Showerthoughts

30554 readers

1229 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted, clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts: 1

Rules

All posts must be showerthoughts
The entire showerthought must be in the title
No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- If you feel strongly that you want politics back, please volunteer as a mod.
Posts must be original/unique
Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

vatlark

forkball

Thekingoflorda

-51

Increasing taxes to solve inequality is based on fundamentally wrong assumptions. (lemmy.fbxl.net)

submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/showerthoughts

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Why on earth would taking wealth from everyone (and it turns into everyone -- There are non-executive wage earners working mundane jobs who pay 50% taxes on their last bit of income and basically pay that on any overtime they work) and concentrating it in the hands of a few insanely powerful government workers ever result in less inequality? You're literally making an overclass of super-powerful people a little bit stronger.

We've done that before -- we gave all the power to people based not on their amount of money but instead their ownership and effective use of horsies and horsie accessories, hard clothing, and pokey sticks of varying descriptions and materials. It wasn't a more equal society back then. The pokey stick hard clothing horsie people still got the nicest houses and could get a bunch of slaves to build big pointy buildings for them.

You're just taking money from the super powerful (and everyone else) and giving it to the ultra mega powerful.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] [email protected] -8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

That's not really true though. You can choose between the blue uniparty and the red uniparty (and occasionally an orange or light blue or purple uniparty)

Its a false choice. You get to choose between different colors of corrupt establishment who become rich off of their time in government because it turns out when you give someone that level of money and power they'll definitely find ways to get some of it for themselves.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yeah but the two-party system is a US thing which is ranking relatively poorly when it comes to democracies and is classified as a flawed democracy according to the Economist Democracy Index.

Your post makes it sound like increasing taxes for the rich will never lead to better circumstances for poor people but it absolutely does.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

In a real democracy you can run to be elected. And if enough people like your policies you will be able to enact them.