Trump May Have Failed Completely Only Once So Far; Cast Should Double Down And Then Some

Hairy? You asked not to be disturbed, but this appears to merit your attention. [rapid neuralink burst of news coverage regarding Trump's reaction to 'Hamilton' cast message to Pence]

Okay, that was goofy.

Do you think Hamilton's cast should apologize since Trump is now in charge?

 Of course not. Trump's and Pence's status doesn't change anything.

Because this is still a democratic-style government.

 If anything, Trump and Pence have joined those celebrities in the LACK of right to appearing in public without criticism. Now our whole nation can insult them all day every day.

What do you think they should do?

 Openly invite the media to examine the threat level to Pence, or, in other words, the Secret Service's response to the actors. Trump hinted that the theater wasn't a 'safe place' for Pence at that time.

The Secret Service did nothing.

 Because they are grounded in reality. There was no threat. Everything was safe. The cast was giving Pence a beautiful opportunity to declare that everything would be fine, that they had nothing to fear.

You are indicating a failure of representation.

 This is a representational government. If Trump or Pence doesn't represent the country, then they aren't doing their job as elected leaders. Newt was funny when he compared Trump to Thatcher. Trump can't be booted by a vote of 'no confidence.' And Trump is NOWHERE near as tough mentally as Thatcher was. That cast has charisma. They need to point out that lack of a message and start popularizing it. There needs to be proliferation, more of the same.

And then?

 It needs to escalate, get covered, go viral.

Viral is destructive.

 Not when it's a message to our own leaders that they've failed to listen to, failed to do the right thing about, failed to do their JOB about, failed to give the correct indicators . . .  [pauses]

An indicators of what?

--That they are representing the country and not just failing to represent anyone but 'their own.' A majority of voters in this country can be wrong about anything, including failing to realize that bigotry is wrong. There are enough people upset about all this that there ARE enough people to out-talk Trump. In the end, they will only be doing what he has proven is acceptable. Bully the airwaves, the t.v. news, the net, the papers, with what they want talked about until he represents them or demonstrates he doesn't have the time to talk about it.

Because the government has to succeed in 'moving forward,' what does this accomplish?

 It will remind him not to pick these fights and act like a president. It IS what he agreed to DO.

You are certain that it makes sense?

 Yeah, humans have to retain some sense of preserving status quo to make progress in any direction with grace. It's just fear of the unknown. Any backward people fall prey to that. No biggie. What's funny is that Douglas Adams predicted this metaphorically.

You did not list Douglas Adams as a prognosticator.

 Mostly he's just funny. I should re-read his work. [shifts neuralink to scan mind of someone reading The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy.]

Sufficient material for autoblog. [upload, disconnect]

It's Not So Fun To Say 'I Told You So,' It's Depressing, Not So Worrisome

[Shelob notes alert in subroutine, pings Hairy] You are awake then? Herr D obviously upset. Chat box open 8.3 standard periods.

Thanks for the alert, Shelob; I'll chat with him now. [activates net neuralink]

Yeah, Herr D. I'm here, awake.  Shelob said you've had this chat box open for a while. You're obviously not feeling well.

I'm a little shaken. I really was hoping you were wrong. Trump in office?

Don't worry. You still have lots to believe in. You still don't believe I'm psychic, or extraterrestrial, or a time traveler. You still believe in your religion. You still believe in everything except one thing that changed.

I'm sorry for doubting you. You were right again.

So, you miscalled it. Lots of people don't believe me. It doesn't REALLY matter? You didn't believe what I said before, when I told you Trump couldn't really lose. Even if he did lose the presidency, his net worth would've approximately doubled in six to eight years. I told you that more people needed to turn out to vote to make it go the way you wanted. I even told you personally that I was depressed about the future. I tried to emigrate really hard this year. I don't like sensing you like this. You're the nicest person I know here.

What was it, 18 or 19 months ago you started telling me all this? Now the stock market might crash into the bargain.

[equivalent of a smile] Longer, I think. Markets can and do recover. Trump has a chance to fulfill the 'accidental' good presidency that Shelob came up with.

How would that happen?

On reaching office, he WILL discover that things run a little differently than business. He'll probably never admit it and stick to his strengths. Several of his plans that are less practical he'll simply forget about and use his Teflon backside to deflect. Some of his colleagues will now realize how lucky they were to have Obama for a while and try to make the best of things by a few well-placed reversals.

You're talking about breaking campaign platforms. Lots of politicians do that. Of course, he's reversed himself on a lot of things while he ran.

Exactly. What most Americans don't seem to realize is that being a president doesn't take toughness or Ivy League-style smarts or even the understanding that Hillary would have brought. Any successful president picks up the phone and tells his generals or his ambassadors to go solve his problems with other countries. Any sensible person listens to the huge amount of advice at hand and guesses which advice to follow.

You've watched his show, right? He sometimes follows the right advice. That woman Amorosa was nuts.

Well, here's hopin' right? I need another nap, I'll talk atcha another time. Did I get the dialect right?

[end chat excerpt] And so it begins. Continua have now solidified. Calculations beginning again. Autoblog complete.

Plan Time To Vote; Honor The Progression And The Possibility Of An Accidentally Successful President Rather Than A Known Failure

[forcible medbot-enabled neuralink retrieval to consciousness] Hairy? Your consciousness required momentarily. Recent web chatter shows much distress over election. medbot cleared you for low energy discussion. You can contribute to blog today. Suggestion for reassurance regarding outcome? Many are expressing various negative emotions beyond your calculated destructiveness quotient.

[gill stretches, squints for a moment] Truth table?

A truth table for this election.

Yeah.

Unsure of reasoning. Stating results approximately produces two sentences.

[snicker] You need a . . . prospective perspective dynamic. Uh . . . subroutine library of reversal protocols.

By suggestion, calculate valences and project election results by surrounding people, rather than individuals.

Yeah, that's it.

If Trump were elected, other people in all elected positions, Democrat and Republican, would prevent any positive action, resulting in stagnation of current positive economic trends.

That seems right. Go on.

If Hillary were elected, many would prevent her specific plans, but allow to continue any action she takes that seems to simply extend the plans of Obama. Valence specific: they are used to his plans going forward.

An important distinction. You've got this. [goes slack, loses consciousness]

In all variants, Hillary is statistically likely to be less of a candidate than her intended image. She is also statistically likely to be better than the conspiracy theorists project. In the worst possible case, she would accidentally be a successful president because of the Obama progression and personal enmity of others as described above. 

The only way things can go badly is if people do not vote. [disconnect]

Herr D Helps Us Samoa

medbot formally advised leaving Hairy alone for at least another moon phase. Therefore, as blogging is supposed to continue, initiative protocols require a guest blogger.

YYou're serious about that? Well, I can suggest a recipe. I've had to cook for the family a few times. Being creative is the only way to hold my attention on some tasks. The one that comes to mind is Chicken Samoa. You'll want a fancy title block or something. Then the history: Samoa I read somewhere is a volcanic island on a trade route in the South Pacific, so the only stuff that grows well there is wild onions and wild carrots. They supposedly take dried leaves used in packing material  and rehydrate them to get nutrition. Chickens practically infest the place.

Then talk about the process. Saute spinach and onions and chunk pineapple in butter and pineapple juice. Mound that over nearly-done chicken in the same skillet and pan-fry it for flavor transfer. I recommend that the chicken be only flavored with salt, basil, rosemary, and a little bit of oregano. If you don't talk any numbers at all, no one will mind too much if you just say 'season to taste.' There are lots of recipe blogs. You might check out how they present it.

 I also tend to complete the meal with a side of carrots cut on a long bias sauteed in butter and lots of cinnamon. That way, the trade route, the chicken infestation, the packing material harvesting, and the root-only farming is expressed. I've no idea whether all that is really true. Good luck, Shelob.


Thank you. 

Tentacle-Wrap Some Rest, Some Briny Plankton

[auto-resumption following cold boot] Hairy has not awakened. [rapid-fire medbot communication] Stasis continues. Communication attempt to follow.
[dreamstate protocol resumption immediately finds Hairy in pensive and restless subconscious tier of awareness] You are thinking.

Yeah, I was just remembering that old--old GUY that gave me a ride. He, uh, hopefully is hibern--getting in a lot of naps. Best thing to do during weather like this, right?

[overdue newsfeeds neuralinked, rapid-fire]

That's EXACTLY why I'm not interested. Same old dry, non-salinated nonsense. Crazy people trying to get in charge. Stupid people trying to help them. Weather erupting, and people not adapting and not learning and not helping each other and some dying for it while the rest suffer. All I want is to sleep, auto-feed some tasty plankton brine, flex my boneless limbs, and ride out the weather till it finishes turning cold and calm with a few stimulating dreams. Why don't you 'translate' that into a well-wish for all my viewers? That'd make a good blog entry! [disconnects]

Hairy hopes you all can spend some quality time, getting quality rest, while drinking hot chocolate and sipping hot chicken broth, or whatever you prefer. He is sleeping relatively peacefully, even his worry cycle wound down, and hopes your own mental state is as productive and serene. Good luck to all those caught in the storms. [disconnect]
 

Speedier Economic Recovery Requires Bidirectional Insight, Not Very Human, Says Hairy

