Login

u/JulianBrandt19

▲ 155 r/boston

The short answer from many folks may be: as long as there are food delivery services, package delivery companies, and ride shares, then enforcement has to be limited. But I’m sorry, that’s just not good enough.

Almost every major square/commercial district in Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, Brookline, and other areas is clogged with cars either illegally standing with no driver in sight, double-parked cars, and even triple-parked cars. Mopeds and scooters are hardly better. Lanes of travel are frequently blocked, including city buses and emergency vehicles. Beyond the legality, it's as if the social stigma that such driving behavior is not acceptable absent exigent circumstances has totally gone out the window.

And regarding enforcement, the battle already seems lost. Unless sufficient numbers of police or traffic enforcement are physically present to observe illegal standing or double-parking enough to issue citations, there will be little done to dissuade this behavior. The businesses that benefit from unsafe delivery drivers are all too happy for this to continue, particularly the large chain restaurants like Chipotle and Chick-fil-A, as much of their sales comes through Doordash, Grubhub, and Uber Eats.

Every single official deterrent (i.e. legal, law enforcement, etc.) and social deterrent (i.e. it's just not an acceptable way to handle a vehicle in a busy city) appear to be dead ends, so I'm not sure how this will be improved absent a massive uptick in surveillance and license plate monitoring, and the collective appetite for that seems low. So what's to be done?

reddit.com
u/JulianBrandt19 — 15 days ago
▲ 154 r/ezraklein

This recent NYT article focuses mainly on Sen. Chris Van Hollen's proposal exempt many working-class folks from income taxes, coupled with a plan to raise taxes on wealthier Americans. This policy appears born of some earnest thought, and I am generally a fan of Van Hollen as a senator.

Other tax cutting proposals from Democratic senators and members of Congress range from the ill-advised to the downright farcical. They include:

  • Sen. Cory Booker also wants a working class income tax carve-out, in his case for people making up to $75k/year.
  • Katie Porter, running for CA governor, has proposed no state income tax for Californian families making up to $100k/year.
  • Keisha Lance Bottoms, running for GA governor, wants to eliminate state income tax for teachers
  • Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (who can count EK himself among her fans) has proposed tax relief on the first $100k of federal income tax for law enforcement.

This may sound unkind, but proposals like this are what you get when you asked the dumbest guy you know what to do about tax policy. Standing around at a summer barbecue, and these are the sorts of ideas that the dimmest guy in the group thinks are good ideas. And while we're at it, why stop at the working class, teachers, or law enforcement? What about nurses? Government employees? Dog walkers? Podcasters? Substackers? Does every niche employment category or job classification get their own unique tax break? Because that's where this thinking leads us.

Countering right-wing populism does not require going bar-for-bar with their stupid and nonsensical ideas. I understand the temptation, but Democrats have to resist running on a platform of promising low-hanging treats to people. No, your particular interest group does not get its own special treat because you're a special little star, more worthy than your fellow citizens.

Instead, any Democratic tax policy proposals should start from perspective of a broad civic renewal in American life. A message that we are all citizens who contribute to their society and have obligations to each other and the most vulnerable among us. You won't get a special treat, but you will live in a society where everyone pays their fair share in accordance with ability and need, and all of us share in the collective belief that the government we are funding will deliver results that will improve society in the long run.

Highest taxes on the wealthy and the billionaire class - or policy changes that actually ensure that tax liability actually applies to those folks - seem like worthy policy aims. But promising treats to various groups in desperate, flailing attempts to counter right-wing populism? Not serious, dumb policy, and failing to meet the moment.

u/JulianBrandt19 — 24 days ago