Which isn’t that untrue. If something doesn’t have a clear price, I assume I’m getting ripped off anyway.
3 Likes
I believe this counts as Calvinism.
4 Likes
His base equates being RICH to being SMART. because they hold out false hope that THEY can be one of those people too.
They do not understand that in most cases being RICH is about GENETIC LUCK.
12 Likes
Poor people are the Eloi. Rich people are the Morlocks. The Unter- and Uebermenschen. In Trump’s intelligent mind: “If poor people were smart, they would be rich.”
2 Likes
poor = doesn’t know what a Patek Philippe watch is.
3 Likes
“YOU aren’t rich because you are lazy and stupid.”
“I’M not rich because those darn elitist libruls have screwed the system.”
“But don’t worry, Trump will fix all that. Really.”
11 Likes
Temporarily set-back millionaires.
6 Likes
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled wasn’t convincing the world that he doesn’t exist; it was making them believe that “One day, all this could be yours too…”
11 Likes
I agree it’s not the biggest issue and there’s plenty of more important news to stay on top of, but disagree that it’s stupid to get upset over this conflation of having money as being equal to having good character or skill to do a job. Yes, for a finance position, it makes sense to hire someone with experience with numbers and money, but just having money doesn’t mean you have the right experience. Or moral character.
And 45 and his cheerleaders do this consistently. It normalizes the thought of, “Well, if you deserved better, you would have something better, so it’s your own fault if you’re down on your luck and don’t expect me to help you.”
From the mouths born holding silver spoons.
Part of my job involves improving housing for low income people, and I see a full range of humanity living in poverty. It’s not an easy way to live, and it is already demoralizing enough without the POTUS adding a national narrative that you’re also stupid and lazy or you wouldn’t be there. If you weren’t lucky enough to be born into a good, healthy family or community, there but for the grace of — go you, and I, and all of us. It’s worth it to have some empathy.
15 Likes
Well, to be honest, the headline here doesn’t talk about his entire cabinet either.
But, flip it around: do you think if he were talking about any other position he’s going to suddenly blurt out “You know what? We’re gonna shake things up. I’m going to put a poor loser in as SecDef! So much winning!” ?
Also also: is “Secretary of Finance” even a thing in the US?
1 Like
That is one ugly watch. Mind you, in watches I tend to overwhelmingly go for function over form - it’s tool, not a piece of jewellery.
Edit: then again, even as a piece of jewellery it’s pretty fucking ugly.
13 Likes
At least it’s only $110k.
3 Likes
Well. . . as long as he explained it so thoughtfully, I’m OK with it.
2 Likes
Well I guess money doesn’t always buy good taste.
3 Likes
And this is the guy his followers elected to save them from the elites and 1%ers.
2 Likes
I’m pretty worn down, and the idea of explaining to our asshole president what people care about is exhausting. I don’t really care if they are rich or not, quite so much as I would hope the people in charge are people who know what it is like to work for a living and live on their own earnings. I guess work only builds character if you are poor. Or non-white.
11 Likes
‘What you want the government to hand out those jobs to just anyone? Having money means you were smart enough or in a good enough position to get ahead. that should allow perks.’
“but in those particular positions, I just don’t want a poor person.”
Positions, plural. He’s talking about more than Gary Cohn here (who was the former president of that company and now Director of the National Economic Council). He may be speaking of just Goldman Sachs people, of which there are about half-a-dozen in various roles in the administration, but he seems to be speaking more broadly than that, even (especially given how many billionaires he has in his cabinet).
I think the equivalent is the Secretary of the Treasury, although Cohn is Director of the National Economic Council (but both are former Goldman Sachs).
By Trump’s apparent standards? Yes, absolutely. His definition of “poor,” based on his cabinet, is someone who didn’t make hundreds of millions in finance or inherit similar amounts, discounting anyone who spent a life in public service, basically. Which is disturbing all by itself.
What, we can’t get the least bit upset over the blatant hypocrisy of Trump? We’re just supposed to smile and shrug when, for example, Trump attacked his opponents by hinting that Goldman Sachs had some influence over them, and then stuffed his cabinet with Goldman Sachs executives and other billionaires? We let Trump do whatever he wants and then just go along with normalizing it? There’s very little that Trump says that we shouldn’t get upset about - there should be a constant state of outrage, based on what’s happening all the time in this administration.
The sunk-cost fallacy does seem to work with morality as well… and here the phenomenon is writ large…
8 Likes
TGOP’ers eat the tRump slop right out’a his hand.
3 Likes
Nice! How much do they cost?
