Pages

Showing posts with label donald trump. Show all posts
Showing posts with label donald trump. Show all posts

Monday, June 30, 2025

Robert Reich’s Three Myths

The Worst Bill in History Trump’s giant budget-busting, Medicaid-shattering, shafting-the-poor-and-working-class, making-the-rich-even richer bill is a travesty..... the Senate bill would add at least $3.3 trillion to the already out-of-control national debt over a decade. That’s nearly $1 trillion more than the House-passed version. ........ it will cause 11.8 million Americans to lose their health coverage. ....... Federal spending on Medicaid, Medicare, and Obamacare would be reduced by more than $1.1 trillion over that period — with more than $1 trillion of those cuts coming from Medicaid alone. ......... it will cut food stamps and other nutrition assistance for lower-income Americans. ....... the legislation will not only cut Medicaid by about 18 percent, it will cut Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps) by roughly 20 percent. These cuts will constitute the most dramatic reductions in safety net spending in modern U.S. history. ........ The bill also makes permanent the business tax cuts from the 2017 legislation, further benefiting the largest corporations. ....... it will not help the economy. Trickle-down economics has proven to be a cruel hoax. Over the last 50 years, Congress has passed four major bills that cut taxes: the 1981 Reagan tax cuts; the 2001 and 2003 George W. Bush tax cuts; and the 2017 Trump tax cuts. Each time, the same three arguments were made in favor of the tax cuts: (1) They’d pay for themselves. (2) They’d supercharge economic growth. (3) They’d benefit everyone. ............ Rather than paying for themselves, the Reagan, Bush, and Trump tax cuts each significantly increased the federal deficit. In total, those tax cuts have added over $10.4 trillion to the federal deficit since 1981 ........... Rather than growing, the economy shrank after passage of the Reagan tax cuts. And unemployment surged to over 10 percent. Following the enactment of the Bush and Trump tax cuts .......... the savings from the Reagan, Bush, and Trump tax cuts flowed mainly to the richest Americans. The average tax cut for households in the top 1 percent under the Reagan tax cut ($47,147) was 68 times larger than the average tax cut for middle-class households ($695). The Bush tax cut for households in the top 1 percent was 16 times larger than the average tax cut for the middle class. The 2017 Trump tax cut for households in the top 1 percent was 36 times larger than for middle-class households. ........... If the bill now being considered by the Senate is enacted, 11.8 million Americans will lose their health insurance, millions will fall into poverty, and the national debt will increase by $3.3 trillion, all to provide a major tax cut mainly to the rich and big corporations. There is no justification for this. .......... Never before in the history of this nation has such a large redistribution of income been directed upward, for no reason at all. It comes at a time of near-record inequalities of income and wealth. ...... help ensure that senators who vote in favor of this monstrosity are booted out of the Senate as soon as they’re up for reelection.

The Worst Bill in History by Robert Reich

Trump’s giant budget-busting, Medicaid-shattering, shafting-the-poor-and-working-class, making-the-rich-even richer bill is a travesty.

Read on Substack


Here’s a balanced critique of Robert Reich’s “The Three Myths of Trickle-Down Economics”. First, we will outline his main arguments and provide the strongest counters. Then, we will offer a final take and verdict.

🌟 Reich’s Three Myths

  1. Myth: Wealth for the wealthy gets invested and everyone benefits.
    Reich argues that tax breaks for the rich don’t reliably lead to productive investment. Instead, wealth accumulates at the top without “trickling down” to wages, jobs, or broader economic growth.

    • Evidence: IMF studies show tax cuts for top earners fail to boost GDP or employment, and tend to widen inequality (robertreich.substack.com).

  2. Myth: Tax cuts pay for themselves.
    Reich contends that slashed tax rates for the wealthy reduce government revenue and increase deficits—creating more debt burden rather than funding public services.

    • Evidence: Historical episodes like Reagan’s and Bush’s tax cuts didn’t pay for themselves; deficits ballooned instead .

