With American families contemplating back-to-school spending and winter holiday budgets, the worrisome economic news is eerily on script: Donald Trump’s tariffs are indeed increasing prices for key goods, job losses due to AI and other payroll cuts are mounting,
The issue for me is the Democrats besides having no vision , have no credibility to govern. I am not indicting all democrats but the ones leading (if you can call it that) are not credible. The major cities they lead have major crime and other issues. They have been on the wrong side of several issues (covid and immigration and crime) that have destroyed their credibility. A really good example of this is how they named their major legislative victory “Inflation reduction “. They did this because what it really was the public was not excited about so they stuck a name on it which was not just neutral phony but actually appeared to cause inflation to skyrocket. I could go on with several other high visibility issues where they squandered their credibility such as their denial of what was plain to the vast majority of people, Biden had serious age issues and not up to the presidents job. I think this credibility issues is going to wreck havoc on the Democrats for a long time.
Their so-called Dem moderate (Shapiro) has been busy backtracking in order to win the primary (like Kamala). Formerly for school choice, now against school choice. He has referred to supporters of PA's Save Women's Sports Act" as "extremist legislators" and refuses to say whether he will veto it. The states of Pennsylvania and New Jersey are currently suing the Little Sisters of the Poor to force abortion funding on them. So the Liberal Patriot can continue gaslighting about kicking the poor off Medicaid and SNAP but it isn't flying.
Tweaking past policies and actions may inspire the base, but non partisan voters voted for Trump because whatever he was going to do, it would be way different from the past.
Tax the rich, how about cutting waste and ideals such as those who can work should. Why should I pay for the 10 million illegals Joe let in? Crime levels are fine? Chaotic tariff policies. How about a new and better way to negotiate with the world. Trump got NATO members to up what they were paying. Dems said he ruined our relationship with them. But look, they are gettin along fine today. Trump said peace in a short time. He lied and can’t get it done. How about Biden got is so screwed up even Trump couldn’t fathom how bad it was. For current events on his was, he has settled them. More Abraham accords. The stop Arab states came out and told Hamas, out down the arms and femur of the way for two state negations. All Biden did was royally (pun intended) piss of the Saudis, which is what they told him when he begged them for more production, and alienate the Middle East with his suck up to Iran debacle. It has been only two hundred days. New and admittedly radical approaches take time. Biden had four years and still never made it better. Trump is giving andy wife and extra $12000 to deduct. Adding the other couple thousand for the standard deduction means and extra $14 to $15 thousand to deduct as a senior. And Joe gave me what. A bankruptcy SS that he didn’t have the balls to address. And not because the majority felt that way, everything Joe did was for the Dems radical minority parts of the party. Note the backlash against his Trans policies. The fact Trump has had good success at reversing Joe’s whacked out policies, even though the Dems still “fight” it tells the impotence of the because their policies were not defendable. They cheer because someone can go 25 hours without urinating? That’s fighting. Ands there’s Murphy again. He was part of the big supports of the Biden administration so what can he possible that is just banks from a spoiled little child. Do we have to get into the media? Indoctrinated to depths that make them laughable. Sullivan brought on to critic Trump’s negations. He freaking started the wars and did nothing to stop time in over three years.
And worse of all, the chickensh*t Dems won’t even go Maher’s program. Republicans do. Republicans go on all sorts of hostile Dem programs and usually make asses of the “journalists” who try to bait them.
To me it boils down to. The harder the Dems work to make the base happy, the further away they push the independents and disaffected Dem voters. I haven’t seen the slightest indication they even care what other than the base thinks. You may win some elections. I hope Mamdani and his election strategy is the template for all future Dem elections. Life will be great for all but the left.
The Democrats have nothing positive to offer, and it really shows. Their negativity is as blatant as anything I've seen in 50 years of watching politics and voting. Opposition is not only expected but it's a duty. Not this, though. Democrats have put all their chips on national failure. This is a very, very bad idea, to put it ever so mildly.
Not one word in the entire essay on illegal immigration, or did I miss it. The best I've ever heard any of my fellow Democrats offer is to "strengthen the border" or some such drivel. Trump already did that, now what.
All over my metro area businesses I deal with and suppliers say things have slowed. People are worried about inflation because the media bombards us night and day with misleading hyperbole probably based on the basic innumeracy displayed by college grads in "journalism".
I'm retired, but still contracting, headed out to work this minute though I shouldn't be and don't need to. I've been charging a heck of a lot more.
That bill was crazy stupid, yes, and I think Trump is something unprintable, don't like him at all, given everything would I vote for him again, you bet.
I cast my third consecutive write-in vote for president last year, but I agree with the thrust of your last sentence in many ways. I would put it differently, but the idea is the same, and it's something I have ALWAYS believed: If the president succeeds, meaning delivers prosperity and peace, the country succeeds.
So I ALWAYS want the president to succeed, even if I didn't vote for him, wouldn't vote for him, and don't like him. Country first, god damn it. I love this country at the molecular level. Anyone or any party invested in American failure, as the Democrats clearly are now, deserves to be left sputtering in the dust.
You have hit the nail on the head. For the first time in US history, 25% of all people dwelling in the US are enrolled on Medicaid, before we experience any economic downturn. 40% of US children are enrolled in Medicaid. Medicaid spending has increased by more than 30% just since 2019.
Likewise, for the first time in the US, more than 1/2 of all immigrants, be they naturalized citizens or noncitizens living legally or illegally, are enrolled in welfare programs. We are not curing anyone's poverty, we are simply relocating it , to more expensive locals.
Now imagine how those percentages will rise in a prolonged economic downturn. Maybe Trump's tariffs are Armageddon, or maybe just a natural pull back in the business cycle. The lack of mass poverty is the first hallmark of any First World nation. As nations develop in the West, all of society is suppose to move up the economic ladder. We appear to be, massively, moving in the wrong direction.
“Accordingly, they want the government to competently harmonize policies that ensure social justice, promote equal opportunity, and encourage purposeful individual initiative.”
Statements like this are why the Democrats are still in the wilderness. They want government to ensure public safety first and foremost. This is something that the Democrats have not only utterly failed at but like inflation and the border under Biden are pretending isn’t a problem. Other than that Americans generally want good paying jobs and welfare to be a temporary hand up not the permanent handout the Democrats are perpetually pushing.
The best advice for Democrats is to meet Trump halfway on issues where the public is largely with him. E.g. stop the “sanctuary” nonsense when it comes to criminals and work with ICE to get them out of your communities. Ditch the trans insanity. And stop the war on fossil fuels. Or more simply put listen to Ruy.
It took 12 years of losing to Reagan/Bush and a belief that Bush would cruise to reelection for the Democratic leadership to decide to sit the 92 election out making room for a previously unknown governor from Hope, Arkansas.
For a good laugh see if you cantrack down a clip of SNL’s skit: Campaign ’92: The Race To Avoid Being The Guy Who Loses To Bush
Good comment, Norm. Somewhere in the Democratic Party there is a disruptive candidate with appeal across party lines. The difference between now and then is the power of the Dems progressive Left to withhold crucial support and funding for any such moderate.
Some decent ideas but they will entail taking on significant elements of the party base like public sector unions and environmental activists. This is especially true if Democrats are to demonstrate competence in governance in their strongholds. NYC is about to provide a demonstration in the opposite direction. Chicago already has but it is not the media capital.
To support his hypothesis that the country needs change, Justin cites an Economist/YouGov poll saying some 70% of Americans think the country is in “poor shape.” In fact, that poll says 72% of Americans think the country is in “FAIR or poor shape”. Very deceptive. The RCP average of polls shows that as many Americans think the country is headed in the right direction as has been the case over the last 15 years. Trump’s RCP consensus approval rating is so-so at 45.8% (vs 51% disapproval), but that’s higher than Biden’s 43.2% average and 39% at year end 2024. The preamble for the article was misleading.
On to the solutions. Justin makes 4 recommendations. The first two are to increase the money supply (print money) and increase the safety net. Classic failed and typical Democrat approaches, instead of making the economy more efficient.
He does offer two constructive suggestions. One is to increase “the quality of life” and the other is to “encourage individual initiative “. Who’s not for that? But here, alas, there are no specific solutions, because they would be in conflict with current Democrat orthodoxy. The article underscores the challenges facing Democrats in constructing a coherent political strategy.
“Not only have Republicans extended tax cuts that heavily favor the very wealthy” The proper term is ‘made permanent current tax rates for everyone’. As a widow, living on social security, rental income from a tiny house, and supplemented with IRA withdrawals, I am very glad my tax bracket isn’t going up. The US economy and stock market is climbing a wall of worry, very bullish.
Congratulations to Justin Vassallo for an incisive explanation of the Democrats' political problem. They might do better in 2026 and 2028 if they offer a credible solution to the housing shortage. Yet, most of the states and all of the cities where housing is scarce and expensive have Democratic governors and mayors. What the Democrats need to win on the housing issue is clear success at the state and local level, the opposite of what they have today.
