Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

he’s working on it god bless him! still a much harder lift than just changing rates and brackets under existing law.

in reply to this
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

modern witchcraft, in a pejorative sense, is detaching words in public speech profoundly from any defensible meaning, for personal or political gain. it can work! but it pollutes the epistemological commons, our collective ability to make sense of the world and to act fruitfully within and upon it.

Loading quoted Bluesky post...
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

by "no one is above the law", they mean "no one is above the donald". they believe no law or even constitution binds the donald, or binds them when they act with what they claim to be his writ.

Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

yes. wealth defined as total net worth, including all assets. and perhaps as gross assets. no individual should be in the business of holding and controlling $1B in assets, even if they have $900M in debt against them.

in reply to this
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

agreed, but see bsky.app/profile/inte...

in reply to this
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

i don't think that's a fair characterization. i think if asked to answer "which is more progressive?" i think most people would say wealth taxes. and it's a great point that high income taxes without wealth taxes fix old winners rather than even the score. 1/

in reply to this
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

nevertheless, income taxes already exist. changing levels and brackets is a far easier lift than developing and imposing a new tax and necessarily complex enforcement mechanisms. so "progressives" tend to talk about income taxes more, as lower hanging fruit. 2/

in reply to self
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

plus marginal income tax rates alone have had and would have virtuous effects. 3/

in reply to self
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

in particular, the very wealthy, while not expropriated by income taxes, lose their capacity and so motivation to engage in destructive rat races to get richer and richer. 4/

in reply to self
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

instead, they allow income to collect in firms as retained earnings, where other stakeholders (workers, customers, vendors) compete for payouts with shareholders whose heart isn't in the fight, given the tax rate they'd pay. 5/

in reply to self
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

in other words, taxing payouts to the already wealthy is a powerful tool in favor of a better predistribution, even if it cannot alone rid us of our Elons. 6/

in reply to self
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

not getting rid of our Elons, though, is better than breeding more of them in the name of not locking in current winners. that Elon and Jeff were able to knock Bill off his pedestal never for a moment helped the rest of us. 7/

in reply to self
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

of course what we really want is both high marginal income tax rates, and wealth taxes to ensure no one can hold wealth of more than ~$100M over anything but a brief period. /fin

in reply to self
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

94% was what FDR brought marginal rates on then very high incomes to. Seems like a good number to me.

Loading quoted Bluesky post...
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

if the answer to bad speech is more speech… drafts.interfluidity.com/2025/03/09/v...

Voice of a Maryland

Loading quoted Bluesky post...
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

i have no idea who does or doesn’t deserve credit for helping to negotiate it, but i’m incredibly grateful there’s a ceasefire between India and Pakistan.

Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

i would really appreciate it if India and Pakistan would just not do this. please.

Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

sometimes my enjoyment of the present is overwhelmed by premonitions of future nostalgia.

Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

"Biden rejected Reaganite trickle-down economics but settled on another kind of trickle down: fixing things in the far reaches of supply chains in hopes the benefits will eventually reach ordinary people." @isabellamweber.bsky.social foreignpolicy.com/2025/05/09/a...

Link Preview: 
What Abundance Lacks: A bestselling progressive book gets its policy all wrong.

What Abundance Lacks

Link Preview: What Abundance Lacks: A bestselling progressive book gets its policy all wrong.
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

it's not that i'm hopeful. it's optimism of the will. we have to do this. we have seen some successes, in and through the courts. the public's interest and support does help judges find courage i think. Stephen Miller wants to do evil, a lot of evil. we have to stop him. bsky.app/profile/muel...

in reply to this
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

There’s a difference between not thinking about operations because we’ve designed and automated them, and not thinking about them because we’ve lost the capability to understand them.

in reply to this
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

We agree this is not a system working for everyone. I’m terribly sorry to hear you are living in a car. It’s intolerable that we don’t provide a foundation well above that. I’m not quite there, but am not great. We disagree about what to do about it. But I get, viscerally, where you’re coming from.

in reply to this
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

i think the result of violence is usually catastrophe. the last 80 years includes the best period in US history. the last 50 have been a bad. we got the better years by reform, under threat of breakdown sure, without enduring the miseries of actual, complete breakdown. careful what you wish for.

in reply to this
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

what they used to call a “rap session” is now described as a “trade deal”.

Loading quoted Bluesky post...
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

reform vs revolution is an old debate. i guess we have different views about what history reveals. (i’m on the reform side, though i have to concede that the risk of revolution, the threat of a real breakdown, has often been crucial to reform. so the “sides” are not quite fully opposite.)

in reply to this
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

Among the most urgent things we need to do is reform the electoral system, in order to change the nature of Congress. Seems hard! They benefit from the *status quo*. And yet, in recent decades Australia, New Zealand, Japan all did manage to reform how their parliaments are elected. It can be done.

in reply to this
Steve Randy Waldman
@interfluidity.com

Who are we? The people Donald Trump hires, literally from Fox News? We've seen transitions to more virtuous systems. The governments of the Nordics didn't result from burning everything down. The resulted from political conflict, in which farmers and workers aligned to build power, and then reform.

in reply to this