It is likely that Sam does not know of the Gilens and Page 2014 study that showed that average citizens have little influence in their voting or by other means to get their policy wishes put into law. On the other hand, the wealthy elite have significant influence. So enacted laws have the wishes of the elite behind them. He may also not know of Thomas Piketty a decade ago, French economist, who determined that the longer capitalism goes on the more the difference between the elite and those at the bottom is exaggerated as in the games of Risk or Monopoly those with more power and more money continue to take away the little amount of power and money that those at the bottom have.
The elite would argue that it is a free world. Elon Musk has the right to “earn” a trillion dollars. They fail to recognize that this is a “freedom” to exploit. And the employees of Musk at the bottom have no freedom to choose their own wages. The freedom of the Right is not a freedom for all. It is not really a freedom or a right at all. They would argue they have merited to be highly rewarded. And they justify that a Musk is worth a million times more than anyone at the bottom. Because they say so. I would argue nobody is worth that much more than another. Because I say so. You have no moral authority to love your neighbor when you take such a large portion of the pie for yourself. You are a rapacious monster. How is it that the robber barons of a hundred years ago became the cool tech bros of today? No, they are still malignant narcissistic robber barons.
Many excellent writers have discussed the issues of ambition/avarice/ego/envy. I am sure we had plenty of such individuals back in 1787 and beyond. But, there was a preponderance of those who were sincere about creating a great REPUBLIC, along the lines of Plato. Those brilliant men like Adams, Jefferson, and Madison were educated by works extolling the true, the beautiful, and the good (TBG). Where has that ethic gone to? Blowin' in the wind, me thinks.
How do we (the wiser, the older with far more experience in life) teach the less wise, and lacking the experiences over time that brings understanding?
I had a public school education that was incredible, but relatively was excellent compared to what I see in today's pseudo-modern world. That education from the 1950s could have been better with the right input, again from those wiser and more experienced at the time. It did not happen. Instead, and especially in America, success simply led to consumption (i.e., amassing stuff, glitz, increasingly more time spent on the frivolities of life).
Our "garden" was productive, and we reaped great harvests, but we failed to heed the wisdom associated with this.
"If you drink from the river, recognize the source." — Adaptation of old Chinese saying
We did not replenish the garden. We did not compost. Not only that, but we increased the harvest instead with more chemicals, pesticides and herbicides, and once more, a la Joni Mitchell, turned paradise into a parking lot. This is the nature of man in my lifetime. It all starts with education and the family upbringing and the values instilled by example. Our educational system waned. People became apathetic, and uncaring about leading a principled life. That apathy coupled with ignorance has led to Americans being less well-informed about those in political power that could make changes for the better but obviously have not.
I think Sam's story needs looking at with perspective. In today's America, the solution to the Trump Disasters is not being offered to the ignorant portion of America consistently. The Democrats jump from one issue to another. But all of these issues are interconnected and are based on ego, avarice, envy and ambition.
Sarah Beckstrom's death, the hit that many of us will take with increased healthcare costs, the blatant failure to support Ukraine but a megalomaniac POTUS who should have been pulled off-stage like a bad comedian in a vaudeville act, the destruction of E (earth), etc, etc are all symptoms and signs of the same underlying pathology:
We have not selected those who are supposed to lead by investing time in the most crucial aspect of our survival. If polls are correct, most Americans are upset about high prices, which translates for many to how much they can consume. Where are the concerns about what we are seeing, for example, in Ukraine. In 1938, Hitler invaded the Sudetenland, and a year later invaded the entire country of Czechoslovakia. Then Poland. We placated (Chamberlain) Hitler. Now, Putin has repeated the same tactic. What did we do? We placated him. We Americans are focused on stuff; we are Consumers first and Sentient Beings last. Americans should have a 95% election turnout. They should know what their elected officials have done. They should ask for what they will do in writing as a contract. There should be elections that are votes of confidence and if the official does not meet the threshold of approval, removed from office.
We should not have senile people in Congress. There should be many changes to the Constitution in light of the change in the context of our times (e.g., gun control for one).
We are a stupid people who have lost sight of the TBG and the beauty of all in this C (creation).
We are more concerned with consuming than with seeing everyone on this pale blue dot have a life of liberty, and happiness.
There is a need to look at the chaos that Trump, his Administration, the GOP Congress and the majority GOP bias of SCOTUS "justices" has created and ask, "what is the rationale, or modus operandi of such chaotic actions.
▶︎ Send ICE, National Guard, Army into the cities of America.
▶︎ Bomb ships in the Pacific and Caribbean without knowing who or what is on board
▶︎ Support Putin's invasion of Ukraine and the obvious immoral acts against children and non-combatants
▶︎ Threaten members of Congress with death
✸✸ And do all of this without Congressional approval.
Hypothesis: Trump is preparing the American Public for a military coup if and when the Congress and the People finally scream out to remove Trump from office.
He is testing the waters to see what he can get away with as regards violating the Constitution on all the issues listed above.
He is testing the complicity of those in the Military for this planned for action. It may come about after a Republican defeat at Midterm elections or before that.
Where are the screams from the Public for impeachment, and imprisonment if tried and convicted? Why did the Democrats cave to the Republicans about the government shutdown when the time was excellent for these issues to be addressed?
Why are we, The People, and our Representatives in the House and Senate not full of piss and vinegar about a REPLAY of Chamberlain's acquiescence to Hitler's invasion of the Sudetenland and then all of Czechoslovakia, and then Poland, etc. Trump is the American Hitler, make no mistake about this.
Lastly, confirm these quotes from John Adams about tyranny, democracy, morality as they seem spot on to what some of us are seeing but most of us are blind to:
"The right of a nation to kill a tyrant, in cases of necessity, can no more be doubted, than to hang a robber, or kill a flea. But killing one tyrant only makes way for worse, unless the people have sense, spirit and honesty enough to establish and support a constitution guarded at all points against the tyranny of the one, the few, and the many." — John Adams
"Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachments is to, grow every day more encroaching; like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour."— John Adams
"When economic power became concentrated in a few hands, then political power flowed to those possessors and away from the citizens, ultimately resulting in an oligarchy or tyranny." — John Adams
"We have no Constitution which functions in the absence of a moral people." — John Adams
Run the above through the AI you are using and see if all are accurate quotes. I just did this Gemini Pro. One of the above is not fully validated, but the rest are. I bet very few of you will know which of the above needs correcting.
Mike, you speak of the “will of the people” as if the U.S. was still a democracy. The consultants and politicians only listen to the “will of the donors.” Until the fact that we have become an oligarchy is realized, the charade will continue. The happiest countries in the world are democratic socialists. The unhappiest are amoral oligarchies like the U.S. and Russia. Follow the money…
George Orwell would have been proud of this. As you say, in the New Gilded Age, socialism (in the sense of a seamless benefit system) is for the uber-rich, and capitalism (in the sense of if you can't pay you can't play) is for everyone else. Looking back, it was JK Galbraith who pointed out that Reagan's policies involved giving the rich more money in the belief that it would make them work harder.
But the divide in the money and the shift to donors began way back in the 1970's. The Republicans always had a core constituency of monied donors, the über wealthy capital class. But they were unable to really win elections based on their capital-friendly posturing.
Until then, the tide of public sentiment, sentiment that corporations polluted rivers, tainted food, made unsafe cars, etc was tilting towards the general public. Ralph Nader was a popular hero, one who drove a lot of regulations to make products and society safer for ordinary people.
The big business leaders (and it was the biggest of companies, not the small to medium businesses) were resigned to not having any power to affect it.
Starting in 1976 or so, the first PAC's started to appear. Ironically, they were created in the wake of Watergate and the reforms, and these business leaders realized that they had enough money to tilt the playing field.
Until then, the Democrats pretty much remained above the fray. But the massive influx of cash, and the precedent of NCPAC turning up negative political advertising (they targeted 6 senate seats and I remember reading that they turfed 5 of them, all by going completely negative) meant that the Dems had to get on the bus or be blown away.
And the consultant class was formed, and that is why today they can't see that even when 70% of the population is for something (paying more taxes, taxing the wealthy, adopting some form of national health insurance like, I dunno, EVERY other advanced country) they fall back on the electability arguments.
It doesn't happen to be a coincidence that the pundit class (especially the "reformed" republicans who call themselves "Never Trump") has become so unified in the game of shifting that overton window that what we call "left" or "progressive" is fairly conservative in the rest of the world.
Whilst the top 0.01% becomes ever more wealthy.
I know the argument that taxing the hell out of the Musk's, Andreesen's, Sacks' and other billionaires will not fund all the things, but it would set the bar.
Like you, I do not mind being taxed. I make a good living (above $200K/year all included, often close to $250k) and we have no kids, and I am approaching retirement, so I could be an ass and vote against assessments for things like schools, and infrastructure, but I don't. I vote for them because I know it is better for society.
I want Sally to not have to worry about her daughter's cancer recurring.
MAGA talks foundly about society back in the 1950's, when women and blacks knew their place, when white men had all the benefits. They seem to want to go back to that. But they are pretty sure they don't want the progressive tax structures from that era, and the strong labor unions that helped the middle.
90% top tax rate and near 40% of union participation sound pretty good to me.
Musk's $1T payout is so much more than all the profit that TSLA has ever made that it is ridiculous to even consider.
So well-written and reasoned! I doubt you have left any escape route to dispute what the majority of Americans want - a universal healthcare system for all. As a Canadian we do have a basic healthcare accessible to all, and it’s not free but geared to taxable income. It’s not perfect, but it would be a rare case to have the heartbreaking choices that Sally has to make. We also have more than two active political parties to choose from (4 actually). Plus, we also have Winter, glorious and wonderful snow blasts in almost every province and territory for several months of the year. I point out these factors because I think they contribute to our overall Canadian political culture of being able to compromise more, and identify with compassion for one another. Against all odds, especially the economic pounding that the Trump Regime is doing to hurt our Sovereignty, we are hanging on to some of the moral and ethical foundations that underlie our democracy. 🇨🇦
Whenever the government provides opportunities in privileges for white people and rich people they call it “subsidized” when they do it for Negro and poor people they call it “welfare.” The fact that is the everybody in this country lives on welfare. Suburbia was built with federally subsidized credit. And highways that take our white brothers out to the suburbs were built with federally subsidized money to the tune of 90 percent. Everybody is on welfare in this country. The problem is that we all to often have socialism for the rich and rugged free enterprise capitalism for the poor. That’s the problem. (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.)
This quote, supposedly by Bertrand Russell seems apropos.
Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim: The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate.
Great view of donors and consultants influence our politics. But the wealthiest Americans also influence the other side of politics, the voters. Since the top donors also control all the national news then they can shape public opinion on things like the progressiveness of the tax code. They can even have the media convince the public that a particular universal healthcare plan would be a disaster, despite the public desire for universal healthcare. It’s not just Fox, all of them are comprised of multimillionaire personalities and executives who decide what news will be covered and how it will be discussed.
Contrast this information ecosystem with the age of newspapers, when each medium or larger town had its own newspaper and the reporters and opinion columnists were middle class. Such a profound change was a necessary precondition for our current Gilded Age 2.0.
This is a compelling script for video akin to the 6 military 'you don't have to follow unlawful orders'.... at least, I read it in full movie form, and it was a great video :) I kept hearing a call to overthrow Citizens United... actually I kinda wanted a massive overhaul built from the 70% who agree with Sam and Sally's healthcare needs.
I've spent decades training in business, instructing in an international management program in Germany. The many conversations, observations about their "socialism" made me both wonder what the heck are we doing, as well as being called 'unamerican' for even bring up that any country could be 'better' at anything than the US. Well.... your expose makes me feel, well, in that center 70%! Thanks - I enjoy your writing style in all its various manifestations!