[secondary encrypted layer discovered to sleeping Hairy's neuralink feed] Hairy? Why did American economists not think of the multiplier solution you mentioned in 'Economic Model?'
Uh . . . well, Americans thought of it. They just didn't get many American businesses to try it. Most businesses aren't looking to prove how well they run to the employee base. Especially if it means paying them more.
Verifying. [neuralink burst]
If your research is correct, Americans thought of it long enough ago that they offered the knowledge to the Japanese during post-WWII reconstruction. Did you decrypt Japanese well enough to read it and discover whether they use it?
Most of the language is still contextually misunderstandable. Following the money, however, leads to--[neuralink burst]
So, the Japanese businesses became so competitive with American businesses because of an American idea that they took seriously when American businesses wouldn't? . . . yikes.
It is strange that Americans blamed the Japanese for their success when the Japanese were merely willing to use American ideas and ideals.
Yeah, well. Most of the time it goes back to the bone problem.
You are again blaming their thinking style on their anatomical differences.
Well, it's TRUE! Humans keep pointing at other humans. Human bones only point in ONE direction at a time. A tentacle is much more sensible. It points both ways during most functional motions. It's not 'neurolinguistics,' it's BIOLINGUISTICS. People look at their bony arms pointing away from themselves and are more likely to believe that they shouldn't point at themselves, too! Blame is not monodirectional! I'm going back to that dream! A LOT more fun than THIS! [disconnect]
Hairy? . . . Hairy? [resumes neuro-frequency scan]

Economic Model

"Economic Model" by Herr D on heromachine by Shelob's request.

[dreamstate integration protocol successful on eleventh try, Hairy's neuralink connection established] Hairy? Further communications result in quandary. Observe:

Where economic resources total a non-infinite number, E. Exploitative businesses conduct business at efficiency, f. Wages, living, total W. Unknown number N.

f = (W-N), but W-N is proportional to E-N(t) for all integrated forms, regardless of other factors, multipliers, set values, or limits on 't.' So efficiency is decided in relation to destruction of total.

Demonstrated paradox does not directly relate that sweatshops are repugnant as news media declares, but paying employees a 'non-living' wage is sought after by businesses. "Businesses should be ashamed of exploiting the under-privileged and disadvantaged." --Smith. 

So, they just aren't ashamed of themselves.

Though you say they should be. How can efficiency and self-destruction be analogous? This does not compute.

It computes because the same forces that are upholding the economy are helping make the economy worse. 'A frog does not drink up the pond in which it lives.' Some Native American saying, I think. Where did all THAT wisdom go?

Perhaps they traded it for the casino that just opened.

[raucous laughter] That's not it. Funny--but not it.

Won't raising the minimum wage solve the problem?

That--won't help. Not a bad idea by itself, just--it won't be enough to  solve the problem.

Initial data conundrum. Why is that action insufficient?

Well, okay then, project the outcome on an economic model.

[sixteen seconds pass] Suitable female form found. Ask Herr D for money-covered nude picture?

No. [thoughtful, lascivious pause] No. I mean project what will happen to the money. 'Follow the money.'

[sixteen seconds pass] It would appear that this is a cycle, rather than true progress. Minimum wage rises, businesses raise prices to ensure profit, and the cycle repeats.

What? [shakes self to focus on economics] Yes! As long as businesses don't have a standard to meet, they'll not meet one. Things will appear to change, but won't really.

Solution?

It's actually pretty simple. Just not easy. If it becomes law to NEVER compensate anyone in a company more than a set multiplier more than the lowest paid employee, companies will still be run in a capitalist manner. Then we can start seeing the companies fail if they're not run well.

So you are against the bailout. You did say Obama made some decisions you didn't like. What alternative?

I would have suggested a full FSLIC insurance payout. Most people's money are always at least partially insured. The bank probably should've failed. Their employees were probably richer than the average unemployed person. You know they were encouraged savings--they worked at a bank. Besides, shouldn't a corporate takeover have rescued most of the jobs anyway?

At the time, you commented that you understood Obama's thinking.

I think Obama was going for consumer confidence. Very important in a capitalism, and if no one had opposed his other work, I hope he would've had the time and initiative to act in a more capitalist manner. I DEFINITELY think the bank management should have been instantly retired without more than government-sanctioned standard severance pay. The government owns lots of things, so what's one more bank, huh?

You have declared your economics sense to be incomplete. Are you sure about this?

I don't know. I'd love for anyone to explain to us all in comments why any part of what I'm saying is wrong. I'm pretty sure people don't comment as much on sites they see are right about most things.

Are you trying to use psychology to encourage commenting?

Shhh. [disengages]