They could tax billionaires who benefit from public infrastructure like roads and laws and citizens at work and who won't change their lifestyle for the lesser by paying taxes at all and it would fund most of the country.
this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
91 points (96.0% liked)
politics
20474 readers
2842 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
billionaires who benefit from public infrastructure like roads
Oh, the billionaires don't use up the roads: they fly from their overpriced condos' helipad to their private yachts' helipad to their mansions in the Hamptons and private-jet to their resorts on the Cote d'Azur.
Those people never touch the ground - literally as well as figuratively.
They do impose an insane cost on our environment however.
I meant more so their businesses that use trucks to ship things and deliver. Also having employees get to work, literally anything outside lol.
Shall they never have to travel as those filthy poors do.
They still use air traffic controllers, which is a government paid job if I'm not mistaken. The government would also back them up if their private jet or heli encountered an emergency and had to land due to a failure with the aircraft. The government regulates when and how their private planes have to be inspected and ready to fly. The government provides the water that the employees that gas up and maintain the aircraft use, and the roads that get them there.
So they may believe they don't need the government, but it's a big part of almost everything we do everywhere.
Children of Kali when?
The whole reason they want to cut medicaid is to justify their tax cuts for billionaires, so I don't think that will help their depraved goal.
What Can House Republicans Cut Instead of Medicaid? Not Much.
Peak NYT headlining there.
The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if the plan is to run up a massive debt now and then push the responsibility for dealing with that debt onto democrats if they win control after midterms.
It's actually worse than that. Who stands to get hurt the most from a severe downturn? Small/medium business owners. Who stands to wind up on top? Billionaires that can take the hit and then some. So as all these startups and medium sized businesses start going under, who's there to buy the business on the cheap? Billionaires. Then they think they can turn around and recover the economy and make even more billions. The problem is that the US economy is teetering on the edge of a precipice that it can never return to if we lose the dollar standard and petro-dollar.
Who stands to wind up on top? Billionaires that can take the hit and then some
Billionaires make money when the economy works well, and make a fuckton more money when it doesn't
Billionaires never take any hit. It's only honest people with real jobs who get hurt.
Oh absolutely. It's not a real hit by any means. But what they want is a bigger version of the wealth transfer that happened at each of these last "bumps".
Oh, you mean the Two Santa Claus tactic that they've been using for literally decades?
That's not a conspiracy theory; that's just normal. I'm pretty sure what Trump is planning is even worse than that.
That’s what they’ve done at least since Reagan so…
Trump a liar? Surely not. /s
I have a feeling that chart isn't being very genuine.
How come? The federal government is basically defense and insurance. Everything else is a rounding error. (Which is why you can’t actually cut $2 trillion without cutting defense spending, social security, or Medicaid/Medicare.)
Because that chart doesn't show defense... Its Medicare, Medicaid, and then 4 blocks of (other)
Spending overseen by the House Committee On Energy and Commerce
instructs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over the program, to cut spending by $880 billion over the next decade
There's actually a shitton of things they could cut, both NYT and US government just refuse to even consider cutting all the subsidies the U.S. gives to companies posting profits of billions of dollars. There's absolutely something in the $850 billion dollars given to the U.S. military that could be cut, but it is considered sacrosanct to these bastards.
There are other things but the interest is not there.