109
submitted 11 months ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/news@lemmy.world
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] SamsonSeinfelder@feddit.de 64 points 11 months ago

People go hungry so Multi-Millionaires can strive. News at 11.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.world 39 points 11 months ago

And still Congress didn't pass a wealth tax, or close at least some tax loopholes only the rich can access.

It's the same damn thing in Canada as well. And it sucks.

Unless gov'ts get off their asses and DO the things that need to be done, revolution will come ... and they won't like the outcome at all.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 23 points 11 months ago

No one will like the outcome. Revolution almost never results in a better living standard in the lifetime of those involved.

That's not to say it's the worst course of action, just recognizing the down sides.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

You're right ofc. But almost every radical change in the world has come from revolution, because rich powerful people don't listen to, or even see, the struggles the people face.

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

People who love power don't give it up willingly.

[-] cmbabul@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I’m convinced the only reason one hasn’t already started is because revolutions, while often very necessary agents of change and herald a lot of good for the future, are both risky and dangerous for everyone involved and in the back of our heads keep hoping things will change for the better without violence. Unfortunately it’s become increasingly and maddeningly obvious that will not ever happen.

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago

It hasn't happened because the people in power have learned the lessons of history and have been manipulating the masses for a very long time.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago

Revolutions are like wildfires: The longer you put one off the more destructive it is when it finally does come.

[-] protist@mander.xyz 9 points 11 months ago

The US Congress will never pass a wealth tax without a Democratic majority in both chambers, and enough of a buffer to make Senators like Manchin and Sinema not matter

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

Wealth taxes have often been ineffective in other countries where they've been tried, since they're very hard and expensive to administer. Something like a land value tax is much much simpler to collect and produces significantly better economic incentives. Wealth taxes incentivize you to offshore as many assets as possible, while land value takes incentivize you to use land as productively as possible since you can't exactly hide a chunk of real estate in Switzerland.

That aside though, any kind of asset-based tax is constitutionally questionable and would absolutely be litigated to the Supreme Court, where I wouldn't exactly want to place any bets on that outcome right now.

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 37 points 11 months ago

But with rent that’s more than doubled...

We really need politicians to start paying more attention to the housing crisis. Housing costs have been such a massive squeeze on literally everyone, and it's an incredibly stupidly self-inflicted wound because for the last 50 years we collectively decided that housing should be a primary investment asset for all Americans instead of a place to live, and fundamentally, you cannot have housing both be a good investment and have it be cheap.

Literally just build more housing. Public housing, subsidized housing, private market rate, yuppie condos, literally anything.

https://usafacts.org/articles/population-growth-has-outpaced-home-construction-for-20-years/

In the last 20 years, we build around a million single-family homes. In that same time period, the population increased by 3 million. There is no universe in which this happens and housing doesn't become significantly more expensive.

[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

Zoning restrictions is a huge cause of housing shortages and higher infrastructure costs.

[-] EatYouWell@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Biden is giving developers a bunch of money to convert vacant business properties into housing, so it's a start.

[-] Winter8593@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

A band aid solution to the problem, in my opinion, but I agree it's a start.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 25 points 11 months ago

Price gouging. Is it price gouging?

reads article

It’s price gouging.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 10 points 11 months ago

Remember the food lines when Trump was President? I do

[-] ares35@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago

the lines at the food pantry every week went from a few people and 5 minutes to get through to 50-60+ and 60-90 minutes during that time.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 4 points 11 months ago

We used to have a strategic food supply in the US in case other countries fell into famine. Or, if we needed it ourselves. No longer. I guess Congress felt it was too expensive to keep.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

Don't tell me they got rid of the strategic cheese reserve!

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The rice was a big hit. No better foreign relations than giving a big ol bag of rice to a starving family. Stars and stripes printed on the outside.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 9 points 11 months ago

These people need to take a look at The Statistics™ so they understand that the economy is actually very good while their stomachs rumble

[-] xc2215x@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Food prices being higher.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee -3 points 11 months ago

monthly grocery bill that now tops $2,400 for her family of seven

I’m not saying the article is wrong, but if you have seven children, you did this to yourself

[-] cybervseas@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago

With so many states cutting off access to abortion, family planning is getting even more difficult.

[-] protist@mander.xyz 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

A family of 7 implies ~~five~~ six children

Edit: It says her husband was deported to Mexico and she's now a single mom

[-] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

So it said "family of seven", which probably means 5 children and 2 adults, or just as likely, 4 children, 2 adults and 1 elderly parent.

The really weird thing about this is that even without making any sort of moral judgement, the numbers still don't add up. For example, I have a family of 6 (and only 2 of those are my kids), and our grocery bill is between $150 and $200 a week (about $700 a month). How do you get to $2400 a month? What are you feeding them? Are you ordering takeout ever day? Because that would be stupid.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

Right. $2400 buys a lot of raw ingredients. Get a Costco membership ffs!!

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

If you read the article it states that her husband was deported back to Mexico, so it's her and 6 kids.

You also don't know if she lives in a food desert where a single grocery store could charge whatever prices it wants because there's no competition.

this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
109 points (95.8% liked)

News

23259 readers
3009 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS