Apr 6, 2025
Apr 5, 2025
Bedfellows
Seems odd. There are guys who harp on "Only soy boys drive hybrids and electric cars. A real man - a real AMERICAN man - coal rolls in his F-350 while chuggin' battery acid on the rocks, and munchin' on 20d nails!".
And these are now the guys rushing to the defense of the green-energy Earth-friendly girly car that comes with a coupon for a free pair of Birkenstocks and a year's supply of paper straws.
After weeks of “Tesla Takedown” protests, extremist groups are showing up to back Elon Musk’s beleaguered car company.
Over the weekend, thousands of people joined the “Tesla Takedown” protest movement at the company’s showrooms across the country. At the same time, a much smaller number of Elon Musk supporters turned out at Tesla locations for a counterprotest movement that some participants dubbed “Tesla Shield.”
While the protest movement comprises people angered at Elon Musk’s role in the dismantling of federal government agencies, the counterprotest movement that showed up this weekend was peopled mostly by MAGA supporters. Among them were an array of far-right extremists, including members of the Proud Boys, armed militias, and at one event in Idaho, a guy dressed as Hitler.
As Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) rips through huge swaths of the federal government and puts people’s lives and livelihoods at risk, the Tesla protest movement has gained traction. Tesla’s stock price has dropped by more than 30 percent since the beginning of the year. Isolated incidents of vandalism against Tesla vehicles and chargers as well as dealerships have led Trump to push the Department of Justice to treat alleged violent protesters as “domestic terrorists,” and now some extremist groups have taken it upon themselves to help Musk fight back.
“My people will be free, my people will rule again,” David Pettinger, a member of the extremist anti-government People’s Rights group, shouted at protesters in a fake German accent outside a Tesla dealership in Meridian, Idaho, on Saturday, according to video footage of the incident.
A moustachioed Pettinger wore a T-shirt with the words “LITERALLY HITLER” written on the back and a picture of Musk giving a nazi-like salute on the front. Wearing jodhpurs and black boots, Pettinger marched in front of protesters and handed out heart-shaped stickers to Musk supporters.
Pettinger told WIRED that he dressed as Hitler to “make fun of the overuse of the terms nazi and fascist.” However, Pettinger’s posts on X echo Hitler’s deeply antisemitic worldview.
Also in Meridian were a number of armed individuals in camouflage gear, some wearing body armor, according to images of the counterprotest posted to Bluesky. Pettinger also appeared to be armed, according to video footage showing a handgun tucked into his jodhpurs.
Meanwhile, Josh Fulfer, who is known online as Oreo Express and was at the US Capitol in Washington on January 6, joined a counterprotest group in Fresno, California, telling a local news outlet: “We’re out here to show support for DOGE, Elon Musk, Tesla, and this administration.” Fulfer can be seen on his own videos harassing and shouting at protesters.
Ahead of the Tesla Takedown protests this weekend, the Proud Boys and other far-right groups put out calls on their social media channels for supporters to show up in numbers and counter the protests.
A virtually all of the dealerships which had protests this weekend, however, the number of anti-Musk protesters vastly outnumbered the pro-Musk protesters.
In Columbus, Ohio, news that a local Proud Boy chapter had urged supporters to show up didn’t dissuade more than 1,000 anti-Musk protesters from turning up. Meanwhile, fewer than 50 pro-Musk supporters were in attendance, according to local media. The Proud Boy group claimed they would be infiltrating the protesters to gather information, but it’s unclear if they were present at Saturday’s protest.
In Salem, Oregon, pro-Musk supporters waved Proud Boys flags in front of a Tesla dealership while many of them walked around wearing the group’s uniform of yellow and black clothing.
Meanwhile, in Oklahoma, the far-right anti-government militia group Veterans on Patrol announced on its Telegram channel that it was taking a break from monitoring and tracking immigrants to infiltrate a Tesla Takedown protest for “redirecting action against Elon and EVs towards a more reasonable target.”
Musk himself posted multiple times about the protests over the weekend, claiming without any evidence that the protesters were being paid. The hate-filled LibsofTikTok account, operated by Chaya Raichik, responded to one of Musk’s post, claiming: “Soros is paying for this,” referring to Hungarian billionaire and philanthropist George Soros, who far-right figures believe is controlling huge swaths of the global population.
