• Casteyes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again … a large portion of the current democratic party is rich. The DNC serves corporations not the people. They are controlled opposition. They will keep the status quo as long as they get to continue living their cushy lifestyle. The whole system is corrupt and that includes the DNC, they won’t be saving us.

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      The entire point of a government is controlled opposition. That’s the fucking point. It’s not some grand revelation. Change from within the system takes a lot of time and constant effort, but it is better than the alternative which takes blood and massive suffering.

      • Casteyes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        The problem is the system has been around for a long time and what we’ve seen is a huge wealth transfer that has made the rich richer and is currently eroding the middle class.

        “As of 2023, the top 1% of households in the U.S. hold approximately 32% of the total wealth. In contrast, the bottom 90% of households collectively hold about 22% of the total wealth.”

        We’ve now reached the point of late stage capitalism/oligarchy and if the system doesn’t change the wealth disparity will continue to grow.

        There is already massive suffering. homelessness is spiraling out of control and a huge amount of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck barely surviving.

        So I’d argue the alternative is starting to look quite attractive.

        • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          The wealth disparity hasn’t been this high since just before the Great Depression where 34% of disposable income went to the richest 5% (not an apples to apples comparison but the closest I could find).

          One of the major causes of the depression was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act which imposed high tariffs on imported goods. Oh hey, look at those shiny new tariffs from Trump.

          Another major factor was the Dust Bowl which was a widespread drought that dramatically impacted agriculture. Meanwhile 50% of the continental US has faced drought conditions since 2000.

          The Stock Market Crash of 1929 was in large part due to overproduction of goods with people not having enough money to buy them. Look at all the companies throwing stock in the trash. Food, clothes, essentials all wasted while there are people who go without.

          During the Depression, unemployment peaked at about 25%. (We are at 4.1% now.) Even during the height of COVID with factories and businesses shutting down, unemployment was only at 14.7%. That is the kind of suffering it takes for change and that is where our failures to learn from history are leading us.

          • Casteyes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            21 hours ago

            You need to read between the lines on the 4.1% figure and how the fed actually comes to it. If you truly believe that’s an accurate representation of the economy and that 95.9% of people are happily employed in this era I have a bridge to sell you.

            The TRU figure covers a broader range in terms of employment. It accounts for people who are underemployed living on poverty wages as well as unemployed. The feds report only covers people who are unemployed period. There are actually quite a lot of homeless people who are working.

            "The February TRU — a measure of the functionally unemployed, defined as the jobless plus those seeking, but unable to find, full-time employment paying above poverty wages ($25,000 a year in 2024 dollars) after adjusting for inflation — rose from 23.3% to 24.6%. This increase reversed five months of progress for White workers, whose TRU climbed 1.6 percentage points (21.6% to 23.2%). Meanwhile, Hispanic workers saw a slight improvement, dropping from 28.4% to 28.1%, and Black workers experienced a more notable decline, dropping from 27.8% to 26%.

            The increase in the TRU is in sharp contrast to official unemployment data released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), which reported only a 0.1 percentage point increase, to 4.1%. Even the BLS’ broader measure of unemployment, which accounts for underemployed part-time workers, rose by just 0.5 percentage points. While this explains part of the jump in the TRU, it does not capture a key factor: more full-time workers fell below the poverty wage threshold last month."

            Oh look, 24.6%, pretty close to the 25% you mentioned with the great depression.

            • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Oh I absolutely agree that the 4.1% figure doesn’t represent actual economic conditions. Wide swaths of the country are underemployed and undercompensated.

              What it does capture is what portion of the country has a job, no matter how shitty, occupying their time. When people have nowhere to go and nothing to do during the day, THAT is when we see real protests. People will make it their job to yell at those in power to fix things when there is nothing else taking their time. We saw that during the Covid lockdowns.

        • Sektor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          The problem for the bottom 90% is the perception. If you present them with a group of people who are advertised as even less valuable like immigrants, gay, black, muslim, etc they will never perceive themselves as the bottom of the barrel disposable pieces of meat. There will always be someone who will be more worthless and less human, so they will have a false sence of value.

          • Casteyes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I agree. The only solution would be for different groups of humans to understand we’re all in this together and unify under a common goal. Which is what the elites do not want.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’ve noticed the financially conservative bias of a certain minority of the Democrats, which I think you could term “corruption”. I’d say even a lot of them would prefer Americans at least be able to get by on a living wage; hence why blue states have a higher minimum.

      I could be missing information you’ve found past me, but what statistics have helped you conclude a “large portion” of them are rich / serving corporations?

      • Dragonstaff@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Why do you think Democrats helped to pass Trump’s budget?

        The "statistics"are the number of Democratic millionaires serving in Congress and the amount of money corporate donors spend to get them elected.

        • Katana314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          About ten Democrats participated in that. I have their names written down close to my workstation and do not plan to support them. But that’s still a minority of the party, as I expressed in my post.

          It’s also very possible some of those senators had less concern for the financial sector or market crash, and more concern for the possibility of shutting down the courts amid so many illegal executive orders. It’s not a great excuse, but it’s also not a self serving one.

          As for millionaires: Due to inflation, the metric has shifted a bit. Some people that I directly know, that are smart and empathetic people that do what they can to help the community, are millionaires in terms of net worth. Simply owning a home in my state often puts someone in that scope. Cory Booker is est. worth $15M.

          Call it a cop-out but that’s why the targeting is now on billionaires. Many millionaires know that they have more money than their basic needs, and want to make that path to success possible for others. The same likely cannot be said for very many billionaires.

      • TronBronson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yeah you’re just missing on the part where nothing is ever fucking good enough for anyone. And we don’t believe in incremental change. Everything should’ve been perfect when we were born and it’s really upsetting that it’s not perfect yet.