HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » DemocracyMouse » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Name: Mouse de la Soul
Gender: Do not display
Hometown: New Jersey
Home country: USA
Member since: Sat Dec 9, 2017, 01:41 PM
Number of posts: 2,275

Journal Archives

Taxing the rich now supported by 53% of Republicans in new poll

----> 53% of Republicans
----> 77% of Democrats
now want the essence of the progressive paradigm: Taxing the richest to pay for social programs. Even the wealthy in both parties are saying enough is enough.

So that leads to a very straightforward conclusion (for those who aren't drinking): Progressives, even Republicans pretending to be progressive when it suits him like Trump, are the most electable.

I hope this lights a fire under ALL democrats. Get your New Deal pajamas on and dance.... oh, and make it a Green New Deal so we can go friggin' solar already. California, Australia and the Amazon burning and Venice is sinking.... and too many people are doing 2-3 jobs to make ends meet.

See below:

‘See? Not Radical’: New poll shows nearly two-thirds of Americans support a wealth tax to fund universal programs

January 10, 2020
By Common Dreams


“It’s simple. The majority of Americans believe that we should tax the rich.”

Supporters of a wealth tax to combat persistent economic inequality in the U.S. pointed to recent polling by Reuters/Ipsos showing that nearly two-thirds of respondents support taxing the rich at higher rates to support programs that would benefit all Americans.

Sixty-four percent of respondents said they either strongly or “somewhat” agreed with the statement, “The very rich should contribute an extra share of their total wealth each year to support public programs.”

The sentiment found support across race, gender, and income demographics as well as from across the political spectrum. Seventy-seven percent of Democrats agreed that the rich should be taxed at a higher rate, while 53% of Republicans agreed.
Posted by DemocracyMouse | Fri Jan 10, 2020, 11:06 PM (13 replies)

Why Castro just endorsed Warren's "fighting Democrat"

This is a deep dive, but may explain how the Democrats lost their path after Reagan, and why Castro just endorsed Elizabeth Warren. Warren, along with other "traditional progressive" Democrats (and social Democrats) is trying to reconnect the party to its former mission.

How America Broke Up With the Democratic Party
By Thom Hartmann / Independent Media Institute
Dec. 19, 2019

The year Reagan was sworn in, we were the richest nation in the world, and other than a few wobbles during the Civil War and two World Wars, our national debt had been relatively steady in inflation-adjusted dollars since the administration of George Washington. We were the world’s largest creditor—more countries owed us money than any other nation on earth.

Today, after nearly 40 years of neoliberal Reaganomics, we are the world’s largest debtor nation, and our national debt nearly outweighs our annual GDP. The year Reagan was sworn into office, the United States was the largest importer of raw materials in the world, and the world’s largest exporter of finished, manufactured goods. We brought in ores for manufacturing, and shipped out everything from TVs and computers to cars and clothing.

Today, things are totally reversed: We are now the world’s mining pit, the largest exporter of raw materials, and the world’s largest importer of finished, manufactured goods. We’ve gone from trade surpluses to trade deficits, a reflection of the fact that our factory floors had moved to Asia and Mexico.... In 1960, about one in four Americans worked in manufacturing, producing things of lasting wealth for our nation. Today, after jumping headfirst into one free-trade agreement after another, fewer than one in ten Americans work in manufacturing. Between 2000 and 2017, 5.5 million manufacturing jobs have been lost. They didn’t disappear; they just moved to low-wage factories in foreign nations.

Ironically, Republican President Eisenhower (1952-1960) knew that Americans loved FDR’s New Deal, and continued FDR’s trade policies... He told his brother Edgar in a 1954 letter, “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history.” Eisenhower added, “There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are… Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.” But Clinton and the “moderate” DLC Democrats embraced becoming Eisenhower Republicans, even as Eisenhower would have repudiated their policies.

“CLINTON SWIPES THE GOP’S LYRICS” read the headline of a 1996 Washington Post column by E.J. Dionne, which opened with this prescient paragraph: “‘The good news is that we may elect a Republican president this year,’ said Republican consultant Alex Castellanos. ‘The bad news is that it may be Bill Clinton.’” The result was the beginning of the Great Uncoupling the Democratic Party experienced in the 1990s, with formerly Democratic-voting working-class and poor people going over to the GOP, a trend we saw continued with Trump’s election. As Harry Truman once said, “The people don’t want a phony Democrat. If it’s a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time..."
Posted by DemocracyMouse | Mon Jan 6, 2020, 02:09 PM (0 replies)

Choose a Democratic candidate that DOESN'T support war

And watch this heroic Veteran spill his guts on US imperialism... before it's taken off YouTube:

Posted by DemocracyMouse | Mon Jan 6, 2020, 01:19 AM (3 replies)
Go to Page: 1