Trump and Energy Policy

Readers here will know that this site is not normally a political forum, and I don’t intend to change the policy of discouraging political arguments, but I think when politics intersects with energy issues (the focus of the site); it is on-topic for ECW, so long as we don’t stray into heated arguments (off-topic).

The world’s attention today is on the victory of Donald Trump in the US election, and I am sure like me, readers here are wondering what his presidency might mean for energy policy, particularly if commercial LENR makes his debut during his administration. Trump did mention energy during the campaign, particularly in connection with American economic growth, energy security and jobs. Here’s a page from his website on his energy policy plans: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/energy

From that list we can see that he is committed to using fossil fuels for economic and national security purposes America, and there’s no specific mention of promoting of alternatives like wind or solar — and there’s no mention of nuclear, nor anything about policies to mitigate climate change. In fact, Trump has vowed to cancel billions of dollars in ‘climate change spending’.

The Obama administration has had a strong commitment to developing alternative energy sources, and some have hoped that this would include support for LENR if it were viable.

So this makes me wonder how he might deal with LENR, if it comes along in a commercial way. One of his campaign themes has been reduce regulations which he says stifles business, and to promote free enterprise. Would he stand in the way if a world changing new energy source like the E-Cat came along that could jeopardize the US fossil fuel energy industry?

Andrea Rossi operates from the US, and I am sure will be hopeful that his work will be able to flourish here. He commented today in response to a question about the election result: “The Great People of the United States has talked, sound and clear. This means that Donald Trump is the best possible choice. I appreciated also the open mind of Hillary Clinton after her defeat.”

163 Replies to “Trump and Energy Policy”

  1. This is an interesting question. How does a Trump America respond to LENR? I do think that a democrat America would be excited by LENR from a CO2 reduction perspective. However, a Trump America may get excited by LENR from a “new business opportunity” perspective. At lease we hope so.

    However the oil industry is going to hate and fear LENR. Will its hatred and fear cause LENR to be held back? Fortunately, Trump’s fortune has not been in oil. He doesn’t personally have deep pockets, and deep history in that industry. This bodes well for LENR over “old guard” oil.

    When LENR strikes, it will produce economic turmoil before it produces benefit. For example, people will be expecting LENR cars, and not buying gas guzzlers before the expensive r&d is done by the car industry to produce those cars. The period of time when LENR cars are promised but not yet delivered will be very hard on the automotive industry.

    Further, the energy industry, 10% of our economy, will see its doom within 20 years of LENR being released. Future plans, such as the develpment of oil refineries, pipelines, hydro dams and wind farms all have multi-decade payoffs. New developments in this area will be senseless in a world where LENR is clearly coming.

    The tremors that precede the bright LENR future will be significant. It’ll take skilled management to keep an economy afloat through them. We’ll see if Trump and the republicans are up to the job.

  2. If one assumes that he knows about LENR/BLP then it would not be bad to stop investing in renewables and to support the more flexible oil I guess.

  3. Call me a cynical but I am affraid they likely got lost between the thousands of snail mails his campaign probably receiced every day about Birther and Truther theories and so on…

        1. Yeh think I see how it works, every time the coil is energised the magnet aligns with the coil, and some sort of switching (Reed or mechanical) is used to de-energise the coil, maybe the back EMF helps a bit. Can see no reason why this would be anymore than an efficient (or not) DC motor, shame.

          1. All comes down to self sustain again for me. If he could feedback and keep it going with some usable output then WOW, but is there any evidence of this, should not be difficult at all the achieve with a motor. Or if it charges the batteries, as suggested, should keep running for years. Why did he ask for so much money for a new Car to test this on when any old one would prove the point. I’m not saying impossible but nowhere near enough evidence to prove, look very dubious to me, so easy to prove positive.

          2. The money for a new Cadilac is an idea only a old timer Texan
            could come up with.
            The rest of your questions and suggestion all I can say
            is I wish Mr Newman where alive and you could go visit him and his machine.
            Thanks for reply.

          3. This is Mr Newmans theory.

            Newman’s Gyroscopic Theory

            The theoretical basis of Joe Nemans’ Revolutionary Energy Machine challenges many accepted laws of physics.

            The starting point for understanding Newman’s ideas is his assertion that the fundamental building block of all matter is the gyroscopic particle, an infinitesimal unit of matter that spins like a gyroscope.

            Newman claims that the mechanics of magnetism and electricity, which have never been fully explained, can be described in terms of how gyroscopic particles react and interact.

            The idea that a single type of particle is responsible for the forces at work in the universe is an old one, yet some of the latest research in physics involves the investigation of particles.

            New and smaller particles with previously unknown properties are being discovered on a regular basis.

            Newman’s theories also depend heavily on the idea that all matter is concentrated energy, which can be released if one has a mechanism for unlocking it.

            That notion is at the heart of Einstein’s work and the equation E = mc^2, then the argument that he is trying to patent a perpetual motion machine has no merit.

            Theoretically, Newman’s machine could run indefinitely, but — according to him — not because it is CREATING energy to run itself, but because it is converting matter to energy.

            In radically oversimplified terms, this is what happens when Joe Newman throws the switch on the Revolutionary Energy Machine:

            1) An electrical current is sent through a long (miles long) coil of copper wire, magnetizing it and creating a strong magnetic field.

            2) Newman describes the mechanics of the magnetic field as “shells of force” composed of gyroscopic particles that move in a spiral pattern around the wire.
            Originally IN the wire, the particles expand outward and thus create the magnetic field.

            3) When the particles form a magnetic field, Newman says, they are traveling at the speed of light in two directions — in the spiral pattern around the wire, and in their own normal gyroscopic spin.

            This gives him the right side of the E = mc^2 equation; the particles (mass) multiplied by the speed of light squared.

            4) The machine operates in pulses; that is, the electrical current is continually turned on and off. This causes the magnetic field — in other words, the gyroscopic particles — to expand and collapse.

            5) When the trillions of gyroscopic particles that have been released collapse back into the wire, some of them collide with other gyroscopic particles.

            Because of the nature of the gyroscopic spin, the collisions cause the loose particles to bounce off at right angles; those particles emerge at one end of the wire as electrical energy.

          4. Thanks Sam. Do you know what is the difference between Newman’s Motor and the Keppe Motor? As the same principles would apply to them both yet the Keppe Motor is just highly efficient not above unity. The same laws would also apply to all EMF forces in a wire so what did Newman do differently to the others and is it easy to replicate then prove. Cheers

      1. No, I think newman is for real. but joes unit is as big as his garage and doesn’t seem to put out much power to size ratio. He is on to something about the whole universe and all particles are gyroscopic. He sounds a bit raw and hokey at times, but very interesting.

  4. As an outsider, Trump will use the internal supplies as quick as possible and be more independent. As it comes to Lenr and it is the next source he adepts it quickly because otherwise you walk behind. He has less bills to pay to other people so I don’t think its bad that he becomes president. Besides the problems he can cause in the world I really don’t think stopping Lern will be one of them.

