By all means, let's never let up on tax and regulatory policies to encourage the most ignorant and clannish cults to breed and overrun every society that seeks an ideal of quality of life.
The cognitively impaired would oppose tax policies designed to reduce incentives now in place for the most ignorant, invasive, and cultish of breeders. Given the broader context, this phases into actually incenting such breeding and swamping. To think beyond their noses, the cognitively impaired do not. They like their cognitive impairment, and they want more of it. These are the farmees of the people farmers, bred to be epsilons for the Brave New Uniparty. The unwitting vanguard for the sub-humanization of humanity and the destruction of every representative republic. Food for Soros.
Trump's supporters include many smart, energetic, average, and not-so-energetic supporters. But all of them are faithful Americans. It is necessary to circle back to relate to and to en-courage even the slower and less energetic among them. Especially the ones that would never have understood the complexities or troubles from the beginning. This is what every leader finds necessary to do in order to accomplish a difficult task. I think you're ankle-biting on behalf of people who are part of the problem.
It would not matter whether Trump were perfectly fluent in Washingtonspeak. It is Trump's independence from the axis of people farmers and farmees that alarms all Ainos. Regardless of his words, whether profound and artsy or not, they would find ways to try to impugn him with his own words. It's not Trump's words they hate. It's his values and ideas. Trump values a decent Republic of free thinkers. His opponents hate that. The sheeple farmers don't want free thinkers. And the sheeple don't want to be bothered to think.
Ainos are great pretenders. They all faithfully shill on behalf of whatever syndicate they chose or that chose them. Dinos shill on behalf of the parasitical syndicate that pretends to want to redistribute fairness and equality. Rinos shill on behalf of the parasitical syndicate that pretends to believe in equality of opportunity (while working to pull up the ladders).
Ainos all shill for faithless pretenders that really just want to farm the little people.
Trump does not work for the syndicate that only pretends to be looking out for the little people, nor for the syndicate that only pretends to want to restore opportunity to Americans. Rather, Trump really does want to allow America and Americans (adults who seek competency) to become great again. And wealthy.
And this is why the people farmers and their farmees all hate him. Dinos, Rinos, and Ainos, alike.
The gap in wealth between ordinary people and oligarchs has increased far beyond the point of diminishing social returns. It is true that entrepreneurs need to accumulate wealth and capital to be able to offer jobs and organize productive employment. Better that they do that than bureaucrats. But to allow oligarchs to agglomerate more wealth than they can put into productive employment is to encourage them to invest the excess by buying political favors for the purpose of pulling the ladders up.
Then the system becomes perverse, similar to what we have now. Evil gets promoted, while virtue is sent packing. We end up with people in power who, like Obama, are evil, cynical, lying, deceiving, chooming, grooming, abusing shills and agents for self-godded, people-farming, fascist-oligarchic collectivists.
Once the ladders are pulled up, inefficiency increases much the same as if productive work were taken over by governmental bureaucrats. That's when fascism becomes much the same in effect as socialism. How then to reduce the gap in wealth, so that fascist oligarchs stop investing so much in buying governmental favors and instead invest in more socially productive endeavors?
Assuming the political will were gathered to reduce the oligarchic insults to humanity, I have not been able to think of any clear way to accomplish that purpose, short of redistributive catastrophe.
I have mused about a fuzzy way, but I am by no means confident it would work. That way would take a few generations. It would entail a progressive tax on each citizen's consumption --- with all governmental lobbing investments to be treated as personal consumptions charged to the agent who exercised authority to approve such investments in buying political influence.
To work, such a plan would have to entail ways to capture fleeing accounts. I am not confident such a progressive tax on personal consumption could work. But, short of redistributive catastrophe, I don't see much by way of an alternative.
I suppose there is RICO. However, the RICO rules will always be subject to oligarchic buying. And, to work, they would have to be applied hundreds of times in the courts --- even though the courts are easily perverted simply by bribing judges, shopping forums, and propagandizing the public with oligarchic owned media. The Oligarchy and its ACLU own the Game of Courts. The people at large have as much chance at incrementally prevailing in the Courts as a small better has of taking a Casino House down.