As Musk continues to tear through the federal government, and Tesla’s stock price continues to plummet, the organizers of the Tesla Takedown movement have pledged to continue to protest, with the movement now reaching other parts of the world as well. But equally, members identifying with the so-called Tesla Shield movement have vowed, on posts on X and Facebook, to continue their efforts to defend Musk and his company.
Bad Government
Once Republicans lined up behind the dumbass generic notions that people can't possibly be working if they're working from home, and that voting any way other than in person is outright fraud, they can't help but apply their shit in a thick even coat across everything they see.
They want us to believe they're just adhering to principle, but we all know they have no principles because they keep talking one way and then doing things that run opposite to what they say.
This is as perfect an example as anything. They yell about freedom and democracy, and then do whatever they can to keep certain people from freely exercising their right - even duty - to vote. Especially when it comes to women.
Case in point:
Johnson fails to kill bipartisan measure to allow proxy voting for new parents
After the vote, Speaker Mike Johnson abruptly canceled votes for the rest of the week
WASHINGTON — Speaker Mike Johnson on Tuesday tried and failed to kill a bipartisan effort to change House rules so that lawmakers would temporarily be allowed to vote remotely after the birth of a child, suffering an embarrassing defeat that paralyzed the chamber and signaled that the proposal could soon be adopted.
Using strong-arm tactics in a bid to block the measure, Johnson tried an extraordinary use of the speaker’s power to prevent the House from even considering a measure backed by half its members. But nine Republicans refused to go along, instead dealing him a public rebuke that left him without a strategy for moving ahead.
After the vote, Johnson abruptly canceled votes for the rest of the week, sending members home and leaving legislative business unsettled. Under House rules, Republican leaders are required to bring the proxy voting resolution to a vote within two legislative days. But they appeared to be refusing to do anything else until the holdouts in their party cave, which they have shown no sign of doing. As Republicans left Washington for the week having passed no bills, it was not clear how or when the issue would be resolved.
The showdown on the House floor was a capstone of a long-running fight over the rights of new parents in Congress.
It began over a year ago, when Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., began agitating for a change to House rules that would allow new mothers to designate a colleague to vote by proxy on their behalf for up to six weeks after giving birth. Luna landed on the idea after her own child was born.
There is no maternity or paternity leave for lawmakers, who can take time away from office without sacrificing their pay but cannot vote if they are not physically in the Capitol. Proponents of the change have called it a common-sense fix to modernize Congress, where more women and more younger members serve now than did 200 years ago.
Democrats, including Reps. Brittany Pettersen of Colorado, who gave birth this year to her second child, and Sara Jacobs of California, joined Luna’s effort, expanding the resolution to include new fathers and up to 12 weeks of proxy voting during a parental leave.
Johnson has adamantly opposed the group at every turn, arguing that proxy voting is unacceptable and unconstitutional, even though the Supreme Court refused to take up a Republican-led lawsuit challenging pandemic-era proxy voting rules in the House.
On Tuesday, he used an unprecedented parliamentary maneuver to close off the only path that members of the House have for steering around their leaders and forcing a vote on a measure that has majority support.
But that measure failed on the floor by a 222-206 vote, keeping alive the proxy voting proposal. Eight Republicans joined Luna and all Democrats in voting no.
Johnson and his allies have argued that any accommodation that allows members to vote without being at the Capitol, no matter how narrow, creates a slippery slope for more, and that it harms member collegiality.
“I do believe it’s an existential issue for this body,” Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., who chairs the Rules Committee, said Tuesday. “Congress is defined as the ‘act of coming together and meeting.’”
Later on the floor, Foxx asserted flatly: “Put simply, members of Congress need to show up for work.”
When Johnson refused to bring the bill to the floor, Luna and her cohorts used a tool called the discharge petition — a demand signed by 218 members of the House, the majority of the body — to force consideration of the measure.
But on Tuesday morning, Republicans on the Rules Committee, often referred to as the “speaker’s committee” because the speaker uses it to maintain control of the floor, engineered a tricky behind-the-scenes maneuver to kill the effort.
They approved a measure that would block the proxy voting bill or any legislation on a similar topic from reaching the floor during the remainder of the Congress, effectively nullifying the discharge petition and closing off any chance for its supporters to secure a vote on the matter for the next two years.