  5. Trump has definitely demonstrated his weakness in science by some of the comments he made during the campaign. However, if shown working prototypes from either Rossi or Mills, he won’t have a preconceived notion that they should not work based on known physics. Hopefully Trump will get a strong team of scientific advisors that can direct some federal dollars into these alternative energy systems, perhaps through university research grants. The business climate for bringing forth a new technology should be excellent under the Trump administration.

    1. I think you have it correctly. And the probable key is Newt Gingrich. Newt has had in the past a very close relationship with sci-fi author Jerry Pournelle, and they have worked together to foster high-tech approaches to solutions to USA problems. SSTO (single-stage-to-orbit) was only one.

      Google search with terms Gingrich Pournelle turns up much.

      1. I think Newt will get a position in Trump’s administration, perhaps secretary of state. It’s good to hear that Newt would be one member of the administration that would be interested in high tech approaches to solving our problems.

        1. I’ve seen SOS mentioned, but I think he would be better as Trump’s Chief of Staff. He is enough of a generalist to interface with groups of specialists. And as COS, he would be in a much better position to “foster” LENR.

          I am sure he is still in communication with Pournelle, and also that Jerry is aware of both LENR and Rossi.

          What I would like to see happen is to settle the science of LENR as a reality once and for all by having NIST offer to test any working model device, and the necessary budget set up to do just that.

          If NIST can’t “get it right”, the country is in REAL trouble.

          1. You might be right that Newt is selected for the COS position. I certainly agree that it would be good to have NIST test prototypes. Wouldn’t it be great if rather than the US Patent Office refusing to consider “cold fusion” type patent applications some years ago, they had said we will consider your patent if you will deliver a prototype to NIST to verify it operates as disclosed in the patent application.

          2. “Wouldn’t it be great if rather than the US Patent Office refusing to consider “cold fusion” type patent applications some years ago, they had said we will consider your patent if you will deliver a prototype to NIST to verify it operates as disclosed in the patent application.”

            Yea, verily and forsooth.

            And in fact, the original modus operandus of the early Patent Office was that inventees had to deliver a working prototype or scale model as part of their application for patent protection. The PO stopped doing that when they started running out of warehouse space to store the models.

    2. “Trump has definitely demonstrated his weakness in science” I don’t think you are right about that. More accurately, Trump is skeptical of scientific consensus. These are two VERY different things. In truth, being skeptical of scientific consensus will make it easier for him to jump on the LENR bandwagon.

      IOW, the biggest reason given to reject LENR is that it is not considered possible by mainstream science. Most of us here buy into LENR despite recognizing this fact. We tend to be skeptical of scientific consensus.

      1. You don’t seriously think he actually understands any of the real issues involved with major scientific controversy today? He knows nothing about science, imho. And I say that while actually agreeing, accidentally, with his skepticism about AGW. He’s typically “skeptical” about things he’s ignorant about, like where the actual sitting President of the United States was born.

        1. I think you should let him tell us what he will do before we assume we know things that may not be true. I trust an honor student from WSB could learn an issue quite quickly. I find your comment a bit arrogant and condescending.

      2. I’ll stick with my original statement that Trump has demonstrated weakness in science. That he is skeptical of scientific consensus is probably true, but the cause of his skepticism is his lack of knowledge. I think as president he will rely on those with good knowledge to help make decisions (with regard to science). (See Warthog’s comments on Newt Gingrich below.)
        I would hope that “most of us here” that buy into LENR do so as a result of studying the data and results of LENR experiments that have been published, rather than just being skeptical of scientific consensus.

    3. Being a businessman, If there is a proven working product, he will not stand in it’s way.
      I do not see him supporting subsidies and the University research would follow current protocol and funding processes.

  6. Trump is a business man.

    And LENR has the potential to make you and your country very very rich.

    So I guess from this point of view Trump and LENR could be a good team.

  7. I count on the facts he tries to achieve his goals. If he wants industrial jobs like producing steel back from low cost countries he will need energy quick and a lot.

    As I loved your sales speech about the potus. I said can cause not will cause, that’s when the other would have won. 😁

    Lets watch it them play for a year, as Trump is use to think in opportunity it could be good for Lern+.

    1. No he was involved in some land deals with Tom Darden and Cherokee in the past but those deals were before IH was created.

  8. I read the same as you.
    He is pragmatic (good), protectionist (long term bad), and manipulative (he is a politician)…

    like all president he will defen US interest as he understand.
    he will bomb to defend US industry, like Obama, like clinton, like bushes, like reagan, like carter, like kennedy…

    nothing will change

    1. He is not a politician, and he does not have any interest in serving the hidden agendas of the NWO that have tried by any means to stop him.
      The wars pushed by Obama were under Saudi orders, so that they can build a direct gas pipeline to Europe, against Russian interests. Search a bit and see how well liked is Trump by the arab princes (hint: not at all). Trump is firmly against those wars.

      I applaud he is against the climate change scam. Those billions of dollars are better spent in actual policies to save the environment, prevent droughts and so. The DNC pushed climate change hard because its a trick to siphon lots of money to their pockets. If you pay attention you find out that they say one thing and act the opposite, everyone in the climate change lobby has invested heavily in oil and carbon.

      I believe he will be pro-LERN, because he has a businessman mindset, and most importantly, he does not have to return favors to any of the energy lobbies.

  9. Getting away from the political and more to the effect of LENR on society. When something becomes free (relative) and readily available, the need, or desire, or actual requirement for regulating diminishes. (like trying to sell air, water, or dirt – is free for the taking, breathing or drinking for the most part) So to with energy, the need for regulating will decrease.

    1. If all other things are equal, I would agree. However, there are many other possible reasons why regulation might be good, like moral and ethical reasons, and others.

  10. Now, what would make you think that I was a liberal? Yeah, I have some liberal viewpoints, but I disagree with them on other things. Liberals are not the only ones who hate libertarians.

    Yeah, I know that my post was nasty. I was NOT trying to win converts – I was just trying to tell it like it is. If you’re dumb enough to believe that a hammer is the best tool for all (or even most) jobs, then I don’t know what to say to convince you that you are stupid and need to wise up.

  11. I have to agree with you that a lot of money goes into research trying to prove a hypothesis is correct, rather than using good scientific experimentation to let the research lead to a theory and explanation of the observations. My recommendation is for everyone to keep an open mind with regard to LENR theory. The same goes for Randell Mills’ theory on how his SunCell operates. His “hydrino theory” certainly does not agree with the currently accepted theory of quantum mechanics, but if he can produce megawatts of power with watts of input power using water as a fuel, his theory merits further investigation.

  12. Doesn’t have mass appeal??? You have to be kidding. When it can totally revolutionize society and create TREMENDOUS wealth (and tremendous power).

