841
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2024
841 points (98.6% liked)
News
23649 readers
2511 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm wondering if we're in the process of seeing the parties flip tbh. It seems like D's are becoming more conservative and R's are now trying to make systemic changes. Granted it's not a perfect flip and R-progressiveness is more like going backwards at times (abortion) but things feel weird now.
If R's realize that voters will strongly support them for attacking the rich, it might happen imo.
republicans aren't for systemic change.. they're literally about the status quo.
Trump took over GOP. It's not the same party as before.
Tariffs and deporting millions of people are both quite radical changes of the status quo. Illegals have been a fundamental part of our labor market for decades. GOP historically has been pro-illegal immigrants even if they've kept mostly quiet about it. It's good for business. Reagan, the GOP quasi-religious symbol, legalized millions of illegals.
Tariffs fly in the face of established free market capitalism economics. Milton Friedman would be turning in his grave. You are artificially repressing the market through strong government regulation. Again, a radical reshaping of American policy.
I think Trump actually has a short window of action for very dramatic change. For example, if he comes out and says he believes we need universal healthcare because of the corrupt elites and whatnot, I think people will rally behind him. His popularity would jump up 20 points overnight. I think his voters are actually expecting some type of radical change.
The country is hurting and when people elect populists, it means they're at the end of their ropes. Some of the class consciousness needs to be released with a pressure valve otherwise we're headed for some murky and potentially ugly consequences.
People like Bannon understand this. I think they see the way the winds are blowing and want to be in a position to benefit
yeah it is; it's still the same party of billionaires and tax cuts
lol what? tariffs and protectionism have been the policies of the republican party and conservatism forever
And I have a bridge to sell you
since Reagan it's been the party of pro-business and free market capitalism. it wasn't until the right wind populism that slowly started during the tea party and eventually led to Trump that we started seeing protectionism
I'm not claiming he is going to do this, I'm saying I think he has an opportunity to do it. The fundamental question is what Trump has in mind. Is his goal to just extract as much money as possible for him and his friends while keeping everything else more or less the same? Or does he have a more radical vision?
Certain individuals connected with the new Trump administration (looking at Vance and his financier Peter Thiel) have some radical beliefs in a new sort of technocratic authoritarian state. If this is really their goal, I think universal healthcare is a useful stepping stone to popular support for more radical items.
Republicans do want to change the system, but only in ways that make it easier for the already wealthy to extract even more money from the rest of the country, and do it faster.
Imagine how rich a small number of people can get if those pesky consumer protection and environmental regulations are tossed in the trash.
One key thing is that the Republican party has very much now become the party of the working class. In 2024, Kamala won those making less than $30k, and more than $100k. She won the poor and the professional class, but Trump won the working class, (and I assume) the extremely wealthy.
The Democrat's real base right now is the professional class. Those with college degrees working white collar jobs. The poor also vote more for Dems, but they vote in fewer numbers based both on their poverty and their lower than average age.
We always assumed it was the rich vs everyone else, but it need not be that way. It could easily turn out to be the rich and the working class vs. the professional class and the poor. When someone like Bannon suggests raising taxes on the "rich," he may not mean the actual ultra-wealthy, but the professional class.
And there is a form of taxation that could be implemented to fall on the professional class the hardest - targeting the tax advantages of 401ks and IRAs. That seems the most obvious target. Just raising income taxes would have to also hit the rich, but taking away a lot of the tax benefits of retirement accounts would mostly hurt the professional class, the white collar workers with bachelors and graduate degrees. The doctors, the lawyers, the engineers, the college professors, etc. The truly wealthy don't really rely on these accounts much, as they have limits on them that make them useless for storing tens of millions or more in. And the working class? Well if you have a household income of $60k, odds are pretty low you're going to be maxing out your 401k contribution.
The retirement accounts seem the most likely targets of this. The poor and working class don't usually make enough to put substantial money away in these accounts, while their asset protections are a rounding error to the wealthy. Raiding 401ks and IRAs would be a way for them to raise taxes in a way that zeros in on the Democratic electorate and hurts them the most.
We could even see a very weird political landscape where 401ks and IRAs were raided to pay for social programs like health insurance subsidies, expanded subsidies for new parents, subsidized daycare, and other social spending meant to increase birth rates. They would sell it as "raising taxes on the wealthy to give to the working class," while they would really be raising taxes on the professional class to pay for subsidies for the working class and tax cuts for the wealthy.
The white collar college educated workers are the heart of the Democrat's current power base. They are the most likely targets of any Republican tax increases "on the rich." And the easiest way to raise taxes on the professional class without also taxing the wealthy is to come after the retirement accounts.
And while some might say, "that would never happen, people wouldn't stand for it. It would be the government going back on its word, people would be infuriated!" Well, I just come back to the end of Roe v. Wade. Republicans stripped civil rights from half the country, and the electorate responded by giving them full control of government. If you can strip the civil rights from half the population, stripping retirement account benefits, which far fewer people are actually able to really take advantage of, is minor in comparison.
401k and IRA protections are just tax policy. They can be changed at any time. A law could be passed tomorrow that said, "401k accounts are being wound down. All 401k accounts must be liquidated within the next five years and transferred to regular taxable brokerage accounts. This liquidation will be taxed like any other 401k or IRA withdrawal." Then, everyone has to liquidate their accounts, and the full balance would be taxed as regular income. Not only would this give the government more long term revenue, but it would represent a massive short-term windfall. The treasury would bring in trillions as the government effectively seizes 20-30% of every 401k account in the nation. It would be a temporary windfall, but in the years of this one-time liquidation, it would likely even allow Trump to claim he actually balanced the budget. Anyone with sense would know it was a short-term stunt, but his base isn't known for having a lot of sense.
trump's core voting bloc was those making 70,000 and up. that's not the working class.
They also need to be careful with selection bias. He didn't significantly change his numbers, the blocks she engaged successfully still voted less.
Yeah, fuck that, fuck those people.