19 August—It’s hard to believe that Donald Trump has overcome his inferiority complex as well as his innate modesty and actually admitted that he’s “a better-looking person than Kamala.” It’s not true, of course. But when has truth ever mattered to Trump? Will we see that in a banner headline in the Republican-American and other GOP-besotted newspapers?

More important, Trump, having beaten (and effectively prodded) Harris to a campaign promise to untax tips, has also one-upped her in promising to dump the income tax on Social Security income. Doesn’t that sound great? It’s sure to win the votes of waitresses and barmaids. But assuming at least one house of Congress has any fiscal responsibility, neither politically expedient albeit idle promise will be fulfilled. But that doesn’t stop political posturing and pandering. Ever.

Realistically and practically there is absolutely no justification for allowing tips to go untaxed. Other than buying the votes of workers of whose incomes tips comprise a substantial part, of course. Tips are essentially variable wages. So if tips are allowed to go untaxed, why not also allow a portion of every worker’s income to go untaxed? Make that a larger portion, since a portion of all taxpayers’ income already is excluded from taxation.

Fair is fair, after all, and the tax code already has far too many exceptions and other strategically aimed fiddles created expressly to buy votes, no matter what pols, commentators, and economists may tell us. And another major downside is that not taxing tips will deprive the trust funds that pay the various Social Security benefits of the scratch they need to pay those benefits.

Not taxing Social Security income, then, is even more attractive to more voters than not taxing tips and doubtless can buy even more votes. But it’s also even more irresponsible—especially in light of the current parlous predicament of everything related to Social Security. Responsible politicians—candidates for office as well as incumbents—should be looking for and promoting ways to maintain and enhance Social Security funding rather than promising to reduce it. Heaven forfend.

Certainly the solution—increased taxes, reduced benefits, or a combination—should and will be made as painless as possible for individual voters and corporations. For obvious reasons.

But we all know reality and honesty don’t get pols elected. So a serious solution to the Social Security problem won’t even be hinted at in any campaign. And an actual solution won’t happen in any meaningful way until the very last minute when the whores who people the administration and both houses of Congress have to choose between screwing every recipient of Social Security retirement, disability, dependents’, survivors’, and Medicare benefits a lot or screwing everybody—including those recipients—a little.

Well, a little less, anyway . . .