GOP lawmakers inserted it into an unrelated resolution to allow for a vote on the SAVE Act, legislation requiring people to prove their citizenship when they register to vote, in a bid to pressure Republicans to support it. That is the measure that failed Tuesday on the floor.
Democrats implored Republicans to consider the proxy voting change, which they argued was vital to allowing all lawmakers to do their jobs.
“It is unfathomable that in 2025 we have not modernized Congress to address these very unique challenges that members face — these life events, where our voices should still be heard, our constituents should still be represented,” Pettersen said on the House floor, holding her 9-week-old son, Sam, who gurgled in her arms.
She denounced Johnson’s maneuver, saying: “It is anti-woman. It is anti-family.”
They also called the move an unprecedented attempt to shut down a crucial mechanism in the House for ensuring that measures that have majority support are voted upon.
“Republicans love to talk about family values, but when given the chance to actually support families, they turn their backs,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. “If you want to protect your rights as members of Congress, you should vote no here.”
In trying to block the measure, Johnson took a gamble, risking public humiliation in a bid to thwart a resolution that had support from members of both parties.
Johnson even leaned on President Donald Trump to help him, people familiar with the conversations said, hoping the president could urge Luna, a stalwart Trump supporter, to stand down. The pressure campaign, however, appeared to have only strengthened Luna’s resolve.
On Monday, Luna resigned from the House Freedom Caucus, citing its members’ unwillingness to back her in what she called a “modest, family-centered proposal.”
After the vote Tuesday, she told reporters the proposal would improve the House and the country.
“We had a good majority of Republicans as well that agreed this needs to change and it’s part of a healthy republic,” she said. She added that it was a big day for the institution “and allowing new parents to have a voice in Washington.”
Johnson’s view is in line with the longtime Republican position on proxy voting.
Republicans savaged Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for breaking with centuries of history and House rules by instituting proxy voting during the coronavirus pandemic. When he was minority leader, Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., filed an unsuccessful lawsuit arguing that allowing a member of Congress to deputize a colleague to cast a vote on their behalf when they were not present was unconstitutional.
Johnson and his allies have argued that any accommodation that allows members to vote without being at the Capitol, no matter how narrow, creates a slippery slope for more, and that it harms member collegiality.
“I do believe it’s an existential issue for this body,” Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., who chairs the Rules Committee, said Tuesday. “Congress is defined as the ‘act of coming together and meeting.’”
Later on the floor, Foxx asserted flatly: “Put simply, members of Congress need to show up for work.”
When Johnson refused to bring the bill to the floor, Luna and her cohorts used a tool called the discharge petition — a demand signed by 218 members of the House, the majority of the body — to force consideration of the measure.
But on Tuesday morning, Republicans on the Rules Committee, often referred to as the “speaker’s committee” because the speaker uses it to maintain control of the floor, engineered a tricky behind-the-scenes maneuver to kill the effort.
They approved a measure that would block the proxy voting bill or any legislation on a similar topic from reaching the floor during the remainder of the Congress, effectively nullifying the discharge petition and closing off any chance for its supporters to secure a vote on the matter for the next two years.
GOP lawmakers inserted it into an unrelated resolution to allow for a vote on the SAVE Act, legislation requiring people to prove their citizenship when they register to vote, in a bid to pressure Republicans to support it. That is the measure that failed Tuesday on the floor.
Democrats implored Republicans to consider the proxy voting change, which they argued was vital to allowing all lawmakers to do their jobs.
“It is unfathomable that in 2025 we have not modernized Congress to address these very unique challenges that members face — these life events, where our voices should still be heard, our constituents should still be represented,” Pettersen said on the House floor, holding her 9-week-old son, Sam, who gurgled in her arms.
She denounced Johnson’s maneuver, saying: “It is anti-woman. It is anti-family.”
They also called the move an unprecedented attempt to shut down a crucial mechanism in the House for ensuring that measures that have majority support are voted upon.
“Republicans love to talk about family values, but when given the chance to actually support families, they turn their backs,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. “If you want to protect your rights as members of Congress, you should vote no here.”
In trying to block the measure, Johnson took a gamble, risking public humiliation in a bid to thwart a resolution that had support from members of both parties.
