Waiting for Trump to set himself on fire is not a strategy

We are now a matter of 100 days away from the most consequential midterm elections in modern history and we're being told its a 'close race', Since when was rewarding failure a thing?

Photo illustration by Salon/Getty Images

I’ve spent some time sitting down and thinking about this piece because I was reminded yesterday that some of this economics stuff is difficult for people to wrap their heads around, and it’s vitally important that people understand the concerted effort by those at the top of the economic food chain to steal the future of you and your loved ones.

Those who have followed my work for a while will know that my political beliefs are unambiguous; I have no truck for what I like to call ‘lip service politics’, representation that pretends to safeguard the interests of constituents, while instead doing the bidding of corporate donors. I have long believed that dark money in politics is a cancer that infects democracy at a cellular level to distort the truth for profit. The question we have to ask ourselves is whether the prognosis is terminal, and sadly, many believe it is.

I think this would be a good point to watch a video which is a fundamental anchor point to my thinking on where we are in this moment.

This might be 7 years old, but it speaks to the very heart of the problems the US faces in terms of representation. The topline message should dominate the thinking of EVERY American when it comes to electing someone to represent their best interests. In the words of Senator Daniel Webster addressing the Senate in January 1830:

“It is, Sir, the people's government, made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people.”

How often we forget that the government governs by the consent of the people, not corporate special interests, though you’d never know it. It’s the people of America who pay the wages of those they elect to put them first. By definition, politics should be a people-first vocation, not a journey to self-enrichment via the garden of Gethsemane. Once public service becomes a profit centre, the road to Damascus is littered with opportunities to betray the oath of office.

There is now a body of thought that believes honesty, moral decency and integrity have left the building for good. I don’t share that view because, for all our human failings, and there are many, history teaches us that right will prevail over wrong. It might take time, but I take comfort from lessons of the past, even if this regime is trying to erase them. I believe America is better than this, and I believe in the ability of an army of activists for good to prevail over evil. Call me an old romantic, but I conclude that tyranny WILL be defeated and together we WILL build a better tomorrow.

I have long held the view that the existential threat we face to our way of life has moved beyond politics towards a need to put dogma aside and coalesce around the belief that the future can’t be determined by tribal division, but only by a common set of goals that were so masterfully defined by the Founding Fathers at the outset of the American Experiment. The goal was to:

• Form a more perfect union

• Insure domestic tranquility

• Provide for the common defence

• Promote the general welfare

• Secure the blessings of liberty

You don’t achieve any of the above through tyranny, no more than you do through subjugation to corporate interests, so yes, I do fear for the future, because while the former might be a Trumpian trait, the latter is tragically a bipartisan failure to resist. Disapproval ratings for the legislative branch hover at around 86%, while approval among critical independent voters for the Supreme Court stands at around just 27%. There is no better evidence that trust in politics is at an all-time low.

Close election results are delivered as a result of an inability to be bold and dispense with risk aversion. You only win big when you light the fuse of hope under an ambitious program of change. You can’t achieve that with the same old same old politics, I’m afraid, and you certainly can't do it if you’re not listening to millions of voters crying out for transformative change. You just add insult to injury when you view progressive thinkers as the enemy of your status quo.

Image - Getty Images

The top 1% in America represents around 1.4 million households out of a pool of 130 million. Members within them control a little over 30% of US household wealth. If we step down the economic food chain to embrace the top 10% (13.4 million households), the number jumps to close to 70% of the nation’s wealth. To add some context, on the eve of the French Revolution, the top 10% controlled a little over 80% of the wealth in France. The next step was to make executioners great again.

I have spoken of this before, but it warrants repeating. The wealth Gini coefficient in the US today is around 0.8. So what exactly is it?