I'm no expert on this... 'just a concerned voter' ... and, your diagram simplifies, underscores what Mike's post expresses. Seems to be a great compendium for this post, especially for a neophyte like me. Thanks!
I wonder if Sam knows that buying all of the news and social networks is a pretty good way for a certain class of people to control what the other classes of people will be able to see out of the Overton window?
When there are consistent numbers where the most people want something, but they can't get the "representatives" to represent that view, or even see it, the people don't have the power that democracy is supposed to mean. So it must be something other than a democratic system. It must be something based on the power of something other than people. This seems especially true when no one in the places where there are the most people living want to be ruled and run roughshod over by masked thugs, but the police they pay to protect and serve, are serving and protecting the thugs instead.
No matter what a con man hired by robber barons says, a mafia state ain't democratic, and whether Sam is socialist or or not doesn't matter one iota to the people who have the power, except to use Sam to vilify socialism as a system for "groundlings," who can't get their representatives to represent them, no matter how much they pay in taxes.
You left out the Sams who knew exactly what Trump would do but found it more important to vote for someone who doesn't believe trans people exist, doesn't believe in women's freedom of choice, doesn't believe Jesus' love-thy-neighbor applies to anyone but white, male Christians. Pollsters ask questions about the economy and government services, but they don't ask whether those preferences are subordinate to the respondents' idea of morality. Thus the discrepancy between the polls and voting results.
This is fantastic. My only quibble is that I am not convinced that the conception of what is realistic, electable, politically possible, strategic, etc. is just a matter of self-deception among the consultants, the Democrats, the billionaires, the elite, and so on.
Or if it is self-deception, then it is of the Doublethink variety, with the knowledge that none of these ostensibly wise clichés have any relationship to reality being continually displaced by the completely sincere belief that they are as real as rocks and trees.
But I’d need more evidence to conclude that peddlers of this category of tripe don’t know that they are lying through their teeth with the specific intent to thwart the democratic will, especially the billionaires.
Otherwise, there is nothing the matter with being a socialist, and it is not anything anyone should ever apologize for, or feel like they have to present about themselves as if they were applying for a license.
What may be unique about the United States is that since the New Deal, and especially after the Civil Rights era, one party has been able to use underlying racism and fear of losing White status as an effective wedge in getting re-elected time after time, even to the point of people voting against their own best interests ( see book “ What’s the Matter With Kansas?). It’s why the so-called Culture Wars have proven so effective. Since Nixon’s “ Southern Strategy” Republicans have been able to use racism and fear of the Other to keep people voting for them, even it means they get no social safety net. While both parties are to some degree beholden to a donor class, the Republicans are much more in that camp than Democrats because their basic philosophy aligns with the rich, that is “ you’re on your own.” Your Sam indeed wants a social safety net and is willing to tax the wealthy to help achieve it, but time and time again, too many Sams ( and sadly, more Sams than Sallys) succumb to the siren song of not wanting to be associated with a Party who the view as full of Blacks and Hispanics, Gays and Transgender, and yes, women! And disappointingly, too many woman will follow “ their man” and also vote against their own interests because after all, you need a man for protection.
Democrats usually win when the economy gets so bad that there’s momentum for enough independent voters to join in to “ throw the bums out” and choose a Democrat. That’s how we got Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden. It was always after the country was in deep enough trouble with major recessions that enough were fed up pushed through a Democrat. Our most recent elections ( the special elections) again showed it was the case. The current regime is making such a royal mess of things that people are fed up.
But if past is prologue, until we can get past the racism and fear, Republicans, who are adept at using both as appeals to voters, will have us stuck in this miserable cycle of voting for Democrats to save them but not keeping them in office long enough to make sustained change. At this point, we would need a good decade of Democratic Party rule ( both Houses and the Presidency) for us to get beyond the consultants to see a real difference.
It is likely that Sam does not know of the Gilens and Page 2014 study that showed that average citizens have little influence in their voting or by other means to get their policy wishes put into law. On the other hand, the wealthy elite have significant influence. So enacted laws have the wishes of the elite behind them. He may also not know of Thomas Piketty a decade ago, French economist, who determined that the longer capitalism goes on the more the difference between the elite and those at the bottom is exaggerated as in the games of Risk or Monopoly those with more power and more money continue to take away the little amount of power and money that those at the bottom have.
The elite would argue that it is a free world. Elon Musk has the right to “earn” a trillion dollars. They fail to recognize that this is a “freedom” to exploit. And the employees of Musk at the bottom have no freedom to choose their own wages. The freedom of the Right is not a freedom for all. It is not really a freedom or a right at all. They would argue they have merited to be highly rewarded. And they justify that a Musk is worth a million times more than anyone at the bottom. Because they say so. I would argue nobody is worth that much more than another. Because I say so. You have no moral authority to love your neighbor when you take such a large portion of the pie for yourself. You are a rapacious monster. How is it that the robber barons of a hundred years ago became the cool tech bros of today? No, they are still malignant narcissistic robber barons.
Many excellent writers have discussed the issues of ambition/avarice/ego/envy. I am sure we had plenty of such individuals back in 1787 and beyond. But, there was a preponderance of those who were sincere about creating a great REPUBLIC, along the lines of Plato. Those brilliant men like Adams, Jefferson, and Madison were educated by works extolling the true, the beautiful, and the good (TBG). Where has that ethic gone to? Blowin' in the wind, me thinks.
How do we (the wiser, the older with far more experience in life) teach the less wise, and lacking the experiences over time that brings understanding?
I had a public school education that was incredible, but relatively was excellent compared to what I see in today's pseudo-modern world. That education from the 1950s could have been better with the right input, again from those wiser and more experienced at the time. It did not happen. Instead, and especially in America, success simply led to consumption (i.e., amassing stuff, glitz, increasingly more time spent on the frivolities of life).
Our "garden" was productive, and we reaped great harvests, but we failed to heed the wisdom associated with this.
"If you drink from the river, recognize the source." — Adaptation of old Chinese saying
We did not replenish the garden. We did not compost. Not only that, but we increased the harvest instead with more chemicals, pesticides and herbicides, and once more, a la Joni Mitchell, turned paradise into a parking lot. This is the nature of man in my lifetime. It all starts with education and the family upbringing and the values instilled by example. Our educational system waned. People became apathetic, and uncaring about leading a principled life. That apathy coupled with ignorance has led to Americans being less well-informed about those in political power that could make changes for the better but obviously have not.
I think Sam's story needs looking at with perspective. In today's America, the solution to the Trump Disasters is not being offered to the ignorant portion of America consistently. The Democrats jump from one issue to another. But all of these issues are interconnected and are based on ego, avarice, envy and ambition.
Sarah Beckstrom's death, the hit that many of us will take with increased healthcare costs, the blatant failure to support Ukraine but a megalomaniac POTUS who should have been pulled off-stage like a bad comedian in a vaudeville act, the destruction of E (earth), etc, etc are all symptoms and signs of the same underlying pathology:
We have not selected those who are supposed to lead by investing time in the most crucial aspect of our survival. If polls are correct, most Americans are upset about high prices, which translates for many to how much they can consume. Where are the concerns about what we are seeing, for example, in Ukraine. In 1938, Hitler invaded the Sudetenland, and a year later invaded the entire country of Czechoslovakia. Then Poland. We placated (Chamberlain) Hitler. Now, Putin has repeated the same tactic. What did we do? We placated him. We Americans are focused on stuff; we are Consumers first and Sentient Beings last. Americans should have a 95% election turnout. They should know what their elected officials have done. They should ask for what they will do in writing as a contract. There should be elections that are votes of confidence and if the official does not meet the threshold of approval, removed from office.
We should not have senile people in Congress. There should be many changes to the Constitution in light of the change in the context of our times (e.g., gun control for one).
We are a stupid people who have lost sight of the TBG and the beauty of all in this C (creation).
We are more concerned with consuming than with seeing everyone on this pale blue dot have a life of liberty, and happiness.
There is a need to look at the chaos that Trump, his Administration, the GOP Congress and the majority GOP bias of SCOTUS "justices" has created and ask, "what is the rationale, or modus operandi of such chaotic actions.
▶︎ Send ICE, National Guard, Army into the cities of America.
▶︎ Bomb ships in the Pacific and Caribbean without knowing who or what is on board
▶︎ Support Putin's invasion of Ukraine and the obvious immoral acts against children and non-combatants
▶︎ Threaten members of Congress with death
✸✸ And do all of this without Congressional approval.
Hypothesis: Trump is preparing the American Public for a military coup if and when the Congress and the People finally scream out to remove Trump from office.
He is testing the waters to see what he can get away with as regards violating the Constitution on all the issues listed above.
He is testing the complicity of those in the Military for this planned for action. It may come about after a Republican defeat at Midterm elections or before that.
Where are the screams from the Public for impeachment, and imprisonment if tried and convicted? Why did the Democrats cave to the Republicans about the government shutdown when the time was excellent for these issues to be addressed?
Why are we, The People, and our Representatives in the House and Senate not full of piss and vinegar about a REPLAY of Chamberlain's acquiescence to Hitler's invasion of the Sudetenland and then all of Czechoslovakia, and then Poland, etc. Trump is the American Hitler, make no mistake about this.
Lastly, confirm these quotes from John Adams about tyranny, democracy, morality as they seem spot on to what some of us are seeing but most of us are blind to:
"The right of a nation to kill a tyrant, in cases of necessity, can no more be doubted, than to hang a robber, or kill a flea. But killing one tyrant only makes way for worse, unless the people have sense, spirit and honesty enough to establish and support a constitution guarded at all points against the tyranny of the one, the few, and the many." — John Adams
"Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers and destroyers press upon them so fast that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachments is to, grow every day more encroaching; like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour."— John Adams
"When economic power became concentrated in a few hands, then political power flowed to those possessors and away from the citizens, ultimately resulting in an oligarchy or tyranny." — John Adams
"We have no Constitution which functions in the absence of a moral people." — John Adams
Run the above through the AI you are using and see if all are accurate quotes. I just did this Gemini Pro. One of the above is not fully validated, but the rest are. I bet very few of you will know which of the above needs correcting.
Mike, you speak of the “will of the people” as if the U.S. was still a democracy. The consultants and politicians only listen to the “will of the donors.” Until the fact that we have become an oligarchy is realized, the charade will continue. The happiest countries in the world are democratic socialists. The unhappiest are amoral oligarchies like the U.S. and Russia. Follow the money…
George Orwell would have been proud of this. As you say, in the New Gilded Age, socialism (in the sense of a seamless benefit system) is for the uber-rich, and capitalism (in the sense of if you can't pay you can't play) is for everyone else. Looking back, it was JK Galbraith who pointed out that Reagan's policies involved giving the rich more money in the belief that it would make them work harder.
You do an admirable job of laying it out.
But the divide in the money and the shift to donors began way back in the 1970's. The Republicans always had a core constituency of monied donors, the über wealthy capital class. But they were unable to really win elections based on their capital-friendly posturing.
Until then, the tide of public sentiment, sentiment that corporations polluted rivers, tainted food, made unsafe cars, etc was tilting towards the general public. Ralph Nader was a popular hero, one who drove a lot of regulations to make products and society safer for ordinary people.
The big business leaders (and it was the biggest of companies, not the small to medium businesses) were resigned to not having any power to affect it.
Starting in 1976 or so, the first PAC's started to appear. Ironically, they were created in the wake of Watergate and the reforms, and these business leaders realized that they had enough money to tilt the playing field.
Until then, the Democrats pretty much remained above the fray. But the massive influx of cash, and the precedent of NCPAC turning up negative political advertising (they targeted 6 senate seats and I remember reading that they turfed 5 of them, all by going completely negative) meant that the Dems had to get on the bus or be blown away.
And the consultant class was formed, and that is why today they can't see that even when 70% of the population is for something (paying more taxes, taxing the wealthy, adopting some form of national health insurance like, I dunno, EVERY other advanced country) they fall back on the electability arguments.
