protect this man at all cost
this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
875 points (99.0% liked)
Political Memes
8744 readers
2875 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
You'd think they'd at least try something like:
- Pay for your neighbours' child care
- Give aways to baby mamas
- $30 minimum wage (4x national minimum)
- Pay for immigrant childcare with your tax dollar
- Defunding police and giving money to black teen mothers
- giving free handouts to lefties
It was supposed to be a joke, but just look at them.
Of course, this isn't Socio-economics, but RACISM against WHITE people!
This is horrible. The worst. *presses the vote for Zohran button harder
If I was in that position, I'd try to be right amap.
You assume Fox News viewers actively think about what they're seeing on the screen rather than emotionally reacting to what the talking heads are telling them to fear.
CNN did enough free advertising for Trump in 2016 to help him win the primary.
Never underestimate the power of "freak factor" news becoming free ads.
Reminds me of an ad (!) German conservatives (CDU) made. I don't remember all the details, but it showed the politician as he stated something like: What the social democrats want to do would make housing in Berlin affordable again, thus removing real estate from the free market.
These people are in it so deep, they think that the common man would hate that just as much as they do.
YUCK, livable wage!? Phuey, I spit in your general direction
Landlords be licking their lips for $5000 a month rents
I got news about that... Rent caps and socialized housing is on the platform too.
If only socialism was this. What a world we live in.
Making me want to move to NYC
Stop threatening me with a good time.
No, they are getting fed propaganda that these good policies are evil socialism and are therefore bad.
You're talking as if fox news viewers can think for themselves.
Fox could really point at a democrat and be like "this fucker thinks it's his job to govern well, can you believe it? Fuck him, right?!" and at least 40 percent of the viewers would be shaking their heads in angry disgust
I think the R is ripe for some socialist ideology, they spend so much time demonizing the D that they could say "we promise baby money" and people will go nuts.
Complaints from the "won't somebody please think of the children?!" crowd? Cannot be!
*clears throat in conservatism* Won't someone think of the fetuses? 😩
Ah, who am I kidding. What difference do they care to know?
As soon as it's aged out of being a fetus it's known as an "unskilled worker" and begins being taxated.
One idea I really want to see percolate into the Zeitgeist? A national wealth cap. We can have a world without billionaires. Though, they did kill the last guy who tried it.
My justification for it is simple. We do not allow people own nuclear weapons. We don't care how intelligent or moral a person is. We don't make them take a bunch of classes or earn a difficult-to-obtain license. We simply accept that no individual, however sane and moral, should have access to that level of power. It is simply too great a risk. Yet people like Bezos or Musk have so much wealth that they can, all on their own, cause a level of damage comparable to a nuclear weapon. Hell, those two have built actual privately owned machines with the explosive capability of modest nuclear devices. There is such a thing as a strategically dangerous level of wealth, where the wealth of a single individual makes them a national security risk. No one should have level wealth and power, period. The only way to obtain such power should be through democratic elections.
I would set such a cap at 1000x the median household income. That way it automatically grows with inflation, and it's a simple enough rule that it can be explained to anyone. Someone with an 8th grade education can understand what such a cap means. 1000x is not only a nice round number, but it also represents a nice break between wealth earned through working and wealth earned through labor arbitrage and hoarding. 1000x the median household income is about $80 million today. If a neurosurgeon or other members of our highest paid, most educationally-demanding fields were to work their entire life, live like a pauper, and invest every penny? They would still struggle to reach that 1000x cap. The only way to reach that level of wealth is to be born rich, to make your business arbitraging the labor of others, or to be a CEO of some sort. It's the kind of wealth that even the most frugal and well paid of workers would struggle to ever get near.
1000x the median household income. Everything beyond that is taxed at 100%. The ultra wealthy can either pay the tax, spend all their extra dollars, or get really into philanthropy. (Oh, and if you donate funds to a charity that you or your heirs control, that charity's assets counts towards the 1000x cap.) It really doesn't matter what they do with the extra money. The goal is to prevent the accumulation of strategically dangerous fortunes.
Tax the billionaires out of existence. And if they flee the country? So be it. Don't let the door hit you on your way out. And while they can leave, their wealth is largely in ownership of businesses that can't so easily be moved. The Waltons can leave the country if they want, but they can't take Walmart with them.
I have been thinking on an absolute wealth cap on income and savings. It should be for both individuals and corporations. The corporations can have their cap increased by hiring employees, based on the wage of the employee. Employees themselves have income ranks, so someone like a CEO is capped at $100,000 a year, while a waitress is at $40,000. UBI for someone who doesn't work is at $10,000 annually. This forces the economy to control inflation and price goods according to what income levels that companies want to reach. UBI can also supply generic items, shelter, and services, so that money is used solely for luxury items or lifestyle upgrades. This gives workers the ability to strike or protest, since society isn't holding their wellbeing hostage.
Also, companies can sponsor an income lotto to increase their caps, that gives individuals increased income ranks without having to work. This helps address the workers that are replaced by AI. We need that sort of mechanism for an automated society, else many people will suffer terribly.
You're suffering from what I might call liberal disease or the wonkish fallacy. If you're going to propose some policy that would radically transform society, you need to KISS. Keep it Simple Stupid. Forget the Everything Bagel Liberalism. Don't try to solve every social ill with one policy. Don't try to make it perfect. Don't add a bunch of provisos and loopholes, even if those loopholes are made with good intentions. People lose track of your goals, and they become understandably suspect that you're trying to pull a con on them with all this fine print.
That's why I propose a 1000x median household income cap. It's simple, clear, and understandable by anyone. If the basic outline of your policy cannot be understood by someone with an 8th grade education, then you are failing at writing policy.
I disagree. It IS simple, especially compared to what we have now as a society. We are so used to traditional capitalism, steeped in it for decades of our entire lives, that rules that depict a different way are strange and foreign. Also, merely raising 1,000x income by cap alone is bad, because it undoubtedly leaves room for exploitation, nor does it address it the snowball effect of capitalism.
We need a means to dictate the everyday wellbeing of people, ensure that they can obtain prosperity, and never have their wealth become a toxic substance. That means rules and engineering.
Anyhow, some slides of what I have in mind.
UNIVERSAL RANKED INCOME
Me: "if your policy isn't understandable by someone with an 8th grade education, you're doing it wrong."
You: "Here's my slide deck."
Cool. Let me ask you this: what philosophies and rules did the founding fathers set down in the founding documents for America?
Those are WAY wordier than what I put here, and they worked for a couple of centuries. Brainpower isn't the issue here, it is the ethical intent and devising rules that naturally lend themselves to be self-enforcing, that matters.
The biggest problem is, according to our current laws, investments aren't income. Thus musk and besos are likely already under that 1000x number.
You're confused. I didn't say maximum income, I said maximum wealth.
"I would set such a cap at 1000X average household income"
I don't think you understand the difference between income and wealth.
The other option is the billionaires.
Fox is using this to sigmatis him. They know both parties will not support him. Even if he wins, they will make sure his programs fail. Then they can say socialism caused all the bad shit.
I dunno, they may be trying to scream "socialism!" Thinking it's along the line of "terrorism!" Thinking people will reject that in and of itself. Hopefully New Yorkers will be like "uhhh yeah, that's what we want." There are far more workers than elite, even in New York. Best of luck to him and the people of NYC.
I believe and hope he will be their next mayor. I will not put it pass democrats or republicans to try and stop him at every turn.
Neither party wants him to succeed.
Republicans- Scary brown man Democrats- We have to hold onto power
Honestly, this is what's wrong with Dems. Straight up pussies. Very smart people but ZERO common sense.
Oh my god. Vote for him.
I can't vote for mayor of NYC, should uhh, should I get my dick out again or did we decide that didn't work?
No, no, it worked last time, I promise. 👀
If you wanna see my dick, I don't need fascism as an excuse. 😘
So fox is doing the same thing liberal media did to trump... hopefully it ends the same way.
"but hOw wiLl wE paY fOR iT?"
Besides the real answer being: return on investment,
I think the better question is how can we live like this?
I think the better question is: why does get 20 mansions while there is still 1 homeless child?
Another good question is: did anyone ask how we'd pay for the bombs dropped on Iran, or given to Israel?
And that's why Zohran is great. He answers questions like this so well that interviewers stop asking, because they'll just be teeing him up to explain his platform in simple, easily understood detail
We should all vote for him so we can watch it fail. Please for the love of God
I'm not a resident, but I hope for the love of humanity that he wins.
view more: next ›