Working people, politics and Trump — Answer to a reader

Journal/Website: and the Macon Telegraph
Article Type: 
Published Date: 
Friday, July 29, 2016

Politics is politics, and to paraphrase the remark misattributed to Bismarck, “politics are like making sausages, not a pretty sight.” Trump, bombastic and offensive to some, is using populism and taking advantage of the disaffection and anger of American voters to get elected president. He did not become a successful businessman from idiocy and pomposity, but from cunning, common sense, and hard work.

Dear ReaderIn a simple, open letter to Donald Trump published in the Telegraph [July 25, 2016], Douglas Fingle, a concerned Georgia voter, wrote that his daughter needed convincing to vote for Trump. He wanted Trump to explain “how he would help young, hard-working people like his daughter… help her save for the future, reduce her cost of living and make her life better for the next four years.”

If I may be so bold, given what I have read, and until Trump himself replies, I would reply to both father and daughter as follows: The Republican Party — of which Trump is part, and for better or for worse, its leader, despite differences with former party leaders — is the Party of opportunity for all in the United States, principally the working people. In some third world countries “progressive” and socialist parties may do at least temporarily a better job for the dispossessed and downtrodden, but not so in America. Young people, who want a bright future ahead of them, in particular, and hard-working people, who are having a hard time at the present time, in general, should support Trump. He is the person, and the GOP the party, to vote for because they support less taxation, less government regulation, and more individualLess government regulation, less taxation and economic freedom with greater opportunity for all.

Trump is for less government intrusion, less red tape, less regulation, and less taxation, which results in more economic freedom, more choices, and more opportunities. Economic freedom leads to more job creation, higher salaries, and thus more savings, more wealth and prosperity for all, particularly thrifty, working people. Those dependent on government, such as the elderly with Medicare and Social Security, and those with real disabilities, have nothing to fear from Trump and the Republican Party. Trump has said he will not abandon these people. Those time-honored programs are here to stay, and are protected, unless the Democrats with their heavy spending habits, and profligate policies bankrupt them. Thus economic security is not provided by the Democrats, despite promises and demagoguery, because of their penchant for fiscal irresponsibility. And because they are soft on criminals, they offer less personal security than Republican legislators; their panacea for crime is gun control, disarming the law-abiding and not the criminals. This makes no dent in crime because criminals do not obey the gun— or any other laws.

Truly the Democratic Party relies on disaffection, bad times and government dependence (photo, below), and their leaders in turn depend on, and expect, the votes of the dependent population to keep them in power, promising largesse derived from the thrifty and working Americans. Democrats rely on these failed policies to maintain themselves in power. Sadly, they are afraid that wealth, prosperity and advancement, will cause people to bolt from their party, so government dependence for them is the order of the day. Americans Dependent on Government

It is the idle but able-bodied person, who prefers to ride in the cart pulled by others rather than engage in work, who should fear Trump and should vote for Hillary Clinton. Honest working people, who want to be left alone to enjoy the fruits of their labors, or save for the future, should vote for Trump. The Republican Party believes that government should protect the basic rights of Americans to be able to pursue life, liberty, property, and happiness. The Democratic Party believes in socialism even though they don’t admit it, except for Senator Bernie Sanders, who as a self-proclaimed socialist — and as the e-mail scandal at the DNC testifies — was denied a fair chance at the nomination by the Democratic leadership.

As to the commitment to the working class people, let me quote from a harsh but insightful reply posted by Mike Ganas, a frequent commenter in the Telegraph, in response to columnist Erick Erickson’s repeated attacks on Trump:

“You hate Trump…. because he stands up for us little people, us riffraff, us working trash. You and your elitist masters want cheap third world labor because it drives our wages down to put money in a few pockets at the top. It just kills wanna be elitists like you to see regular middle class working folks do well, even though it isn't taking anything away from you. You want all the money to go right to the top instead of us working folk being able to earn a decent living and provide for our families and send our kids to the same school as yours.” [July 22, 2016]

Government assistance should be provided only to those who genuinely need it and according to the law. We should remember that what government gives with one hand, it can take away with the other; so the best security is provided by savings, hard work and investments, not empty government promises, which is what Hillary and the Democrats propound in this election. Vote for Trump and a better future!

