World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
He's not a part of both sides.
Fuck everyone who voted for joe and hillary in the primaries.
I like Sanders because he isn't just another d/r. He speaks his mind, and I believe he believes in what he says. I would vote for him out of principle.
That said, his ideas are idiotic for the most part, and he has no clue how the economy works.If elected the country would quickly become a wasteland if his ideas were implemented but I would feel decent voting for him at least.
Oh look, the taxes are theft guy (who will vote for Trump) is here to say how little someone else knows about economics.
I'm sure all that wealth will start to trickle down any minute now though.
Funny, I don't remember ever saying taxes are theft by default. What I have said is the tax system should be fair.
Bernie has suggested this, such as taxing wealth, which is unconstitutional. He didn't propose an amendment; he just wanted to tax wealth. He didn't even realize that it was against the Constitution. He also said it's unfair that Elon didn't pay more in income tax when he made a dollar that year. He couldn't even be bothered to look up Elon's income.
He says things so his plebes will clap without realizing it isn't an intelligent or viable solution.
By reducing the amount that the people who benefit most (by orders of magnitude) from our society pay into it. Yeah. That sure sounds fair to me.
What an intelligent and viable solution!
I have never suggested that. Nice Strawman you built there!
You say that all the time.
Nice lie.
The rich already pay more than their fair taxes. If you have a cite to show otherwise, I would love to see it.
https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/rich-pay-their-fair-share-of-taxes/
As this chart shows, The top 1% pay 40% of all taxes but only bring in 20% of the income. That is paying their fair share.
The top 5% pay 20% of the taxes but only bring in 15% of the income.
So yes, I deserve a tax cut, and most likely, you deserve a tax increase.
Wait, I thought you never said that?
That paper ignores people's capacity to pay.
Even the Bible recognizes that a poor widow's mite is a bigger ask than a wealthy person's contribution of a larger portion of their income. That was written two thousand years ago, but somehow conservatives still haven't come to the same obvious conclusion.
Our society is specifically set up to funnel money to oligarchs, and then they cry about having to contribute to that system? Boo fucking hoo.
Why are you quoting the bible? The bible also says I shouldn't eat shellfish. Leave your sky God out of the discussion.
People need to be responsible for their finances. The answer isn't to make other people pay your way in life. As California and New York learned, people will leave and their budgets are wrecked.
If you actually read what I wrote you'd understand my point.
Nothing you said to me is a response to my post.
Try again.
Your peacocking value judgement is adorable, but irrelevant.
No, it answers what you said but you choose to think otherwise.
I will make it simple for you.
Elon typically earns 1 dollar per year.
How much should he pay in taxes on that 1 dollar?
Your point is invalid. High-income earners already pay more in taxes, not only as a percentage but also as a total of their income.
You don't see the irony in wanting others to pay more but not wanting to pay more yourself.
And I'll add back in the context that you're desperate to jettison.
Let's look at a situation that resembles the real world:
Elon Musk earns about $1.5 billion dollars/year with an estimated net worth of about $150 billion.
The median American income is about $70k/year with an estimated net worth of $193k
Musk should be taxed at 90% like we did for top earners during the biggest economic expansion in our nation's history.
And that wasn't my point; you're trying to change the argument because you know you're wrong.
I would love for you to point out where I said I wouldn't be willing to pay more in taxes. This accusation is a confession, it seems.
False. Elon does not earn $1.5 billion a year. That is not his income. His net worth has nothing to do with his income.
That is also false. Income was taxed at 90%, not wealth. We have never taxed wealth because it is unconstitutional. Also, the tax code was very different back then, and only 1 person ever paid that level of tax. People had many more deductions than they do now.
How much more do you think your tax bracket should pay to keep the current rates for all the other brackets?
I'm done pretending you're a serious person arguing seriously.
Anyone can say "nuh-uh."
I also never said wealth was taxed. I said his income should be taxed (in response to your question).
You're misrepresenting my argument at every step like you always do. Your sealion question at the end is irrelevant; you have no idea how much I earn, and I'm not here to impress Internet strangers like you seem to be. Bet you're real close to that billion though if you keep grinding!
Bet it burns you up that you can't ban me from here.
Then, be more clear. Don't blame me because you can't articulate your thoughts well. You are talking about wealth but claim you are not talking about wealth. Elon does not earn $1.5 billion per year. That is factually inaccurate.
"buy borrow die" is totally income, dude. It's just not taxed, and step-up basis makes it worse.
The net worth is used to fund everyday expenses, it is effectively income.
If Bernie wasn't so dumb, that is where he would focus his angst. I suspect few people really understand that is how Elon supports himself through loans and not income.
One day, those loans have to be called, but until then, there is no income.
I wouldn't be surprised if those loans are repaid without realizing the gain of the collateral. Step-up basis is a huge tax dodge, and tax dodge is theft from all the people who would benefit from the things those taxes could pay for.
The way the rich use loans as income is unfair. Therefore the rich do not pay their fair share.
It would be interesting to see how many of the rich are using loans to bypass taxes.
I have only heard of a few cases dealing with tech wealthy people who are paid mainly in stock.
I do think it is an issue and something should be done about it.
It is a fallout from being a public company and we can regulate that much easier.
I think our whole tax system needs to be burned down and replaced.
If you agree the system is broken I encourage you to reconsider your prior statements about the rich not paying their fair share.
Rich people do a variety of shady stuff and keep it hidden (Panama papers), I wouldn't trust your lack of data points to mean it isn't a pervasive problem.
That’s moving the goalpost.
The pay their fair share of income tax.
The issue is there is a way to avoid income.
That’s the problem we need to solve. Technically they’re taking on debt to avoid taxes. Sounds reasonable but those are loans we couldn’t get. It’s just a tax avoidance system.
Yeah. Don't listen to this guy.
Can you show otherwise?
It really boils down to this: why would you go to bat for people who have more than you? They only get more by taking in more than they put out. This is called "maximizing profit."
At every turn, the people you're defending do not say "Neuromancer pays his fair share of x." They always look for ways to get you to pay the absolute most that you are willing and able.
It does not make sense for people like you to say millionaires "pay their fair share" when they only become wealthy due to exploitation of everyone else who has to work for a living.
The fact this needs to be explained to you really shows how unaware you are of the world you live in. If you're over the age of 18 and you still haven't figured these basic facts out, that means you're being taken advantage of left and right without even realizing it.
"A fool and his money are soon parted."
I don't buy that at all. Going to work is not being exploited. I go to work every day, and I am not exploited. I am paid fairly for the work I do.
That's the thing. He knows how the economy 'works', it's just that it works for the ruling class and not for everyone else.
Guess what? The only way to reduce the disparity in wealth is to reduce the disparity in wealth. This means those who have too much will get angry because they have less so others can have more.
No, Bernie has shown time and time again that he doesn't understand how anything works.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2022/02/17/senator-bernie-sanders-doesnt-understand-the-oil-industry-or-inflation/?sh=1070703e2604
https://reason.com/2018/08/09/the-economic-ignorance-of-bernie-sanders/
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bernie-sanders-biggest-weakness-is-that-he-doesnt-understand-economics-2015-11-15
Can you find anyone that says Bernie understands economics?
Sorry, I've already replied to you explaining basic economics.
You're the one who doesn't understand, and linking sensationalist blogs doesn't help your credibility one iota.
You didn't cite anything. When called out, you make a personal attack?