Barackface: FDR

Showing posts with label FDR. Show all posts

Saturday, July 12, 2025

FDR To Reagan To AOC: The Half Century Pendulum Swings

📉 From Reaganomics to Mamdani Politics: Is the Pendulum About to Swing Back?

For nearly a century, American politics has swung like a pendulum between two competing visions of capitalism: one expansive, inclusive, and redistributive, and the other lean, deregulated, and market-driven. The FDR era (1930–1980) was defined by the New Deal, Social Security, union strength, and public investment. The Reagan era (1980–2030, for simple math) heralded tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation, and a steady erosion of the public sector.

But nothing lasts forever. The tides of economic ideology may now be shifting again.

🔁 Why the Reagan Era May Be Ending

The Reagan consensus—low taxes, small government, deregulated markets—has ruled for over four decades. It shaped Democrats and Republicans alike. Even Clinton and Obama operated largely within its framework, focusing on technocratic reforms rather than redistributive transformations.

Yet cracks have appeared:

Soaring inequality has become impossible to ignore. In 1960, the CEO-to-worker pay ratio was about 20:1. Today, it’s over 300:1.
Essential services are failing. Millions are uninsured, student debt has ballooned, and housing is unaffordable in most major cities.
Climate change and pandemics have exposed the fragility of privatized and underfunded systems.

Americans—especially younger generations—are rethinking the trade-offs they were told were necessary. A top tax rate of 90% during the FDR era didn’t destroy capitalism. In fact, it underwrote massive public investments in highways, housing, and higher education. So why not a top rate of 70% now, if it can finance high-quality healthcare, universal education, a Green New Deal, and an end to homelessness?

💡 Big Government Isn’t the Problem. Bad Arithmetic Is.

Critics of progressive programs often fear-monger about “socialism.” But if we define socialism as state ownership of all production, that’s not what any mainstream progressive is proposing.

The real question is fiscal math. Can ambitious programs be fully paid for?

The answer lies in:

Reinstating progressive taxation, especially on billionaires who currently pay lower effective tax rates than their secretaries.
Closing corporate loopholes and taxing multinational profits fairly.
Ending wasteful subsidies to oil companies and other polluters.
Reprioritizing military spending, which often exceeds the next 10 nations combined.

If the numbers add up—and they must—progressives can win the argument on both morality and arithmetic.

💥 Tariffs: The Regressive Tax No One Asked For

Donald Trump’s economic nationalism includes massive tariffs. But tariffs are simply taxes on consumers, particularly lower- and middle-income households. They make goods more expensive, worsen inflation, and empty store shelves.

The result? An angry electorate.

Historically, the party in power loses midterms. Add tariff-fueled inflation to the mix, and Republicans could face massive backlash in 2026—giving Democrats two years to present a sane, progressive, and fiscally responsible alternative.

🌊 The Mamdani Moment: NYC as Harbinger of 2028?

What just happened in New York City is more than a local political shakeup—it may be a signal flare for the nation. The NYC mayor is often seen as the second most visible political office in America. A decisive shift toward progressive leadership in America’s largest city suggests public appetite for a new approach.

The rise of figures like Zohran Mamdani and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez shows what post-Reagan politics might look like: unapologetically ambitious, socially democratic, and laser-focused on policy with a calculator in hand.

🧮 Progressivism With a Calculator

There’s growing room in the national conversation for leaders who can dream big and balance budgets. Proposals like Medicare for All or tuition-free college are no longer fringe. The key to their political viability is demonstrating exactly how they’ll be paid for.

Voters are increasingly savvy. They don’t mind “big government” if it works—and if it’s not wasteful. What they do mind are broken promises, vague numbers, and deficits with no plan.

📚 Want to Explore the Next Era of American Politics?

Two thought-provoking books shed more light on this coming transformation:

🔥 AOC 2028: The Future of American Progressivism
A bold political manifesto imagining what it would look like if the next era of American leadership was shaped by AOC-style vision, courage, and policy detail.
💥 Trump’s Default: The Mist of Empire
A gripping political novel about what happens when the empire collapses under its contradictions—tariffs, debt cliffs, and all. A fictional warning, or tomorrow’s headlines?

Bottom Line:
The Reagan era was real. It shaped our world. But it may be over soon. If the pendulum is swinging back, the next generation of leaders must learn from both FDR and Reagan: be bold, be clear, and make the math work.

📉 रीगन से ममदानी तक: क्या अमेरिका में राजनीतिक बदलाव की घड़ी आ गई है?

पिछले एक शताब्दी में अमेरिकी राजनीति दो विपरीत आर्थिक विचारधाराओं के बीच झूलती रही है—एक जो समावेशी, पुनर्वितरण पर केंद्रित और सार्वजनिक निवेश वाली है, और दूसरी जो निजीकरण, कर कटौती और मुक्त बाजार आधारित है।
FDR युग (1930–1980) में न्यू डील, सोशल सिक्योरिटी, मज़बूत यूनियनों और सार्वजनिक बुनियादी ढांचे का विस्तार हुआ।
रीगन युग (1980–2030) में टैक्स कटौती, निजीकरण और "सरकार समस्या है" जैसी सोच का बोलबाला रहा।

लेकिन हर युग की एक सीमा होती है। अब लगता है कि लहरें पलट रही हैं।

🔁 क्यों रीगन युग का अंत करीब है

रीगन के विचारों—कम टैक्स, कम सरकारी हस्तक्षेप, और निजी क्षेत्र की प्रधानता—ने चार दशकों तक अमेरिका की नीति को दिशा दी। डेमोक्रेट्स और रिपब्लिकन, दोनों इस ढांचे में काम करते रहे। क्लिंटन और ओबामा भी मूल रूप से इसी रास्ते पर चले।

लेकिन अब परिस्थितियाँ बदल रही हैं:

विषमता चरम पर पहुंच गई है। 1960 में CEO और एक आम वर्कर की सैलरी में 20:1 का अनुपात था। आज यह 300:1 से अधिक है।
स्वास्थ्य, शिक्षा और आवास जैसी बुनियादी सेवाएं चरमरा रही हैं।
जलवायु संकट और महामारी ने कमज़ोर निजी व्यवस्था को उजागर कर दिया है।

अमेरिकियों—खासकर युवाओं—ने अब इस व्यवस्था पर सवाल उठाने शुरू कर दिए हैं। FDR के समय में टॉप टैक्स रेट 90% था, फिर भी अमेरिका न तो समाजवादी बना और न ही लोकतंत्र टूटा। तो फिर आज अगर टॉप टैक्स रेट 70% हो जाए, और उससे स्वास्थ्य, शिक्षा, सार्वजनिक परिवहन, और आवास जैसे ज़रूरी कार्यक्रम चल सकें—तो इसमें हर्ज क्या है?

💡 समस्या "बड़ी सरकार" नहीं, गणित है

जब प्रगतिशील योजनाओं की बात होती है, तो आलोचक जल्दी ही “समाजवाद” का डर दिखाने लगते हैं। लेकिन अगर समाजवाद का मतलब यह हो कि सरकार हर चीज़ की मालिक हो, तो वैसा कोई मांग भी नहीं कर रहा।

मुद्दा है: बजट कैसे संतुलित होगा?

इसका समाधान है:

प्रगतिशील टैक्स प्रणाली की वापसी, खासकर अरबपतियों पर जिनकी प्रभावी टैक्स दर आम कर्मचारियों से कम है।
कॉरपोरेट टैक्स में छूट बंद करना और बहुराष्ट्रीय कंपनियों को ईमानदारी से टैक्स देना।
तेल कंपनियों को मिलने वाली सब्सिडी बंद करना।
सैन्य बजट की समीक्षा, जो आज दुनिया के 10 देशों के कुल बजट से भी अधिक है।

अगर गणित फिट बैठता है—तो नैतिकता और व्यवहारिकता दोनों स्तरों पर प्रगतिशील विचार सफल हो सकते हैं।

💥 टैरिफ: गरीबों पर कर

डोनाल्ड ट्रंप का आर्थिक राष्ट्रवाद भारी टैरिफों पर आधारित है। लेकिन हकीकत यह है कि टैरिफ एक छुपा हुआ कर है जो उपभोक्ताओं को देना पड़ता है—खासकर गरीब और मध्यम वर्ग को।

इससे:

रोज़मर्रा की चीज़ें महंगी हो जाती हैं
मुद्रास्फीति बढ़ती है
दुकानों में सामान कम हो जाता है

