elon Musk’s Space X to go to Mars: it will be interesting to see if Trump pursues these policies of tapping public institutions for making particular plutocrats and their corporations ever wealthier).

Trump got rich from inheritance, and then building things. The plutocrats connected to, or inside, the Democratic Party seem to be rather into other sorts of deals: Feinstein’s husband set-up deals in China (wait until Trump gets on that blood trail!)

In other words, people who vote for the Democratic Party have been trumped. (Originally, in the 1500s, “trump” in English meant exactly what it means in French to this day: lied to.)

People already voted for change eight years ago (when they selected Obama over his conservative rivals). Unfortunately, all the change Obama brought was none at all. (Very recently Obama started to do little progressive things, like taxing the rich a bit more, or his clemency project: too little, too late.)

The big picture with Obama was conservative, not progressive. Obama pursued what Bush did: giving money to the biggest banks. I am not saying it should not have been done, but what was needed is what Hoover (yes, Hoover) and Roosevelt did in the 1930s: a massive stimulus program (instead Obama did a short, small stimulus program; the stimulus of the 1930s extended, overall, for more than 25 years, as it extended into WWII, and then into the “Cold War”.

Under president Hoover, masterpieces such as the Chrisler and Empire State Buildings, and the Hoover dam (across the Colorado, and still watering Las Vegas) went up, some of them in a matter of months. Roosevelt ordered the construction of an unbelievably massive armament program, the construction of 24 fleet carriers (Japan would start a world war with 10).

Obama, long an admirer of Reagan in economic matters, reduced the taxes on the hyper rich by 20% in his first mandate (then brought them back up, the rather trite story of the arsonist who douses the fire later, while posing as a great hero…) The idea was to stimulate the rich, so they stimulate you.

All what We The People Who Vote are going to feel increasingly like, is that Obama was Bush III, or Clinton III-IV. Indeed, where was the “Change We Can Believe?” Yes, none at all. It was all the way down further.

Meanwhile a friend of mine went to Yosemite ten days ago. She told me she could not believe the devastation of the forest. Most of it is fiery red. It is devastated by the Pine Bark Beetle. To kill the Beetle, one needs twenty days well below freezing. However, this hard freeze is now a memory. So the Beetle invades, and kills forest. Treating tree by tree is hopelessly expensive, and futile. Yes, the forests will burn soon, adding to CO2 in the atmosphere. And it is all the way like that to Alaska.

Fort McMurray, Alberta may not have seen the worst of a devastating wildfire.

Massive walls of flames prompted authorities to order the evacuation of all the city’s more than 80,000 residents last night. The blaze has been caused by un-naturally high temperatures. Such giant fires are our immediate future. Nobody said the Greenhouse crisis was going to be nice. More evacuations coming.

These are not normal times. Ever since the universe was seen expanding, and, like the all-seing eye, we have contemplated possibilities we never dreamed of, we have come to realize that the world was in our very large hands (even larger than Mr. Trump’s hands…). Obama had very small ambition. Just like the Clintons, he surrendered to Wall Street, preferring big bucks to come to the dreams of his father. Now Charles Koch, the notorious fossil fuel multibillionaire, and great influencer of US politics, is saying he may support Hillary Clinton (instead of Trump). All plutocrats sucking at the public teat, are scared stiff of Trump. As Trump himself observed, in his boldly introspective style: “They say, what is he doing? We can’t buy him!”.

At least, through all the smokes and mirrors (in which Obama admires himself), this has the merit of clarity. By choosing Hillary Clinton, the Dems will choose business as usual. But this is not business as usual. And, increasingly, through all the smoke and mirrors, people feel that way, all around the most advanced countries, from Siberia, to California.

Change means Trump or Bernie Sanders. Clinton will surely bring only doom, as she did, ever since she and her husband helped fellow traveler, and implicit mentor, president Ronald Reagan with Iran-Contra…

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

22 Responses to “Doomed Dems”

  1. Paul Handover Says:

    Very interesting!


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Thanks Paul! There was a funny typo caused by an automated spellchecker, which a reader saw, right at the beginning, but I left it!


      • Paul Handover Says:

        I will have questions, without doubt, but want the last twenty-four hours and this post from you to undergo a few ‘coatings of thought’. As you imply, these are times unprecedented in modern political history.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Your questions are always interesting, and it’s no wonder, considering your unique cocktail of various backgrounds (engineer, successful entrepreneur, pilot, solo sailor, dog lover, volunteer of America, ;-))


  2. SDM Says:

    Trump is reportedly a denier of climate change. So, the US wants to elect a climate denier. Maybe the problem will go away if we just ignore or deny. They want change and are willing to accept more lies so long as the lies are not “politically correct”? They are entranced by the showmanship and shtick- give them style over substance, emotion over reason.
    Trump will deliver…..for whom? If anyone, most likely Trump. It will be interesting to watch this unravel. Sanders appears to have run his course already in his tilt against the party machine. Curiously he was unable to get them same results as Trump at the polls if change is wanted. At least Cruz is gone from the race.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Climate denial is not the problem: it is a blatant lie, and the plutocrats who offer it, know it. What counts is proposed policy. Bernie Sanders wants a carbon tax, Hillary does not. Of course Trump is not going to propose one.
      I notice he flies cheap (his private fleet is old, and was bought second hand), and uses commercial for long distance transcontinental (he has the means to buy the latest transcontinental private jet).

      What was real sick with Obama was the attitude that all he did was progressive because… Because of what already? With Hillary, it would be the same again. Instead, in Trump we have a worthy adversary. Moreover he can, and has already run to the left of Hillary… He will do much more soon. But he can’t propose a carbon tax.

      Bernie’s campaign was sabotaged by the Plutos who hold the demonic Dems… I am, of course, for Bernie…


      • SDM Says:

        Bernie is the most preferable candidate yet he seems destined to come up short for the nomination. The pluto media have shunned him and Trump gets lavish attention. Trump appears to have a better act within his respective party going for gut emotion whereas Bernie’s message is more to reason than the reptile brain.Can Bernie push Hillary to his position even if he fails to be nominated?


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Bernie says it: we need a revolution. We, the US, the West, the Rest, Civilization, now. I am in awe to what Bernie succeeded to do, considering the creeps out there: I was knocked out (“banned”) from a famous youngish prof with chair in famous university, for just quoting a racist passage of David Hume and the like:

          Maybe there will be a miracle, Hillary will get indicted, whatever. Every day Bernie hangs in there, he changes the creepish, auto-destructive mentality of the ignorant slaves out there…
          (BTW, Trump did pretty well too, demolishing the Neocons with incredible gusto. He demolished the Bush cult, live.)


    • Gmax Says:

      Hillary is a climate denier too. Anybody against a carbon tax is a denier


  3. Paul Handover Says:

    In the end, there seemed to be no questions other than the one of why is it so few see the foreign lands we are close to entering. Plus, your post inspired tomorrow’s post over on Learning from Dogs that will be entitled Foreign Lands.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Glad and honored for providing some inspiration, Paul!
      Indeed, the notion of foreign lands has changed. Exoticism used to mean overseas, far way, colonies, etc. Some other places on Earth. But now, ISIL or not ISIL, the world’s culture is quickly becoming one. The foreign, exotic land is indeed the future, and we are engineering it with wanton fury.

      The key to the future is hidden in complexity itself covering-up bitter truths. An example is the financialization known as Quantitative Easing. It has enabled many politicians and economists to lie. Most people have no idea what it is, and what it entails. It entails inequality, and much more of what caused the 2008 crisis. Namely the ever increasing (financial) power of a few. I should make an essay on it…


  4. Foreign lands. – Learning from Dogs Says:

    […] Patrice Ayme posted an item on Wednesday under the title of Doomed Dems. It was, inevitably, a commentary on the recent news regarding Donald Trump. Here’s how […]


  5. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [Sent to LfD]

    Hi Paul, and thanks for quoting extensively my intricate thought processes. One caveat: I do not esteem the concept of “blogger” very much: all too many of them say, all too often, whatever. All too many of the more prolific of them are also paid for their activities. I esteem much more “writers” and “thinkers”.

    Indeed, being led by plutocrats is to be led by what motivates them, and this is all too often little more than the Dark Side of elementary school bullies. They can only produce the worst childish solutions.


    • Paul Handover Says:

      Paul Handover
      May 6, 2016 at 08:34
      Thanks Patrice, and your point about the term blogger is noted. Indeed, I think the word ‘blog’ is an ugly word. I agree with your broader message.


  6. Patrice Ayme Says:

    From: petspeopleandlife
    May 6, 2016 at 07:50
    … Big business, insurance companies, oil and gas and pharmaceutical companies are running the US. It is about lobbying and greed of the 1% population. No other country has insane costs for medications. Outsourcing has taken the jobs to China and there in lies the problem of un-employment.

    I’m not into the political thing where everything is about Trump and the Democrats are the cause of the all the US’s problems. Everybody keeps knocking Obama. Well he was not the best president nor was he the worst. Repubs rebuffed everything he wanted to change. Yes, Obamacare was a disaster. Bush destabilized the mid-east by invading Iraq. Every president has had a hand in damaging our country. Can’t blame it all on any one party or president. So that is my two cents worth and I’ll shut now.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Petspeopleandlife: I know Obama personally, he is a friend. However he did what he was told to do by the powers that be, like Clinton before him (plutocrat Bush, from the powers that be, is not worth mentioning…) That was obviously a mistake. Watch the (Federal Reserve originated) graphs in: “Doomed Dems”.


  7. Paul Handover Says:

    According to Anthony J. Gaughan, Associate Professor of Law, Drake University in a recent article a President Trump is highly unlikely. Article is here:

    Would be interested in your reaction to his analysis.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Can’t wait to read it, and see if he says something I did not already say… The point I have been hammering for 6 months is that Bernie Sanders is the ONLY hope to defeat Trump. Except if he got the heart attack prior to the election, or the like, Sanders is 100% sure to defeat Trump.

      Let’s not forget Trump and Clinton are pals, in kissing terms. Trump is fighting somebody he knows well… And Trump is arguably WELL TO THE LEFT, yes, left, of Clinton, on many important issues…


  8. Corrupt CEOs & Their Evil Boards | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] exploding up corporate profits, consult my “Doomed Dems“, and the Federal Reserve Economic Data graphs therein. Confronted to catastrophic, […]


  9. Patrice Ayme Says:

    New York Times so ill-informed, and francophobic, it announces that the National Front has “gained power in France”
    [Sent to NYT, May 7, 2016.]

    New York Times says: “Some even point to France and other European countries, where far-right parties like the National Front have gained power because of the sort of resentments that are frequently given voice at rallies for Mr. Trump.”

    The National Front has not “gained power” in France: the president (Hollande) is socialist, and the National Front has exactly 2 Members of Parliament, out of 577. Two out of five hundred seventy-seven does not strike me as “gained power”.

    Now it is true that all over the West enormous resentment is rightly growing against the scavenging elite. Candidates of the scavenging elite will find increasingly harder to be elected. The politics of using public money to make the biggest banks rich enough to be able to lend again to their friends in brokerage and hedge funds was inaugurated by Bush, and then pursued by the elite. Meantime real median family income has been collapsing, and keeps on collapsing.

    Meanwhile corporate profits have exploded up, and are higher than ever.

    Thus Trump is a symptom of a deeper problem. We The People are angry for reasons which can be put in dramatic graphs. And this is what one should be talking about.


  10. tom Says:

    It’s true that all over the world people are angry. And it’s true that the ‘system’ has failed them and their justified expectations repeatedly. Historically however this anger has only led to positive results when it was combined with a path to the solution, which in turns needs a clear vision of the goal and means to get there, appropriate leadership and mechanisms to control this leadership/power. This can and has been done (for instance the French Revolution), but resentment and anger has also given rise to a Hitler, terrorism and the current state of the ‘Arab Spring’. In the case at hand, I am unaware of any candidate giving a clear picture of exactly what their plan is to ‘change’ things. Everyone wants change, but I doubt for instance that the people who voted for Hollande had the Labor Reform or the way it is being passed in mind as ‘desirable change’. Voting on charms, perception (who looks the nicer/more trustworthy etc/more presidentail etc) is a problem in modern democracies and perhaps the solution is that the people need to force the candidates to bindingly commit to a program, with deviations having to be justified and be viewed as an unforeseen and special event justifiyng some sort of temporary deviation from the promised schedule. Actually reading and understanding, not to mention evaluating the programs is unfortunately beyond the interest or capabilities of many voters and this is why democracy needs a certain level of education to function well (for instance ‘Enlightment’ before the French Revolution )


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Anger can indeed lead to disaster: the Franco-Algerian civil war is an example. There are about ten million people living in France right now who, somehow, came or descended from people who came, from there (including yours truly). It brought only negativity, heart break, tortures, death, deprivation (and those are still going on).

      Education requires an effort, and effort requires motivation. This is why we need direct democracy, as it will incite said motivation.


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: