Rama, the Swami and all that Lolly

[filghy2]

Vivek Ramaswamy Wants to Rewrite the Constitution (yahoo.com)

It's interesting that he wants to rewrite the Constitution when one of his previously-declared 10 truths was:
"10. The US Constitution is the strongest guarantor of freedoms in history."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/vi...gn/ar-AA1fAdm8

It seems like all supposedly conservative principles these days are sacrosanct when useful to stop the other side doing things, but can be discarded when convenient to the right.

[Stavros]

It's interesting that he wants to rewrite the Constitution when one of his previously-declared 10 truths was:
"10. The US Constitution is the strongest guarantor of freedoms in history."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/vi...gn/ar-AA1fAdm8

It seems like all supposedly conservative principles these days are sacrosanct when useful to stop the other side doing things, but can be discarded when convenient to the right.

You have made good points in your last two posts. On one level, I think it is clear that the core ideas that used to be associated with Conservatives, Liberals and Socialists have been eroded by events, such as the expansion of a global economy since 1989, and the crash of 2008, but also by a failure in politics to produce solutions that satisfy the broad mass of people. From a cynical point of view, Capitalism remains the dominant economic model globally, and benefits the few rather than the many, and yet what Trump and Ramaswamy claim to represent are the losers, even though they are beneficiaries of the very 'corrupt' system they claim they want to get rid of.

Ramaswamy may talk about stripping out layers of government and administration, but the majority of American citizens who work are employed either directly or indirectly on Federal or State government contracts. If this policy means making a substantial number of Americans redundant -and a lot of Black Americans work for the State or the Fed in some capacity- what of that other historic bogey called Welfare? I once heard a Republican on the radio say, simply 'take away the welfare and those people will get jobs'. Yet none of the previous Presidents -Nixon, Reagan, Bush I and II or Trump took an axe to welfare, even as these days Republicans call all Federal spending 'Socialism'.

So I am puzzled as to why, when in Europe for example, most Socialist parties have lost elections and have become weak parties, but why the Nationalists have challenged and often replaced the Conservatives, when in policy terms it may mean the erosion of civil liberties, but does not produce the kind of economic growth for all that is promoted, usually through the use of the word 'Great'. Trump has his 'Made America Great Again', Boris Johnson's Brexit vision was of a 'Global Britain' which is just another version of 'Great' (though if only geographically it is already there in Britain).

So if Ramaswamy fires most of America, where is the wealth going to come from?

[broncofan]

What is under-appreciated in relation to people like Ramiswamy and Musk is that venture capitalism is essentially a form of gambling. These people make risky bets in the hope that enough will pay off to make their fortune.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Even mutual and hedge fund managers who make hundreds of decisions per year need a pretty long track record before one should be convinced they are skillful stock pickers.

Like you, I am sure you cannot conclude much about someone's intellect based on a handful of large investments in risky ventures. Both of these guys seem like megalomaniacal idiots.

[Mirgofino]

People who do not "believe" in climate change can easily also not "believe" in the sun, water, breathing, skin and bones, potatoes and millions of other real life things.

[filghy2]

From a cynical point of view, Capitalism remains the dominant economic model globally, and benefits the few rather than the many, and yet what Trump and Ramaswamy claim to represent are the losers, even though they are beneficiaries of the very 'corrupt' system they claim they want to get rid of.

Neither or them are proposing to anything about the system that creates these inequalities. I fact, they want to gut the limited regulations that prevent corporations from exploiting their workers and consumers. When they rail against elites (as if they weren't elite themselves) they just mean elites who support things they don't like.

When Trump was President the main economic priorities were deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy. The only point on which he differed from Republican economic orthodoxy was his enthusiasm for trade protection, which I think is just an extension of his general xenophobia.

[filghy2]

Yet none of the previous Presidents -Nixon, Reagan, Bush I and II or Trump took an axe to welfare, even as these days Republicans call all Federal spending 'Socialism'.

I think one the major reductions in welfare might have occurred under Bill Clinton. There were also significant Social Security adjustments under Reagan (you may recall some idiot here tried to blame this on Biden). Bush II did have a go at more fundamental Social Security reform, which went nowhere. Republicans also went within one vote of abolishing Obamacare under Trump.

I think John McCain may have done them a favour there, because otherwise many of their potential voters would have realised that this dreaded 'socialism' was actually helping them. These proposals are based on magical thinking - claiming that it's possible to save many billions of $ without affecting any ordinary people.

[Stavros]

Points taken. That said, I think the scorched earth policy claims are probably just headlines, as I doubt even if Ramaswamy were to be elected, Congress would abolish welfare at a stroke, which after all is what people like him really want.