this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
994 points (91.3% liked)

General Discussion

12084 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy.World General!

This is a community for general discussion where you can get your bearings in the fediverse. Discuss topics & ask questions that don't seem to fit in any other community, or don't have an active community yet.


🪆 About Lemmy World


🧭 Finding CommunitiesFeel free to ask here or over in: [email protected]!

Also keep an eye on:

For more involved tools to find communities to join: check out Lemmyverse!


💬 Additional Discussion Focused Communities:


Rules

Remember, Lemmy World rules also apply here.0. See: Rules for Users.

  1. No bigotry: including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘silly’ questions. The world won’t be made better by dismissive comments to others on Lemmy.
  4. Link posts should include some context/opinion in the body text when the title is unaltered, or be titled to encourage discussion.
  5. Posts concerning other instances' activity/decisions are better suited to [email protected] or [email protected] communities.
  6. No Ads/Spamming.
  7. No NSFW content.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I like almost all of this, but I disagree with merging the Senate and House as well as a VAT on luxury items. We already have tax on basically every transaction and the burden is on the consumer, that needs to change. What should happen is that all taxes on food items currently should be removed. I believe the separation of Senate and House, while burdensome and inefficient at times, really does an essential good for American society. We would fare much better if we had term limits and more than two (essentially one) political party.

Edit: I want to continue with strickening the UBI from this list as well in exchange for significanly improving social services to make sure that everyone is guaranteed food, housing, medical, and security. I get that income is important and some people cant work, but inflation is real and that money has to come from somewhere not just the ether. It would be better to create/improve upon existing social safety nets to make sure everyone can contribute to society in some way rather than just giving everyone money for nothing.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm wondering who defines "luxury items". I'd currently put a trip to the dentist and a car with under 120k miles in the luxury category.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Term limits on Supreme Court and Senators/Reps.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Elected officials already have term limits, they're elections. I think that if a representative keeps getting put back up there by their constituents, less turnover might be more efficient, bringing along experience.

My opinion on this did a 180 the year Trump was elected. I suddenly value experience.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Out of these, unfortunately the only one that even has a chance of being realized is "IRS does taxes for everyone", and even that is more like "IRS provides official avenue to not have to pay a tax prep service"

The rest of these won't happen without a revolution, because the people with the power to make these things happen all directly benefit from them.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see even one or two things on this list become reality. Any two would make a ton of difference for a lot of people. But capitalism doesn't like it when you benefit the average Joe, and capitalism always wins here.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I will take 1 of those, watered down and neutered, and it would still make more sense than the landfill fire we live in right now.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Something something.. gerrymandering

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Lots of good stuff here, and I agree with others to keep the senate. Abolish the filibuster!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Depends on what time-scale. Sweeping changes all in one go would be asking a lot, and none of these are minor changes on their own, either.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

RCV first. After that, everything gets easier.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Roleplaying as Decronym bot for a moment:

Acronyms, initialisms, and other phrases seen in this thread:

Shortform Likely Meaning
VAT Value-Added Tax
IRS Internal Revenue Service
UBI Universal Basic Income
CPI Consumer Price Index
GDP Gross Domestic Product
FPTP/FPP voting First-Past-The-Post, or First-Past-Post voting
STAR voting Score Then Automatic Runoff voting
RCV Ranked Choice Voting
IRV Instant-Runoff Voting
STV Single-Transferable Vote
AV Approval Voting
321/3-2-1 voting 3 Semifinalists, 2 finalists, 1 winner via rating candidates
MMP Mixed-Member Proportional (Representation)
PAC Political Action Committee
CCC Civilian Conservation Corp
EC Electoral College
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
EU European Union
US United States
SCOTUS Supreme Court of the United States
RMV Registry of Motor Vehicles
IIRC If I Remember Correctly
TF The Fuck
UBU Universal Basic UwU
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Any time a budget is not passed on time, House, Senate and Presidential/VP salaries are cut to minimum wage until a new budget takes effect.

(I say "cut to minimum wage" because unfortunately the Constitution has been interpreted as dictating that their pay never be interrupted. It does not, however, specify how much they have to be paid.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

And another one: push cities (by carrot and sticks, financial incentives and penalties) to change their layouts and designs to be humans first, 15 minute cities, whatever you want to call them. Pedestrian areas and cycling infrastructure over cars, mixed use building areas, let's get rid of the suburb rot. It makes it that people don't need a car and if you don't need a car, why have an expensive piece of crap that costs a fortune to use and maintain? Cars will still be allowed, because of course. It's just that priorities have to change. People first, cyclists first. Cities will become more quiet, people will walk and cycle more, they'll be outside more, healthier, happier, safer, richer, safer.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

No more first past the post elections and so break the duopoly

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Soapbox: You there! Are you tired of getting sand kicked in your face? I ask you: why does the US have public debt without public equity?

Public funding, subsidy, stimulus, and infrastructural spending should purchase public equity that can only be bought back from the public via surplus taxes. We don’t have to call it socialism. It can be capitalism proper. But it’s the people’s capital and labor being lent, interest-free. They should expect a return. Fair is fair.

It’s simpler and stronger than labor unions. There’s no collective bargaining for temporary compensation, no dues, no pickets, no fuss. The pension is paid from the start by public endowment as a matter of course, eliminating the underlying financial insecurity employers exploit. The free market is more free when poverty can’t dictate your fee.

And besides securing the future for so many people, it would change the way citizens see themselves and the world around them, the stake they have in their governance and economy, and would certainly reframe public discourse.

  1. National healthcare is clearly overdue vertical integration that would curtail inefficiencies and improve outcomes.
  2. Entitlements like UBI could then be ordinary financial vehicles, annuities of the ever-expanding public trust.
  3. National debt would become leverage for a better future rather than a burdensome inheritance.
  4. Conservative rhetoric would sound hopelessly plebeian against an owner-proletariat. Whining about unfair government handouts has no place where everyone is granted the same share of public dividends.
  5. Many large private interests that have historically gobbled up public funds would quickly see the public become majority shareholders, effectively nationalizing many industries that should have been long ago. In particular, many nonprofits would coalesce into the bonafide public works they should have been all along.
  6. It even allows the good intent of inheritance without compounding generational inequality, and your safety net is not contingent upon means testing or number of years working. Were you just born? Welcome. You’re covered.

Public equity unlocks the logical, humane, and sustainable version of capitalism in which every worker is vested and shares both the means of production and the value they produce.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The 50k and under untaxed I disagree with. It sets up for a possible scenario where those who are taxed get priority in policy. If you are able to be a productive member of society, you should pay taxes to support that society, and the infrastructure it provides.

Most of the others in the list I agree with or don't know enough about the case to comment

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Way way way better than the first one!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Why do you want more than 435 reps? How does that benefit anyone? They're doled out in proportion of population.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Ranked Choice Voting? 100% approve.

Get rid of the EC entirely. The popular vote would work quite a bit better as a means of ensuring power is exercised with the consent of the governed.

Scotus and congress both desperately need oversight that is different from 'we oversee ourselves and find we did nothing wrong' when obvs. that doesn't work too well

Tax prep companies... I wish them a prompt and thorough viking funeral.

Fun fact about corporate power at the time of the framers: the colonists felt first-hand the abuse of being effectively governed by crown corporations and shortly after the founding of the USA, corporations were drastically limited in what they could do- for example, they could not engage in politics, they could not own other corporations, could not engage in activities not strictly related to their charters, had charters of finite span, and their charters could be revoked for any violations. If corporations are going to be people today, it's about damned time we started charging them with crimes when they commit crimes- and yank their charters if they re-offend.

One thing worth questioning: do we really need representative districts? Why not have at-large representatives on a per-state basis, with seats allocated to states/apportioned via census? It would be pretty hard to gerrymander an at-large system, I think

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I see the value in an odd number of branches. That’s the only one that I don’t support. Can’t have two branches fight. We need an odd number for a tie breaker.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

If you could achieve 1 thing on this list you could do all of them.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›