और नतीजा? नाराज़ मतदाता।

इतिहास बताता है कि सत्ताधारी पार्टी को मिडटर्म चुनावों में नुकसान होता है। अगर ट्रंप की नीतियाँ मुद्रास्फीति बढ़ाती हैं, तो 2026 में रिपब्लिकन पार्टी को भारी नुकसान हो सकता है—और डेमोक्रेट्स को 2028 के लिए एक मौका मिल सकता है।

🌊 न्यूयॉर्क से राष्ट्रव्यापी ममदानी पल

न्यूयॉर्क सिटी की राजनीति केवल स्थानीय मामला नहीं है—यह अक्सर राष्ट्रीय रुझानों का संकेत होती है। NYC का मेयर अमेरिका का दूसरा सबसे चर्चित राजनीतिक पद होता है।

ममदानी जैसे नेताओं का उभार और AOC की लोकप्रियता यह दर्शाते हैं कि रीगन युग के बाद का युग कैसा हो सकता है—बोल्ड, स्पष्ट, और "कैलकुलेटर के साथ वामपंथ"।

🧮 प्रगतिशीलता = गणना + दृष्टि

आज के मतदाता जागरूक हैं। वे बड़ी योजनाओं से नहीं डरते—अगर वो काम करें और पैसे की बर्बादी न हो।

प्रोग्रेसिव एजेंडा सफल तभी हो सकता है जब:

प्रस्ताव स्पष्ट हों
फंडिंग का स्रोत निश्चित हो
बजट संतुलित हो

"मुफ्त" के नारे से ज़्यादा ज़रूरी है वित्तीय पारदर्शिता।

📚 आगे पढ़ना चाहें? ये दो किताबें ज़रूर देखें:

🔥 AOC 2028: The Future of American Progressivism
कल्पना कीजिए कि अगर AOC जैसी नेतृत्व क्षमता और नीतियाँ अमेरिकी राजनीति की धारा बन जाएं तो कैसा होगा? यह किताब उसी संभावना की झलक देती है।
💥 Trump’s Default: The Mist of Empire
एक राजनीतिक उपन्यास जो बताता है कि अगर अमेरिका अपनी ही नीतियों के बोझ तले दब जाए तो क्या होगा। यह एक कल्पना है—लेकिन शायद आने वाली हकीकत भी।

निष्कर्ष:
रीगन युग ने अमेरिका को गहराई से प्रभावित किया है। लेकिन अब वक़्त बदल रहा है। अगर लहरें पलट रही हैं, तो आने वाले नेताओं को FDR और रीगन दोनों से सीखना होगा—साहस दिखाओ, स्पष्ट रहो, और गणना सटीक हो।

View on Threads

FDR To Reagan To AOC: The Half Century Pendulum Swings @aoc @rbreich @IlhanMN @zohrankmamdani https://t.co/FWI0dske5D @BernieSanders @ewarren @RashidaTlaib @JamaalBowmanNY @mm1124 @MiraPagliNair @_waleedshahid @saikatc
— Paramendra Kumar Bhagat (@paramendra) July 12, 2025

FDR To Reagan To AOC: The Half Century Pendulum Swings https://t.co/FWI0dske5D
— Paramendra Kumar Bhagat (@paramendra) July 12, 2025

Ignored by #Rajasthan government, villagers of #Dholpur’s hamlets risk lives just to cross a river; children makeshift rafts daily as no bridge connects

More details 🔗https://t.co/WyG5FZpiBu pic.twitter.com/zzUQlrGpar
— The Times Of India (@timesofindia) July 12, 2025

Saturday, March 28, 2020

Imagine FDR Delegating World War II To Governors

World War II did not go to every country on earth. This pandemic has. World War II did not freeze national economies and supply chains, although there were unmistakable disruptions. My point is, on scale, this is big. World War II seems to be the only available metaphor. But that is like using earth as a metaphor to talk about Jupiter. Jupiter is also a planet, alright.

And Trump has been botching it.

He spent precious weeks in denial. He was going to tweet the pandemic away.
A nationwide lockdown lasting three weeks would have been the least disruptive economically and the most effective medically. When testing everyone is not an option, putting everyone in isolation for three weeks is enough time for the infected to start showing symptoms and qualify for further self-isolation.
Just like FDR needed airplanes in huge numbers, this pandemic is asking for supplies: masks, gloves, ventilators, hospital beds. This pandemic would be a good reason to call a truce on the trade war with China. China seems to have an immediate capacity to produce those things plenty. If not, the wartime act for this needed to be put to practice. Domestic production needed to be ramped up.
Trump is in a hurry to get America back to work. Because if the economy does not go back to pre-pandemic, he is toast in November. The fastest way to get America back to work is through widespread testing. Everyone who needs to or wants to get tested should be able to get tested with results showing up within the hour. Then you become much better at identifying and isolating people. And the rest can go to work.
But is is already late. The sky has already fallen. The unemployment numbers already have passed Depression levels. Numerous businesses have already gone belly up.
With Trump not only is the national dimension missing, but the global dimension is also missing. This pandemic is global. Only a coordinated global dimension will work. In the aftermath of 9/11 the FBI and the CIA learned to work together. Now national governments will have to learn that same lesson. Otherwise you are looking at massive deaths and massive economic disruption.
Trump is unfit for the moment. He has failed to rise to the occasion. Trump has botched it bigly.

This has such a North Korea feel. https://t.co/xNyUkiPhqG
— Not Bill Murray (@StayWonked) March 28, 2020

Out of work & facing an uncertain future, millions of our brothers & sisters across India are struggling to find their way back home. It’s shameful that we’ve allowed any Indian citizen to be treated this way & that the Govt had no contingency plans in place for this exodus. pic.twitter.com/sjHBFqyVZk
— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) March 28, 2020

Imagine FDR Delegating World War II To Governors https://t.co/JoENYNQDsd #TrumpMadness #TrumpPandemic #TrumpGenocide #TrumpCrash #TrumpPlague #trump #DonaldTrump #coronavirus #CoronaLockdown #CoronavirusOutbreak #pandemic #lockdown #CoronavirusUSA
— Paramendra Kumar Bhagat (@paramendra) March 28, 2020

My mom works an hourly job.

This is personal to me. https://t.co/QLaR0jIjqK
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) March 27, 2020

'Come as you are in the family car.' Drive-in church services are taking off during the coronavirus pandemic https://t.co/LyWynBjqo0
— TIME (@TIME) March 28, 2020

My Pediatric ER doctor friend posted this, from Dr. Josh Lerner, on his FB page. Everyone needs to read it. pic.twitter.com/CL2tbhpoU3
— Amanda Guinzburg (@Guinz) March 21, 2020

"We had time to right the plane before it crashed. But the pilot’s been too busy blaming the clouds and spouting lies over the loudspeaker. If I’m sick and can’t get a test, how do we even know that the attack rate in New York City is...?" -- @dcopaken https://t.co/USEIkOfDMG
— Amanda Guinzburg (@Guinz) March 28, 2020

Not sure how it’s even physically possible to write something this searingly beautiful while plague-stricken. But @lsjamison did. https://t.co/YjxwCraoCx
— Amanda Guinzburg (@Guinz) March 28, 2020

Sunday, July 26, 2015

FDR = Keynesian, Barack Obama = Kenyan

FDR Was No Keynesian
Barack Obama In Kenya

FDR Was No Keynesian

John Maynard Keynes Русский: Джон Мейнард Кейнс Türkçe: John Maynard Keynes (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

John Maynard Keynes and FDR were contemporaries. Keynes, of course, fathered macroeconomics. FDR fathered what is known as the New Deal. But the real stimulus was World War II itself. FDR was not someone who had read up on Keynes, and then got into office and applied the ideas. He did the New Deal based on his political instincts. His populist impulse was massive deficit spending in the face of a huge recession. And it worked.

What I call globoeconomics, I have been calling since 2008, I don't have the economics/finance background to put a theoretical spin to, but the political part of it is fairly obvious. Here too perhaps the dog can wag the tail. You build a genuine world government, and globoeconomics will flow out of it.

Defense Budget: Too Big
The 4%
A Fan Of Israel
Guns Are Insanity
Shashi Tharoor: Impressive Speech At Oxford
लालु यादव: मौसम वैज्ञानिक
Climate Change Is For Real
Barack Obama Is Biologically Superior
Barack Obama Should Create And Lead A Genuine World Government
How To Make Peace With Pakistan
Putin
Political Reform For China
Climate Change, Terrorism, Poverty, World Government
2001, 2002, 2008: Cycle Of Violence
न्यु यर्क मेरा होमटाउन
So Much For The Butterfly Effect
Modi: A Force Of Nature
Elon Musk's Hyperloop And India

Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Radio Debate: Reshma Saujani, Carolyn Maloney

If FDR were around today, he would NOT be doing radio chats. He would disapprove of these two East Side politicians doing a radio chat. FDR would be doing YouTube, like Barack Obama is. I don't understand Maloney's love for radio technology. Or maybe I do.

Audio Of The Debate
Another Audio

New York Times: Debate In House Race Stirs Big Passions For A Small Audience: a long-awaited radio debate .... abruptly hit Ms. Maloney with a tough question about her ethics..... when Ms. Saujani chimed in that “Carolyn Maloney just lied,” Mr. Louis left the accusation hanging ..... WWRL-AM (1600), which ranks about 50th among stations in the metropolitan area ....... The primary contest has grown increasingly heated as election day draws near, with each woman calling the other dishonest and desperate. ..... refused several invitations to debate her rival on television ..... Saujani had raised $1.36 million ..... Saujani pounded her again and again, belittling her recent legislative record by calling her a “member of Congress emeritus” and denigrating her intellect by questioning Ms. Maloney’s mastery of Wall Street jargon. ..... “If I were to ask Carolyn Maloney what a basis point is, she probably doesn’t know,” Ms. Saujani said. ..... “People are sick and tired of the corruption and lack of ethics and integrity,” Ms. Saujani said. ...... Ms. Maloney seemed to stumble here, saying, “I was not involved in fund-raising,” though she did not deny having attended the two events or that her campaign team, in which she presumably has some role, had arranged them. ......Saujani kept on the attack until the end, accusing Ms. Maloney of doing too little for Queens and of taking sole credit for achievements that were not hers alone, from the Second Avenue subway line to the establishment of a new bank in Queensbridge. And she tried to deflate Ms. Maloney’s passage of credit card reform legislation last year by noting that a delay in its implementation allowed card issuers to raise interest rates.

Friday, March 05, 2010

The Obama FDR Parallels

Image via Wikipedia

"The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, who fears a lost decade, said in a lecture at the London School of Economics last summer that he has “no idea” how the economy could quickly return to strong, sustainable growth."

FDR's was the Great Depression. We are calling ours the Great Recession. FDR gave us Social Security, Obama is going to give Universal Health Care. The recession is over. The recession is not over. You love me, you love me not.

I think there are obvious parallels between the Great Depression and what we are going through right now, but it is also important to realize we are treading new territory.

(1) The Bailout

That was necessary. It is interesting that many of the banks have already paid back most of the money. I am on record at this blog saying that is what will happen, although I did not see it happening this fast. But they have not paid back all the money, so.

The bailout was putting the fire out. Without the bailout it would not have been a Great Recession but Great Depression II.

(2) The Stimulus

It was necessary but insufficient. When it was put together, I was not shocked by the size of it. What did bother me was it focused too much on the past and too little on the future. I was surprised how little was allocated to broadband, for example.

(3) Banking Regulation

Work here has not gone as well as needed. Wall Street needs a new set of pants. Take off the boxer shorts. Put on some pants.

(4) Public Works Programs

Basically I am arguing for a second stimulus package that might be similar in size to the first one. This would be one pig push to create a truly post-industrial America. The first big wave of job creation will have to be the government's work, otherwise the 10% unemployment figure is feeling pretty comfortable where it is. You did not rely on the market for the bailout, or the stimulus, you sure do not expect the market to do the regulation work. That same courtesy has to be extended to job creation.

Most of the job creation will happen in the education and health sectors. Instead of creating a Tennessee Valley Authority, you would create a program to hire a ton of mentors to kick-start the inner cities, for example.

Universal and faster broadband is fundamental to this very idea. That is the centerpiece. That basic physical infrastructure is what will take both education and health to their next levels. Obama has to build that universal, faster broadband infrastructure like Eisenhower built the interstate highway system. Without that America is not going to become a post-industrial society. People will have to be plugged in.

The idea has to be for the government to hire five million people. If you are going to do it anyway, it makes no sense to do it later, or do it in small steps. Creating new jobs has to be the centerpiece of the second stimulus bill.

Education and health will have to be reimagined. That is why getting health care right is so key. It can't just be about adding entitlement programs for people who are known will not pay in, although everyone has to be covered. It also has to be about bringing the costs down across the board. You inject technology and the market forces into the sector.

On Deficits And Debts

The time to reign in the deficit and the debt will come, but that time is not now. Once the recovery is full, the political wind will blow in that direction.

Pages