• Minotaur@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Yeah Ngl, very good state of the union. I wish more people would actually… watch them.

    I’ve got so many friends (mostly white guys in their 20s & 30s) who spend so much of their time huffing and puffing about how politics is this inherently broken system and how no one wants what they want (more taxes on the wealthy, more affordable housing, maybe some kind of work on the border).

    Then you got at least one politician who rolls down the line saying all of those issues and absolutely no one watches it because they’re all doing the same “he can’t talk!!!” Joke.

    Like I’m not saying Joe Biden is the perfect candidate or even that anyone in particular should vote for him, but it is frustrating to see how many people are willingly ignorant

    • 👍Maximum Derek👍@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I wish more people would actually… watch them.

      I agree but, to be fair, this is the first SOTU I remember in a long time that wasn’t written to be sound bytes in between platitudes.

    • Krono@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Every SOTU since at least Clinton has had a section where the president says he supports a variety of populist economic policies. Anyone who follows politics closely knows that this is just pandering to voters, it is not representative of actual policy that will be adopted.

      Your friends are right to be cynical.

      • Minotaur@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        This is just flagrantly untrue. Trumps SOTU addresses we’re almost entirely about his personal foreign relationships with North Korea, Mexico, his takes on various Mexican gangs, “global freeloaders”, warning against “the call to adopt socialism”, how much of ISIS he wiped out, etc.

        This is deeply different from Joe Biden going up and saying “hey maybe Billionares shouldn’t pay 8% in taxes, maybe 25% would be a good benchmark” and “hey maybe we should give new home buyers a few hundred bucks a month” which are real and substantiate new initiatives and not just masturbatory remarks about how much other people suck

        • Krono@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          But how is Joe Biden saying “billionaires should pay more taxes” any different from when Obama said it?

          I hope I’m proved wrong, but I expect the same results: no legislation, no policy change, only rhetoric.

          • Num10ck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Biden has drastically more experience working politics in DC than Obama, and has already gotten more done. If he can inspire more people to vote, he could do even more.

            • DancingBear@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              I think you misspelled “old as heck”. Biden first got elected to the senate in 1972.

              I don’t think the “more experience” angle means what you think it means.

              It means Biden is a corporate crony in a room full of corporate cronies, who actively stifle progress so that “nothing will fundamentally change” which keeps the donor class happy.

                • DancingBear@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  Yes. Which negates any ideas Biden has mentioned raising taxes on the wealthy.

                  In the same speech he also told wealthy donors income inequality is not the fault of the wealthy. He was begging the donor class to support him.

                  Nina Turner was right. I’m no longer going to choose between a bowl of 💩 and a half bowl of 💩

                  3/4’s of US Americans believe taxes should be raised for the wealthiest Americans

                  (Well, if you knew the context you would know that absolutely something fundamental needs to change)

                  • kofe@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    …if you knew the context you wouldn’t be writing out disinformation. He said that wealthy people being taxed at higher rates would not fundamentally change their lifestyle, which is true. Someone making 500k and being taxed 20% would not see a substantial change if it raised to 30, 40, even 50%.

                    So he agrees with you.

                    Cheers.

          • Minotaur@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Man, I guess we should look at the common factor of what’s opposing the tax raises for billionaires instead of saying “well, it hasn’t happened yet - I guess both sides are equally bad!!”

            • Krono@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              There is no “both sides are equal” argument here, Republicans are obviously worse.

              I agree that we should examine who is opposing tax raises for billionaires. And we agree Repubs are horrible, so just consider when Democrats had full control of Congress and the WH- what stopped them then?

              Democrats can’t pass economic populism, even when they have full control, due to their corporate donors, lobbyists, the DNC, etc. This Democratic establishment has prevented anything left-of-center from getting passed in my lifetime.

              • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                so just consider when Democrats had full control of Congress and the WH- what stopped them then?

                They had control for ~70 days and in that period they passed the largest healthcare overhaul in a generation (that’s still incredibly popular). Seems to me like they got some serious shit done when we gave them a relatively small period of actual control. The idea that they didn’t get anything done is completely ahistorical.

                • Krono@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Yes that is exactly my point, Dems had full control and they still passed a right wing healthcare plan.

                  In that 70 days they abandoned a public option and quickly adopted Romneycare. Then they added even more corporate subsidies and giveaways for health insurance companies.

                  • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    The Democrats abandoned the public option? I seem to remember Senator Lieberman and the GOP being the ones that blocked that.

                    So the Democrats propose legislation, the GOP fights tooth and nail to water down and make it worse at every possible step knowing the Democrats don’t have the seats needed to pass the original legislation, and your takeaway from that is that Democrats are passing right wing policy?

                    I’m sorry you don’t like the ACA, but the solution to your problem is electing more progressive Democrats, the thing you seem to be advocating against. Do you have a solution or do you just want to say “Democrats bad” and act like the party of domestic terrorists across the aisle doesn’t exist?