4 ms·

We do, but the ultra-wealthy owners of Meta et al don't, and they're the ones with large wallets and direct lines to coming administration. How a party can bil

We do, but the ultra-wealthy owners of Meta et al don't, and they're the ones with large wallets and direct lines to coming administration. How a party can bill itself as a champion of the working class while also being in the pocket of dozens of billionaires is beyond me.

culi 2y ago
Both parties are in the pockets of billionaires. The only astounding part is how Trump, whose personal business history includes illegal labor rights violations and has always had a vitriol for unions, is sometimes preferred over Biden, who's been the best president for labor in over 100 years "It's the economy, stupid" is an old and tired cliché. Really its "the vibe of the economy"
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  I think the vibe is "no point being the best president for labour if things cost far more".
  - pessimizer 2y ago
    Or when you break a railroad strike.
  - spondylosaurus 2y ago
    The thing that I still haven't grasped—and this isn't snark, I truly haven't wrapped my head around it—is why people think "things cost more" (1) is the direct result of government rather than a coordinated effort from retailers raising prices, and (2) why the GOP is the party to fix this when they're the ones historically opposed to both business regulation and minimum wage increases.
    - refurb 2y ago
      People don’t “think” things cost more, things actually cost more. I don’t think they care why it happened, they care about it being fixed.
      - spondylosaurus 2y ago
        Right, I'm not disputing that. What I'm questioning is whether people understand why that happened, or how to actually fix it. Because they should care how, and it won't get fixed unless we have actual solutions.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      > (1) is the direct result of government rather than a coordinated effort from retailers raising prices Why would they think this? Has price fixing been shown to a) exist and b) be the dominant effect over some obvious and enormous effects?
    - psadauskas 2y ago
      Because the places that these people get their "news" have been harping almost nonstop that high prices are Biden's fault. Fox News and its brethren exist solely to make its audience mad about things, and then explain why those things are the current Democratic leadership's fault.
- spondylosaurus 2y ago
  Yeah, I'll definitely grant that both parties are in the pockets of billionaires, although one seems to more than the other. There's a reason so many of them flock to one side. The only explanation I can think of for the constituency is that people like a confident but far-fetched proposal more than an undramatic but feasible one. Slowly chipping away economic inequality and strengthening labor protections and introducing social benefits actually works, it just doesn't sound as impressive as "I will quickly and singlehandedly fix the cost of living (source: trust me)."
- Schiendelman 2y ago
  It's always a vibe. But the Democratic Party really hasn't had a good vibe in the last few years, so we lost. :(

culi 2y ago

Both parties are in the pockets of billionaires. The only astounding part is how Trump, whose personal business history includes illegal labor rights violations and has always had a vitriol for unions, is sometimes preferred over Biden, who's been the best president for labor in over 100 years "It's the economy, stupid" is an old and tired cliché. Really its "the vibe of the economy"

robertlagrant 2y ago
I think the vibe is "no point being the best president for labour if things cost far more".
- pessimizer 2y ago
  Or when you break a railroad strike.
- spondylosaurus 2y ago
  The thing that I still haven't grasped—and this isn't snark, I truly haven't wrapped my head around it—is why people think "things cost more" (1) is the direct result of government rather than a coordinated effort from retailers raising prices, and (2) why the GOP is the party to fix this when they're the ones historically opposed to both business regulation and minimum wage increases.
  - refurb 2y ago
    People don’t “think” things cost more, things actually cost more. I don’t think they care why it happened, they care about it being fixed.
    - spondylosaurus 2y ago
      Right, I'm not disputing that. What I'm questioning is whether people understand why that happened, or how to actually fix it. Because they should care how, and it won't get fixed unless we have actual solutions.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    > (1) is the direct result of government rather than a coordinated effort from retailers raising prices Why would they think this? Has price fixing been shown to a) exist and b) be the dominant effect over some obvious and enormous effects?
  - psadauskas 2y ago
    Because the places that these people get their "news" have been harping almost nonstop that high prices are Biden's fault. Fox News and its brethren exist solely to make its audience mad about things, and then explain why those things are the current Democratic leadership's fault.
spondylosaurus 2y ago
Yeah, I'll definitely grant that both parties are in the pockets of billionaires, although one seems to more than the other. There's a reason so many of them flock to one side. The only explanation I can think of for the constituency is that people like a confident but far-fetched proposal more than an undramatic but feasible one. Slowly chipping away economic inequality and strengthening labor protections and introducing social benefits actually works, it just doesn't sound as impressive as "I will quickly and singlehandedly fix the cost of living (source: trust me)."
Schiendelman 2y ago
It's always a vibe. But the Democratic Party really hasn't had a good vibe in the last few years, so we lost. :(