Love and Support Regardless

With the Trump tards coming out of the woods. And a sexist / abnormal President 
getting to power or not if impeached. I need to note the way of life of those people
that treat their wife like shit. Like the many that tell their wife "No drama in the house!"
Without them knowing that women vent and for the Trump Tards they don't have a clue
they need a clue. Well... How are you to know what is wrong with the wife so you can
fix it not do this or that, what is bugging your wife. No! Sorry sweetheart no drama!!!

What kind of living hell is that! Might I say the wife should treat their husband like a
child being he is a child in the mind! Really! It's sick like seeing women with black eyes!
Numb to his wife needs!
https://www.safehorizon.org

That points to the Pay Equity and Discrimination issues how are you to solve the problem
if you keep your wife back from growing in her own house. Sorry No Drama please!!!
http://www.iwpr.org/initiatives/pay-equity-and-discrimination

It's about love and support making life better for all. And you can't do that holding
people back Not saying what it is, is what it is! So in that the wife says
what, he is, is what he is! And so I see the need for more women to stand up
to these Trump Tards the days of no drama please needs to go!

Love and support regardless! In life there are no rules to love and we all should
know this in life. If it's meant to be it is and should be recognized.
If all met at one point in time then again at a second point in time marked, stamped
with screws embedded in the floor then that is pre-eminent it sets the agenda!

As for myself I am in love with a married lady I support her, she falls back I would be
there to catch her and push her back up being she knows I am for her best interest so
I am there for her. Not a bad thing, it's better than going over the cliff of insanity!
No cliff here I got you sweetheart and she goes on a better person as it's about support.
Not the No Drama in the House! Love is love and should be positive for growth
and so no mater who be true!

Small towns are like Prisons

Why did trump win? Well it's the votes in small towns. Hillary won the popular-vote
but it's about those small towns.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/12/501848636/7-reasons-donald-trump-won-the-presidential-election

Yes there is less education vs bigger towns. Bigger towns have more income for
education. And you get what you pay for... Your education is only valued on the paper
it's printed on. Or like when I was in school my dad put me in a school that had better
funding because it had more resources for learning. It's like wanting your kid to goto
Berkeley college and not a JR college because the better college gives you better income.

In life there is a pursuit of happiness as in getting out Middle School moving up to
High School and College ending to going where the money is, noted bigger towns
that have more resources, jobs, etc.

And people in smaller towns make lower income so in that is less money for education.
It's not that the people are lazy, no they will work themselves right into the hospital
over $7 after taxes. If you make children wages you live like a child.
Kids don't pay for insurance, car payment, rent food money yet alone
go to college to move ahead and is why there is the need to do better,
but they are not paid to do better so there is no better just low pay no growth
or time to go to college. So the small town is small and has nothing!

Without bigger towns there would lower and lower no growth in smaller towns,
just their personal hell the rest of their life! So it's best for small towns to grow
like bigger towns do. Small towns need to listen to make life better
not a living hell for themselves. If you haven't been out of your town in 10 years
you know something is not right! No evolution there!

If they can't have a evolution then there is a reasion they live in small towns.
Small towns are like prisons. And should be recognized as such!
If you can't get better and get out then well no parole!

The income needs to go up! So people can afford their education,
healthcare, buy something to help businesses not do without! 
Small towns are always small towns from the beginning of time.
Slow , no growth homes with no paint on them for 10 years.
People walking with no cars, or cars driving with no bumpers.

So you can't run a government like a small town because it would have nothing!
This is a good point that needs to be noted! Small towns need to get up to speed!
Because bigger towns are not going down to the level of small towns!
You do better not worse!

Why do Trump supporters believe so many things that are crazy and wrong?

 

For me I don't take anything Trump says as a positive thing.
He acts unstable and that alone scares the Stock Market being
investors won't know how to invest. Where do I put my money,
is Trump going to put us in a war for 35 years, who will pay for that,
where is the losses going to be, where will be the growth, what is the
heading for the labor force will they have cars and all that relates! 

This is stupid, to vote for a insecure setting for America.
To make America great again you don't turn it upside down.
I mean it's stupid like building that wall for Mexico... Why people fly over
in planes! Well I wouldn't want to walk in the desert I might die
I will just get tickets and visas and fly to Ohio for a vacation...
Taking a cab to NY to get a job! And that is the point really!
Why believe a wall is good! It's like these people never been able to afford
anything so they haven't been in a airplane their whole life, not been out of
town for 20 years, so they forgot about planes... "We always forget planes!!!!!!"

We are talking about a presidential candidate pushing something stupid not
even thinking himself about what he is saying, even with him flying in a plane
himself did he even think about it? "OH, crap... Planes fly over walls!" Nope!

So why vote for Trump that pushes fear in people. Fear is a way to control people!
So why be a slave to fear? Let it go and jump away from Trump and do better for the
labor force. Why make new jobs they can't get there with no cars!

~~~~~It’s science, stupid: Why do Trump supporters believe so many things 
that are crazy and wrong?
Trump supporters suggested that Hillary Clinton had multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease and even AIDS, and was using a body double to conceal her ill health from the public. They also dug into birther conspiracy theories about President Obama.

One man even ranted that, “Barack Obama had big part of 9/11,” because he was “always on vacation, never in the office.” (Pro tip: Barack Obama was not president when 9/11 occurred.)

To liberal viewers, this whole display is boggling. These folks clearly are competent enough to dress themselves, read the address of the rally and show up on time, and somehow they continue to believe stuff that’s so crazy and so false that it’s impossible to believe anyone that isn’t barking mad could believe it. What’s going on?

“There definitely are conspiracy theorists. There definitely are facts where people have fundamentally misinformed beliefs. But there are also propositions that they’ll affirm for a display purpose,” Dan Kahan, a Yale professor of law and psychology explained to me over the phone. 

Kahan also works as a researcher and educator for the Cultural Cognition Projection, where researchers look into “the tendency of individuals to conform their beliefs about disputed matters of fact … to values that define their cultural identities.” The project looks at issues, such as climate change or vaccination safety, where huge swaths of people stubbornly reject scientific facts, because those facts don’t conform to their worldview.

There are a couple of reasons that people might embrace flatly false beliefs like the ones on display at this Trump rally, Kahan explained to me. One explanation is that they sincerely belief these false things.

“People have a stake in some position being true,” Kahan said, “because the status of their group or their standing in it depends on that answer.”

“But then there are other things that people will say because that’s kind of like a declaration of who they are,” he added. “Part of the reason they might be doing it is because they know it’s really going to get an aversive response from people who have an alternative identity and who know that’s the true answer.”

With birtherism, Kahan continued, there are people who actually believe that Obama is hiding the facts of his birth, but there also a lot of people who are saying that more because it’s a “kind of a middle finger” and because it gives conservatives pleasure to drive liberals batty by saying these things.

As evidence, Kahan pointed to a paper by published in Public Opinion Quarterly in 2014 that found that minor changes in survey wording found very different rates of birtherism in the public. 

With some questions, researchers hypothesized, “respondents might have viewed this question as constituting a quiz to assess whether they were well informed about political facts,” leading Republicans to be more inclined to admit that Obama was born in the United States.

Other questions, however, might have been viewed “as offering them an opportunity to express anti-Obama sentiment by challenging the legitimacy of his presidency.” In these cases, aligning one’s self with birtherism was less about actually believing the president was born in Kenya, per se, and more about expressing one’s racism and hostility towards liberals.

It’s not exactly lying. It’s more that the truth is secondary to the goals of expressing political views and antagonizing liberals by staking out these positions. 

This distinction might explain some of the positions that Trump supporters staked out in the Daily Show video.

“I don’t have any,” one man told Klepper when asked for proof of his outrageous claims. “It’s my opinion.”

This, of course, makes liberals nuts, because whether or not Clinton has Parkinson’s is not an opinion, but a matter of empirical fact. But folks who say things like this are “telling you something about this belief,” Kahan explained. 

“It’s not even a matter of fact for them,” Kahan continued, noting that some beliefs, “by their essence, defy empirical assessment.”  

“Do I have proof? No. Do I have articles? No,” one woman in the Daily Show interview proudly declared. “My mind is made up.”

“I think at that point someone’s just telling you that it’s some kind of performance,” Kahan said. 

This no doubt goes a long way towards explaining how on earth it is that Trump is considered more honest and trustworthy than Clinton by voters. According to Politico’s fact-checkers Trump tells a lie an average of once every three minutes. Clinton, in contrast, was rated by Politifact as the most honest candidate in either party in this year’s primary season.

For a lot of people, a candidate’s adherence to empirical facts isn’t really relevant to their estimation of how honest they are. “Honest” is more about a tangle of beliefs, stereotypes and wishful thinking than about the facts on the ground.

The fact that Clinton is female, for instance, works against her, since she’s carrying hundreds, possibly thousands of years of misogynist stereotypes about women’s mendacity as baggage. Many people have a kneejerk belief that ambitious women are inherently conniving and deceitful, and that is more powerful than actual facts in shaping perceptions of Clinton’s honesty.

On the flip side, Trump’s willingness to thumb his nose at “political correctness” may not be fact-based, but it is blunt, and that often gets confused with honesty by a lot of people. Conservatives aren’t wrong to think that a lot of people believe racist or sexist things, but fear to say them out loud for fear of social censure. Trump throws caution to the wind and says the foul things that many people fear to say out loud, and that makes him seem “honest” in their eyes, even though he literally struggles to make it through five minutes without telling a lie.

None of this means that facts don’t matter. But in understanding why people believe the things they do or say the things they do or vote the way they do, facts matter less than things like identity, values or what social circles people run in. That Trump can lie his head off, day in and day out, and never lose the support of his fans is just further evidence of what social science has been demonstrating for years.

http://www.salon.com/2016/09/26/its-science-stupid-why-do-trump-supporters-believe-so-many-things-that-are-crazy-and-wrong

It's a Rigged System and Taking your Guns

Well is it a rigged system? Well hiding your taxes and as you know many rich do,
would be seen as a rigged system the best way it can be rigged!

You know we are talking about Trump saying everything bad, in bad ways,
pointing at how Hillary is but not his own tax returns.
Pushing fear into people that don't look it up themselves to see if it's true.

As in Hillary saying she wants to take guns away from people.
It's just something like Trump inducing the paranoia over it!
Please think about it. Fear is a way to control people, so who is controlling you?
It makes you look stupid you know right? Being stupid is not a point of view
as it makes others pay for it to and that is not fair to others that look into
what is real or not. Why vote against your best interest when it takes out
their best interest?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-voters-are-arming-themselves-to-the-teeth-2016-08-12

