Thursday, December 22, 2016

Moving Through Stages of Grieving

It seems Eric is moving into the later Stages of Grieving.
The 5 Stages... "The 5 stages of grief and loss are:
  1. Denial and isolation
  2. Anger
  3. Bargaining
  4. Depression
  5. Acceptance
People who are grieving do not necessarily go through the stages in the same order or experience all of them."

Here is the first of my Exchanges there:
Everyone I knew and those I argued with who voted for Trump didn't listen to him other than to pick out what they liked about what he said, then they ignored everything else. From that point on they gathered together to talk about what they thought was going to happen or should happen and didn't hear what they didn't want to hear.

They are going to be in trouble. Trump will blame it on the Democrats when he passes legislation that hurts them. They aren't going to be able to place the blame where it should go, Trump and his administration.

Most of these people are living on the edge now. Social Security and Medicaid, Unemployment insurance, etc. and getting help from the 'food stamp' (SNAP) program. They think that somehow it's going to get better for them when Trump produces the magic they believe in. But they are the first in line to be hurt. They don't know it.

Most of them are hugely undereducated when it comes to our own History. Most can't tell you the political leanings of the countries who fought in the first and second world war, and forget about the History of the World. Most of them have told me that the Nazi's were Socialists rather than the Fascists the Nazi's actually were.

Our educational system has already put us decades behind where we should be. It's going to get even worse." Jon 
"Took an hour to get here for this comment: Good heartfelt article: I still support HRC as the most qualified for the position. Would we hear the howling if the vote numbers had been reversed? we did in 2000! The majority can only be suppressed for a period of time, and per O'Reilly he thinks white supremacy is the law of the land.  
One day it will change, and if the Latino's, black etc chose to seek justice in a end justifies the means as the Republicans and Trump have, who is to blame them? Care of the seeds one sows. 
Per some above, true, it may take a tremendous crash and burn to shake folks of their fact ignorant stupor. For some facts/reality are to be ignored, Machiavellian is the answer, such appears to be the plight of man." Dennis
"You continue with the belief that these people want to be on the dole. (ie welfare, Medicaid, food stamps, heating assistance, etc) When the reality is these smart independent folks want good jobs. And as I mentioned before, Government, American History and World History are still required curriculum in all schools as far as I know.

As for the failures of our Social Services and Education Systems, it is possible that Trump etal may find a way to hold the parents, bureaucrats and public employees accountable for delivering excellent results that are aligned to the large amount of money we tax payers provide them to do so. I truly hope so since they have been leaving far too many kids behind for far too many years." G2A
I did leave a response to the Dennis comment, but it is not posted yet.  In essence I noted that African Americans seem to be the only minority group that is truly in the Democrat's pocket. I mean the GOP got ~30% from the other minorities. They own businesses, some of the them are pretty strong Christians, don't want job competition from illegal workers, etc.  I am not sure the Democrats can keep them as they become wealthier.  Also, I questioned if Liberals keep trying to label the opposition as racist to keep their supporters scared and in line?

One would think Urban Liberals would have learned to stop belittling and insulting the people who vote differently.  I kind of hope they keep it up, it makes getting Conservatives elected much easier. Thoughts?


Laurie said...

I don't think repealing Obamacare, privatizing medicare, and cutting social security is going to be very popular. Nor will the effects of the trade war. Large tax cuts for the rich probably won't be widely supported either.

John said...

People care a WHOLE LOT about their household budgets. So the question as always is will the changes reduce the expenses for the majority of US citizens who actually show up to vote?

Unfortunately Obamacare raised expenses for most of these folks...

And the Democrats spend most of their time insulting many these people, and focusing on the citizens who are less likely to vote or work hard at becoming successful.

I do agree with you that a trade war would be very unpopular with everyone, so I am guessing he will avoid it. Please remember that he is a professional negotiator... Meaning start high and press your opponent to come up.

Laurie said...

How is Trump going to increase the income of the bottom half of workers who pay no federal income tax and therefore cannot be given a tax cut. I just see Trump blowing up the deficit with all the gains going to the rich. I also predict Trump policies will wreck havoc on the economy I just have no idea how fast and how bad the impact will be.

Where Trump is really scary is on foreign policy / commander in chief. Is Trump scaring you yet with his tweets implying he plans to restart the nuclear arms race.

John said...

Probably the same way Bush did... Tax credits...

The government gives them money to make good decisions and take productive actions.

Unlike welfare which gives them money for doing pretty much nothing, or doing the wrong things.

John said...

Only time will tell what will happen...

Obama didn't do us many favors...

But worrying about something you can do nothing about is just going to give you anxiety and an ulcer. My advice is stop worrying until they actually pass something.

jerrye92002 said...

I really don't see the Democrats ever getting past stage 1 or 2. They seem to vacillate between Denial and Anger. And if they ever got to bargaining the country might have a better chance to move in the right direction. I thought it was very instructive to hear what the new Secretary of Labor said when he became CEO of Hardee's, "The first person who says 'we've never done it that way' is fired."

jerrye92002 said...

I hear two things from Democrats right now. 1) Trump is going to do TERRIBLE things (predicting a future event) and 2) Those things will be terrible because we say so. I guess I would be more convinced of their prescience if their predictions for the raging success of Obamacare had been proven.

Anonymous said...

The question this line of thinking prompts is, Is our nation dead? I have, for some time, been of the view that our nation is dying, that we are in a state of irreversible decline. If I am right about that, the Kubler Ross analysis seems perfectly appropriate. But is it appropriate if our nation isn't dying, or dead?


John said...

I think they sound a lot like the Conservatives did in 2008 and 2012... Now hopefully they become more pragmatic and willing to get things done than the GOP did. The GOP behaved like children who took their toys home and refused to play nicely.

I think so. These steps occur for many forms of loss, not just death.

The Urban Liberals were so hopeful and exuberant because of the polls, and then their "worst nightmare" became a reality. That is quite the emotional roller coaster to process.

Anonymous said...

I don't think urban liberals are a good guide for analyzing polls. Bear in mind that they never, ever talked to Trump supporters. They are few and far between in cities. As a suburban liberal, it was pretty clear to me that Hillary was struggling.

We have elected a stupid and a mentally disturbed mas as president. There are nightmares worse than that but the one we have chosen is pretty awful.


jerrye92002 said...

Hiram, let me ask my question another way: If this "stupid and mentally disturbed mas [sic]" brings us some eminently sensible and successful policies, will the liberals move through to bargaining and acceptance? Will they remain stuck in Anger or try to Bargain and then get stuck in Depression?

jerrye92002 said...

"I think they sound a lot like the Conservatives did in 2008 and 2012."

You are right, but I claim significant differences. I think we went through our grief and anger pretty quickly, but based on a far more realistic estimate of what Obama would do in office. We tried bargaining only to have Obama run roughshod over Republicans, passing Obamacare, forcing a government shutdown and issuing executive orders, and that led us through to depression but only unwilling acceptance.

If this is what Trump must do to liberals, it is only long-overdue and proper payback, but I was hoping it would not come to that. I was hoping there were enough sensible Democrats to recognize that good policy is preferable to bad politics, so that they will get through to acceptance and help to turn the country around.

John said...

Oh give it break... The GOP wouldn't even work with Obama to fund Infrastructure improvements... And now Trump is talking about spending a Trillion dollars and no one is arguing.

John said...

"some eminently sensible and successful policies,"

I don't think the other half of the population is going to find the GOP tossing millions of people off health insurance to be deemed either of the above... :-)

Nor will they find coal / carbon friendly regulations to be so...

Therefore I will have things to write about for at least another 4 years...

jerrye92002 said...

Amazing how our individual biases alter reality, when it should be the other way around. For example, if Obamacare is repealed with the simple provision that "if you like your Obamacare plan, you can keep your plan," then NOBODY will lose their Obamacare insurance unless the replacement is better and cheaper, which it inevitably will be. So the question will be how hard the Left works to find that 1 person who neglected to pay the premiums and didn't go find a new policy and "lost" his health insurance. Because that is what they will do, try to alter our perceptions of reality.

As for regulations on coal, I think the election answered that one. West Virginia went heavily for Trump. And if Trump succeeds in explaining to people the reality that "fighting climate change" is today's massively greater snake oil medicine show, I think he will be MORE popular, not less.

John said...

Please remember that most people got their health insurance through the expansion of medicaid, which was part of ACA. If that expansion / funding stream disappears, so does their health insurance.

As for people seeing more clearly regarding climate change, I don't see it happening. Since the data / science is not perfect either way, it is more like a religion for now. And it unlikely that either side is going to change their religion based on a politician's argument. I mean thousands of scientists are in agreement around the globe and you refuse to convert. Do you really those with the opposing view will believe Trump anymore than you believed Obama...

jerrye92002 said...

Correct, most people got their insurance through Medicaid, but about half (as I recall) were those who were eligible before but hadn't signed up. The other half got their insurance because eligibility was increased to 133% of poverty. The thing is that the federal payments that were to induce states to adopt that higher limit are expiring, so whatever Trump does to the budget won't change Medicaid coverage. It's another of those lies told by Democrats to scare people away from common sense "reform" (aka repeal) of the ACA. Those who got insurance from the exchanges are only a few more than those who lost their insurance because of the ACA. And those few should have the opportunity to choose something better once choice is restored through repeal. In short, other than sheer demagoguery on the subject, those actually affected negatively will be vastly outvoted by those positively helped.

jerrye92002 said...

I think you are correct, that those supporting the idea of catastrophic manmade climate change do so as a religion, because it most certainly cannot be supported by any scientific fact. Even the piece you cite starts out by conflating "climate change," which nobody denies, with some mythical "95% probability or higher that this warming is predominantly caused by humans." That confusion is intentional on the part of the acolytes (and profiteers) of the global warming religion.

Unfortunately for them, the scientific facts are exactly the opposite. There is a 95% probability that the climate models, which consider humans the predominant cause, are WRONG. Scientific and Mathematical fact versus demagoguery, deceit and devout adherence. The only hope, IMHO, is for Trump to abruptly cancel all taxpayer money going to "fight climate change" (keeping the research and monitoring) and let people see that the scare was all just hot air. They are already inclined to believe their own eyes over these high priests, so a few years of added proof should dissuade many more.

John said...

Jerry, I think I am correct also.

That those supporting the idea of man made climate change being a hoax do so as a religion, because it most certainly cannot be supported by any scientific fact.

Just curious... Is your education or experience in any way relevant to determining if climate change is man made or natural? How things will turn out ~80 years from now?

Another Tea Cup Story

jerrye92002 said...

My education and experience are largely irrelevant. Any fool can see that the predictions of the climate models are WAY off already, and that is enough. But, my limited knowledge of statistics shows the models high to a 95% confidence level. My knowledge of computer modelling tells me it MUST be so. My common sense says the range of model predictions-- 17:1-- says they are not predictions at all, but SWEGs-- Scientific Wild-Eyed Guesses. Anyone should be able to understand that there is no "knowledge" enabling any of us to predict the future, only assumption and supposition. It is like my favorite stock market advice: "A trend will continue until it changes." And yours: "correlation is not causation" (and CO2 does not correlate with temperature over short [century] time scales).

Now, you might say that applying the word "hoax" is a matter of "religious" certainty not born out by fact, but what other word would you like for something not proven (in fact DISproven already) and that cannot be proven, even a hundred years hence? Scam? Demagoguery? Fear-mongering? The Cardiff Giant of our time?

John said...

Usually when a lot of very smart trained people from many cultures believe something that I disagree with, I figure it is time for me to start re-evaluating my beliefs and getting a bigger cup.

Now are they certain and perfect, of course not... We have never been here before. Are they directionally correct? Probably.

Remember my simplistic view: How can 7 Billion Humans burning / processing the following daily not have a very negative effect on a pretty closed system? As compared to if the humans were not here and those chemicals stayed in the ground. The vollume is just incredibly large.


jerrye92002 said...

Let me help you with that. "Climate Change" (nee' Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) has been called "the most widespread and successful pseudoscientific hoax in history." To quote Mayor Shinn, you've been hornswoggled, flim-flammed, and bamboozled. The ONLY evidence of CAGW is in the climate models, and they are clearly and KNOWN to be in error, with only the magnitude of error in question. The direction of the error is not in question, since every model predicts higher than actual measured temperatures.

Your simplistic view is not wrong, it is simply a couple orders of magnitude less important than you think it is, and it assumes that the supposed correlation (now disproven) between CO2 concentration and temperature equals causation. In short, while there is no scientific proof for the CAGW hypothesis, there is widespread scientific evidence against it. Just look at the arguments being made in favor. Is there any quantitative, scientifically factual evidence for it, or is it all just sanctimonious, fear-mongering cant?