Imagine this money put into public healthcare…
Every drop helps, but the US spends around $4.5 trillion annually on healthcare. If we changed to single-payer, cut out the middle-man multi-pipeline network of private insurers thereby also lowering administrative overhead that last I checked was around 30%… We would likely achieve what most other nations are achieving at half the per-capita cost we pay now.
Common Dreams - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Common Dreams:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
Are there other western countries that have a similar rule regarding money in politics? I’m not familiar with rules regarding political donations in other countries
Not really. Most actually have very strict rules about who can donate
Are the rules around who can donate or around how much they can donate? My understanding is that in the US, most people can donate directly to a candidate (within a limit) but you can donate unlimited amounts “indirectly” to the candidate
Most have rules stipulating who can, and how much and where.
In the US, that’s how it works. The caveat is that the people who fund it are supposed to be know. This is why we have PACs that act as a buffer between the actual donors and the public.
Ken griffin (the idiot billionaire in the photograph… of Citadel Securities infamy,) recently dropped millions to defeat a measure that would have seen taxed “enough” that it was profitable to do that.
Do you think it would have worked if the scare-ads said “this message brought to you by a rich fuck you all hate”?
After a certain point, they’re just going to cut out the middle-man and say Money = Votes and allow you to bid or hold shares in the office of the President.
Citizens United and SpeechNow fucked us. Until these are overturned, along with the Electoral College and FPTP abolished, dark days are ahead for our Democracy.
At which point we the people would be morally and legally obligated to make that office uninhabitable.
There is always an answer. Just not always a civilized one.
They’re all begging for the guillotine. Why keep them waiting?
Republicans don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them against Democrats. Democrats don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them lock out progressives. We’re stuck with it.
How would the Democrats “get rid of” a supreme court decision?
Proponents of which party brought the case? Appointees of which party were in the deciding majority on the court?
How would the Democrats “get rid of” a supreme court decision?
Stacking the courts and bringing another case. Or an amendment.
So like I said, we’re stuck with it.
SCOTUS does not need a case to reverse itself or review a law. In fact there’re startlingly few rules around SCOTUS.
add more justices
Thanks a lot John Roberts and Sam Alito for fucking up our politics. Citizens United may be the worst Supreme Court decision since the Civil War
There’s a conservative group trying to use Dred Scott as a precedent to disqualify Kamala Harris. The civil war never ended, it just went cold.
It’s funny people believe before citizens united that money didnt run politics. America is an oligarchy ,has been my entire life, and always will be. It’s not a bad system if you learn about it. Lots of opportunities if you are willing.
The entire point of the law they struck down was to take money out of politics. Yes we know money has been a problem.
America is an oligarchy ,has been my entire life, and always will be.
Are you over 200 years old? government used to break up monopolies. citizens united probably wasn’t the beginning but it sure did streamline the corruption and legalize the purchase of politicians. Anyways, normalizing apathy probably isn’t going to help the situation.
Since Eisenhower at least.
Yeah, I keep reading that as “Megaboners”
They always give these draconian laws positive sounding names. Also, all that disposable money could’ve be used for social programs through taxation
What law are you referring to?
They appear to be mistaking the shorthand for the Supreme Court ruling to be the name of a law. In fairness, bills do often have overly patriotic names that hide their paradoxical purposes.
Typically, the collection of judicial opinions are referred to as “case law” if one wanted to be generous.
Well the same principle is at play here, since Citizens United is a deceitful name for an astroturfed, billionaire-funded organization that had absolutely no involvement from ordinary citizens.
The ministry of Truth would never lie! It’s right there in the name!
Fuck Citizens United.
Just gonna leave this here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_(organization)
The current president, David Bossie… served in executive positions for President Donald Trump’s and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s reelection campaigns.
As I always say;
The rivers of ruin run deep.More swampy than a river imo
The swamps of stupidity run derp
democracy :)
If we don’t turn over the institutions of government to the highest bidder, all the ads on TV say we’ll get something way worse
Like healthcare for everyone 👻
”Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest…”
~hysterical laughter with a backing track of Ominous Latin Chanting~
Pretty sure I might be on this list. Gave $20 not too long ago, so I’m about to buy some laws.
So let’s see Kamala’s plan to end this bullshit… Obviously Trump wouldn’t, but Kamala might if we push enough
Lmao this take that Kamala is somehow immune to the realities of our political financing structures makes no sense to me
Not immune, and not calling for her to abstain… But she could easily say she wants to change the system and how. It’s not even controversial and would get her plenty of points from the left to the center.