Written by Dr. Miguel Faria

Miguel A. Faria, M.D. is a retired neurosurgeon and author of “Cuba in Revolution Escape from a Lost Paradise” (2002). His website is

This article may be cited as: Faria MA. Working people, politics and Trump — Answer to a reader., July 28, 2016. Available from:

This article was also published in the Macon Telegraph July 29, 2016.

Copyright ©2016 Miguel A. Faria, Jr., M.D.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (3 votes)
Comments on this post

Libertarians vs Big Green in 2016 Election

In an article in GOPUSA, “2016's Biggest Loser: Big Green,” Stephen Moore, predicts, “that Democrats will only make a comeback in American politics when they throw crazies like Tom Steyer, the Sierra Club and Greenpeace off the bus and start listening to the everyday concerns of working class Americans again.” But there is more that should be learned from this election and that is the performance of the Green Party in contrast to the Libertarians. The Green party made not an iota of difference and made s shameful performance. They were trounced even by the Libertarians, who got three times as many votes. The Libertarians prevented Trump from winning several states, assuming that the Libertarian vote had not been wasted and gone the way of the GOP.

The Libertarians by this assumption prevented Trump from carrying New Hampshire, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado & Minnesota. These were the reported statistics:

The Libertarians candidates, Gary Johnson & William F. Weld obtained 4,488,919 or 3.28% of the popular vote. The Green Party candidates, Jill Stein & Ajamu Baraka received 1,457,044, only 1.06%, which made no difference in any states pointing out their utter irrelevancy. As the poster Dido noted, “And these are the people asking for a recount? Incredible arrogance and out-of-touch with reality!”

By their own recognizance, so to speak, and after decades of pulling no major punches in presidential or congressional elections, the Libertarian Party should consider joining with the GOP in exchange for positions in GOP administrations, such as Interior, Energy or Education, and exert more influence from within than from without. They should learn how much the progressive/socialists gained ground in working from within the Democrat party, even the Presidency! --- MAF

Malaise, recession or stagflation?

Jose: Dear Both, I thought you would like to read Jim Rickards explanations below about the economy. He wrote the book on “The Death of Money”, which is a very well documented analysis of what is happening in the world economy and the USA.

“The Fed’s Only Escape Is to Trash the Dollar”

“The first and most important constraint on Fed policy is that the U.S. economy is dead in the water. Quarterly GDP figures have been volatile over the past three years, with annualized real growth as high as 5% in the third quarter of 2014 and as low as minus 1.2% in the first quarter of 2014. We have not seen persistent growth or a definite trend – until now. Finally, there is a trend, and it’s not a good one.

“Annualized real growth for the past four quarters has been 2.0%, 0.9%, 0.8%, and 1.2%, for an average growth of 1.23%. That’s a trend that will drive the U.S. into a sovereign debt crisis. Deficits are still running over 3% per year and are set to skyrocket as baby boomers retire and claim Social Security and Medicare benefits. In effect, the U.S. economy has flatlined at a level that cannot sustain our deficit spending…”

“Inflation would help to solve the U.S. debt problem because it would lower the real cost of the debt. Making the debt burden sustainable is not about real growth…

“There are four ways to get inflation when rate cuts are off the table. These four ways are helicopter money, world money, higher gold prices, and currency wars. As mentioned, we may see helicopter money in 2017 if there’s political will in Congress and the White House. But helicopter money does not guarantee inflation. People and companies on the receiving end of government deficit spending may just save the money or pay down debt instead of spending more themselves. This behavior negates the ‘multiplier effect.’ But that doesn’t mean it won’t be used anyway. The Fed never lets reality get in the way of trying out a bad idea.

"The second way to get inflation is for the IMF to issue world money in the form of special drawing rights, SDRs. This may happen in the next global financial crisis, but it won’t happen in the short run. The IMF moves even more slowly than the Fed. SDRs may be issued in sufficient size to cause inflation in 2018. But it’s unlikely to happen before then…”
Jose continues: Although I am not an economist, I think we are in or very close to Stagflation. Stagflation occurs when there is INFLATION, high UNEMPLOYMENT and LESS DEMAND or spending. So prices go up from the manufacturers as they need to make more money, but people buy less because there are more unemployed. The rising prices produce additional unemployment as the people buy less goods. Retail sales have fallen, and you have read that Macy’s and others are closing stores. You wives can verify that there is inflation as they know the prices of food they buy and goods are up. My wife says the inflation for food is at least 30%. Yet, the government figures on inflation do not include gas prices or food prices. Unemployment figures from the government are not reliable, as a recent editorial in IBD suggests. Just look around to see that unemployment is high, actually at least 1 in 5 are not employed from the Bureau of Labor Statistics U6. And price rises I have mentioned. The reason more cars are being sold is that 15-20% are being sold to high risk buyers as in the housing crisis. Note that the interest rates on new cars are 0% and the time to pay off the cars has been extended to 6 or 7 years. Japan has been in Stagflation for almost two decades. Whatever the conclusion, the news is not good as you know and as Rickards points out.