Johnson even leaned on President Donald Trump to help him, people familiar with the conversations said, hoping the president could urge Luna, a stalwart Trump supporter, to stand down. The pressure campaign, however, appeared to have only strengthened Luna’s resolve.
On Monday, Luna resigned from the House Freedom Caucus, citing its members’ unwillingness to back her in what she called a “modest, family-centered proposal.”
After the vote Tuesday, she told reporters the proposal would improve the House and the country.
“We had a good majority of Republicans as well that agreed this needs to change and it’s part of a healthy republic,” she said. She added that it was a big day for the institution “and allowing new parents to have a voice in Washington.”
Johnson’s view is in line with the longtime Republican position on proxy voting.
Republicans savaged Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for breaking with centuries of history and House rules by instituting proxy voting during the coronavirus pandemic. When he was minority leader, Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., filed an unsuccessful lawsuit arguing that allowing a member of Congress to deputize a colleague to cast a vote on their behalf when they were not present was unconstitutional.
A Little Hopium For Today
It's encouraging to hear both a Dem and a Republican signed on to the letter, but I'm still interested to know:
What's the Over/Under for days before somebody tries to fire the DOD IG?
This Will Not Be Fun
And part of that problem is that some companies whose stuff isn't imported - or are selling stuff that's impacted just a little - will see the tariffs as an opportunity to jack up their prices right along with everybody else.
And I'll go out on the limb here and say there are politicians just itchin' to use the potentially backbreaking effects of the tariffs as leverage to kill taxes altogether (some have talked about this for a long time, and we're getting it from Trump now too). We may start to hear about attempts to re-animate some variation on the stupid idea that a flat tax is the fairest way to do things.
Also - there have been proposals floated that we should ditch income tax and go with a universal sales tax, or a value-added tax. This is all regressive as fuck and pushes what's left of the middle class down - and keeps everybody down - while benefiting only people who're making more than 3 or 4 hundred K.
I hate this shit. When we had a graduating, progressive tax schedule, it helped drive the societal machinery that made for a strong and stable middle class, which build up the best overall system ever.
Fake lord knows it wasn't perfect - far from it - but by the middle 60s it seemed like everybody was going to have a shot at the dream. And we'd begun to understand that when everybody has a shot, and everybody understands that everybody deserves it, then we're making the whole thing better for ourselves.
I sound like a sad old man waxing nostalgic, so back to the point:
This latest bullshit feels like more coercion. If they make us miserable enough, we'll bend to their will and sign on for whatever might ease the pressure.
So here's a look at what WaPo thinks is headed our way.
Shoppers will see uneven price increases on goods.
The global tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump this week will cause prices to rise on a broad array of food, household items and electronics, economists warn.
But the increases won’t be applied equally — some items are likely to see much higher price hikes than others. Trump imposed 10 percent tariffs on imports from nearly every country and imposed higher rates on goods coming from about 60 specific countries.
Consumer goods will be more exposed to higher tariffs than food and drinks
That means products that the United States commonly gets from Vietnam, such as clothing and shoes, would be subject to a new 46 percent tax, whereas goods from Colombia, like flowers, would see a lower new 10 percent levy. Imports from Mexico, such as avocados, will have no new tax. In any case, shopping is about to get more expensive for Americans.
“There’s no way this is going to be absorbed by firms alone,” said Michael Pearce, deputy chief U.S. economist at Oxford Economics. “This will be felt by consumers.”
The vast majority of consumer goods — almost 80 percent — brought into United States will be subject to tariffs of at least 20 percent, according to a Washington Post analysis of international trade data from the Census Bureau.
Canada and Mexico weren’t included in the latest round of tariffs, though a 25 percent tax was placed earlier this year on some of the goods they export to the United States.
“I think Mexico is breathing a sigh of relief,” said Michael Camuñez, president and CEO of Monarch Global Strategies, which advises businesses in international trade.
Mexico and Canada are the United States’ largest trading partners for food, and imports can avoid tariffs entirely if they are compliant with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) agreement. Still, experts expect food prices to rise somewhat with the new tariffs.
“The bottom line is, it does mean more inflation,” said Tom Bailey, a senior consumer foods analyst at Rabobank.
The prices of food products from other parts of the world, such as tea from Vietnam, could increase much more sharply with the high tax rates.
