WASHINGTON — Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s massive campaign apparatus and an army of some 500 staffers will march on through the general election in November even if he loses the Democratic nomination, campaign officials tell NBC News, shifting their efforts toward working to elect whomever the party selects to face President Donald Trump.
Bloomberg’s vast tech operation will also be redirected to help the eventual nominee, as Democrats struggle to compete with the vaunted digital operation built by Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale. Hawkfish, a digital company started by Bloomberg that’s carrying out his $100 million online ad campaign, will be retained through Election Day to help defeat Trump, the officials said.
There are a bunch of obvious issues with this (billionaires shouldn’t elect presidents, what’s he going to want in return, etc.). That said, having been raised by a woman with a titanium grudge carrier, I have to throw a little respect his way. He clearly hates Trump and he isn’t letting go.
raven
I think we need all the help we can get.
robmassing
Maybe he could spread it around a little, not just focus on the presidency? Just a thought.
Baud
We’ll see what happens with this. It’s an unenforceable promise.
Another Scott
@raven: Yup.
Unfortunately, who ever spends more usually wins so it would be foolish to reject Bloomberg’s efforts to help elect the Democratic nominee.
Cheers,
Scott.
Martin
Maddow called him and Steyer out on this last night. Good on Bloomberg to respond with the correct answer.
But what a shitty state of affairs. Whoever can line up the biggest billionaire wins? What a clown show.
raven
WASHINGTON — U.S. Rep. Doug Collins regrets saying Democrats are “in love with terrorists” after some of them criticized President Donald Trump’s decision to authorize the killing of an Iranian general.
“Let me be clear: I do not believe Democrats are in love with terrorists, and I apologize for what I said earlier this week,” Collins wrote on Twitter.
Martin
@Baud: It is, but Bloomberg fucking hates Trump. It’s personal.
Baud
@raven:
I don’t believe he’s sorry but it’s nice to see that they feel like they have to formally apologize.
Baud
@Martin:
Don’t make me relate to Bloomberg.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
my current tinfoil hat theory is that Bloomberg is building an infrastructure for an indie run if Sanders (or maybe even Warren) get the nomination . I could make a stronger argument– or dismiss it all together– by looking up the deadlines for getting on the ballot in each state, but I’m a rando on the internet who uses wool-gathering speculation to procrastinate.
Kent
I don’t know why more of these people don’t do bottom up campaigning.
If you get people excited to get out and vote for your local Congressional candidate they will also be there to vote for President. Reverse coattails. And the money goes a lot further in a Congressional race.
hitchhiker
In spite of everything, I’m still able to believe that sometimes people have good motives. Yeah, maybe he just hates trump. Maybe he’s just sandbagging and he’s eventually going to try to sink a Sanders or a Warren candidacy.
But maybe he’s like the rest of us — horrified at what’s happened and certain that repeating the mistake in 2020 would spell the true end of even pretending this country is worth saving.
schrodingers_cat
Things are bad but at least Orange T admin is not breaking the heads of students and then filing spurious cases against them, yet.
waspuppet
@Kent: And they won’t be as standoffish about who the presidential nominee is.
Still, it’s clear that Bloomberg is everything Trump wishes he was, and that Trump knows it. I’ll be happy to see him sticking around getting under Trump’s skin, or at least his makeup.
yellowdog
@robmassing: He gave 5 mil to Stacey Abrams group and promised 250 mil for vulnerable House Dems who voted for impeachment. And, oh yeah, was the major funder for the gun control groups that were the major reason we got both Virginia houses. Do your f *cking research. Bloomberg isn’t my candidate (I haven’t quite moved on from Harris) but Bloomberg deserves credit for putting his money where his mouth is.
James E Powell
@raven:
He “apologizes” for it but knows it will be repeated & reposted till the end of time.
Roger Moore
@Kent:
Ego. SATSQ.
Mnemosyne
I was getting ready to wonder out loud if being a declared candidate for the nomination gave you a certain amount of access that being a mere well-wisher would not, and maybe that was why Bloomberg was making what he knew would be a doomed run at the nomination.
But if making that doomed run means that he’s legally allowed to give additional assistance to the Democrats as an insider/former candidate … well, it’s all pocket change to him anyway, so why not put yourself into a position where you can do more than you otherwise would have been able to?
It was clear in 2016 that Bloomberg really, really loathes Trump, so I’m not surprised that he might figure out a way to be able to work against him more directly this time around.
VeniceRiley
I don’t think he’ll run 3rd party. He doesn’t want to be the 2020 Ross Perot. And I applaud his move here. Parscale’s efforts must be countered head on by an outfit with real expertise. And the money spent on this will enable our candidate and our party to use their funds for GOTV and more traditional activities.
Mnemosyne
@Kent:
In my theory (for which I have no evidence), Bloomberg can legally give more support to Democrats as a failed presidential candidate than he could as just some rich guy. He doesn’t really want to be president, but he does want to squash Donald Trump like a bug.
IIRC, Bloomberg made his billions by looking at every angle and figuring out the niche where he could make money, so I am hoping that he has similarly figured out an angle to help the Democrats. We shall see.
MattF
@yellowdog: I think Bloomberg’s support for Abrams is a big deal. Five mil may be a rounding error to a multi-billionaire, but it’s real money to us peons.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Mnemosyne: he has what I think is a very good ad defending/promoting/wrapping himself in Obamacare. It talks a lot about how much he expanded access while mayor, and I wonder how much is that based on policies of his, and how much to having been in office while O’Care/mediciaid expansion was implemented.
Sister Golden Bear
To repeat last night’s quote from famous/infamous California pol Big Daddy Unruh:
Make use of his grudge money and then
eattax the rich after we’ve won.James E Powell
@yellowdog:
No disrespect, but could we maybe be a nicer to each other. We don’t all have the same information or the same priorities. Not every point of disagreement merits that kind of anger.
Mnemosyne
And to be clear, I’m not saying that Bloomberg is a great guy. He’s basically an asshole. But he seems to be an asshole who has a white-hot loathing for Donald Trump based on personal experience with the dude, so if he wants to help defeat him, I ain’t turning him or his billions away.
And for folks who (rightly) want to get big money out of politics, can you picture any circumstance more likely to get the Republicans to suddenly want the same thing than a Democratic billionaire using his money to defeat them? It’ll be like Reagan and gun control after the Black Panthers marched in Sacramento.
Archon
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
There is no 3rd party/Indie path to beating Trump. None.
Bloomberg HAS to know that.
LuciaMia
“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” But like you said in the intro, kingmakers can be a problem.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
I wonder how long before the Conservatives start screaming about how awful the power the rich has. now that some billionaire isn’t one of theirs? Bloomberg is everything the right accuses Soros of being.
LuciaMia
At least now the Republicans will have someone else to whinge about besides Soros.
JustRuss
@Mnemosyne:
Stop it. Now I want to vote for him. And bear his children.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@LuciaMia: Yes, right now Bloomberg probably just hates Trump and has the money to burn to screw with Don the Con. 2021 and if Trump is out of office, Bloomberg might remember he burned a lot of money to help make that happen.
Cacti
I also appreciate that he’s willing to hit the Dotard in a way that he finds the most embarrassing:
By flaunting his much larger personal fortune.
Kelly
As a presidential candidate Bloomburg gets tv stations “best price” for ads. He may just be saving a little money for his attacks on Trump.
Bill Arnold
@raven:
Wow. That’s an actual apology. (That is, it has the structure of an actual apology.)
Roger Moore
@Mnemosyne:
Yep. This is the same reason I think it’s a good idea for Democrats to aggressively gerrymander everywhere they can. I think gerrymandering is awful, but I also think the easiest way of getting the Supreme Court to agree is for the Democrats to use it aggressively against the Republicans.
Roger Moore
@LuciaMia:
No. The enemy of my enemy may be my ally, but that doesn’t make him my friend. My friend is somebody who will still take my side even when we aren’t facing a common threat.
Archon
@Roger Moore:
If politics are game theory then we are way past the point where playing fair and by the rules will bring positive outcomes for Democrats or change the behavior of the Republican Party.
The drop the coffee cup moment for me was Merrick Garland but I’m sure people came to that realization earlier.
germy
Even Sanders? Or Warren? All this time I thought he’d jumped into the race to thwart those Wealth Tax advocates.
Chief Oshkosh
Bloomberg? It’s all good, IMO.
Collins of Georgia, however, needs to have a large spotlight put on all of his past, current, and future activities. How much, if any, oppo research has ever been done on this guy? Sure would be sweet to deep-six his career, and very visibly tie this to his cult behavior.