~~~~~Where does Hillary Clinton stand on guns?

Donald Trump's persistent -- and false -- accusation that Hillary Clinton would abolish the Second Amendment as president is renewing scrutiny of her position on gun rights.

In the 2016 campaign, Clinton has fought for a raft of gun reforms. But she hasn't always been as strident an advocate for gun control.

In the 1990s, she was a fierce supporter for the landmark Brady Bill restrictions. But in the 2000s, she didn't push the issue, and even slammed then-Sen. Barack Obama's criticism of people who "cling to guns or religion" in the 2008 presidential primary. And now, after a rash of mass shootings, she's the Democratic standard-bearer on a renewed gun control push.

"I'm not looking to repeal the Second Amendment. I'm not looking to take people's guns away," she said. "But I am looking for more support for the reasonable efforts that need to be undertaken to keep guns out of the wrong hands."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/11/politics/hillary-clinton-gun-control-second-amendment

But about those Tax returns?

~~~~~Donald Trump Breaks 40-Year Bipartisan Tradition By Not Releasing Tax Returns

It’s official: Donald Trump is the first major party nominee since Gerald Ford not to release his tax returns during the presidential campaign.

The Republican nominee announced his bid for the White House on June 16, 2015, from the lobby of Trump Tower, the gleaming Manhattan symbol of his real estate empire. Almost immediately after he did so, questions began to swirl about his net worth and how much of it he would use to bankroll his campaign.

So the following month, in July, Trump’s campaign filed a disclosure with the FEC and issued a statement that claimed he has a “massive” net worth that is “in excess of TEN BILLION DOLLARS.” At the time, Forbes listed his net worth at merely $4.5 billion. Earlier this year, Forbes re-evaluated the number at $3.7 billion, down $800 million from 2015.

Initially, the media reacted to the statement, capital letters and all, with amusement. It was at the time considered as unserious as Trump’s candidacy ― conventional wisdom that soon fell apart. But the episode was an early sign as to how Trump planned to run for president ― evading transparency and accountability at every turn by refusing to release the very document that could unravel the narrative he sold of a successful, wealthy and charitable businessman.

The Washington Post’s David Fahrenthold, in particular, had an instrumental role this election with his intrepid reporting on the Trump Foundation, the candidate’s New York-based private foundation. Trump and his campaign often boast about his “millions” in charitable giving, but the numbers could not be independently verified without a copy of his tax returns. The Post reported the businessman actually used the organization to give away somebody else’s money and claim the credit for himself. And in another bizarre twist, Trump used charity money to purchase a 6-foot-tall portrait of himself.

Trump’s tax returns could also offer answers to questions about his business dealings abroad ― especially in adversarial countries like Russia. During the campaign, Democrats suggested he refused to do so because he was beholden to leaders like Russian President Vladimir Putin, a man Trump has praised at length.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-tax-returns_us_5820c196e4b0d9ce6fbd9e3c

Janet Reno Dead at 78

Janet Reno, former US attorney general under President Bill Clinton, died Monday
morning following a long battle with Parkinson's disease, her sister Maggy Hurchalla
said. She was 78.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/07/politics/janet-reno-dies

I met her in the 90's when I worked at the Doubletree Hotel.
She was the guest speaker for a banquet there.
Our Banquet manger at the time worked at Camp David in his past
and met her before so he was standing in the back hallway along
with the sheriff as that was her security not the secret service.

I was working on the other Hotel property and went over to the Hotel
to get more coffee pots and I saw Janet, a sheriff and our manager.
I had to say something so I walked over to them because I had to say
that I thought she got ripped off about the Waco incident.
I said there was nothing she could of done anyway, even if
they hung around to get him before he went back to the camp
they probably would of done the same thing anyway.
The guns where at their camp so the shootout at the camp would of
still happened anyway! What choice did she have?!

Janet I think said "thank you" and I took off because my boss was
looking at me. Funny, but I did have to say that being it was in me
and I would never have that chance again, so I did!

That is my memory of Janet Reno!

The Cost of Being First with a Light of Hope

~~~~~The Cost of Being First

When Chris was accepted into the Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service, he didn’t think of himself as a first-generation college student. Acknowledging his first-generation identity and how it influenced his path came years later, but the label assigned by his college is only a part of Chris’s individual story.

His parents, both Vietnamese refugees who had not gone to college, raised him in south Florida. Chris, who did not want to use his last name, knew he’d earned a golden admission ticket, but he didn’t know that getting in was only half the struggle. He hadn’t considered how his parents’ lack of higher education might influence his own college studies. “I did homework with my classmates for the first time and I found myself getting defensive about what little knowledge of college I had coming in,” Chris said, describing the anxiety and distress he experienced studying, taking tests, and meeting classmates. “I was playing pretend the moment I had my first meaningful conversation with someone, and I consequently felt lost the next year and a half.”

More schools are focusing on supporting students like Chris. But in their goal to increase access to higher education, schools label young people in ways that isolate rather than include them particularly where colleges and the support systems they develop for these students automatically equate being first generation with being low income, as many studies suggest.

As a sociologist, Celine-Marie Pascale, a professor and the associate dean for undergraduate studies at American University, where I also teach, is concerned with the language and attitudes that develop around culture, knowledge, and power. When Pascale was a first-generation graduate student, 17 years after earning her undergraduate degree, she was awarded a scholarship and asked to visit donors. “I was incredibly grateful, of course; I could not have gone to school without it. But I became weary of going to events and representing the poor student they were saving. It felt demeaning,” she said.

The labels aren’t always intentional, and they aren’t always bad. Colleges anticipate and define student categories—like low-income, first-generation, and minority mostly based on voluntary Common Application data provided before a student ever arrives on campus. While students aren’t required to disclose their parents’ educational backgrounds—and many don’t self-identified first-generation students are often linked to or assumed to have economic disadvantage. Students may also choose not to disclose their first-generation status; professors and classmates won’t know unless they claim the label. But labels that assume first-generation always correlates with low-income may get in the way of the more important conversation of how individuals relate to their college community and larger culture and foster feelings of resentment.

Does it matter if first-generation students are also low-income? What about a first-generation student of color who comes from a family of means? How many labels are necessary to understand first-generation students’ needs? Labeling theory has been well established in multiple disciplines, and when applied to the classroom, teacher expectations may influence student performance. If a teacher lowers standards because he assumes a student needs the accommodation, the student’s true potential won’t be measured. A label may unintentionally shape a teacher’s reaction, meaning she may assume a certain behavior results from the label rather than the individual. At a critical juncture in a college student’s cognitive development, the combination of labels may hinder more than help.

