Or we prioritize other objectives first, like gutting corruption and FINDING THE MISSING BILLIONS OF PENTAGON DOLLARS.
There's already a fuck ton of money, it's just misappropriated.
Because that would involve actually improving things, instead of spreading disinterest and apathy in change.
Find me a candidate that'd work toward of these objectives and they'd have my vote, assuming I can stomach the rest of their politics.
But it seems to me that the greater focus there is on a single matter, the more likely it is to change. And the mildustry complex is probably the greatest threat to the planet right now imho.
the mildustry complex is the greatest threat to the planet right no imho.
They're probably second when it comes to existential threats to life. The greatest threat is big oil.
Politics is like the bus: it's not likely to take you exactly where you want to go, but it'll get you in the area.
You want to go directly there? You're gonna have to drive yourself.
Yeah, that sucks. I'd rather start somewhere than just throw my hands up and go "well, it's fucked, may as well not try."
My thought is, sure we can tax the rich and make them less rich. But I find it hard to believe that the government is going to magically allocate those resources in a way that actually benefits Joe Schmoe. On top of that, even if you totally liquidated every billionaire, you'd get less than $2k for every person in America. Make it $4k if you only distribute it to the bottom half. Sure, it would be nice and I think billionaires are a scourge, but I don't think it's going to fix the problems people think it will.
Seems to me that the people going on and on about eating the rich would get a lot more done if they focused on achievable policy goals that directly affect their community. I would bet money 95% of the clowns that keep going on about this stuff don't even know who their city councilman is and have never been to a town hall meeting.
But if you inverse those thoughts or even pull back a bit, it's the same defeatist perspective. "Sure we can allocate taxes better but I find it hard to believe we'll ever be able to tax the rich." These aren't unrealistic changes or even far fetched, it just comes down to informing people and making the change. Most average people don't know what the Military Industrial Complex is or how it works and by telling them and illustrating how bad it is, politicians who'd like to remain politicians might listen to their constituents a little bit more than their wallet. Not entirely but enough.
Eating the rich is just a vivid expression to get the point across. A motto of sorts that just gets the idea across that the ultra wealthy need to be reconstituted into society at large. Be it through harmless proposals of policy and ranging to, well, the French Revolution. You don't need to know who your city councilman is nor your town hall to agree with something and make a change. I personally don't have time to attend a town hall with the oldest people in my county who are more interested complaining about a bakery not being in the right zoning area than change their mind about local taxes.
Change is slow and it starts with education. Being pissy or condescending also isn't a very good way to convince people you're right. If anything, they'll put extra effort into being wrong to spite you.
My main thing is that I'm tired of hearing people whining about it all the time, yet they do nothing themselves and don't even provide any actionable policy proposals. A comprehensive solution will have to involve both some mechanism to reduce the outsized influence that specific individuals and organizations can project onto society, including but not limited to corps and rich people, AND policies targeted to actually directly improving social welfare like healthcare, housing policy reform, overhauling disability, SNAP, and similar benefits, etc.
A lot of this needs to happen at the local level, especially housing reform, and even if you can't attend your local town hall, you can email your councilman. That's the person who controls whether or not that affordable apartment complex or homeless shelter goes up, and things like that will make a much bigger positive impact on your community than any amount of rich people eating. For the sweeping reforms, proving that things like this work at the local and state level is the first step to bringing them to the national level. The ACA for example was directly copied from the system Massachusetts had come up with.
But it's not about what makes sense. Yes, obviously, the ideal situation would be to make a perfect structure before pulling the lever but we can't be idealist about this. The system will never be perfect so we have to settle with marginal improvements. I'd rather the military industrial complex have the money than the rich because they'll actually spend it. Sure, it's not where I'd like it to be spent but it'll actually trickle down through industries. Can't make a tank without metal, can't get metal without mining, can't mine without workers, so on and so forth.
Next step is aiming that from the complex to something better. Something closer to infrastructure. But it's important to understand these things are done incrementally and rarely all at once.
what corruption?
I am a European and i also was of the Opnion that the US spends too much on military. But since the 24th of February, I have had to completely change my Mind. I was in the wrong. THEY were right. The West still needs to fund their Militaries. Because Putin and Xi are not interested in a peaceful world, if they don't pull all the Strings.
The United States' military industrial complex is entirely corrupt. It's not because we produce too many weapons, it's because we're willfully overpaying for literally everything. Just as an example, one military supplier sells/sold cups for $100 each, which even given their quality and material is still outrageous. It's good that the US is prepared for war, and our military political apparatus functions far better than Russia's, but there's a wide gap between "better than Russia" and "not corrupt" that we sadly fall into.
I'm not saying there aren't suppliers overcharging, but I suspect most of the time it's used to hide other purchases. For instance: a line item that says $100/cup when it's really $1/cup and $99 for helicopter fuel for the CIA.
this is what a whiney ass Russian says about life.. this is how a coward thinks.. this is what defeat looks like from inside the mind of the loser..
I agree, memes like this act like this isn't a reason to try. It's an illusion to think one solution solves all problems. There are several problems here and having the wealthy pay their share will be part of the solution.
JFC. Yes, both problems exist, and the barrier to taxing the rich are the cunts in control. Cut them out, then the money will go where it needs to and we have greater control over who gets taxed what.
Oh no, I've been labeled a coward for an unpopular opinion on
checks notes
tax policy
I'm all for taxing the rich, and paying taxes, so long as the funds go to programs that don't blow up children in foreign countries.
Another constructive comment adjusted by view on the matter.
Just because you can't fix everything at once doesn't mean you shouldn't fix one thing then move onto the next.
Yeah the money won't go where we want it to and that sucks. It's already not going where we want it to. Progress is often achieved in steps.
Then why not start with the root of corruption? If the end result is the same, why not go after the politicians that enable the rich to ease taxes to begin with?
Because often times you have to cut a tree down from the top, you can't just uproot it right away. It's the reason we go up stairs one at a time instead of two or three at a time. The end result is the same but we learned as kids it takes a lot more effort taking a few massive steps instead of more smaller ones. Politics takes time, politicians have a lot of voices to sift through. We'll always hear our own voice in a choir, it's a lot harder from the audience.
But literally how!? The politicians who control tax law are in control. Isn't this a paradox?
If you can't change the laws, change the politicians, If you can't change the politicians, change the system. If you can't do either, talk about it until enough people agree and you can. Incremental changes my friend.
"so long as" is the weak point in your approach, IMO. There are separate problems. If you insist on solving them together, probably you fail to do anything. Work on both, but don't insist on a single grand solution.
what if your Taxes go to Programs that help Ukraine and Taiwan not be annexed by brutal Dictators?
Stabbing in the dark with misattribution isn't helping...it's closer to being what you claim me to be: an agent if misinformation.
This meme has been brought to you by an anonymous Asian country's disinformation campaign.
Please give up.
lol you got me! you must work in the attribution industry!
I'm all for taxing the rich. Go after them! But the foundation of how those tax dollars are allocated are corrupt as fuck, and that needs to change just as much.
Yes comrade! Allocation is an equal issue! Do not question the propaganda that makes you think this.
Let the frustration flow through you until you recognize the only option is to give up.
continues typing furiously from behind the great firewall of china
Did you just manage to roll China with your cyber attribution dice?
All military spending comprises ~10-15% of the budget, just a FYI.
The military budget isn’t stopping anything. In 2022, $4.1 Trillion was spent on mandatory programs (social security, Medicare, Medicaid, income security).
Social security, Medicare, and Medicaid alone were just shy of $3 Trillion.
It's still a rediculously large military budget and it's incredible how much we spend on our social programs only for them to still suck ass
Fixing our social programs would go so far to make things better without even changing anything else at all.
The amount of money spent isn’t the issue, it’s how inefficiently it’s spent.
Agreed!
I think that was part of my thinking with my hot take.
I'm all for the rich paying their fair share, but maximizing what we already have is important too.
Admittedly, I thought these percentages were different.
Not above admitting when I'm wrong.
https://www.pgpf.org/budget-basics/budget-explainer-national-defense
No worries.
A part of that is that there’s the entire budget of all federal outlays and then “the budget” which is what the President requests and Congress authorizes.
That is solely the discretionary spending. It’s unfortunate that it’s the only thing that actually gets talked about in the media.
Related, but interest on the debt is set to pass military spending like next year even.
Any concern for retaliatory strikes? Guess the poor needn't worry about going hungry if they're dust, right?
Assuming Russian nukes even work.
The Kremlin Gremlin isn't poor. He sure should be dust tho.
Fact: despite popular perception and rhetoric, the government does not actually need to issue taxes pay for things. Taxing the rich does not actually act as a source of revenue; it disincentivizes greater Extremes of price gouging and wage suppression as well as reducing the wealth disparity between the the poor and wealthy.
Your objection is nonsensical, misleading, and damaging to the cause. Good job. 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏
Thanks for sharing a perspective that I hadnt considered. I certainly agree that corporate greed is detrimental and plays a key role in governmental corruption.
US military is already larger than the 4 next largest militaries worldwide IIRC, so no need to worry about being a paper tiger
as opposed to the rich people doing military donations on their own? the spotify ceo invested in fucking AI military killing machines man grow up. you have no control over rich people and they have demonstrated that there is no reason to trust them. the government sucks too, but at least you get to cast a vote on how much it sucks. stop bootlicking
I'm all for taxing the rich, but I'm even more for rooting out the corruption that enables the rich to become the monsters they are. This isn't bootlicking, its holding the opinion that the priorities are out of order.
Thanks for sharing your perspective.
Even stuff like welfare and social benefits help the rich more than the poor. Walmart can have billions of profits while their people make so little they have to apply for aid. If aid wasn't there, they would have to pay proper wages and their profits would be smaller.
Taxing the rich means their money will go straight to government. Just have corporations pay workers more, so it goes straight to the people. Taking the rich is a stupid fucking movement, people should be emphasizing paying the workers more