Gov. Newsom recently signed into law a bill which raises the California Renter's Tax Credit to $500 a year. The income limit is higher than the median household income there, so most California renters will qualify. The problem is, $500 is 1.5% of the median annual rent in Los Angeles and 1.2% of that in San Francisco. A small drop in a large bucket.
And that’s hardly a solution - let the taxpayers subsidize poor policy decisions. With more rules and regulations than any other state, it’s almost impossible to build here in California. My next door neighbors wanted to remodel - not even change the footprint of their house. The permits took two years and cost many thousands of dollars.
We'll see. I've argued here that all it takes (as it did with Reagan in 81-82) is a little time and the tariff position will jump to an 80/20 issues for Rs too. I would welcome a looser Fed--right now, that's one (but not the only one) of the factors holding back the home industry.
Now, you are dead on that AI is going to cost jobs as all automation does. But AI has massive power and WATER needs. There is a jobs bonanza coming in energy and water/desalinization etc. If the Ds could get on that band wagon . . . but nooooo. That conflicts with the green transition.
"Should prices soar by year’s end, Democrats will have a clear-cut message for the 2026 midterms."
Maybe, but their messages to date have been vague, disproven, contradictory or, as the author himself concedes, strictly "reactive" to Trump's and the GOP's initiatives.
In politics, as in life, you don't win a cigar nor an election with that kind of cowering timidity and absence of a clearly articulated vision.
This site is less insulting to Reps than 99% of Dem pundits , so I am loathe to complain, but what is it in Dem DNA that feels comfortable describing Republican voters as "ignorant" if not just plain "uneducated"?
Forgive my bluntness, but I am not ignorant of Dem infrastructure spending, I'm appalled. Tens of billions of dollars for rural high speed internet that did not connect one single US home to the internet, in 4 years. Tens of Billions for a few dozen EV charging stations. Some, in remote areas, sitting next to diesel generators, providing the necessary electricity. Billions for luxury EV SUV companies, with starting prices of $100K, as if financing the toys of tomorrow for the wealthy, is a reasonable use of US of taxes collected from waitresses and truck drivers. Billions wasted to rebuild perfectly good "racist roads", could have been spent, actually helping the poor people on the wrong side of the offending speedways, rather than demolishing safe roads, to rebuild them a few hundred yards away.
The above is but a short list. Toss in 3rd world adult cosmetic circumcisions, sex change operations, trans operas.. . Hundreds of billions to support 10 million unvetted migrants in luxury hotels, with room service and laundry delivered, so more than 1/2 could enroll in US welfare programs. Hundreds of extra federal billions, dumped on public schools with no accountability or even auditing, as test scores mostly drop each year.
Don't get me started on the Biden handouts to the wealthiest Americans. Does the Silicon Valley Billionaire Bank Bailout ring a bell? The wealthiest and best educated Americans excused from FDIC limits, every 80 year Iowa farm widow understands and abides. An attempted trillion dollar student debt forgiveness that sought to hand up to $40K, to 26 year old lawyers married to 26 year MBAs, earning $250K together, long before their 30th birthdays. $7500 checks for those buying $80K luxury EVs. Nearly unlimited billions for anyone that could scratch out a Green business plan on the back of a napkin, form a corporation and call a DC Dem buddy, looking for ways to burn a trillion dollars ASAP.
Many of us assumed, Trump's reelection was going to be the proverbial slap the Dem Party needed to wipe the smug smiles off their faces, ditch the perpetual "uneducated" insults and seek, at least, a mini Reformation. All, in hopes of avoiding the 12 years of Rep rule that followed Carter's debacle, that was mirrored by Biden's massive failures. 6 months later, the only Dem policy change has been a begrudging acknowledgement that migrant murderers, rapists and pedophiles should be deported. Absolutely nothing else has changed.
Dems are counting on massive Trump failure to save them, along with horrendous Rep messaging, that fails to convey the historical consequences of Dems mucked up policies. If Reps ever figure out how to speak, so voters understand the full destruction of the Biden years, Dems will need more than Trump failures.
