Scott Adams, Persuasion, and Hillary

Scott Adams, of Dilbert Fame, had for quite some time now been endorsing Hillary for President. 

As most of you know, I had been endorsing Hillary Clinton for president, for my personal safety, because I live in California. It isn’t safe to be a Trump supporter where I live. And it’s bad for business too.

But that has changed.

Lets look into the reasons. First, he flat out admits he doesn't know enough about event current issues, much less issues that have not yet arisen, to pick either one on the basis of their expertise. Hell - the only reason he had been endorsing the psychopathic Hillbot was because his writing on Trump was being taken as endorsement, and was resulting in threats, etc.

Weirdly, even though his "endorsement" of her ("for my safety") was a slap in the face, it worked, and the uproar died down. He explains why at one point - but it has to do with the fact of the endorsement, no matter how couched, being more important than why.

So, it came down to Hillary proposing something that would hurt him and his family:

Given the uncertainty about each candidate – at least in my own mind – I have been saying I am not smart enough to know who would be the best president. That neutrality changed when Clinton proposed raising estate taxes. I understand that issue and I view it as robbery by government.

First, he dings Hillary on bullshit. Remember how HC and her supporters ding Trump on having "no policy?"

Confiscation of Property: Clinton proposed a new top Estate Tax of 65% on people with net worth over $500 million. Her website goes to great length to obscure the actual policy details, including the fact that taxes would increase on lower value estates as well. See the total lack of transparency here, where the text simply refers to going back to 2009 rates. It is clear that the intent of the page is to mislead, not inform.

So don’t fall for the claim that Clinton has plenty of policy details on her website. She does, but it is organized to mislead, not to inform. That’s far worse than having no details.

Worse than no details. Let that sink in. He's very politely saying her web page that is supposed to make clear her position is nothing but superficial bullshit.

I call this a confiscation tax because income taxes have already been paid on this money. In my case, a dollar I earn today will be taxed at about 50% by various government entities, collectively. With Clinton’s plan, my remaining 50 cents will be taxed again at 50% when I die. So the government would take 75% of my earnings from now on.

This isn't the first time she's raised this. For those of us who were around in the early and mid 90's, in addition to pushing for ObamaCare beta and Imputed Income for tax purposes, she even then wanted to jack up capital gains and estate taxes. It's one reason why anyone who remembers the Clinton presidency but thinks he can't vote Trump because Trump isn't a "true" conservative is a moron. 

And imputed income? Let's say you were smart, and didn't buy more house than you could afford, or set aside more money to pay it off faster, and now had no mortgage. Hillary wanted the IRS to treat that money you were no longer spending on a rent or mortgage as taxable income, because most Americans had that money going to a roof over their heads, and you had it free and clear.

Except for the part where you worked your butt off or didn't buy more house than you could afford. 

3. Party or Wake: It seems to me that Trump supporters are planning for the world’s biggest party on election night whereas Clinton supporters seem to be preparing for a funeral. I want to be invited to the event that doesn’t involve crying and moving to Canada.

OK, that's just funny.

Most of the job of president is persuasion. Presidents don’t need to understand policy minutia. They need to listen to experts and then help sell the best expert solutions to the public. Trump sells better than anyone you have ever seen, even if you haven’t personally bought into him yet. You can’t deny his persuasion talents that have gotten him this far.

In summary, I don’t understand the policy details and implications of most of either Trump’s or Clinton’s proposed ideas. Neither do you. But I do understand persuasion. I also understand when the government is planning to confiscate the majority of my assets. And I can also distinguish between a deeply unhealthy person and a healthy person, even though I have no medical training. (So can you.)

So - go read the whole thing.