  13. The oil industry will not resist LENR. With their unlimited resources they will embrace it by buying it up and controlling it, then dole it out to us at a cost commensurate with the cost of other petroleum products and conducive to their bottom line. It is the only hope for a non-disruptive transition. We should not be concerned with what effect Trump will have on this new disruptive technology, but instead the effects of capitalism on it’s use. So many fail to understand that the value of something like LENR is not set by how cheap it is to produce. Regardless of whether it is American capitalism, European style socialism or otherwise, the price of energy will be set by the market place and demand and as a result will be likely offered to the end user (us and business) at a price not unlike current energy resources.

    1. I would bet initial cost of energy will be comparable to current cost. A necessity to pay the huge up front costs of a new technology. In time it will be much cheaper then today’s cost.

  14. You don’t garner the wealth that Trump already has by being without vision. And Trump already has advisors that can and will quickly bring it to his attention.

  15. I see this Republican sweep as a rare opportunity to have a somewhat scientific political experiment, it is very rare to have a single political party get control of the House, Senate, President, and Supreme court picks all at the same time. It is a perfect scenario to see exactly how the Conservative way of governing will actually function unencumbered by the usual array of opposition from the other political parties. In the past both sides have complained that their system has never been given free rein, a chance to see what is possible if their ideas could be put into full effect without restrictions. Well, now we have four years to study, watch, monitor and learn what if any value the Conservative way of governing has when allowed to proceed without any limitations. Once and for all the country and the world will have an open experiment like never before, and it will make or break the Conservative ideology for a long time to come. Four years will go by quickly and it will be a plain as the nose on our faces whether or not America has been made better, or worse. Finally the claims and political promises of the right wing will have their day in public court. This could be the beginning of a political dynasty,… or the last years of an impossible promise.

    1. For periods of time, the democratic party has controlled all branches. usually in 2 year spans and more rarely a 4 year span. The republican party on the otherhand hasn’t controlled all branches since the great depression.

      I’m personally not a fan of either party having a lock. As to Trump, he is niether democrat nor republican. He’s kind of a wild card. Who know’s. He may surprise everyone. He’s not beholding to either party.

      Trump is a businessman and may create jobs and build up the economy. That’s good. There can be no transition to any energy technology if the economy is broken. Transitions cost a lot of money and resources.

  16. ->”Cars are already heading toward 100% electric”

    Less then 500,000 Ev’s a year out of nearly 100 Million ICE vehicles built annually. Lithium price has increased about 400% with current demand.

    We need about 200 more Elon Musk type Mega battery plants and dozens of new lithium minds that will take decades to obtain. Far more if they intend to use these batteries for energy storage.

    1. I don’t think you’re hugely wrong Omega about the stats you’ve posted above…. AND I still think EVs will dominate in less than 10 years, 15 tops!

      I would not be surprised at all if ICE passenger vehicles are barely even sold in 2025. Nobody is going to want one. It would be like buying a film camera when everyone else is raving about their digital.
      https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/65193431/ICEs%20are%20like%20Film%20Cameras%20and%20it%27s%201998.jpg

      Try spending a few hours/days here: insideevs.com and maybe you’ll start to appreciate why the whole automotive scene is changing… that is if you are honest and open minded.

      And even if Li costs go up battery costs are going to drop amazingly fast. Once we break below $100/kWh (probably before 2020) the ICE is toast. GM is already only paying $145/kWh for Chevy Bolt batteries!

      Every automaker has publicly committed to an electric car future and behind the scenes their commitment is even more serious. The ramping up of dozens of giga-large battery manufacturing plants can happen within a decade.

      AND eventually, EVERYTHING with wheels will be electrified too – not just passenger cars – including big trucks, large buses and light duty pick up trucks. The cost savings on fuel and maintenance make all of this a NO BRAINER!

  17. https://www.greatagain.gov/

    Link through which suggestions can be made to the incoming Trump administration.

    Caveat—-I haven’t done any checking into the legitimacy of the link. I will let more experienced minds/hands do that. I’m sure there are many here.

    1. Warthog,
      Thanks for the link. I also didn’t check the validity of the website, but thought it worth the time to put in a word for how I thought the government could assist with LENR (and the SunCell): 1) verify prototypes work as claimed, 2) publish results to bring in private investment, and 3) provide grants to university to study the physics of the devices.
      Dr. Mike

      1. I think a big part of the failure of LENR to gain traction is that up to now, control has rested solely in the hands of the DOE, which means “run by physicists”, so that despite the fact that every committee that has examined the LENR claims has recommended that sufficient funding be made available to determine the validity of the phenomenon, that has never happened.

        Putting that determination of validity into another federal agency means that the physicists no longer are “judge, jury, and executioner”. NIST is for the most part run by chemists, and actually has better expertise than the DOE to make the necessary measurements.

        1. aps recently showed their ideological base problem.
          even asking for funding to the new bpss cannot be accepted by those academic.

          https://www.yahoo.com/news/major-physicists-group-retracts-trump-friendly-press-release-215349023.html

          Judith Curry, who does not seems so Trumpist but loyalist to the constitution at best, have long ago moaned that academic were biased agains conservatives and very consanguine.

          this bias, in journalism, in academies, in GAFAs, in my opinion is source of the blindness that led to current furror

          the crazy

          read that about strategic surprises
          http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fphilippesilberzahn.com%2F2016%2F03%2F07%2Fhomogeneite-diversite-et-aveuglement-ce-que-donald-trump-nous-apprend-sur-les-sources-de-surprise-strategique%2F&sandbox=1
          by a very liberal guy, explaining how even himself is insulated from reality.

          read also that
          http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lefigaro.fr%2Fvox%2Fpolitique%2F2016%2F11%2F11%2F31001-20161111ARTFIG00209-brice-couturier-donald-trump-a-mis-une-claque-au-parti-des-medias.php&sandbox=1

          FB Huyghes is an expert in infowarware and write this post
          http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhuyghe.fr%2Factu_1423.htm&sandbox=1

          note that in that problem of elite insulated from reality we are much better than american, far ahead in digging our hole in the sand…
          I prepare for a strategic surprise in France.

          Trump defend GMO , is skeptic on immunizations, climate AGW… no coherence to an ideology except questioning consensus by liberal elites…

          a french guy interviewed trump (one of the few) and report that he was all but crazy.
          another industrial entrepreneur (the last compressor manufacturer in France) having worked as your consultant in the rust belt then in New York bet a bottle of wine for Trump and won.
          He see Trump is an instinctive animal feeling not thinking, and he expect him to finally be rational because it is business.

          He have no money in oil, in solar, in electric car, but only in space to heat, and in middleclass peripheral electors who voted for him.

          His moto, maybe stupid because prodectionism is suicide for an economy, is to do anything good for america. LENR is good for america.

          his interest is to support LENR if it is in position to be useful for his assets.

          1. Insular blindness and groupthink respect no boundary.

            But if Trump is crazy, it is “crazy like a fox”. After all, he had the astuteness to beat ALL of the self-proclaimed intellectual leaders, Democrat, Republican, and media, not just in the USA, but pretty much globally.

            On a political discussion board I comment on, I have been telling everyone who would listen that the only comparable political phenomenon in American history was the election of Andrew Jackson to the US presidency. A lot of the same things were said of Jackson as of Trump.

            I have only had time for a quick glance at your links, but will work through them and possibly comment further at a later time.

            Oh…and Trump’s assets are probably candidates for even the “old” E-Cat….big buildings, lotsa HVAC.

          2. ->”a french guy interviewed trump (one of the few) and report that he was all but crazy.”

            I’ll assume that means anything but crazy…

          3. probably (il est tout sauf fou)
            google translation with the full sentence translate like you 8)

            the industrialist I refer to, member of croissance+ group, pushing non protectionist solutions, explains that he experienced working from industry people from many states of the rust belt first, then in New york experience this “political animal” named Trump, appreciating his instinct…

            note that Nouriel Roubini just tweeted something like predicting Trump could govern in a “center” way after being elected the extreme way…

  18. Heh! Not intending to be insulting, but if you believe that the business world is devoid of politics….well…let’s just say that the correct descriptive is “naive”. In fact, I suspect that what got Lucifer tossed out of Heaven was inventing politics……..(he lost the election).

    1. Your comment is more appropriate as a response to Manuel Cruz’s comment who I responded to since I agree with you and there is no reason from reading my comment to believe otherwise and your comment is perfect for Manuel’s comment. (:->)

  19. Trump doesn’t think – this is his advantage over mainstream scientists. Whether he will utilize this advantage depends rather on China than on DOE.

    1. Your hatred has clouded your judgement. I did not vote for Trump, but I do not let my anger cloud my judgement such that I would say something so degrading and foolish. Just because he doesn’t think your thoughts and has a relatively low character does not mean that he doesn’t think.

      1. I think Zephir meant he doesn’t think well.

        Trump’s complete lack of any rational train of thought exhibited at many points during the campaign gives Zephir much evidence to back up his claim.

        1. “Trump’s complete lack of any rational train of thought exhibited at many points during the campaign gives Zephir much evidence to back up his claim…

          Remember….any such data have been filtered through the very media who were actively working to elect Hillary. OF COURSE they will portray Trump this way. The fact that Trump won the election in the face of opposition from not only the Democrats, but some Republicans and virtually all the media refutes that meme (remember when Obama claimed the fact that he won the election showed he was qualified to be president).

          1. The media did not control the words that came out of Trump’s own mouth. Just go back and watch the debates. The man is a word salad specialist with a superficial understanding of everything except bankruptcy, litigation and currency manipulation.

            Believe me.

          2. Sorry, but I refused (and refuse) to watch “the debates”, which are a ridiculous farce totally operated to favor whatever Democrat happens to be running.

            I believe the evidence that I see unfolding before my own eyes. And that tells a different story from the one you are selling.

          3. I think we have a decent understanding of why people voted for Trump. It boils down to two main things in my mind:

            Withering economic desperation in much of the country — especially the MidWest. Even though the economy has improved significantly, life has gotten too hard for many Americans. It seems like the deck is stacked against them at every turn — and they’re right.

            Successful demonization of Hillary over decades by a determined and ruthless right wing media, topped off by a last minute faux “reinvestigation” to stoke the fire at just the right time.

            The irony is that those frustrated and leery voters just voted in a ‘solution’ that’s much likely, IMO, to be worse than the problems.

          4. Maybe I’m wrong but your expression resonate with what I hear, and I consider you may miss the real problem.

            I analyse that from French , UK and what I understand from US problems, as I’ve perceived through various documents and interactions (especially farmers).

            The problem is not (only) marxist economic desperation, having less money.
            I see for example a problem with government puting his nose in intimate and key domaine of people life, and ruining their life.

            take for exemple the EU regulation to reduce hoover power, or to forbid farmers usage of herbicids, or unaplicable laws and regulation that make them work more and earn less, while organic food seems pushed like Koscher food in israel…

            take for example the middleclass people having kids, where there is an increding regulation on how to raise kids, increasing penalization , increasing rules advised to parents (like on screen usages); while schools don’t educate correctly, while tax are less protective for families, and at the same time laws (that I support) focus on minorities that seems to capture all government interest, LGBT….
            People don’t understand, and are furious of
            – being poorer
            – having less freedom to make money and be independent
            – have more work
            – have less freedom to do their daylife
            – feel culpabilised by authorities and their minions (NGO, media) on their dayly acts (car, kids, food)
            – suffer more competition, while being more strictly regulated

            all of that feeling amplified by personal bias and lack of global vision and personal contact with who they blame of the troubles…

            a scissor effects…

            This is why the marxist don’t understand what is happening, because it is not only money, but regulations and morality that make people feel and be poorer.

            the 1% discourse is not totally inored, but people are not stupid and they see the rich and the well introduced elite, from Musk to Gore, benefit from the new regulations, unlike they…

            they understand that Rockfeller get richer by dumping coal, because of climate anti-coal regulation, but that their coal miner pension is damaged by those regulation…

            the new gap is not between rich and poor, the 1% and the 99%, but etween the insiders and the outsiders, the one who benefit from new regulations new morality and globalization of commerce, and the one who suffer from that by losing their job, their assets, their education value, their past investments, their tranquility, their stability…

            he coal miner of pensilvania, as his doctor, and the truck driver beside, feel fucked by Musk and Gore, forgotten in benefit of gay and weed smokers in Los Angeles (that they would support kindly if they were not so furious selfishly).

          5. It’s more complicated than insiders versus outsiders.

            Take Flint, Michigan where REPUBLICAN state government authorities knowingly let poison water flow for months and decided to do nothing about it. Here more regulation and more federal government intervention was begged for.

            Insiders in America mostly means corporate entities that have managed to seize the reigns of power and now shape the laws and decisions according to what they want (look up ALEC). That’s resulted in decreasing size and power of the middle class, stagnant wages, denial that a potential existential environmental problem even exists, and CRASHING OF THE ECONOMY IN 2008 because of financial adventurism of deregulated investment banks… to name a few.

            The root problem in America is not government. It’s that money has taken over. Money is making the decisions that benefit money most. People are second tier concerns in their own country.

          6. “Right wing media”?? The only part of the media that is “right wing” is talk radio, which is miniscule in comparison to the media like print and broadcast, which has been in the tank for leftist Democrats for decades. Sheesh….they even started a TV series (“Madame Secretary”) to aggrandize Hillary.

          7. In franec fox news is presented as evil and many wonder why is apeared.

            I’ve seen on a business media how fox news apeared. it was simply the observation that there was nearly no conservative media, that most were liberal (à la Clinton, not à la Sanders).
            Judith Curry report similar bias in academics.

            When some entrepreneur decided to make a really conservative media, Fox News, it caught great success instantly…

            My feeling from a French point of view is that it is 20th century way to make propaganda that to try to control media like the elite did. if is backfiring greatly…

            I’m mostly French Liberal (say free market, free choice, developmentalist humanist, not the US-liberal typology), and the evolution is painful to admit.I know protectionism will be damaging the poorest, but i admit current crony capitalism with central bank giving money to the richest pretending to help the poorest, with regulation benefiting the big corps at the expense of the small entrepreneur, with human-right wars benefiting the weapon corps and not the bombed populations, are what cause that tragedy.

