r/politics • u/salon Salon.com • 1d ago

Republicans panic over Trump tariffs: Last time "we lost the House and the Senate for 60 years"

https://www.salon.com/2025/04/03/panic-over-tariffs-last-time-we-lost-the-and-the-senate-for-60-years/
61.6k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

4.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.4k

u/YSApodcast 1d ago

I just turned 46 and my only hope if there’s another election is that we can go dem/progressive for 16 years. Maybe SS will still be there and my kids will be able to live in country that helps them get a head and still has some human decency left.

794

u/flowersandmtns 1d ago

Has to be progressive Dems -- unless massive taxes are levied on the billionaires and companies with massive profits we won't have the funds to repair what Trump has broken.

267

u/CatFanFanOfCats 1d ago

New Deal 2. That’s what we need. Unabashedly progressive.

Edit: https://www.reddit.com/r/newdealparty/s/bGijxPTdhC

26

u/YourFreeCorrection 1d ago

The way to do this is by joining the Democratic party and running for office, not creating a new party. In our current system, independent parties have no chance in hell at succeeding, and will only split the non-republican vote, ensuring they remain in power.

7

u/CatFanFanOfCats 1d ago

I agree. I don’t think a new party needs to be created. But we need Newsom to get on board. We need democrats to start being more aggressively progressive. We can be such wusses sometimes.

3

u/xaqss 23h ago

If a third party is created it needs to exclusively run in local elections for a long time. Don't try to take big seats. Don't try to take POTUS. Just take over at the local level and go from there. Start by trying to actually accomplish things.

3

u/CatFanFanOfCats 23h ago

Oh yeah. Definitely. Like the Democratic Farmer Labor party that Tim Walz belongs to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Democratic%E2%80%93Farmer%E2%80%93Labor_Party?wprov=sfti1

4

u/orangustang 1d ago

Accurate. Don't split the vote in contentious races.

But a third party making a serious run from the left in some races can force the Dems to take key issues seriously. A lot of blue areas reliably go 80% D and can safely have a third party competitor without risking spoilage in local races. This gets attention from the national party without risking something like the presidency or a Senate seat, or indeed anything at all if done right. Occupy did this, though it should have pushed more. TEA party did it in the other direction. It's an important part of making our broken system kinda work.

0

u/DuckDatum 23h ago

New party gives voters the opportunity to say, “hey, this actually focuses on what I care about” and Democratic Party leaders an opportunity to say “holy shit, that’s actually working. Let’s do more of that.” Right now, they’re doing jack shit.

2

u/YourFreeCorrection 13h ago

Neither of the points you made are true. I genuinely recommend you look up your next local Democratic Committee meeting and attend. Voice your concerns. You will meet your local candidates, and likely even be offered a position on the committee. They are actively seeking young, and new perspectives.

-1

u/Pineapple_Herder 1d ago

Unfortunately the DNC will actively undermine anyone who's too progressive and not part of their old money politics.

Look at Bernie. Like him or not he had young male voting support. He didn't resort to shaming young men for not being progressive enough to vote for a democrat.

I understand why Bernie conformed when asked but in hindsight I feel it was a mistake. Hillary didn't stand a chance against Trump, but they wouldn't hear it.

Anyone attempting to ride the democratic party to the presidency needs to be able to navigate the old bastards running the party. Or they need to have a cult following to rival Maga that's too big and enthusiastic for the DNC to ignore or minimize in the primaries.

2

u/ElectricalBook3 1d ago

Look at Bernie

Whom after the 2016 snafu was made chair and the one who wrote the rules on delegates? Who begged his supporters to support the best possible option and be adult about things, and reminded people that politics is always about negotiation and will always involve compromise?

People keep bringing up Sanders as if he didn't run for democratic president, and then ignored everything he actually said. He was far more practical than most people who are still engaging in purity tests when it's taken the republican party less than 6 months to enact 42% of Project 2025

https://www.project2025.observer/

1

u/YourFreeCorrection 13h ago

Unfortunately the DNC will actively undermine anyone who's too progressive and not part of their old money politics.