This piece is another diagnosis of Democrat party problems. The fact that the Democrats allowed in 10 to 20 million illegal migrants of whom 500,000 are criminals and are committing crimes to this day is not even mentioned. If citizens don't feel safe, then their economic well being may take a back seat, and if citizens don't trust the Democrat party because of the invasion they allowed, and if citizens don't trust the Democrat party because of the big time inflation they caused, then the Democrat party is screwed just like they screwed America. They put up Biden as a moderate and then shoved the DEI and Green New Deal down our throat without asking us what we want. DEMOCRATS CANNOT BE TRUSTED!!! I am an unaffiliated voter who voted for Obama twice, Trump 3 times, and may have voted for Bernie if the Democrat party had allowed him to run against Trump. And so far, the way I see it, Trump is the man of the hour. GO TRUMP!!!
I'm a pretty fierce critic of the Democrats in recent years, but I am also critical of the Republicans on Social Security, in an oblique way. The following comes from a back-and-forth with an affluent wingnut friend who was complaining that the return on FICA contributions is low. He argued that people should have a choice of investment vehicles for their FICA money, and I argued vigorously against it. Here were my points:
1. If, for example, people could designate money to be put into S&P 500 index funds, the federal government would eventually have major ownership stakes in those companies. And of course there would quickly be demands to be able to put FICA contributions into a variety of other passive vehicles, small-caps, large caps, ETFs, currencies, you name it.
The dead sweaty hand of government would be regulating fees, and voting shares. Government would have incentives to protect existing companies at the expense of innovative challengers. If we'd done this, 75 years ago, we'd all be driving 1963 Pontiacs, paying $5 a minute for long distance, wireline only. Personal computers? What are those?
Secondly, I told him, never forget that half the population is below average. Social Security is a floor meant to keep Americans from having to eat cat food in retirement. As a finance proposition, it's a risk-free vehicle (see below for more), and very much a direct investment in the real economy. It's not supposed to be something with superior returns. It's a safety net, and it should be as simple as it gets.
2. SS was designed to be part of a three-legged stool, the other two legs being private pensions (now 401Ks) and personal savings and investment. That's where you chase yield, not in the safety net.
3. The Republicans just cannot help trying to undermine Social Security in various "privatization" schemes. In so doing, they miss a big opportunity. Instead, they should stress what Social Security actually is: that "risk free" investment in the long-term performance of the real American economy. The lack of risk depends on a stable federal financial position, and the rapid accumulation of external debt through reckless spending is a threat, and if not contained will undermine Social Security.
Thus, if I were a Republican, I would say, "Look folks, regardless of what some of the most conservative in my party say, I am 100% for Social Security, and I am here to say that the biggest parts of ensuring the future of this vital program is to pay a lot more attention to our fiscal situation and to ensure the ability of our businesses to succeed." The Republicans, in my opinion, constantly miss the chance to include Social Security in their platform and rhetoric.
4. By, in so many ways, pulling for American failure, today's "progressives" are actually endangering Social Security, and should be called out for it -- by the Republicans, in the terms I mentioned in point #3 above. They are injecting more risk into its future, and that's a very negative thing.
A few comments. First of all, FDR envisioned Social Security as a temporary program until Americans learned to save more. He would be appalled at the level of entitlement spending that exists today.
Many countries allow some portion of their social security payments to go into private/market accounts. It works fine and improves outcomes, as do programs that are indexed to life expectancy. If individuals own an index fund, they are the voters of proxies, not the government. That is how 401(k) plans work already.
The much maligned George W. Bush tried to reform Social Security to put it on a path to solvency. As an aside, he also promoted comprehensive immigration reform. Both were shot down by Congress on both sides of the aisle.
The problem with Social Security is that it was set up when people both died younger and had more children.
I kind of agree with you on privatization. It sounds great in theory, but the risks of increased government involvement in board rooms is a massive downside.
It’s probably going to require some combination of raising both the retirement age and taxes along with some level of means testing.
Right now the Republican plan is the same as the Democrats: kick the can down the road and demagogue any proposed changes as killing Grandma.
Means testing means just another government welfare program. The truth is people just think 'the rich' are going to somehow fund trillion dollar programs.
Your #1 is the Republican version of the criticism at the original enactment of SS. The Democratic version is all that money would be taken out of the economy which was trying to recover from the Depression. (Probably neither would be true today.) FDR actually wanted a sort of mild version of individual accounts but he got rolled (with the connivance of his own staff) which is how we wound up with the Ponzi-type system we have.
Your #3 is a fair criticism of the Paul Ryan Republicans but not of Trump who has been steadfast in defense of Social Security. Hopefully, Ryan will be seen only in the rear view mirror.
As for #2, have you been following the attempt of the hedge fund giants to get their greedy hands on the 401k pool.
