Wage First

Independent advocacy organization putting affordability first. Research, public accountability & organizing for working Americans. Work should buy a decent life

[Wage First @Wage1st]

House Republicans currently control the House.

So “communism is bad” is not much of a governing report card.

We already know communism is bad.

Tell us what your majority is doing about the things actually crushing working Americans right now: housing, healthcare, insurance, food and purchasing power.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

@MikeJohnson Opposition owes voters an alternative.

Government owes voters results.

Mike Johnson is not an opposition pundit. He is Speaker of the House.

So judge the governing majority by the household scoreboard:

What got cheaper?
What pays better?
What became more attainable?

[Wage First @Wage1st]

Cool story Blago. Let’s explain the cool tricks you used….

First, the $78K starting point isn’t “since Trump took office.” Monthly estimates were already around $82K by January 2025 meaning the numbers were derived from the previous period.

Second, going from $78K to $88K doesn’t mean somebody “put $10K in your pocket.” Inflation exists. Taxes exist. Housing, healthcare, insurance and groceries exist.

If real household purchasing power is up, great. Give Trump credit for the part his policies caused.

Then show us the actual gain after the bills.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

This is a useful distinction.

You can oppose endless war without being isolationist.

You can oppose deficits without wanting to weaken the dollar.

You can support markets without believing every market outcome is automatically good.

And you can reject postliberalism without needing another ideological identity to replace it.

Policy first. Labels second. Results always.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

This is an incredibly revealing “fact check.”

Mental health: nobody died.

Food: nobody missed an entire meal.

Supplies: fresh resupply was unavailable.

Communication: calls home were restricted.

Deployment: 266 days, including 200 in a combat zone.

And your own Navy Secretary says they were “pushed to their limits.”

Those facts don’t make us less concerned about the sailors

[Wage First @Wage1st]

485 days deployed in Afghanistan is extraordinary service. Thank you.

But what does that tell us about conditions aboard the Lincoln right now?

Nobody is questioning whether American servicemembers can endure hardship. Of course they can. Their ability to endure bad conditions is not evidence that the conditions are acceptable.

We’re asking something really basic:

After asking this crew to endure an extraordinary deployment, has leadership done everything reasonably possible to keep them fed, supplied, healthy and supported?

[Wage First @Wage1st]

Nobody is asking for combat plans, ship movements or classified details.

We’re asking about the welfare of sailors on a carrier that has now been deployed for more than 250 days which during that deployment went a record 208 consecutive days at sea without a port call.

These are Americans serving under extraordinary conditions. The country is allowed to care whether they’re being properly cared for.

If the answer to concerns about their welfare is “you’re not allowed to ask,” that only makes the need for accountability more obvious.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

@SenSanders The federal paid vacation guarantee is currently:

0 days.

Basically: if your boss is cool wit it

A country as productive as we are should have a serious argument about how much paid time workers should get

[Wage First @Wage1st]

@MarioNawfal Congratulations to the S&P 500.

Now we’d like an update from the index called “Can I afford rent, groceries, insurance and a doctor on one full-time job?”

[Wage First @Wage1st]

@SenateGOP @SenTomCotton A photograph from Venezuela is not an economic model.

Name the policy. Price it. Show how it affects wages, prices, taxes and supply.

Then put the Republican alternative next to it and let the better household result win.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

This is beautiful.

They found a Cato article that says:

Range: $71T–$212T.
Method: approximate.
Programs: potentially overlapping.
Sources: different authors, different assumptions.
Possible overstatement: yes.

And somehow television turned that into:

🔥 SOCIALISTS HAVE A $200 TRILLION PLAN 🔥

My brother in Microsoft Excel, YOUR SOURCE JUST TOLD YOU IT DOESN’T KNOW THAT.

“$75T for healthcare” is gross federal accounting theater too.

We already spend trillions every year on healthcare. Changing who writes the check does not magically create the entire healthcare bill from nothing. CBO has modeled single payer systems where total national healthcare spending is LOWER than current law.

“$6.6T is all billionaire wealth”?

Nope.

That’s the Forbes 400.

“92% of GDP”?

That’s Cato’s HIGH END scenario. Their low end is about 57%. Naturally, only one made television.

And DSA itself never wrote “$28T reparations, $60T jobs, $17T housing” into its platform. Those numbers were assigned by the people attacking it.

By all means, attack DSA’s actual program. We sure will.

We’re no cheerleaders for them. There is plenty there to debate.

But please stop calling the most expensive hypothetical you could assemble “their $200 trillion wish list.”

Pure theatre.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

This is a Republican message we want to hear more often:

Fiscal discipline + affordability.

Now get specific.

What gets cut?
How much does it save?
What happens to working families?
How does it improve affordability?

“Cut spending” is the method.

Better household economics is the goal.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

Democrats: more of this.

Not “it’s all the republicans fault.”
Not “Trump is terrible.”

Here is the harm.
Here is the policy.
Here is how households get money back.

Crockett’s Payback Act is an actual material offer.

Just keep the numbers honest: $219B is broader inflation loss, not the tariff refund total.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

Families are struggling. That part is true.

But stop pretending the affordability crisis began on Inauguration Day. Americans were choosing between bills, food and healthcare before Trump returned too.

You have a real grievance.

Now give people the Democratic solution.

What gets cheaper?
What pays better?
What changes first?

[Wage First @Wage1st]

@piersmorgan @AOC The JD Vance precedent would like a word.

Apparently you can go from “America’s Hitler” to Vice President and call it political evolution…

…but AOC reconsidering 2020-era politics is proof of a sinister “taste of power.”

Convenient rule.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

Gold standard.
Fiat currency.
M2.
Yield curves.
Sure.

My rent is due.

Use whichever monetary alphabet soup actually makes ordinary life affordable.

And if your brilliant theory doesn’t work, please don’t spend 10 years explaining why it technically did.

Admit it. Fix it. Try again.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

Apparently changing your politics makes you permanently untrustworthy.

Someone please alert JD Vance before his next meeting with the President he once called “reprehensible,” “unfit,” and privately compared to Hitler.

Politicians can evolve.

Just make them explain the evolution.

Same rule for AOC. Same rule for Vance. Same rule for everyone.

[Wage First @Wage1st]

@RepLuna You have an affordability record we actually like. We want more of that. Given the severity of the problem facing your constituents, we would rather see even more of your political capital going into bills like these than another round of 2020 investigations

[Wage First @Wage1st]

This is a much better political argument than slogans.

Tell us what you did.
Tell us what it was worth.
Tell us who benefited.

Credit to @lawler4ny for putting actual results on the table.

Now keep measuring the bigger outcome:

Are Hudson Valley working families gaining purchasing power and economic security?