Damn. Figured you would be too to take any new tricks seriously. Nothing was ignored in mine. Your effort to distract noted. However, to get back on track: You ignore the connection between what i just gave you, and your man.
The Men Who Gave Trump His Brutal Worldview "Trump and the Aristocracy of Fraud" [...] 'The Most Dangerous Man in the World’: Trump Is Violent, Immature and Insecure, Psych Experts Say https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=134958274 [...] As federal investigators had discovered, the elder Trump had collected an extra $1.7 million in rent—equivalent to $15 million today—before beginning to pay back his low-cost government loan. He was able to do this because a bureaucrat named Clyde Powell approved the paperwork. Powell, who had never been paid more than a modest government salary, had mysteriously amassed a small fortune. (While it was clear Powell accepted bribes, the sources were never officially identified.) In addition to collecting the extra rent, Trump paid himself a substantial architect’s fee. And he charged inflated rents based on an estimate of construction costs that was far greater than what he actually spent. All of this was legal, even if it did victimize taxpayers, veterans, and other renters.
Like his father, Donald J. Trump seems to be a patriotic American, but like his father he's also someone who never misses a chance to bend the rules. (Fred was not inhibited by patriotism when it came to exploiting federal housing programs, even those devoted to veterans. To him the profit motive was supreme.) By the accounts of his children and friends, Donald appears to be a good and devoted father, perhaps a somewhat more attentive one than his own dad—as well as grandfather to eight children, the latest of which was added to the Trump dynasty this week by his daughter Ivanka, who gave birth to her third child. But Trump’s basic philosophy of living, instilled by his fiercely ambitious, workaholic father, enforced by the tough-as-nails coach at his military high school and honed over a lifetime of ruthless deal-making, is fairly simple and severe: Life is mainly combat; the law of the jungle rules; pretty much all that matters is winning or losing and rules are made to be broken. It is largely a materialistic worldview; even the brand of Christianity Trump was raised in was fairly materialistic, the product of pastor Norman Vincent Peale, who wrote: “Learn to pray big prayers. God will rate you according to the size of your prayers."
Thus, for those of us who have followed Trump’s career from the start, the worldview he has trotted out to the public is no surprise. Some people seem shocked that he embraces torture without compunction; openly admires the suppression of freedom by Chinese and Russian dictators; and shows little grasp of ethics, governance or constitutionalism, as evidenced by his insistence that the U.S. openly engage in war crimes (by killing the families of terrorists). Or that he often seems ignorant of history and the economic benefits of free trade, dismissing the U.S. alliance and trading system that won the Cold War as “obsolete,” calling regularly for punitive tariffs and insisting over and over again, “We never win anymore,” as if trade were a zero-sum game (which it is not). Or that he relishes the idea that people at his rallies punch each other, suggesting that his supporters “knock the crap out of” any disrupters.
But, as Trump's biographer, I can tell you these views fundamentally define the man. And if you’re looking—or perhaps hoping—for something more, you shouldn’t expect to find it. If you are seeking reassurance that the man who could be the next president of the United States possesses a coherent political philosophy or ethical foundation other than this rather pre-Enlightenment code of behavior—that he subscribes to the ideals of the Founders, or has studied and understood American democracy, human rights and our Constitutional system—you won’t get it.
Rare if not unique in American politics, Trump’s views and provocations are consistent with his biography. Trump first became a public figure in the 1970s when, in response to charges of housing discrimination, his lawyer compared federal officials to the Gestapo. From this point on, Trump consistently showed he was willing to use threats, insults and deception not unlike the kinds of things he says about his political rivals today—if it meant getting what he wanted. His view of life resembled the Hobbesian nightmare of a “war of all against all” with little regard for the social contract that makes for peaceful communities and countries.
And clearly Trump’s message is resonating with voters, which tells us something about many of our fellow Americans, and the cult of success that is part of our national lore. The candidate’s words, streamed out of his consciousness with few connecting ideas, have the effect of little electric shocks that stimulate fear and rage—invite those feelings into the open and legitimize them among his supporters, who appear to be getting bolder in their own responses.
[...]
Fred Trump was a real estate developer who established a web of political connections with cash. (Though he was a Republican, the donations were about currying favor, not advancing ideals, so they went to the Democrats who controlled things in New York City.) Father Trump used his relationships with politicians to access government programs, which offered subsidized financing to developers of apartment buildings. Clever lawyers helped him create a variety of corporations so he could violate the spirit, if not the letter of the regulations that governed these programs and wring maximum profit out of the taxpayers.
For the most part Fred practiced his manipulations out of public view. But when his turn before the U.S. Senate committee investigating housing abuses came, Fred Trump admitted his manipulation of the program even as he said he saw nothing wrong in it (prefiguring some of the things his son would later say about his own practices, like political donations). Any suggestion that he had cheated was “very wrong, and it hurts me,” said an indignant Trump, who also complained of the “untold damage to my standing and reputation” caused by the committee. Trump was almost alone in taking such a publicly self-justifying position. In their turns before the committee other builders had refused to answer questions because they didn’t want to incriminate themselves. One of the men had a heart attack three hours after his testimony. .. with more .. and others .. https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=169466901
You also ignore the fact that humans do evolve. And with humans so do societies. Cultures. See
What Is Rankism and Why Do We “Do” It?
No doubt Trump is. "‘Jealous’ Trump mocked as a ‘self-loathing manbaby with crippling insecurities’ after latest Bloomberg rant"
All the evidence supports it. Trump has been a crass primal predator throughout his working life.
Robert W. Fuller Ph.D. Somebodies and Nobodies
Rankism is what "somebodies" do to people they think are "nobodies."
Posted Feb 17, 2010
Rankism is an assertion of superiority. It typically takes the form of putting others down. It's what "somebodies" do to people they think are "nobodies."
It turns out that rankism is the source of most manmade suffering. So, if we could get rid of it, we would be a lot happier. Let me explain.
Before you conclude that rankism is human nature — that we're like the apes, and they do it, so we have no choice — and dismiss the possibility of overcoming it, consider this list of specific kinds of "put-downs" that, not long ago, were deemed cool, but have now become a surefire way to embarrass yourself:
1. Racism: Whites putting and keeping non-whites down
2. Sexism: Males keeping females at a disadvantage
3. Ageism: Patronizing the young, condescending to the elderly
4. Anti-Semitism: Discriminating against Jews
5. Classism: Putting down people based on differences in class (more prevalent in former aristocracies like Britain than in America, but also known here)
6. Homophobia: Heterosexuals demeaning gays and lesbians
7. Ableism: Humiliating people with disabilities
8. Colonialism: Subordinating and exploiting another society or nation
9. Workplace and schoolyard bullying; sexual harassment, child abuse, and domestic violence; corporate, bureaucratic, and political corruption
The list goes on. Once you have a word for it, you see rankism everywhere.
Although all of these familiar "isms" persist, none of them has the force it did 50 years ago. Most of them are now regarded as distinctly uncool, even grounds for dismissal.
The burden of proof, which formerly fell on "nobodies," now falls on "somebodies." That's historical change, and that's why it is not utopian to think that we might be able to give up putting people down — and not just people bearing a targeted trait such as color, gender, age, class, religion, sexual orientation, or disability — but give up putting people down period. For any reason.
You're probably thinking, What if they deserve to be put down? What if they have screwed up?
Even then, being put down is not what's needed, nor is it justified. Correction, maybe; put-downs, never. Indignity and humiliation have no place in human relations. That is where the above sequence of no-longer-legitimate putdowns is heading. That is how humans are evolving behaviorally. https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=153368479
Most all of us still do it when we feel it is justified. When we really do feel it is deserved. Personally i would hate to see the pretense of politeness, which you have cultivated to cover your coldness, become the norm in any place.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
