• PhilipTheBucket@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Nixon, at this point, would be a progressive Democrat. He was an absolutely legendary piece of human garbage, but he did care about the country and attempt to do big good things for it sometimes, in a way that most of the campaign-contribution-fueled crop of ghouls that are “congress” today do not. Reagan and Clinton really redefined the whole scope of what even being in charge of the country was supposed to mean.

    • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I was genuinely surprised when I read that Nixon intend to “declare war on poverty” and end it by wanting to propose a bill for UBI. He was convinced by several positive studies for UBI presented to him, iirc. But it just so happens that an influential economist breaking grounds at the time, who goes by the name of Milton Friedman (the man who (in-)famously coined the phrase “greed is good”) convinced Nixon to abandon the idea. Although I don’t remember the exact arguments on how Nixon was convinced to abandon the idea of UBI.

      • PhilipTheBucket@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Yeah. He actually kind of meant well. He was hampered by the fact that he was a flinty-hearted vindictive psychopath. But he did a bunch of stuff which there is literally no way to explain other than that he wanted to do something good for the [white] [Republican] [pro-war] people of the country [as long as they were nice to him at all times which is what he deserved].