It's a common and almost inevitable component of communist history that the leaders of proletariat movements always end up becoming some of the wealthiest people in those movements. The idea of "equity" is a fantasy; every society no matter how "progressive" has an elitist class with more money and more power than the common citizen.
Socialist and communist societies have some of the most egregious power gaps imaginable; they even reinstate archaic systems of hereditary succession. Just look at North Korea or the "princeling" (taizidang) system in China which favors the descendants of founding revolutionaries. The notion of an economic Utopia where outcomes are equalized and no one has to struggle is a fantasy sold to the masses by clever elites seeking unfettered control.
Someone always comes out on top, and it's usually the same money-players that leftists claim to be fighting against.
For example, Democrat Socialist and rising Democrat star Zohran Mamdani comes from an affluent family with a net worth in the tens of millions. Socialist and Islamist influencer Hasan Piker is worth $8 million alone, but his family is affluent with extensive corporate and political connections. Ilhan Omar's husband listed their net worth at up to $30 million before they suddenly revised it down to $95,000 in the face of voter backlash. She is currently facing a DOJ investigation into her odd financial history.
The point is, these are not working class people who experience the struggles of the everyday laborer. If they have not always been rich, they have at the very least always had a family safety net of considerable wealth. Enter Illinois Governor JB Pritzker (a billionaire), who jumped on the Democrat Socialist train this week in an interview with CNN.
JB Pritzker says embracing Socialism is how Democrats are going to win elections:
CNN: "In New York, three candidates who identify as Democratic Socialists won their primary campaigns...Do you think that's good?"
PRITZKER: "That is the recipe for winning in 2026 and beyond." pic.twitter.com/HSyGaRRYEN
On CNN's "The Source", Pritzker defended progressive/Democratic Socialist candidates as the "recipe for winning" for the Democrat Party going into the future. His statements come just as news hit that Kamala Harris has been in touch with Zohran Mamdani for months in preparation for the 2028 election cycle. Meanwhile, new polls show that 32% of Democrat voters openly support socialist candidates.
The trend is clear; the political left is either doubling down and embracing radicalism, or they are simply revealing their true nature. The Democrat Party is riding the socialist wave and the extremists are in charge.
Pritzker went on to suggest that Donald Trump's concerns over the radicalism of socialist candidates are unfounded and a "sign of dementia". This is coming from the same man who outright denied that Joe Biden was showing signs of cognitive decline in the lead up to the 2024 elections, calling Biden "completely mentally sharp" during personal meetings.
Pritzker, confronted with the potential hypocrisy of an ultra rich politician supporting his party's shift into open socialism, suggested that he's actually "one of the good billionaires".
Bernie: There should not be billionaires.
Mamdani: I don’t think we should have billionaires.
Pritzker: That doesn't mean me! pic.twitter.com/7aHhbObFqJ
At bottom, there is a large contingent of billionaires and ultra-wealthy elites backing the Democratic Party and, like Pritzker, none of them are worried about socialist ideology taking over. Why? Because they know what the leaders of every communist revolution have known - That they will end up in charge regardless, and militant activists are nothing more than useful idiots paving the way for the elites to gain even more power.
Tyler Durden Thu, 07/02/2026 - 18:50Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,
States that adopt the updated 2024 International Energy Conservation Code could see building costs for a typical single-family home go up by $14,000, the Department of Energy (DOE) warned on June 26.
The International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) is a model code developed by the Washington-based International Code Council (ICC) for setting minimum energy efficiency requirements for commercial and residential buildings.
While the ICC doesn’t mandate its code, states and local jurisdictions can choose to mandate the code in their building standards. The IECC is the most adopted across the United States as it is recognized in federal law as the national model energy code for low-rise residential buildings.
The DOE takes part in the ICC’s consensus process to update energy efficiency provisions of the IECC. The code is revised once every three years.
Regarding the latest IECC codes published in 2024, the DOE has determined that adoption of the code “would increase residential construction costs by more than $9.2 billion annually compared to the 2006 code levels, adding more than $127 billion in cumulative costs nationwide.”
The IECC model regulation forces “American families to pay thousands of dollars more upfront for a new home, while projected energy savings may take decades to materialize. In most states, estimated payback periods exceed 10 years, with some exceeding 20 years—locking American families into decades-long repayment timeframes and restricting consumer choice.”
According to the National Association of Home Builders, the 2024 IECC contains several provisions related to energy efficiency, including heat or energy recovery ventilation systems; installation of energy-efficient appliances such as refrigerators, dishwashers, and clothes washers; and the deployment of renewable energy resources on building sites.
In March 2024, when the 2024 IECC codes were approved by the ICC’s Board of Directors, the ICC said that the new codes were anticipated to improve energy efficiency for commercial buildings by roughly 10 percent, and for residential buildings by around 6.5 percent.
On Feb. 15 this year, the DOE sent a letter to the ICC, raising “serious concerns” about the trajectory of the IECC.
The purpose of IECC is to provide model building codes that can be adopted to provide energy efficiency gains for communities. However, in recent years, IECC has expanded its scope to focus on areas such as energy generation infrastructure requirements and greenhouse gas emissions. This shift risks undermining existing DOE objectives, the letter said.
The department’s priorities for building energy codes involve ensuring affordability for American households and businesses, and safeguarding consumer choice to opt for their preferred appliances and equipment.
The DOE urged the ICC to return its codes to its traditional focus on building energy efficiency that would provide both “clear cost savings and beneficial efficiency advances” to consumers.
In its recent statement, the DOE said it encouraged the ICC to omit requirements related to onsite energy generation and greenhouse gas avoidance, which raise construction costs.
“This analysis shows how unnecessary regulations and ineffective building codes have drastically increased housing costs with little to no benefit for homeowners or communities,” Assistant Secretary of Energy Audrey Robertson said.
“Standard-setting bodies should take note: we prioritize the American homeowner and will not allow erroneous building requirements to push homeownership out of reach.”
The Epoch Times reached out to ICC for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.
Ensuring Housing AffordabilityThe DOE said in its recent statement that it would continue implementing President Donald Trump’s March 13 executive order titled “Removing Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Home Construction.”
In the order, Trump wrote that unnecessary regulatory barriers and “onerous mandates” have delayed construction and driven up the cost of new homes, making housing less affordable for Americans.
One of the provisions in the order directed the Secretaries of Energy, Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and Agriculture to take “appropriate action to reform and, where appropriate, eliminate unduly burdensome or costly energy-efficiency, water-use, or alternative-energy requirements regarding housing.”
This shall include reviewing and revising residential building energy codes, energy efficiency standards for certain new construction, and energy conservation standards for manufactured housing.
In a March 13 statement, HUD said that regulatory costs make up almost $94,000 in the final price of a new single-family home, with green energy mandates in building codes alone raising construction costs by $30,000.
As such, cutting red tape, including “onerous” energy and water requirements and “woke” green building codes, will boost housing stock and bring down the cost of newly built homes, the department said.
In April, HUD and the Department of Agriculture rescinded a policy related to energy standards, which HUD said would have pushed home construction costs by $20,000 to $31,000.
Tyler Durden Thu, 07/02/2026 - 18:25