          8. The “article” is BS. It certainly bears no resemblance to any REAL rural area. This poseur drives through a lot of small towns, but doesn’t actually do something real, like actually talk to the people…no, he garners the “zeitgeist” from whatever restaurant or bar he stops at for lunch.

            And if you accept “dailykos” as a news source, that explains your badly informed point of view. DK is about as far left as you can get without actually being “The Nation”.

          9. The article’s opinion is as valid as yours.

            Daily Kos is an exceptional news source and community for progressives. Progressives, I’m sure to your disgust, are about half the country. Deal with it.

          10. “The article’s opinion is as valid as yours.”

            Uh, no. Mine reflects reality…his doesn’t. For all of his traveling around, he has NOT interacted with real rural people, and that by his own admission.

            But you and he manifest the standard blind spot of communists (what “progressives” really are)……..you want to force everyone else to move into YOUR bubble by whatever means necessary, including violence. When even slightly conservative ideas win elections, you go riot. Conservatives don’t. Evidence……the behavior of the “Tea Party” after Obama’s election vs the behavior of the “progressives” after Trumps election.

            Who made the “progressive” philosophy the sole “right” way to think???

          11. Progressives are not communists and progressives don’t believe violence solves anything.

            If you believe those things, and apparently you do, you might want to challenge your assumptions and spend some time on Daily Kos or other bubbles not your own to see how other people really think.

          12. You are correct, but your perspective fails to accept that progressives practice a form of information violence as in dishonesty, deception, exaggeration, name-calling, and all other forms of using information to discredit and otherwise smash people over the head information-wise.

          13. It is a complex issue.
            Having goal is one thing
            Seeing the problems is another
            proposing a solution is another
            and implementing it is yet another.

            I disagree on many diagnostics by “progressives” and on many solutions they love, even if i share most of progressive and liberal values.

            a big problem is when people fall in love with the solutions, and start to be blind to reality that dissent with their beloved policy, and worst is when they sit on their values because of their sub goals supposed to implement their values.

            for me there is a problem with crony capitalism implemented by liberal and progressives politicians, and even by pretended hard capitalist …
            there is huge pollution done by green policies,and huge wastes by pretended orthodox policies…

            people fall inlove with their theory like in cold fusion, and they start to ignore people, democracy, epistemology, experiments, to save their beliefs, and also their economic rents, budgets, and academic positions.

          14. Confirmation bias exists and money corrupts. No kidding.

            What does that have to do with progressives not being communists and not advocating or tolerating violence?

          15. The final destination for both progressives and communists is the same. The only difference between them is the proposed route to get there. One (progressives) want to take the scenic route, the other (communists) want to take a short cut. I disagree with the destination.

            I’ve spent sufficient time on Daily Kos and Democratic Underground to know exactly what they are. But I look at who funds them and who runs them as well as the content. I do that with most bloggy opinion sources people quote to me.

          16. Progressives are not anti-capitalism.

            Wherever you got or are getting the notion that progressives are just communists taking the scenic route, they have misinformed you.

          17. Please, LENR G, tell us (tell me) what is the destination of progressives? Are you speaking from a position of being a progressive? And what is the position of progressives on ISIS and their ilk?

          18. Yes, I consider myself a progressive in general, though I have strains of other philosophies on various issues.

            I don’t usually think in terms of destinations, but I suppose if I had to I would describe my desired destination as perpetually secure, prosperous, equal and abundant opportunity, a strong dedication to social justice, taking care of the most challenged among us including the elderly and disabled, aggressive overseas to protect our allies and prevent or undo moral atrocities and the strong military to accomplish such, a culture of aggressive investment in science to improve lives and cure diseases… and a dedication to the principle of all created equal where all citizens have an equal say in the society through their vote and their voice, minimizing the influence of money and foreign powers on the choices we collectively make.

            Regarding ISIS, progressives want to wipe the floor with them just like everybody else. We happen to favor the prudent, logical approaches that Obama pursued, understanding that long term solutions are better than short term feel good bombing runs. Hence the patience to support the Iraqis to uproot them, plus an intelligence surge to prevent terrorist attacks.

            So if that sounds like communism to y’all then I guess we disagree about what communism is.

          19. “Progressives are not anti-capitalism.

            Neither was Hitler. All he wanted was for government to have total control. He still called himself and his government “socialist”. Which just happens to be what progressives want. It’s about CONTROL, not about ownership. I prefer maximum individual liberty., not forced equality.

            And I “got the notion” that “progressives are just communists taking the scenic route” from fifty-five years of observing politics and world affairs.

          20. Progressives don’t want government to control everything and also value individual liberty.

            Progressives believe that government can play a valuable and vital role in providing for the common good.

          21. Fifty plus years of observation and fact-checking tell me otherwise. I’m talking about ACTIONS TAKEN and not propaganda. The actions taken have been to constantly expand government control of peoples lives.

            You sound very young and very naive.

          22. As to the religious right. There is an approximate “Parity of Religion” among the 2 parties. I have heard the democratic party referred to as the Popes party in the past because it is so heavily catholic.

            The conservatives are not antiscience. They’re just of the opinion that if you teach evolution in the schools, you should also teach creation. Scientifically, there is no more evidence for 1 then the other leaving one as valid as the other. Some in mainstream science claim what appears to be evidence of an omnipresent cosmic consciousness.

            Integration of public schools in the south was not the cause of private schools and academies. They existed prior to public schools before the commons were allowed to be educated. When public schools came into being, the private schools continued to provide a superior education to those of financial means. Tho in disproportionate numbers, you will find all races among them. This totals all of about 2.5% of students.

            ->”Television? The channel of choice in any public space, be it a doctor’s waiting room, a car-repair shop, or a restaurant, is Fox News. etc,etc”

            B.S… You will not find Fox news on these TV’s. It’s bad business and bad for business. IF you find it tuned to the News, it’s either weather related or some disaster. If it’s political news, you risk offending 50% of your clientele regardless the party. As a rule, you find these TV’s tuned to sports.

            Some clarity in regards to: Fox news is the number 1 cable news channel. Key word here is cable. It’s not available over the free airwaves. Fox news is #1 of the big 3 cable channels.(Fox, CNN, MSNBC)

            According to Nielsen data, Fox News is averaging 2.26 million total viewers a night in prime time. More then MSNBC and CNN combined in total prime time viewers. That makes it #1. Meanwhile, 22.5 million people watched one of the three commercial broadcast evening news programs on ABC, CBS or NBC. On it’s best day, the election returns, Fox had 6 million viewers of a total of 71 Million. About 8.5% of the total audience. As to Right-wing talk radio, NPR has about double the audience of Rush Limbaugh who has the largest right wing audience.

            6000 years. This B.S. isn’t worth anymore time.

            “foresterbob” claims it’s never been this politically bad before.

            Guess he slept through history class. He apparently missed that part during the 1860’s when about 1 million Americans died and vast areas of the U.S. was devastated.

            When you control over 90% of the media plus the Hollywood propaganda machine, nearly all of academia, all the minorities, and you still lose. There must be something wrong with what you’re selling.

          23. LOL. How much time have you spent in rural areas?? I was born and raised in one, and continued to visit until I moved to the west coast (Washington).

            The TV’s there get the same channels as any city. The biggest audience for talk radio is people commuting to and from jobs in the city. Fox news is no more a staple of rurality than CBS, ABC or NBC

            And unless you have forgotten, political commentary in churches is verboten……although that has never stopped the Democrats from using the pulpits in black churches for such.

          24. So you agree then that since consumers have a wide range of information sources to choose from and generally select the ones that conform to their view of the world… so much so that we live in bubbles now.

            The majority of rural votes live in a bubble of Fox News, conservative talk radio and churches (people talk and community sets expectations). By choice, not because they’re forced or have no other choices.

            The right wing media, that these rural votes are drawn to, have demonized Hillary since the 80’s. Those are just the facts, man.

            Not all bubbles are equal. Bubbles that are reality-based are better bubbles.

          25. No, I’m telling you that your hypothesis about rural people is flatly wrong. I guarantee that they live in less of a bubble than the leftist one you seem to inhabit. The huge majority of the media are leftists.

            Rural folks live in the real world FAR more than urbanites. They don’t have a choice about it, as their livelihoods depend on it. Wishful thinking doesn’t make it rain.

            And your “facts” simply aren’t.

          26. It’s ALL the real world.

            So you’re denying that conservative media is popular in rural areas and that conservative media has demonized Hillary.

            Ok, then. I thought that was obvious to everyone, but your bubble is your bubble. Agree to disagree.

          27. “So you’re denying that conservative media is popular in rural areas and that conservative media has demonized Hillary.”

            Well, the conservative media has certainly demonized Hillary, but no more than the liberal media has demonized Trump. Much less so, in fact.

            But I “am” denying that “conservative media” (which to you appears to mean Fox News) is unusually popular in rural areas. A lot of people in rural areas can’t even GET Fox News, as they depend on broadcast TV. Nor can they get CNN for the same reason. Some areas “do” get cable, and many individuals have DISH, but the coverage isn’t remotely even close to urban.

            I’ve lived in the rural south, the urban South, and now live in a rural area on the West Coast (but close enough to a major urban area (Seattle) to see what goes on), so I think my data basis for comparison is pretty good.

          28. When LENR G thinks of Rural populations, Probably he hears banjo’s playing, because that’s how the Hollywood liberals portray it. In the real world, Maverick and Goose in Top Gun would probably have originated from Rural areas.

          29. ->”In the rural areas that voted heavily for Trump”

            That’s the argument originally promoted by the Lame stream media. They also claimed that college educated would overwhelmingly vote HRC.

            The facts don’t match. 49% of college grads voted Trump, 48% voted HRC and 3% other. Trump recieved the average Black and hispanic vote and above average blue collar union vote. The only demographic Trump underperformed in was white female and even then he did much better then anyone expected. The point is the rural areas didn’t make that much difference.

            What’s disturbing is you and the Lame stream media thinking the rural population doesn’t have the right to vote their conscience and look down on them. You literally bite the hand that feeds you. Not just food but all the raw and processed resources that make cities feasible.

            Rural populations are more resourceful and tend to be multi-disciplined. They understand better that the more government does for you, the more they own you. So yes, they do tend to have a different view point.

        2. What is “good thinking” by now is the matter of discussion. By “well minded” opinion of scientists the main cause of global warming are anthropogenic emissions and the cold fusion can never work. This is an example of rational – nevertheless quite probably bad thinking. And what I already appreciate about Trump is his pro-russian tactic. He managed to fool the Russians in this matter completely. This is a good sign.

          The less good sign is Trumps anti-China politics as the USA and China were traditionally allies against Russians. It’s a big mistake to lose this partnership.

          1. Russian and Chinese are allies today.
            In fact Russia is demographically and economically becomming weak, and China is becoming dominant…
            anyway the share many concerns and a working hard on the new Silk Road.

            Note that many can interpret recen US wars as trying to conain the silk road.

            recently a Chinese Neutrino experiment leader was named at Russian academy of science.

            Siberia is now flooded with chinese pioneer with Russian support.

          2. Do you approve of Trump’s:
            * Praising of Putin while denigrating Obama
            * Offering approval of the hacking of the DNC and encouraging more of it
            * Denying Russian meddling in our election despite the clear conclusion of our entire intelligence apparatus
            * Having a secret back door communication channel with a Russian bank
            * Changing one and only one plank at the Republican National Convention in Russia’s favor relative to Ukraine.
            * Rhetorical weakening of NATO

            Republicans of 30 years ago would be loading their shotgun shells right now.

          3. /* Praising of Putin while denigrating Obama, Rhetorical weakening of NATO */

            It could all be tactics – after all, if Trump wants to become a second Reagan, such an approach would be logical. Reagan did the same against Russians.. Former New York City mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani introduced Trump on Wednesday, saying that Trump will be “a totally reliable ally” to Poland. Giuliani blasted the Obama administration for the attempt to reset relations with Russia while Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. He said the Russian reset compromised the security of Poland and the Czech Republic, and he accused Obama and Clinton of “double-crossing” the two countries.

        3. What you see as ->”lack of any rational train of thought” is just his style. Because of this, you already underestimate him. To whose advantage is that.

          Between 2 individuals/parties, What we’re accustomed to is personal attack’s followed by a defensive action from the target. Today with prolonged public attacks, society tends to believe any claims from the antagonist regardless of the facts.

          Defense is not Trumps way. He immediately goes on the offensive and may include statements of an outlandish nature. This accomplishes 2 things. The antagonist is immediately thrown on the defense and the outlandishness of Trumps comeback usually leaves them thinking WTF. Second, few people even remember what the antagonists original claim was about.

          His style works. He lay waste to 16 wannabe candidates in the primaries. The news media asked weekly who was going to be brave enough to take Trump head to head. Even his democratic opponent was afraid to be to direct leaving any serious attacks to surrogates who had no political ambitions of their own. This guy is Crazy. You have no idea what will come out of his mouth.

          Yep. Crazy. Crazy like a Fox.

  20. Likely to be climate-change-is-a-hoax and space types. I support expanding the space program and Trump talks about that some in his policy papers, so that could be a good thing, at least.

