Listen on Spotify (transcripts available)
Listen on Apple (transcripts available)
Update: Here are the photos of James Joyce’s Martello Tower I mentioned.
Looking towards the sea from the strand.
A tie Joyce gave Samuel Beckett, which is exhibited in the Martello Tower.
Me, pretending to be Buck Mulligan, spying the ship named the Samuel Beckett.
Three things happened in the last week that have befuddled a lot of observers, but which might best be understood as the kinds of developments we’ll see increasingly as the power structure around Trump grows fragile and fluid:
All of these, in my opinion, arose out of and reflect Trump’s increasing political weakness, his separate mental and physical decline, and the fight for power that results.
Much of the focus on the Trump-Mamdani meeting was on what Trump did, such as his interruption before Mamdani had to answer whether he believed Trump was a fascist, rather than on what Mamdani said. But if you look closely at what Mamdani said — which was often simply a restatement of his campaign pitch — he managed to say them in such a way that Trump parroted them as his own.
Both men centered their statements on their shared love of New York City, which is real and has been underplayed.
Mamdani’s first comment did so — as did his relentlessly disciplined campaign did — in terms of affordability; Mamdani mentioned “groceries,” the awkward shorthand Trump’s handlers have had him use to address affordability.
Mr. Trump: You know, we had some interesting conversation, and some of his ideas really are the same ideas that I have. A big thing on cost. The new word is “affordability.” Another word, it’s just groceries. It’s sort of an old-fashioned word, but it’s very accurate. They are coming down. They are coming down.
Mamdani repeatedly spoke in terms of Trump’s voters (again, a line directly from his campaign).
Trump had no idea that Mamdani targeted Trump voters, and as the coalition that elected him last year abandons him in the polls, Trump took notice when Mamdani explained that.
When I spoke to New Yorkers who had voted for the president last November on Hillside Avenue and Fordham Road, I asked them why. I heard, again and again, two major reasons. One was that they want an end to forever wars — they wanted an end to the taxpayers’ dollars we had funding violations of human rights, and they wanted to address the cost-of-living crisis. And I appreciated the chance to discuss both of those things.
Mr. Trump: He said a lot of my voters actually voted for him.
Mr. Mamdani: One in 10.
Mr. Trump: And I’m OK with that.
[snip]
Reporter: First of all, for the mayor-elect: You’re both from different parts of the political perspective. You’re both populist, though, and I just wonder to what extent the president’s campaign styles — his techniques, his social media use — inspired any part of your campaign?
Mr. Mamdani: Well, I actually told the president that, you know, so much of the focus of our campaign has been on the cost-of-living crisis, and when we asked those New Yorkers who had voted for the president — when we saw an increase in his numbers in New York City, that came back to the same issue. Cost of living. Cost of living. Cost of living.
And they spoke about the cost of groceries, the cost of rent, the cost of Con Ed, the cost of child care.
Mamdani seems to have reminded Trump that Trump got a historic number of votes last year (the voters Mamdani kicked off his campaign by canvassing) by running on affordability.
Reporter: Mr. President, you said you grew up in New York City. Mr. Mamdani, does New York City love President Trump?
Mr. Mamdani: New York City loves a future that is affordable. And I can tell you that there were more New Yorkers who voted for President Trump in the most recent presidential election because of that focus on cost of living, and I’m looking forward to working together to deliver on that affordability agenda.
President Trump: Got a lot. I got a lot of votes. One more, go ahead. One or two more. Go ahead.
Mamdani’s focus on Trump voters became a way to dodge very contentious questions.
Mr. Mamdani: I appreciate all efforts toward peace, and I shared with President Trump, when I spoke to Trump voters on Hillside Avenue — including one of whom was a pharmacist that spoke about how President Trump’s father actually went to that pharmacy not too far from Jamaica Estates — that people were tired of seeing our tax dollars fund endless wars.
By the end, Trump spoke of the way he himself (thinks he) picked up Bernie voters.
Mr. Trump: We agree on a lot more than I would have thought. I think he’s — I want him to do a great job, and we’ll help him do great job. You know, he may have different views, but in many ways, you know — we were discussing, when Bernie Sanders was out of the race, I picked up a lot of his votes, and people had no idea, because he was strong on not getting ripped off in trade and lots of the things that I practiced, and been very successful on.
Tariffs, a lot of things. Bernie Sanders and I agreed on much more than people thought, and when he was put out of the race — I think quite unfairly, if you want to know the truth — many of the Bernie Sanders voters voted for me, and I felt very comfortable frankly seeing that and saying that. And you know, it just turned out to be a statistical truth.
Perhaps the most fascinating reflection came when Trump appeared to parrot Mamdani’s shift of discussions about ICE into a question about crime, whence Trump immediately addressed building.
Mr. Trump: What we did is, we discussed crime. More than ICE, per se, we discussed crime. And he doesn’t want to see crime, and I don’t want to see crime, and I have very little doubt that we’re not going to get along on that issue. And he wants to — and he said some things that were very interesting, very interesting, as to housing construction, and he wants to see houses go up. He wants to see a lot of houses created, a lot of apartments built, et cetera. You know, we actually — people would be shocked, but I want to see the same thing.
Trump repeated that progression later, and specifically said Mamdani told him things Trump had not seen in coverage.
He wants to see no crime. He wants to see housing being built. He wants to see rents coming down, all the things that I agree with. We may disagree on how we get there. The rent coming down — I think one of the things I really gleaned very, very much today, he would like to see them come down ideally by building a lot of additional housing. That’s the ultimate way. He agrees with that, and so do I.
But, if I read the newspapers, and the stories — I don’t hear that. But I heard him say it today. I think that’s a very positive step. Now, I don’t expect — I expect to be helping him, not hurting him. A big help, because I want New York City to be great.
Look, I love New York City. It’s where I come from.
None of Mamdani’s success should be that surprising. He’s a rock star in whose aura Trump would like to bathe.
Mamdani simply managed Trump the same way everyone does: by getting alone in a room with him and making him adopt your ideas as his own.
Which brings us to the latest Ukrainian “piece” plan, a 28-point plan to force Ukraine to capitulate to Russia on threat of losing US intelligence and arms (though Cristo Grozev believes there are two bullets that Russia did not release publicly).
Phillips OBrien announced, hopefully prematurely, that this was the long-awaited denouement of Trump’s long con of pretending he cares about Ukraine.
Instead, what actually happened on November 21 was that the Trump Administration came for Ukraine—as they always intended to do. The Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, a very close associate of VP JD Vance, went to Kyiv and tried to bully the Ukrainians into accepting Trump’s 28 Point Plan to neuter Ukraine. Driscoll formally presented the plan to divide Ukraine now, and end it later, and the reality of what Ukraine and Europe was facing finally sunk in. Here was how the Atlantic story on the meeting began.
Dan Driscoll kept everyone waiting. The United States secretary of the Army had been due to arrive earlier today at the U.S. ambassador’s residence in Kyiv to speak with diplomats from NATO member states. The guests were eager to hear about the 28-point peace plan Driscoll had delivered on behalf of the Trump administration to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. But what they heard when Driscoll finally got there left some of the Europeans infuriated. “I feel nauseous,” one diplomat told us afterward. “It’s like the world is shattering around us, and we are watching it in real time.”
The most depressing thing from the above story was that the diplomat was surprised at what the administration was doing; or I should say that the unnamed diplomat had fallen for the Trump Administration’s long con. The long con was that they would ever do anything meaningful to hurt Putin and help Ukraine, that somehow they were honest brokers in this war. They never were. They have always wanted Putin to get the best deal possible and they have always wanted to severely weaken Ukraine. Whatever steps the administration took to seem to help Ukraine were performative; steps that were designed to make it look like they would be tough on Putin, but in the end never were more mirage-like than anything else.
Michael Weiss catalogs all the signs that the deal was, instead, Kirill Dmitriev successfully manipulating the press.
What struck me as odd about this whole affair was that for such a multi-authored, monthlong project, no one from the American side was willing to go on the record to talk about it. Everything was on-background comment — except for Dmitriev, who was only too happy to gibber. Moreover, the State Department was silent; all journalist inquiries directed at Foggy Bottom were not even redirected to the White House, which is highly abnormal on matters of foreign policy sensitivity. Then, late Wednesday night, Rubio, under his personal account, tweeted this: “Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and realistic ideas. And achieving a durable peace will require both sides to agree to difficult but necessary concessions. That is why we are and will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this war based on input from both sides of this conflict.”
To anyone on nodding terms with diplomatese, this sounded like the whirr of the backpedal, Rubio’s way of trying to downplay expectations created by Dmitriev and Axios and the resulting press frenzy. An “extensive exchange of serious and realistic ideas” was not, after all, a signed, sealed, and delivered plan of action, which Politico’s Dasha Burns had described (citing a “senior White House official”) as a “fait accompli,” cobbled together without the input or consent of Brussels. “We don’t really care about the Europeans,” said that same senior White House official, even though the EU and NATO will have an outsize say in determining the future of Ukraine and Europe, from sanctions relief to security assistance.
[snip]
Was Trump really acquainted with the deal in all its details? What did his “support” for Witkoff amount to? Recall that the preliminaries for the doomed Anchorage summit consisted of Witkoff misinterpreting what the Russians were offering (easy enough to do when you rely on an SVR translator) and making it seem as if they’d conceded things they hadn’t. This caused some dyspepsia in the Oval, and Trump later “jokingly” dismissed Witkoff’s ability to parlay with the Russians.
Could this be happening again? And could it be even worse now that Trump (distracted with his imploding MAGA coalition at home, a flush-worthy approval rating, a battering at the polls on Nov. 4, and bloodlust for the domestic opposition) is too busy to care about the finer points of his big, beautiful peace deal for Ukraine? “Sure, Steve, sounds great, keep going” sounded like what amounted to the Trump seal of approval here, but we don’t know because no one bothered to ask this question (or, at least, no one managed to have it answered).
[snip]
Politico now clarified that “a number of people who would have normally been informed of such a plan at the White House and State Department were also not consulted about Witkoff’s renewed push,” with one U.S. official saying there was “zero interagency coordination.” You don’t say.
Reuters (including Erin Banco revisiting her past reporting on Dmitriev’s efforts to do precisely this in Seychelles in 2017) describes some of the machinations in Miami that went into this production.
U.S. officials and lawmakers are increasingly concerned about a meeting last month in which representatives of the Trump administration met with Kirill Dmitriev, a Russian envoy who is under U.S. sanctions, to draft a plan to end the war in Ukraine, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.
The meeting took place in Miami at the end of October and included special envoy Steve Witkoff, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and Dmitriev, who leads the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), one of Russia’s largest sovereign wealth funds.
The most telling development, however, are competing and quickly evolving stories from Senator Mike Rounds (who would lead opposition to such a plan in the Senate) and Marco Rubio about whether this is a US plan.
Rubio reassured Senators mobilizing opposition to this development that it wasn’t a done deal, but then backtracked to avoid losing his place in the room.
As Yaroslav Trofimoev quipped,
Foreign nations now have to deal with rival factions of the U.S. government who keep major policy initiatives secret from each other and some of which work with foreign powers as the succession battle for 2028 begins, is how one diplomat put it.
One thing that’s happening is that Marco Rubio has survived in the Trump White House as long as he has because he is very good at mirroring, usually passively so. He says, and his State Department says, what his State Department babysitters say, people like Darren Beattie and Christopher Landau. But Rubio has generally remained in the room even at key times, and particularly with Ukraine, has thus far managed to prevent the worst from happening.
Importantly, though, Dmitriev’s tremendous success at manipulating the other people in the room with Trump comes at a time when Tom Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene — neither big backers of Ukraine — showed how to beat Trump: by bypassing Mike Johnson to force a politically difficult vote, and to do so with enough success to force the Senate’s hand.
Brian Fitzpatrick and Don Bacon, both staunch backers of Ukraine in the House, have initiated an effort to replicate that approach.
There are the numbers right now to pass sanctions against Russia: at least 218 in the House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Those numbers just happen to be similar to the same numbers as it would take to impeach Trump.
Which is to say, the very thing that made it possible for Dmitriev to recruit (ahem) the people in the room with Trump — the flux in the White House now — is also the thing that makes him more vulnerable than he was a month ago.
There’s a lot about MTG’s departure I’m not much interested in: making Trump the primary actor, making Marge the victim, debating whether she’ll be friend or foe, focusing more on the timing as it relates to getting her pension than as it relates to the healthcare crisis Republicans will soon own.
MTG is far smarter than people give her credit for and she’s very adept at using the tools of right wing politics.
In recent months the good old boys in Georgia and even Trump’s top aides refused to let her run for state-wide office in Georgia, believing she could risk an increasingly purple state.
That was part of, but only part of, the background to her willingness to take a leadership position on Epstein. She does genuinely care about the issue and/or she does recognize its salience among populists.
The part of MTG’s statement that generated the most attention (which appears in ¶¶33 and 34 of her statement) — her prediction Republicans will lose the House and have to stave off a Trump impeachment…
I have too much self respect and dignity, love my family way too much, and do not want my sweet district to have to endure a hurtful and hateful primary against me by the President we all fought for, only to fight and win my election while Republicans will likely lose the midterms. And in turn, be expected to defend the President against impeachment after he hatefully dumped tens of millions of dollars against me and tried to destroy me.
It’s all so absurd and completely unserious. I refuse to be a ‘battered wife’ hoping it all goes away and gets better.
… Comes long after (¶¶4-12) a series of paragraphs that could be spoken by a racist Zohran Mamdani, and with all the charisma and political acumen he has.
No matter which way the political pendulum swings, Republican or Democrat, nothing ever gets better for the common American man or woman.
The debt goes higher.
Corporate and global interests remain Washington’s sweethearts.
American jobs continue to be replaced whether it’s by illegal labor or legal labor by visas or just shipped overseas.
Small businesses continue to be swallowed by big corporations.
Americans’ hard earned tax dollars always fund foreign wars, foreign aid, and foreign interests.
The spending power of the dollar continues to decline.
The average American family can no longer survive on a single bread winner’s income as both parents must work in order to simply survive.
And today, many in my children’s generation feel hopeless for their future and don’t think they will ever realize the American dream, which breaks my heart.
MTG is taking her significant campaign cash and selling high, and promising to be there to buy low after whatever upcoming catastrophe happens.
When the common American people finally realize and understand that the Political Industrial Complex of both parties is ripping this country apart, that not one elected leader like me is able to stop Washington’s machine from gradually destroying our country, and instead the reality is that they, common Americans, The People, possess the real power over Washington, then I’ll be here by their side to rebuild it.
Until then I’m going back to the people I love, to live life to the fullest as I always have, and look forward to a new path ahead.
She rode Trump’s coattails until she decided the coattails weren’t worth the effort anymore.
HuffPo had a story describing how Trump has hired 50,000 new people while firing a bunch more in the parts of government that make your lives better,
The U.S. government has hired 50,000 employees since President Donald Trump took office, his top personnel official said, with the new staff largely in national security positions reflecting the administration’s policy focus.
The bulk of the new hires, reported first by Reuters, work at Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said Scott Kupor, the federal government’s human resources director, in an interview on Thursday night.
The staff changes are part of Trump’s campaign to recast the government while sharply cutting other federal jobs.
“It’s about reshaping the workforce to focus on the priorities that we think are most important,” Kupor said.
The administration brought on the new employees while freezing hiring and laying off workers in other parts of the government, such as the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Health and Human Services.
The administration expects to shed about 300,000 workers this year, Kupor said in August.
Meanwhile, the Daily Beast has yet another story about the continued shitshow of the effort to expand Kristi Noem’s goon squad, this time with the price tag associated with getting people to do such morally repugnant work.
DHS insiders said the money on offer has lured back former executive-level leaders from HSI and Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO)—with some of them taking home north of $250,000 for office-based shiftwork, per multiple sources who spoke to the Beast.
According to those familiar with the packages, the most senior HSI rehires return as GS-13s on the federal pay scale. With locality pay in high-cost areas—such as parts of Texas, California, and New York—adding 35 percent or more to a basic salary, agents can earn up to $137,000 in the majority of the country. This rises to $171,268 in more expensive parts of the country, such as San Jose and San Francisco.
Law Enforcement Availability Pay (LEAP) adds a further 25 percent for being available for substantial unscheduled duty beyond 40 hours. Add in ongoing federal pensions worth around $8,000–$9,000 a month, and some rehires can land well in excess of a quarter of a million annually, sources said.
50,000 ICE goons in, 300,000 people out, including people who cure cancer, help learning disabled kids get through school, protect our National Parks, ensure your Social Security comes on time, and care for veterans.
After I pointed this out, Christopher Ingraham did a handy graphic to show the trade-off.
Stephen Miller’s dragnet is unpopular in the abstract and wildly unpopular in the lived sense, even — if meekly — among local Republican leaders.
But it still retains support of a big chunk of the population, probably because Trump officials routinely blame their own failures to address American problems on migrants, when as often as not, Trump’s response to immigration is the source of the problem.
America can’t have nice things, like cures for cancer and welcoming public schools, because Republicans in Congress took the money used to pay for those things and gave it to Stephen Miller to use to invade America’s neighborhoods.
We need to start making that more obvious.
[NB: check the byline, thanks. /~Rayne]
By now you’ve read the news the shut down ended thanks to a few House Democrats caving and crossing the aisle to vote with the GOP.
These are the problem children:
Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA-03) – running for re-election, district rated R+2
Jared Golden (ME-02) – NOT running for re-election
Adam Gray (CA-13) – running for re-election, toss-up district
Don Davis (NC-01) – running for re-election, district rated R+1
Henry Cuellar (TX-28) – running for re-election, district rated R+2
Tom Suozzi (NY-03) – running for re-election, toss-up district
Some are the usual suspects, like Golden and Cuellar and Suozzi.
All of these races are gettable by a Democrat firmly left of these boneheads given the current dissatisfaction with the Trump administration and his party of enablers. As Charles Gaba pointed out, “Dems have overperformed an avg of 15 pts across 55 Special Elections so far, winning 36 of them including *flipping* 6 GOP seats!” Democrats running on affordability have done very well.
Golden apparently can read the weather and is bailing out. But the rest of these reps need to be primaried — even Cuellar who has been primaried in the past and survived. Suozzi must think affordability is a NYC thing and doesn’t affect his district.
Gluesenkamp Perez is particularly annoying because of her bullshit party bashing about the shutdown. She posted this on the Nazi bar site:
Tonight, I voted to end this partisan car crash of a shutdown. Nobody likes paying even more money to insurance companies – and the fight to stop runaway health insurance premiums won’t be won by holding hungry Americans hostage. Americans can’t afford for their Representatives to get so caught up in landing a partisan win that they abandon their obligation to come together to solve the urgent problems that our nation faces.
The last several weeks have been a case study in why most Americans can’t stand Congress. None of my friends who rely on SNAP would want to trade their dinner for an ambiguous D.C. beltway “messaging victory” and I’m glad this ugly scene is in the rearview mirror.
Now, it’s time for Congress to get back to work and build an economy where people aren’t yanked around by partisan interests, where we understand national health doesn’t come from insurance coverage – and reestablish a truly deliberative democracy. I’ll work with whoever is necessary to reach those goals – and I don’t give a damn which side of the aisle they sit on.
8:28 PM · Nov 12, 2025
Emphasis mine.
Bet she wouldn’t turn down money from the DCCC for her re-election campaign. Biting the hand, much?
Apparently Gluesenkamp Perez is pretty dense as are these other Dems. What leverage does the Democratic Party have now to negotiate a reinstatement of healthcare subsidies? Because if she knows of any, she can’t be arsed to offer it.
Here’s a snapshot of the problem, offered in a joking manner:
Shoshana @[email protected]
Rent: $3,200
Health Insurance: $2,600
Avocado Toast: $8Someone who is good at the economy, please help me with my avocado toast budget
AltText for image above: Screenshot of healthcare plans without the ACA subsidies. 2025 plan was $45, 2026 plan will be $2,620. The deductible will increase from $800 to $6,000, primary care visits increase from $5 to $40, ER costs go from $0 to 40% co-insurance
The poster may offer this in a lighthearted fashion but the looming threat is real: a sizeable number of Americans will have to choose between paying for rent/mortgage/food and healthcare insurance. For many of these folks this will be a matter of life or death.
Trying to protect more than 20 million Americans who rely on the ACA marketplace and healthcare subsidies isn’t a partisan stunt for “messaging victory.” It’s about saving the lives of Americans who will otherwise be unable to afford healthcare insurance.
Assuming the GOP will act in good faith to address this country’s problematic for-profit healthcare system is insanely naive or ignorant. I assume Gluesenkamp Perez stuck her head in the sand every time Trump said he wanted to kill ACA, and missed Sen. John McCain’s going against his party and Trump in 2017 to vote to protect the ACA.
John McCain is dead. There’s no maverick to save Gluesenkamp Perez’s butt when her constituents lose their homes to pay for their healthcare because she didn’t want to appear to be too partisan.
[NB: check the byline, thanks. /~Rayne]
I am biting my tongue, resisting the urge to be extremely blunt. What I will say is already rather pointed.
Nancy Pelosi, former House Speaker, announced her plan to retire from Congress at the end of her term.
Did it take the death this week of a warmongering former vice president nine months younger than her to clue her in?
Or was it the ages of Tuesday’s three election winners?
Abigail Spanberger, at 46, is old enough to be Pelosi’s kid as is Mikie Sherrill at 53.
But Zohran Mamdani at 34 is of an age to be Pelosi’s grandchild.
There are now four generations of voters — Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, Gen Z — who are of voting age, and two of those generations are retired or approaching retirement. It’s time the youngest generations of voters had representation that understood their society and their needs.
The number of solid primary candidates in the wings should have encouraged this announcment some time ago.
This is an open thread, but let’s try to discuss what the future of the Democratic Party will look like as the oldest electeds exit the stage.
[NB: check the byline, thanks. /~Rayne]
With the election yesterday of Millennial Zohran Mamdani as New York City’s mayor, generational change in Democratic Party politics has shifted more firmly away from Boomers.
With the youngest Boomers in their mid-60s, it’s time — not to mention other reasons like a lifetime of baggage impeding effective governance.
This is an open thread with an emphasis on state and local elections. More details about elections across the country will be published here as updates throughout the day. In the mean time, discuss election results in your state and municipality here; what are the implications of the elections’ results, and what blowback might we expect? What effects may these elections have on the 2026 mid-term elections?
[NB: check the byline, thanks. /~Rayne]
There’s been an uptick this week in reporting on the role of health care subsidies in congressional budget negotiations.
Most Americans worry about health care costs: AP-NORC poll
By ALI SWENSON and LINLEY SANDERS | Updated 1:22 PM EDT, October 21, 2025
https://apnews.com/article/poll-shutdown-health-care-insurance-costs-trump-f0282a0f5bedf3f01172ed3fa0ba4fd2
Health insurance sticker shock begins as shutdown battle over subsidies rages
Many states have shown rising premiums ahead of open enrollment for Affordable Care Act plans. Congress is deadlocked over extending covid-era subsidies that bring costs down.
