Did the person who made this consciously fuck up the grammar? It's so bad it's hard to believe otherwise. The idiocy required for any of those options is disgusting.
When the majority gets more money companies raise prices and you feel poor anyway. Mass wage increase sounds nice in the short term but leads to all the inflation articles you've read recently. Money feeds up. This can be prevented by reduced demand for goods and services. As in, when you obtain disposable income you... Don't dispose of it.
Energy, living costs it can't be done. Necesities. But a lot of areas you can make real change by voting with your dollar. For example, if you don't think the new iphone should cost 2 grand because that's absurd then don't validate the company's plan by buying it. Reduced demand causes reduced price until we find a balance. That's how this horrible evil capitalism is supposed to work.
One of the problems is we as consumers suck at voting. We want the new iphone. So a majority of us buy it anyway. On credit. And Apple raises the price next year becase "it worked last time"
Corporate greed is part of what I laid out. Inflation is complex and happens regardless. Certain things can have a larger impact on the rate of inflation. Introducing monetary supply in the form of wages or stimulus is one of those things. I'm all for higher wages. What I am trying to get across is that we also need to recognize the impact we have. Corporate greed exists. People want money. It makes sense. It is further driven by us having the money to take in the first place. If the product or service doesn't get purchased the price lowers until it does and/or the business fails. All I am saying is we as consumers could do a better job being mindful of this. We don't have very much control in this system, but we do have some. Of course we're not united in this so it probably doesn't matter. If you don't buy the 2k phone your neighbor probably will.
Yet somehow when 100% of Republicans voted against they are held blameless as they are expected to be fully servile to the corporate class, and only Democrats have the obligation to pass laws.
That's because Republicans aren't people, and they aren't really pretending to be with any particular effort. Democrats are claiming to be the good guys
Republicans dont survive out in the open on places like here. If a post showed up by a republican trying to argue against minimum wage, it'd get obliterated with rebuttals.
Even when criticizing democrats, its only when theyre acting like republicans.
I have no power over what republicans do because I don't vote for them and never have. There is no reason for them to acknowledge me. Therefore I can scream to the high heavens about them sucking, and they won't change a thing. Democrats I've voted for before, they actually have reason to listen to what I want to happen because it can net or cost them a vote.
Ill tell you what, you go yell at republicans and see how much progress you make, and I'll continue to raise my concerns to those that have reason to listen to them.
I dunno, for me this is more about the candidate that wants to stop the world from burning vs the one that's actively wants the world to burn for profit.
The one who follows the science versus the one who lets millions of people die because it might hurt his political image to acknowledge that he is incompetent.
Too bad biden wants to expand the oil industry and refuses to step down then. It'd very be cool if one of the two big candidates wasn't straight evil rather than one who's guilty of less evil, you should tell Biden to let an actually viable candidate run instead
? He killed the nord Keystone XL pipeline and revoked several permits for operating oil refineries and oil wells. He has done the most work towards curbing climate change of any president in US history. Are you trolling, misinformed, or a tankie?
Edit:looked at your post history, you are all three. Congrats, you should run for third party. I hear brain worms are in right now.
I love when liberals tell blatant, easily disproven lies to pretend Biden isn't a huge piece of shit. Have fun voting for your hair sniffing genocide boi :3
Lmao, it is a fact that I made an error. You could've pointed it out, but you didn't even realize I made an error. You are completely and wholly misinformed. You have no idea what you are talking about.
It's funny that you literally can't debate anything I said because there was nothing there to debate. I posted facts. Enjoy your fiction. Have fun voting for Xi Poohbear though, hope that works out for you.
The only informed thing you posted was that the IDF is shit. You must've made a mistake, I can't imagine you'd intentionally post something factual.
I don't think anybody here is pretending he isn't less than ideal, tbqh. We're comparing two stooges and one of them is clearly not a fascist or orange. If you're gonna accuse others of lying, the least you can do is be accurate and honest with your own speech.
