Older Americans Must "Work More, Take Less" - Another Suggestion From Neolib Imps With Cushy Jobs & Assured Security

                                                          

The sad fact is there will always be lowbrow idiots, often in academic disguise, who chirp in assorted op-eds that they have a way to "fix" Social Security, or they are doing so to "save the young".  In nearly all cases - like a recent one from Johan Norberg in the WSJ, i.e.

Why The Swedish Social Security System Would Not Be Practical In The U.S.

 recommending a switch to the Swedish system, this is bare bollocks.  As  I pointed out, if in the U.S. "pensions corresponded to what the beneficiary pays in" as Norberg suggests, most of the elderly population - likely over 75% - would be in poverty and have to rely on 'Go Fund Me' pages or on charity from family to survive.

Enter now the latest iteration, in a NY Times op-ed essay entitled:  “The U.S. Needs Older Americans to Work More and Take Less,” by C. Eugene Steuerle and Glenn Kramon (Oct. 28).

These two nattering nabobs of negativity argue for a higher Social Security retirement age in order to relieve younger working people of some of the burden of paying for the retirements of the elderly. They argue:

"If people took the same number of retirement years as the average person retiring in 1940, they would stop working at around 77. As such, Social Security is increasingly losing its purpose as old-age insurance, as benefits stretch well into what is becoming late middle age for many.

The young have been losing out for some time: 80 percent of federal spending growth since 1980 has gone to Social Security and health care (much of it for Medicare)"

And to make sure readers understand that the authors are really part of the 'culprit" elders, writing:

"We older Americans are not only controlling national politics; we are consuming an ever larger share of our economy’s resources through programs like Social Security and Medicare."

Two things here: First, it's easy for these two clowns to write "we older Americans" to try to blend in with the rest of us when they really don't. After all,  they both have cushy jobs in academic settings  (Steuerle co-founded the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.  Kramon is a lecturer at Stanford Business School) and likely in perpetuity.  So they are assured plush economic cushions in retirement even minus Social Security. So yeah, they can afford to wait until 77 in the current fiscal era to stop working.  But nurses, many high school teachers (assailed by violent students, crackpot parents about CRT and sex education, 'Moms for liberty'), as well as those in laboring capacities - like janitors, truck drivers, BK burger flippers, sanitation workers etc. ...hardly. 

As for the young "losing out", the fundamental reason for that is that too many don't bother to vote! National politics are "controlled" by elderly citizens precisely because they are the ones who resolutely - come hell or high water- vote, irrespective of the election mode (midterm, general etc.) of doing so, or the form (whether actually standing in line to cast ballots, or being in a state which uses mail ballots.) While oldsters vote in typically a 60-65% proportion, the young barely make 30% - like in 2020.  And many are likely to sit out the most critical election of all, next year, because they are not energized by President Biden who turned 81 last Saturday.  They'd rather play the fool, let Trump and the Reeps probably get in, and make Social Security a yearly budget item.  

Back to Steuerle and Kramon, they depict the typical U.S. Social Security recipient as carefree, golf-playing, medically fit scammers living off struggling young wage earners. The truth is the elderly are increasingly among the nation’s lowest-income citizens. Social Security earnings are based on wages earned in a lifetime. Wages have been stagnant for decades while the richest 1 percent have become richer by the minute.

Not mentioned by the two fiscal hawks, Social Security benefits are subject to taxation- and it's not adjusted for inflation. (In 1983 Congress voted to start taxing Social Security benefits, again reinforcing the 'reservation of power' concept). This means that an ever increasing share of benefits is being snatched away - or one might say, "clawed back" by the government. And even when recipients do get a COLA (cost of living allowance boost) it is often cancelled out by the increase in Medicare deduction for Part A.

The solution, as I have posted on before, is not to raise the age limit for retirement but to eliminate the payroll tax cap.  That is, the maximum taxable income for Social Security, currently $160,200.  The "payroll cap" actually   prevents billions of additional dollars from flowing into the Social Security Trust Fund. That cap is currently set at $160,200 which means anyone earning at least $1 million a year automatically stops paying into Social Security once that tax threshold is reached. That threshold was attained this year at barely 7 weeks into the year  (near end of February) according to the National Committee to Protect Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM).   

By the simple, straightforward expedient of applying the payroll tax to all wages (instead of only the first $118,500) then 66 percent of the current shortfall would be wiped out overnight. The rest could easily be wiped out by ceasing to raid Social Security monies and instead doing what Al Gore always suggested back in 2000 - put it into an effective "lockbox". The idiot media mocked it at the time, but by implementing the sequestration of S.S. monies from all other - no shortfall would emerge - assuming all wages are also subject to the payroll tax.

 Steuerle and Kramon incredibly blab: 

"Nearly everyone in Washington, Democrat and Republican, socialist or MAGA, is aware that withdrawals from these programs exceed the money being put in"  

 Yet seniors who depend on the system they paid into still find their benefits failing to keep up with their real expenses. Indeed, a valid economic argument can be made that given the persistent specter of too low aggregate demand, Social Security benefits should be increased - not cut. Those benefits, after all, pay for billions of dollars in goods and services that otherwise might never be transacted - with the result that the GDP would contract even more. 

But that is because Social Security funds have been used for general revenues.  Had Al Gore's "lockbox" been instituted from the time he suggested it (2000 election campaign) there would not be any deficit in the Trust Fund now. Then there is the problem of Social Security Disability heading toward insolvency. As I noted earlier, e.g. http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2015/07/with-social-security-disabiiliy-nearly.html

 Both parties are to blame for this, having cut in half the payroll taxes collected for almost two years.  Now the solutions are few, either redirect revenue from the much larger S.S. retirement fund to S.S. disability or ...let the disability fund empty in which case an immediate 19 percent benefits cut goes into effect.

  All this is why smart people need to do themselves a favor and inform themselves on the facts. No better book can be found right now than 'Social Security Works' by Nancy J. Altman and Eric R. Kingson, which in their Chapters 8, 10 totally demolishes this "IOU" nonsense, showing these bonds carry the same weight as those dispensed to other countries, including China. In other words, they carry "the full faith and credit of the U.S. government" and - if ever betrayed - will show this nation can't be trusted to pay its just debts.

As to the staying power and importance of Social Security, we read (p. 23):

"Social Security transformed the nation. It eradicated what was once a primary anxiety for the majority of Americans: the terror of growing old penniless,  dependent and vulnerable. It provided basic economic protection previously not available to most households."

This basic economic security provided to non-wealthy elder citizens is exactly what drives Social Security's opponents nuts. They hate to see anyone collecting a check just for breathing. At the very least, they insist, the money ought to be "privatized" - put into special investment accounts (with the costs of administration vastly greater than the 1 penny per dollar rate for S.S.) and subject to the vagaries of the stock market. Well, we saw how that worked out with 401ks back in 2008 with the financial meltdown didn't we?

Again, the optimal solution now is to remove the payroll tax cap and let the millionaires and  billionaires pay more!  

See Also:

Column: An exhaustive debunking of the dumbest myths about Social Security

Excerpt:

Slate paired Eric Boehm, a writer for the conservative magazine Reason, with a writer named Celeste Headlee for a dialogue titled “Social Security Doesn’t Make Sense Anymore.” The roughly 2,000-word piece contained so many misconceptions, inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and flat-out lies about the program that I almost gave up counting.

And:

Social Security

Giving Thanks for Social Security and Staying Vigilant Against a GOP Death Panel

by Nancy Altman | November 21, 2023 - 7:01am | permalink

Excerpt:

For over 80 years, Social Security has given American families a reason to be thankful each and every month. Over 66 million Americans currently receive Social Security’s earned monthly benefits.

Our Social Security system represents the best of American values, including reward for hard work, sturdy self-reliance, and shared risks and responsibilities. It is efficient, virtually universal, fair, portable, and secure. Nearly every American is either a current Social Security beneficiary or is likely to be one in the future. And every single one of us benefits from living in a country in which all of us join together, through our Social Security system, to provide ourselves and each other with, in the words of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, “sound and adequate protection against the vicissitudes of modern life.”

This Thanksgiving, families across the country are united in our appreciation of Social Security. If we don't give express thanks, it is because it may not come to mind, for good reason. Social Security is always there, quietly in the background, doing what it was created to do. It protects us if the unfortunate strikes in the form of disability or death of a family breadwinner. It is there if the fortunate occurs in the form of long life. We can outlive our savings, but not our Social Security!