The issue for me is the Democrats besides having no vision , have no credibility to govern. I am not indicting all democrats but the ones leading (if you can call it that) are not credible. The major cities they lead have major crime and other issues. They have been on the wrong side of several issues (covid and immigration and crime) that have destroyed their credibility. A really good example of this is how they named their major legislative victory “Inflation reduction “. They did this because what it really was the public was not excited about so they stuck a name on it which was not just neutral phony but actually appeared to cause inflation to skyrocket. I could go on with several other high visibility issues where they squandered their credibility such as their denial of what was plain to the vast majority of people, Biden had serious age issues and not up to the presidents job. I think this credibility issues is going to wreck havoc on the Democrats for a long time.
Their so-called Dem moderate (Shapiro) has been busy backtracking in order to win the primary (like Kamala). Formerly for school choice, now against school choice. He has referred to supporters of PA's Save Women's Sports Act" as "extremist legislators" and refuses to say whether he will veto it. The states of Pennsylvania and New Jersey are currently suing the Little Sisters of the Poor to force abortion funding on them. So the Liberal Patriot can continue gaslighting about kicking the poor off Medicaid and SNAP but it isn't flying.
Tweaking past policies and actions may inspire the base, but non partisan voters voted for Trump because whatever he was going to do, it would be way different from the past.
Tax the rich, how about cutting waste and ideals such as those who can work should. Why should I pay for the 10 million illegals Joe let in? Crime levels are fine? Chaotic tariff policies. How about a new and better way to negotiate with the world. Trump got NATO members to up what they were paying. Dems said he ruined our relationship with them. But look, they are gettin along fine today. Trump said peace in a short time. He lied and can’t get it done. How about Biden got is so screwed up even Trump couldn’t fathom how bad it was. For current events on his was, he has settled them. More Abraham accords. The stop Arab states came out and told Hamas, out down the arms and femur of the way for two state negations. All Biden did was royally (pun intended) piss of the Saudis, which is what they told him when he begged them for more production, and alienate the Middle East with his suck up to Iran debacle. It has been only two hundred days. New and admittedly radical approaches take time. Biden had four years and still never made it better. Trump is giving andy wife and extra $12000 to deduct. Adding the other couple thousand for the standard deduction means and extra $14 to $15 thousand to deduct as a senior. And Joe gave me what. A bankruptcy SS that he didn’t have the balls to address. And not because the majority felt that way, everything Joe did was for the Dems radical minority parts of the party. Note the backlash against his Trans policies. The fact Trump has had good success at reversing Joe’s whacked out policies, even though the Dems still “fight” it tells the impotence of the because their policies were not defendable. They cheer because someone can go 25 hours without urinating? That’s fighting. Ands there’s Murphy again. He was part of the big supports of the Biden administration so what can he possible that is just banks from a spoiled little child. Do we have to get into the media? Indoctrinated to depths that make them laughable. Sullivan brought on to critic Trump’s negations. He freaking started the wars and did nothing to stop time in over three years.
And worse of all, the chickensh*t Dems won’t even go Maher’s program. Republicans do. Republicans go on all sorts of hostile Dem programs and usually make asses of the “journalists” who try to bait them.
To me it boils down to. The harder the Dems work to make the base happy, the further away they push the independents and disaffected Dem voters. I haven’t seen the slightest indication they even care what other than the base thinks. You may win some elections. I hope Mamdani and his election strategy is the template for all future Dem elections. Life will be great for all but the left.
Sorry if the post misspelling etc. my wife came out to car and I had to finish.
The Democrats have nothing positive to offer, and it really shows. Their negativity is as blatant as anything I've seen in 50 years of watching politics and voting. Opposition is not only expected but it's a duty. Not this, though. Democrats have put all their chips on national failure. This is a very, very bad idea, to put it ever so mildly.
Not one word in the entire essay on illegal immigration, or did I miss it. The best I've ever heard any of my fellow Democrats offer is to "strengthen the border" or some such drivel. Trump already did that, now what.
All over my metro area businesses I deal with and suppliers say things have slowed. People are worried about inflation because the media bombards us night and day with misleading hyperbole probably based on the basic innumeracy displayed by college grads in "journalism".
I'm retired, but still contracting, headed out to work this minute though I shouldn't be and don't need to. I've been charging a heck of a lot more.
That bill was crazy stupid, yes, and I think Trump is something unprintable, don't like him at all, given everything would I vote for him again, you bet.