  21. The first big question for Trump to answer for himself: Is there climate change?
    It is November 11th and we have not had a freeze in Fort Collins Colorado. All my flowers are still blooming, brought in a bouquet of roses today. Historically there is a 90 percent chance that we have a freeze by October 17th. (see site below) In the last three years the mountains to our West have been on fire, and we had a “biblical flood”.

    http://davesgarden.com/guides/freeze-frost-dates/index.php?q=80526#b

    This is not happening only in Fort Collins:
    http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

    Trump has said he thinks climate change is a Chinese trick. I am not a scientist, and I realize NASA and all the scientists could be wrong, but do we really want to play poker with our planet. Would it not be prudent to take steps to mitigate what they say man is doing to our climate? I think Trump is an intelligent man, I hope he reaches the right conclusion.

    1. Agree Bernie. except “I think Trump is an intelligent man, I hope he reaches ”
      I think that he is a demagogue ready to say anything that allows him to please his audience. Now that he is in charge,he won’t know what to do as he has no plans and no principles.

      1. Hi Alain, You point out the most scary thing about Trump, he has little knowledge of the issues and will have to rely on advise from people like the person he just appointed to be his “Chief Strategist”: Stephen Bannon, OMG.

    2. No, not China, the globalist Club of Rome might have invented the climate scam, back in the 70’s:

      “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill….All these dangers are caused by human intervention….and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself….believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose.”

      “Kenny Boy” Lay of Enron also was active in promoting the scam, as a rent seeking way to maximize his natural gas holdings against coal:

      Enron: The Godfather of Kyoto

      The rest of the oligarchy wasn’t far behind:
      “The Climate Research Unit (CRU) in the UK was set up in 1971 with funding from Shell and BP as is described in the book: “The history of the University of East Anglia, Norwich; Page 285)” By Michael Sanderson. The CRU was still being funded in 2008 by Shell, BP, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate and UK Nirex LTD (the nuclear waste people in the UK)”

        1. they don’t tak of the record cold in russia and in many other place where they don’t look.

          this is a media war and knowing the reality is now beyond our capacity.
          even my probes are helpess.
          I see the news on record heat, cold, on frauds, on peer review manipulation, on funding by NGO or oild corps, …

          I also see hug manipulation by organic food industry agains glyphosate and GMO, I see CDC launching inquiry about frequent epidemia with organic food like the one which killed 50 people in france, like chipotle… nd no media coverage…

          don’t say me we are manipulated, even mainstream experts on inforwate like FBHuyghe show the battle everyday…

          Clinton vs putin, greepeace vs monsanto … wind turbine industry vs oil..

          this is a wat.

          BBC was caucght makin secret conference to manage the information policy of BBC with climatologist and wind industry industrialists…

          imagine if they have done that with oild companies and skeptics ?

          I am opposite to Trump but I feel the same desire to vomit than I imagine most who vomited their ballot.

      1. in fact I was told the greatest supported for climate apocalypse was a canadian oil industrialist (later jailed) who clearly felt guilty for humanity, and who pushed strongly the creation of IPCC…
        I don’t know well US characters, maybe US will know this guy.

        WWF was created by an eugenicist deeply Malthusian, but people have forgotten. Goering was a deep ecologist having improved greatly the civil right of cows in Germany.

        all is complicated, and once there is a budget the animal you created have a desire to survive.

        Today it is poor farmers in Africat who lobby western NGO to stop blocking GMO they need to reduce pesticide usage and disieases.

        of course noobdy except me and few fanatics follow those stories…
        The most funny is that all those skeptics think I’m crazy to support LENR, as most of LENR supporters think I’m crazy to support nuke, GMO, modern farming (no tile+glyphosate) and oppose organic and homeopathy.

        I am not a genius, I have probes.
        There is no conspiracy, all is public.

  22. FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.

    SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward.

    SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fi x America’s water and environmental infrastructure.

    https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/djt-pdf-contract.jpg

  23. Michael, you said, “I just hope Trump isn’t the left wing radical I thought he may have been. But something has to break this hold they have on the world.” Not sure where you are getting Trump is a Left wing radical, he just hired a very conservative Chief Strategist, Steven Bannon. The ball is in the court of Trump and the Republicans who hold both houses of Congress, lets see how “left wing radical” they are.

  24. Right now there is no substitute for fossil fuels. If we reduce fossil fuel use, even more innocent people will starve to death because we make food with fossil fuels. 1/3 of the world’s population is already starving. That is why we need nuclear research, because only nuclear energy can replace fossil fuels to a significant degree, and even then not entirely. I have lots of links on my website on this issue at http://renewable.50webs.com/climate.html, including a link right at the top of the page to *Climate Hysteria*, a compilation YouTube video on the climate change hoax. Dr. Tim Ball calls it all “the deliberate corruption of climate science.” See YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Owm25OHGglk

    1. Hi Chris: I requested references from you for these two statements you made, “fire(ing) scientists who state that dangerous man-made climate change has not occurred, while financially rewarding scientists who claim that the earth is burning up” or “Politicians have paid NOAA, NASA, and the IPCC to find evidence for the predetermined conclusion that carbon dioxide……..controls earth temperatures”. You sent me to your web site. I have reviewd this web site and find no references to collaborate the above two statements. please give references for these accusations.

      1. That has been in the news for many years. It’s no big secret. Even university professors have been fired in this witch hunt atmosphere against climate change deniers. That has occurred in my own state and around the nation. Others have had multiple death threats against their lives, even at MIT where people are supposed to know better. Members of the House of Lords have been so attacked by the press and other members of the UK parliament and the Prime Minister that they have been silenced. The US Government pays all the salaries of NASA, NOAA, and most of the IPCC. Obama and Biden publicly asked the IPCC to construct a new report that shows definite proof that man is causing abnormal global warming due to carbon dioxide emissions. That is not how real science works. Those were the IPCC’s marching orders and the IPCC complied, but not with real science,…with hucksterism. Climatologist Judith Curry summed up the Orwellian situation in her testimony to Congress. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GujLcfdovE8

  25. Republicans have been trying to scuttle EVERY social program in the US since 1933. Their latest workaround they’ve been working on for 35 years to stave off the mobs with torches and pitchforks is privatization (of course, what they REALLY want is to privatize ALL government functions, as long as thy don’t have to pay for any of it and can deload costs to the underclasses (that would be millionaires or lesser, but they’ll start with all public services). The DoD is already essentially privatized and has been since WWII due to the buildout and entrenchment of the MIC.

    1. “Social programs” means treating everyone the same, and/or bureaucracies that are burdensome. Being on the edge of poverty, I know that the bureaucracies are a kafka-esque migraine headache inside of a nightmare. I am not against all social programs. But it is the swing back and forth between liberals and conservatives that help keep these social programs honest and efficient. If liberals had their way all of the time, we couldn’t have computers because we all know that staring at these screens all day is bad for us.

      1. by the way I see a great difference between urban and rural people.

