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.
- 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
I get what the title is trying to say, but it is pretty poorly written because low birthrates DO strain social security. However inequality causes lower birthrates which in turn strains social security
That isn't what the title is saying.
Basically the percentage of taxable income has dropped drastically. The wealthy's income has spiked drastically compared to less monetarily-gifted citizens. So the population is putting less money into social security. That drop is hitting a lot harder than just have fewer workers.
Thanks for clarifying. Your interpretation does make more sense.
I'm for reducing the birthrate to zero until inequality is fully addressed.
You have to either be a monster or truly not care about anyone to bring a non-wealthy child into this work camp as our very habitat fails by our own sabotage. Why? Because misery loves company? Because the job creators want new capital batteries for their progeny to drain the life force of?
Oh I know, because the owners promised 50 years ago that if we gave them ALL the money and power, and we did for some reason, one day they would emerge from their guarded towers to whip their cocks out and urinate golden showers of prosperity upon all of us, and though you won't live to see it, surely your child will amirite!
If you don't reproduce then you leave the world to the kids of the bootlickers.
No I leave it to the owners. Those bootlicker's kids are going to have a worse time than their parents.