So if Mr. Alighieri was completely correct in in his views of the afterlife, at which level would you place Manchin and Sinema? I am thinking fourth, but perhaps only third level if one is in a certain live and let live mood. On the other hand, at what level might you place Trump?
It seems that now we might replace The Inferno with history books, and if you can assume they will be completely fair and just- capturing the time and motivations perfectly, where might any politician land according to their just merits? (*) Does any very progressive deserve a place in hell?
As much as I insist that I am an atheist, I still like parables as a way to convey lessons of morality and money and society as a whole. I do not recall the source of this ‘lesson’, but I have read quite a bit on money and personal finance (with some small overlap on economics), brain development and brain function, child development and childhood mental issues, with a small spattering of western philosophy. Since most here are better read than I am, someone will eventually pinpoint the source for me (and remind me I might have forgotten as much as I retain in my quest)
There is a game scientists play with innocents where money is found in different circumstances by more than one party. They were all just minding their own business when ten dollars (American) or One-Hundred Dollars or sometimes One-Thousand Dollars is found. They consult and if they agree (someone always has some slight advantage) they split the money as they agree. If one agrees and the other does not then one of them gets the whole amount, but if they both double cross when being asked by the authority which will hand out the actual money – then they both lose out and no one gets any money.
The thing Economists always remember that “civilians” do not is that it is always found money. If you walk away with ANYTHING, it is more than you had and more than you expected ten minutes ago. The interesting thing is how often one person would sacrifice any benefit at all in order to ruin the other persons gain. Before a one-third / two-thirds split almost every one will sabotage the deal. As I recall about forty/sixty is as big as it ever got. So someone who got forty dollars free with no effort would sacrifice that forty clams if they knew they were costing the other person sixty clams. It was small minded and petty and VERY personal. It was like the percentage of the total they were given was equal to their value as a human being. But the power to screw someone else over was always stronger than the power of having some benefit. And a reminder that no one was going to lose anything but something they didn’t know existed before. The smart move it was explained was always to take anything over nothing. Personally, I wish someone gave me forty dollars everyday and kept the other sixty — rather than receiving nothing but keeping the other for getting his or her sixty bucks. (In all honest I might be less enthusiastic about receiving forty bucks out of a grand- but I would still like to believe I would not be petty enough to want to hurt the other at a cost to myself.)
We are in a place where taking something is better than losing everything. Pass the bi-partisan bill and get as much as you can with the clean energy bill as it was laughingly named before. Then work on getting more in the future by showing the progress is working in real life!!
(*) A Visitor’s Guide to Dante’s Nine Circles of Hell | Penguin Random House
I must add an edit: Sam_Stone, I do appreciate your comments and think they should be weighed and measured and judged upon their merit. But they have convoluted the recent conversation which was something along the lines of “Hey lefties, what should we do now” and now is more in the course of international politics and all of human history.
I will thank you for putting our one sided discussion into a larger perspective and for reminding us that whatever happens in progressive circles there is a larger world we must encounter and live in.
I will add this however, I do not believe for a moment that either Sinema (my Senator) or Manchin, are living by their convictions or principles. I was and remain a fan of John McCain and believe that he did have principles (and occasionally wanted to fuck with Trump or some other enemy – not rival). But Manchin and Sinema are not supporting their constituents or their principles, they are taking the money and delivering the votes in a very transactional and cynical manner.