  3. Myth: Historical “supply-side” triumphs.
    The blog pokes holes in classic supply-side cases (Reagan, Thatcher, etc.), showing that growth was uneven, temporary, and accompanied by stagnating wages and rising inequality (robertreich.substack.com).

⚖️ Counterarguments & Context

  1. On Investment vs. Consumption:
    Proponents of supply-side economics argue that high earners, facing lower marginal tax rates, are more likely to save and invest—fueling innovation, business expansion, and long-term economic growth. Critics (like Thomas Sowell) note the “trickle-down” label mischaracterizes supply-side logic: it's not about charity from rich to poor but about enabling productive capital formation (en.wikipedia.org).

  2. Behavioral and Dynamic Effects:
    Advocates say reduced tax rates can incentivize entrepreneurship and increase work effort. Some contend that even small investment boosts can compound over time, especially in high-growth sectors. But these dynamic benefits are often modest, delayed, speculative—and contested in empirical studies.

  3. Complexity of Broader Tax Reform:
    Supporters of various tax cuts may include provisions for middle-income brackets or aim to simplify tax codes, rather than solely helping the rich. These broader packages blur attribution: growth effects might be due to credits, capital gains, or simplified filings—not top-end rate reductions alone.

🏛️ My Stand and Verdict

Reich’s critique is persuasive and empirically grounded. A broad consensus in modern economics—spanning the IMF, Nobel Laureate Stiglitz, and peer-reviewed journals—is that trickle-down policies have not reliably generated sustainable growth, improved employment, or bolstered wages (en.wikipedia.org, en.wikipedia.org).

Does this mean higher taxes or no supply-side incentives at all? Not necessarily. But any pro-growth tax policy should be targeted, well-evaluated, and part of a comprehensive strategy:

  • Lower taxes can be useful when targeted toward investment incentives, R&D, or small businesses—not as blanket cuts for high incomes.

  • Middle- and lower-income tax relief often provides a more direct route to boosting consumption, strengthening labor markets, and reducing debt via increased revenue.

  • Public investments in infrastructure, education, and healthcare often outperform broad supply-side tax cuts in terms of growth and equity.

✅ Verdict

Reich's critique is solid. Blanket trickle-down approaches are ineffective, inequitable, and fiscally irresponsible. Tax policy should be smarter—not just smaller. Packages should be strategic, evidence-based, and inclusive of those who most reliably spend and contribute to growth. A mixed model—supporting both productive investment and middle-income prosperity—will likely outperform trickle-down orthodoxy.

Final Takeaway

My endorsement of Reich’s position is firm—universal tax breaks for the wealthy lack justification based on outcome. If you want to stimulate economic vitality, focus on targeted incentives and broadened benefits, especially for those who drive demand and economic stability.


Grounded Greatness: The Case For Smart Surface Transit In Future Cities
The Garden Of Last Debates (novel)
Deported (novel)
Empty Country (novel)
Trump’s Default: The Mist Of Empire (novel)
The 20% Growth Revolution: Nepal’s Path to Prosperity Through Kalkiism
Rethinking Trade: A Blueprint for a Just and Thriving Global Economy
The $500 Billion Pivot: How the India-US Alliance Can Reshape Global Trade
Trump’s Trade War
Peace For Taiwan Is Possible
Formula For Peace In Ukraine
A 2T Cut
Are We Frozen in Time?: Tech Progress, Social Stagnation
The Last Age of War, The First Age of Peace: Lord Kalki, Prophecies, and the Path to Global Redemption
AOC 2028: : The Future of American Progressivism

at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, June 10, 2025

America’s Political Culture and the Power of Protest


America’s Political Culture and the Power of Protest 

There’s something deeply ingrained in American political culture that sets it apart on the world stage—a fierce, almost instinctive reverence for free speech and the right to protest. While many nations claim to uphold democratic principles, the practical space for dissent and public demonstration varies widely. In the United States, these rights are not only protected by the Constitution but actively exercised by citizens who see protest as both a civic duty and a cultural expression.