“Some retailers might just hang up a sign to consumers in shops and say, ‘price plus tariff,’” said Judy Ganes, president of J Ganes Consulting, which works with food and agricultural industries.
Bailey cautioned that prices will not rise exactly in line with the percentage of tariffs — a 46 percent tariff does not mean the final product will cost 46 percent more. Actual increases on finished goods are expected to be much less because some of the cost of the product comes from distribution and operations in the United States.
Countries in Asia are facing some of the highest rates, including goods from China, with tariffs of at least 54 percent, and goods from Vietnam, with a new 46 percent tax. That’s sure to mean higher prices for electronics such as phones, computers and video game consoles, which are often imported from the continent. The tariff imposed on goods from China could add roughly $250 or more to the cost of a $1,000 iPhone, though it’s not clear yet how much of the tariff costs would show up in consumer sticker prices.
The United States Fashion Industry Association said in a statement it was “disappointed” that the Trump administration imposed tariffs on the industry’s trading partners.
Most of the clothing sold in the U.S. is imported from abroad, and even clothing made domestically often relies on fabrics and yarn that are brought in from other countries, said Sheng Lu, a professor of fashion and apparel studies at the University of Delaware.
Apart from paying the new tariffs, clothing companies could also face a pullback from consumers, as people grow increasingly wary about their personal finances.
“If consumers do not feel safe about their financial outlook, they may stop buying clothing,” Lu said.
Apr 4, 2025
Outlook: Bleak
The "smart money" is all on recession right now.
Gold just hit a fresh all-time high with tariff worries sending investors scrambling for safety
Gold just hit a fresh all-time high with tariff worries sending investors scrambling for safety
- Gold reached a fresh high over over $3,100 an ounce on Monday.
- The safe haven is gaining on tariff fears, falling yields, and a declining dollar.
- Goldman expects the gold prices to reach $3,300 an ounce by year-end.
Tariff anxiety is crushing risk appetite and sending gold to fresh highs amid the flight to safety.
The yellow metal surged to $3,127 per ounce Monday morning, up $100 in less than a week. Tariff-driven economic fears have made it one of this year's hottest commodities, having gained 18.3% so far in 2025.
The metal gained momentum amid heavy losses in US stocks on Monday as traders brace for the April 2 tariff date set by Trump.
Investors worry that the sweeping duties could escalate a global trade war, battering US markets and the economy. The tariffs have been the chief culprit behind the stock market's correction this year, and explain why Treasury yields have dropped to the 4% range.
But the stock market's pain is gold's gain this year.
"While stocks falter, gold continues to shine. The metal's status as a safe haven has been reinforced by tightening financial conditions, falling bond yields, and a weaker US dollar," wrote Daniela Sabin Hathorn, senior market analyst at Capital.com. "As foreign demand for US assets drops due to lower yields, the environment becomes increasingly supportive for non-yielding assets like gold."
At $3,100 an ounce, the metal trades above the year-end forecasts made at the end of 2024.
But since President Donald Trump took office, banks such as Goldman Sachs have reassessed expectations. As of last week, the bank now sees $3,300 as the likely outcome, as tariff fears have reshaped gold flows and a pick up in central bank demand.
"While ETF flows generally track Fed policy rates, history shows they can overshoot during extended periods of macro uncertainty -- such as during the Covid-19 pandemic," the bank wrote Wednesday.
While technical indicators suggest gold is currently overbought, broader bullish momentum should overcome any short-term consolidation, Hathorn said. The next level of resistance for the metal will be at $3,200.
But some are not so sure the metal can keep outperforming. Morningstar analyst Jon Mills told Business Insider that a number of headwinds will drag gold to $1,820 in the coming years.
For now, tariff jitters are also moving other metals. Copper, which reached a nine-month high recently, is in retreat ahead of the April levies. According to ING, industrial metals suffer if tariffs slow global growth.
The yellow metal surged to $3,127 per ounce Monday morning, up $100 in less than a week. Tariff-driven economic fears have made it one of this year's hottest commodities, having gained 18.3% so far in 2025.
The metal gained momentum amid heavy losses in US stocks on Monday as traders brace for the April 2 tariff date set by Trump.
Investors worry that the sweeping duties could escalate a global trade war, battering US markets and the economy. The tariffs have been the chief culprit behind the stock market's correction this year, and explain why Treasury yields have dropped to the 4% range.