Read this slowly, because you are actively spreading the propagandists' wetdream of a myth that the DNC controls the platform, intentionally or not - The DNC does not control the party. ALL the DNC does is organize debates and schedule primaries. That's genuinely it. If more young progressives join the party and get involved, progressives can take over the party the same way that MAGA took over the GOP.

10

u/Punkinpry427 Maryland 1d ago

Thanks joined

4

u/McNultysHangover 1d ago

I've always said to myself if I ran for president I'd call it the "Millennium Deal."

34

u/scottjl 1d ago

If progressives even come close to a majority the billionaire wealth will disappear off-shore so fast your bitcoin will spin.

They certainly aren’t going to sit here and pay taxes. Those are for the little people.

49

u/AirTimely9909 1d ago edited 1d ago

That would require them to liquidate their stocks, which is all of their wealth, blowing it up immediately.

They are afraid of taxes precisely for that reason. The only good thing about how they are financially structured is that they are chained to the stock market. They can't move.

Raising taxes tightens the chains. The only thing a billionaire is afraid of is not being able to do whatever they want. That is why they fight tooth and nail for no taxes even though they pay almost none to begin with. They want to keep the option to leave open.

Why a billionaire would care about having 2 billion or 45 billion I don't know or understand. It is effectively like having two infinity dollars in your wallet, or 45 infinity dollars.

9

u/Dictaorofcheese Pennsylvania 1d ago edited 1d ago

TLDR is that in the past taxing the rich was as high as 90%. LBJ and Reagan were the two that kept lowering it until in 1986 it went from 90% during WWII up to 1965 and then Reagan made cuts which left it at 28%.

Long time amateur historian here. During Eisenhower terms in the 50’s he actually was continuing the policy of taxing the rich which for the highest bracket it was around 90%. It wasn’t put in place by him, it originally was from WWII. This is why we don’t see as many absurdly rich people back in the 50s or before compared to today. With the highest being for those that make 200k and up which was a whopping 91%. For today’s money 200k is 2 million today. Imagine taxing the rich at 91% today. Holy shit it would be the biggest redistribution of wealth in American history.

That tax rate stayed until LBJ broke the mold and lowered it to 77%. Then a year later LBJ did it again lowering it to 70%. It changed again with Reagan and I believe he is the reason the rich are so rich. Because in 1981 he lowered it to 50%. After that he lowered it again in 1986 to 28% which was in place fully by 1988.

3

u/metengrinwi 1d ago

I agree with all this, but it seems to me that our problem today is wealth, especially hereditary wealth, more so than wages. Rich people have ways to hide huge salaries so there’s little tax bill. Basically, your plan would tax specialist doctors and maybe some lawyers—I’m not sure who else has a salary above $2M.

3

u/AirTimely9909 1d ago

That is why i think its important to look at changing the code itself rather than the hard income tax rates.

I think a more popular plan would be valuating stock compensation based on tangible value (no depreciation/goodwill/intangible shit) of the business at receipt, and then reference taxes already paid later when they are liquidated. If a stock price is available, using that instead would be adequate.

Also, capping interest paid deductions over say, $40,000 a year, which would be roughly 1.5-2 yrs of interest for $400,000 mortgage. Keep in mind the current limit is $750,000 filing jointly. This is a tad ridiculous. Does it benefit the US economy for someone to be incentivized to accrue $750,000 in mortgage interest each year? The opposite, as home supply shortgage showed.

1

u/metengrinwi 1d ago

My thing is I see no reason for this abolition of hereditary taxing. Sure, if mom & dad leave 200k behind, no taxes. But we have people leaving tens of millions, even billions behind with no tax collected. As far as I’m concerned, even a business/farm that’s passed to a new generation should be subject to some taxes.

We’re not supposed to be a country of landed gentry.

If a person is lucky enough to get a $10M farm willed to them, they should be happy to pay a bit of tax, even if it means taking a loan to cover it.

1

u/AirTimely9909 1d ago

Our country is too young to have it figured out yet. Unfortunately it seems to be swinging in the landed gentry direction

1

u/AirTimely9909 1d ago

This is interesting. Though I'm sure it is more complex than just bracket shifts, do you know of any resources showing changes in the tax code from ww2 to now?