You literally just asked chat gpt to make a post claiming he's not a piece of shit xD you know for a fact liberals like biden, are you one of them and you're just lying like all liberals do? Or are you just unaware of how cultish liberals are with biden?
asked chat gpt to make a post claiming he’s not a piece of shit
I did? Or did I simply ask it to compile a list of policies from the web that were pro and against climate change efforts? Because it seems rather impartial about it overall. Or is there a specific aspect of it that bothers you besides Biden doing progressive things that you randomly label as liberal?
Or are you just unaware of how...
I'm unaware of whatever bullshit you're on about. You have a huge list to debunk now but all I see is you deflecting and making shit up.
You either debunk it or you accept that you're talking out your ass. You choose.
Or maybe those are actually obstructions getting in the way of the majority of the party that actively pushes for that stuff consistently?
You're alleging a party leadership conspiracy that would necessarily be of a size surpassing when a conspiracy will naturally collapse and be outed by its own members trying to save their own skin.
This isn't apologism, it's a mathematically proven fact of how conspiracies and secret keeping work.
Occam's razer, a big tent coalition party is naturally going to have at least one or two contrarian assholes and as a result needs to overperform winning mere simple majorities to be able to achieve the most points of their agenda.
We could turn around and call the Squad rotating villains for some of their symbolic votes against party policy, but we don't because those votes were rendered symbolic by there being a wide enough margin for those bills to pass anyways.
You mean that super majority that lasted only long enough to get the Affordable Care Act done and even then only after like ten Joe Manchins had to be appeased first?
The dems have had all three branches for maybe ten percent of all that time since the 90s and even then only barely.
This would not be a problem if y'all spent half the energy turning out that you do complaining about what happened because everyone else did.
You mean that super majority that lasted only long enough to get the Affordable Care Act done and even then only after like ten Joe Manchins had to be appeased first?
You say that as if they can't work on more than one piece of legislation at a time. They have aides and staffers! They have the manpower to do two things at once!
Do you actually know for a fact that that's enough manpower to work on multiple major pieces of legislation at the same time, or do you just want to say that because you wamt be amgy?
First of all, the Affordable Care Act was mostly just cheating off of Mitt Romney's paper.
Second, Federal legislation in general is ghostwritten by lobbyists most of the time to begin with.
Third, of course they have manpower: they control their own budget and can vote themselves as much help as they want. If they choose not to do that, it's hardly an excuse for failing to get shit done!
Fourth, even if the above weren't true and they really did have to choose between the ACA and the other things mentioned upthread, prioritizing further enshrining insurance industry bureaucracy in its privileged position was absolutely the wrong choice.
bro you don't have to have a conspiracy when your interests converge. where is this majority that's pushing for actual change ends not just talking about it for campaign purposes?
bro you're replying to my comment that says there isn't a conspiracy. you can just say "I don't feel like providing sources for my claims" you don't have to try to act like you've got some moral high ground
This person claims to be Palestinian, then insisted if you voted uncommitted in the primaries you're a trump supporter. They're literally just a troll, nothing that comes out of their mouth is worth listening to. Like all liberals, all they can do is lie about the state of their party and blame everyone but themselves and conservatives for everything being fucked
You say that as if a substantial portion of the fuckery (in general -- not about the Democrats or this issue specifically) isn't in the form of procedural machinations to stop things from coming up for a vote in the first place.
You say that as if it's not exactly what's kept happening. None of what's happening is new, just how often it keeps happening because Republicans have been taken over by the obstruction caucus completely.
Why are you so insistent on blaming the democrats for what the Republicans (and leftover Liebercrats) are doing to stop them from achieving anything?
The passivity of regular folks is what allows fake grassroots interests to dominate the conversation on the Democratic side. Progressive people exist in the Democratic party, they aren't all Feinsteins. It's time to get the butts of people who are trying to enact change into seats of power, and let the ones who don't retire.
"let them retire"? Biden will never step down. Trump will never stop trying to be dictator. SCOTUS judges rule for life. Nobody with that level of power voluntarily retires. They need to be forced out of office. "let them retire" is the definition of passivity. Even if this is just about democrats, they're no less power hungry than republicans. No Democrat in a position of power would voluntarily retire unless they got caught in a big enough scandal, and even then probably not
The minimum wage was last raised by a Dem House, Senate, and President, all of which were arguably less progressive than the current incarnations. Why wouldn't they do it again if they had the votes?
