Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

B402, Yep, and you tell us again which party is most responsible for increased inequality.

"These conversations will always circle back to income inequity out of control..."

Which party railed against raising the minimum wage. Which party does the most to make income tax scales less progressive.
Which party does more to disempower workers. Which party has made less of an effort to break monopolies. See:

"Bidenomics Is Real Economics" Excerpt 3
[...]
Bidenomics’ focus on “empowering” workers is an equally radical departure from an economic orthodoxy whose theories disingenuously ignore the role of power in determining economic outcomes while employing policies that do all they can to disempower workers. Reagan infamously broke the air traffic controllers union in 1981, firing all 11,345 striking workers and vindictively banning them from public service for life. Corporate America quickly followed his lead. Over the next four decades private sector union membership plummeted .. https://www.epi.org/unequalpower/publications/private-sector-unions-corporate-legal-erosion/ .. from over 20 percent in 1980 to barely 6 percent in 2020, an erosion of worker power that is exacerbated by a $7.25 an hour federal minimum wage that would be 63 percent higher today (nearly $12 an hour) had the wage Reagan inherited merely kept pace with inflation. By contrast, when Biden broke with tradition to join striking auto workers on the picket lines, he sent a clear a message that the balance of power was shifting. A few weeks later, Ford agreed .. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/17/uaw-ford-workers-ratify-new-contract.html .. to a contract that delivers auto workers an effective 33 percent raise. Stellantis, GM, and even non-unionized automakers quickly followed.

Contrary to the charts in the Econ 101 textbooks, employers don’t pay you what you’re worth. They pay you what you have the power to negotiate. When worker power erodes, so do real wages.

In fact, the stagnant wages of the past forty years are best understood as a feature of Reaganomics, not a bug.
[...]
But of Bidenomics’ three pillars, [1. public investment .. 2. empowering workers .. 3. promoting competition] perhaps the most dramatic departure from the old consensus has come in the administration’s historic Executive Order on Competition .. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/07/09/executive-order-on-promoting-competition-in-the-american-economy/ , which “commits the federal government to full and aggressive enforcement of our antitrust laws .. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/07/09/remarks-by-president-biden-at-signing-of-an-executive-order-promoting-competition-in-the-american-economy/ ” for the first time in more than forty years.

On antitrust as on most economic issues, Reaganomics simply asks us to place our faith in the infinite wisdom of the market.
[...]
This emphasis on efficiency illustrates a fundamental disagreement between Reaganomics and Bidenomics. The orthodox economic theories that inform Reaganomics insist that the market functions primarily as a self-organizing tool for efficiently allocating capital, and if efficiency can be maximized through market concentration or automation or offshoring (or union busting), then so be it. By contrast, Bidenomics is grounded in modern economic theory that recognizes that, while markets are incredibly effective at evolving new solutions to human problems, they are often remarkably inefficient, and that what capital efficiencies they create can sometimes come with unacceptable amounts of economic and societal risk. For example, the capital efficiencies that arguably came from relying on “just in time” deliveries of masks and gowns and gloves and other basic medical supplies offshored to low-cost Chinese manufacturers surely cost American lives during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, while the subsequent shortage of semiconductors, mostly designed in America but efficiently manufactured overseas, ground our automobile industry to a halt for want of a domestic supply at any price.

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173500262

Your enabling of Trump by constantly piling on the Dems is wildly contradictory to your claim to be independent.

Your false equivalency that the extremes of both parties are equally damaging to America is just silly.