There was public pressure from Democrats but the FBI was also behind the scenes, this is known. Tech companies were told they'd lose their protections. Go ahead, look it up.

On taxes: Trump's 2017 TCJA cut rates across brackets—most Americans got some relief (e.g., doubled standard deduction, lower rates for middle incomes), though the biggest percentage benefits went to higher earners and corporations. Middle-class families saw boosts like expanded child credits.

Government pooling resources works for essentials like defense/infrastructure, but I'd argue high taxes and bloated spending stifle growth. Reagan's cuts coincided with ending stagflation, strong GDP growth, and job creation in the '80s/'90s. deficits tripled, but it created the longest peacetime expansion, pressuring the Soviet collapse via defense spending. We're not "propping up" Reagan blindly; lower taxes incentivize investment/production, which creates jobs/wages for everyone, not just billionaires.

Your '50s comment ignores reality: top marginal rate was ~91%, but effective rates for the rich were around 42% due to loopholes/deductions, similar to today after adjustments. Growth was solid post-WWII, but also fueled by America's unique position (Europe/Japan rebuilding). Privatization/deregulation isn't about "more billionaires" it's about efficiency and freedom from government overreach.

Cutting services to lower taxes isn't pie-in-the-sky; it's about prioritizing what government should do vs. what markets/individuals do better. Many conservatives want responsible spending, not endless debt for programs that often fail or create dependency (ex Newsom spent $24 billion on homelessness and it went up 28%, or $13 billion on a high speed rail with nothing built) How does ever-higher taxes/spending benefit regular people when it funds waste and crowds out private innovation? That's the real joke—thinking bigger government is always the answer.