Summary
A Harris poll reveals that 69% of Americans believe Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs would increase consumer costs, with many planning purchases ahead of his inauguration to avoid price hikes.
Trump has championed tariffs as a key policy to boost domestic manufacturing, but economists and corporate leaders warn costs will be passed to consumers, potentially adding $2,600 annually to household expenses.
While Republicans are more supportive of tariffs, only 51% think they will benefit the economy.
The poll highlights widespread concern over tariffs’ economic impact, especially amid lingering inflation and financial uncertainty.
Mandatory voting?
Make not voting cause you to be chosen first for jury duty.
Personally, I’ve never minded jury duty, but people seem to lose their minds over it.
I don’t want to potentially be judged by people who can’t even be fucked to vote, thank you very much.
Do you want to be judged by someone who isn’t smart enough to get out of jury duty?
I never understood the hatred over jury duty. Except for people who work minimum wage or don’t get paid jury duty.
Jury duty is the most direct way a normal citizen can affect democracy.
I’d agree, except do we really want to emphasize the least engaged citizens for jury duty? That’s still someone’s freedom on the line, and while for some select few people finding a chance to vote is extremely difficult due to registration fuckery in Republican states, with the rise of early voting and vote by mail, the primary demographic of non-voting adults is people who are apathetic or intentionally ignorant to the political process. My fear is: “This is a waste of my time, and 30 days isn’t that long; just send them to jail.” And there won’t be anyone who cares strongly enough to object because the jury is packed with these apathetic citizens. To clarify, I see this as more of a problem with small-fry misdemeanor or less serious felony cases, not like murder or rape trials. But that’s most trials.
You could argue that politically engaged Republicans can be much, much worse on a jury, that this could help them develop a sense of engagement with politics, and that they might care if they can see their choice directly affecting someone else, but it seems sketchy.
When we don’t get paid because we miss work and are dependent on that money, it can be annoying. In theory, I think it would be cool to be on a jury, but its a luxury to be able to afford to be on a jury.
I guess it depends on where you are. In my city, you get 150% of minimum wage/hour of jury duty, so $18 an hour. Though of course if you make more than that and are paid hourly, it’s a definite loss.
My state pays $20/day. The last time I was summoned, the estimated cost of the commute using the IRS average is $35 (granted, that’s a high estimate) and not reimbursed or compensated. Also the $20 is taxed. So it effectively cost me money to go to jury duty in my old county even before accounting for lost wages.
Oof - yeah, that’s garbage.
I vote in every primary and every election and have never been selected for jury duty.
Which implies I have no peers.
While I too want more people to participate, I think we should also recognize that choosing not to vote is protected speech. That’s probably not why people don’t vote, so we should probably find other ways to encourage voting (holiday, more access to polls, etc.) Unfortunately, some repulsive people prefer it when fewer people vote.
For protected speech, I’d prefer if people would go in, take a ballot, and submit it blank. Essentially, making a statement that there is no one on the ballot who would represent them. It would be more meaningful than not going to the polling place at all. It sends a more significant message than just staying home.
I do agree that we need to make it easier, not harder, to vote.
Automatic registration, election day holiday, laws forcing employers to facilitate voting by their employees.
“If you are going to protest at least do it exactly the way I think you should.”