Take a step back and compare it with India—another vibrant democracy, and one of the largest. Despite its democratic structure, freedom of speech there is often tempered by social sensitivities and historical trauma. You can be taken to court for remarks deemed offensive to a religious group. And there is context—India has lived through the scars of communal violence, including the horrific partition riots of 1947 that left deep wounds still visible in the national psyche. Maintaining social harmony is often prioritized, sometimes at the expense of absolute free expression.

America is different. Here, even the mere suggestion of sending federal troops into a civilian city—say, downtown Los Angeles—evokes not silence, but a response. Not just from legal institutions, which would examine the constitutionality of such a move, but from everyday citizens. Protest is not a fringe act—it’s mainstream. It’s a reflex.

That reflex is alive again.

In moments of national crisis or moral outrage, Americans don’t wait for permission to respond. They organize, march, speak out, and act. It happened after the murder of George Floyd in 2020. It happened after the 2016 election of Donald Trump, when millions poured into the streets across all 50 states, in demonstrations that were enormous in scale yet largely peaceful in nature.

And it is happening again.

We may be entering another summer of protests. One can only hope that this time, like before, the demonstrations are peaceful, imaginative, and inclusive. It’s not just about rage—it’s about resilience. And strategy.

Protest leaders and organizers must take note. There is power in preparation. Organize not just emotionally, but tactically. Train protestors in de-escalation. Make space for art, music, poetry, and powerful symbolism. Let marches become expressions not just of dissent, but of vision—what we do want, not just what we reject.

The American tradition of protest is not a disruption of democracy—it is democracy, in its most vital, most visible form.

And in that sense, it might just be one of the most patriotic things a person can do.
























Maddow Blog | As Trump melts down over L.A. protests, Americans prep for nationwide ‘No Kings’ rallies That question will be answered not by Trump or his actions, but by the people of this country. And so the most important story of our time is this one: What is this country going to allow him to do? .......... This is an attempted authoritarian overthrow of the United States Constitution and the U.S. government. This is the attempted imposition of a dictatorial regime. ....... The answer won’t come from the White House; it will come from the streets, the courts, the states and in Congress. The strength of the movement against Trump is what will determine our fate as a country. Because what we’re seeing over and over again is that organizing against him works. Fighting him in court works. Pushing back works. Protesting in the streets works. ......... On Friday, large-scale protests broke out in Los Angeles over the administration’s militarized immigration raids. By Saturday, Trump was fulminating against those protests and announced he would federalize the National Guard, the first time a president has done that against the wishes of a state’s governor in 60 years. (When it was done 60 years ago, it was to protect protesters, not to threaten them with military force.) .......... The response of the American people to that move is exactly what you would expect: In Los Angeles, bigger protests than ever, and across the country, solidarity protests in Atlanta; Baltimore; Boston; Chicago; Tampa, Florida; Raleigh, North Carolina; and in Washington, D.C., outside the Justice Department headquarters. ......... this coming Saturday, we will likely see the largest protests yet against Trump and his administration. As the president holds his military parade in Washington, people across the country are set to take part in what organizers are calling the “No Kings Day of Defiance.”

More than 1,800 rallies are planned nationwide — peaceful, organized and united.

......... What we are seeing right now in California is a president panicking. Since polling began, we have never in the history of the U.S. presidency seen a president who is less popular than this one at this point in his presidency, and we have never seen a president less politically equipped than this one to turn that around. ......... Someone convinced Trump that attacking immigrants would work for him, that the American people would love it; that the crueler he was, the more political capital he would accrue. Instead, the opposite has happened: In town after town, school after school, city after city, it has run him into a wall — and he has no idea what to do. .......... Remember, in Trump’s first term, when he reportedly suggested nuking hurricanes to stop them from hitting the U.S.? Now in his second term, he’s trying the equivalent: Trump has no idea what to do with the sustained, growing, intractable and indomitable protest and opposition of the American people against him, so he's decided to try to stop it by using the Army......... What we’re learning, now more than ever, is that the movement against Trump is unstoppable.

