Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that President Biden’s $2.25 trillion infrastructure package is “encouraging."
However, she added that she has “serious concerns that it’s not enough.”
AOC said that the U.S. could “realistically need $10 trillion over 10 years."
“I know that may by an eye-popping figure for some people, but we need to understand that we are in a devastating economic moment. Millions of people in the United States are unemployed. We have a truly crippled health care system and a planetary crisis on our hands, and we’re the wealthiest nation in the history of the world. So we can do $10 trillion,” she told Maddow.
And here is the part where Rep. Ocasio-Cortez mentions the 10 trillion number that caught @Lawrence 's attention.
— Maddow Blog (@MaddowBlog) April 1, 2021
We'll have the full @AOC interview published later tonight. pic.twitter.com/y7ZXNr9sht
Maddow must have been short on time because she did not get a chance to ask AOC how she would pay for a $10 trillion program, or ask her about the economic distortions government programs cause or ask her why she wants to promote standard of living lowering unions.
-RW
Evil is like a box of chocolates, you never know what kind of cockroachs are going to appear to take bite. Evil is as evil does. (My apologies to Mr. Gump for my brazen hack)
ReplyDeleteResistance To Evil is life!
Why stop at 10 trillion? Why not advocate for 100 trillion! After all it's gonna take a lot of investment to completely reconfigure the economy in our efforts to combat climate change, racial inequality, Covid, and infrastructure. I mean if MMT is correct then there isn't any number too high that we can't spend right?
ReplyDeleteThis complete denial of economic reality is getting irritating. It's just like the minimum wage debate. If there are no consequences to doubling wages for low income workers then why stop at $15? Why not a $100 an hour?
It's almost as if the left will use any argument regardless of facts in an attempt to increase their own power. If they were honestly serious about improving the standards of living then they would advocate for a more free market system. But advocating for the collective in politics has always been the means people use to maintain and increase their power.
Whether it's Facsism, Socialism, Marxism, Nationalism, or National Socialism, these ideologies always have one thing in common. To assert control over the populace by means of collectivizing society under a leftist system. The systems they seek to institute may be different, (i.e on class or racial lines) but it always values the collective over the individual.
Nationalism is the biggest threat to the individual in America right now. Both parties advocate it. And if the polls are accurate then we could very well be stuck with a Trumpian populist Nationalism on the Republican side for years to come.
The only way we can beat back these people is to refuse to play their game. Hopefully the failures of Trump can be used as a lesson to convince more people that electing one guy to be president is not enough to roll back the State. It's going to take numerous local efforts throughout the country to essentially tell the federal government to pound sand.
If we stop focusing on national politics alone, then we can start using federalism to our advantage. This is where concepts like nullification and yes secession if necessary become a key strategy. We've seen how this works with the decriminalization of Marijuana throughout the nation. The federal government still classifies it as illegal to buy or sell. Enough states refused to enforce the federal laws and the government does not have the means or the resources to force those states into compliancy.
I'm not saying it's perfect, and there's a lot more to the strategy than what I've written. Still there's many ways to getting to a more moral society i.e. one that sees the individual not the collective as the most important structure to society.
We should use any means necessary to convince as many people as possible that our way is not just the most practical, but most moral for society at large. Whether we use founding documents, the non aggression principle, or non interventionist philosophy to advocate why the State is nothing more than a monopoly of violence for society that will always be used by the megalomaniacs to exert more and more control over our lives.