Both sides are not the same. Republicans are the ones who don’t want to help the workers and lower/middle class. Tax the rich and the big business. Make public college free, make healthcare free, make child care free. How? Tax the rich and big businesses. They have hoarded all the money we generated for them. (They are using it to create space ships for fun and buying up EVERYTHING). If they want to do business in the USA tax them. Stop voting for republicans, they don’t care about our democracy. Get more liberal justices on the supreme court to fix what republicans have done to our rights. Money shouldn’t be speech and corporations are not people.
I’m sure that Republicans right now are trying to stop student debt relief, again. Stop voting for them. They have no policies to help the workers. Only tax cuts for the rich and hate, i.e. woke, i.e. minorites, LGBT, women, non Christains, and diversity.
None of the parties is interested in doing what you’re talking about.
There is one party that’s literally, not metaphorically, trying to get student debt relief. And reproductive rights. Other isn’t.
Which one made promises for 50 years and did nothing?
Yeah and they’re still warmongers.
These guys have been in power for decades and haven’t done anything but empty promises.
It’s easy to suggest something that you don’t want, but looks good on the media that you know it will be rejected.
Remind me cuz I seem to have forgotten which party recently busted up a union strike, which one refused to repeal Trump’s tax cuts for the wealthy, and worked directly with McConnell to make the bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent, who was the one that forced for profit health care system on us and then mandated everyone participate? Which one was it? That should have gone through the higher education act to eliminate student debt but followed a route that was destined to fail? Which one is it that is now overfunding cops to the extent of pushing and funding cop city in Atlanta, to further subjugate minority communities, which party passed a far overreaching crime bill that specifically targeted black males, and the for-profit prison system that he’s used to house them in? Which party had the crime bill that was so restrictive that it went too far for even Reagan, and he had to insert it into the violence against women act so people would not vote against it, which party was that?
All concessions to Republican control. Don’t blame the party stopping progress, blame the progressives. What a joke.
I blame the party, they are the ones in control, or in most cases, not in control. They are shit for governing while blaming everyone but themselves for incompetence.
The Democrats aren’t responsible for the impedence of a Republican owned house, senate, and supreme court you fucking moron.
Since its hard to keep up sometimes:
Which party busted up a union strike? Democrats Which one refused to repeal Trumps tax cuts for the wealthy? Democrats Which one worked directly with McConnell as VP to make the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent? Biden Which party forced everyone to participate in protecting healthcare profits under the guise of healthcare? Democrats Which party should have gone through the HEA to eliminate student debt because it already had provisions to allow canceling student debt, but they didnt so it would get challenged and fail? Democrats Which party is over funding oppressive cops and is now pushing for ‘cop cities’ all over the country so they can subjugate uniformly? Democrats Which party passed a crime bill so unpopular with the public and Congress they had to sneak it into the Violence Against Women Act so it would pass? Democrats Which party help increase the federal use of for profit prisons to house the targeted black males using their crime bill? Democrats Which party fundraised via fear mongering over Roe for 50 years while promising to codify it into law, then did nothing resulting on it being challenged by SCOTUS? Democrats Which party talks about climate change but issues more drilling permits than any other President before them, and further increases funding to the world’s largest polluter, the military? Democrats
Do you see a trend now? All these things were done without the controlled opposition republicans
Removed by mod
What he is doing is called gish gallop and has soured all forms of debate in America. Its… textbook. You just give out so many arguments, no matter the merit, that it’s a complete slog to counter each of them. Where it falls flat is if you press them on one fucking thing, doesn’t even have to be about the shit they listed and you can easily win any argument with these ass hats.
It’s funny, cause when you do press them and they see their bullshit isn’t working they go, “no fair.” Pricks, all of em.
Easily my favorite roast I’ve seen in quite a while. I love it cause it’s true
Removed by mod
Reposting for posterity, apparently the mods are prone to removing legitimate conversation and discussion because bad words hurt their fefe’s. +20 / -2 at time of removal.
Yeah, I see a trend of ignorance and stupidity in your posts, you ignore the why and the how and the intent and the hurdles. You look at a result and ignore everything about how it got there because you’re too stupid to think beyond one layer of complexity.
Like the union strike that was broken for capitalist ideals, not progressive ideals, but Biden still negotiated and got the workers demands from the rail companies. But you ignore that. And every other item you listed has just as much if not more context that your braindead troglodyte mentally deficient self can’t comprehend because you’ve been poisoned by lack of education, lack of nutrition, and lack of social support, so you grew up functionally retarded. **
The only ignorance here are the fools that can’t see their party and its leaders are incompetent. And that you support right-wing policies and legislators
You right, let’s get rid of all the conservatives from the Democrat party.
I’m all for it
That would result in the elimination of the DNC, which Im all in favor of
Let’s do it
I’m sure that Republicans right now are trying to stop student debt relief, again
lol what happened to Biden forgiving debt??
Y’know, the only reason the Democrats struggle to win at all is that sometime in the post-Nixon era they collectively decided to stop standing up for labor’s buying power. When they did this, (which helped them a lot in terms of their ability to get corporate donors to finance their elections), it meant that working people would go from having 1 party represent labor to 0 parties doing that.
In the 50s an entry-level job that a high-school graduate could get would support a family, buy a home and a couple of cars, and pay out a retirement. Today, that job won’t even pay for an apartment without roommates.
That right there is the whole reason the GOP is a viable political party at the federal level- with both parties beholden to corporate donors, winning elections is more or less a matter of spending money on campaign ads attacking the other party because neither party has to do anything that voters want
As things stand right now, the GOP’s platform is “let’s pick a scapegoat to exhume the lower classes’ frustrations”, while the Democrats’ is “let’s not do that”. It’s no wonder why the Dems can only garner around ~27% of all elegible votes (vs the Republicans’ ~25%), most of their voters don’t particularly like their politicians nor their policies, they just don’t want to be governed by fucking crazies.
Unfortunately progress is making and eating gradually less shitty sandwiches until all of humanity individually decide we don’t like the taste of shit.
Most Dems do like their representatives and their policies and that’s why those representatives win primaries
In the 50s an entry-level job that a high-school graduate could get would support a family, buy a home and a couple of cars, and pay out a retirement.
While I agree with the general thrust that more needs to be done for the average worker, your comparison of these times completely falls on its face if you speak to anyone with firsthand experience. It shouldn’t be used because it is just noise, not relevant to the world we live in.
My dad grew up in the 50s and lives with me, due to his age/health. Here’s a mix of his take and current data:
Homes have tripled in size on average. Providing for a family involves machines that take on 16 hours per day of household chores (and this number is set to increase further), which are expensive and taken for granted. Electricity and television, to say nothing of the internet, are taken for granted. Cellular phones are taken for granted.
6 children would live in a 3 bedroom house - I know this because this is how my uncles grew up in the 50s, and my grandfather wasn’t just some regular guy, he was top salesman in his compamy. The vast majority of people did not have a “couple of cars.” They had one car and the entire family packed into it without seatbelts.
You can absolutely live like it’s the 50s right now. Cancel your cable, internet, and phone. Do not own a dishwasher, wash your laundry by hand, and only bulk-buy groceries in the forms of cereal grains, meat, eggs, and vegetables. Buy nothing pre-made. Mend your own clothes. Cook everything from scratch. Don’t have air conditioning.
If this sounds like a poor, miserable existence, it’s because almost everyone lives a standard of living unimaginable in the 50s except in science fiction, and that standard is expensive.
That’s why we should help people - because our standard of living rose and we no longer see the 50s as acceptable, not because tradwives and nuclear families made the world safe for one white guy to provide for his family. We are the richest country in the world and our standard of living should be a cudgel we wield in soft-power diplomacy.
As my dad said when I read him this post: “this going back to the past shit is about the stupidest shit in the world.”
Sorry but I do all of that and it’s not any better at all. No washer/dryer, no washing machine, I live in a fucking garage and pay more rent than anyone in the 50s paid mortgage.
Houses that are glorified sheds in flood zones in the worst parts of town go for 300k+. I’m not even entry level and I can’t afford the cheapest garbage excuse for a house out here without becoming house poor. I can’t even “move where it’s cheaper” because WFH people did and now it’s not cheaper. The areas that are truly cheap, are so because there’s no work to be had around them. Can’t appreciate the low cost of an area when your unemployed.
I specifically said it wasn’t better. That’s what “massively increased standard of living” implies.
It is cheaper though, which is why you do it. I agree it sucks.
That we should make it easier to achieve a massively better life than the 50s is the intent of the post you are replying to.
I absolutely agree. I think the “smaller houses” bit just sent me off on a rant because I keep hearing that argument as a way to dismiss current housing price issues, but it’s just not the reality I see when I look at glorified sheds selling for 300k.
Well there’s also a dramatic under-supply of housing as well.
A tripling in housing cost resulting in average houses costing $80k or so, which would approximately align with price increase/sqft would be much more tenable for people.
Still, it’s a higher standard of living and more expensive though, and should be taken into account when looking to provide the right economic conditions for people. That’s why I brought that up.
Bottom line is, as always, fuck NIMBYism and build more. Big houses, small houses, multi-family housing, all of it.
Do not own a dishwasher, wash your laundry by hand
this ends up costing more where I live - its actually cheaper to run a dishwasher daily.
source: I own a dishwasher and my water bill is only like $30 - $40 in the US.
You can absolutely live like it’s the 50s right now.
No, you can’t . You can’t send your kids to a state college or university today and expect them to work their way through on part-time minimum wage and graduate without debt. Pensions are a thing of the past. Unions have been decimated and their protections have been unavailable to most workers for decades now. Today, banks are regulated by private trade associations made up of- you guessed it- banks. Today, employers buy back their own shares (which was made illegal in the 1930s and brought back in 1982) at labor’s expense. Today’s median wage buys you less than minimum wage did then.
My post above was not a call to go back to the 50s, (fuuuuuck that) it was a call to recognize that the buying power available to labor has been squeezed so hard that the middle class as a demographic is shrinking and that in turn probably causes people to lose faith in democracy. When both major parties have worked together to dismantle labor protections and to deregulate finance, is your democracy really working for you, or for corporate power?
Yes, today it’s normal to buy things that didn’t exist then, and most fatal childhood diseases have been all but wiped out, and bigger houses and a housing inventory shortage is a thing, but that’s not the whole picture by a long shot. Raw material inputs (like lumber, and basic foodstuffs) cost more in normalized labor purchasing power terms and that’s probably largely because of corporate mergers in the supply chain and wage standards have not kept up with basic costs.
I think it’s remarkably silly that so many Americans that long for the 50s to come back think they’re gone because the Democrats embraced civil rights or because of feminism and not because they joined the GOP in dismantling the New Deal.
Roughly 50% more people go to college now than in the 50s and 60s: https://educationdata.org/college-enrollment-statistics#college-enrollment-statistics
That’s why college is more expensive now. It used to be something you paid for to go, and now there are loans. This drove up demand and changed the financial incentive structure. It’s the #1 reason why I believe college should be free for the lower three quintiles.
Pensions are a crap idea and always were. Today my wife and I are straight up cashing in her pension because it’s worth more in an IRA.
Share buybacks are good for companies, workers, and the market in general - which protects 401(k)s as well. Not sure why that’s an issue for you?
Unions are expanding again and I hope that really takes off.
I definitely do not see how the New Deal was “dismantled” or that the Democrat party of today had anything to do with it. The New Deals/Great Society were a defining time for conservatives and many conservative Democrats left the party over it.
That’s why college is more expensive now.
Back then, states funded their colleges- tuition wasn’t the primary funding mechanism. But, shortly after desegregation, that funding started to dry up now that brown people could benefit and the politics of keeping college cheap became fraught (and educating a multiracial egalitarian society became ‘communism’, which nicely dovetailed with the red scares of the time).
Then, as prices went up, loans became a thing- but loans were routinely discriminatory on things like race, gender, etc. So, when they made loans less discriminatory and easier to get, that’s when your answer became accurate: we all watched an army of MBAs swoop in and become middle-management of universities that transformed themselves to capture a share of all that available money.
Yeah, college got expensive because loans got easy to get- but the reason for loans in the first place was in large part that the right wanted to gatekeep education because they saw an educated public as a threat.
I definitely do not see how the New Deal was “dismantled”
Then you’re not looking. Glass-Steagall? Repealed under Clinton. Enforceable financial regulations? Deregulated quietly on a bipartisan basis since the 90s. Labor relations? Unions have been gutted and wage protections neglected, so much so that it became difficult to form unions. Antitrust? When the Democrats swept congress after Nixon, they retired the Democrats’ expertise on antitrust enforcement. The then-new dem leadership became fascinated with pivoting towards the center, such that the Democrats stopped representing labor and became the party of professionals. With 0 parties representing the working class and both parties engaged in the project of deregulation and privatizing public goods and services, several major parts of the New Deal were quietly neglected or just not enforced.
Today, banking is to a much greater extent regulated by private consortiums composed of… yes, bankers than it was then. The same fox that guarded the henhouse prior to the Great Depression was put in charge, and it wasn’t long before we had another depression-scale collapse.
As of the early 1970s, the robust trust-busting of the 1930s onward was quietly discontinued; the ‘watergate-baby dems’ (who were elected in the wake of Watergate) weren’t excited about monopoly enforcement. On their watch, enforcement was largely defunded. Non-enforcement of The Packers and Stockyards act eventually led to today’s state of affairs, in which there are just 4 conglomerates in the market between farm and grocer. This pattern isn’t limited to the meat industry, it is happening everywhere- middlemen control supply chains, ‘vertical integration’ and mergers and acquisitions mean producers are squeezed. That’s just plain down on the neoliberals getting hold of the Democratic party and letting corporations reassert dominance.
The New Deals/Great Society were a defining time for conservatives
If by that you mean conservatives hated everything about it and called it communism and conducted non-stop red-scares and moral panics to fight it, I suppose you’re right. That bit where conservative dems left the party- yeah, that coincided with the democrats’ embrace of the civil rights movement too, and that party realignment broadly energized the American right under the GOP banner (where before that, both parties had conservative and progressive wings)
Jesus you people are fucking exhausting the way you write like you’re trying out for Last Week Tonight.
Just speak like a person. I would’ve been interested in this discussion. We’d have politely disagreed on a couple things, I’d have fixed some of your bad history, and it would’ve been fun
If you’re gonna keep writing all jackassy at least try to be funnier.
For anyone that wants to really know exactly what the conservatives plan to do against the American people, read their ”Project 2025: Mandate for Leadership."
At least read the Forward, but here’s the whole PDF:
https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/project2025/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf
The rhetoric just in the Forward is frightening, disgusting, and dangerous.
We MUST vote for the Democrats if we’re going to maintain any semblance of real freedom for everyone and not just conservative white people.
(Side note, I found it hilarious that the “Forward” felt like it was 1000 pages down. And reading that much BS made me feel gross.)
Ok so, the Project 2025 thing is terrifying. Their Forward is terrifying. They have no plan for making this country better for anyone except themselves. They state very clearly they want to delete anything they don’t like.
They want to ban books and open discussions.
They want to deny racism exists or ever existed.
They want to deny that biology exists outside of their narrow minded beliefs.
They want to force a single religion on everyone.
They cite problems and point the finger at everyone except themselves.
As if it wasn’t abundantly clear at this point based on their ACTIONS what Republican rule will be… And yet we still have millions of people fully invested in that cult of hate and fear.
I’m not American, but reading the Foreword was just plain scary to me since it comes from a major party. There’s nothing about economics and all about moral outrage. You guys need to diversify your parties somehow.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I’m sick of the two party system also but also recognize that’s the system in place. Requires voting reform for that to ever change, which I support. I’m still going vote for democrats in the meantime because anything else, to include third party or abstaining, is ultimately supporting the republicans whether one wants to admit it or not.
If enough people, 5% of the population, voted 3rd party in one election, it gives the 3rd party the ability to get on the ballot in every state. This goes a long way.
Neither side wants ranked choice voting. Neither side is going to give up power.
We have to vote something different to change the 2 party system. Not going to change itself.
I’m sick of voting which seems to go nowhere.
How about we all just do something instead.
Removed by mod
So what’s your plan to stop the US from turning into Gilead? Wear lots of black clothes and whine about it?
I can’t speak for the previous commenter, but I know that not voting for either party is my plan. Everyone that votes out of fear of “the bad one getting elected” is part of the problem. How about something you can vote for instead of something you’re voting against?
Thanks for enabling fascists because you can’t be bothered to do the bare minimum.
No, the people enabling fascists are the ones voting for them. I don’t take that notion of enabling fascists to heart at all in this context, not sorry either. For the record, when the Democrat party undermines citizens almost as badly as Republicans, it occurs to me that they’re not my party anymore. Thinking railworker strike, trade deals, erosion of support for US jobs, and lacking the spine to push through socialized medicine. I’m also thinking about how Bernie should have won the nomination instead of Hillary but the undemocratic superdelegates supported her against the will of the popular vote anyway, with the literal explanation of the superdelegates being that they are there to stop undesired grassroots efforts from being successful…and here you’re pretending they’re somehow not fascist themselves?
Dream on, we need the two parties thrown out, and to quit bickering amongst citizens and unite against the true enemy - billionaires who want us to vote the way we have been.
Dream on, we need the two parties thrown out
I’m sure you’ll get right on that, right?
Every time I vote, and have done so for the past 6 years. Sucks that all the other sheep don’t wake up.
Democrats almost got rid of abortion entirely.
both parties can fuck off.
The fuck are you talking about?
deleted by creator
But you’re supposed to pick a side and be willing to literally lay down your life for them and their cause! Ra ra, go team go. Otherwise you’re just part of the problem according to either side.
I agree with you and I’ll go a step further and say fuck all politicians in general. Today, they’re all owned in some way by the money that puts them in power. They’ll all tell you what you want to hear. They’re all experts in half truths. Never trust a politician.
Politicians are owned by their constituents, who they overwhelmingly vote in alignment with.
The whole “politicians are owned” thing just doesn’t show up in any data whatsoever.
Take one look at who the biggest lobbyists in the US are. Then compare that to the most glaring issues we have in the US. I’ll wait.
Here’s a link of the top US lobbies, and I’ll go ahead and spoil that it isn’t what you’d think - for instance, no energy lobby makes the list.
Also, you’d think actual votes would be more along lobbyist lines than constituent lines but they are not.
https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/top-spenders
NAR for instance would absolutely love zoning changes that create more homes to sell. That’s a lobby we should listen to.
But again, we don’t, because getting re-elected is always of paramount importance.
You’re joking right? https://www.statista.com/statistics/257364/top-lobbying-industries-in-the-us/
From your own source. https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2023/02/oil-and-gas-industry-spent-124-4-million-on-federal-lobbying-amid-record-profits-in-2022/#:~:text=The oil and gas industry,slightly when adjusted for inflation.
And for you last point about NAR, I have doubts. I could see home builders and home buyers benefitting from zoning changes. It would drive down costs of a new home, open up more choices for home buyers, and put construction companies to work. Realtors are middle men who work off commissions. The more they can sell a house for the more commission they make. Realtors have a vested interest keeping the market balanced in their favor.
Realtors with more property to sell make more than realtors with less property to sell. Do you know actual realtors? The vast majority are not selling a few multi-million houses and calling it a year.
Look at what they lobby for: https://www.nar.realtor/advocacy/federal-advocacy/all-federal-issues
A recent NAR study estimates that the U.S. has developed an “underbuilding gap” of at least 5.5 million housing units over the last 20 years. This translates into more than $4 trillion in underinvestment in housing. Even relatively modest steps taken now to reduce this gap will unleash tremendous economic activity and create millions of new jobs.
Multi-family housing proposals are a core plank of their program, for instance - and yet politicians don’t listen to them because their constituents don’t want them to
I’m not sure what you think you’re arguing when you call me out my link then share data that agrees with my link.
Your preconceived notions are incorrect, and lying about data doesn’t make it correct
I’m curious as to how being a politician is even a job? Do they get salary? If so, from what? How do they pay their mortgages?
Politicians are almost all paid (some things like city council aren’t necessarily paid). Many politicians have “day jobs” they only leave once they reach a level of office where they can live off the pay.
Speaking very broadly, the cutoff is generally “state rep or higher” or “in a big city” where you can lean on politician as your main source of income.
I like how “day job” is in quotes. That makes it seem even sketchier than I originally thought lol
what kind of “day jobs” are we talking about here? Are they in an office?
And yeah, how do they have time to be a politician if they have that day job going?
I’ve worked with local politicians in office settings, as salespeople (trained a city councilwoman as a saleswoman once), etc. They also sometimes own businesses (a bit of selection bias there because that “plays” really well to the electorate).
Most political jobs that aren’t state/federal arent very demanding of time. School board, local government, etc, is generally unpaid/low pay and very much part time. If you can carve a couple nights a week, you can work in local gov.
Thaaaank you. Looking at you getting downvoted cause idiots don’t understand we can do something better than this two party bullshit.
no no no he has it all wrong. It’s the party of the WORKING class. E.g. they are going to put you all TO WORK.
Keeping the wealth with the wealthy means you get to work for them. They’re in charge don’t you see? We’re just their worker bees. There’s enough of us that we don’t need healthcare. Education is a luxury for the children of the wealthy elite, NOT the workers. The dumber and more ignorant the worker the less they need to offer them in compensation. If you don’t know better, you don’t ask for more!
It’s all about being the smartest in the room. Why do good things for people when you can just fuck them over and have them sing your praises? This is why they want to teach that slavery taught valuable skills. They want to enslave us, and they are slowly doing that generation after generation with income disparities. Pretty soon we’ll work our whole lives just to subsist and owning a home will be only afforded to the wealthy elite. The rest of us will work for them in the form of rent and they will be our land LORDS.
It’s definitely the party of workers. More workers! Work for your owners!
BuT hOw ArE wE gOnNa aFfOrD iT!?!?!?!??!?!?!!?
the fucking pentagon can’t account, literally cannot conceive, of where more than two thirds of its budget WENT.
Of almost a TRILLION DOLLARS, 886 billion dollars, they only know where ONE THIRD of it went.
That ~600 Billion Dollars have afforded all those things.
The Pentagon does know where there money goes but they are never going to tell a committee of idiots who cannot keep a damn thing secret. If you can’t trust even the President to not run his mouth or expose classified satellite capabilities to our enemies then why would they ever tell anyone in politics where that money is going? I want a transparent govt as much as the next person but it isn’t going to happen.
They’re legally required to tell those things, and democracy is not built on secrecy.
This is the major interest point for me in UAP investigations - it looks exceedingly likely that the Pentagon is embezzling some of those funds through “pet projects” that are all legacy, ultra-secret, unaccountable, and need to produce nothing.
Legally yes. But you have to prove they didn’t simply misplace the funds. Democracy is great and I love it. However, the fact remains you can’t report something you don’t have documentation on.
Americans are wage slaves to our government
Americans are wage slaves to
our governmentthe wealthy. FTFYWeird, nobody I know works for the government.
perhaps not directly…
Where is the meme though?
There isn’t one. A subset of Lemmy users have decided to go down the Reddit path where anything and everything MUST be politically related. Ideally it would be 24x7x365 coverage of “Republicans Evil” and nothing else.
I actually don’t mind that. Life is inherently political, and Republicans truly do suck. I’m more upset that something is labeled a meme when it’s not a meme at all.
This is not a meme.
“Oh no no no, you misunderstand, we’re the party of WORKING the lower CLASSES to death, gotta read that fine print”. - Lionel Hutz, GOP Supreme Court Justice Candidate
It never was 🌎 👩🚀🔫👩🚀
It’s just do much more obvious now. The only real values holding this shell of a “party” together are fear and hatred. Emotions >> platforms/issues in modern politics. It’s pathetic, and this complete death grip on a two party system will ultimately kill American democracy.
I’d argue that right up until the three way brawl that was Taft V Roosevelt V Wilson, the Republicans were very much the party of the people. Roosevelt split the party, and all the lefties left the party, mostly to become Communists. Then the 1950s and 1960s happened and the Republicans leap frogged over the moderate right wing Democrats to leap head long into right wing extremism.
Admittedly that was only the first 50 or so years that the party existed.
Image Transcription:
X/Twitter post by user Robert Reich @RBReich reading: "The Republican Party is against:
- National paid family and medical leave
- Universal childcare
- Universal pre-K
- Tax increases on the wealthy and corporations
- The expanded Child Tax Credit
- Student debt relief
Doesn’t sound like the party of the working class to me."
[I am a human, if I’ve made a mistake please let me know. Please consider providing alt-text for ease of use. Thank you. 💜]
I’m not American, so I curious why they have only two parties?
Their election system (basically winner-takes-all) pretty much guarantees that it will converge in a two-party system with roughly 50/50 share and people voting for “the lesser evil” rather than their favourite. If a third challenger appears, it will split the voter base of the more close candidate and guarantee a huge victory for the farther candidate (the opposite of what the challenger stands for). So essentially it’s doomed to be a bipartisan circlejerk unless the election system itself is changed.
Ranked choice voting seems to be the solution
However, both parties are against it because neither want to give up power
Some states have switched over to ranked choice for some if not all of their elections. Alaska is a big one - nearly every election on the ballot is ranked choice.
Maine also allows it for their presidential elections. Originally, it would have been used for their gubernatorial, state legislature, House, and Senate elections, but the state Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional since the state constitution required a plurality to win.
Nevada is also likely to approve it for their primaries.
Many other states use it to some degree at the local level. Unfortunately, we’re unlikely to see much progress nationwide without a major shift in politics.
Correct. Also worth saying that because it was designed by rich white male British colonists over 200 years ago who deliberately made it almost impossible to change, our system is hopelessly outdated and very difficult to upgrade. This is especially true when there are certain demographics that get a ton of over representation through the existing system.
There are more parties than two, they just aren’t very popular
That’s a common fallacy. There’s really just one party with 2 factions that pretend fight but really fight when any other party tries to pop in.
The Republican Party is against:
N
U
U
T
T
S
Lmfao I’m pretty sure liberals also hate the working class, watch them talk about rural people for 5 seconds. The utter disdain for rural working class people is a real thing.
There are rural Democrats. You know that, right? It’s not a monolith.
I didn’t mention political affiliation at all.
Yeah because we all know you’re talking about those liberal Republicans.
They’re all liberals, by definition.
You didn’t have to.
Rural people are the foundation of this country and need the most support for they often are over looked. Probably because they vote for people that don’t have their well beings in mind.
You seem to be implying that the only “real” working class people are rural. Do all the working class folks that live in the burbs and cities not count?
That’s not what I meant to imply at all, but generally there are more blue collars than white out in the sticks. Do you think that’s inaccurate?
I would argue that used to be the case. My parents own a “farm” in Indiana, and most of their neighbors were indeed farmers and farmhands when I was growing up 30 years ago. I’ve visited the farm recently, and was shocked by the gentrification that has happened. None of their neighbors are worth less than $1,000,000 these days. All the old neighbors are gone. The population density didn’t increase, but the prices did, and the price of gas makes it impossible for low paid blue collar workers to live that far out of town. They wouldn’t be able to get groceries.
That may even still be the case west of the Mississippi River, but back east property has gotten so expensive that even the rural areas are turning into havens exclusively for the rich/ wealthy
The only reason I dislike them is because they actively vote against their best interests for the people who are fucking this country and planet into the ground. I just don’t understand them… As people, they’re fine. Voters, not so much.
Rural people as in the people who consistently vote for and cheer for all the vile shit Republicans want to force on us? Gosh, why would we have anything against those people?
Democrats are not liberals 👀
Removed by mod
Liberals and progressives are frustrated with many rural conservatives. Changes we advocate not only help us, our neighbors, the less-advantaged, but would even more benefit rurals. Why are you voting against your best interests, and for the blowhard who more blatantly lies, and wants to “take” more from you in favor of the wealthy? Why would you vote for those vowing to disrupt and destroy many of the programs you rely on? Why do you keep voting for the country to step backwards when you’re the first one getting stepped on?
Removed by mod
Very few progressive ideas would benefit the rural areas.
Rural electrification. Farm subsidies. Rural mail delivery. Wind farms. And Texas is currently seeing what happens to rural hospitals and clinics when rural areas decide they don’t want anyone’s tax dollars to subsidize healthcare.
Removed by mod
Rural areas have electric.
And I bet you think they always have. Thank progressives every time you turn on the lights.
Farm subsides predate progressives by a hundred or more years.
In the US? Just how young do you think progressive policy is?
Rural areas don’t want wind farms.
Then why do farmers keep leasing out land to wind companies? Could it have something to do with the fact that it’s a reliable revenue stream that uses a fraction of the land and you can still farm there?
Also, you ignored something:
And Texas is currently seeing what happens to rural hospitals and clinics when rural areas decide they don’t want anyone’s tax dollars to subsidize healthcare.
Removed by mod
So I felt like I had helped pushing debt relief forward in the US, hope that is okay with you folks here.
And I would agree with the image. But can I be risky and question some things? I can delete my post if people don’t like it.
But, Ok regarding tax increases on wealthy and corporations: won’t they just find loopholes? Heck wasn’t the tax rate raised to like 80% for the wealthy as one point in the US?
I would prefer if culture steps away from tax the rich to either simplify tax rules or remove loopholes, which I would think both sides of voters in the US would be happy for? (Assuming both sides hate the current tax system)
Or assuming politicians are in in the loopholes too, making the tax easier or the loopholes more complicated that labor wise it would be better to just pay taxes?
Sorry… why do you think people on the left wouldn’t be in favor of removing tax loopholes for rich people?
Sorry I didn’t intend to bring sides into this, I am referring to the super rich and poor. Not left or right. Is that okay?
I think both voters on both sides would be in favor of removing tax loopholes. But I imagine the wealthy on both sides would be hesitant?
Assuming if you are super rich that takes priority over political parties. Would the Military Industrial Complex be a similar example?
The wealthy are only on one side- their own. The aren’t left or right, they’re just greedy hoarders. Their ideology goes as far as their wallet. They give to politics to get their way and they give to charities to get tax write-offs.
I think he problem is that the wealthy are lobbying for laws to keep their loopholes or make new ones. Unless we can find a way to keep lawmakers from accepting bribes, the lower class will always be at a disadvantage even if we do vote for better taxing of the rich.
Okay good I felt like I was alone in that respect. Sometimes I feel like causing two partiess to fight is what the richest want so they can get away with anything sometimes lol.
But I’m sure that’s not true, and if it is I would be sad people have been tricked into choosing sides and being brainwashed to hate for the gain of others who couldn’t care.
It’s unfortunate that our entire culture has been boiled down to a few wedge issues by people with no interest in bettering the common persons life. Your stance on Gods/Guns/Gays pretty much determines how you’ll vote at this point.
Oh another Q I had was the student debt relief.
Isn’t student debt relief just a short term fix? Yes debt relief is something I would vote for, but Like that money has to go somewhere right? Wouldn’t it be better to lower the cost of the out of control education or health care first to make it easier to provide more affordable universal care in the future?
Unless other country with universal care charge $20 for a cough drop at the distributor level for hospitals, then disregard my statement 😄
Why not give people student debt relief and make college free and have universal healthcare? It’s not like you have to pick one.
I am just going to guess no one will make that happen for another 150 years, but it’s a nice dream isn’t it.
But my rationality is if you start with a long term plan for universal health and education, debt relief would follow suit.
I am just confused why debt relief is headlined and no long term solutions, as if the culture wants to hide long term solutions.
The culture doesn’t want to hide from it, politicians do.
Neat. Thanks! I wonder what it would take to get constituents to pester politicians more about this. Anything I can do to help would be neat!
Debt relief can literally change lives right now. Long term changes are important, but the positive impact on actual current living situations is huge.
How much are you willing to give up of your own pay cheque to fund that?
I’m more than willing to pay more in taxes as it will be offset by not paying my expensive monthly health insurance premium. Even bureaucrats would be better than insurance “for profit” flunkies in deciding what health decisions I’m allowed to make.
Yes, forgiving student loans can realistically only be a one time fix, but:
— most of these are for a previously existing forgiveness program that was managed so poorly no one could qualify
— halting payments as part of COViD relief while continuing to accrue interest means that some people are getting hit with ballooning payments after year of none
But of course the real problem is how to get college education costs back under control. They have been going up much faster than inflation for decades, making a good education much harder to afford than for the rich devious generation
— a big part of this is reduced state spending on education, so public school costs go up as fast as private. States need to start investing more in public universities again. Top tier private schools will always command any price but most private schools would need to compete if public universities were affordable
— some states are starting to offer some amount of college free
How do you think loopholes creep into the tax laws? It’s done by politicians who accept bribes from lobbyists who work for the mega corporations and the ultra wealthy. Yes those kind of politicians are in both camps. But one side is full of them and the other is slightly less full of them. Vote for better politicians and show up to every election even the local ones. That’s how you can put a “radical” into power who might want to do something about the current system. And those “radicals” aren’t a member of the Republican Party.
✊agreed
Removed by mod
So the next question is what can be done, like today, where can I go who should should I contact other than my usual reps?
Removed by mod
I like to think my support in third parties on the rise in 200 years has helped then 😄
Removed by mod
The party I am registered as primarily focuses on spreading word on Ranked Choice, only because there’s no other way to compete.
Removed by mod
— No one is advocating for the old days with 90% tax on the wealthy. We all know that won’t work
— we have a progressive tax, meaning wealthier pay a higher rate, which is good. However many “tweaks” have eroded that so it’s no longer as true. Most people just want to undo those tweaks
— There are multiple tax brackets so you pay a higher percentage as you earn more. I do earn more than average so I pay more, fair. But I’m far from wealthy, so why am I in the highest tax bracket? Why do the Elon Musks of the world pay the same rate on income as my upper middle income?
— our income taxes are more complex than people realize, but many tax cuts of the last few Republican administrations have been for sources of income that mostly benefit the wealthy. Why is my salary income taxed at such a high rate compared to Elon Musk’s capital gains income?
— why do I pay taxes on all my income while a well known real estate grifter can incorporate hundreds of times and play shell games with his money, and claim to be both a billionaire with huge income AND writing off all that income as a business loss to avoid taxed
Interesting stuff to look into, thanks!
Yeah because the liberal elite really cares about you /s