at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Trump vs. Newsom: The 2028 Showdown Begins in the Shadows



Trump vs. Newsom: The 2028 Showdown Begins in the Shadows

The 2028 presidential race may still be years away, but in American politics, the future has a habit of arriving early—and loud. As of mid-2025, the stage is already being set for a showdown that is equal parts symbolic and seismic: Trump vs. Newsom. Only, in a twist worthy of modern political theater, Donald Trump may not even be eligible to run.

And yet, his shadow looms large. So large, in fact, that it seems to have summoned his opposite number into the ring before any formal declarations have been made. Gavin Newsom, the high-profile, camera-comfortable governor of California, appears poised to inherit a strange role: the protagonist in a race that Trump himself may legally be excluded from—but still dominates in spirit.

A Vacuum of Opposition

What’s striking is not just the early start to the political maneuvering but the strange nature of it. Trump has always thrived on opposition—he is at his strongest when fighting someone, or something. But in a Democratic Party that’s still recalibrating itself post-Biden, there hasn’t been a clear foil. That vacuum may have tempted Trump to all but conjure his next opponent into being.

By stepping into policy battles—on immigration, on crime, on state rights—Newsom hasn’t just defended California’s values; he’s stepped into a national spotlight where contrast is the currency. With sharp words, televised debates, and state-level policies that defy Trumpian logic, Newsom has become the natural, if unofficial, rival. If this were a comic book, the villain has chosen his hero.

10th Amendment Politics: The States Strike Back

What’s unfolding isn’t just a clash of personalities. It’s a structural tension baked into the very DNA of American governance. The 10th Amendment—the one that reserves powers not delegated to the federal government for the states—has become the quiet battlefield for this emerging contest.

Law and order? That’s a state and local matter. But Trump and his ideological allies have increasingly leaned into federal overreach to impose their vision. Just like his past forays into trade policy and tariffs—also outside clear-cut federal authority—Trump's allies now find themselves in court, defending actions that blur constitutional lines. The irony is thick: a movement that claims to revere the Constitution seems endlessly eager to test its limits.

And it’s happening again. Legal scholars, state attorneys general, and constitutional watchdogs are preparing for a storm of litigation. These cases aren’t about policy in the abstract—they’re about who gets to wield power and how. The very mechanics of the union are on the table.

A Legal Grey Zone with Political Red Lines

What’s most telling is that the legal grey zone Trump often inhabits is now becoming a litmus test for political legitimacy. An administration or faction that frames itself as “law and order” may increasingly find that it is the law—and the courts—that check its ambitions.

These are not isolated skirmishes. They are the prelude to a broader ideological war: authoritarian impulse versus decentralized democracy. In that narrative, Newsom becomes more than a governor. He becomes a stand-in for a vision of America where local governance, civil liberties, and constitutional balance still matter.

The Real Contest Has Begun

So, is this the beginning of Trump vs. Newsom? In a sense, yes. Even if Trump’s name never appears on a ballot again, his ideas, followers, and legal entanglements will define the political arena. And in stepping into this storm, Newsom is doing more than positioning himself for a presidential run—he’s answering a summons from history.

Call it pre-election jockeying. Call it constitutional chess. But don’t mistake the quiet months of 2025 for peace. The next great battle for the American soul is already underway—and the protagonists are beginning to take the stage.

Whether it's fought in courtrooms, campaign stops, or state capitols, one thing is clear: Trump vs. Newsom is less about two men and more about two futures. And the first shots have already been fired.




at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, June 05, 2025

"Your Name Is Elon Now"

Russia launches nuclear-ready hypersonic missile at Ukraine port city in major escalation
A bold new target: Ukraine’s next move has Russia on edge

at No comments:
Labels: ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)