Betty Cracker
If Bloomberg were in the race solely to kneecap Trump, wouldn’t his ads would be more like Steyers’ ads, which are more about how terrible Trump is than how great Steyers is (80/20)? Bloomberg’s ads seem to be the opposite. IIRC, if the healthcare ad running here in FL a lot mentions the ACA at all, it’s in passing — mostly it’s about how Bloomberg got healthcare done. I don’t trust him, but better inside the tent pissing out, I guess.
JWR
@Mnemosyne:
I read something recently that suggested Bloomberg’s primary motivation was to get under Trump’s skin. Can’t say as I’ve seen any evidence this is true, but hey, if it has that effect, more power to him.
Hoodie
While it’s possible this is a grudge, it may simply be the case the Bloomberg knows from personal experience that Trump is an incompetent and dangerous buffoon and, thus, represents a threat to what Bloomberg holds dear.
Kelly
@Roger Moore:
I agree and it’s something we don’t need billionaires for.
sdhays
I thought Bloomberg got into the race because he was worried about what Elizabeth Warren might do to his taxes. Will he actually work to support her if she’s the nominee?
Jay
Jay
@sdhays:
it’s unknown if Bloomberg entered the race to sink Progressive Agenda’s, a white hot loathing for Dolt 45, a Billionaire’s ego, or all three.
Jay
Sebastian
My theory was all along that he entered the race officially so he could get the cheap ad rates reserved for candidates only.
Sebastian
@Roger Moore:
Yes, you maximize leverage and then compromise from a position of strength, not an appeal to decency.
yellowdog
@James E Powell: I’ve seen repeated attacks on Bloomberg for the same thing. Why aren’t you telling people to investigate before criticizing someone. The stories about Bloomberg’s contributions are all over social media and the news; I have no special information. Being lazy about checking assumptions and attacks is part of what got us here in the first place. I will continue to be openly angry about people targeting Dems running for office with bad information.
Barbara
@Sebastian: He is not an idiot.
Sebastian
@Mnemosyne:
Exactly, he had to show some effort so he couldn’t be dismissed or sued by the GOP. He has cleared all hurdles as serious (albeit doomed) contender but now he has, he can do whatever he wants with his OWN money without FEC limits.
john b
That is also my theory
Sebastian
@Barbara:
No doubt about that. I think he gamed this out quite well. Still don’t trust him if he won’t torpedo a Warren or Sanders nomination but perhaps we were judging too quickly.
It appears more and more that he entered to shiv Donnie.
mrmoshpotato
@raven: (clears throat) Doug Collins can go fuck himself!
Jay
Ruckus
titanium grudge carrier
I got a chuckle out of that, being someone who has manufactured products out of titanium. It’s expensive and a pain in the ass to work, although it does weld well…….
Bloomberg.
Is it possible that not every overly wealthy person is a total asshole?
Is it possible that he really does not want to be president but wants to bring the country into someplace that isn’t all bad to live in for a majority? He’s 77 yrs old, does he really want 4 to 8 yrs of his twilight years to be working for a lot of someones – all of us? He’s very well off, he’d actually have to work, and wouldn’t think he could be like trump and actually do only shit all day long.
I’d bet he’s spending his money to beat trump but wants to be in the WH about as much as I do, which is only as a replacement for shit for brains because I’d be dramatically better and no, I’m not serious and no you don’t want me.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
speaking of billionaires and their campaigns, has anyone seen any evidence, data or stories on the ground, that suggest the Steyer surge in SC and NV is anything more than an outlier? I would’ve been less surprised by just about any other candidate, Bloomberg or Booker or Bernie or Klobuchar, surging, but Steyre?
ETA: I hope all those who say there’s more strategery and progressivism to Bloomberg 2020 than meets my eye are right.
Citizen Alan
@germy:
He can do that even if he loses if the practical effect of his candidacy is to make Biden more palatable to the “Eat the Rich” crowd.
WaterGirl
@MattF: Stacey Abrams had a stated goal of 5 million, I believe. Since Bloomberg gave her 5 million, and the is supposedly 1/3 of everything she raised, that means she raised 10 million when her goal was 5 million, plus the 5 million bonus from Bloomberg.
That’s a pretty good haul. Also the Pod Save America guys committed to trying to raise 1 million for Stacey Abrams, and they raised over 2 million.
All of which is good news for voting, and is a good indication that at least some people get what’s at stake.
Ruckus
@Sebastian:
No actual billionaire wants to “waste” money. But spend it for something they want? Yeah they are all in for that. I’d bet he doesn’t give a damn about the savings, only that he can get more ad coverage for the same amount. Don’t think it’s his motivation, just a perk.
WaterGirl
@Bill Arnold: Apparently what she said last week didn’t poll well. That’s my guess, anyway.
Kent
Get real. No one who knows anything about American politics thinks that Warren will get any major tax increases through the next Congress. Her wealth tax is as ephemeral as Trump’s Repeal and Replace with the best health care ever medical plan.
Worst case scenario for billionaires? 4 years of Warren demagoging the topic might make it slightly easier for some future 60 seat Dem Senate do it in the future.
Mnemosyne
Anyone who doubts that Bloomberg hates Trump should go find the video of Bloomberg’s speech at the DNC in 2016. He really, really, REALLY hates Trump, with a sneering contempt.
Barbara
@WaterGirl: Wrong Collins, I believe. I think it was Doug Collins who covered himself in shit this time around.
robmassing
@James E Powell: thank you.
Mrs. D. Ranged in AZ
@WaterGirl: Not a “she”. Believe it was Doug Collins (R-GA), notorious dbag from recent hearings….
zhena gogolia
@Baud:
I want to see him do it on Fox News.
Brachiator
@Mnemosyne:
I’m liking Bloomberg more and more. Still wish that he had not entered the election race.
Betty Cracker
@Kent: Such a weird coincidence that Warren’s brief flirtation with front-runner status brought Bloomberg and Patrick out of the woodwork and prompted every multimillionaire celebrity TV pundit and plutocrat-friendly print outlet to adopt a laser-like focus on skittish suburban centrists and their deep and abiding affection for their private health insurance.
Jeffro
Has anyone considered the possibility that Bloomberg’s just laying the groundwork, getting a little name recognition, for his 2024 or 2028 run? A guy’s got to start somewhere, you know.
;)
JaySinWA
@Ruckus:
I’d bet he’s spending his money to beat trump but wants to be in the WH about as much as I do, which is only as a replacement for shit for brains because I’d be dramatically better…
Ruckus, Ruckus, he’s our tuchas. Campaign slogan needs some work.
germy
Brachiator
@Ruckus:
Not only possible, but very likely.
jl
@Baud:
” Don’t make me relate to Bloomberg. ”
But millions related to Baud 2020!, which, many people say, is a heavier lift. You’re planning on turning down the Bloomberg billions’ help after your nomination?
Citizen Alan
@Kent:
Actually, the worst scenario for billionaires, IMO, is 4 years of Warren’s IRS chief making it a priority to crack down on tax cheats among corporations and the 1%.
MoxieM
He’s a Meffid Homeboy (Meffid being the former gateway to the All-American city of Summavul.) That shit runs deep. I heard him mention it on the radio the other day.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@germy:
Jacob Wohl? lol
Citizen Alan
@Brachiator:
I do genuinely hold to the belief that excessive wealth makes people evil. I really do believe that. There are people in this country who literally have more money than they can possibly spend in a human lifetime. And that wealth alone is worthless to them because wealth only has value when compared to poverty. Their money has distorted their sense of morality until they genuinely believe that people must be allowed to starve in misery because the alternative is a government safety net financed through taxation … and taxation is theft that threatens to take that which gives their life meaning.
Charles Koch knows perfectly well that global climate change is real and is threatening the survival of our species. But addressing it might cost him some of that money that he’ll never be able to spend anyway because no one could spend that much money. And so he would rather see the Earth burn than feel the diminution and emasculation that comes from paying a fair tax rate.
Brachiator
@Citizen Alan:
Sadly, the GOP tax bill was such a sweet deal for the ultra rich that they don’t have to cheat as much anymore.
Also, the if the GOP retain the Senate, they will fight any budget that increases IRS resources.
SiubhanDuinne
@Bill Arnold:
I don’t like the “let me be clear” formulation. That makes it sound as though when he said “Democrats love terrorists,” he accidentally misspoke (or we misunderstood).
Nope. He said what he said. There’s nothing to “clarify.” Apologize by all means (and I’m glad he did), but don’t drape your apology in this “clarity” bullshit.
jl
@germy:
” Even Sanders? Or Warren? All this time I thought he’d jumped into the race to thwart those Wealth Tax advocates. ”
Bloomberg didn’t include any conditions. The news I’ve read said ‘the nominee’ full stop. There is plenty of hate and loathing there. But recent events show that Trump is willing to lurch into extremely dangerous foreign policy adventures and stunts for political reasons.
