alvvayson @ alvvayson @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

0

Comments

308

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yeah, the smell is obnoxious. I'm not surprised at all. Seems like a "water is wet" finding.

Damn, then it's even worse than I thought.

I don't think you understand how politics and elections work.

If people on the flanks give their voting power to "Blue (or Red) no matter who", you end up with the Clintons and Bushes of the world. Parties have no incentive to actually do anything for their flanks.

When people on the flanks leverage their voting power effectively, you get MAGA and Justice Democrats.

Anyway, hope you learned something today. Otherwise, hope you have a nice day.

I am fully aware of that.

But in the German context, I am not sure if it is effective.

Perhaps someone can make a nice rhyme against genocide.

"Germany sides against genocide", or something. Maybe something that rhymes in German.

Supporters of Bush and Bowman now face a strange incentive.

If they vote for Latimer and Bell, they will only embolden AIPAC and corporate America to use the same playbook in the districts of other progressive Democrats. And they will have them as incumbents in 2026.

If they do a protest vote (third party, write-in or stay home), that sends a clear message, but also gives the Republicans a +1.

On the face it, it would suck if the Republicans win their district, but also consider that a Republican win will (a) ensure Democrats field a progressive in 2026 and (b) show both Democrats and Republicans that the progressive vote is powerful and can be courted.

So it might actually be a good strategy. Look at 2016. Yeah, four years of Trump sucked, but it also made Democrats realize they had to court their progressive win. Corporate Hilary just couldn't win without them.

Knowing this, there is also a Dark Brandon, scorched earth, move available: Vote directly for the Republican and give them a +2.

This will show progressives know how to yield their voting power and that they should be taken seriously as a group.

You have to look at the bigger picture, not the short term issue.

If progressives want to be taken seriously, and if Americans want AIPAC out of politics, then there have to be consequences.

If Latimer and Bell hold on to the seat, corporate and AIPAC Democrats only learn that they can take progressives for granted.

If they lose their seat, they learn that they need progressive support to win.

Yeah, two years of a republican rep will suck. But it's only two years.

If the Democratic congressional candidate underperforms the Democratic presidential candidate, it definitely sends a signal.

Obviously, it only "sends a signal" if progressives say what they're gonna do.

But it has a double whammy: Dems get a 2 vote difference when you switch.

Agreed, but also: if I were in their district (Bush or Bowman), I might even consider voting Republican out of spite.

Yes, AIPAC is to blame, but Democrats also need to grow a spine against AIPAC. They can't just take progressive voters for granted.

Free speech in Germany is dead.

That said, if I were in Germany, I would use a different phrase. Maybe "stop the genocide in Gaza, ceasefire now".

That would just be way more effective in actually rallying support.

But I'm not in Germany, so Free Palestine, from the river to the sea.

For one, you can't transfer a 401K to your kids.

You have to first cash it out, pay income tax and then you can transfer what remains.

Yep, but nowadays they are losing popularity. I don't even know if you can still find them.

Then you'll need to educate yourself beyond what the government tells you.

Look up the ProPublica leaks. Someone is serving a very long jail time for leaking that out. It clearly shows how billionaires have very low taxable income, probably lower than yours.

To then say that you are upper class and Jeff Bezos is middle class is... Absurd.

The top 10% of income is not upper class. The error that people make, including you, is to focus on income.

People like Elon Musk have incomes smaller than $100K.

Upper class are the people who do not need to work and who live off of capital.

We need to shift our focus on wealth equality.

Look, the economy needs capital. If we want to be less dependent on the capital of rich people, then middle class people need to take over that role.

The people making $100-300K per year are key, because they can provide an alternative source of capital if their tax burden is lowered.

The people making $50K will not be able to provide large amounts of capital.

Yes, I fully agree.

So we need to find the right messaging.

I don't know about Germany, but here in the Netherlands most people identify as middle class.

So "stop taxing the middle class" and "let the billionaires pay more" is a message that should resonate.

I'm optimistic and I believe we will get there. The level of equality we have today would be unfathomable for somebody living before 1945.

Which is why the tax system needs to be reformed.

The political right actually has one good point that we on the left don't always appreciate: taxes on middle class people should be lower.

Specifically, very liberal tax exemptions on things like 401Ks, including the ability to transfer wealth across generations.

Combine that with higher taxes on the wealthy, and it will be possible to shift power to the middle class.

Consider the total market cap of the S&P 500, rounded up it's about 50 trillion. Divide that among 130 million households and each household should own about $400K in stock on average.

Full equality is neither achievable nor desired by most people, so a good scheme would be to let every household hold up to $1M in wealth, tax exempt.

And then progressively tax everything above that.

And even if they didn't care about Gaza, do Americans really want a foreign country to have so much influence on their elections and politicians?

Americans who care about America should want to get rid of AIPAC.

As a European, I am appalled that I didn't get to vote for Harris.

Gotta share the love man.

Can't save the cultists, yes, but Independents do care.

And even though Indies are a minority, they are still the ones who decide the election outcome in every swing state.

So, good strategy by the Dems.

Why doesn't the USA or Europe just accept the Jews and let the Palestinians have the land?

Jordan especially has a ton of Palestinians. More than half of Palestinians already live outside of Palestine.

Your question actually boils down to, why don't they take all the Palestinians so Israel can have the land?

And the answer is: they don't want to be complicit in ethnic cleansing.

Totally with you here.

How did I end up on a timeline where I am vibing with Erdogan.