this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2026
242 points (96.2% liked)

politics

31071 readers
3067 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

President Trump got in the face of ABC’s Rachel Scott after she asked him a question about the rationale behind his national midterm voter bribe.

“Mr. President, on the checks: The U.S. is still $40 trillion in debt. If your economic policies are working, why do you need an incentive for people to turn out to vote?” she asked Thursday night.

...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Whirling_Ashandarei@lemmy.world 6 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Remember that enshittify is just a colloquialism for how capitalism works.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Enh. I disagree, but acknowledge it’s arguable. It sucks either way!

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I'd say how it was supposed to work vs how its actually worked. One is a work of fiction on the level of twilight, the other is historically important. Capitalism can't control or regulate itself. Not as long as people are in control.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

It can, but it doesn’t. Whether that’s because people-are-evil or not is a different discussion. Strong regulation, judiciously applied, makes a fair market better.

Of course money is the root of all evil, but then we like stuff.

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

No disrespect. If it "can" when did it ever? If never, then can it really?

The one and only time we ever came close in the United States was around the new deal. But that was forced on the capitalist. And they spent the next hundred years dismantling it again.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The 70s had some good progrss in several areas. Conservative/republican/fascist assholes focused on media right after that and that’s why it’s all been going to shit, but if we could shake off this fascist cult and elect a decent government they could get back on track.

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 1 points 1 hour ago

This isn't a republican / Democrat thing. In fact if the government is involved it's not an instance. If it's not capitalists regulating themselves and making themselves more competitive and less shitty. It doesn't count.

And it's easy to understand why this wouldn't work. Also why we had so much legislation against price fixing which is no longer enforced. Put it this way. The base mechanism on how capitalism is supposed to be self-regulating and improving. Is competition. But if you and your competitors actually compete. Your profit margins will always be minimal. Almost nonexistent. However if you and your competitors agree not to compete. You can simply multiply your margins by many times with no extra effort. Thus outside government pressure you have a fiduciary duty to the business owners not to compete. Competition is only in the consumers favor. Never the business owner.