It's true that older workers and retirees have just lost $15 trillion in the collapse of the housing bubble and the stock market plunge, but that is no reason not to cut their Social Security, according to the Washington Post. After all, some of them still have enough money for food.
Btw, someone has to explain the bank multiplier to the Post. Yes, giving a dollar in capital to the banks can end up generating $10 in loans, if they are prepared to make them. But, the benefit to the economy may be very little. The loans may go to buy cattle futures, credit default swaps, or shares of Goldman Sachs stock. None of these uses provide any direct stimulus to the economy. The economy is driven by real demand (C+I+G+X-M for those who have taken intro econ), and the relationship between more bank capital and an increase in real demand is very indirect at best.
A second Trump administration will cement a right-wing majority on the Supreme Court for a generation, and put our collective future in the hands of someone who will be virtually unchecked by our institutions. The country has shifted rightward, and the reverberations will ensue for potentially the next few decades. In this climate, a robust independent media ecosystem will be more important than ever. We're committed to bringing you the latest news on how Trump's agenda will actually affect the American people, shining a light on the stories corporate media overlooks and keeping the public informed about how power really works in this country.
Quality journalism is expensive to produce, and we don't have corporate backers to rely on to fund what we do. Everything we do is thanks to our incredible community of readers, who chip in a few dollars at a time to make our work possible. Any amount you give today will help us continue reporting on what matters to our democracy.
