this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2026
673 points (99.1% liked)

politics

29594 readers
2265 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A pair of progressive Democrats unveiled a bill on Tuesday that would raise the federal minimum wage to $25 per hour, considered the bare minimum a single adult needs to meet the cost of living in much of the US.

The Living Wage For All Act is the first bill to be introduced by the newly sworn-in Rep. Analilia Mejía (D-NJ), who won a special election earlier this month after helping to lead the fight for a $15 minimum wage in her home state of New Jersey.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Darcranium@lemmy.world 59 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Would be better to lower the maximum wage

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 25 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Yeah, that's called a wealth tax or marginal tax rate. And we need that too. Only problem is that over half of America has been thoroughly brainwashed into believing that a wealth tax would "ruin the economy" because multiple conservative think tanks funded by billionaires has spent the last 4 decades propagandizing that belief into them.

[–] osanna@lemmy.vg 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

the weird thing is, if the billionaires had their wealth redistributed, it would actually BENEFIT the economy. People hoarding wealth does nothing for anyone except them.

[–] 1D10@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think people need to understand that we don't actually have to eat the rich.

[–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

I recommend combining the rich with an equal volume of leaf litter, yard waste and veggie scraps.

Keep the pile moist and aerated, and in 90 days the warm, wet mass of viscera and wastes will be transformed into a wealth of rich compost!

Of course, if you use it to grow food, you are still ultimately eating the rich. Someone has to eat them eventually.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

But what if I win the lottery!? Then I'll be affected! That's why I'm against it!

/s

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No reason it has to be only one. Both is the correct answer

I agree, there should be also a maximum wage and a medium wage

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

definitely.

pass laws that say highest paid employees can only make 10x what lowest paid employees can.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The rich don’t get paid money. Just check Jeff Bezos salary.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

That's why you tax their net worth instead of their salary.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Rich people live off equity. Make them realize gains used as loan collateral!

[–] oopsgodisdeadmybad@lemmy.zip 12 points 2 days ago

Or just stop granting loans to people with net worth over some amount. If they can afford to do whatever they're doing with their current assets, then they should sell that to make the value of the loans they "need".

Loans aren't meant to be a gamble or profitable (for the borrower) transaction. They're to access items you can't currently afford but need and are willing to pay significantly for over time.

Especially when your net assets cover the cost of the loan amount hundreds of thousands of times like "Richie's" do.

I'm sorry, but people who have never seen a balance in their life with less than 7 digits just shouldn't qualify for any loans at all, period.

And none of that signing stuff of to hidden Bank accounts and fake companies.

Tldr- if you're rich, absolutely disqualified for all loans.

[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Or cap the multiplier that upper management make compared to the lowest employees and make it harder for companies to hire contractors instead of full time employees with benefits.

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 0 points 2 days ago

Should be 1 to 1 tho