this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
692 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19223 readers
2752 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. 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.
  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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I hope she trips again, and this time, never gets up again.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 26 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It should be illegal to own stocks as a Senator.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

ETFs should be fine, individual stocks not.

And even ETF purchases and sales should be declared a week in advance or sth.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I like the idea you’re going for but it’s not sufficient.

  • ETFs can have narrow holdings, or be actively managed
  • other investments like mutual funds can have wide holdings and be passively managed
  • an appropriate trust can take the person out of decision making for his holding without giving them up
[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 3 points 8 hours ago

An improvement on my original idea then:

A congressional trust that any representative can pay into, that is only allowed to invest in wide US-based index funds (or it could build its own index fund) or US bonds, etc. Basically: Allow them to invest in the future of the country they're managing. Don't limit it to only politicians, either. Let everyone invest if they want.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Honestly, at this point we just need to dissolve the US in its entirety. I no longer believe it can be saved. We need to grant all 50 states full independence. They can then come back together and form whatever new nation or nations they want. The existing union is broken beyond all repair. It can no longer be salvaged.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 7 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

What actually happens if the Union splits is that corporate interests start buying states. If you think we live in a cyberpunk dystopia now, just imagine what would happen if Amazon owned Mississippi through Georgia.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world -2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Well, they can be responsible for their own sins. It's called personal responsibility. Give all 50 states independence. If some states choose to become the next Belarus, that's on them. That's what independence means - responsibility for your own salvation or damnation.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

None of the 50 states currently have a standing military. What if those corporate interests don't take no for an answer, and decide to hire private military contractors to conquer it by force? With the collapse of the U.S. military, there'll be plenty of mercenaries available. What if, after consolidating their power in their new former U.S. holdings, they decide that they want more and push for expansion? At that point, the corporations can have their own professional armies, made up of former U.S. citizens, fight against the remaining "independent" states.

I'm not saying your initial premise is wrong, but you haven't fully looked at the consequences of releasing ~43 incredibly weak nations into the world with no treaties or alliances protecting them. It guarantees conflict. You'd have maybe seven states masquerading as the "real United States," and complete chaos.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Realistically we wouldn't just do this overnight. You would take a couple of years to work all the details out. Peaceful dissolution of nations has happened many times before. You don't just shut down the old empire like turning off a light switch. But there would be existing institutions to build off of. The existing state national guards could be expanded to serve as full military units.

As far as doing this Constitutionally, the process is a bit dubious. But really, it doesn't matter. If you're at the point of the population being willing to voluntarily dissolve the country, you simply ignore the old constitution entirely. If a president and Congress were elected with a mandate of dissolving the US entirely, they could simply do it and there wouldn't be anyone to stop them. Hell, you could probably do this just by electing a president on a platform of dissolving the country. Yes, it really wouldn't be constitutionally valid, but in these kind of situations, that's not really relevant anymore.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 13 points 1 day ago

I like where your head is at, but that's a terrible idea that will just lead to all the Red States going full jihad on "others"

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Biden could premptively pardon every American for choosing to secede if they want to and we can just end it now with no repercussions or violence.

[–] Skates@feddit.nl 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Right? It's fully within Biden's power to stop Trump from taking office because he has a duty to protect the constitution.

But he would need a spine for that.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 hours ago

That would mean helping the American population, and that isn't good for corporate interests, so "Sorry Jack, I did all I could, I pardoned my son for his crack addiction!"

[–] rigatti@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 day ago

Why should the Nazi fucks in Texas drag down people trying to live their lives in California or NY?

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au -4 points 1 day ago

Shame she wasn’t at home with her husband.