data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cb97f/cb97f3e815a6a6506a9d3e69bef39296578798b6" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/46069/460692bda71b4646fdb0a688218881341e90297a" alt=""
So you agree tax cuts for the rich are bad, or do you actually believe the wealth inequality and political bribery this enables is a net good? It’s clear the trickle-down bullshit doesn’t work as evidenced by stagnant wage growth.
I would recommend supporting progressive candidates instead of simping for the people who enacted the laws which have destroyed our middle class. Pointing out corporate Democrats exist and vote with Republicans to protect their shared donors is valid, as long as you can recognize that Republicans cry about the deficit whenever they are not in power, and when in power spend like drunken sailors, increase military spending, and continue to use the deficit they grew as a cudgel to dismantle only the parts of the administrative state they disagree with. I’m not that stupid, and I doubt you are either.
Usually when people are asked when America was Great™ they’ll point to the burgeoning middle class of the post-war economy of the 1950s. Sometimes they’ll point to separate drinking fountains however we’ll ignore racists for now. The economic nationalists won’t like it when you point out the thriving economy was partly the result of other economies still receiving from war, but more importantly for the middle class there was a 94% marginal tax rate for income over $200,000 in 1945, which meant dollars were circulating and demand was created for more jobs. The trickle-down clowns who insistent the rich getting richer is good for the economy would be slightly more credible, if they weren’t the very same people saying the poor demanding higher wages is bad for the economy. As Nick Hanauer put it: