If they do that will you protect them from the wrath of the US war machine? Exactly.

What? You’re not making any sense.

there’s simply 0% chance that any family anywhere in this country is living in poverty with that kind of income.

The original Substack addresses this point, but the short of it is: Most income gains from 35k to 100k are cancelled out by a loss of government benefits, so there’s a lot less difference between these than you’d expect. You only start making real gains starting from 100k. Now a family making 100k will have expendable income that’s true, but the vast majority of its income will still go towards essentials so it’s still one emergency away from insolvency.

Edit: This means that a family with two incomes and two young children making 50k is getting a market price equivalent of 50k in government benefits, so we can crudely approximate families straddling the poverty line as making 100k net. In that case the difference between the effective official poverty line and the proposed poverty line is a large but realistic 40%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#Poverty_income_thresholds

TL;DR: “The U.S. poverty line is calculated as three times the cost of a minimum food diet in 1963, adjusted for inflation.”

Uh… right where they are? The American welfare state is insufficient across the board, so it needs to be strengthened across the board, and employers across the board should be forced to pay living wages.

I mean those are technicians, not factory workers. For those see: https://www.bls.gov/oes/2023/may/oes519199.htm

By this point, I am almost afraid to think that even voting as the solution is beyond us.

Exactly. Trump is a symptom, not the cause (and that’s before we get into how he’d probably rather launch a coup than lose his majority in 2026).

Holy bootlicking batman. You already had your argument dismantled elsewhere so I won’t do so myself, but what the fuck how delicious does the boot have to be for you to so persistently defend such blatant cruelty? This is “you don’t know why those IDF soldiers shot children in the head” levels of apologia and you should think deep and hard about why you’re doing this.

We have no idea what actually transpired here, but there’s no viable chain of events that would make it acceptable to evict a 93 years old. Full stop.

Protest doesn’t, direct action does.

These clauses don’t apply to the rich.

Or the middle option: She’s incompetent but this is what the people guiding her want.

I mean depends on execution but giving members even a cursory view of socialist literature and ideas would make it a worthwhile affair. This is the sort of thing that would have real teeth if widely implemented.

I wasn’t expecting much from a literal banker, but what the heck Carney? Just… what?

he also might not be bothering with the billionaire tax because the billionaires would all just fly off Hawaii or Nevada or Jackson Hole or wherever to avoid paying it anyway.

That basically never actually happens. See: New York.

Clearly the meme is referring to rebellions against the interests of the country in question. So since they brought up Ireland: How supportive were the British of the Irish war of independence? What about the IRA during the Troubles? How does France react when its neocolonial empire in Africa is disrupted? Before 2023, what was your average European’s image of Palestinian resistance? What’s the verdict on the Houthi “rebels” again? And so on. With some exceptions, these supposed liberatory ethos are thrown out the window the moment they become inconvenient.

Don’t join the army and don’t be a cop, especially not in 2025. Odds are you’ll be sent to beat up protesters.

The point is that just because there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism doesn’t mean we should drop all pretense of trying, because there are still levels of unethicality.

Background people not smuggies, immersion broken.

Gee, I wonder if there’s a formative event in the early 90s that could’ve had some effect on this. Maybe a decline in quality of life that would make people liable to embrace a rightwing dictator. Perhaps neoliberals could be involved? Nah, no way.