Bloomberg may also see that Trump may be extremely bad for business. Regional war in the Person gulf would be extremely bad for billionaires.
I note that news came out today that Trump decided to do the strike to keep some senators on his side for impeachment. See Josh Marshall twitter (joshtpm) from this morning.
Wonder if the news media celebs will start mentioning that issue, which to my mind has been pretty obvious from the beginning of his assassination stunt. I remember that has been very big topic for all the celeb media news stars whenever a Democratic takes a dramatic executive military action.
Or is Trump going full corrupt tin pot dictator mode in executing corrupt and very dangerous foreign military stunts for his personal benefit an IOKIYAR thing now too?
zhena gogolia
@Citizen Alan:
I feel this way too.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@Ruckus:
@Brachiator:
Color me skeptical. Yeah, accept his help for the general campaign along with the down ticket races, but I still don’t like billionaires being kingmakers.
As for not all billionaires being assholes, some may mean well, but wealth often brings with it arrogance and blinders.
zhena gogolia
FWIW
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@zhena gogolia:
Susan Collins’ word means nothing. She voted to confirm Justice Blackout Drunk McRapey. I think this is just optics for back home in Maine, where 50% of voters disapprove of her
Jeffro
@SiubhanDuinne: They say crazy stuff on Fox when speaking directly to their base, then throw out an ‘apologetic’ tweet or comment somewhere – it’s all part of the plan.
Rile up the rubes, but give ’em something to point to when Dems get (rightfully) inflamed about it. “Whuddya want, the guy apologized!” (wink wink)
Helps with the disinformation/confusion, and keeps the low info “independents” and occasional voters on the sidelines, instead of siding with the Dems
Fair Economist
@Jay:
Pretty sure it’s all three. If Bloomberg’s money plays a big role in defeating Trump, he’ll have a lot of influence with the elected Democrats. That’s the problem with the current campaign finance system – it’s inherently corrupting. And while it’s wrong, it’s still in force and Bloomberg intends to benefit from it.
We more or less have to accept his help, because you have to take all allies when fighting fascists.
I note, though, that he has not yet contributed money to Senate campaigns, and that’s where the critical fight is. Without the Senate, we can’t fix much of the damage Trump has caused (no repealing tax deform), and if we take the Senate, we will beat Trump and keep the House.
Barbara
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): Oh yes, definitely. Above all, she wants to keep her little perch where she can whine about how people are so mean to her.
Dorothy A. Winsor
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka):
I don’t know. I don’t have any faith in Susan Collins, but someone on twitter wondered if Pelosi’s sending the impeachment charges to the Senate was related to Collins’ claim. Pelosi is no fool.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl:
Even Baud.
Yutsano
@Brachiator:
I’m still in shock they allowed the modest increase in this last budget. With an emphasis on enforcement.
Jeffro
Btw OT but did anyone else hear that Neil Peart passed away on Tuesday? Wow.
jl
@Dorothy A. Winsor: Might well be the reason. Either Collins and other supposed but fake moderate GOP senators get witnesses and there is some fair process (I think unlikely). Or they chicken out, or are lying now in order to put a facade of keeping their oaths for the trial (more likely).
Either way, good to get them on public record before the trial.
MomSense
@MoxieM:
When I lived in a triple deckah there we called it slumavul, but it’s become very chi chi since then.
WaterGirl
@Barbara: @Mrs. D. Ranged in AZ:
Thanks to both of you for the correction. I thought that was a little out there for Susan Collins, they have all lost the plot so it’s hard to be too surprised by anything anymore.
My point may still be correct – what HE said likely did not poll well. I hate them all.
Brachiator
@Citizen Alan:
I hear you, but I think that facts get in the way. There are despicable people up and down society. Look at all the lower income dopes who support Trump and cheer him own.
I will grant that some wealthy people believe, somewhat reasonably, that their wealth lets them do whatever they want to whomever they want without repercussion. But again, I have seen people from every social class rationalize doing evil.
When I tutored about human evolution, I noted that homo sapiens are the only species that can have food and shelter comfortably provided for, and still go out and hurt others for fun or whatever reason.
I think what is more likely is that wealth allows people who are already evil more opportunity to do what they always wanted.
Also, I will quickly throw in, I know people who have become wealthy. Sometimes, their children, born into wealth, have compromised morals if not raised well. But their parents don’t change. Odd.
A former friend of mine believed that no one should be allowed to earn more than $300,000 (which was about close to what she and her husband had in money and assets). She also believed that the homeless should be euthanized to put them out of their misery. I found this appalling. But I am also cynical by nature and distrust the everyone’s motifs, even those who claim to care about society.
George Washington, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, JFK were all excessively wealthy. Are they exceptions to your rule? Hell, let’s look at Forbes list of the wealthiest people in the world. Please detail for each person the evil that they have done.
Of course, I would love to throw Rupert Murdoch, Charles Koch and a bunch of other wealthy people under the jail. But there would still be room for many more.
I understand that a general detestation of the rich is a unifying principle for many. And it has rhetorical uses. It feels good to demonize the ultra rich. They ain’t us. And I don’t want to take this easy satisfaction away from anyone. But real life is more complicated.
WaterGirl
@zhena gogolia: I believe they must informally refer to themselves as the Furrowed Brows Committee, or the FBC for short.
JustRuss
@zhena gogolia:
I’ll take Things That Don’t Exist for $1,000,000, Alex.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@Barbara:
She does a good job whining, doesn’t she? I still remember her whining about the nominee fund that was set up against her if she voted to confirm McRapey, calling it a “bribe”. She apparently hasn’t done anything legally about it.
@Dorothy A. Winsor:
I hope you’re right. Pelosi has shown she’s very savvy in the past
Sebastian
@Ruckus:
I am not sure (not being an expert in these things) but I seem to recall that there are also different rules regarding allowed content or what tv stations can refuse between candidates and non-candidates.
I imagine there are also limitations to prime time slots etc
Shana
Well, let’s hope he means it.
I know what you mean about grudges. My father, to his dying day, was still mad about stuff his older brother had done when my dad was 5. And his brother had been dead about 10 years at that point. Sheesh.
MoxieM
@MomSense: and how! I read that a Kennedy bought a single family for over a mil. I worked on a Historic DIstricts plan for the city, until they pulled the plug b/c one of the 3 agencies at City Hall wanted the pittance we were being paid. All tied up in the politics of the Green Line extension. Which is great, but Holy Moly the snake pit of politics!
Ruckus
@Citizen Alan:
He may know all about global warming and it’s causes, but I don’t think he gives one fuck. I have worked with one of his companies a while back and if the company is any indication of the owner he is a complete fucking asshole. And I agree about his views on money and him having a lot of it and not respecting the people that in the long run make that possible. Each of us.
Mnemosyne
@Citizen Alan:
I do think that there’s a difference between people who built their own businesses that made them wealthy — like Bloomberg — and people who inherited their wealth, like the Koch brothers. We really need to have a 100 percent inheritance tax over, day, $3 million in assets. Basically, nobody anywhere gets to inherit more than $3 million. If you can’t support yourself with that even though you had other privileges like a good education, then you’ve already shown that you shouldn’t have access to large amounts of money.
Mnemosyne
By the way, everyone who likes sneering at the idle rich (and who doesn’t?) will really enjoy the movie “Knives Out.” It’s a clever, twisty thriller in the Agatha Christie or “Columbo” tradition. Check it out!
lahke
@Mnemosyne: yes, loved it, saw it twice just to make sure that I didn’t miss any tricky bits. I do think that I spotted a plot hole.
Ruckus
@Brachiator:
Agreed but.
Money can be a major influence in life. For someone with not enough or someone with far more than they could spend. Life of course is “more civilized” now than when you had to hunt or farm to survive, or pay someone to do that for you. 6+ billion hunters or farmers in the world is not a reasonable concept in this world, so we had/have to create a way for people to earn a way to pay for food and shelter. Of course not everyone sees or understands that reality and they hoard money even if they “earned” it legitimately. We have to understand that the world isn’t as it was 150, 100 or even 50 yrs ago. This is different than it was for most over that 150 yrs ago. We had a monetary system of course but few ways to earn without the concept of getting food/shelter taking most of the time. Have we always had wealthy people in this country? Yes. Will that continue? Yes. But to have any kind of equality of life we have to have a better way of some having way too much and many not nearly enough. Progressive taxation is one answer. And far better than the other answers found throughout history. And right now we don’t have that, many very wealthy are not paying as high as people actually doing physical jobs. Money has become the driving force, not what is in any way done to deserve it.