A statistical measure of how unequally total net worth is distributed across a population

(A score of 0 means total equality, while 1 means total inequality). On the eve of the French Revolution in 1789, just 13 years after the Declaration of Independence, the wealth Gini coefficient was between 0.80 and 0.85. It’s often said that when wealth inequality reaches the levels now present in the US, there are just two directions of travel. A revolution, or a police state and this might provide an explanation for where we find ourselves.

For the purpose of the point I am trying to make, I use the above stats to highlight the difference between income and wealth. The rich would point you to the fact that they pay the lion’s share of income taxes, and that is factually correct, but it obscures the fact that high net worth individuals use what they call ‘tax efficiency’ measures to take salaries at a level that is just high enough to avoid attracting scrutiny, while shifting what is really income, into assets. This is why you often see them taking stock options as a significant part of their remuneration. Once that income is wrapped in an asset, it becomes what is called an ‘unrealised asset’ on which tax is not payable until that asset is sold.

Needless to say, while it is held in stocks, it is expected to gain value, but the rich will tell you that stocks can go down as well as up. Let me just add then, these people rarely bet on losers. Also, stocks are not the only assets they invest in; it could be in property, a business, art or any number of asset options. The bottom line is, these assets will not attract tax liability until they are sold, and then they will not be subject to income tax at the appropriate rate; they will instead be subject to capital gains tax, which is at a much lower rate.

We also know that they are only subject to payroll taxes up to a ceiling of $184,500, which should be noted, is only for the Social Security element. The Medicare element is taxed at 1.45% and has no wage ceiling. In addition, an extra 0.9% Medicare tax applies to wages over $200,000 ($250,000 for married couples filing jointly). In conclusion, no matter where you look, there is a two-tier tax system in place that unquestionably benefits the rich.

Before anybody jumps in and says, ‘You’re just jealous of their wealth’, let me assure you I am not. I believe that capitalism is the only viable model that provides a practical solution to the social responsibility that should be demanded to accompany it in a modern democracy. I absolutely believe that risk and innovation should be rewarded, but not at the expense of the rich writing the rules that govern their own behaviour.

The whole reason we find people screaming ‘tax the rich’ is because the government are helping them to, in effect, tax the working and middle class in order to transfer wealth to the top. When the government provides tax breaks that the rich don’t need (and the reason we know they don’t need them is that the first thing they do is use them to buy back stock to ultimately expand their wealth still further), the government are not growing that money on a tax cut tree; it’s either coming out of the taxes you pay, or they are borrowing it on your maxed-out credit card, for which your tax dollars will be used to service the interest on a debt that can never be repaid.

Even worse, they are pawning your healthcare insurance and food assistance for the hungry to pay for it. Corporate welfare is replacing social welfare. Now call me old-fashioned, but someone is being bent over the nightstand and shafted, and the rich aren’t even leaving a tip for the gratification they received, as they walk away. I would remind you that under the Biden administration, none of the asset classes starved because Biden didn’t provide billions in tax breaks. It really is time to wake up and smell the coffee. This isn’t about jealousy; this is about an economic street mugging of working Americans that has been going on for more than half a century with help from BOTH parties.

Let’s say you earned the median salary in the 1970s; if you had retained your share of the nation’s wealth resulting from your labour, you would now be on a salary of around $120,000 today. The truth of the matter is, governments of all stripes have allowed those at the top of the economic food chain to steal 50% of your share. There can be no other conclusion drawn. If you want an example of how greed has manifested itself in 2025, this regime handed close to $4 trillion in tax cuts to the rich; at the same time, they are estimated to evade $1 trillion in taxes EVERY YEAR. Meanwhile, YOUR money is used to pay the same amount just to service the interest payments on the national debt. A debt of which almost 25% was added to by the leader of a transnational extortion gang currently sitting behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office. If you can make that make sense, you’re likely to reside in a padded cell wearing a straitjacket.

For those who want to support my work but can’t commit to a paid subscription, you can now make a one-off donation by clicking on the image below. By donating, you help to keep this independent reporting free for all.