this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024
818 points (99.3% liked)

politics

19107 readers
4037 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.
  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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] m3t00@lemmy.world 1 points 1 minute ago

tax them until they learn to mind their own business

[–] kelargo@lemmy.world 26 points 1 hour ago (1 children)
[–] LordGimp@lemm.ee 9 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

Anyone with over 10 million dollars in wealth should be legally classified as a dragon and anyone stealing from their hoard shall not be punishable under the law.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 points 17 minutes ago* (last edited 12 minutes ago)

Not so fun fact: The absolute richest dragons in all of fantasy, excluding Smaug, only have a net worth of several hundred million dollars. A Red Elder Wyrm will have, on average, around 2.5-3 million gold pieces of wealth, with an absolute maximum of 5 million gold pieces. That means that the absolute greediest, and richest, type of dragon, by far, only has between 100,000 to 500,000 oz worth of gold.

Smaug being the absolute outlier because he had somewhere between 5 to 10 billion dollars worth of gold.

Now if you are wondering why I'm making a big deal about this, it is because 500,000 oz of gold is only worth about 1.1 billion US dollars. But that is the absolute outlier of the greediest type of dragon that there is. Still only looking at Chaotic Evil Red Elder Wyrms, the average would only be about 3.5 million gold pieces, or a mere 350,000 oz of gold. That's only about $600,000,000 and that is just the most average of the absolute greediest manefestations of greed that our limited minds could imagine. Most dragons would be absolutely fine with between $1,000,000 to $10,000,000. The literal manefestations of greed don't need more than $10,000,000 according to every treasure table.

Those people that have more than 100 million dollars have already passed the greed alignment chart into Chaotic Evil. They are damn near caricatures of dragons at this point.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 9 points 1 hour ago

Free press in the USA? LOL, it becomes more and more difficult every time a US oligarch buys a news outlet.

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 88 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Rep. Ted Lieu, a Democrat from California, in his own tweet on the news wrote, “The first step towards fascism is when the free press cowers in fear.”

I don't know if this is the free press cowering, or the free press being bought out by rich people. Either way, it's some bullshit.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 27 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Private ownership of a news outlet breaks every definition of "free" in "free press".

A "free press" no longer exists.

[–] Microw@lemm.ee 9 points 2 hours ago

Eh.. no? Most free press is privately owned. Just not by billionaires who influence the content.

[–] Hugin@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

So government owned news is better?

[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 15 points 3 hours ago

When the billionaires who own the media and the highest level of government are in bed together so long as the government continues to tailor it's policies to ensure that the wealthy stay wealthy, then the line is so blurred it might as well not exist.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Maybe non-profit would be best. Incentives to encourage good journalism, but not trying to raise the bottom line every year, chopping costs and spamming mass amounts of AI garbage because I'd bet 100 shitty articles is worth more than 1 good article for their bottom line.

Easy access links to the journalists other works, peer reviews from other non-profit and about me profiles can also help people discern bias.

I'm no expert though, so I'm sure someone has tried it and found making money is better for their paychecks

[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

What if it already exists, but you, like many others, don't read it and instead continue to passively consume the very media you're complaining about? Making better journalism doesn't mean multiple generations of people hooked on social-media-feed dopamine hits will read it.

[–] kofe@lemmy.world 1 points 48 minutes ago

I'm subbed to my local NPR's daily top news stories. Highly recommend folks in the US look to see if their local station has a similar program or find the closest one.

[–] mynameisigglepiggle@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

Free press is your uncle's Facebook rants

[–] bzarb8ni@lemm.ee 62 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

“The most consequential election in our country, a choice between Fascism and Democracy, and you sit out? Cowards. Unethical, fearful cowards,” wrote one reader.

Haha, yep.

[–] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Honestly don’t know what’s worse. People who don’t vote or people who vote 3rd party in protest.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 1 points 18 minutes ago

You are worse than both, because you're insulting them which in turn undermines your own goals.

[–] Sarmyth@lemmy.world 6 points 2 hours ago

Oh Jeffrey.... that's not how you're aupposed to run a newspaper.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 10 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

NGL, I had to reread the headline because my brain got too excited.

this sounds better

[–] robotech@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 hours ago

Sigh

Canceled my friday.

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

Where are the conspiracy theorists when there is actually something going on? I guess they stand back and stand by...

[–] ravhall@discuss.online 67 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Oh man the first 3 words got me excited.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 58 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Sigh.

Canceled my subscription.

[–] BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world 12 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Just spoke to my parents. Uninterrupted subscribers since '73.

I called them right after canceling my own subscription and they'd already canceled theirs.

I hope Bezos is happy losing 51-year patrons of his paper.

[–] TheOctonaut@mander.xyz 1 points 30 minutes ago

Look, that's honestly quite sad and very telling of the way things are, but I audibly snorted at the idea of Jeff Bezos noticing his income slightly lower this week, panicking, scrambling to find The Borbendorfs' payment. A single tear wells up, but he wipes it away frantically. Never let them see. Never let them know how it hurts.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 9 points 4 hours ago

I certainly much hope he has to justify that decision to a jury and later a deity

load more comments
view more: next ›