Here’s how Stoermer describes Liberal Nationalism and the role it plays in american politics:
There’s a belief system that combines two things — first, that change must happen through official channels (voting, courts, proper debate), and second, that this procedural faith is wrapped in American exceptionalism. The system isn’t just legitimate. It is sacred because America itself is exceptional.
Now here’s where it gets complicated. Klein says the project is “the American experiment.” Newsom builds on that. Kirk said the same things, but meant something completely different. Kirk’s American experiment would destroy Klein’s and Newsom’s — he wanted to dismantle multiracial democracy, restrict voting, and return to what he called the real Founders’ vision. That would end everything Klein and Newsom claim to value.
Yet Klein’s nationalism enables Kirk’s. By treating Kirk’s anti-democratic project as legitimate discourse within the American experiment, by claiming they share common ground, Klein validates extremism as just another voice in the great American conversation.
And I keep wondering: Does the white Christian nationalist movement understand something about liberal nationalism that we don’t? Do they realize that as long as they frame their goals in terms of the Constitution, the Founders, and the American experiment, individuals like Klein will always find common ground with them?
I found other notable liberal figures saying similar things while perusing twitter. Notably senator John Fetterman recently insisted that americans (sorry, I refuse to capitalize demonyms. Sue me) should stop calling Trump an autocrat and pleaded for toning down the anti-Trump rhetoric. To me this attitude plays right into MAGA’s hands. This is the kind of stuff that whitewashes bigotry and helps reactionaries move the Overton window further right.
I would venture that in a similar situation, on this side of the pond we would be out on the streets, striking the economy to a screeching halt. But in the US, there seems to be this nationalist bootlicking mentality that prevents people from even considering direct action, simply because they believe the system will somehow fix itself and everything will be honky dory in the end.
I can’t help but think the US of A was never truly the haven of freedom we were told it was. And as much as I appreciate the comparably stronger fighting spirit of the working class here, I’m not sure it will be enough to resist the rise of the far right here in Europe either, propped up by the ever influential american politics. I’m a pessimist, so please give me hope, or don’t. Thoughts, please?
Please report to your nearest facility for reprogramming. You have been observed consuming the wrong media, and your professors are on a List. Oh, and Up the Constitution.
keiths,
I don’t think your questions/assertions move the dialogue forward in any productive way. I see some productivity when you and Eric talk so carry on.
colewd:
They’d be quite productive in showing you trying and failing to justify the invasion and the coverup, which is precisely why you don’t want to answer them.
I don’t see how your unquestioning acceptance of every last Trump action as justified and reasonable advances any dialogue, to be fair.
Unquestioning acceptance of everything that Trump says and does is common ground. If you do not accept the common ground, you are not moving the dialogue forward in any productive way.
These guys refuse to deal with any facts. Has colewd acknowledged that Trump does not know (or that colewd himself does not know) what tariffs do and what tariffs even are? Has colewd acknowledged that Trump lied about making peace deals? Has colewd acknowledged that the “I need 11000 votes” phone call was election theft and Jan6 2021 was a coup attempt by Trump? Does colewd acknowledge a further slump in job creation numbers even after Trump replaced the person who reports the numbers? Can colewd say how much fraud, waste and abuse has DOGE uncovered and saved? And so on and so forth.
If you want to stay rational, you should demand obvious facts as the common ground. Else they will draw you down to their level of idiocy and beat you with experience. Of course, they think they have already beaten you anyway by virtue of Trump being president again – you are just upset that Trump is fulfilling his promises! The victory is in that Trump is shining bright like the Second Coming of Christ and this triggers the libs!
Allan Miller,
You’re badgering a candidate in his last term. This is not going to solve the problem that Dems are facing. Trump is not the long term problem. A viable campaign in which sensible policies and a real leader is what’s needed.
The problem to solve is how do the Dems become relevant again because right now they have no power and the situation is getting worse. Trump is a symptom and not the cause of the Dems downfall. Eric appears to get this.
colewd, to Allan:
He’s a president, not a candidate, and why on earth should a president be exempt from criticism during his last term? (If it is his last term. The fact that that’s even a question is yet another reason to criticize him.)