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/10/the-cost-of-being-first/504155

 ~~~~~Ranking the Best (and Worst) Colleges for Low Income Students

Attending college is among the best ways to move up the economic ladder. Bachelor’s degree holders earn more than two million dollars more over a lifetime than those without. Given the rising costs of education, many fear that good higher education is getting out of reach of the poor.

And when poor students do attend schools, they too often choose the schools for which students have the worst outcomes: Low graduation rates, high debt and low future earnings.

To battle these forces, the federal government implemented the College Scorecard initiative. This initiative is an attempt to highlight those schools which are low cost and financially remunerative, and to condemn those that are neither. While the primary feature of College Scorecard is a website at which students and parents can look up statistics about schools, another aspect of the initiative was the release of a huge, publicly available dataset, which includes a breakdown of outcomes by economic background.

We decided to use this data to see which schools are helping lower income students get into the middle class, and which are not. Where exactly does a low income student get the “biggest bang for their buck?” The answer seems to be that, if possible, poor students should attend the elite institutions that lead to high salaries and have generous financial aid programs. If these highly selective institutions are out of reach, as they are to most Americans, a technology-focused state school may be the best option.

https://priceonomics.com/ranking-the-best-and-worst-colleges-for-low-income

Fair Minimum Wage and the House Not For Sale

As it is in reality, low pay do without. Well why wouldn't you want the pay
to go up? Giving people more money to burn is more spent more sales tax,
more into social security making better cost of living increases.

It puts the money where you need it. Why have people walk with no cars or
drive cars with no bumpers or old cars that will blow up in time.
Well they do. In the 90's in Tulsa there was many old 70's, 80's cars
leaking oil all over the place. They mostly died a victim of low wages!

I believe people should be able to live like a American not like
a third world country. Why walk with no car why live with no AC
because you can't afford it! What do you work for? Pay the bills, boom broke!
Why have a boom the labor force is now walking with no cars.
How are people with no cars to help they have less consumer demand!
Make nothing, have nothing and well why have stores I mean there is nothing
I can afford there anyway...

I would rather see the wages go up! For one it makes a stable labor force.
You get what you pay for. Offer the lowest pay get the bottom of the barrel.
In I/O Psychology that is a point that needs to be talked more about!
It's a sick path that needs to be fixed, changed for help and growth of the
workers. No adult should have children wages. Children don't pay rent,
pay for health care, make a car payment or even get a loan.
"Sorry your income is too low!"

So as you can see there is a need for better pay... To not impoverish the consumers!
And with better pay is better living being able to get a car, fix your car, pay your bills!

Or even to say this house is not for sale as you can pay your payments now!
A time for more money to be put back into the economy not people staying home
broke. Broke helps no one!

Also I do look forward to the end of Republicans obstructing wage growth.
It's about time that ended! Well what you want more obstructing in your own life?

~~~~~Business for a Fair Minimum Wage Federal Sign On Statement

 As business owners and executives, we support gradually raising the federal minimum wage to at least $12 by 2020. It’s good for business, customers and our economy. Today’s outdated minimum wage has far less buying power than it had in the 1960s. Stuck since 2009 at $7.25 an hour – just $15,080 a year – the minimum wage impoverishes working families and weakens the consumer spending at the heart of our economy.

Raising the minimum wage makes good business sense. Workers are also customers. Minimum wage increases boost sales at local businesses as workers buy goods and services they could not afford before. And nothing drives job creation more than consumer demand. Businesses also see cost savings from lower employee turnover and benefit from increased productivity, product quality and customer satisfaction. The most rigorous studies of the impact of actual minimum wage increases show they do not cause job loss. Raising the minimum wage will keep more dollars circulating in our local economy and reduce the growing strain on our social safety net caused by inadequate wages.

We support gradually raising the federal minimum wage to at least $12 an hour by 2020, and then adjusting it yearly to increase at the same rate as the median hourly wage. This will restore the lost value of the minimum wage, assure the wage floor does not erode again, and make future increases more predictable.
http://www.businessforafairminimumwage.org/Federal-12-By-2020-Sign-On-Statement