i just think that you haven’t been paying attention, none of this is a departure from what she’s been saying since elected to the senate.
Warren isn’t hating at billionaires, she’s responding to billionaires who are stating to the media that her policies are dangerous. Does some of those responses run the risk of being misrepresented. Sure, but 99% of her message is “I just want them to pay their fair share, which is way more than they pay now.”
Not doubting you but do you have specific billionaires in mind?
Even as her poll numbers drop, it looks like the Warren campaign is still focused on the anti-billionaires strategy. Her latest Instagram ad is for a sticker saying, ‘I’m tired of freeloading billionaires.’
Maybe it’ll work, I still don’t think most voters wake up every morning seething with hatred towards billionaires. Her campaign might be looking too much at her most avid twitter supporters.
Now some billionaire HAS to get a “progressive tears” mug ready for when Biden wins the nomination.
I’ll make my own “centrist tears” when Sanders gets the nomination and personally mail you one if you so want.
If Sanders wins the nomination I’ll send you MY tears.
That’s the definition of populism though - the wider People against the smaller Elites. Who the People is varies, as do the Elites ; but whenever the discourse is framed that way it’s populism. It’s not an inherently bad thing mind you - only the Elites say that :).
The problem for populism is that it basically requires Warren to act as if people making six figures are hard pressed and should receive more government support.
Yeah, over this weekend one of my friends, along with the Twitter left, were twisting themselves into a pretzel trying to attack Pete’s college plan.
Well, it is pretty stupid, when you come right down to it.
I mean, if you’re going to provide free college to 80% of the population, and give partial assistance to another 10%, why not just go ahead and make it universal?
But the real issue isn’t that his own proposal doesn’t go that last mile, it’s the bullshit attack on Warren and Sanders over free college for the kids of billionaires. It’s a farcical issue, but it lets him play Younger Joe Lieberman for a new generation, I guess.
As I said, if you’re going to pay for college for 80% of the population, and subsidize it for another 10%, why not make it universal?
It’s not like it would cost much more - the rich and near-rich are mostly going to send their kids to elite private universities - and not even Harvard or Princeton; remember those parents who were paying a bunch of money to scam the system and get their kids into the University of Southern California? (Nothing wrong with USC; my parents went there, but I don’t think of it in the same breath as Stanford or Swarthmore.) Parents who want their kids to go to a good private college and can afford to send them there aren’t going to take advantage of free college at a public university just to save some money.
Not to mention, if it’s universal:
-
Nobody needs to jump through a ton of paperwork just to prove they’re not too affluent to take advantage of the program. And quite seriously, the paperwork itself is a barrier for many families at the lower end of the scale, just like many families eligible for various forms of public support already fail to take advantage if they’ve got to prove they’re eligible. Universality helps poor families take advantage of the program.
-
Universal programs have much closer to universal support. Once you start means-testing a program, it’s slammed as welfare, and lots of people are reflexively against welfare.
-
And once you means-test a program, it’s easy for it to be turned into something like welfare. The next round of budget cuts might well shift the line of ineligibility downward - those people making $70K can afford college for their kids! - and then it gets shifted again, at which point it really is aid to poor families, and then it’s on the chopping block.
The point is, rich people would be paying for this program anyway - through Warren’s wealth tax, or whatever tax Sanders has for rich people. That’s how you do it: make them pay for public college for everyone’s kids, and then they can be part of ‘everyone’ and take advantage of it if they want to send their kids to a public college.
Exactly. It’s hypocritical and divisive and, yes, extremely populist. “We’re going to help you but don’t worry, we’re not going to help These people, they’re elites, fuck 'em, amirite ?”
And that’s another bingo.
Here’s the thing though: you’re not providing it to 80% of the population. You’re providing it to the 30-40% of the population that goes to college and is capable of finishing college. Most of whom are either pretty well off or are going to be. Now if a bill with a GENUINE funding source that hits only the upper class is part of a free college bill, I can get behind that. I’m not vehemently against free college, so much as I want to see an actual bill get scored by the CBO, because campaign promises involving revenue numbers and promises to spare working families are usually bullshit.
And I’m not even against taxing working families, if it’s providing a benefit working familiies will use. But most kids from middle class and lower middle class families won’t go to college, so it would be a terrible idea to have them pay for it, either directly, or indirectly.
Well, it looks populist at first glance, doesn’t it?
Then you add in all the hoops that families with no resources will have to jump through, just to prove they’re not affluent, and it’s not populist at all.
Open it to everyone, so there are no hoops.