Re: " Fines are payable to Insurance Companies instead of the Treasury (Fascism)"
Sounds like it would empower Insurance Corporatists to confiscate the holdings of people too poor to pay for insurance and to turn those people into debt slaves.
This does sound like a kind of fascism that would empower corporations to make perpetual serfs out of the masses. Which fits almost perfectly with the NWO ideal of oligarchic collectivists.
The flimflammers will never give up their flimflammery, will they?
Re: "A powerful mental construct – the liberal myth of a progressive utopia brought about by surrender of the individual to state control – is at risk of being swept away by a great movement to free consciousness from the controlling ideas of the liberal past."
Indeed! The work of the ACLU and its fellow-traveling legalistic-utopians can be summed up as law drooling. Rabid droolings of godless and/or godforsaken, wannabe people-farmers. Funky S for brains.
Why are people who identify as Jews, even when they are atheistic, so unlikely to marry people who do not identify as Jews?
Why do these same people tend to promote the diversification of every other tribe/society/culture?
Why are they so opposed to applying their preaching about diversity to themselves?
Why are they not called more to account for this?
Why do they tend to incite "privilege" ideas by all minorities against all whites, except Jewish whites?
Is it "anti-Semitic" to call a white Jew to account for his privilege and his tendency to prefer supporting and promoting his own tribe. even as he tries to shame others that may do the same?
Better yet, why have other whites allowed this hypocrisy to go unchallenged for so long?
Why are you always preaching about anti-Semitism? What are American Jews being denied? How are their rights being restricted? If they are so mistreated, why are nearly all our institutions and much of our nation's wealth under strong Jewish influence?
There are billions on this planet who really are mistreated. How are you being mistreated? What is society denying to you that you think you should be entitled to?
I would rather that needed social incentives be general, rather than applied as direct force. I don't trust elites to make detailed, intrusive decisions for each member of the masses. I prefer a society of educated, responsible citizens, who are respected and trusted to do what's best for themselves --- subject only to such general constraints as are necessary.
The problem is, as difficulties approach becoming emergencies, ever more specific and intrusive constraints and rations are soon deemed to be necessary. And sometimes the emergencies are hyped or invented, to facilitate elitist rule. I would rather societies acquire vision enough to instigate general (tax) incentives to reduce populations.
Some societies are less suited to individual trust, responsibility, and freedom. But that is not a good reason to flip our demography to become like them.
Too many unwise and abusive people want to run other people's lives. Maybe they can be trained or diverted more to identify with virtual worlds of X Boxes, where they can interact in virtual worlds, without harming ours so much?
Many years ago, I believed in affirmative action to be encouraged or imposed by the government. Since then, I have learned how it produces ingrates and hollows out real charities. Indeed, most charities nowadays seem to be about lobbying for more gov welfare in order to produce more ingrates --- who tend to be incompetent, both in skills and in moral purposefulness.
I raised children who have become good citizens. I did not do that by raising them to feel entitled to reparations. Mommas and Daddies, don't raise your children to be ingrates. They'll always be unhappy -- even when they're looting.
Ingrates owe gratitude, but they will never find it in themselves to show it. They think this makes them righteous. In reality, it makes them unhappy and spiritually deformed. And harder to love or want to help. Trying to help an ingrate is like pouring time and money down a pit.
One of the worst traits to instill in a child is a general sense of entitlement to everything. When a person believes he is owed, he is not grateful when he receives volunteered help or charity. More likely, he sees the volunteer as a mark. He does not learn charity from a mark, but he does learn how to bait and take from marks. Moreover, this ugly character trait is soon seen by his relatives, friends, and even acquaintances. Not many people want to volunteer their time to help an ingrate with a permanent attitude disorder. Not even a dog will play with an ingrate dog. A jealous, envious ingrate is a walking sin, looking for a place to happen.
And why the crazy concern about equalizing material goods? Above what is needed for shelter, sustenance, and community, how much value is there, really, in additional material stuff? How many real friends would you surrender in exchange for more material stuff?
Our society has free access to libraries, with computers, with access to an internet of information of which the richest Kings of old had but a tiny fraction. This was developed, not by a communistic society, but by a society that respected the dignity of individuals and their freedom of expression and enterprise.