Biden pledge to fix unfair economy resonates with Americans

Published

2 years ago

February 11, 2023

admin

A populist undercurrent running through President Biden’s State of the Union address and churned up by turbulent conditions in the global economy is resonating with Americans.

It’s the feeling that people are “getting ripped off,” as Biden put it, by an economy that isn’t “fair” – a word that appeared in Biden’s prepared remarks nine different times.

From pesky fees charged by big retail banks to deep, structural imbalances in the U.S. tax system that favor wealthy people and large corporations, Biden’s speech hit on a perennial frustration in American economic life: how the deck feels stacked by big companies and institutions against ordinary taxpayers and consumers.

“If we – the poorer people, the middle class – pay tax, the big companies are supposed to do the same. This is right. So I think the President [said] something that is true. We need more tax to be paid by the big companies and then that money can go back to the poorer people to help people,” Jean-Michel Dossous, a New York City cab driver who watched the State of the Union on his phone, told The Hill.

Returning to the notion of economic fairness again and again, Biden touted numerous initiatives to bring down prices after a year of high inflation that has harassed American pocketbooks and that fiscal authorities, like Congress and the president, have limited powers to fight.

“Big Pharma has been unfairly charging people hundreds of dollars [for insulin] – and making record profits,” Biden said during his speech on Tuesday, praising the $35 insulin price cap for seniors who use Medicare that was passed as part of Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act last year. Price caps have only been used minimally so far in the government’s battle against high prices, which is mostly the responsibility of the Federal Reserve.

He also touted his administration’s effort to fight so-called “junk fees,” expensive penalties charged by banks, financial firms and other businesses for reasons such as late payments, insufficient funds or an attempt to cancel a service.

“I know how unfair it feels when a company overcharges you and gets away with it,” he said about the overdraft fees charged by banks, a commercial practice he called on Congress to curtail with new legislation.

The Biden administration also announced last week an effort to cap bank overdraft fees at $8 through a new rule to be issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

Tatiana Nazario, an administrative assistant at the Newark, New Jersey, public library told The Hill she “absolutely” had the feeling she was getting ripped off by big banks and that she knew people who’d gotten locked into a cycle of debt due to overdraft fees.

While some major banks have already phased-out overdraft fees, bank lobbyists and advocates for the sector call those penalties a useful and popular way for consumers to smooth out expenses.

“If you get one overdraft fee and it stays in your account for a couple of days, they overdraft you again and again and again until you pay it. If you’re already broke and you’re waiting on that direct deposit to hit, by the time it hits you’re not going to have much left,” Nazario said in an interview.

“People are living off of payday loans, and now they’re promoting these apps … where you get payday loans rather than coming up with better solutions for us,” she added.

The CFPB describes payday loans as short-term, high-cost loans for small amounts of money and cautions that people’s “ability to repay the loan … is generally not considered by a payday lender.”

Of all the mentions of unfairness in the economy in Biden’s State of the Union, perhaps the point he hammered home the most was about unfairness in the tax code.

“I think a lot of you at home agree with me that our present tax system is simply unfair. The idea that in 2020, 55 of the biggest companies in America made $40 billion in profits and paid zero in federal income taxes? That’s simply not fair,” Biden said.

Steve Taylor, an adjunct English professor at the City University of New York, said he felt the same way, arguing that rich people and corporations need to be paying more.

“I think they should pay their fair share. They’re getting away with murder. These guys are not paying any taxes. I mean, come on. I pay taxes. What’s the median for working people, like 25 percent? Come on. What’s going on?” he said in an interview.

Critics of corporate tax hikes argue that big businesses still pay billions in other types of taxes outside of taxed income.

The views of Taylor and Jean-Michel Doussos on the tax system are held by a majority of Americans, according to a variety of public opinion polls.

Fifty-two percent of Americans believe the government should “redistribute wealth by heavy taxes on the rich,” according to one such poll published by Gallup last August, while 47 percent feel the opposite. Prior to the 2008 financial crisis, those preferences were by-and-large flipped, with more Americans disagreeing with the idea of redistributing rich people’s wealth with taxes than agreeing.

A 2020 poll by Reuters/Ipsos found that nearly two-thirds of respondents believed “the very rich should contribute an extra share of their total wealth each year to support public programs.” Support for that position was stronger among Democrats, at 77 percent, but 53 percent of Republicans also stood behind it.

The difference between how workers and wages are taxed and how profits and businesses are taxed has been coined the “two-tiered tax system” by other members of the Biden administration, including Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.

“At the core of the problem is a discrepancy in the ways types of income are reported to the IRS: opaque income sources frequently avoid scrutiny while wages and federal benefits are typically subject to nearly full compliance. This two-tiered tax system is unfair and deprives the country of resources to fund core priorities,” she said in 2021. Biden has big plans for junk fees, a billionaire’s tax and paid leave. But can he actually enact them? Yahoo announces layoffs of 20 percent of staff by end of 2023

Tom Ankner, a librarian in Newark, New Jersey, said he appreciated hearing the message during Biden’s speech that the economy could treat people more fairly.

“I liked the fact that he was taking that line,” Ankner told The Hill. “Because that’s where I’d like [to see changes]. That’s the direction I’d like to see the country go.”

Politics

‘Shameful’ that black boys in London more likely to die than white boys, says Met Police chief

Published

51 mins ago

July 12, 2025

admin

'Shameful' that black boys in London more likely to die than white boys, says Met Police chief

It is “shameful” that black boys growing up in London are “far more likely” to die than white boys, Metropolitan Police chief Sir Mark Rowley has told Sky News.

The commissioner told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips that relations with minority communities “is difficult for us”.

Sir Mark, who came out of retirement to become head of the UK’s largest police force in 2022, said: “We can’t pretend otherwise that we’ve got a history between policing and black communities where policing has got a lot wrong.

“And we get a lot more right today, but we do still make mistakes. That’s not in doubt. I’m being as relentless in that as it can be.”

He said the “vast majority” of the force are “good people”.

However, he added: “But that legacy, combined with the tragedy that some of this crime falls most heavily in black communities, that creates a real problem because the legacy creates concern.”

Sir Mark, who also leads the UK’s counter-terrorism policing, said it is “not right” that black boys growing up in London “are far more likely to be dead by the time they’re 18” than white boys.

“That’s, I think, shameful for the city,” he admitted.

The Met Police chief’s admission comes two years after an official report found the force is institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic.

Baroness Casey was commissioned in 2021 to look into the Met Police after serving police officer Wayne Couzens abducted, raped and murdered Sarah Everard.

She pinned the primary blame for the Met’s culture on its past leadership and found that stop and search and the use of force against black people was excessive.

At the time, Sir Mark, who had been commissioner for six months when the report was published, said he would not use the labels of institutionally racist, institutionally misogynistic and institutionally homophobic, which Casey insisted the Met deserved.

However, London Mayor Sadiq Khan, who helped hire Sir Mark – and could fire him – made it clear the commissioner agreed with Baroness Casey’s verdict.

After the report was released, Sir Mark said “institutional” was political language so he was not going to use it, but he accepted “we have racists, misogynists…systematic failings, management failings, cultural failings”.

A few months after the report, Sir Mark launched a two-year £366m plan to overhaul the Met, including increased emphasis on neighbourhood policing to rebuild public trust and plans to recruit 500 more community support officers and an extra 565 people to work with teams investigating domestic violence, sexual offences and child sexual abuse and exploitation.

Watch the full interview on Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips from 8.30am on Sunday.

World

Backlash as Air India crash report points to possible human error – here’s what experts think

Published

51 mins ago

July 12, 2025

admin

Backlash as Air India crash report points to possible human error - here's what experts think

As investigators continue to piece together the full picture, early findings of the Air India crash are pointing towards a critical area of concern — the aircraft’s fuel control switches.

The flight, bound for London Gatwick, crashed just moments after taking off from Ahmedabad airport on 12 June, killing all but one of the 242 people on board the plane and at least 19 on the ground.

According to the preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), the two engine fuel control switches on the plane were moved from the “RUN” to “CUTOFF” position.

These switches control fuel flow to the engines and should only be used when the aircraft is on ground, first to start the engines before a flight and later to shut them down at the gate.

They are designed so they’re unlikely to be changed accidentally, pointing to possible human error on the Air India flight.

The findings include the final conversation between the pilots and show there was confusion in the cockpit as well.

When one pilot asked the other why he cut off the fuel, he responded to say he did not do so.

Moments later, a Mayday call was made from the cockpit, but the plane could not regain power quickly enough and plummeted to the ground.

Captain Amit Singh, founder of Safety Matters Foundation, an organisation dedicated to aviation safety, told Sky News: “This exchange indicates that the engine shutdowns were uncommanded.

“However, the report does not identify the cause – whether it was crew error, mechanical malfunction, or electronic failure.”

Previous warning of ‘possible fuel switch issue’

“The Boeing 787 uses spring-loaded locking mechanisms on its fuel control switches to prevent accidental movement,” Mr Singh explained.

But a previous bulletin from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) “warned that these switches might be installed with the locking feature disengaged,” he said.

This could “make them susceptible to unintended movement due to vibration, contact, or quadrant flex”, he added.

Speaking to Sky News, aviation expert Terry Tozner said: “The take-off was normal, the aircraft rotated at the correct speed left the ground and almost immediately, the cut-off switches were selected to off, one then two.

“But nobody has said with any clarity whether or not the latch mechanisms worked okay on this particular aircraft. So we can only assume that they were in normal working order.”

In India, there has been a backlash over the findings, with some saying the report points to pilot error without much information and almost dismisses the possibility of a mechanical or electric failure.

Indian government responds

India’s civil aviation minister Kinjarapu Ram Mohan Naidu has been quick to respond, saying: “We care for the welfare and the wellbeing of pilots so let’s not jump to any conclusions at this stage, let us wait for the final report.

“I believe we have the most wonderful workforce of pilots and crew in the whole world.”

Both pilots were experienced, with around 19,000 flying hours between them, including more than 9,000 on Boeing 787s.

The report says the aircraft maintenance checks were on schedule and that there are no signs of fuel contamination or a bird strike.

So far, no safety recommendations have been issued to Boeing or General Electric, the engine manufacturers.

Concern over destroyed flight recorder

Mr Singh said “the survivability of the flight recorders also raises concern”.

The plane’s rear flight recorder, designed to withstand impact forces of 3,400 Gs and temperatures of 1,100C for 60 minutes, “was damaged beyond recovery”.

“The Ram Air Turbine (RAT), which deploys automatically when both engines fail and power drops below a threshold, was observed as deployed in CCTV footage when the aircraft was approximately 60ft above ground level,” Mr Singh said.

“This suggests that the dual engine failure likely occurred before the official timestamp of 08:08:42 UTC, implying a possible discrepancy.”

Mr Singh said it was also “of particular note” that the plane’s emergency locator transmitter (ELT) did not send any signal after the crash.

“Was the ELT damaged, unarmed, mis-wired, or malfunctioning?” he said.

The report has generated more questions than answers on topics including human error, power source failures and mechanical or electrical malfunction.

The final report is expected to take a year. Meanwhile, families grapple with the unimaginable loss of loved ones in one of the worst disasters in India’s aviation history.

Environment

Tesla launches new software update with Grok, but it doesnt even interface with the car

Published

3 hours ago

July 12, 2025

admin

Tesla launches new software update with Grok, but it doesnt even interface with the car

Tesla has launched a new software update for its vehicles that includes the anticipated integration of Grok, but it doesnt even interface with the car yet.

Earlier this week, CEO Elon Musk said that Tesla would integrate Grok, the large language model developed by his private company, xAI, into its vehicles.

Today, Tesla started pushing the update to the fleet, but there’s a significant caveat.

The automaker wrote in the release notes (2025.26):

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Grok (Beta) (US, AMD)

Grok now available directly in your Tesla

Requires Premium Connectivity or a WiFi connection

Grok is currently in Beta & does not issue commands to your car – existing voice commands remain unchanged.

First off, it is only available in vehicles in the US equipped with the AMD infotainment computer, which means cars produced since mid-2021.

But more importantly, Tesla says that it doesn’t send commands to the car under the current version. Therefore, it is simply like having Grok on your phone, but on the onboard computer instead.

Tesla showed an example: