>>>'m not sure what you consider an "all-out revolution". If you mean a violent revolution then I disagree that would be necessary here in the USA. If you mean a peaceful revolution based upon people getting voted in, then sure that can happen. It's kinda already happening if you take a look at those who have been recently elected to congress.
>
>Yes. Their new Green deal will impoverish and isolate Hawaii back to the 19th century, but that's a small price to pay to save the planet, right?

Couple points on that line of thought -- doing nothing about the climate will cost a lot more money than actually doing something about it. I do not know why you think Hawaii would end up back in the 19th century. We already use clean energy quite a bit here, and tourists from all over the world are not going to suddenly quite coming to Hawaii - which brings in like $1.5 billion to the islands every month.

>>>There are plenty examples of things like that happening in American history. Doesn't happen overnight, but it sure does happen.
>
>I can't explain in a few hot takes how powerful the 1% has become and how immune they are to voter decisions. The days when assets were firmly patriated so could be taxed without fail, are long gone. As I keep saying, look at CA for a case lesson in what happens when you try to make the rich pay their way.

There are 3 people in the USA who between them have more money than the poorest 160 million Americans. In other words 3 people have more money than 1/2 the population of the whole country. Laws can, and do all the time, change. The rich did not get all the money at once and it will take time. The rich can not say immune forever.

>>>It needs to be done at the federal level.
>
>Whether state or federal you should expect their behavior to be the same. Just look at the CA example.

That is a good example of how not to do it --- doesn't mean it can't be done.

>>>I'm aware of the yellow vest protests. now as far as protests in the USA in 2019 -- they are indeed different than what we saw in the USA in the 1960's....but I'd have to say it doesn't sound like you know much about them in the USA today or those involved in them either. Expected as you are not here nor from here.
>
>I'd say that recent protests were misdirected and achieved nothing except a delicious sensation of defiance for participants. You may perceive some nobler result, but where's the beef?

The protests resulted in the democrats gaining control of the house lol.

>>>Explaining to you that history is about to repeat itself (again) economically is hardly hateful...and it will hurt all those in the USA (including me) so not like I want it to happen -- it just will.
>
>You've no particular reason to say that except that current boom conditions thwart the narrative, so you come up with this to foul the nest. I challenge you to provide an iota of original evidence- meaning not paraphrases from far left MSM- supporting such doomsday aspirations.

So you don't think any left wing media has reported that every Republican since Teddy Roosevelt has had a recession? Really? OMG just google it lol.