Well, do you know what socialism is? I mean really: I’m interested in hearing what you fear or like about it. Public Schools are good, right? Public Works- road maintenance, parks, electric. And public service like police and fire, courts, tax assessors- all of it to support We The People. And the places that privatized public services screwed us. The Prison system is the perfect example.
But we *are* a socialist country. The root word, social, refers to Society. We are tribal people. We do not do well on our own- isolated. And the US hasn’t fought an honest war since 1945. I have so many younger friends who enlisted and served tour after tour in Afghanistan and Iraq. Some died there, others died after they returned. What does the Middle East War (2003 -present) have to do with our way of life? What were my friends fighting for?
I seriously welcome the opportunity to learn from you; to share our ideas.
Let’s start with “socialist.” For 17 of my 32 years working I taught public school. I served the public. I’ve been in the trenches of service to my country. Instead of a rifle I carried a baton, lesson plans, and an iPod. But service just the same.
Are services that benefit the whole society a bad thing or a good thing and how are we defining “social”?

New York Times archive: The Reagan Boom - Greatest Ever
JAN. 17, 1990

Almost everyone knows that the greatest depression the U.S. ever had was in the 1930's. It was known as the Great Depression, and its infamy merits a separate section in economics textbooks. But what was its counterpart? When did our greatest economic expansion occur?

We just had it. And it is still expanding, setting new records with each passing month.

We don't know whether historians will call it the Great Expansion of the 1980's or Reagan's Great Expansion, but we do know from official economic statistics that the seven year period from 1982 to 1989 was the greatest, consistent burst of economic activity ever seen in the U.S. In fact, it was the greatest economic expansion the world has ever seen - in any country, at any time.

The two key measures that mark a depression or expansion are jobs and production. Let's look at the records that were set. Creation of jobs. From November 1982, when President Ronald Reagan's new economic program was beginning to take effect, to November 1989, 18.7 million new jobs were created. It was a world record: Never before had so many jobs been created during a comparable time period. The new jobs covered the entire spectrum of work, and more than half of them paid more than $20,000 a year. As total employment grew to 119.5 million, the rate of unemployment fell to slightly over 5 percent, the lowest level in 15 years. Creation of wealth.

The amount of wealth produced during this seven year period was stupendous - some $30 trillion worth of goods and services. Again, it was a world record. Never before had so much wealth been produced during a comparable period. According to a recent study, net asset values - including stocks, bonds and real estate - went up by more than $5 trillion between 1982 and 1989, an increase of roughly 50 percent.

There are other important measures. Steady economic growth. As we begin the decade of the 1990's, we are in our 86th straight month of economic growth - a new record for peacetime, five months longer than the wartime growth of World War II and only 23 months short of the wartime record set during the Vietnam War in the 1960's. Most experts now predict that it will last right through 1990, and perhaps beyond.
Continue reading the main story

Income tax rates, interest rates and inflation.

Under President Reagan, top personal income tax rates were lowered dramatically, from 70 percent to 28 percent. This policy change was the prime force behind the record breaking economic expansion. Interest rates and inflation also fell sharply and, so far, have stayed comfortably low - a further indication of the power and pervasiveness of Mr. Reagan's economic policies. The stock market. Perhaps the key indicator of an economy's booms and busts is the stock market, the bottom line economic report card. And here the record has been striking. During the period from 1970 to 1982, the stock market barely moved. The Standard & Poor's index of 500 stocks inched up about 35 percent during that entire period. But starting in late 1982, just as Reaganomics began to work, the stock market took off like a giant skyrocket. Since then, the Standard & Poor's index has soared, reaching a record high of 360, almost triple what it was in 1982.

There were other consequences of the expansion. Annual Federal spending on public housing and welfare, and on Social Security, Medicare and health all increased by billions of dollars. The poverty rate has fallen steadily since 1983.

When you add up the record of the Reagan years, and the first year of President Bush - during which he has faithfully continued Mr. Reagan's economic policies - the conclusion is clear, inescapable and stunning. We have just witnessed America's Great Expansion.

The Reagan economic expansion was not perfect and we will never have one that is. The Federal budget deficits were too high and still are, too many Federal regulations lay unreformed and the trade deficit is worrisome.

In fact, the Reagan expansion may not have been the best economic expansion in history, for every economic expansion must be judged by many criteria. But if we look at the sheer size and immensity of it, at its scope and power, then it cannot be denied that it was the greatest.

The full impact of the powerful economic recovery that President Reagan launched during the 1980s is still unfolding.

Mr. Reagan's expansion provided the financial resources to allow the U.S. to build up the combat capability of its defense forces and to begin blazing the new trail for a protective missile system. This, in turn, convinced the Soviet rulers they could never defeat the U.S., and today the Soviet Union and the U.S. are busily engaged in nuclear disarmament as peace breaks out in country after country throughout the world.

Equally important, it proved beyond doubt to all (except perhaps for a handful of left-wing faculty members in our best universities) that capitalism is superior to Socialism and C*******m. Our economy is the guiding beacon for all those countries that are ripping apart the ruthless collectivist regimes that ruined the lives of their people for so long.

One thing the Marxists got right: Economics is a powerful determining factor of history. But Marxists never dreamed it would be the economics of Ronald Reagan and all those capitalists that would prevail in the end.

Yes. This is far from the simple conclusion the first study reached that if you are a liberal you have a normal sized amygdala (how do they know what is normal), and if a conservative you have an a******lly large amygdala. None of the studies can come close to covering all the possible variables. But the one dealing with political leanings would not have accepted by my high school science teacher for being so flawed. (By flawed I don't even mean conclusions but by not doing anything to try to isolate variables.

No this is too big for me and I am just a layman science (biology/genetics) buff.

I got through a portion of it . so much bull dung I thought I was going to drown in crap . if President Trump is a r****t because he wants immigrants to come into this country legally . then the writer of this article may be a r****t . he has NEVER made a statement to keep muslims out of America . he does not deny any Hispanic from coming to America . just do it the proper way . -----regs. that were cut were usually doubled or tripled regs. concerning the same point . ----tax cuts , yes he did cut taxes on the corp. side . he also cut out some of the deductibles . I know I lost several deductibles . there was also a tax cut for working people . and a increase of some deductibles for children . ---- if per chance the far , far ,right v**ed for Trump , then I would venture to say that sense the far , far left v**ed for obumer, then he is a r****t . --- open boarders ? why is it that the dems. and the left want open boarders? to build a new v**er base ? they say it is immoral , to not ecept others . yet when President Trump , suggested sending them to sactuary cities and states . oh no you cant do that . ------ reality TV. syndrome I don't watch that crap . I v**ed for Donald J. Trump , BECAUSE he seemed to be the only candidate who gave a ____ about our country . the people who live ,work , protect , serve and love this country . not some run of the mill political figure head to help bring about the end our country . --------head dr. have done some fantastic work . but I also blame them as part of the down fall of the American society . our prisons are full of young men and women . who have been brought up in households where there was no or very little discipline . thinking that they can do as they darn well please and to _ _ _ _ with what any one thinks or says . no consequences for their actions . now their sitting in prison because of that . I could go on and on arguing with that persons line of BULL DUNG . but it would be a enormous waste of time .

Depends on what age the person is. The amygdala grows larger with age. And the left and right do not seem to grow at the same rate. There is a definite difference in growth between a man's and woman's with one developing the right more and the other the left (I'd have to look up which is which). A person's experiences might also effect the rate of growth if you look at the studies showing children who have experienced trauma have larger amygdalas. Maybe the more rapid growth under trauma is like a muscle developing more when used more. A couch potato having less muscle than a weight lifter is perfectly understandable. Maybe the same is the case with the amygdala that exercising it causes it to grow faster. This would correlate with the more rapid and effective response to potential threats by those who face those potential threats more frequently, which amygdala activity to threats documented under MRIs has been associated with. By potential threat I don't just mean attacks but dealing with situations where poor or slow choices can put you in danger or give poor performance outcomes such as with the taxi drivers or many sports. I would bet that if amygdalas of race car drivers were scanned under MRIs, they would be larger than the average for their age.

So there is no standard size across the board. Again if comparing it to muscles, what would the standard size of biceps of humans? Wouldn't you say that would depend on what age, sex, and activity of the person?

The larger sized amygdala of cab drivers would fit right in with what I said about pattern recognition. An experienced cab driver would certainly not logically solve how to negotiate every shift in traffic as it happens.

My post is not taken directly from any single abstract, but is my conclusions based on the findings of a number of studies. I first became interested after reading an article about differences in the brains of liberals and conservatives. I tracked down the study and read it. While I don't agree with their conclusions, and find the way they structured the study to be wanting; there is some good data to be found. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/130213173131.htm

Then I sought out a more scientific abstract which didn't appear to be done with preconceived political bias. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/

And here is a study on the size differences of right and left amygdala, and other brain structures. While nothing in the study mentions political ideology, I noted that the articles regarding size differences of liberals vs conservatives described the same differences as this one for age. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3633516/

While this study was not focused on political ideology, it is very useful as it indicates a definite correlation between psychological differences in people and the differences in their amygdala. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28689329

This article is not an abstract but an article written by a top pioneering neuroscientist regarding his work and the common misinterpretations. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/i-got-mind-tell-you/201508/the-amygdala-is-not-the-brains-fear-center

Within a Wikipedia article on the amygdala, I've copied out two snippets I find interesting. "Social interaction
Amygdala volume correlates positively with both the size (the number of contacts a person has) and the complexity (the number of different groups to which a person belongs) of social networks.[64][65] Individuals with larger amygdalae had larger and more complex social networks. The amygdala is responsible for facial recognition and allows others to respond appropriately to different emotional expressions.[66] They were also better able to make accurate social judgments about other persons' faces.[67] The amygdala's role in the analysis of social situations stems specifically from its ability to identify and process changes in facial features. It does not, however, process the direction of the gaze of the person being perceived.[68][69]

The amygdala is also thought to be a determinant of the level of a person's emotional intelligence. It is particularly hypothesized that larger amygdalae allow for greater emotional intelligence, enabling greater societal integration and cooperation with others.[70]"

And
"Political orientation
Amygdala size has been correlated with cognitive styles with regard to political thinking. A study found that "greater liberalism was associated with increased gray matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex, whereas greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala." These findings suggest that the volume of the amygdala and anterior cingulate gyrus may be associated with an individual's ability to tolerate uncertainty and conflict.[86]"

So a larger amygdala allows for greater social interactions and is associated with conservatism. Of course that is extremely simplistic, but not inaccurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala

I can't remember where else I've read studies regarding the amygdala. I know there was another regarding size and age broken down into a number of age groups, yet not as in depth as the one I included. But I'm afraid I've misplaced the site.