        In urban zone , for most people I see well structurec life and career, depending much on regulation, on statuses.
        Some urban “startuper” seems more outlaw, but not so much since they jump from one deep job to another.

        the Uber drivers, and food delivery cyclist (I know one here) are more “outlaw” and in france they are often form surburban outliers population. They have a lifestyle nearer from rural as i will talk later.
        https://www.ft.com/content/bf3d0444-e129-11e5-9217-6ae3733a2cd1

        big pain of suburban population in france is that in a very regulated city there is no room for them, and they often live outlaws (illegal work, fraud) or insecude dependent (short work, which is very painful in regulated France)

        the rural people, farmer or not, have a very different lifestyle.
        first they often have more freedom, more ersponsibility.
        Less trafic jam when driving, less paid jobs but many activities that make them save or earn money.
        they can tink/DIY their houses, instead of asking to the landlord, and the the city urbanists. they can raise vegetables and animals, install pools (without trouble with the city planners), cut wood (instead of buying gas or electricity for heating)…
        they can use outdated cars…
        they can pump water.
        they can incinerate wastes.

        many of those freedoms make their effective lifestyle more comfortable than the faceplate income.

        the problem that i see is that more and more of their freedoms are endangered by urban elite inspired regulations…
        forbidding wood heating, incineration.
        regulating pesticides use in gardens and fields.
        regulating cars.
        regulating house renovation.
        regulating water usage.

        this is one point.

        another is something I learned recently, that in fact US have greatly reduced unemployment and increased average income.
        There is a lack of truck driver (by the way removing Mexican imigrants from

        First problem is that those who voted trump, if they were richer than average (>50k$) were feeling at risk of losing that higher than average status.

        Job are evolving, because of globalization, because of internet, and they feel at risk of losing their status.

        at the same time urban regulation is preventing them to exploit their alternative way of life.

        Note that I mix my understanding of French situation with what I heard of US…

        in France it is more terrible as there is high unemployment, higher regulation, …

  26. found and relayed by a liberal journalist of business journal in france

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/this-is-how-steve-bannon-sees-the-entire-world?utm_term=.dh9ydWAea#.ktE8Nndp3

    we are far from what I’ve heard on the news.
    I recognize many statement and diagnostic by Extreme right, and string right, and by strong left and extreme left, and also by root-liberal (economic&social true liberal that are invisible in France, and US) … even by the Pope.

    I buy the critics of Republican conservative as crony-capitalist …
    of Putin kleptocracy vs ISIS fascism…
    of root-capitalism versus crony capitalism of both Washington and Republican party… the hypocrisy of anti-social-freedoms (abortion, gays…) used to sell crony capitalism…

    I’m surprised that they more focus on judeochristianism vision of capitalism and not on ethnicity, unlike what I heard of them on TV…
    However they recognize that some fringe groups express their trouble with ethnicity…
    They also have a vision for all the West… a christian inspired capitalism, vs cronyism and fascism…

    Now question is the implementation, and I’m not so optimistic.
    Good luck US.

    NB: We are the next one in EU. aduhhhh…

  27. Progressives are nothing like communists and don’t lie more than anybody else.

    I can’t believe some of the things being said here. Do you people even hear yourselves talking (typing)?

    1. I am disappointed in you. You are quoting a left leaning site that is characterizing a right leaning person. How in the world can you expect objectivity and balance that way??? That is just exactly like my friend Jim going to his physicist brother to get the low-down on cold fusion.

  28. Well, health care is a complex topic.

    I would just say a couple of things.

    Evidence from around the world indicates that our current way of doing it costs way more and gets worse results — and most of the comparison countries have adopted a system with an even heavier government role then we have.

    Second, that as a progressive I want to live in a society that takes care of those who fall seriously ill… and I want it to be affordable… and I would like to see it decoupled from small businesses (if not all businesses) so that Americans had more economic freedom to start businesses and not have to worry about the risks on one side and any onerous paperwork and regulations on the other.

    1. First off, with regard to health and health care, I am the teacher and you are the student. This is certainly not the case in most other departments of life, but it is in the case of health. I have real results with CURING supposedly incurable diseases, and we both have sweet and caring theories and intentions about health care.

      However, it is only my bitterness that causes me to not want to take care of those who participated in and enthusiastically supported a system that did everything to discourage and discredit me and what I was doing for the past 46 years, but now they want my sympathetic tax dollars to continue paying for their increasingly expensive “health care” until the grave relieves me of this burden. In fact, I guarantee that many of those self-same people who want my tax dollars now castigated me and my wife for being “health-nuts” and insisted upon organic and nutrient dense foods.

      The USA spends 2 or 3 times more on so-called healthcare as any other industrialized nation on Earth, and yet our longevity and infant mortality is worse than even Portugal and Greece, the worst of all the industrialized nations. We are like 25th in both categories. It is probable that you are counting the government spending only, and I am counting all spending. If those other countries have fully socialized medicine, then their governmental spending is going to be greater. Believe it or not, I like the single payer system; it would be better than the present Kafka-esque monstrosity that we currently have. In doctor’s offices, more people push paper than do any “healing”, which is really just symptom removal most of the time.

      But the problem with the single payer idea is that the ph[‘]cking reductionistic, materialistic, pharmaceutical shills (doctors) are still in power. Why should I pay twice, once for things that actually work, and once for irresponsible and malicious (towards me) people who have their lips super-glued to the rear-ends of medical doctors who look down their nose at their patients? The only way to get the doctors out of power is to separate healthcare from government completely. Let doctors compete fairly with other health care modalities. Let freedom ring.

      1. I can see you’ve had some deeply personal experiences that have shaped your opinion. I respect that but it’s wrong-headed to make decisions about large systems based on anecdotal evidence. Science and data need to drive the decision.

        Alternative medicine should be given the same chance as ‘regular’ medicine but in crucible of scientific facts and data, not on the passion of one or hundreds of people.

        There are things that federal government is best positioned to do. The obvious example is the nations defense. So everybody pays, whether you agree with the way it’s spent or not, and everybody benefits. Health care may or may not be one of those things. Many countries have decided it is and they are doing better than us on this front, spending less and enjoying a healthier populace. If we collectively decide to take a similar route it means that everyone will have to pay, whether they agree with the details or not, and everyone will enjoy the benefits. A single payer system would have much going for it. The question is can we do it while preserving the American desire for freedom in choosing doctors and philosophies, to give a name to your personal experiences. And can we make it a truly level playing field where alternative medicines and techniques are evaluated fairly. I don’t know. I do know that I don’t particularly like the role that insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies play right now. We spend too much and get too little. And everything is harder than it needs to be with insurace companies acting like our adversaries just to get reimbursed or get the coverage we were promised.

  29. Recent moves by Trump and the transition team only triggers more questions about how the administration will respond to the advent of LENR:

    1. The transition team this last week requested a listing of those employees who have supported Climate Change from the Department of Energy
    2. It has been leaked Trump would announce this coming week that Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon, will be choice for Secretary of State.
    3. Trump today responded very strongly to the CIA’s assertion that Russia interfered with the US election with the intent of tipping the odds towards Trump. It has been suggested by an ex-CIA official that if the hacking is confirmed then a re-vote for president should be held.

    It should be noted Exxon had a $500B investment agreement with Russia for oil exploration and development which was shelved by the current administration when Russia invaded/annexed the Crimea

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *