politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is not old versus young, plenty of old heads want what the younger gen wants.
This is class warfare. The Epstein class has been attacking the rest of us for ages with impunity. The first strike came from Senator Joe McCarthy in the 1950s.
I appreciate what AOC does in most respects, but this is a miss for her. We can’t afford this divisive messaging and she needs to be told this.
Accountability to the people for ALL politicians.
There is no war but the Class War.
Except in a way it is old vs young. The old will need more and more care, and that ends up coming from the youth. The same youth that were promised a future that doesn't exist, and now have little desire to give giving what they cannot afford. Many countries are going to have to have a real reckoning with aging populations, and few have even started the conversation.
Young people would not mind providing that care if they were paid for it.
If we soaked the rich to fund the welfare state there wouldn't be so much simmering anger.
Not doctors and lawyers, the billionaires and decimillionaires. The epstein class.
Tax wealth not work.
If you taxed 100% of the 0.01% wealthiest, took every drop and redistributed it, each person in the world would get $5k USD.
When you get to that 1%, you are already talking about the doctors and lawyers and people you don't want to target, and compared to many parts of the world, you may already be in the 1 or top 5% of wealth. Should your money be taken as well, so those in Afica with nothing get something more?
Maybe that would certainly change things for some, but wouldn't have the effect you want, and would also collapse the world economy and put all of us back in the stone age. Certainly I think when you hit a billion of net worth you get a nice little trophy and have 99% of it redistributed, but just 'taxing' wealth isn't going to do a damn thing about fixing societal issues that cost far far more than $5k a person.
I live in the US. I'm assuming each nation deals with its superwealthy internally.
Separately, I think the US should dismantle its empire, which would redistribute wealth to the rest of the world.
So because you are in the US, only the US deserves all of the wealth? That doesn't sound very fair when you think about it. Sorry Canada, sorry Mexico, you deserve nothing. Seems like all your idea would do is just make every person over 'X' wealth move to a different country, which has happened everytime high welath taxes have been implemented.
To your first sentence, that's the opposite of what I said.
I don't think wealth taxes should be limited to citizens. If billionaires own wealth here they can pay taxes here. If they don't like it they can sell their assets in the US.
If billionaires want to move they can obviously do so, but they can keep paying the wealth tax or they can sell their assets in the US. If enough billionaires sell their assets then eventually non billionaires will be able to afford assets. That's a win for Non billionaires either way.
Soooo property taxes? They already pay those.
It's almost like you haven't really thought about the proposal or even if it's going to generate the revenue for the services you are demanding.
Know what's a quicker path? End wars around the world, invest in local economies, and elect leaders that will do so.
Those are also good things and we should do them.
Wealth tax isn't directly going to fund the welfare state. The purpose is to slow or reverse the concentration of wealth into ever fewer hands.
If we fail to tax wealth, every other good government reform will only delay the inevitable slide into poverty. They might delay it for a generation or 2, because many nations have vast resources or have not reached high levels of inequality or both, but eventually, the rich will own everything if they are not stopped.
We’re going to be old one day and need care. Society as a whole takes responsibility for this.
The young need to support the old and in turn, we will be supported when the time comes.
Socialist mentality is about benefit to all, including the elderly. The rich also have it in for the elderly. To them, the death of the boomer generation profits them, because they can come up with more excuses to eliminate social security, thereby screwing us all. They want to saddle us with a privatized retirement system that they control for their own profits.
We also need to fight for ourselves and our own interests.
We can fight for the interests of all, not just our select group.
No it really doesn't, and never has. Families and communities have taken care of that. Not entire societies. It shouldn't be the youth's burden to work their entire life just to ensure the old have a comfortable 20+ years to live while owning everything and giving little back.
Really really depends what you mean by socialism. By owning the means of production? Umm, that's all people, instead of you guessed it, mostly the elderly.
Those two statements directly contradict each other. So what is it, do you want to have a good life for yourself, the family you raise, or the person down the street who will ask each year that more is taken away so they can live comfortably? In previous 'generations' the family either did well and took care of each other, or the family suffered, rather than everyone in the next town over, the next city, state and county over suffering because everyone wants to live in a home by themselves and have an acre of land.
Thanks for your input, Elon
I am not sure 100,000 years of how humanity handled things is suddenly 'Elon' but you go on queen. Perhaps we as a society should be working on our communities and helping each other out rather than thinking isolation and rugged independence is the way to survive life. But hey, you can only tell people to touch grass so much.
Unfettered exploitative capitalism hasn’t existed for 100,000 years either, the pre-agricultural blueprint was communism. Blame capitalism for rugged individualism and isolation, it’s what it does best: Alienation. So yes, you lick Elon’s boots and apologize for terrible people. That makes you one of them.
Umm, it was hunter gatherer where most people has very short brutal lives and had small communities.
Most of the world has capitalism (the entire world to a large degree), and individual individualism is a very very American thing not seen in most other countries around the world.
I am sorry though, it seems your public school systems haven't been getting the funding the desperately need to teach history for you. Luckily if you spend enough time online, there are a lot of resources that can help you.
Funny you say that from your position, because your side is all about slashing educational fund in favor of religious brainwashing education, huh?
What do you call when someone goes hunting/foraging and makes sure everyone in the tribe is fed and taken care of? Sounds like socialism/communism to me, unlike the “I got mine, fuck everyone else’s mentality neoliberals, ultra capitalists and fascists crave.
The problem with your mentality is you split the world into winners and losers and blame the “losers” for all their problems while ignoring whatever privilege, good fortune or help you got to your position in life with. Sorry buddy, working a full-time job and having some money doesn’t make you better than anyone else. Get in line as all of us working suckers slowly have our dignity sucked away, and as we fall further behind.
Don’t worry, we can just bootstrap ourselves harder to survive while the elite crust fucking us over laughs their asses off while the wealth welfare and tax breaks roll in.
She said millennials are getting more politically active...
And you're attacking her because she's divise?
By any chance do you consider the phrase "Black lives matter" divisive and think "all live matter" is better?
Logically that's what you're saying, I just would prefer not to make that assumption, so just trying to clarify.
Edit:
And in the spirit of clarity, this is her quote that you said is divisive: