this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
265 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19118 readers
2865 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 politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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 a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.

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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 74 points 1 month ago (3 children)

This is getting weird.

We have billionaires voicing their opinions on the presidential race in a way that hasn't happened before.

This is important to pay attention to. The reason being is it's a big club we aren't in.

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 43 points 1 month ago (2 children)

SuperPACS have gotta go and the us contribution limit should be lowered to $100 for every candidate for every year.

[–] joel_feila@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

No it should be zeroa and all elections publicly funded

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Why not move to publicly funded elections?

[–] Tyfud@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I assume because it's easier to take small steps in cases like this

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

I prefer to talk about what the ideal solution might be and go from there. Incremantalism doesn't work when the opposing side wants to burn everything to the ground.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 24 points 1 month ago

I mean, the only real difference is that Musk is an idiot and is doing it brazenly. Every election since Citizen's United has been 100% about money, and it's not like it was a non-factor before that.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They've never been this rich before.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's kinda debatable.

Rockefeller alone accounted for as much as 3% of the US GDP at one point. That would be like 800 billion today. It's difficult to just draw a straight line of inflation on his net worth from his height to today, because the economy has fundamentally changed since then. Partially because of how fucking ruthless of a motherfucker he was.

Imagine if all cars were electric, and Tesla was ultimately the only source of electricity for everything you own. And Elon basically said if you don't vote for his guy he'll shut off the lights. And had done exactly that before.

Rockefeller, and others like him, also purchased their fair share of elected officials and if you worked for them, it was understood you voted for the guy they wanted. Or there would be consequences.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As of 2024, U.S. billionaires collectively hold 3.8% of the country's total wealth.

US billionaires now worth more than half the nation - USA Today https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2024/07/19/us-billionaires-worth-6t/74453346007/

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Imagine all that wealth being held by just one guy, and there still being a handful of others.