And:

Republicans | Social Security

MAGA Mike Johnson's Catfood Commission 3.0 Is Part of GOP Obsession to Kill Social Security

by Thom Hartmann | November 29, 2023 - 6:46am | permalink

— from The Hartmann Report

Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt pushed Social Security through Congress, signing it into law on August 14th 1935, and Republicans opposed it then and have hated it ever since.

And:

Economic Policy | Social Security

Let's Be Clear: Social Security Is Not Adding a Penny to US Debt

by Frederic H. Decker | March 6, 2023 - 7:29am | permalink

And:

• Why Social Security Privatization Cannot Be The Solution...

And:

Revisiting Pareto Efficiency & How It Favors Inbuilt Economic Inequality

 

Will The End Of Astronomical Time Be Determined By The World Radio Conference In Dubai?

                                                                             

  Standing astride the Greenwich meridian which separates the eastern and western hemispheres, in July, 1978.

Few regular mortals may have heard, but the world community of time measurement specialists will arrive today for the World Radio Conference in Dubai. The agenda calls for discussions about the leap second, but American time scientists are not optimistic that the conversation will yield a result. Any proposed change would require consensus among all the attending nations, including Russia. In other words, agreement on how to measure time at the micro-level is no ‘slam dunk’. 

Back in November, 2016, I wrote a fairly detailed blog post, i.e.

• How Did We Go From Astronomical To Atomic Time?

 On how astronomical time is defined and how it is inextricably bound to our daily lives.  However, I also pointed out by way of caution:

"In truth, the Earth's rotation rate is not stable over time, hence the lengths of time - especially the second- will be affected. "

Which leads to the development of atomic time, which I then clarified as not being subject to the variations in Earth's rotational motion. In this sense, the "leap second" has had to be added (as it turns out 27 times in the last 50 years), to compensate for the changes in Earth's rotation.  Can we then say - yes we can - that many of the world's timekeepers are getting tired of it?

The introduction of the leap second in 1972 codified that a second would be introduced each time the two clocks (astronomical and atomic-cesium) diverged by more than 0.9 seconds. This had at least three aims: i) to keep time connected to the natural world and the tradition of astronomy;ii)  to suit digital technology; and (ii) to reconcile and synchronize the two clocks.

This was ok, sort of, until the turn of the century when new problems arose. To wit, big technology companies (like Google, Amazon, Meta-Facebook) developed their own methods for reconciling astronomical and atomic time, essentially bypassing the leap second. Meta, for instance, “smears” the leap second in millisecond increments across a 17-hour period, rather than leaping abruptly.

Alas, this has led to a literal timekeeping free-for-all and threatening uniformity. In addition, we have the Brits still adamant that losing the leap second would disconnect official time from the ancient traditions of astronomy and eventually lead to the pre-eminence of lab-created atomic clocks. After all, Britain controls Greenwich Mean Time (what is now Coordinated Universal Time), an astronomical clock that is determined by averaging the position of the Sun over the year.  (See the photo of me at top of post standing on the Greenwich Meridian).

Over the last decade, a major reality check has entered. Namely that the growing challenges of implementing the leap second have prompted a willingness to change the current system. A sea change occurred last November when the member states of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures declared it was ready to explore alternatives to the leap second. No proposal was adopted, but the ground was laid for considering options, like scrapping the leap second or relaxing the relationship between astronomical and atomic time. 

Among the fiercest opponents  were the Brits who, of course, jealously guard the paradigm of Greenwich Mean Time or what is now Coordinated Universal Time). Others also aren't enthused by the prospect.  For example, Rev. Paul Gabor, an astrophysicist and the vice director of the Vatican Observatory Research Group in Tucson, Ariz., has expressed concern about ditching the leap second. 

His concern is that “eliminating the idea could create some uneasiness, as humans feel connected and want to remain connected to the natural world.” Also: “Men look to the sky and count days; this is something ‘unspoken’ but deep in the heart of men.”

Rev. Paul Gabor's opinion is valid and is supported by Dr. Judah Levine, head of the Network Synchronization Project in the Time and Frequency Division at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST, in Boulder, Colo.  Levine, in  a recent NY Times interview said he sympathized, adding:

 “The public has this great distrust of scientists as people who propose something that seems to go against common sense,”.  

 In  the case of this Dubai conference we will have to wait and see what the final consensus is, and hope that it conforms to common sense and doesn't violate it. At least not beyond the breaking point!  

