SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
inflation
Working People Must Recognize the Basis of Class Struggle
Polls suggest that working people are becoming more aware that our economic model is failing them. Regrettably, this increasing discontent stops at addressing the symptoms rather than the cause cemented into our economic model.
Mar 01, 2026
Currently working people are inveterately distracted with attacks on the Constitution by MAGA gangsters, thugs, and reprobates.
Another distraction is the heinous protection of the international cabal of rich men guilty of exploiting young girls in the Epstein criminal network.
A third distraction is indoctrinating working people into supporting a glutted military budget while cutting programs for working people.
Distractions
General Dwight D. Eisenhower warned working people in 1961 of the dangers of the "military-industrial complex."
The root cause of unemployment, underemployment, and inflation is the wage and salary component of our economic model.
It results in violations of international laws to protect corporate profits in foreign countries like Venezuela; that includes the murder of innocent civilians in cruising boats.
However, a not so obvious din of these distractions is designed to numb Americans from zeroing in on the foundation of their chronic economic adversity and anxiety.
That foundation is the wage and salary construct of our economic model.
Economic Model Decline
The symptoms of the decline of our economic model are well documented.
The Ludwig Institute of Shared Economic Prosperity (LISEP) reported a functional unemployment rate in November 2025 of 24.8%. LISEP reported a real inflation rate of 9.4%.
Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed, (ALICE) reported that 42% of households in the US were below the ALICE threshold of poverty.
The underemployment rate reported by the Burning Glass Institute in February 2024 was 52% for college graduates.
These are chronic symptoms of an economic model that cannot provide an equitable and moral distribution of employment opportunities. If you harbor the belief that anyone here can become rich or wealthy, think again.
Progressives recognize that the Republican Party has devolved into a fascist cult. The evidence is Project 2025 and screams daily that our government is being replaced by rich con artists inside the Trump administration swamp.
However, polls do suggest that working people are becoming more aware that our economic model is failing them.
Regrettably, this increasing discontent stops at addressing the symptoms rather than the cause cemented into our economic model.
Many progressive politicians, scholars, academics, and journalists go to the water's edge of the cause, but cravenly avoid a discussion of the that cause.
Upton Sinclair’s assertion in 1935 is applicable:
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. (“I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked”)
Root Cause
The root cause of unemployment, underemployment, and inflation is the wage and salary component of our economic model. To understand how that model is inherently exploitative and inequitable, the basics must be understood.
The following is a simplified example on that process.
The primary purpose of our economy is to return a private profit to the business owner.
The basic opportunities for a contented lifestyle are decreasing.
There are two types of investment that the business owner must spend.
First is expenditures on space, plant, machinery, tools, hardware, software, technological advances, and raw materials. This includes legal registrations, licenses, permits, and financial services. Often, the business owner inherits the business so this expenditure may be minimized.
Next, the business owner must purchase the physical or mental efforts of the employees. It is realized in the form of wages and salaries.
The employees create the products or services that the business owner sells in the market. In spite of the delusions of many business owners, no business owner creates those products or services alone. It is a social process.
If the business owner paid the employees the salary and wages equal to the value of the products or services created by them, there would be no profit.
Hence, there would be no reason to continue the business. Moreover, the business owner must compete with other business owners to sell as much as possible and minimize costs. Parenthetically, layoffs and recessions crushing working people are the usual remedy for the business owner.
Specific Example
The business owner must sell the products or services created by the employees at a price above the amount spent on wages and salaries.
In this example, a male employee works a typical nine to five workday.
In that workday, the employee works for wages or a salary that will allow him to maintain himself or his family.
However, inside that workday is the key to the exploitation and moral flaw in this economic process. It appears that the employee is being paid for working a full day, but that is not the case.
The business owner must calculate the amount paid to the employee based on how much is required for a private profit.
The employee is working some hours to provide a profit for the owner and some hours to maintain himself or his family.
In this example, in one workday the business owner pays $50 an hour for all the initial expenditures listed above to create one product.
The employee must be paid to create the product or service. By an arbitrary calculation of the business owner, it is $10 an hour.
The business owner must sell the product or service in the market by charging an amount above what has been spent already to produce it. It was created for $50 plus $10 which equals $60.
