this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
263 points (89.0% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4132 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You realize that you need people to have children if you want to keep having a doctor or firemen or farmers and so on? Child credits benefit you even if they don't go in your pockets directly.

You're the exact type of person that prevents social programs from being implemented, if it doesn't benefits you directly then no one should get the benefits.

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

Can you go over my comment one more time, and point to me where I said I was against the credit completely? As in, I said I didn't think it deserved to be there at all?

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You said your "don't jive" with such measures because it doesn't concern you as a childless person, I'm telling you it's ridiculous to "not jive" with such measures because you still need people to have kids even if you don't have them yourself. You don't like a measure that benefits you because you are too self centered to realize it does.

[–] LucidNightmare@lemm.ee 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Oof. Bad take, bad take.

Here’s the thing, I can still not personally like something, complain about not ever getting anything myself as a single non married person, while still voting for the person and that policy because I know it benefits the greater good.

You don’t seem to realize that people can dislike something, and feel left out of policies like these, but still support it for the greater good.

Next time before you call someone fucking self centered, how about getting more details.

Fucking asshole. Have a terrible terrible day today.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

That's the thing though, you are getting something from it! But because others are getting money and you're getting something that isn't money you can't see it and therefore dislike the project!

Who's got a bad take here? The person disliking social safety nets or the person disliking them when it isn't a direct advantage to them?

You're part of a community, when people suffer you feel the consequences, when people do better you do better. Get your head out of your ass.

[–] LucidNightmare@lemm.ee 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Prove me wrong if I'm so stupid.

Child poverty leads to people who don't get as much education which leads to people voting against their own best interest like they did a few days ago.

Are you going to pretend you won't feel any consequences of that?

Less education leads to people being less healthy which leads to higher healthcare costs that comes out of your pockets.

Are you going to pretend you don't feel any consequences of that?

[–] LucidNightmare@lemm.ee 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

This will be the last time I reply, okay? I do not have the energy to explain myself to some fucking fool with no reading comprehension. I’ll put it as simple as possible.

Just because I do not agree with something 100%, does not mean that I do not support it 100%.

If you had any reading comprehension skills, you’d have noted during my first comment I asked you where I said I didn’t think the credit deserved to exist at all. You never did that, by the way. You started blabbering about shit I already understand and support. That is precisely why I called you stupid. I never said it did not deserve to exist. I said I voted for Kamala anyway, because I understand the greater good. What are you not fucking getting?

Imagine that. A “leftist” who immediately attacked another actual left leaning person, because for some stupid fucking reason, they read an entire paragraph, and only came through with the sentence “that don’t jive with me, personally”. That’s it. That’s all it was. I didn’t agree with it completely, but still supported it.

That, in my opinion, is why I think you’re terrible about getting your “point” across. You had no point, because you went on the basis of a part of a huge paragraph, without even looking at the rest and digesting that and fully taking it in.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 40 minutes ago)

You keep repeating the same shit, "I don't get anything from it", my point from the beginning has been that yes, you do in fact gain something from it.