When has Allan, a UK citizen, indicated that his goal is to solve the Democrats’ “problem”?
And we all know that short term problems don’t count. House on fire? Don’t sweat it. In the long run, you’ll be living somewhere else.
Why this fixation on the Democrats? (That’s a rhetorical question: it’s because you can’t defend your Dear Leader and keep looking for ways to change the subject.)
Trump is a clear and present danger, not just to the US but to the world. Of course we’re criticizing him. Look at the damage he’s already caused, in less than a year. We’re in for three more years of this thanks to you and your fellow Trump voters, who irresponsibly put this man in the Oval Office despite his obvious unfitness for office.
Here’s a suggestion. Whenever we point out something vile or moronic that Trump has said, pause and ask yourself: “How would I have reacted if Obama had said something like that?” When we point out some horrible thing he’s done, pause and ask yourself: “How would I have reacted if Biden had done something like that?”
Answer those questions honestly and you will be staring your own hypocrisy in the face. Then ask yourself: “Do I really want to be a hypocrite?”
PS “Badger” doesn’t mean what you think it does.
keiths,
What is your end game with your badgering strategy? It appears you don’t like the conservative platform and now you are stuck with no clear way to change the lack of power liberals have in this country.
Do you remember the definition of insanity? Keep doing the same thing and hoping for a different result.
The last two local candidates I supported were democrats who were hard working capable people. Where are the hard working capable democrats at the state and national level?
No, I’m badgering you! You’re hanging around the debate, without really saying anything, beyond how everyone but you is brainwashed.
As I’ve said, don’t give a crap about the Dems, not being American and all. Trump’s awfulness stands independent of any alternatives. Your unwillingness to voice even a whimper of disapproval is frankly weird. No other politician is so Teflon-coated. I can slag off the people I vote for without a qualm. But MAGAs circle the wagons.
While people like you swallow the hateful rhetoric against the Left, see nothing wrong in gathering the Generals and suggesting they take out your own citizens, or fail to acknowledge concern at overreach, then America will remain fucked. It’s not up to the Dems to unfuck it.
I doubt there is any policy that a Dem could offer that would make you cast your vote against Trump, in a hypothetical runoff.
Can you suggest one?
colewd,
You still don’t understand the verb ‘badger’. Look it up. I’m not badgering Trump, I’m lambasting him.
Just give up on trying to change the subject and deflect attention from Trump. It hasn’t worked, and it isn’t going to.
Says the guy who has been trying to change the subject for four months now, failing each time, but always trying again.
As for me, I’m not hoping for a different result. We’re criticizing Trump and backing up our claims. You’re utterly failing to defend him, and instead of trying to refute our arguments, you’re attacking us and failing at that too. We’re succeeding and you’re failing, so why would I want that to change?
The only thing I would change, if I could, would be to inject some courage into you so that you’d address our arguments instead of running away from them. It would make the discussion more interesting. But that’s out of my control. It’s up to you to gin up some courage. I can’t help with that.
It seems like in USA “independent voter” means voting for Trump completely independent of policy choices and policy actions on all sides, no matter what policies Dems may suggest or do and no matter what policies Trump enacts. No matter if they are even policies or something else, political theatre and overreach, undermining the constitution and the economy, incompetence and corruption, independents vote for Trump independent of all that.
All three branches of government are in the hands of Repubs right now, yet somehow the government shut down. Doesn’t the fact that Repubs with all three branches in their possession were unable to prevent a shutdown indicate that they are not really working? I mean, they sure as hell make it look like they are busy, but this is clearly not focused on ensuring good governance.
Moreover, Trump himself has in his comments on occasion of earlier government shutdowns said that the president is to blame for that. Trump said in 2013, regarding Obama, “A government shutdown falls on the president’s lack of leadership. I mean, problems start from the top and they have to get solved from the top. A shutdown means the president is weak.”
Yes, Obama was weak – he did not have all the branches of government. Trump is in a strong position – he has all three branches. So, who is working hard and for what purpose?
No, we are not on the same page. Namely, you are not on any page at all.
The problem is not the downfall of the Dems. The problem is the fascist shift towards the personality cult of Trump by Repubs and I understand very well why in a two-party system Dems hesitated to address this decisively, and this failure in turn indicates a larger problem with the entire buildup of USA. In a normal country, i.e. a multi-party democracy, the party that makes a failed coup gets banned, usually forever. In USA, banning one party means that voters will have the choice of just one other party, i.e. it would become a single-party country, which is a bad look. Given the choice between two bad looks – a single-party country and an unpunished insurrection – Dems hesitated.
Insurrection is not just a party problem. At its core the cause of it is the clique who arranges the insurrection, in this case the Repubs, and the normal way to deal with it is to punish the clique. The duty of punishing the insurrection is not of Dems alone, but of the government institutions as a whole, most importantly of the judicial system. The judicial system is supposedly more or less independent of the parties. But the judicial system failed totally and the insurrection was left unpunished. All this – the incapacity of the judicial system, continued personality cult of Trump, the fact that he became the president again, signifying the crumbling of the entire constitutional order – is not fixed by making Dems relevant again. Any third-world dump of a country has great difficulties in digging itself out of the hole and USA’s difficulties in this are far bigger because it is a far bigger country.
For a small start, it would help if you personally would renounce your cultism and begin identifying elements of reality on the basis of facts. But as a quick initial fix for the whole country, it would help a lot to get rid of Trump immediately and keep him out of any position of responsibility and trust until EOL.
Erik:
More Americans blame the Republicans than the Democrats, which is good (and accurate). The two polls I’ve seen break it down like this: The NPR/Marist poll has 38% blaming Republicans, 27% blaming Democrats, and 31% blaming both parties. The Washington Post has 47% blaming Trump and the Republicans, 30% blaming Democrats, and 23% unsure.
I wonder how many people are buying the lie being spread by Republican leaders (including Trump and Vance) that Democrats are pushing for healthcare for illegal immigrants. Did you fall for it, Bill?
Trump’s not one for consistency. He once said
…and then proceeded to take the Fifth 450 times while being deposed for the Trump Organization civil lawsuit.
The Democrats couldn’t have banned the Republicans. It wasn’t in their power.
The only time the judicial system per se really failed was when Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, dismissed the classified documents case on the bogus grounds that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional. The other failures were the DOJ’s fault (and in the case of the Georgia case, the district attorney’s fault). I don’t know how other countries handle this, but having the DOJ as part of the executive branch is a major flaw in the American system, because it allows the president to kill any prosecutions against himself.
It’s going to take something major to jolt Bill out of his stupor, if that ever happens. He is deep, deep, deep in the cult. The cognitive dissonance must be extreme. To be that enamored of the Dear Leader, yet utterly unable to defend him, can’t feel good.
Allan Miller,
I am interested to see how he does over the next 3 years. Do you think you have a good sense of what it takes to move US policy forward over the next 3 years? How do we measure success?
No idea. But I would not regard the elimination of plurality of political thought ‘ make no mistake, that’s where this is heading – as in any way a good thing.
colewd:
The only thing that could turn the next three years into a success for Trump would be a brain transplant. For the rest of the world, success will be seeing him fail in his autocratic goals, like violating the Constitution and serving a third term.
Serious question: do you want America to remain an actual democracy, or are you comfortable with the idea of a dictatorship under Trump?
keiths,
I think your assertion is not realistic and based on propaganda.
If you don’t like his level of power being built in the executive branch it is because the opposing party is leaderless and in deep trouble. Being a Brit I know this is not your issue but the Trump is Hitler strategy is failing miserably.
Do you have any idea what the American Democratic Party stands for?