It doesn't happen to be a coincidence that the pundit class (especially the "reformed" republicans who call themselves "Never Trump") has become so unified in the game of shifting that overton window that what we call "left" or "progressive" is fairly conservative in the rest of the world.
Whilst the top 0.01% becomes ever more wealthy.
I know the argument that taxing the hell out of the Musk's, Andreesen's, Sacks' and other billionaires will not fund all the things, but it would set the bar.
Like you, I do not mind being taxed. I make a good living (above $200K/year all included, often close to $250k) and we have no kids, and I am approaching retirement, so I could be an ass and vote against assessments for things like schools, and infrastructure, but I don't. I vote for them because I know it is better for society.
I want Sally to not have to worry about her daughter's cancer recurring.
MAGA talks foundly about society back in the 1950's, when women and blacks knew their place, when white men had all the benefits. They seem to want to go back to that. But they are pretty sure they don't want the progressive tax structures from that era, and the strong labor unions that helped the middle.
90% top tax rate and near 40% of union participation sound pretty good to me.
Musk's $1T payout is so much more than all the profit that TSLA has ever made that it is ridiculous to even consider.
Pleast keep writing!
So well-written and reasoned! I doubt you have left any escape route to dispute what the majority of Americans want - a universal healthcare system for all. As a Canadian we do have a basic healthcare accessible to all, and it’s not free but geared to taxable income. It’s not perfect, but it would be a rare case to have the heartbreaking choices that Sally has to make. We also have more than two active political parties to choose from (4 actually). Plus, we also have Winter, glorious and wonderful snow blasts in almost every province and territory for several months of the year. I point out these factors because I think they contribute to our overall Canadian political culture of being able to compromise more, and identify with compassion for one another. Against all odds, especially the economic pounding that the Trump Regime is doing to hurt our Sovereignty, we are hanging on to some of the moral and ethical foundations that underlie our democracy. 🇨🇦
Whenever the government provides opportunities in privileges for white people and rich people they call it “subsidized” when they do it for Negro and poor people they call it “welfare.” The fact that is the everybody in this country lives on welfare. Suburbia was built with federally subsidized credit. And highways that take our white brothers out to the suburbs were built with federally subsidized money to the tune of 90 percent. Everybody is on welfare in this country. The problem is that we all to often have socialism for the rich and rugged free enterprise capitalism for the poor. That’s the problem. (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.)
I wish more of maga thought like Sam. I’m discouraged at the 30 - 40% who still support this corrupt regime.
This quote, supposedly by Bertrand Russell seems apropos.
Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim: The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate.
Great view of donors and consultants influence our politics. But the wealthiest Americans also influence the other side of politics, the voters. Since the top donors also control all the national news then they can shape public opinion on things like the progressiveness of the tax code. They can even have the media convince the public that a particular universal healthcare plan would be a disaster, despite the public desire for universal healthcare. It’s not just Fox, all of them are comprised of multimillionaire personalities and executives who decide what news will be covered and how it will be discussed.
Contrast this information ecosystem with the age of newspapers, when each medium or larger town had its own newspaper and the reporters and opinion columnists were middle class. Such a profound change was a necessary precondition for our current Gilded Age 2.0.
This is a compelling script for video akin to the 6 military 'you don't have to follow unlawful orders'.... at least, I read it in full movie form, and it was a great video :) I kept hearing a call to overthrow Citizens United... actually I kinda wanted a massive overhaul built from the 70% who agree with Sam and Sally's healthcare needs.
I've spent decades training in business, instructing in an international management program in Germany. The many conversations, observations about their "socialism" made me both wonder what the heck are we doing, as well as being called 'unamerican' for even bring up that any country could be 'better' at anything than the US. Well.... your expose makes me feel, well, in that center 70%! Thanks - I enjoy your writing style in all its various manifestations!