See Also:

Tackling Simple Astronomy Problems (5): Astronomical TimeKeeping

The Ten Steps "Team Joe" Must Take Now To Ensure Trump Does Not Reach The White House Again

                                                                                 

              Biden needs to make changes now to ward off the Trump peril

"Rarely in American history has democracy’s inherent messiness been more striking. In Weimar Germany, Hitler and other agitators benefited from the squabbling of the democratic parties, right and left, the endless fights over the budget, the logjams in the legislature, the fragile and fractious coalitions. German voters increasingly yearned for someone to cut through it all and get something — anything — done. They chose the strongman.

We are closer to that same point today than we have ever been, yet we continue to drift toward dictatorship, still hoping for some intervention that will allow us to escape the consequences of our collective cowardice, our complacent, willful ignorance and, above all, our lack of any deep commitment to liberal democracy. As the man said, we are going out not with a bang but a whimper".- Robert Kagan, WaPo, ‘A Trump dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending’

"Biden can claim to have been the best president elected this century: more honourable at home than Trump, less derelict abroad than Barack Obama, with nothing like George W Bush’s Iraq war to his name. But Americans next November have to decide who leads them for the following four years. The Democratic proposition — a man eight years older than US male life expectancy, with an unloved lieutenant — asks voters to accept too much risk. For the world’s sake, at least one half of that offering should be changed, not just sold better."-  Janan Ganesh, "Biden Can't Spin His Way To Re-election',  The Financial Times

“So we arrive at the final battle.  If your immediate point of reference for that phrase is not the Book of Revelation’s depiction of the apocalypse, you are probably not a Trump supporter.

 

The final battle, Trump would later tell his supporters, would once again set all of this right. By implication of its title, this is their last chance to fix what’s broken, to intervene in lieu of anticipation of a divine hand.

Might just be rhetoric aimed at turnout. You’ll forgive me if I take it more seriously than that”. – Philip Bump. ‘What Happens After Trump’s Final Battle’, The Washington Post

"Trump's final battle is against the United States. He wants to execute his enemies (especially military ones, then Hillary & Obama) as he continues on his final battle against fed gov employees who do not vote for him. His final apocalypse is to install him as dictator as he destroys our country, our constitution & your lives. Count on it. Vote blue or your ass is grass!" - Commenter on Philip Bump's article in Washington Post

"I get that Joe Biden isn't flashy, but young people need to show up and vote for him in numbers if they don't want to end up living in a fascist or Nazi state." - Commenter on Philip Bump's article in Washington Post

"Old people with any common sense need to show up and vote for Biden as well. In fact, anyone who lives in a fact-based, rational universe needs to show up and vote for Biden."  -  Commenter on Philip Bump's article in Washington Post

“The threat Trump poses hasn’t diminished. It has increased. He’s more open about his plans to alter the country and our form of government if he is returned to the White House. And yet, some Americans simply aren’t registering that threat as having the potential to harm in the way that it obviously can.  It seems, in their minds, that if the country survived one Trump term, it can survive another. And that all the Chicken Littles claiming that the sky is falling, or could fall, are addicted to worry and prone to hyperbole”.-   Charles M. Blow, NY Times, ‘Electorate In Revolt Threatens Biden’s Chances’

“It’s not just the economy, stupid. It’s the public relations war over it. But never in my adult lifetime has that battle seemed so agonizingly beside the point, such a distraction from the most important questions before us. In 2024, it’s not the economy. It’s the democracy. It’s the decency. It’s the truth.

I’m not talking about what will influence voters most. I’m talking about what should. And I write that knowing that I’ll be branded an elitist whose good fortune puts him out of touch with the concerns of people living paycheck to paycheck or priced out of housing and medical care. 

But I don’t see any clear evidence that a change of presidents would equal an uptick in Americans’ living standards. And 2024, in any case, isn’t shaping up to be a normal election with normal stakes or anything close to that, at least not if Donald Trump winds up with the Republican presidential nomination

Trump and his allies would upend core elements of American governance, democracy, foreign policy and the rule of law if he regained the White House, as Jonathan Swan, Maggie Haberman and Charlie Savage wrote in a recent Times article that all voters should read once, then read again.”- Frank Bruni, NY TIMES, ‘It’s Not The Economy, It’s The Fascism'

“Given voters’ dispositions and attitudes reflected in polls, there may be only two choices now for the 2024 election: Bad versus calamitous. The latter would be the choice for Donald Trump who has vowed to tear up the Constitution. We ought to pay attention to what he says.”  -Chris Hayes on ‘All In’

The ABC News poll on Friday night showed - incredibly - Trump ahead of Joe Biden by 46% to 44% if the election were held now. Then, hours later, Dan Balz writing Saturday night in The Washington Post, laid it all out there with his piece: 'Voters Must Take Trump Seriously and Literally, The Stakes Are That High':

"The headline in the latest issue of the Economist magazine does not mince words:

 “Donald Trump poses the biggest danger to the world in 2024.” 

