The DNC does not want to tax the rich and fund social programs, otherwise they would actually do it when they have functional majorities like a good portion of Obama’s tenure. They would whip people like Manchin and Sinema. They might campaign on some of these ideals but they do the exact opposite once in power.
The dems basically had 2 years, with a razor thin senate majority, to prevent a second Great Recession, and they passed massive healthcare reform for the uninsured.
And yes, they did sneak in some taxes for the rich during that. They killed Bush’s tax cuts and snuck some stuff in the ACA for high earners.
Actually the “massive health care reform” only further cemented private for profit health care instead of actually moving forward with a real solution: single payer. Sure it helped some people now, but it made the problem worst in the long run. It’s shortsighted at best, and malicious at worst.
Single payer was never going pass in 2008. Not enough dems to break the filibuster, and they needed 9 republicans to jump across the aisle to get to 60 votes.
If people voted in more dems, they’d be getting the healthcare plans that the rest of the modern world has.
The first person to truly float insurance reform was a republican. Romney Care. The DEMs literally went no further than Republicans. That tells you how much they truly tried. Not a lot.
Insurance reform pushes are older than that. The democratic and republican healthcare reform plans from the Clinton era famously both had insurance reform as an element of the reform plans.
The ACA does have similarities to the old Massachusetts plan, but it does go farther in a number of places. Employer mandates are a good example of that. That was an element taken from the old Clinton plan. Most in the GOP never liked that mandate.
Given that most in the GOP moved pretty far to the right in the 15 years between the last national healthcare push, and the dems needed 9 GOP votes to get to 60 in the senate, what was the alternative? Most of the national GOP were basically for the “let the uninsured go bankrupt and die” plan.
Binyamin Appelbaum (of “you worked for a company that was fixing bread prices” fame) wrote a book all about how liberals ushered conservative economics into our financial system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdhUPzrJ1A8&t=2s
First off, the Democrats only had a majority for two years during Obama’s 8 years. Second, they have zero leverage over Sinema who’s not even running as a Democrat in the next election. Third, the liberal and progressive majority of the party hasn’t had a majority in congress for over a decade. The democrats are a big tent party that currently has to appeal to all non fascists, so of course there are conservatives in the party.
There’s a solid grain of truth to your assessment, as far too many Democrats aren’t willing to do what is necessary to prevent fascism from taking over. They make numerous mistakes. However, to paint all liberals as being against raising taxes on the rich and funding social programs is inaccurate. Some do believe social programs are necessary to maintain the government, capitalism, or liberal democracy. It’s not great, but it is better than neoliberalism.
The DNC does not want to tax the rich and fund social programs, otherwise they would actually do it when they have functional majorities like a good portion of Obama’s tenure. They would whip people like Manchin and Sinema. They might campaign on some of these ideals but they do the exact opposite once in power.
Liberal Hypocrisy is Fueling American Inequality.
In the wise words of Phil Ochs Love Me, Love Me, I’m a Liberal.
The dems basically had 2 years, with a razor thin senate majority, to prevent a second Great Recession, and they passed massive healthcare reform for the uninsured.
And yes, they did sneak in some taxes for the rich during that. They killed Bush’s tax cuts and snuck some stuff in the ACA for high earners.
How is that hypocritical at all?
Actually the “massive health care reform” only further cemented private for profit health care instead of actually moving forward with a real solution: single payer. Sure it helped some people now, but it made the problem worst in the long run. It’s shortsighted at best, and malicious at worst.
Single payer was never going pass in 2008. Not enough dems to break the filibuster, and they needed 9 republicans to jump across the aisle to get to 60 votes.
If people voted in more dems, they’d be getting the healthcare plans that the rest of the modern world has.
The first person to truly float insurance reform was a republican. Romney Care. The DEMs literally went no further than Republicans. That tells you how much they truly tried. Not a lot.
Insurance reform pushes are older than that. The democratic and republican healthcare reform plans from the Clinton era famously both had insurance reform as an element of the reform plans.
The ACA does have similarities to the old Massachusetts plan, but it does go farther in a number of places. Employer mandates are a good example of that. That was an element taken from the old Clinton plan. Most in the GOP never liked that mandate.
Given that most in the GOP moved pretty far to the right in the 15 years between the last national healthcare push, and the dems needed 9 GOP votes to get to 60 in the senate, what was the alternative? Most of the national GOP were basically for the “let the uninsured go bankrupt and die” plan.
Binyamin Appelbaum (of “you worked for a company that was fixing bread prices” fame) wrote a book all about how liberals ushered conservative economics into our financial system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdhUPzrJ1A8&t=2s
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=hNDgcjVGHIw
https://piped.video/watch?v=3cdqQ2BdgOA
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
First off, the Democrats only had a majority for two years during Obama’s 8 years. Second, they have zero leverage over Sinema who’s not even running as a Democrat in the next election. Third, the liberal and progressive majority of the party hasn’t had a majority in congress for over a decade. The democrats are a big tent party that currently has to appeal to all non fascists, so of course there are conservatives in the party.
There’s a solid grain of truth to your assessment, as far too many Democrats aren’t willing to do what is necessary to prevent fascism from taking over. They make numerous mistakes. However, to paint all liberals as being against raising taxes on the rich and funding social programs is inaccurate. Some do believe social programs are necessary to maintain the government, capitalism, or liberal democracy. It’s not great, but it is better than neoliberalism.