I think Mike’s focus on consultants is on the right track. I wrote something along these lines a few months ago. See if you like it.
https://open.substack.com/pub/citizen99/p/feeding-the-propaganda-machine?r=2sauq&utm_medium=ios
I'm no expert on this... 'just a concerned voter' ... and, your diagram simplifies, underscores what Mike's post expresses. Seems to be a great compendium for this post, especially for a neophyte like me. Thanks!
I wonder if Sam knows that buying all of the news and social networks is a pretty good way for a certain class of people to control what the other classes of people will be able to see out of the Overton window?
When there are consistent numbers where the most people want something, but they can't get the "representatives" to represent that view, or even see it, the people don't have the power that democracy is supposed to mean. So it must be something other than a democratic system. It must be something based on the power of something other than people. This seems especially true when no one in the places where there are the most people living want to be ruled and run roughshod over by masked thugs, but the police they pay to protect and serve, are serving and protecting the thugs instead.
No matter what a con man hired by robber barons says, a mafia state ain't democratic, and whether Sam is socialist or or not doesn't matter one iota to the people who have the power, except to use Sam to vilify socialism as a system for "groundlings," who can't get their representatives to represent them, no matter how much they pay in taxes.
You left out the Sams who knew exactly what Trump would do but found it more important to vote for someone who doesn't believe trans people exist, doesn't believe in women's freedom of choice, doesn't believe Jesus' love-thy-neighbor applies to anyone but white, male Christians. Pollsters ask questions about the economy and government services, but they don't ask whether those preferences are subordinate to the respondents' idea of morality. Thus the discrepancy between the polls and voting results.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/8/18/2337788/-Meet-the-MAGA-Americans-who-moved-to-Russia-to-hilarious-results
This is fantastic. My only quibble is that I am not convinced that the conception of what is realistic, electable, politically possible, strategic, etc. is just a matter of self-deception among the consultants, the Democrats, the billionaires, the elite, and so on.
Or if it is self-deception, then it is of the Doublethink variety, with the knowledge that none of these ostensibly wise clichés have any relationship to reality being continually displaced by the completely sincere belief that they are as real as rocks and trees.
But I’d need more evidence to conclude that peddlers of this category of tripe don’t know that they are lying through their teeth with the specific intent to thwart the democratic will, especially the billionaires.
Otherwise, there is nothing the matter with being a socialist, and it is not anything anyone should ever apologize for, or feel like they have to present about themselves as if they were applying for a license.
What may be unique about the United States is that since the New Deal, and especially after the Civil Rights era, one party has been able to use underlying racism and fear of losing White status as an effective wedge in getting re-elected time after time, even to the point of people voting against their own best interests ( see book “ What’s the Matter With Kansas?). It’s why the so-called Culture Wars have proven so effective. Since Nixon’s “ Southern Strategy” Republicans have been able to use racism and fear of the Other to keep people voting for them, even it means they get no social safety net. While both parties are to some degree beholden to a donor class, the Republicans are much more in that camp than Democrats because their basic philosophy aligns with the rich, that is “ you’re on your own.” Your Sam indeed wants a social safety net and is willing to tax the wealthy to help achieve it, but time and time again, too many Sams ( and sadly, more Sams than Sallys) succumb to the siren song of not wanting to be associated with a Party who the view as full of Blacks and Hispanics, Gays and Transgender, and yes, women! And disappointingly, too many woman will follow “ their man” and also vote against their own interests because after all, you need a man for protection.
Democrats usually win when the economy gets so bad that there’s momentum for enough independent voters to join in to “ throw the bums out” and choose a Democrat. That’s how we got Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden. It was always after the country was in deep enough trouble with major recessions that enough were fed up pushed through a Democrat. Our most recent elections ( the special elections) again showed it was the case. The current regime is making such a royal mess of things that people are fed up.
But if past is prologue, until we can get past the racism and fear, Republicans, who are adept at using both as appeals to voters, will have us stuck in this miserable cycle of voting for Democrats to save them but not keeping them in office long enough to make sustained change. At this point, we would need a good decade of Democratic Party rule ( both Houses and the Presidency) for us to get beyond the consultants to see a real difference.