Obviously the government does not want to talk about Stagflation. The same is happening with this week’s revelation that CentCom was told by the White House to only give good reports on the fight against ISIL. More central control of the news. By the way ISIL means Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Only Obama uses the term Levant which includes Israel, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. So, he has adopted a term that means the destruction or disappearance of Israel. Few have picked up on this term.  Rolando, note what he says about SDRs, which is international money that can replace to currencies now that are becoming worthless. More of collectivism in action. "Connecting the dots…”

MAF: Re. Bill Bonner’s Diary, Weekend Edition: "The Fed's Only Escape Is to Trash the Dollar,” by Jim Rickards (August 13, 2016), I agree with you assessment. So we are approaching a recession, but what about now — recession or stagflation? IMO we are presently on (and have been experiencing) the camouflaged stagflation mode for a long time. The media and the government economist, like the proverbial monkeys, see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil. I’ve been amazed at the news media silence on the term stagflation for some time. That the bubble has not burst, as it did in Japan, is beyond belief, given the fact that record number of people are not working and sustained in the socialist-liberal plantation of the welfare state. Many people are unemployed because there is no incentive to work, given pay checks of the welfare state. And those who are thrifty, productive, and conscientious —and who could buy durable goods or expand their business — are afraid to spend and do so because of worries and uncertainty. Only high-risk buyers are, as you mentioned, buying anything substantive, such as cars or homes. It is a dreadful situation. The low educational level, high degree of ignorance coupled with the steady dose of PC indoctrination delivered by the media and the popular culture,
account for Obama’s popularity, despite the political and economic woes. How else could one explain it! My youngest daughter is very afraid for the future and says that her friends in college live in their own world without worries, as another saying goes, ignorance is bliss. It again reminds me of the Elois in the Time Machine.

Rolando: Very interesting discussion. Richards left out what I think is the most important factor and way out for them, and that is a world war. I believe we are seeing the beginning of that war now, but it will come suddenly and will catch most unaware. The international money manipulators have always used war to enrich themselves and to save themselves. Quigley discusses this in his two books as does Gary Allen in his book, None Dare Call it Conspiracy. Things can be done in war that would be impossible during peace. The issuance of the SDRs is a case in point. It was designed for the IMF to use during emergencies and a war would constitute such an emergency on a grand scale. Rickards’ book, which I read, notes that the SDRs would most likely start small and gradually replace the dollar. A world war would create such an enormous crisis that first, people would not be upset by a currency change and two, they would welcome anything that would save them from financial ruin. Historians have noted that the greatest changes in the governments of the world come during and after a war. It was after WWI that both Britain and the US underwent its fundamental change in their political structures, that is, toward collectivism. After WWII even greater collectivist changes occurred and we have had repeated wars ever sense. The present war has lasted over 20 years and its proponents are calling for a 100 year war. An enormous growth in government has occurred during this war--and, the national debt has expanded enormously--all to the glee of the international bankers and money manipulators. All this is being done under the cover of a war--but the war is about to become much larger. 

A massive war will accomplish several things for these elite--1. it will depopulate the earth enormously. 2. It will allow the elite to restructure the world's financial systems 3. It will greatly expand the growth and power of centralized governments 4. It will eliminate private property rights 5. It will accustom people to regimentation and centralized control, and last, it will eliminate their enemies-- us. The world is sitting on a powder keg-- any one of a dozen places could be the trigger that sets the world war off. Even though the elite Superclass thinks it can control this powder keg, they have been wrong in the past, and we must all keep in mind Mary Shelly's moral tale of Frankenstein-- its easy to make a monster but difficult to control him!