By Paige Winfield Cunningham | October 22, 2025 at 6:00 a.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2025/10/22/obamacare-aca-enrollment-price-increases/
Some Americans fear high health insurance premiums if ACA enhanced subsidies expire: ‘Very much a worry’
ACA enhanced premium tax credits are set to expire at the end of the year.
ByMary Kekatos | October 21, 2025, 10:51 AM
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/americans-fear-high-premiums-aca-enhanced-subsidies-expire/story?id=126613026
News media are finally telling us what many of us have already known: Trump’s GOP congressional caucus wants to kill Americans.
There are some GOP moderates who are pressing for some, well, moderation on health care subsidies because their constituents need the assistance.
Republican moderates press leadership on health credit extension
Millions of Americans in red states rely on subsidies to keep insurance costs down
By Sandhya Raman and Jessie Hellmann | October 22, 2025 at 12:36pm
https://rollcall.com/2025/10/22/republican-moderates-press-leadership-on-health-credit-extension/
And these moderates need their seats. Check the last graf of that RollCall article — it’s a who’s who of GOP seats in districts that are flippable.
In other words, the state of health care subsidies may mean control of the House.
Trump refuses to negotiate unless the government shutdown ends, but that means giving up the only leverage Democrats have since the moderate GOP reps have been unable to persuade Trump and the rest of the GOP House caucus to budge.
Meanwhile, reality is doing a number on Americans who rely on health care subsidies, including small business owners:
These kinds of rate increases mean households will be making choices between going without health care insurance or going without paying mortgages, skipping car payments, not making the rent, cutting back on groceries they haven’t already cut because of inflation.
Do the math:
— Median weekly earnings for wage and salary workers = $1196 / week
— Average rent for a one-bedroom apartment in the U.S. = $1631 / month
— “The USDA estimates $297–558 for a monthly food budget for one person, $614–963 for a couple, and $996–1,603 for a family of four.” (This number was reported in May 2025 and has surely risen since the underlying source report.)
— Average transportation cost per U.S. household = $819 / month
That’s just the basics and doesn’t include out-of-pocket health care expenses, or any other necessities like clothing. It’s extremely grim for minimum wage workers, and for those whose work fluctuates like freelance writers or seasonal contractors.
There’s almost nothing left or worse after rent and/or health care, and it will be worse in rural areas.
Imagine having to choose between feeding your kids and getting any necessary medication including insulin. Imagine trying to pay for prenatal care let alone delivery of a healthy child, and making the rent. Heaven help you if either you or the child suffer complications before/during/after birth.
For many of us this isn’t a thought experiment. It’s a painful reality. Some of us will have to work even longer to pay for health care, well beyond age 65; some of us are already dealing with this challenge, as Business Insider reports in these slice-of-life stories that tend to blame the victim (ex. Faber shouldn’t have been a farmer).
I’m 82 and earn $16 an hour working at a boat store. I don’t have much saved and can’t retire, but everything will work out.
https://www.businessinsider.com/cant-retire-working-at-80-social-security-minimum-wage-2025-10
A trucker in his late 70s who can’t afford to retire shares the big regret he made decades ago that may have changed his circumstances
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/retirement/a-trucker-in-his-late-70s-who-can-t-afford-to-retire-shares-the-big-regret-he-made-decades-ago-that-may-have-changed-his-circumstances/ar-AA1HKHOP
These folks couldn’t save enough for retirement when health care costs were much lower. Today’s younger workers aren’t able to save much at all, not with inflation chipping away at all their expenses. We’ll be reading bleak stories of elderly who can’t retire for decades.
In essence, Trump and his GOP minions’ death panel have become Dickensian: “If they would rather die, …they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.”
One might think this is the Trump-GOP’s approach to housing policy; if enough people go bankrupt, into foreclosure, or die, there will be more housing available.
It’s as destructive and thoughtless as taking a wrecking ball without a plan to the East Wing of the White House.