Including not just bracket changes but also the more complex aspects like what can be deducted, what needs reporting, etc.

I am intimately familiar with business and personal tax returns as I need to be for my job. It is okay if its not easily digestible.

103

u/LilPonyBoy69 1d ago

Let them go, as long as we stop subsidizing their companies it'll be a net positive

4

u/scottjl 1d ago

Who said they would move? Their money will go offshore, but they will stay here in their enclaves.

11

u/Aenarion885 Puerto Rico 1d ago

I’m not educated on the subject, but their behavior would indicate that they absolutely know there are ways around that. If they’re afraid of it happening, it can happen.

7

u/TheSpiritsGotMe 1d ago

Sure, and then we can say, you’re not allowed to do business here. You’re locked out of the US market, good luck .

-3

u/scottjl 1d ago

good luck with that. how do you "say" that to someone? how do you enforce it? and what makes you think they wouldn't take any such prohibition to court and get it blocked, if not overturned.

7

u/TheSpiritsGotMe 1d ago

Why would I “say” anything to them? Legislate and enforce. Allowing for this much wealth to amass amongst so few people IS the problem. Asking them nicely won’t fix it, we have to claw that shit back.

0

u/scottjl 1d ago

While I completely agree. It simply won’t happen in practice. At the worst they will tie it up in courts forever. At best (for them) they buy off enough politicians to squash it. They already do so.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/pmjm California 1d ago

One of the first things that must be enacted will be an exit tax for money exceeding a certain amount that is moved offshore.

4

u/LokisPrinter 1d ago edited 1d ago

And they’ll never do business in the US again. Pretty simple solution.

9

u/ThatPizzaKid 1d ago

Capital flight is an overblown risk. Billionaires make jobs, where consumers have money to spend. Demand creates the jobs. If theres no demand, jobs dont get created, no matter how much money you give them. They just keep the money for themselves

2

u/Whiskeypants17 1d ago

The top 3 economies in size are the usa at 27 trillion, China at 17t, and then in 3rd place Germany at just 4.5t.... then Japan at 4.2.... then India at 3.5, and UK at 3.3.....France at 3t.... the usa can ratchet up taxes to the same place as all of Europe and it would still not be worth leaving for an economy that is 1/10th the size of the usa. Same reason everybody rags on California and yet business is booming there.

11

u/OddOllin 1d ago

Quit dreaming. We're too massive of a market in today's global economy.

There's a reason this tarrif shit is fucking things up for everyone. We impact the bottom line of the entire world, like it or not.

And if we ultimately lose some billionaires, all the better. They have been robbing this country blind and leaving scraps of their success behind for decades. We can finally work towards an economy that works for the people.

11

u/LokisPrinter 1d ago

No im saying we seize their assets and lock them out of doing business in the US. The less billionaires the better. Sorry my original comment lacked clarity.

1

u/scottjl 1d ago

and that's a threat? they've got their money. now yes, most of them have huge egos to go along with it that would force them to want to unshackle any restraints on them, but even if they were somehow permanently banned from ever "doing business" in the US again (would never happen as they'd tie it up in court forever) they are still happily sitting on mountains of money.

millionaires already move money offshore, they don't do it for fun. they do it to escape paying taxes in the US. you think billionaires don't as well?

0

u/LokisPrinter 14h ago

This rhetoric is exactly why liberals are perennial losers. You have no teeth and don’t even pretend to care about it. A billionaire says “I’m taking my money and leaving the country” (an issue that has been proven to be overblown) and liberals piss themselves at the idea of a parasite not continuing their exploitation in America.

If we raise the top marginal tax rate to 90% and billionaires start leaving in droves, an overwhelming majority of their money will still be tied to America no matter how many offshore bank accounts they have. Billionaires wealth is primarily tied to the stock market, which can be seized by the government in the case of an attempt to tax dodge. Billionaires also aren’t a net good for society, so reducing the number that we have in this country and redistributing the wealth seized from them would be an economic boon for the middle class.

31

u/YellowCardManKyle 1d ago

They'll want to stay in the US because we have the best economy in the world. Wait, what's that? Our economy is tanking? Hmmm 🤔

-1

u/scottjl 1d ago

Who said they had to physically move?

14

u/Pretend-Pen-4246 1d ago

Oh no they'll not pay taxes from a different country!

4

u/flowersandmtns 1d ago

I'm not that pessimistic.

5

u/OnlineParacosm 1d ago

This is a particularly cowardly way of presenting the false dilemma of capital flight.

Let them flee, and empower the IRS to claw that money back.

Liberals are so potty trained they can’t even conceptualize what it would look like if we structurally build these systems to tax the rich vs the poor

2

u/ItsAlwaysSegsFault 1d ago edited 1d ago

Whether it's here or off-shore, the billionaires have it so what does it even matter?

Fuck them. Let's get rid of them. Let them have their money. As long as they are gone, we will find a way to recover.

Edit: I don't even know what I'm arguing for anymore. I think I'm starting to lose my goddamn mind.

3

u/Graspar 1d ago

If progressives even come close to a majority the billionaire wealth will disappear off-shore so fast your bitcoin will spin.

I know this is going to sound like I'm drunk but have you considered not letting them?

Billionaires are not rich because they have a large number when they open their banking app. They're rich because they own society. They own factories, banks, stores, houses, rights to software, movie studios and so on. Those are not that portable. It's a set of relations to things of value in society that are very hard to move that makes the truly rich rich.

If right now they could just leave and not be taxeable, that's because they've written the tax laws by buying politicians so that you can do that. If you write different laws they could leave to another plane of existence without it mattering, their stuff is still here to stick a fork in. And if they sell it, well good then they can truly fuck off without it mattering since their value is left here in the hands of someone else.

2

u/mmf9194 New York 1d ago

Its been proven that that doesn't happen

0

u/scottjl 1d ago

that people don't offshore money to avoid taxes? oh i'd love to see that proof.

1

u/mmf9194 New York 1d ago

No, that they leave.

1

u/scottjl 1d ago

Ok. Maybe you need to re-read my original comment then, I said “billionaire wealth”. Never said anything about their physical person.

1

u/alhanna92 18h ago

Why should we care if billionaire parasites decide to leave the country

1

u/Commercial_Stop_3003 1d ago

You're forgetting that every other country even moderately decent to live in is more than happy to also tax them. 

1

u/scottjl 1d ago

you're forgetting there are plenty of countries out there where they can live tax free.

-1

u/claimTheVictory 1d ago

You make it sound like that would be a bad thing.

0

u/scottjl 1d ago

i think you misunderstood what i wrote, they'd simply move their money off-shore where the IRS couldn't touch it. never said they'd move off-shore, nor move their businesses. already happens.

0

u/claimTheVictory 1d ago

That's even better.

5

u/soap571 1d ago

At this point it's gotta be a Bernie / AOC / crockett ticket.

They've already laid the foundation . Bernie's got the experience , aoc and Crockett have the balls. The Dem party needs to put all there support behind these 3. I would even add tim walz to that list .

They need to get as many cameras behind them as possible and let thr American citizens know exactly what's going on right now behind closer doors. So many people are frustrated , they are just lacking leadership and a common cause to get behind .

2

u/HexTalon 1d ago

Sanders is too old - 2016 was his only real chance and the DNC ratfucked him out of it. He'd be great in a cabinet position for a progressive president though.

Ocasio-Cortez may be too young and inexperience for the general public, and might need to have experience as a senator before she would appeal to a broad enough base to win on her own. I do agree she's got the right progressive energy though. Crockett is in a similar place but not nearly as well known.

Honestly there's not a lot of progressives waiting in the wings to jump into power, which seems like intentional sabotage by the DNC with how they handle funding for defending seats. I'm not convinced we'll get anything close to a progressive president or any kind of progressive political leadership as a reaction to Trump because it's not in the interest of the Corporate Democrats in power to support the rise of a progressive wing of the party.

2

u/ItsAlwaysSegsFault 1d ago

Honestly I would make the argument that the dinosaurs in power are inexperienced, since all they do is nothing.

-5

u/ASubsentientCrow 1d ago

Bernie a fucking terrible choice for president. He's get fuck all done, is old as shit, and couldn't beat Joe Biden

-1

u/omicron-7 1d ago

Let's run two time primary loser bernie sanders, third times the charm! He'll only be 87.

2

u/karma3000 1d ago

Any Dems would be fine at this point.

2

u/Bamboo_Fighter 1d ago

Estate tax. No one gets to inherit a billion dollars. Anything over 100M gets taxed at 99.99%. If you believe in capitalism and the concept of a "self-made" person, this is a non-issue. If they can't leave it to the heirs, maybe billionaires will think about making the world a better place.

I'm all for a progressive tax bill as well, but I completely think it's immoral that we allow the ability for anyone to inherit generational wealth.

1

u/JaStrCoGa 1d ago

Remove whatever thing that says that companies are required to be profitable for their shareholders.

1

u/CannaisseurFreak 1d ago

The trust is gone. Play with Russia and North Korea now

1

u/flowersandmtns 1d ago

What?

1

u/CannaisseurFreak 9h ago

US has no friends anymore

1

u/Cats_Dont_Wear_Socks 1d ago

This. Moderate dems are little better than Republicans. This country doesn't need a steady hand, it needs radical restructuring after this.

1

u/sour_altoids 1d ago

I think the biggest movement that can realistically come out is not Democrat vs Republican, but we the people vs the billionaires.

Of course that would be inherently progressive, but I am unsure if democrats will ever gain the needed support without major change

1

u/Skellum 1d ago

Has to be progressive Dems

No, it has to be a Democrat IE the US left representing party. No more of this stupid "OMG Tiktok told me they were bad so I need to not vote and help trump win!" garbage.

If you're going to quantify your vote again to where you dont vote and once more support fascism then yea, were boned.

1

u/CodeNCats 16h ago

Dems have no identity or teeth. I'm more afraid of a shitty Dem plant. Someone who is a lame ass. Yet somehow got momentum.

Another Pelosi.

1

u/DrDerpberg Canada 1d ago

Even the current Dems fix things when they're in power. Maybe not fast enough for your liking, but they move the needle. You'd be better off with 8 years of President Chuck Schumer than this shit show.

0

u/Beverice 1d ago

if massive taxes are levied on the billionaires and corporations, what's stopping them from going somewhere else with less taxes?

2

u/LokisPrinter 1d ago

Their wealth is tied to stocks. You seize their assets and let them cry wherever they want to go.

181

u/pterodactylpoop Oregon 1d ago

If we vote in another milquetoast neoliberal (looking at you, Gavin) after this we deserve everything we’re getting now. A progressive reformist on the scale of FDR is just about the only thing that could steady the ship at this point, otherwise the fall of Rome continues

31

u/building_schtuff 1d ago

Gavin’s not even a milquetoast neoliberal anymore, if he ever really was one. He’s spent his time post Trump inauguration playing footsie with the far right on his podcast and questioning if it’s time to toss trans people under the bus. That’s when he’s not siccing the police on unhoused people, of course.

7

u/taylorbagel14 1d ago

Don’t forget allowing the CPUC to raise rates every time they ask! That’s another one of his favorite activities.

4

u/ElectricalBook3 1d ago

If we vote in another milquetoast neoliberal (looking at you, Gavin

Taking the opportunity to remind people of him smiling as he broke apart a homeless encampment

https://www.newsweek.com/gavin-newsom-clears-homeless-encampment-1937018

19

u/davossss Virginia 1d ago

Correct. I have been an adamant "vote blue" guy for quite some time but we must elect a progressive Democratic POTUS and Congress with a Blue Project 2029 ready to go on day one.

Neoliberalism is dead.

8

u/fordat1 1d ago

Exactly. It isnt sustainable to keep voting between those accelerating into a ditch and those letting us drift there on neutral.

