In which we yet again post yet another ten thousand plus interesting or amusing -or neither- tweets

It should be very skewed towards the rich, to the tune of 100% tax on wealth over 1 billion.

 

This is the way.

 

That gets tricky real quickly.

 

Just saw a Xweet that then I could not copy, but paraphrasing:

This remake of Weekend at Bernie's really suck...

 

This is the difference between the liberal Democrats and the far left.

The far left just hates rich people, they want them to pay for all their free shit.

Liberals understand that we all need to pay taxes to get government services.

 

I don't hate rich people per se (some of them have earned it, not by being rich, but for what they do); I just don't see the point of having multibillionaires accumulate money that they will never spend, while we have people in need. It is cool that they earned a billion, but since it seems like ultra rich people won't do much to help society, I'd rather tax them at 100% (after 1 billion) and let the goverment fund things like education, health, transportation and pensions, or better yet, energy transition to minimize the effects of global warming.

And, in the meanwhile, the rest of us, can either get higher pay, or lower taxes. Damn, how commie pinko socialist of me to want people to get free education, free healthcare, cheap transportation, a living income in retirement, and also leave a livable planet for our children and grandchildren.

You also seem to forgert that ultrarich people were taxed at 70, 80, 90% and we sent people to the moon, while having a more or less, a prosper society. Since they started lowering the taxes on the uberwealthy, the money has flown upwards to the tune of trillions, and the rest of us are the ones actually paying for the tax cuts.

 

One more thing that I wanted to say but could not add after the edit was closed, then went for lunch:

Many people seem to assume that Capitalism is the best economical system we can come up with, and/or that the current stage of American Capitalism is its best and only possible development. I would like to think that both assumptions are incorrect.

Capitalism is a framework that has worked well, as long as you ignore war, inequality, pollution, child labor, revolts, exploitation, racism and so on. As a matter of fact, it has been improved, because people who spotted all those defficiencies, worked to change them, and since it is that, a framework, it can be changed for good (say 40 hour week) or for bad (more tax breaks for people who doesn't need). Also, there seems to be a widespread assumption that people that succeds within the framework is "better" and more deserving, which could be something that people that succeds, like to spread.

 

Speaking of trillions, what is the point of offering Elon a pay package potentially worth a trillion dollars? First off, it's not going to happen. But assuming it did, I honestly don't see the difference between $500 Billion and a trillion. What can a trillion dollars get you that 500 billion can't? It's obscene.

 

I'm sure the egos of better adjusted people than Elon would appreciate the stroking of a trillion dollar pay package.

 

I’m guessing the theory behind a lower tax on capital gains is because an investment is a gamble. If I invest a million dollars in 5 companies I’ve spent $5M. If 4 of those go bankrupt but the fifth increases in value 5 times, I’ve broken even so why tax the $4M as income?

as Jules said, allow me to retort

1. Professional gamblers don’t get to do that, they can’t count losses from last year to offset wins from this year. So why are CGs different?
2. It creates incentives to use shenanigans to recast income as cap gains.
3. Everyone knows the actual “theory” is class warfare by the rich in the poor.

 

This summarizes the sorry state of history education.

Because any passing familiarity with history makes it obvious that all of those things predate history. Why not blame capitalism for male pattern baldness too?

I will grant you that a couple things on the list, exploitation and inequality, are exacerbated by capitalism. In return, yall grant me that one reason capitalism exacerbates inequality is because it doesn’t mean a sharing of a society’s increased riches, an increase facilitated by capitalism. It doesn’t make the poor absolutely poorer, just (if unfettered) makes them relatively poorer.

Unless you have a magic pill that will make all humans look at humanity as part of one family, so that rich people share resources just like parents share resources with their own children, capitalism is the best system. We’re human animals. Don’t forget that.

 

agreed, though those predate capitalism, and likely, history as well.

 

Someone a few hundred years ago could have and actually did make the same defense of feudalism especially if you didn't include the harms of racism and pollution. Positive human development also means improving the social systems you are in.

 

Fair point. What I meant to say is that a system that allows all those things should not be considered perfect, or be our ultimate aspiration as society, and there lies our conundrum.

As I heard someone say (or maybe I read it) recently, we are dealing with technology age problems with post feudal institutions and stone age emotions. I'm mangling the quote, I know it was a lot better, but that's the essence.

 

I'd say our conundrum is less knowing that capitalism is imperfect and more that there is no visible alternative one can aspire, too. There are a lot of ideas but they are often unproven and not thought through. Societies are so complex that just realizing the ideas can lead to devastating results. The Soviet Union was one of those experiments, the US itself was one in the 18th century. So at the moment everybody is trying to find evolutionary improvements, which might lead to good results but isn't really inspiring.

I also think that the situation with capitalism is not all so dire as a lot of people on the left claim. Social democracies are a proven way to contain the worst effects of unfettered capitalism but it relies on a well run state, enough welfare state but not too much, which is difficult. The main problem is more the current state of US politics which prevents a proper establishment (and administration) of a social democratic/welfare state.

We also know and have the root and the solutions for the climate crisis in capitalism. It is just that implementing them in a nation state is pointless because it is a global problem. That won't change with the economic system unless that new system drives the global technology level down to stone age levels.

Maybe the concentration of wealth in the US is already at such a level that you're at the brink of a new form of feudalism. People might be willing to trade in their rights and freedoms for financial safety, instead of security like in the middle ages.

 

You’re NOT two paychecks away from a private jet.

You’re two paychecks away from SNAP.

Stop defending billionaires they don’t gaf about you pic.twitter.com/4osB9OZGP3

— Drebae (@Drebae) November 3, 2025

 

"We're killing all the right people" a truly ghoulish thing to say https://t.co/57hkQ842uJ

— Dave DeCamp (@DecampDave) November 2, 2025

 

Guys, it's 5 years, FIVE. I thought this account would last... 48 hrs? A week?

But I'm still here - and it's ALL thanks to YOU!

Hopefully I'm still making you laugh. I feel like we've been on a journey together. So, from the bottom of my heart, THANK YOU! Follow if you don't! pic.twitter.com/wA1LpxuuIl

— Four Seasons Total Landscaping (@TotalSeasons) November 7, 2025

 

Who is Breanna Lyman?

EDIT: I guess what I’m actually asking is . . . is she the stupidest person on twitter, or is she just a run-of-the-mill idiot who’s having a bad day?

 

Brianna Lyman probably homeschools her kids.

 

She writes for the Federalist. So yes.

 

The statue of Liberty was donated to honor freed slaves. Thus statue of Liberty. And also thus why we didn't put it up right away until we could figure out what to do with it.