It is not an assertion, it’s a question, viz:
I would have thought a relatively easy question to answer, but I may have over-estimated you again.
keiths:
colewd:
As Jock notes, it’s a question, not an assertion, and it isn’t even a loaded question. It doesn’t assert anything about Trump’s desires or intentions. (Yes, I do believe that Trump would like to be a dictator (remember this?), but my question doesn’t assume that). I’m simply asking: given a choice between either maintaining a democracy in America or having Trump as a dictator, would you be comfortable with the latter? As an American citizen, your answer ought to be easy and automatic. The fact that it isn’t is disturbing.
What I don’t like is his abuses of power, which we have thorougly documented here and which you’ve been helpless to rebut, since the evidence is on our side.
Two strikes. I'm an American who lives in California and I've made no secret of that. I've also never claimed that "Trump is Hitler", although I have pointed out that his unconscionable foreign aid cuts are projected to cause 14 million deaths over the next five years. How do you feel about that? Gung ho, as long as your portfolio isn’t affected?
Yes. Now stop trying to change the subject.
colewd,
l repeat:
There are also some questions waiting for you in the other thread (here and here).
Different from JD Vance who has, way back. Did JD Vance fall for radical leftist propaganda back then?
What happened was that JD Vance recognised the fascist traits of Trump and liked it! Vance is now perfectly okay with it, ready to continue to pursue fascism if Trump happens to croak.
Know your history, colewd. Different from you, I don’t do factless propaganda. Facts don’t care about your brainwash.
Looks like I have to help you out by reminding you of the multiple times that the SCOTUS has issued unconstitutional decisions, such as the absolute impunity ruling and forcing Trump stay on ballot in states that wanted to remove him from the ballot on grounds of insurrection. These are times when SCOTUS set the example for lower courts to fail in upholding the law and keep failing on purpose.
By now it should be a standard observation that the judicial system per se has failed. Following the pattern of SCOTUS decisions of late, say since the absolute impunity ruling, it can be noted that the only times that SCOTUS rules unfavourably for Trump are the times that Trump challenges SCOTUS authority or some recent SCOTUS ruling directly. In every other instance, namely cases stemming from lower courts, SCOTUS always rules favourably for Trump, including even in the case of nationwide injunctions, which is about the authority of the judicial branch as a whole. SCOTUS is fine with letting Trump undermine the entire judicial system, except the authority of the supreme justices personally. Thus the American judicial system, per se, and in its totality, has failed.
I presume this was directed at me, given the ‘Brit’ comment, but “Trump.is Hitler” is a vast oversimplification. Not atypical of MAGA to be simplistic, of course… so let’s show ‘propaganda’ back to its regular seat in the thread. No-one could possibly have a rational basis for their position, right? Right?
There are many concerning aspects to Trump’s governance. But as long as he’s not actual Hitler, they’re absolutely fine, I guess. And that is the real problem. It has nothing to do with the effectiveness or otherwise of the opposition. It is all to do with the wilful blindness of his supporters. The opposition is up against that.
I note that you did not answer my question regarding what possible Democrat policy might make you cross the floor. It’s not really about the Democrats, is it?
Erik,
I absolutely agree that the Supreme Court has screwed up multiple times. I wasn’t trying to exonerate the judicial system for everything Trump-related — just pointing out that regarding the actual Trump prosecutions — the documents case, the Stormy Daniels case, the Jan 6 case, and the Georgia case — the only judicial failure was Aileen Cannon’s dismissal of the documents case. Everything else was the fault of the DOJ or, in the Georgia case, the district attorney.
I heard confirmation today that the Georgia case is still alive, though there’s a deadline approaching for them to appoint a new prosecutor. Glenn Kirschner pointed out that it may actually be beneficial for them to let the deadline pass because if they do, the judge will dismiss the case without prejudice, meaning that it can be refiled later. They’ll have to re-indict, which means going before the grand jury again, but the advantage is that they’ll be able to introduce any evidence that has surfaced since the first indictment, which might lead to more serious charges the second time around.
The ‘propaganda’ dodge is genuinely absurd. It’s down to things that he actually says and does. I saw his words to the Generals. I’ve seen him demonise the Left on Truth Social and in speeches. Shut down ‘unfavourable’ media, ignore the courts, go after enemies, pardon cop-beaters, grift on company time, lie.
colewd has seen all the same things. His conclusion is that Trump is a choir boy compared to keiths. I will not speculate today what colewd may have used to arrive at such a conclusion.
Allan Miller,
Policies like those of Bill Clinton where how we spend money was useful and helped the voters both short and long term. Policies like Trumps where ending wars is a priority.
Allan, to colewd:
Allan, later:
colewd:
As we speak, the Democrats are promoting healthcare policies that fit your description perfectly. They want to help Americans both short- and long-term by reversing the Republican cuts to Medicaid, which will result in 10 million more uninsured Americans, and by extending the Affordable Care Act subsidies, without which premiums will more than double, on average.
Republicans are fighting hard against the Democrats, to the point that they’re lying about what the Democrats are proposing. That includes Trump, Vance, and Johnson, who are all lying and saying that the Democrats want government-funded healthcare for illegal immigrants. It’s a brazen lie, so it fits nicely with the ethos of the Republican party under Trump.
Your Dear Leader is lying in order to block a policy that would help Americans. Whose side are you on in regard to this issue? Are you glad that Trump is lying about this and that he wants to deprive Americans of healthcare?
I’ll hazard a guess: you support Trump on this, and it doesn’t matter to you that he’s lying and trying to hurt Americans. Your claimed desire for policies that help Americans is just a pretense, an effort to make it sound as if you really are independent and openminded, when in fact you’re down in the subterranean depths of the cult.
It would be great if you would shock me by saying you’re with the Democrats on this one, but I’m not holding my breath.
keiths,
I am for the country balancing the budget over time.
You may be right on the medicare issue as I have not looked into the detail of the proposed spending cuts. The republican argument is that the cuts are a result of reducing fraud and abuse.
colewd:
The so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBBA) that Trump pushed through Congress is adding $4 trillion to the national debt. Trump did it anyway.
The Medicaid cuts aren’t proposed, they’re actual. Republicans passed them in July as part of the OBBBA. Democrats are trying to reverse them.
You fell for that? Only 3.2% of the Medicaid cuts are a reduction in waste, fraud, and abuse.
Here are some facts and numbers for you:
1. Republican healthcare policies already in place are going to increase the number of uninsured people by 17 million if they aren’t reversed.
2. Republicans’ refusal to extend the Obamacare subsidies will more than double the cost for the 24 million people participating — a 114% increase on average, from $10,656 to $22,848 annually. How many of those people have an extra $12,192 they can afford to spend each year?
3. Of the people affected, more than 3 out of 4 people live in states that Trump won in 2024.
4. The Republican Medicaid cuts amount to $990 billion — almost a trillion dollars. 96.8% of that is benefit cuts; only 3.2% is reductions in waste, fraud, and abuse.
5. In January, Trump said
“The people won’t be affected,” he said. A complete lie.
6. Trump and the Republicans are adding $4 trillion to the national debt via the OBBBA.
7. The OBBBA is a massive tax cut for the rich. The top 1% are receiving more in tax cuts than the bottom 60% combined.
8. Republicans including Trump are lying to the American people, claiming that Democrats want to fund healthcare for illegal immigrants. That’s false, and they know it. Not a dollar of what the Democrats are proposing would go to illegal immigrants.
There’s no way to put a positive spin on those numbers. Trump and the Republicans are screwing ordinary Americans, including their own voters, in order to pay for tax cuts for the rich, adding $4 trillion to the national debt in the process. And they’re lying about it. It’s that simple, and it’s despicable.
Do you support that?
Those numbers come from nonpartisan sources, by the way.
keiths,
AI search supports your position. Thanks for the detailed explanation.
https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5LWNvcHk%3D_d9f191be-3533-4ab2-81b8-94069feea186
colewd:
I’m glad you agree with me factually, but my question is whether you support Trump and the Republicans on this issue. Is it good policy, in your view?
keiths,
Not sure at this point. Can you comment on this list from Speaker Johnson?
https://x.com/SpeakerJohnson/status/1975635502448443450
I can. He is lying.
ETA: but before we change the subject, you owe keiths an answer to his very simple question. In light of keiths 8 points, which you acknowledge, do you consider the OBBBA to be good policy?
colewd,
Like Jock says, Johnson is a liar. Despite all of his pious posturing.
But before we explain his dishonesty, tell us this: assuming that his figures are all correct, and taking everything I’ve told you into account, do you approve of the Republican policy?
keiths,
What is the justification for giving non citizens healthcare subsidies?
if your contagious neighbor passes a disease to you, are you somehow less sick if he’s not a citizen? Do you see any advantage to living in a nation with healthier people? Do you think an accelerated path to citizenship would help solve whatever confusion you’re expressing here? Disease doesn’t care about citizenship, right?
colewd:
In addition to what Flint said, there’s an issue of fairness. Those non-citizens are working and paying taxes, just like citizens do, so why should they be denied what they are paying for?
keiths,
If they are indeed working they should be able to afford health insurance in most cases. We can justify many expenses that lead us into more accumulated debt.
colewd,
This is pitiful. Your Dear Leader supports those policies, so you do too. You fall in line with your fellow cult members instead of judging those policies on their merits. And you call yourself an independent?
By your logic, we should stop funding healthcare for Nebraskans:
We’ll accumulate less debt if we stop subsidizing those freeloaders. Let’s end Medicare and Medicaid for Nebraskans. While we’re at it, let’s stop giving them Social Security benefits and food stamps. For the majority who won’t be able to afford health insurance after the cuts, screw ’em. Who cares about a bunch of Nebraskans? And why stop at Nebraska? Why are we subsidizing Hoosiers and Minnesotans?
If you were really concerned about spending, you wouldn’t have supported the OBBBA, which is going to add $4 trillion to the national debt. This isn’t about the debt for you. The debt is just an excuse you’re using for supporting the Dear Leader. When Trump and the Republicans drive up the debt in order to give tax cuts to the wealthy, that’s good debt. It’s worth it. But if some noncitizen has been working here for decades, paying taxes the entire time, and has the bad luck of getting hit by a drunk driver or developing cancer, they don’t deserve our help. That’s bad debt.
It’s blatant hypocrisy.
I’m looking at some poll numbers from the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation.
83% of Americans have a favorable view of Medicaid, including 75% of Republicans. Trump and the congressional Republicans don’t care. For them, this isn’t about serving the people, it’s about funding tax cuts for the rich. They’ve slashed Medicaid spending by almost a trillion dollars and more than 95% of that is a reduction in benefits, not the elimination of “waste, fraud, and abuse.”
78% of Americans support extending the Obamacare tax credits, including 59% of Republicans. There’s overwhelming support among the people, but Trump and the congressional Republicans don’t care. They’re fighting against it.
On the bright side: big ballroom. And look at this gold detailing. You’ve got to tighten your belts; ostentation is not going to pay for itself.
Allan:
He’s lining up donors to pay for it, so the taxpayers won’t be footing the bill. Which is worse in my opinion, since he’s so corrupt and easily bought. The two donors I know about are Google and RJ Reynolds.
He’s so obsessed with gold that in the White House, even the TV remote is gilded. I’m not kidding.
A look at what it says about him:
A Psychologist Reveals What Trump’s Fixation with Gold Really Means
As if his other offenses weren’t bad enough, we have to endure the tacky Oval Office backdrop every time he hosts a meeting there.
His tastelessness even extends to food. He likes his steaks well done and puts ketchup on them. His former butler said “It would rock on the plate, it was so well done.”
ETA: A photo I took in Sandpoint, Idaho:
keiths,
I am concerned about spending and yes OBBBA is not aggressive enough in reducing spending. You realise the Dems request adds to the OBBBA right?
The tax cuts help all income levels by not reverting to older levels.
colewd:
Oh, so after four months of lamenting the national debt, now it’s just spending that you’re concerned about? That’s convenient. Instead of complaining that the OBBBA doesn’t reduce spending to your taste, why aren’t you howling about the fact that it aggressively increases the national debt by $4 trillion? Is debt suddenly OK since it’s Trump and his minions in Congress who are ballooning it? And if you’re worried about the debt, as you’ve been saying for months now, why aren’t you complaining about the tax cuts that increase it?
It subtracts from the OBBBA by undoing some of the Republicans’ draconian healthcare cuts. It’s reversing cuts, not increasing spending. And if you’re tempted to argue that every dollar of healthcare funding increases the debt, I will point out that dollars are dollars. Every dollar spent on anything increases the debt, so why single out healthcare? If we’re going to cut spending, we should cut it where it does the least harm. The OBBBA is the opposite of that. It maximizes the harm for the poorest Americans, who are already struggling and don’t need the government to step in and make it worse.
You’re just parroting a dishonest Republican talking point. The tax cuts are a massive wealth transfer in disguise, from the poor to the rich. That’s a mathematical fact.
Here’s a hypothetical example to make the point. Suppose there are two separate tax reduction bills. The first one reduces taxes for everyone by the same amount — let’s say 5%. The second one decreases taxes on the rich by 2% and increases taxes on the poor by that same percentage. That’s obviously unfair, right? Everyone got the same 5% cut, but now the poor are having their taxes jacked up while the rich get a tax cut. It punishes the poor and rewards the rich.
But mathematically, that’s no different from this scenario: there’s just one bill. It cuts taxes by 7% for the rich and 3% for the poor. If you’re a Republican, you say “See? Everybody wins! Tax cuts for everyone!” But the poor end up with less money in their pockets than they would have if the percentage were the same across the board. The poor have less money, even though they need it the most. The rich have more money, even though they need it the least. That’s a wealth transfer, plain and simple, and it’s exactly what the OBBBA does. It stinks.
I generated a couple of bar graphs to show how unfair the OBBBA is. This one shows the tax cut as a percentage of income, with the poorest people on the left and the richest on the right. I also added a separate bar for the top 1%. It’s striking:
One glance at that graph and you can see how unfair it is. But it gets worse. Not only do the poor get less of a tax cut — their expenses also go up due to Medicaid and food stamp cuts. When you take increased costs into account, the overall impact of the OBBBA looks like this:
Poor people lose money while the rich get richer. It’s a wealth transfer, and it goes in the wrong direction. If wealth is going to be transferred, it should be from the wealthy, who don’t have to worry about putting food on the table, to the poor, who are struggling to get by from paycheck to paycheck.
A lot of Republicans flaunt their Christianity, Mike Johnson being one of the most vocal. Yet here’s what Jesus said:
Trump and the Republicans are doing the opposite. Trump’s been worrying out loud lately about whether he’ll end up in heaven. He should have thought about that earlier.
keiths,
The biggest issue is spending not revenue. Lower taxes can increase spending and investment.
colewd:
Bullshit. You’ve been focused on the debt for months now. Samples:
And:
And:
And:
And:
That’s just a sampling of your statements. The only reason you’ve shifted your concern away from the debt is because as a cult member, you need to support and justify the Dear Leader even when his policies exacerbate what you consider to be a national emergency. The OBBBA is a massive debt increase, but suddenly that’s OK with you because Trump is the one who pushed it.
Trickle-down economics doesn’t work:
50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says
Even if trickle-down did work, the effect wouldn’t be large enough to offset the punishment that Trump and the Republicans are inflicting on the poor. If you’re concerned about spending, why not support cuts elsewhere?
If you insist on tax cuts, why not cut them more for the poor than for the rich? Poor people spend their money because they have to. They can’t afford to save, but the rich can. Putting money in the pockets of the poor therefore increases consumer spending more than if you gave it to the rich. It’s better for the economy.