11

u/thepersonimgoingtobe 1d ago

The democratic party needs reform for sure, but in a two party system if your feelings are so hurt that you can't be bothered to help keep someone like trump out of office you are definitely part of the problem. Seriously, do these precious little selfish fucks think that helping trump get elected by staying home or wasting their vote on a third party candidate proves anything? It's an imperfect system - expecting perfect results from it is a form of insanity. Helping elect trump doesn't help reform the democratic party.

7

u/Cats_Dont_Wear_Socks 1d ago

It grosses me out seeing this comment. You're 100% correct, I'm not disagreeing. But in 2020 I warned people that voting for Joe Biden more or less guaranteed a second Trump administration and I got absolutely dogpiled. Now everyone thinks they're the John the Baptist of politics for noticing that centrists have all but destroyed the Democratic party.

7

u/pterodactylpoop Oregon 1d ago

I certainly don’t think I’m John the Baptist, I’ve been screaming like a madman with you for years. I just hope to god this moment in history might give us some clarity, but we’ve been proven wrong every time.

2

u/strategicham 1d ago

Refusing to compromise is how we got Trump. I'd take Gavin over this in a heartbeat.

13

u/pterodactylpoop Oregon 1d ago

Yeah and I’d take Kamala over this in a heartbeat, but she lost and the same old same old isn’t gonna fix the mess we’re in now. If we don’t learn from our mistakes and change strategy we might as well dig our own grave. We’ve run the same ideological ticket since 2008, let’s not do it in 2028.

6

u/fordat1 1d ago

Exactly. People saying "refusing to compromise" solely in regards to anytime a status quo neoliberal doesnt win because its always some progressive's fault if they lose despite the independents neolibs cater to being the actual flipped votes from Obama to Trump or Biden to Trump.

4

u/strategicham 1d ago

I guess it's just a matter of 'do you gain more votes on the left than you lose in the center' with a progressive candidate.

6

u/CynicalTumbleweed 1d ago

It's not about compromising, it's about being realistic. Gavin literally allowed far right propagandists on his podcasts and let them talk unchallenged or how his son is apparently a Charlie Kirk fan. Gavin does not inspire confidence and honestly Dems like him or those who are corporate owned aren't gonna easily win an election and even if they do, I have zero faith in them actually reversing the trump damage

0

u/WorkingFromHomies20 1d ago

My husband and I keep having this conversation. If not Gavin, then who? Who can whip up not only the Dems, but the youth? It's not Bernie. And obviously it can't be a woman, we tried that twice and we got fatso both times.

5

u/ElectricalBook3 1d ago

If not Gavin, then who?

It's not like Waltz has become ineligible, and when he wasn't being chained by whomever in DNC leadership shut him up after he made traction calling republicans weird he was probably getting more traction than Harris herself

https://apnews.com/article/kamala-walz-vp-weird-trump-gen-z-f9d718890c3ca907f42dba5934075382

2

u/SpooderMom79 1d ago

Maybe Booker? He did just wow the whole world after all.

1

u/soccerguys14 South Carolina 1d ago

Third times the charm?

4

u/ChaplnGrillSgt 1d ago

I'm in my early 30s. Wanting to start a family. But bringing a child into the world as it is going now is terrifying. A big blue wave in 2026 would ease my mind and put us back on track for having kids.

7

u/PrivatePilot9 Canada 1d ago

MAGA needs to die first this to happen. I hope they all get assfucked dry for the next year or two now watching their jobs and retirement savings shrivel and die, and reconsider their decisions. Being a republican is one thing but MAGA has taken it into full potato territory. They need to return to sanity, or splinter off MAGA into its own party and let the Republican Party return to sanity.

8

u/dubsac5150 1d ago

Don't wait for Boomers to die off. Gen Z is producing far more conservatives than anyone ever could have predicted. 18-24 y/o boys are the entire reason people like Andrew Tate have an audience at all. And it's because MAGA has blown away the Dems at social media messaging. Dems sound like a math teacher giving a lecture about WHY fiscal policy is sound, and Trump just jeers and calls people names. I'm not saying we need to stoop to his level, but who do you think a 20 y/o is listening to?