I cast my third consecutive write-in vote for president last year, but I agree with the thrust of your last sentence in many ways. I would put it differently, but the idea is the same, and it's something I have ALWAYS believed: If the president succeeds, meaning delivers prosperity and peace, the country succeeds.
So I ALWAYS want the president to succeed, even if I didn't vote for him, wouldn't vote for him, and don't like him. Country first, god damn it. I love this country at the molecular level. Anyone or any party invested in American failure, as the Democrats clearly are now, deserves to be left sputtering in the dust.
You have hit the nail on the head. For the first time in US history, 25% of all people dwelling in the US are enrolled on Medicaid, before we experience any economic downturn. 40% of US children are enrolled in Medicaid. Medicaid spending has increased by more than 30% just since 2019.
Likewise, for the first time in the US, more than 1/2 of all immigrants, be they naturalized citizens or noncitizens living legally or illegally, are enrolled in welfare programs. We are not curing anyone's poverty, we are simply relocating it , to more expensive locals.
Now imagine how those percentages will rise in a prolonged economic downturn. Maybe Trump's tariffs are Armageddon, or maybe just a natural pull back in the business cycle. The lack of mass poverty is the first hallmark of any First World nation. As nations develop in the West, all of society is suppose to move up the economic ladder. We appear to be, massively, moving in the wrong direction.
“Accordingly, they want the government to competently harmonize policies that ensure social justice, promote equal opportunity, and encourage purposeful individual initiative.”
Statements like this are why the Democrats are still in the wilderness. They want government to ensure public safety first and foremost. This is something that the Democrats have not only utterly failed at but like inflation and the border under Biden are pretending isn’t a problem. Other than that Americans generally want good paying jobs and welfare to be a temporary hand up not the permanent handout the Democrats are perpetually pushing.
The best advice for Democrats is to meet Trump halfway on issues where the public is largely with him. E.g. stop the “sanctuary” nonsense when it comes to criminals and work with ICE to get them out of your communities. Ditch the trans insanity. And stop the war on fossil fuels. Or more simply put listen to Ruy.
I agree. But will they?
I don’t think they’ve hit rock bottom yet.
It took 12 years of losing to Reagan/Bush and a belief that Bush would cruise to reelection for the Democratic leadership to decide to sit the 92 election out making room for a previously unknown governor from Hope, Arkansas.
For a good laugh see if you cantrack down a clip of SNL’s skit: Campaign ’92: The Race To Avoid Being The Guy Who Loses To Bush
Good comment, Norm. Somewhere in the Democratic Party there is a disruptive candidate with appeal across party lines. The difference between now and then is the power of the Dems progressive Left to withhold crucial support and funding for any such moderate.
An authentic moderate? Or one who pretends to be moderate?
Some decent ideas but they will entail taking on significant elements of the party base like public sector unions and environmental activists. This is especially true if Democrats are to demonstrate competence in governance in their strongholds. NYC is about to provide a demonstration in the opposite direction. Chicago already has but it is not the media capital.
Weak article.
To support his hypothesis that the country needs change, Justin cites an Economist/YouGov poll saying some 70% of Americans think the country is in “poor shape.” In fact, that poll says 72% of Americans think the country is in “FAIR or poor shape”. Very deceptive. The RCP average of polls shows that as many Americans think the country is headed in the right direction as has been the case over the last 15 years. Trump’s RCP consensus approval rating is so-so at 45.8% (vs 51% disapproval), but that’s higher than Biden’s 43.2% average and 39% at year end 2024. The preamble for the article was misleading.
On to the solutions. Justin makes 4 recommendations. The first two are to increase the money supply (print money) and increase the safety net. Classic failed and typical Democrat approaches, instead of making the economy more efficient.
He does offer two constructive suggestions. One is to increase “the quality of life” and the other is to “encourage individual initiative “. Who’s not for that? But here, alas, there are no specific solutions, because they would be in conflict with current Democrat orthodoxy. The article underscores the challenges facing Democrats in constructing a coherent political strategy.
“Not only have Republicans extended tax cuts that heavily favor the very wealthy” The proper term is ‘made permanent current tax rates for everyone’. As a widow, living on social security, rental income from a tiny house, and supplemented with IRA withdrawals, I am very glad my tax bracket isn’t going up. The US economy and stock market is climbing a wall of worry, very bullish.
Congratulations to Justin Vassallo for an incisive explanation of the Democrats' political problem. They might do better in 2026 and 2028 if they offer a credible solution to the housing shortage. Yet, most of the states and all of the cities where housing is scarce and expensive have Democratic governors and mayors. What the Democrats need to win on the housing issue is clear success at the state and local level, the opposite of what they have today.
Gov. Newsom recently signed into law a bill which raises the California Renter's Tax Credit to $500 a year. The income limit is higher than the median household income there, so most California renters will qualify. The problem is, $500 is 1.5% of the median annual rent in Los Angeles and 1.2% of that in San Francisco. A small drop in a large bucket.
And that’s hardly a solution - let the taxpayers subsidize poor policy decisions. With more rules and regulations than any other state, it’s almost impossible to build here in California. My next door neighbors wanted to remodel - not even change the footprint of their house. The permits took two years and cost many thousands of dollars.
Interesting observations that could have been in the article.
We'll see. I've argued here that all it takes (as it did with Reagan in 81-82) is a little time and the tariff position will jump to an 80/20 issues for Rs too. I would welcome a looser Fed--right now, that's one (but not the only one) of the factors holding back the home industry.
Now, you are dead on that AI is going to cost jobs as all automation does. But AI has massive power and WATER needs. There is a jobs bonanza coming in energy and water/desalinization etc. If the Ds could get on that band wagon . . . but nooooo. That conflicts with the green transition.
"Should prices soar by year’s end, Democrats will have a clear-cut message for the 2026 midterms."
Maybe, but their messages to date have been vague, disproven, contradictory or, as the author himself concedes, strictly "reactive" to Trump's and the GOP's initiatives.
In politics, as in life, you don't win a cigar nor an election with that kind of cowering timidity and absence of a clearly articulated vision.
This site is less insulting to Reps than 99% of Dem pundits , so I am loathe to complain, but what is it in Dem DNA that feels comfortable describing Republican voters as "ignorant" if not just plain "uneducated"?
Forgive my bluntness, but I am not ignorant of Dem infrastructure spending, I'm appalled. Tens of billions of dollars for rural high speed internet that did not connect one single US home to the internet, in 4 years. Tens of Billions for a few dozen EV charging stations. Some, in remote areas, sitting next to diesel generators, providing the necessary electricity. Billions for luxury EV SUV companies, with starting prices of $100K, as if financing the toys of tomorrow for the wealthy, is a reasonable use of US of taxes collected from waitresses and truck drivers. Billions wasted to rebuild perfectly good "racist roads", could have been spent, actually helping the poor people on the wrong side of the offending speedways, rather than demolishing safe roads, to rebuild them a few hundred yards away.
The above is but a short list. Toss in 3rd world adult cosmetic circumcisions, sex change operations, trans operas.. . Hundreds of billions to support 10 million unvetted migrants in luxury hotels, with room service and laundry delivered, so more than 1/2 could enroll in US welfare programs. Hundreds of extra federal billions, dumped on public schools with no accountability or even auditing, as test scores mostly drop each year.
Don't get me started on the Biden handouts to the wealthiest Americans. Does the Silicon Valley Billionaire Bank Bailout ring a bell? The wealthiest and best educated Americans excused from FDIC limits, every 80 year Iowa farm widow understands and abides. An attempted trillion dollar student debt forgiveness that sought to hand up to $40K, to 26 year old lawyers married to 26 year MBAs, earning $250K together, long before their 30th birthdays. $7500 checks for those buying $80K luxury EVs. Nearly unlimited billions for anyone that could scratch out a Green business plan on the back of a napkin, form a corporation and call a DC Dem buddy, looking for ways to burn a trillion dollars ASAP.
Many of us assumed, Trump's reelection was going to be the proverbial slap the Dem Party needed to wipe the smug smiles off their faces, ditch the perpetual "uneducated" insults and seek, at least, a mini Reformation. All, in hopes of avoiding the 12 years of Rep rule that followed Carter's debacle, that was mirrored by Biden's massive failures. 6 months later, the only Dem policy change has been a begrudging acknowledgement that migrant murderers, rapists and pedophiles should be deported. Absolutely nothing else has changed.
Dems are counting on massive Trump failure to save them, along with horrendous Rep messaging, that fails to convey the historical consequences of Dems mucked up policies. If Reps ever figure out how to speak, so voters understand the full destruction of the Biden years, Dems will need more than Trump failures.
This piece is another diagnosis of Democrat party problems. The fact that the Democrats allowed in 10 to 20 million illegal migrants of whom 500,000 are criminals and are committing crimes to this day is not even mentioned. If citizens don't feel safe, then their economic well being may take a back seat, and if citizens don't trust the Democrat party because of the invasion they allowed, and if citizens don't trust the Democrat party because of the big time inflation they caused, then the Democrat party is screwed just like they screwed America. They put up Biden as a moderate and then shoved the DEI and Green New Deal down our throat without asking us what we want. DEMOCRATS CANNOT BE TRUSTED!!! I am an unaffiliated voter who voted for Obama twice, Trump 3 times, and may have voted for Bernie if the Democrat party had allowed him to run against Trump. And so far, the way I see it, Trump is the man of the hour. GO TRUMP!!!
I'm a pretty fierce critic of the Democrats in recent years, but I am also critical of the Republicans on Social Security, in an oblique way. The following comes from a back-and-forth with an affluent wingnut friend who was complaining that the return on FICA contributions is low. He argued that people should have a choice of investment vehicles for their FICA money, and I argued vigorously against it. Here were my points:
1. If, for example, people could designate money to be put into S&P 500 index funds, the federal government would eventually have major ownership stakes in those companies. And of course there would quickly be demands to be able to put FICA contributions into a variety of other passive vehicles, small-caps, large caps, ETFs, currencies, you name it.
The dead sweaty hand of government would be regulating fees, and voting shares. Government would have incentives to protect existing companies at the expense of innovative challengers. If we'd done this, 75 years ago, we'd all be driving 1963 Pontiacs, paying $5 a minute for long distance, wireline only. Personal computers? What are those?
Secondly, I told him, never forget that half the population is below average. Social Security is a floor meant to keep Americans from having to eat cat food in retirement. As a finance proposition, it's a risk-free vehicle (see below for more), and very much a direct investment in the real economy. It's not supposed to be something with superior returns. It's a safety net, and it should be as simple as it gets.
2. SS was designed to be part of a three-legged stool, the other two legs being private pensions (now 401Ks) and personal savings and investment. That's where you chase yield, not in the safety net.
3. The Republicans just cannot help trying to undermine Social Security in various "privatization" schemes. In so doing, they miss a big opportunity. Instead, they should stress what Social Security actually is: that "risk free" investment in the long-term performance of the real American economy. The lack of risk depends on a stable federal financial position, and the rapid accumulation of external debt through reckless spending is a threat, and if not contained will undermine Social Security.
Thus, if I were a Republican, I would say, "Look folks, regardless of what some of the most conservative in my party say, I am 100% for Social Security, and I am here to say that the biggest parts of ensuring the future of this vital program is to pay a lot more attention to our fiscal situation and to ensure the ability of our businesses to succeed." The Republicans, in my opinion, constantly miss the chance to include Social Security in their platform and rhetoric.
4. By, in so many ways, pulling for American failure, today's "progressives" are actually endangering Social Security, and should be called out for it -- by the Republicans, in the terms I mentioned in point #3 above. They are injecting more risk into its future, and that's a very negative thing.
A few comments. First of all, FDR envisioned Social Security as a temporary program until Americans learned to save more. He would be appalled at the level of entitlement spending that exists today.
Many countries allow some portion of their social security payments to go into private/market accounts. It works fine and improves outcomes, as do programs that are indexed to life expectancy. If individuals own an index fund, they are the voters of proxies, not the government. That is how 401(k) plans work already.
The much maligned George W. Bush tried to reform Social Security to put it on a path to solvency. As an aside, he also promoted comprehensive immigration reform. Both were shot down by Congress on both sides of the aisle.
The problem with Social Security is that it was set up when people both died younger and had more children.
I kind of agree with you on privatization. It sounds great in theory, but the risks of increased government involvement in board rooms is a massive downside.
It’s probably going to require some combination of raising both the retirement age and taxes along with some level of means testing.
Right now the Republican plan is the same as the Democrats: kick the can down the road and demagogue any proposed changes as killing Grandma.
Means testing means just another government welfare program. The truth is people just think 'the rich' are going to somehow fund trillion dollar programs.
Your #1 is the Republican version of the criticism at the original enactment of SS. The Democratic version is all that money would be taken out of the economy which was trying to recover from the Depression. (Probably neither would be true today.) FDR actually wanted a sort of mild version of individual accounts but he got rolled (with the connivance of his own staff) which is how we wound up with the Ponzi-type system we have.
Your #3 is a fair criticism of the Paul Ryan Republicans but not of Trump who has been steadfast in defense of Social Security. Hopefully, Ryan will be seen only in the rear view mirror.
As for #2, have you been following the attempt of the hedge fund giants to get their greedy hands on the 401k pool.