The alarm is twofold. First, that the former president could win the election next November; and second, what he might do if that happens  ...

The Economist summed up why a Trump victory in 2024 could be materially different from his first in 2016. 

“A second Trump term would be a watershed in a way the first was not,”

 The editors wrote. 

“Victory would confirm his most destructive instincts about power. His plans would encounter less resistance. And because America will have voted him in while knowing the worst, its moral authority would decline.”

This is serious shit, especially The Economist piece, bluntly noting we in this nation are at a literal political "Defcon 2" condition, as the Trump threat magnifies - with too many Americans sleepwalking toward Gomorrah.  The NY Times Maureen Dowd was also on target citing Politico's Jonathan Martin who warned how President Biden's current team appears to be missing 'beats'  - especially pushing 'Bidenomics' when too many aren't feeling any benefits when they leave the grocery store a lot poorer. She notes:

"Like other pols, Biden has a healthy ego and like all presidents, he’s truculent about not getting the credit he thinks he deserves for his accomplishments. And it must be infuriating that most of the age qualms are about him, when Trump is only a few years younger.

No doubt the president is having a hard time wrapping his mind around the idea that the 77-year-old Mar-a-Lago Dracula has risen from his gilded coffin even though he’s albatrossed with legal woes and seems more deranged than ever, referring to Democrats with the fascist-favored term “vermin” and plotting a second-term revengefest. Trump’s campaign slogan should be, “There will be blood...For Biden, this is about his identity. It’s what he has fought all his life....    But he should not indulge the Irish chip on his shoulder. He needs to gather the sharpest minds in his party and hear what they have to say”

Jonathan Martin's piece ('Here's How Biden Can Turn It Around') basically lays the groundwork for a number of strategy -campaign changes that may yet save us from the ravages of a Trump dictatorship.  But Biden and his WH crew have to be prepared to take the leap and make the changes.  Martin's recommendations - slightly condensed from his piece-  begin with a wakeup call to political fantasists (like Bill Maher) that Biden isn't going anywhere. So stop holding your breath and dreaming, like for Dean Phillips. Anyway, as Martin writes (leaving out 1' which is directed at outsiders yearning for Biden to quit the race in favor of someone else):

1') Absent a health issue or some other act of God, Biden isn’t bowing out, and he’s not going to dump Kamala Harris. We’ll skip the Aaron Sorkin cosplay here. Sorry, Democratic daydreamers and terminally online Republican presidential candidates, there’s no smoke-filled room session on the Biden calendar. The Obamas are not going to pop over from Martha’s Vineyard to Nantucket this Thanksgiving to talk Joe out of the race and plot the Michelle-led restoration any more than Trump is going to serve vegan turkey at Mar-a-Lago.

1) Change must start with Biden himself. Enough with the bravado and denialism. Also cease calling any former Dem strategists (like David Axelrod) 'pricks'. The time now is to find common ground to ward off the Trump threat - not divide.

2) Biden can do little about Jill Stein entering the race, but he must smother Manchin with kindness and keep him in the Democratic tent. While he’s at it, the president and his top aides should also woo Manchin’s Republican friend (and third-party temptress) Mitt Romney. Neither senator wants their legacy to be abetting Trump’s return.  Get these two then to work as allies not as opponents.

3)On this score, why is Biden not doing more to secure the support of Liz Cheney? She has made clear she’s determined to stop Trump’s return to the Oval Office. Yet Cheney is still publicly keeping open a presidential bid of her own. Biden can let her publish her book next month, but then she should be brought into the fold. Whether it’s called Republicans Against Trump or Republicans for Biden, Cheney must be deployed and do all she can do to bring other prominent figures with her.

Democrats are sufficiently alarmed by the possibility a No Labels candidate could hand the election to Trump. But the way to preemptively undermine No Labels is to dispatch Democrats such as Manchin or Republicans like Romney and Cheney to articulate the risk they pose. These individuals may be reluctant to do so, but they can be prodded, charmed and shown the data detailing the danger of inaction.

4) The best service Rahm Emmanuel can offer Biden isn’t using his post in Asia (Biden’s envoy to Japan) to forge Pacific alliances and taunt the Russians and Chinese. The president should call Emanuel back stateside and have him chair the reelection. Doing so would demonstrate a willingness by Biden to broaden his inner circle, create a manic urgency in the campaign that is Emanuel’s trademark and, by elevating one of the most ferocious operatives of our times, signal that when Trump goes low the Democrats will go fucking lower.

5) Speaking of putting the best team forward, Jennifer O’Malley Dillon should either leave the White House and formally manage the campaign or be given the role David Plouffe had in 2012 and oversee the reelection full time from the West Wing. Having taken over Biden’s 2020 bid, O’Malley Dillon has the most high-level campaign experience of any member of the president’s inner circle.

6) There’s been chatter for months that Biden’s alter ego and ad man, Mike Donilon, will leave the White House and go to the campaign. As with O’Malley Dillon, why are Donilon’s talents not yet entirely directed to the reelection?

7) The White House must move to the political equivalent of a war footing. Biden should lure back former Chief of Staff Ron Klain in some capacity. Few modern chiefs could do as much simultaneously as Klain, and he could be particularly useful as the left grows restive over Biden’s Israel tilt.

8) On the topic of the Mideast, once the Israeli incursion into Gaza ends there will presumably be some steps toward diplomacy. Biden cannot run the country, run for reelection and oversee a new Mideast peace process. He should appoint a pair of high-level envoys for the post: Bill and Hillary Clinton. It may sound far-fetched, but this is no time for small thinking. The moment demands all hands on deck.

9) Biden cannot dedicate himself to the campaign like he could have as a younger man. So make use of all those next-generation stars scheming for the presidency and thirsting to be on camera. The way to win favor with tomorrow’s Democratic primary voters is to stop Trump now. So let them compete for who can emerge as the best advocate for Biden and against Trump. Some of these would-be candidates are coming to the GOP debates, but that’s not nearly enough. The governors, the senators, the cabinet secretaries and the infrastructure czar should be the faces of Biden’s campaign.

10) More than personnel, though, Biden must move dramatically to reshape his appeal to voters. Perhaps the most overwhelming economic messaging advice I picked up from Democrats was for him to heave “Bidenomics” into the dumpster. Attempting to make voters believe something they don’t is folly. Attaching your name to that strategy borders on masochistic. At a time when people are paying more for housing, gas and groceries, focusing on job growth and the unemployment rate is ineffective. Use that sense of empathy and acknowledge voter concerns about inflation. Take steps, with executive actions, to address costs. And brag about what you have done, not because it’ll make voters believe they’re wrong about how they feel but because it reminds them you’ve been fighting — and in the face of opposition.

Which raises one of the most vital imperatives: Go on the offensive against the GOP. Where are the frontal attacks on Republicans? Especially with Biden at risk of defeat because of slippage among working-class voters of all races, it’s confounding that he doesn’t lash the opposition for siding with the wealthy.

I believe these are all critical steps 'Team Joe' must take from now to ensure a second term, and prevent Trump gaining power which could spell the end of our democratic experiment. As Martin himself writes:

 "This election will be exceptional because of the threat Trump poses. The former president is an exiled strongman who’s taken over a traditional political party and is attempting to reclaim office to consolidate power and punish his enemies with little regard for the Constitution. Just ask him."

To any sentient citizen, then, Trump's threat and his ever-increasing Hitlerian rhetoric are not hyperbolic or hysterical, they are as real as a heart attack.  This is why, as one WaPo commenter put it, he must be stopped at all costs. It is also why, to help ensure this, Jonathan Martin's 10 steps (which I have condensed for this post) need to be adopted by Biden's team and implemented ASAP. 

See Also:

Donald Trump

A 'Reichstag Moment' for Donald Trump Must Never Be Allowed

by Michael Waldman | December 1, 2023 - 7:57am | permalink

— from Brennan Center for Justice

Excerpt:

Donald Trump has made clear that, in a second term, he would govern differently than any president in U.S. history. He has hinted at suspending the Constitution, building vast deportation camps, weaponizing the Department of Justice, and mass firing career civil servants.

Here’s one you might have missed: He reportedly plans to invoke the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to use the military as a domestic police force, on his first day in office.

In 2020, of course, Trump himself engineered a shambolic insurrection. This time, the thought goes, if he is displeased by protests, he will use the law as a way to crack down and grab more power. Think of the “Reichstag moment” reportedly feared by General Mark Milley three years ago.

Much like the Electoral Count Act—a similarly archaic and poorly drafted law that Trump attempted to exploit—the Insurrection Act was written for a different time and urgently needs reform, as my colleague Joseph Nunn writes.

And:

Donald Trump | Liz Cheney

Liz Cheney Sounds Alarm on Trump: Cannot Survive a President Willing To Terminate Our Constitution

by Carl Gibson | November 29, 2023 - 7:32am | permalink

— from Alternet

Excerpt:

In her forthcoming book "Oath and Honor," former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming) called out the complicity of her Republican colleagues in enabling former President Donald Trump, and warned Americans to keep him away from the White House in 2024.

"As a nation, we can endure damaging policies for a four-year term. But we cannot survive a president willing to terminate our Constitution," Cheney wrote in an excerpt obtained by CNN.

And:

Trump's Speech Mirrors Dictators Mussolini and Hitler (esquire.com)

 Excerpt:

Over the weekend, Fulton County (Ga.) Inmate No. P01135809, the guy who used to keep Hitler's speeches handy for bedtime reading, crossed over into a declaration of outright fascism and didn't break a sweat. What is so frightening is that it was so damned easy for him to do it.   

The Washington Post at least got the headline right. The New York Times spent all weekend fumbling around the clear intent of the former president*'s remarks. The original headline — Trump Takes Veterans Day Speech in a Very Different Direction — lit up the Internet. I mean, the speech did, in fact, go in a very different direction — the general direction of Nuremberg. 

 The former president*'s rhetoric, coupled with his stated plans for his next presidency, should clarify for any thinking human being the fact that he must not be elected next year. There is no other issue. Not any more. It is an issue that ought to be beyond argument, beyond partisan politics. It is the very definition of the Constitution's call to "provide for the common defense." 

And:

Donald Trump | Media

Four Ways the Mainstream Media Is Quietly Helping Trump and His Republican Allies

by Robert Reich | November 27, 2023 - 7:29am | permalink

— from Robert Reich's Substack

Excerpt:

The mainstream media is helping Trump and his authoritarian allies in four ways.

First, it’s drawing a false equivalence between Trump and Biden — claiming that Biden’s political handicap is his age, while Trump’s corresponding handicap is his criminal indictments.

Rubbish. Trump is almost as old as Biden, and Trump’s public remarks and posts are becoming ever more unhinged — suggesting that advancing age may be a bigger problem for Trump than for Biden.

Why isn’t the mainstream media reporting on Trump’s increasing senescence?

Secondly, every time the mainstream media reports on another move by Trump and his Republican allies toward neofascism, it tries to balance its coverage by pointing out some fault in the Democratic Party (such as the ongoing federal corruption and bribery case against Senator Bob Menendez).

And:

Donald Trump

Authoritarian Lunatic Trump Aiming for Something Resembling Nazi Germany in the 30s

by Maya Boddie | November 27, 2023 - 7:17am | permalink

— from Alternet

And:

Donald Trump

An Even Worse Nightmare Lies Ahead

by Jaime O’Neill | November 27, 2023 - 7:10am | permalink

Excerpt:

Perhaps you’ll recall seeing Donald Trump and his third trophy wife (the only kind of wife he ever had) descending toward us on that de-escalator back in 2016, coming down from his heights to declare himself a candidate for the presidency. Perhaps, like me, you thought that was your worst nightmare. Perhaps, like me, you might have been a bit too optimistic in that shuddering assessment of how bad nightmares could get. Perhaps, like me, you are now facing a much worse (and even worser than that) nightmare with the distinct possibility that Trump may yet win a do-over even more horrendous than what we’ve endured since he did us the first time around.

Perhaps, like me, you don’t need to be told what a calamity that was since the damage is everywhere we might look, and especially when we look to the future and see Donald Trump installed once more, but really even more whiny, disgruntled, churlish, and pissed off than he was last time. Only now, of course, we are farther down the road toward fucking up the planet beyond repair. And perhaps, like me, you just doubt you can actually do four more years of Trump’s shit even if he’s not re-elected through who knows what machinations, collusions, or subversions of the democratic process....

Few of us are actually thrilled at the prospect of President Biden running again four years older than he was when we worried he was too old last time, but if he is our candidate once more, we’d better get behind him as if your lives depended on his victory, and we all should know it’s no real exaggeration to say they do, no matter whether Biden’s up against Trump or some other generic fascist pretending to be the best friend Americans ever had.

And:

Here’s How Biden Can Turn It Around - POLITICO

And:

Donald Trump

Doom and Gloom Was the Ultimate Goal — And Now It Is Working: Trump Wins With Voter Apathy

by Heather Digby Parton | November 24, 2023 - 7:28am | permalink

— from Salon

And:

Trump’s Second-Term Plans: Anti-‘Woke’ University, ‘Freedom Cities’

And:

2024 Elections

Voting for President Is Not an Exercise in Personal Expression

by Mitchell Zimmerman | November 27, 2023 - 6:24am | permalink

And:

Trump won’t need more Black votes. He just needs Black voters to stay home again.

And:

Donald Trump

‘Lawless and Corrupt’: How Trump’s Plan Is Straight out of the History of Authoritarianism

by Maya Boddie | November 20, 2023 - 7:41am | permalink

— from Alternet

Excerpt:

Earlier this week, ex-President Donald Trump was recently added to the top of The Economist's list of the world's greatest dangers heading into 2024.

During a Sunday morning panel, MSNBC's Ayman Mohyeldin referenced a recent Axios report by Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen, in which they exclusively report ex-President Donald Trump "allies are pre-screening the ideologies of thousands of potential foot soldiers, as part of an unprecedented operation to centralize and expand his power at every level of the U.S. government if he wins in 2024."

The MSNBC host asked historian and authoritarian expert Ruth Ben-Ghiat to "put this reporting into perspective," by explaining whether "this effort from the ex-president and his allies" is "something that is unprecedented as it seems on the surface — given the fact that our country has not had presidents who have lost and then come back to win reelection."

Capitalism | Fascism

The Connection Between Neofascism and Capitalism (and Happy Birthday, Joe!)

by Robert Reich | November 20, 2023 - 7:53am | permalink

— from Robert Reich's Substack

And:

Donald Trump

Now We Know How Hitler Did It

by Thom Hartmann | November 18, 2023 - 8:40am | permalink

— from The Hartmann Report

The Nazis in America are now “out.” This morning, former Republican Joe Scarborough explicitly compared Trump and his followers to Hitler and his Brownshirts on national television. They’re here.

At the same time, America’s richest man is retweeting antisemitism, rightwing influencers and radio/TV hosts are blaming “Jews and liberals” for the “invasion” of “illegals” to “replace white people,” and the entire GOP is embracing candidates and legislators who encourage hate and call for violence.

And:

Donald Trump

Wannabe Führer Donald J. Trump Must Be Stopped

by C.J. Polychroniou | November 16, 2023 - 8:43am | permalink

And:

Sweeping Raids and Mass Deportations: Inside Trump’s 2025 Immigration Plans - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

And:

Voters must take Trump seriously and literally. The stakes are that high.

And:

Donald Trump

Trump’s Big Payback: The Plot for MAGA’s Revenge Should Scare Voters Straight

by Heather Digby Parton | November 7, 2023 - 7:33am | permalink

— from Salon

And:

Third Parties

No Labels Is All Grift

by Joan McCarter | November 19, 2023 - 7:10am | permalink

— from Daily Kos

Fascism is on the ballot in 2024. Donald Trump has made no bones about that, and should he fail to get the GOP nomination, the Heritage Foundation is creating its “Agenda 47” to make sure the next Republican president has a fascist gameplan ready anyway. The stakes couldn’t be higher for democracy, but the supposedly “centrist” No Labels is still readying a spoiler campaign.

Despite attempts to get a No Labels ticket on the presidential ballot in all 50 states, No Labels isn’t an actual political party. It’s a political nonprofit, and it is exploiting that status to the max by raking in millions of dollars of dark money, with most of its donors undisclosed. Some of the high-profile donors are known—and notorious. For example, Harlan Crow, best buddy and benefactor to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, has hosted fundraisers for the group and donated more than $130,000 of his own cash.

And:

What Would My Revolutionary War Ancestors Think Of Our Nation's Present Predicament?