• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Nobody in politics really cares for voters. They just tell convenient lies, and once you dropped your vote into the ballot box, you stop to exist for them again. You are just the annoying necessary means to lift them up to the pork barrels of political bribery.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        For the US, this would require removing companies from political actions, and channeling private political donations to a neutral handler that limits those to a certain maximum amount.

    • TheReanuKeeves@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Question answered. No further comments needed. Part of growing up is realizing the “democracy” we live in is just a mask for fascism.

    • Fishnoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      And they also run fake competitions where they promise to give a million dollars to people for voting a certain way, but really the winners were predetermined the whole time…

    • Binturong@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      We REALLY need to normalize demystifying the rebrand of bribery as ‘lobbying’. There’s a reason that term has power, cause people alreayd learned the dangers of it, and the corruption it breeds.

  • Absurdly Stupid @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Over 70% of voters want universal healthcare. About the same amount want a higher minimum wage.

    About 90% of Democratic voters want universal healthcare, more than half of all independents want the same thing, and even a huge amount of Republicans want universal healthcare (around 40%).

    Even so, D&Rs can’t be bothered.

    (yes yes, I know, BoTh SiDeS so I must be a secret Nazi bot, etc. you got me)

    • Hapankaali@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s not the full answer though, since a similar phenomenon appears in much less oligarchic systems.

      While the rich also have a disproportionate influence in those systems, it wouldn’t be enough without the assistance of the racism and spite of the average voter.

      • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Why do we think they’re less oligarchic? It’s a classic principal-agent problem. Representatives are generally for sale.

            • Hapankaali@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              An oligarchic system is one where political power lies predominantly in the hands of a small privileged elite. But it’s not a binary concept, the current US system is less oligarchic than it was in the 19th Century, or the Venetian Republic for example. What did you mean?

  • Canaconda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    3 days ago

    Because America was founded with a bunch of horse sniffing half-literates for a general populous and the only thing that’s really changed is the number of horses to sniff.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’ve used this quote a lot over the years. One of the far right posters liked to “retort” by saying it’s better than being a pseudointellectual (directed at me), LOL!

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          💯

          Yup. To the conservative mindset, the notion of having aspiration to bettering oneself, etc. == “pseudointellectual”. I cannot tell you how many conversations I’ve had from people that did not go to college and did not plan to go to college about how all those “college people” are. Also, calling someone an “intellectual” is considered an insult among conservatives. Calling them a pseudointellectual is spicing it up, LOL.

          I still remember a conversation with an in-law where his literal mic-drop line (he thought) was to huff, “yeah, but YOU went to college!” He literally believes that going to college somehow taints a person. He has said as much, explicitly. He doesn’t want his kids going to college, either, because he thinks it will ruin them/turn them against him or whatever, with the “woke mind virus”. FFS.

  • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Because 90% think they’re in the top 10%, and the top 10% think they’re all 1 step from being the next musk.

    They’re all deluded be capitalism.

  • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Blue-state Democrats are in a bind. They support a more equitable tax system, but fear, with some justification, that they and their party will be blamed if higher state taxes cause their wealthiest residents and their state economies to “head south,” literally and figuratively.

    They say “with some justification,” but what is that justification? Is there evidence that higher taxes causes wealthy residents to leave AND that that has negative consequences for the broader economy?

    • amniotic druid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Yeah, this feels like a made up reason (it is). What working-class voters do they think are going to be like “boy, you know who I miss? The billionaire who used to live up the bloc!”

      If you leave a state/city because they raised taxes, it stands to reason that the reason you were there in the first place was because they had lower taxes. It doesn’t matter how much private wealth you have, you leaving or staying has very little impact on the people who live in a low-tax area. This is very basic logic

    • NM_Gringo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      So what if the rich leave? They’re not paying taxes, who needs them? The need for vendors and contractors doesn’t go away when the wealthy leave. The economy goes on. Someone will take their place and pay taxes and not bitch about it so much.

      • baronvonj@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        the fear isn’t that a rich person leaves. the fear is that a large employer moves and takes all those jobs with it.

  • SalamiDommie@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Because they’re using some of their money to keep us from holding them accountable? And that they have probably run the numbers to find that it is cheaper to do this than to just… Pay the taxes.

    • Fribbizz@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Not entirely. Generally of course people who don’t have to labour for their livelyhood have more time and certainly more resources to influence politics. But the common man can make their voices heard. -you can vote in your interest. Be careful of what people try to tell you is your interest -you can protest (peacefully); look at France to see a populace that doesn’t just take what is rammed down their throats -you can talk to your neighbours; discuss things with them to form an opinion; don’t just parrot talking points from media; -you can write to representatives; sure, your letter won’t be directly shown to then, unlike one from Koch or someone. But it won’t go unnoticed. -participate at town halls -participate in polls A fortune 500 CEO or Forbes billionaire list name will have more impact than a single voice from the population. But organised, the voices of the population make a difference. Organisation, participation and critical engagement can make a difference.

  • nanometer1625@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Some things that would help:

    • A wealth tax. Their wealth will continue to grow exponentially, but at least a portion of it could be harvested to reduce the deficit.
    • Taxing capital gains the same as ordinary income. Making money from investments requires no effort, and it blows my mind that wage income is taxed more heavily.
    • MrGeneric@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Trying to get exact numbers for wealth to tax it is near impossible especially in ultra wealthy areas with their own ways of hiding it Anyone who suggests touching capital gains will be accused of attacking peoples retirement at least in the US 401ks have replaced most other forms of retirement benefits

      Im surprised there aren’t more Georgists in this day and age when we have so much bogarted land and empty luxury apartments

      • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Probably because the foundation of georgism became fundamentally irrelevant with the invention of the microprocessor.