this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
825 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19165 readers
2698 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Billionaires like Marc Andreessen, Elon Musk, and Vivek Ramaswamy are spreading false claims to discredit the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), a federal agency protecting consumers from fraud and abuse.

Andreessen falsely accused the CFPB of politically motivated “debanking,” despite no evidence.

This rhetoric aligns with the “DOGE” project, led by Musk and Ramaswamy, which aims to slash government regulations and programs under the guise of efficiency.

Critics warn this effort will harm public services, benefit billionaires, and push privatization at the expense of ordinary Americans.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Gaurenteeing that's exactly what we will do. Hopefully i be mostly dead.

[–] Floon@lemmy.ml 24 points 8 hours ago

Rich people are like other rich people, more than they are like their fellow countrymen, or ethnic group, or religious group. Anything a billionaire says is good for "everyone" needs to be understood in that light: the "everyone" they see are "all the people I associate with", meaning "other rich people".

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 11 points 9 hours ago

And the Tankies and Anarchists both are cheering them on despite bullshitting to themselves that they're opposed to the Billionaires.

A planet overfull of people in the Age of Information and we've got Billions of fucking Rubes.

[–] abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 98 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Remember kids, they want the government gone because they want to become the government to enrich themselves.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 56 points 1 day ago (1 children)

More accurately they want to become the oligarchy. Like in Russia.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 39 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think this is partly why they got the stupid gomers thinking that Russia is some fantasy zone for white right wing xtian nationalists. For the oligarchs, Russia's set up is a dream, so they have to find stupid voters to vote against their own economic interests for backwards identity politics reasons...so they make Putin out to be sympathetic towards xtians and homophobia and "whiteness" for the benefit of the rubes in the U.S.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

For the oligarchs, Russia’s set up is a dream

Until they get defenestrated

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Putin's been in power for like 20 years, and despite putting the Russian people through hell these last two years and an actual coup attempt he's still going strong. Arguably you could say things didn't really change much even after Joseph Stalin died in 1953, aside from secession of several nations outside of central Russia, that it's all just one big continuation of the same system.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Breve@pawb.social 112 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I like how the only "increases" in efficiency they have proposed are to completely eliminate programs instead of actually making any of them better. Maybe we should adopt this same methodology to "solve" the problem of billionaires. 🤷

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

All you have to do is convince the ignorant, unwashed masses that you're speaking for them, not about them, and they will let you have whatever you want.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

People don't want policies. They don't even want demagogues. They want a set of jingling keys in front of their face. That's what they'll pay attention to.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 3 points 14 hours ago

Doesn't matter, had shinies.

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 27 points 1 day ago

But wait, they’re all wearing Tshirts instead of suits on these podcasts. Are you saying that doesn’t mean they’re one of us?

[–] b161@lemmy.blahaj.zone 57 points 1 day ago (1 children)

All billionaires must go by any means necessary.

[–] Allonzee@lemmy.world 43 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Nothing new.

Americans are easy marks. Not most of our faults, we're poorly educated by design. Critical thinking is college level here.

Few of us have any interest in being a society, any snake oil con man has to do is tell us we'll be rich!.. Just fuck over our fellow humans first, lol, and we'll come a running to that ballot box to literally destroy the very safetynet under our own feet. It's quite pathetic to witness.

Then we'll spend decades kneeling in front of them waiting for golden showers of prosperity, when we're not at one another's throats out of the zero sum mindset this herp derp land of rugged individualism propagates.

Our hyper individualist, disdain for the very concept of society is gallows hilarious. It's like bragging that we're conditioned to let one another drown. Yay? Got to hand it to the marketers on that one.

[–] witten@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

I agree with you. Quite a lot. And yet.. Rugged individualism can also make a person want to think for themselves and not herp derp with the uneducated masses. I'm just saying American individualism can, uh, in certain cases make one more prone to collectivism.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I am the result of that type of backfiring, got fed right wing propaganda about rugged individualism and the founders as a kid. Turns out that that can backfire heavily into making someone who wants to be left alone, wants to tar and feather people, and thinks some type of collectivism is the best way towards that.

Fun fact, my grandmother finds my politics annoying which makes sense given the fact she fed me the propaganda but doesnt generally argue my points since I have pointed out that she is the fucking base source of them. She copes and thinks its cause of school and not the fact that she held up violent revolutionaries and our bastard ancestors up on pedestals.

[–] witten@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

You reap what you sow, amirite? Even if sometimes you don't know what you're sowing.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 1 points 45 minutes ago

Yep, dont really know what she expected though since our ancestors while bastards were historically progressive and the founders were violent revolutionaries including the weird internal infighting. I do wonder how many "conservative" men are like me and are just surrounded by idiots, ive met a few who completely dropped the act once I said some distinctly non conservative terms like syndicalism, armament of the masses, and bougie bastards so its certainly higher than one would probably expect.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 81 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Oh no, what will we do if billionaires control the U.S. government.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1893 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1907

And those are just J.P. Morgan.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›