politics
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
view the rest of the comments
How's the commute from there to the Capitol building where he works?
He doesn't have to work. The comment was that he could buy a house, buy solar, and never have to do anything again.
You think he works for the money?!?
Thats the whole point of the original comment. I can't figure out WHAT his motivation is, when his entire career is him basically saying "DESTROY ME! I SHOULDN'T HAVE THIS MUCH MONEY! NOBODY SHOULD!"
.........but whys HE saying that. Like I could understand if he made like 30k a year, and had a few thousand in savings. But he's the image of who's he's trying to turn the torches on. Is it intentional? Does he not realize?
Meanwhile, people read the innitial comment I made, and are defending him by saying he's not the problem.
Which completely misses the point.
Why's he saying that? Because he believes in a better world rather than acting out of self interest. Plenty of high net worth and high income individuals advocate for higher taxation. I know I'd rather live in a world where the hungry are fed and the people are housed, rather than have an extra 10% of my income each year.
He's not advocating for just taxing the rich though. He's advocating for eliminating the rich. Which he's part of.
Which would make for a better world. Which he believes in.
He's not fucking rich! A few million dollars is not rich in the USA in 2025. How can you be this ignorant?
I'm never going to have a few million dollars, but just because I am lower class doesn't mean it's not possible without exploiting others!
His motivation is pretty clear if you actually look at his political career. You may agree or disagree with him but the way you're trying to tear into him just shows you don't have a grasp of the actual problem he presents.
You can go read his tax returns yourself. His income most years is his salary, boosted several times by the release of his books after his popularity. This in total has netted him a few million. You can argue his books should have been published for free, but it's not some shady stock manipulation.
This site is a good visualization. I'm not sure if it's up to date but the top end has only gotten bigger. You're arguing about something on the first screen scroll. By the end of the decade we're likely to see our first TRILLIONAIRE...