SuzieC
@Brachiator: Does anyone know WHY Bloomberg hates Trump with the heat of a thousand white-hot supernovas? Because I do too and this makes me like Bloomberg. Not enough to vote for him but to welcome his participation.
To someone upthread who speculated that he might run indie if he loses the D primary, many state have “sore loser” laws which preclude this. I’m too lazy to look up Ohio’s right now but I believe we have one.
Ruckus
@Sebastian:
I believe you are correct.
However that does not change that how normal people see things and how very wealthy people see things can be two enormously different viewpoints. A lot of wealthy people think they are wealthy in all things human, not just the monetary bit. And they think that because they have something that most people will never have. And even if not every wealthy person sees it that way, which is quite likely, a lot of them do. Privilege is addictive and easily deniable. It’s a worse drug than heroin.
Brachiator
@Mnemosyne:
Thanks for the reminder. I want to try to check it out this weekend. I understand there are plans for a sequel.
I hear that Daniel Craig may have escaped James Bond typecasting with his role in the film.
ETA: Of course, on tv, “Columbo” and “Law and Order” liked to focus on wealthy or privileged folk who committed crimes. Lots of fun “Columbo” clips on YouTube.
SuzieC
https://ballotpedia.org/Sore_loser_laws_in_the_50_states
The Castle
@Brachiator:
Sure, there are SOBs in every social class.
But there is actually oodles of experimental evidence that the rich behave less ethically, more selfishly, and have less empathy than everyone else.
Some of it is that less ethical, more selfish, and less empathetic people have an easier time becoming rich. Some of it is that the mere fact of becoming rich makes people more of these things.
It’s interesting to me that what a century or even half century ago was widely believed – that great wealth was inherently corrupting – is now much more controversial. That says something about the Gilded Age in which we live.
Gin & Tonic, Duke of Tanqueray
@MoxieM: I always thought it was Meffa.
Gin & Tonic, Duke of Tanqueray
Always fun(?) to take the Blue Line out to ORD past the lines of cars going at a walking pace
Mnemosyne
@Brachiator:
I mean, it’s not deep, but it does a good job of keeping you guessing about what’s really going on. And Rian Johnson put together the perfect set of scenery-chewers.
As I understand it, Johnson is hoping to create a series of Benoit Blanc mysteries and make him the new Sherlock Holmes or Miss Marple. Hopefully he can!
Mnemosyne
@SuzieC:
As far as I know, Bloomberg thinks that Trump is an asshole, a poseur, and a fake billionaire, and he knows this because he’s seen Trump at close range for several decades. They’re in similar social circles in NYC.
FelonyGovt
@Ruckus: Friends of ours sold their company for many millions of dollars. Once the deal was reported, investment advisers, bankers etc. came out of the woodwork to kiss their asses. It changed them, into people who were no longer fun to be around. They really acted as though the money made them superior.
@Ruckus:
Brachiator
@Ruckus:
Yep. This is the heart of it. A person with not enough, with just enough, or with too much, can all become and do evil. It’s as 1 Timothy says:
The love of money is the root of all evils
Human beings have had spare time for hundreds of thousands of years. We know this from the archaeological record. We had extra time after getting food and shelter to make trinkets, to create art, to get into all kinds of trouble.
And there is a case to be made that civilization brought the ability to create and hoard great amounts of wealth, and also made possible great poverty and inequality.
Agree with you here. How we deal with this is the question and challenge, not whether we think that the ultra wealthy are bad people.
Brachiator
@The Castle:
I seriously doubt this. And I am always curious: what is the dollar amount tipping point that transforms someone into the callous wealthy? Is this amount adjusted for inflation.
I would love to see a video clip of a college athlete transforming into an amoral monster as soon as he signs a contract making him or her a multi-millionaire.
It’s funny. In the UK, especially, social status overlapped with, but did not always coincide with wealth. And certain forms of wealth were considered unacceptable. So, it was assumed by some that aristocrats were amoral, less empathetic, etc. compared to their social inferiors.
The poor were amoral, but sometimes this was inherent, and at other times because of their social condition.
And women were either inherently virtuous, or inherently defective.
Yeah, all kinds of crap was widely believed a century ago.
Today, some want to make a fetish of the grass roots, the ordinary Joe, unless they become Deplorables.
And so it goes.
Morzer
“billionaires shouldn’t elect presidents”
I am sure the Kochs and Mercers feel completely chastened and will slink off into the shadows in shame when they read this.