The key to RayGun's success in undermining confidence in our federal government was the basic misconception people have concerning how money is created and spent at the federal level. By positing such spending as "taxpayer money" he was able to set in motion the class envy (always punching downward of course) and the cruelty of austerity economics that allowed neoliberalism to gain such traction.

A massive reversal of this could be achieved if the voting public became econ literate enough to understand the simple difference between money users and money "issuers". The money issuer is, of course, the federal government, specifically Congress, and the money supply is the national debt that is used as a club to beat the working class about the head and shoulders should it ever demand nice things like much less wealthy countries enjoy as a benefit of citizenship.

It was quite an easy sale to make because it resonated with how voters relate to their own budgeting and income. Any program that might benefit the working class is easily shot down now before its merits can even be discussed with the simple question "How will you pay for it?". This has essentially neutered the ability of the federal government to fulfill its Constitutional mandate to "coin the money for the common welfare" in Article 1: Section 8 and handed the regulation and supply of money over to banks and corporations.

I know that you have been exposed to MMT economists and advocates on your podcast. If you want to be an agent of change for the good you should pursue their message instead of promoting the continuation of envy politics and zero-sum thinking of money as finite and growing on rich people and their corporations.

If you want to oppose the forces of neoliberalism you'll find it much more acheivable to make them irrelevant to the public purpose than to make them less wealthy. Once their cover as "job creators" is blown I guarantee they will end up paying more.