this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
1100 points (88.6% liked)
Political Humor
3310 readers
1 users here now
Post politically charged comedy here, but be respectful!
Rules
- Keep this a humor community
- No NSFW content
- No bigotry, hate speech, advocacy or incitement of violence or crime, etc
- No harassment
- Extreme or offensive content are subject to removal at the mods' discretion
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Incorrect, Vote 3rd party and make a difference.
Trump would love for you to vote 3rd party or not vote.
The Electoral College is set up to benefit conservatives and no change.
A third party in a first past the post system is a waste. You may as well not vote
Believing the MSM is see.
Here's a really simple video explaining why in a first past the post system voting for a third party is the worst thing you can do as you will only harm the larger party that you are most aligned with https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo?si=W8hd2GZCL15L6KU7
I'll check it out now.
Ok, the problem I see is that Turtle, Snake, Owl, etc. seem to be only worried about being on the "winning" side regardless if the candidate is against their values. They've also been victims of Political Propaganda (Negative ads). Each time they vote for the Lesser of Two Evils they are giving conceding a little more and more each time. Get rid of Gerrymandering and replace it with Ranked Choice Voting to eliminate the "Spoiler Effect." Vote with you conscious and not your desire to Win.
Yes, IF it is a Ranked Choice election great idea to for the party you most align with. If it's a first past the post election, it's really bad idea (unless you align most with a party that can win).
100% agree that ranked voting/proportional representation is a much better option. The problem with FPTP is you have to keep picking the lesser evil or the greater evil wins. It's a bad system, I'm lucky in a country that doesn't use FPTP
Incorrect, stop worrying about being on the winning side. Vote with your values. Then if it all burns down you can take solace in the fact you voted correctly according to you. Help educate others on voting for a candidate who will get Government out of your house and wallet, Libertarian candidate. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. The only way out is to vote differently. Get enough people to vote differently and change will come. Voters have been brainwashed into thinking there are only two options.
Libertarian?! Good luck with that. You know what, go ahead. Vote for a third party, I just not sure how you'll get to a polling station without using the public funded road system, oh well
Nice, I love the "Who will build the roads?" argument.
So who will build the roads? Are all the libertarians going to form a collective? How would this work?
People will pay for what they want and I'm not under the assumption that we will ever have zero taxes for public needs. I believe we need to reel in Governmental power and eliminate a lot of the "government funded" programs.
So you do want government, or do you want a system where every single road is tolled? How would this work? Do you want a tracker in your car that monitors how far you drive so you can be billed appropriately or toll boths every mile? Are you off the opinion that would somehow be more efficient?
I think we should have a very limited Government with transparency and accountability of where our money goes. I think we should have a flat tax far less than what we're are paying now.
A flat tax less than the current level? So the consolation of wealth, no social supports, restriction of education to those who are descendants of the wealthy, and degraded public service.
Transparency as accountability are 100% how it should be. I believe you are American so are you asking for this? https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/datasets/monthly-treasury-statement/outlays-of-the-u-s-government
People will pay for social supports if they feel inclined to do so. I also think that there would be less need for social supports if people could keep more of their own money. Restriction of education? Have you seen what is being "taught" in schools nowadays? Plus, the expense of higher education is inflated due to Governmental interference also. Public Services would be dictated by the people and what they want to support, rather than an inefficient Government run system.
The fiscal statement has a lot of "other" categories along with many things the Government shouldn't be involved in anyway.
Social supports are there to help the person that can't pay for it. Do you not understand that or do you really lack empathy that much?
Please clarify what you mean by "taught". I'm genuinely interested to see if you have an real complaints.
47,884 individual spending breakdown I linked to (if you even bothered to download the file) and your response is there are some "other" classification in there and I don't agree with that... If you are capable of any sell reflection take a good hard look at yourself. You really need to reassess your worldview.
Wow, I feel that this is getting personal. All I'm saying is that if people were not taxed roughly 40% of their income, there would be less of a need to look to Government for solutions. The Government is highly inefficient at everything it does and misappropriates our tax dollars, they are not helping anyone but themselves.
This is such an idiotic take. First of all almost no one is paying 40% Do you not understand marginal tax rates? A single person in NY earning 100k has an effective rate of 31%. They would have to be earning at least 350k to hit 40%.
Government provision is the only efficient way to allocate common goods. You only see real inefficiency when a common good is privatised. Look at the absolute shit show that is the US health care system.
@DrZoidbergYes comes out swinging with insults first. Isn't the Healthcare system a victim of Governmental regulation?
The US healthcare system is a victim of a lack of government regulation. An essential service cannot be effectively be privatised because no matter how ineffective or expensive people have no choice but to use it. Why do you think every EU country has a higher life expectancy than the US? Could it be an effective government...
You still haven't clarified what you meant by "taught" in your previous comment, you still haven't clarified what the issue is with the very clear breakdown of government spending.
Libertarianism is an utterly stupid belief. It doesn't stand up to the most basic critical examination. You don't respond with any facts because you can't.
If you are worried about coming out swinging with insults try countering that with actually addressing questions. I know you won't.
I don't know what you mean by this. MSM?
Main Stream Media.