What’s with the obsession for each side to promise a big check for everyone? Surely the money is better spent on public services rather than bribery…
Every family, eh? What would that mean exactly? Only married people? Only people with children?
I think 99% of people agree with this - that Bernie Sanders wants to do it. Do they support it, though?
Removed by mod
I’ll pass on the check and stick with student loan forgiveness, Medicare for all, well funded public schools, housing for the homeless, etc…
Will he cut the Pentagons budget put the American bourgeoise on trial and leak all the fucked up shit american intelligence agencies have been up to the last 30 years?
Yes.
No. I never agree with anyone using engagement bait titles.
And yet you engaged
Only 5%? Mine is approaching 30% and I can’t afford shit.
Also sending out checks is fucking stupid. Just lower our taxes.
It’s 5% of wealth, not income. But still, anything short of 100% will not stop the parasites. But its a nice gesture, if nothing else
But its a nice gesture, if nothing else
Not particularly. 5% is nothing to them.
I am pretty sure that there are no democracies left.
It’s so crazy to me that people eat stuff like this up. Pages like this make BANK slapping some text on a bunch of image while adding absolutely nothing to the conversation.
Everything they make exists not to make a difference but to drive page views to their stupid accounts. It’s so, so transparent.
And in this house, we hate all ads
5%?! How about 50%, for starters.
So your wealth is halved every year?
No, it should be 10% at least.
We could tax a billionaire 95% of their wealth, and they would still have more money than you or I could reasonably spend in a lifetime.
Oh yeah, I’m a big proponent of no more billionaires. But it appears to a lot of average people smaller amounts are more palpable because they think they’ll ever be that rich.
I have the same amount of power to make this happen as Bernie Sanders has.
I hate using this term because I don’t think he’s stupid but the phrase is “useful idiot”
If you think of the machine that is politics he serves a purpose. Allowing him to vocalize this message essentially is a pressure release valve. His existence and beliefs although not wrong are keeping more aggressive views at bay. He’s basically keeping a segment of the population docile by making them think “he speaks for me. I don’t have to do anything”
Hate to say it but AOC as well. They’re part of the machinery. They are not disruptors at all.
You seem to be advocating that no one American even talks about taxing the wealthy so that there isn’t a “pressure relief valve”?!
In the world of shit that is American politics right now, your solution, out of all the things that possibly change, is to silence anyone suggesting that just maybe there’s a better way?
THIS?! This is what you would change? Remove even the discussion of anything even slightly left of the Clintons?!
Are you insane? Are you Nancy Pelosi? Are you JD Vance?
Do you hate the Democratic party so much that you want to remove all traces of progressive politics from it?
I’ve got news for you. The water is boiling and the lobster isn’t climbing out. Putting the lid on and turning up the heat isn’t going to work. Throwing younger lobsters in the pot isn’t going to work. And silencing the only people talking about turning the heat down isn’t going to fucking help.
Americans need him but more agressive
Disagree. Mamdami is a good example. They just need someone new and fresh without baggage. You go back far enough you will find inconsistencies in any politician. A fresh face benefits all.
Why America only wants geriatrics is beyond me.
They don’t want geriatrics, but being an incumbent comes with a massive fund raising and name recognition boost. Making it a huge accomplishment to break into the debate. AOC was a major upset for a reason when she took office. That was not a small accomplishment.
Polish government decided to send check to all parents as a way to promote having kids.
You know what happened? All the products needed by young kids suddenly rose in price. Sending checks to americans will do the same - all necessities will just become expensive exactly by amount of money they got.
Want to change the world? Tax the debt machine (5 or 10% of every transaction involving stocks and obligations, including using them as a loan security) and treat companies like people (as in - tax them on income, not on profit).
It’s supply and demand, if your raise the demand of course the products cost more. What did they expect?
There was no increase to amount of kids conceived after the “financial help” was redistributed. Prices of child necessities grew after the funding was passed, before first money reached the parents.
And we are surprised? That exactly how the market works.
And, as I said, this will exactly happen in the USA - they will give handouts, necessities will grow and all the handout money will just pass back to billionaires with interest.
That exactly what would happen. I agree.
If supply is, for example, 10.000 units a day, and demand rises from 5.000 to 8.000, there is no reason why the price should increase, other than corporate greed.
This isn’t what was happening. Supply was 10k, and demand was 10k. They gave out money to people, and supply stayed 10k. Of course prices increases under these conditions.
Things only cost more if the people pay more. With spending discipline, people could have had actually more. Most things are industrially produced. Supply likely was no bottleneck and the increased demand could have been matched.
The implication is that people already own everything that they can buy. Wage increases only increase inflation. Fighting for higher wages only increases the prices.
