Uh…Did you actually read the article before you posted it?
Her capstone work so far has been moving 5 million dollars in a budget of 3T. That’s really it…the rest of the article is fluffy feel good conjecture.
I like AoC, but pretending the progressives are getting things done is not helping. We’re in dire need of change and the R’s / Conservative D’s have a stranglehold on making it not happen.
Killing parts of the Patriot Act and stopping our government from selling more weapons to a Bolivian government that coup’d its way into power don’t seem like fluffy conjecture to me (and those are just the next two things after the $5million)
e; got my “it’s” and “its” backwards
Removed by mod
She “was involved” in those things…she didn’t “do” those things. It’s a big difference, and why I say fluffy conjecture. She says the right things (mostly), but that’s my point…it’s just talk. I also said we shouldn’t sell arms to dictators to guy a at a bar once…I could make a long winded argument about how that influenced US policy…but I’d be full of shit.
My point isn’t she’s a bad person or politician. But we NEED universal healthcare and free college…we NEED curbs on housing costs…we NEED climate change regulations.
The progressives were supposed to implement those things and they never did.
So…sure…she stopped a small arms deal and shifted around some pocket change. I’m not real excited by that.
She is a legislator, by definition anything she does is a group effort not a solo accomplishment.
Pray tell, how are a handful of the 435 representatives the house supposed to pass meaningful legislation on their own?
They vote on moderate bills because there’s no better alternative and no way to get there YET. Cultivating an image around progressive ideas at least ensures that they enter the public discourse. This will take time to wrench the pendulum back from the center right
Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater
Not to mention, a lot of Congressional work happens in committee and in their home states. Counting primary sponsorship of bills is a terrible way to measure activity.
Yeah, but you need to get the R and conservative D seats to change to progressives for that to happen.
A squad of representatives that you can count on one hand isn’t enough of a voting block to force major change. It isn’t like replacing AOC would fix the issue.
I fully agree with the general sentiment, but the Inflation Reduction Act was pretty major. Not only has it kick-started an unprecedented amount of private sector clean energy investment, but analysts are saying that it’s a major reason why unemployment hasn’t spiked with the fed’s increased rates. More still needs to be done, obviously, but I think we should acknowledge these kinds of hard-fought wins.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I didn’t know they made clickbait comments now too
Flat tax is fucking stupid. It’s not just about contributing more or less, because someone making 20k a year contributing 10% hits a lot harder than someone making 400k paying the same %.
Not if the tax dollar goes to help the folks of the country.
Yes it’s redistribution of wealth but we have redistribution of wealth right now and the money mostly goes back to the wealthy.
Sooo about 19 top fortune 100 companies in US paid virtually no tax in the last few years. If You can tax ALL companies, people and religions who are making money, You’d have quite a lot of money in the pot.
The money needs to go to military, I get it; but after that if You prioritize the homeless and the mentally ill, you’d see progress IMHO.
10% is just an example, maybe it should be more. But when (some) fortune 100 n 500 companies are getting away with paying no tax… I think 10% might work; as long as EVERYONE ( who’s making money) pays. As long as the government takes care of , prioritizes the poor and middle class; things should be alright.
I agree with the sentiment for the most part. Religious institutes and all businesses should pay taxes, but it should be a progressive tax instead of a flat tax. The other thing is I think anything before a certain threshold should be tax exempt for the same reason that I think a flat tax is bad. Idk what that number is, but I would set it at the poverty line.
Sooo; if the government could collect 10 % flat tax from everyone and was able to subsidize housing, education, medicine and healthcare for everyone that needs it… Then I think 🤔 it might work, it’d get rid of tax loopholes and also allow everyone to do their own taxes simply… 10% … Just move a dot one over a number… Everyone could understand that.
As for the rich and wealthy classes their reward is still income. They just have to pay their “fair” share. And to me the same percentage across the board is equal/fair.
Maybe 🤔 You can explain it to me better, where I am missing the point ☝️ or where I am wrong on this idea / notion 😔? I am probably missing something.
What your saying is all possible with with a progressive tax, only more tax revenue would be generated. The way a progressive tax works is at certain income levels, the tax % goes up, but only for income earned above that amount. Idk what those numbers are off the top of my head, so I’m going to make them up. Say less than 20k is exempt, then up to 80k is 20%, then 200k is 30%, then 400k+ is 40%. So if I make 150k, I pay 20% across the board. If I make 300k, I pay 20% on the first 200k, then 30% on the next 100k, and so on. A flat tax charges the same % on all income at all levels for everyone. While that might seem fair on the surface, it’s not when you take in account cost of living. If I make 20k and have to spend $100 on groceries every week and pay 10% of my income to taxes, that’s $7200 a year, or 36% of my income. If I make 200K a year and spend the same on groceries, that’s $25000 or 12.5% of my income. Poor me ends up taking a much bigger hit than wealthy me after accounting for cost of living. If wealthy me paid 20% instead of 10% I still have > $150k take-home which is more than enough to live on.
Businesses are different. They shouldn’t have any tax loopholes or write-offs (imo) and should have to pay taxes on revenue. A progressive tax could work there as well, but the brackets would be higher. And the end of the day, everyone should be paying taxes including businesses, whether that’s flat or progressive, except I think if you’re in poverty you should be exempt.
The rich are still rich, the poor get some built in help with exemption, and there’s more tax money to subsidize social programs, healthcare, and other things.
Ok 👌 I am going to have to read that a few times n go do some arithmetics on that, N I’ll get back to You on that someday.
I just had a feeling that if tax dollar went to subsidize good living standards for all , whether poor or middle class that it wouldn’t be a big deal if we all paid about roughly the same percent for all to have access to decent wage / life / opportunity at climbing some kind of a ladder of a profession / industry .
I’ll try and read more about both ideas 💡 of tax n understand it better…
TY BassTurd
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
high-five
Thx mate
I’m sorry, Congress accomplished something?
Gee, it’s almost as if the GOP wants you to think there’s no point in voting.
Left-wing scrutiny of the Squad and particularly Representative Ocasio-Cortez has steadily veered from constructive criticism and needed pressure to a kind of caricaturish vitriol.
Jacobin is clearly panicked by the possibility that the Outsider Left might not actually inherit the Democratic Party’s mantle, but seems unwilling to ask why or to suggest a solution.
This op-ed consists of hand-waving apologetics that glaze over AOC’s often neoliberal voting record with feel-good references to, for example, the legacy of the failed Green New Deal, and it reads like an excuse.
Perhaps Jacobin is merely attempting to convince itself, but an injunction to think of “the health of the socialist and broader progressive movements” feels pathetic at the end of an article that’s largely failed to defend the socialist Wunderkinder against the leftist critique that they’re all just regular old Democrats now.
It’s tough being a member of the “Squad” these days.
Is it really, though? AOC and her ilk further their careers by happily selling their politically-profitable, “socialist” personas to a tragically hoodwinked outer-left constituency that’s just hopeful for meaningful change.
See ya at the next Met Gala, AOC.
Maybe you should give it a shot and see if you can do better.