But the stock market's pain is gold's gain this year.
"While stocks falter, gold continues to shine. The metal's status as a safe haven has been reinforced by tightening financial conditions, falling bond yields, and a weaker US dollar," wrote Daniela Sabin Hathorn, senior market analyst at Capital.com. "As foreign demand for US assets drops due to lower yields, the environment becomes increasingly supportive for non-yielding assets like gold."
At $3,100 an ounce, the metal trades above the year-end forecasts made at the end of 2024.
But since President Donald Trump took office, banks such as Goldman Sachs have reassessed expectations. As of last week, the bank now sees $3,300 as the likely outcome, as tariff fears have reshaped gold flows and a pick up in central bank demand.
"While ETF flows generally track Fed policy rates, history shows they can overshoot during extended periods of macro uncertainty -- such as during the Covid-19 pandemic," the bank wrote Wednesday.
While technical indicators suggest gold is currently overbought, broader bullish momentum should overcome any short-term consolidation, Hathorn said. The next level of resistance for the metal will be at $3,200.
But some are not so sure the metal can keep outperforming. Morningstar analyst Jon Mills told Business Insider that a number of headwinds will drag gold to $1,820 in the coming years.
For now, tariff jitters are also moving other metals. Copper, which reached a nine-month high recently, is in retreat ahead of the April levies. According to ING, industrial metals suffer if tariffs slow global growth.
Goldman Sachs downgraded their guesses:
GDP Growth 2025: 1%
Recession Probability: 50%
Biden Showed Up
Joshua Roberts/Reuters
Trump didn't.
Trump Picks Golf Dinner Over Dignified Transfer of U.S. Troops’ Bodies
It was unclear who would be attending the transfer at Delaware’s Dover Air Force base, as the White House did not respond to a request for comment from the Daily Beast.
The Daily Beast has been unable to verify the timing of the dignified transfer, and the White House and the Defense Department also did not respond to requests for comment from NBC.
The soldiers ...
- Sgt. Jose Duenez Jr., 25, of Joliet, Illinois
- Sgt. Edvin F. Franco, 25, of Glendale, California
- Pfc. Dante D. Taitano, 21, of Dededo, Guam
- Staff Sgt. Troy S. Knutson-Collins, 28, of Battle Creek, Michigan
... died when their 70-ton armored vehicle sank in a bog.
The four were honored earlier Thursday during a dignified departure ceremony in Lithuania, with the country’s president, Gitanas Nausėda, in attendance.
“I paid tribute to the four United States soldiers who lost their lives during training exercises in Lithuania,” Nausėda said afterward in a social media post.
“Americans are our loyal allies and friends. Our nation today expresses its condolences, respect, and gratitude to the entire American people.”
Presidents do not always attend dignified transfers of U.S. soldiers, however they have appeared in the past. Then-President Joe Biden and first lady Jill supported grieving families at Dover Air Force Base in February 2024 at a dignified transfer for three U.S. service members killed in a drone attack in Jordan. The Bidens had also met with the families prior to the ritual.
In August 2021, Trump attacked Biden for checking his watch while attending the dignified transfer of 13 U.S. service members killed in Kabul, Afghanistan.
Trump said he has been to Dover “many times.”
According to a 2020 article in The Huffington Post, Trump was so damaged after a Feb. 1, 2017, incident involving Bill Owens, the father of slain Navy SEAL William “Ryan” Owens, that he has avoided many of them since.
Owens refused to meet or shake Trump’s hand during the dignified transfer of Bill’s son, telling the Miami Herald at the time, “I told them I don’t want to meet the President.”
At the time of the HuffPost article, a review of Air Force records showed of 96 dignified transfers since the beginning of Trump’s first presidency. At that stage, he had been to just four.
It Won't Get Better
Near the end of this piece, Steven Rattner hits the mark by identifying the problems of income & wealth disparity, and the long slide from middle class prosperity into stagnation.
But he fails to fully acknowledge that the causes lie, in large part, with short-sighted corporate policies, and the lopsided advantages handed to big companies and their management teams.
None of this gets better until we burn a few CEOs at the stake.
IF WE TAX THE RICH NOW
WE WON'T HAVE TO EAT THEM LATER
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)