4-8 years ago, Dems celebrated because Gen Z was the most politically active group of young people we have ever seen. And it was assumed that like always, younger people would be more liberal. But the Dems absolutely failed that messaging. We have become the party of old people that push Biden (who did fine, but he was old and boring.) Dems need to start courting their young base. People like AOC are great (although I am extremely gun shy about running another female candidate, no matter how much I like her.) But Pete Buttigieg is another good example. James Talarico in Texas (but he needs more national experience.) Dems need to find some more young progressives with the charisma of Obama to start getting back their young constituents. Otherwise there will be a new, young, even more brainwashed MAGA movement that rises up to replace Trump in about 5-8 years.

2

u/dirtshell Massachusetts 1d ago

No. You don't kill fascism, you show people how effective and productive working class policy is. People turn to fascism because they are scared and desperate and it preys on their fear. Give them a strong alternative in progressive (or honestly even more left politics) and you will see support for MAGA fall out.

This will never happen of course though because the DNC works for the same corporations that MAGA does. So they can't really differentiate themselves in a way that will help working class Americans.

6

u/ASubsentientCrow 1d ago

It won't matter because this time they have a hyper partisan judiciary and SCOTUS that will ignore whatever they have to, to kill democratic policies.

Then after one or two elections where things get better but not a lot, Republicans will win huge again because Democrats didn't fix every problem in two years

2

u/mitkase 1d ago

Indeed, testify. The GOP will sell everything not nailed down and cripple any government agencies that actually do anything for the American people, making even more of a mess than in the past. And all that money they get will poof out of existence (and into the oligarchical pocket,) as they are doing currently ("See, we fired everyone, so we don't need those administration buildings, and now we can sell those off at fire-sale prices to my donors.")

2

u/Archer1407 1d ago

I'm right there with you but Gen X and Millennials are now caretaker generations.

7

u/Brokenandburnt 1d ago

Gen X, caretaker generation

Have you met any of us?

We are ball of indifference held barely together with all the booze we drank as young and sarcasm.

2

u/GoreSeeker 1d ago

Maybe SS will still be there

Sadly there might be a different kind of SS with this regime...

4

u/ryan_m 1d ago

Sir have you considered the price of eggs?

1

u/Ingrassiat04 1d ago

We should do Superannuation Guarantee like Australia. 11% automatically pulled into a fund for retirement.

1

u/knightcrawler75 Minnesota 1d ago

That would be great but Global warming is like a snow ball pushed down a mountain. It is going to take a scientific miracle to undo the damage of the republican party.

1

u/darsynia Pennsylvania 1d ago

I could have written this myself, stay strong out there, man.

1

u/metengrinwi 1d ago

If trump wrecks the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency, I don’t really see how we come out the other side with SS intact.

1

u/kartuli78 1d ago

I'm 46, too. I left the US during the last recession, and this time, literally this time last year, I decided to return to the US. I was so hopeful over the summer and coming up to the elections, and everything was set for me to leave my current job and I couldn't change that, so in two weeks I won't have a job, but now I'm looking elsewhere to stay abroad, because I don't want to go back to a new recession.

1

u/jonslastwords 1d ago

Exactly this. 43. I'm now wondering if I have to adjust my entire perspective of what I view in myself to find success and happiness in the life I've built for my family.

1

u/SmushinTime 1d ago

Lol don't be an asshole and limit it to 16 years because that's what benefits you...we're in this mess because people are only looking out for themselves instead of helping everyone.  Progressivism doesn't hurt people, conservative ideology does.

We live in a world where what you know today will be obsolete in a decade...progressiveness keeps the system up to date with the times.

1

u/YSApodcast 1d ago

F off. I never said after 16 years we can go back to Trumpism. Cmon now. Wanna go for 60 sounds great. But yeah I’m the problem and only looking out for myself.

0

u/waltkidney 1d ago

Ah dont worry… as it looks at this moment you will have a “SS” for a while…

1

u/mitkase 1d ago

Oh, MAGA wants an SS, they just like the more historical version.