However, the business owner must sell the product or service for $70 each to obtain a profit of $10. The “new” value of the product or service is $70, yet it cost $60 to create.
If the employee created a product or service that is worth $70, it is inescapable that the employee is not being compensated for the value that he created. This is basic exploitation of unpaid labor and, in most spiritual belief systems, immoral.
Perceptive Voices
Pope John XXIII wrote on this subject:
We therefore consider it our duty to reaffirm that the remuneration of work is not something that can be left to the laws of the marketplace; nor should it be a decision left to the will of the more powerful. It must be determined in accordance with justice and equity; which means that workers must be paid a wage which allows them to live a truly human life and to fulfill their family obligations in a worthy manner. (Mater et Magistra May 15, 1961)
Martin Luther King commented on this moral flaw:
We are saying that something is wrong... with capitalism... There must be better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism. Call it what you may, call it democracy, or call it democratic socialism, but there must be a better distribution of wealth within this country for all of God’s children (1966)
Malcolm X, American Muslim leader, spoke at one of his speeches at the Audubon Ballroom in New York City in 1964:
You show me a capitalist, and I’ll show you a bloodsucker.
Consequences
The inherent exploitation of our economic model begins at the wage and salary level. From there we organize, produce, transport and distribute goods and services. Private profit for the business owner supersedes all other values.
In the US we have seen the values of community, family, and social sentiment diminished. Those values are overwhelmed by a tsunami of advertising urging working people into a conspicuous consumption of material items whether needed or not.
Simultaneously is the harsh economic reality for working people. The basic opportunities for a contented lifestyle are decreasing. Those opportunities are quality and affordable healthcare, smart and accessible education, safe and comfortable housing, healthy nutrition, and a clean environment.
This dilemma can be addressed by providing the material opportunities above with policies formed by the best of spiritual and secular values.
That can only be realized by a transition to an economic model based on realistic democratic principles and collective profits.
Otherwise, the present economic immiseration and despair will continue to transform working people into a morass of fear and hatred seeking scapegoats to blame. They will become an alienated, vapid mass of untethered individuals at the mercy of the soulless and parasitic oligarchs who live off the products and services of their labor.
Keep ReadingShow Less
With Its Tariff Ruling, the Supreme Court Shows It's Possible to Take Trump's Toys Away
The decision is a sign that US institutions are attempting to claw back authority from an overreaching executive.
Feb 26, 2026
The Supreme Court’s decision is clear. The president did not have the authority to impose most of his tariffs.
President Donald Trump argued that, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, his actions were justified because of a national emergency caused by a foreign threat. In the 6-3 ruling, the court said that, on the contrary, that act provides Congress with that authority, which hadn’t delegated it to the president. The tariffs left standing are largely by sector: cars, semiconductors, steel.
Trump, like the infamous honey badger, don’t care.
The president immediately insulted the six justices who ruled against him, calling them “disloyal, unpatriotic” and “lapdogs… for the radical left Democrats.” Then he turned around and reimposed a global 15% tariff rate.
The court decision—on top of other judicial setbacks Trump has faced—may well mark the high tide of the president’s overreach.
For a lot of countries, that new rate is actually an improvement. Mexico and Canada have faced higher tariffs, at least for products not covered under the existing US-Mexico-Canada Agreement. China, Brazil, and India will also benefit from the court decision. But for countries that negotiated lower rates with the Trump team—Japan, Indonesia—it’s a slap in the face. That should teach them to made deals with the devil.
To justify his reassertion of tariffs, Trump is using another law, which establishes a ceiling of 15% and a 150-day limit before Congress can weigh in. No previous president has invoked this law to impose tariffs. For good reason: its provisions reference not a trade deficit but an “international payments problem” connected to fixed exchange rates and the gold standard, a world that no longer exists. As such, Trump is simply graduating from one illegality to another. It may not be long before Trump dispenses altogether with his misinterpretation of esoteric laws to sanctify his lawlessness.
A sensible president might have used the court decision as an opportunity to jettison an unpopular policy and pivot toward “affordability” in the run-up to the midterm elections in November, as his advisers have been urging. But that’s not Trump’s style. He almost always doubles down in the face of resistance.
And resistance there will be. The court ruling opens up the possibility for companies to file suit against the US government to recover costs associated with the tariffs. In his dissenting opinion, Brett “OG Lapdog” Kavanagh warned that this could usher in a “mess.” Perhaps Kavanagh slept through his econ classes at Yale, because the “mess” was already created by Trump’s chaotic approach to trade in the first place.
Trump’s intransigence will naturally interfere with a court-driven effort to restore a measure of predictability to US trade policy. However, perhaps the court decision—on top of other judicial setbacks Trump has faced—may well mark the high tide of the president’s overreach. Low approval ratings, pushback by some Republicans against Trump’s federal diktats, intimations of rebellion from countries like Canada: These are signs that guardrails are going back up to protect against a presidential monster truck gone amok.
Tariff Impact
The United States continues to run a huge trade deficit—in goods and services—of roughly $901 billion. There was a slight decline last year—of $2 billion—that amounted to a reduction of 0.2%—a far cry from the 78% decline that Trump has claimed. Worse, from Trump’s point of view, the deficit in goods—which his tariffs were supposed to target—went up 2.1%.
Okay, but hasn’t the United States pulled in a lot of revenue from these tariffs? With an effective rate of 11.7%—the average for the previous two years was 2.7%—tariffs brought in $194.8 billion in 2025. That’s not a small figure. It ends up in the same place as domestic taxes: the US treasury. From there, Congress makes decisions regarding spending (which the Trump administration has, on occasion, unconstitionally ignored).
The more important concern is: Who pays?
The president imposed these tariffs in order to help American businesses. Those same businesses are saying pretty clearly, “No, thank you.”
A majority of Republicans believes that foreigners pay the cost of these tariffs. They are just following the president, who argued this week in his State of the Union that “tariffs, paid for by foreign countries, will, like in the past, substantially replace the modern-day system of income tax.”
However, since they apply to goods entering the United States from other countries, it’s actually American importers who pay the tax. That includes car manufacturers that are using foreign-made components, big retailers like Walmart that are selling foreign-made products, and service providers like FedEx that deliver goods across borders.
Ordinarily, US companies will pass on the cost of tariffs to the consumer. And there has been an overall increase in inflation over the last year: an uptick of 2.7% in consumer prices in December 2025 from the year before. The rising cost of autos is a case in point. The average cost of a car hit a new record in December at just over $50,000. And that’s with car companies making the decision not to pass on to the consumer many of the additional costs associated with imported components. Companies are not likely to continue swallowing their losses in 2026.
It’s not just consumers who are paying for the tariffs in the form of higher costs. It’s also American farmers who aren’t selling their soybeans to China because of the reciprocal tariffs that Beijing has imposed. This year, crop farmers in the United States lost nearly $35 billion, though not all of that can be connected to tariffs. The $12 billion the Trump administration has pledged in agricultural assistance this year only goes part of the way to limit the damage.
Recouping Costs
The Supreme Court decision opens up the possibility for companies to sue the federal government to recover some of the costs inflated by the tariffs. According to economists at Wharton, the total could reach as high as $175 billion. If companies went after that full amount, that would leave only $20 billion of the tariff revenues in the federal kitty.
To get the issue to the Supreme Court, thousands of companies, including Costco, Revlon, and Goodyear Tires, had already sued the Trump administration. Ford says that it has lost $2 billion because of the tariffs.
Like most bullies, Trump backs down if confronted with comparable power and resolve.
The president imposed these tariffs in order to help American businesses. Those same businesses are saying pretty clearly, “No, thank you.”
FedEx is the first company to take the administration to the US Court of International Trade after the Supreme Court ruling. This federal court, located in New York, already ruled against Trump’s tariffs back in May, with even Trump’s appointee to the court siding against him. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker has also sent Washington a bill for $8.6 billion, the proceeds to be distributed to all of the state’s households.
Trump promised to run the country like a business. But he has more experience navigating bankruptcy than posting genuine profits.
Peak Trump?
The US president is still exercising his erratic unilateralism in the global arena. He continues to threaten Iran with military strikes if it doesn’t bend to his will. He has encircled Cuba with a new embargo covering oil shipments. The Pentagon is still bombing alleged narco-traffickers in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, with six strikes this month alone.
But the Supreme Court decision is a sign that US institutions are attempting to claw back authority from an overreaching executive. Some Republicans have pushed back against Trump’s insane moves to seize Greenland. CEOs and the Chamber of Commerce are starting to test the waters with mild criticisms of Trump’s economically destabilizing policies. Back in December, the Republican-controlled Senate in Idaho rejected the redistricting plan the Trump administration was trying to push down the state’s throat.
It’s not as if Trump will mature into the job of president. He is, after all, already well into his second childhood.
The president has abysmal approval ratings. But it’s not so much fear of public disapproval as of Trump’s retribution that has kept critics within his party and in the economic elite in line. Politicians prefer to retire—Marjorie Taylor Greene from the House, Thom Tillis from the Senate—rather than face the outpouring of hate and death threats that Trump unleashes when he wants you out of office.
Like most bullies, Trump backs down if confronted with comparable power and resolve. China played chicken with Trump over tariffs, and the US president swerved out of the way. The power of the street in Minnesota forced the administration to reduce its Immigration and Customs Enforcement presence in the state. And some independent-thinking Republicans are standing firm—Lisa Murkowski from Alaska, Thomas Massie and Rand Paul from Kentucky.
Trump seems to be growing increasingly erratic. He has threatened Iran with not just a targeted attack but a rapid escalation. He has lashed out against his judicial allies (like Neil Gorsuch on the court). Rather than deal with all the backlash against his heavy-handed approach to the Kennedy Center programming, he decided just to close down the center “for repairs.”
The president’s attention-deficit problems are legendary. His unlimited capacity to insult people goes all the way back to his youth. But his most recent tirades seem to be tinged with desperation, like the tantrums of a child who can’t get out of the crib no matter how much it screams and shakes its rattle.
It’s not as if Trump will mature into the job of president. He is, after all, already well into his second childhood. The only solution is to take away his toys before he hurts himself and everyone else. The Supreme Court has shown the way.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Report Details How Trump Economic Agenda ‘Will Make Ordinary Families Reliably Poorer in the Future’
In just one year, Republicans' 2025 budget package is expected to increase income inequality at quadruple the rate seen over the past 40 years.
Feb 24, 2026
President Donald Trump's economic agenda "will make ordinary families reliably poorer in the future," according to the author of a report published Tuesday by the Economic Policy Institute.
Josh Bivens, EPI's chief economist, said Trump's slashing of federal spending and jobs, mass deportations, chaotic tariffs, and anti-labor policies were suppressing hiring and wages, draining household and business spending, and slowing economic growth.
While a recession is not yet inevitable, Bivens argued that worrying signs are already on the horizon, with 1.4 million fewer new jobs than expected in 2025 and unemployment ticking up to 4.4%, up from the low of 3.4% in April 2023.
For low-wage earners, the past year has been particularly rough. After seeing unusually fast growth during the presidency of Joe Biden, real wages for the bottom 10% of earners fell by 0.3% in 2025.
The report predicts that Republicans' 2025 budget package will reduce “aggregate demand” in the coming years. The so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act cuts $100 billion annually from Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), while allowing health insurance subsidies that saved families thousands to expire, which the report projects will cause many families who rely on these benefits to pull back spending in the economy.
While the law reduced taxes, the vast majority of those benefits went to the wealthiest earners, whose spending was already much less constrained by their incomes.
The report notes the astonishing increase in inequality caused by the law. Between the years of 1979 and 2019, which were considered to have seen an explosion of wealth inequality, the share of income claimed by the richest 10% increased by about 0.25% per year.
It found that the GOP budget law will, in just one year, increase the top decile's share of wealth by a full percentage point. In other words, the rate of inequality will "quadruple in its first year."
Aside from this major driver of inequality, the report also says that the Trump administration's hostility toward collective bargaining rights and its mass firings of federal workers would further suppress wages by making the labor market less competitive, and that the president's erratic tariff regime would make those wages less valuable by fueling inflation.
“Disastrous policy choices that led to excess unemployment, slower growth in the economy’s productive capacity, and rising inequality have made life less affordable for typical families in recent decades," Bivens said. "The Trump administration’s policies double down on the worst policy decisions of this period and will make ordinary families reliably poorer in the future, even if an outright recession or spiking inflation does not happen."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular