A society is always about 3 days of hunger away from a violent revolution. Start your clocks.
Good, it is completely unnecessary. It’s a bad solution to an old problem that already has much better solutions out there that are much more accessible too. They only made it so people will rely on them for everything and stop trusting others, but thankfully it failed. Canonical should be ashamed of themselves for ever trying this snap thing.
Risky joke, woosh is very likely.
I don’t get it.
It’s a joke on how “Snap” is also an application distribution system for Linux. Ubuntu (by the company Canonical) uses it.
Wrong. It’s a system for killing half the people in the universe to decrease overpopulation
thanks for pointing this out, i missed it!
Fuck… I was squinting so hard up until I read that last sentence.
God, and I can’t say this with my entire chest, fucking dammit. You got me.
This is just outrageous. I’ll have you know there are many single-mothers who depend on snap day-to-day. You can’t honestly expect them to just switch distros.
Hah. I was ready to rage comment until I finished reading your whole comment.
Based
Fuck. Add me to the list of people who were fooled until the last sentence, and even then I had to read it twice.
Fact: absolutely none of this would have happened if Kamala had won.
Shame she decided to support wildly unpopular policy and messaging instead of winning.
Shame millions of leftists had advanced warning of Project 2025, chose to ignore it and boycott the only viable other candidate anyway, and now are living with the concenquences of that inaction.
But they’re still only blaming Kamala and the Dem party, rather than taking a moment for self reflection as to how they willingly surrendered the country to fascism and damned marginalized groups to hell on Earth.
Kamala was a shitty candidate, but the left who boycotted the vote owns their own inaction. It’s not Kamala’s fault everyone had a year advance warning on Project 2025 and chose to do nothing anyway.
A friend of mine was sincerely advancing the idea that it’s better that trump wins, because less-bad candidates like Harris just let people coast by without doing much as the world gets worse. He thinks something like Trump will be really bad, and people will demand more radical change. I think you can call that acellerationism. Pretty easy position to hold as a wealthy professional who owns property, I guess.
Personally, I’d rather people organize and try to make the world better without the worst people in the world having most of the power. Seems easier that way to me.
I find this to be the most common occurrence of accelerationists.
The most willing to send millions to their graves to achieve what they believe is socialism, while they themselves will never pick up a rifle and fight for it.
They’re identical to every fat cat chicken-hawk piece of shit that sends young Americans to die in wars for the profit of political donors.
Nothing we could have done would have made genocide, the MoSt lEtHaL miLiTary electable. The only thing we could have done was riot to get a candidate and policies capable of winning.
You’re missing the point entirely.
Everyone agrees Kamala was shit. That’s not the point.
The point is millions of leftists, the people who are supposed to be advocates for marginalized peoples, absolutely refused to be advocates for said marginalized peoples when the easiest possible way to do it was to show up and vote for Kamala.
Was Kamala shit? Yes.
Would all these marginalized people be sent to concentration camps whole the government abandons the rule of law entirely and ends democracy under Kamala?
Obviously no.
Yet so many millions of leftists, especially those in swing states, decided to surrender these marginalized people to the fourth Reich instead.
The only lesson here is not to get to the point where the only alternative to fascism are libs who would prefer fascism to socialism. We lost when we allowed the dems to run on unelectable policy.
My dude, that decision was made almost 250 years ago.
We were getting to that point by primary neo-libs out of office and putting in more and more progressives. Progressives willing to end the Electoral College.
That is entirely up in flames now. US democracy is gone. Its not “at risk”, its already fucking dead. Straight up gone and never to come back.
Boycotting Kamala didn’t make us rise above the 2 party system, it placed us firmly in a permenant 1 party system under fascism.
Nothing we could have done would have changed the outcome then. You can’t make sending the cops to kick the shit out of the activated college students who make up your ground game popular.
I hated that she sounded like a politician dodging questions with nonsense answers. She should have been direct and stopped worrying about being a different direction than Biden.
But yes with all those flaws she would have been better than Trump by miles.
But she was going to kill Palestinians with her bare hands!
But uh but shes a woman. A brown woman. The horror,!
fun fact: i think it has nothing to do with it. it’s just that trump is a reality tv star and tv stars and entertainers tend to get elected in democracies (see england, italy, USA) because they know how to present themselves to the people in an “entertaining” way and also because harris refused to focus on the real buying power of people.
Yeah. But we would be listening to that laugh. I mean, did you even hear it?
I don’t think people are understanding your obvious sarcasm.
Yeah. That’s not surprising. The only thing worse than my sarcasm is a tan suit.
Clearly you’ve never put mustard on a hot dog
DIJON! Unacceptable!! Insert Lemongrab screech
Maybe she shouldn’t have committed genocide in Gaza if having a chance of getting elected was important to her
Hey dipshit,
Trump supported the genocide in Gaza too.
The difference is Kamala wouldn’t be committing a genocide against minorities in the US too, while sending the military and her own Gestapo to US cities to crush dissent.
Trump IS doing that, we knew over a year in advance to the election that he would do that, yet y’all refused to support the one thing that would’ve prevented that, which was Kamala, like her or not.
Hope your hollow virtue signal of sticking it to the Dems is worth the pro-genocide option of letting Trump win and commit even more genocide, including inside the US.
These people dont actually care about Gaza. They just hate America. Makes a lot more sense when you realize that.
With the left, it’s never about being good enough or better than the right, it’s always about being perfect enough.
Just a reminder that no one steals food in America. If you thought you saw someone shoplifting food, no you didn’t! That never happened, you imagined it, turn around and walk away, nothing to report here.
Not American, but I totally didn’t see someone shoplifting a couple of weeks ago and I just carried on with my business, but on the way out I heard another customer grassing them out. What is the world coming to?
You know what you hardly ever see - billionaires telling on each other for their crimes for no reason. Solidarity, people!
it’s AI
Everyone on a jury should argue this. “I can’t trust the bodycam footage. Could be Sora. I have reasonable doubt.”
Duh, the U.S. government stopped SNAP payments and Trump will soon say nobody is poor or hungry here. Thus shoplifting is impossible, if you see it or ghosts, you’re literally hallucinating.
Republicans don’t give a fuck if they kill people by withholding healthcare, obviously they don’t give a fuck if people starve.
At some point the Democrats have got to realize this and start acting accordingly, but Democrats are still bending the knee: 13 Senate Democrats just voted to install a conservative judge in Alabama.
Republicans don’t give a fuck if they kill people by withholding healthcare, obviously they don’t give a fuck if people starve.
Maybe that’s why they love Israel so much?
This administration needs to be concerned about what happens when you have millions of people with nothing to lose anymore.
They want that
yhea they want escalation.
but that doesn’t mean the best strategy is to do nothing.
Totally. But they have been begging for “Civil War”. Like it’s some Hero’s Journey and people won’t die. It’s so short sided and dumb I can’t believe they actually believe it’s for the better.
You can only get your civil war if there are two clear sides, divisible by geography and cultural lines.
When you just have a widespread, starving population, you get mobs and mass riots and government leadership dragged out of their homes and offices.
I am not sure at all what their game is. I know they want the chaos but surely they can’t be so dumb that they think this will… oh yeah, lol caught myself there. They’re that dumb.
DT is probably just thinking back fondly of his last visit to North Korea.
“Hey, what if I did that?!”
mate, it’s fascism, would you tell the french resistance against nazis to chill, because nazis want an excuse to escalate?
It’s mostly red states that get food stamps. …
I can’t imagine the people in the US fighting against the government because to have a will to fight, you have to have something worth protecting in your life, and i’m pretty sure that social cohesion has been eroded so much in the USA that people simply won’t care about their neighbours enough to actually fight and risk their lifes for them, but what do i know.
Not an American but if the government shutsdown and they are cancelling programs, shouldn’t you not have to pay taxes for that time period?
Most working people have their estimated taxes deducted from their pay before they receive it. They don’t have an option to not pay.
Well, that one congressional district that has their congress person being kept out should definitely not have to pay because that would be a taxation when they have no representation.
Also, several congresspeople have said that they “don’t represent the Democrats” in their districts. I think that, too, should immediately exempt those residents from taxes.
You can fill out a form and send it to your HR/payroll department to adjust your withholdings at anytime, and they are supposed to do so no questions asked.
The employee not paying their income tax does not actually have an adverse impact on the employer, so they don’t care. Of course, the employee still has the legal obligation to pay; but breaking tax law is pretty inherent with tax protest.
They don’t have an option to not pay.
Sort of. When you start employment, you fill out a whole bunch of paperwork related to taxes and pay. Most people opt to have standard tax withholdings, but you can opt to get the full paycheck with no withholdings. It just requires you to pay a huge bill at the end of every year out of your bank account.
If you’re smart and time it right, you can take what would be deducted and put it into a 12-month certificate. Then, when the year ends, you take that principle and pay the taxes. You just get to keep the interest.
Most people don’t because taxes and the deductions from the paycheck change so much every year. It can be hard to figure out and a pain to have to refile the paperwork to change the deductions to see what this paycheck’s deduction should be.
If your income does not have withholdings you are required to make payments quarterly. If you owe above a certain amount when filing your tax returns you have to pay a penalty.
You can write exempt on the withholding form to stop your employer from withholding, but the forms are very clear that it is only to be done if you owe no tax. Unless you earn less than $16k or whatever the standard deduction is for you, it would be unwise to not make advanced tax payments.
You can file your forms differently to avoid paying the feds, or delaying those payments, but you do so at personal risk.
i used to do that, claim exempt and just pay at the end of the year. if what you end up paying is over a certain amount, they will get you for penalties and interest.
$1,000 is that number, or at least it was a few years ago. The IRS requires quarterly estimated payments. Although from what I could tell (not a tax expert), it would’ve been fine for me to just pay the whole sum on Dec 31.
Then we have to pay someone $150 to mail it to the IRS.
Lol
Lmao
Rofl
It would be like withholding rent from your landlord until they repaired your heating. You’d have to still place the money in escrow to prove to a judge you had the money intended to pay.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Good we should stop paying our taxes.
if there isn’t a government, why pay taxes to it?
actually, stupid question. but what percentage of people could do a tax strike, resulting in the government having no funds or means to go after all of them. and collapsing?
Vast majority of working people have federal taxes automatically deducted from their checks before they even see a dime. Most people get refunds at the end of the year instead of having to pay, so it would be up to the self-employed and basically anyone who doesn’t file a simple form to start withholding their taxes.
I guess we could talk about getting everyone to adjust their paycheck withholdings but most people live under the assumption that “everything will blow over by next year” whatever the circumstances.
Well they print money so not really any amount of people, but at this point you are probably better off just paying taxes to your state, because the federal government is mostly just a Mafia middleman anyways, which has become very apparent under trump. Taking people’s own tax money away from them because they don’t like him or his terrible policies.
The reality is almost all of this money, well the part that is leftover to give back to the people, is given back to the states anyways, just with a bunch of strings and hands in it. The federal government likes this so that they can manipulate what is taught in schools and road laws and everything else. The states rely on getting their citizens money back from the federal government and so they get this defacto management by executive agencies and stuff.
Abolish the states = abolish taxes
We are a long, long, long, long way from doing away with borders, as true as the idea is for a better world.
Billionaire class already not paying taxes.
There is the idea of taxing them 2%, chosen bellow inflation, so their wealth would still grow, it is a tax that they wont even feel. And it is ridiculously bellow what everyone else pays.
Yet, even that, painfully compromised idea is considered ridiculous by the rich and powerful.
Their greed knows no bounds
The issue is they will just write IOUs. It’s not like they can’t. They can also literally print money. So.
yeah the federal government can essentially print arbitrary amounts of money through the federal reserve bank if it has control of it, yes.
the only way out (to prevent the federal government from having infinite, literally unlimited economic buying power) is to devalue the dollar in such a way that the dollar becomes completely worthless, i.e. its value goes to zero. but this will only happen if people stop accepting the dollar as a valuable currency, i.e. if people switch to using alternative currencies instead, like the euro (€) or something else entirely.
So about those government contracts for immigration, you would think some of those states that raked in a lot of money, could perhaps use that ill-gotten money to at least benefit the residents of their states.
Funny that Florida got more than half a billion dollars from the government the day before the shutdown, but they just can’t find it within their hearts or their budget to use any of that money to feed families relying on food stamps in their state. Wonder where it’s going instead?
Wonder where it’s going instead?
Alligators with freakin’ laser beams attached to their heads for Alligator Alcatraz.
Stephen miller would approve
I think calling it “Alligator Auschwitz” would be more effective, except one of my old coworkers sincerely asked me “What’s Auschwitz?”
This will destroy the US economy. I hope you like standing in bread lines…
SNAP benefits are already the equivalent to bread lines. They took away their bread line…
Russia has bread
Sure do, they give it to you as rations on the front line :)
It’s mostly going to be the elderly who suffer. People just forget about old people. They can’t get out and go stand in line at food pantries.
Sometimes they don’t have anyone checking on them very often.
Most don’t know how to get online and find services and such.
If you have an elderly neighbor or family member. Try to check with them and see if they need help.
If only it was the elderly people in the government that suffered.
Yeah kids and disabled people too. I just always think of the elderly cause they get forgotten about.
this is a disaster for the people affected (and also every society is 3 days without food before violent revolutions and all that) but also IMO these programs should ideally be paid for by the states anyways, not the federal government. i also think that taxes should go to the states instead of the federal government, and the states then forward whatever amount is appropriate to the federal government. that would make the states more resilient against these kinds of federal fraud.
On the one hand, maybe. On the other, many states (mostly red ones) are also cruel and incompetent.
Also, the federal government has vastly more funding power than the state government.
And with only one week for people to prepare. Smooth.
if you really didn’t see this coming, it’s on you, honestly
The leopards! They hunger!
where does the expression “leoparts ate my face” even come from?
I believe it’s from a tweet that goes something like: “But the leopards weren’t supposed to eat MY face,” says person who voted for the Leopards Eating People’s Faces party.
Can any Americans explain to me, a Canadian, how it makes sense for essential services like food benefits to be suspended just because your government can’t get their shit together?
Like, genuine question here; how is this is a good system? How does your country benefit from things being designed this way? I’m not saying we don’t ever have political deadlock in Canada, we most certainly do, but even as someone who gets half my household income from the military, I’ve never had to worry about a missed paycheck just because politicians are being stupid. We have failsafes for that. Why don’t you?
So, many many years ago, there was a system where when a bill was passed, that meant it got funded. Simple and sweet. Actually it wasn’t that sweet, because Nixon was refusing to spend money that the law required the U.S. government to spend, similar to what Trump is doing today.
The current system is generally based on the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. There have been many small and large changes since, but the structure basically goes back to that.
Now that’s useful context that I didn’t know. Thank you.
In a sensible country, the government would continue to spend at the levels of the previous budget in the event of a delay in negotiating the renewed budget. It makes no sense. There are no benefits. Please do what you did in 1814 again we need it.
We don’t even need to go burn the white house down again, he tore it down himself.
Bbbuuuuttttttttt, what if he was inside it still? Please???
It wasn’t just the white house. Also congress is the one that makes the budget, and the laws that causes a delay in budget negotiations to stop payments.
So fun fact, the shutdowns came from a legal opinion of the AG in the 80s, and they didn’t even adhere to that decision until a decade later, except for the first time. Reagan wanted the government shutdown to force Congress hands to cut more then they wanted to.
Then for the rest of the 80s and some 90s everybody ignored that AG decision until 1995 when Newt Gingrich (man that fuck was bad for the country) got into a fight with Clinton over spending and then all of the sudden the AG opinion mattered again.
It’s not a good system. It benefits none of the citizens. It’s being done to intentionally divide us further.
Like, genuine question here; how is this is a good system?
Good question. I think to answer that you have to take into account competing ideals in hyper-capitalist American noggins about how the poor are thought of, how americans measure themselves, how we see social services as charity, and where charity “belongs” in our system of governance. Many Americans even on the left think charity should be the role on non government organizations, usually churches. We’re an overly religious country and we arent realistic about what churches do and how and why they do it. Since we hate the poor, we hate their support systems, and so we intend for them to be failure prone.
The TLDR (in my opinion) is that (on average) American policy makers hate their poor and think being impoverished is inevitably the result of a character flaw, criminal intent, or racial inadequacy and wealth is the result of higher character and virtue. Most Americans are startled to meet a rich black man, and doubly so to meet a rich black woman.
We also dislike the intelligencia, since at least the 70s. Unless they are in finance.
Okay Mr. Canadian, I’ll try my best to explain it. The first thing you have to remember is that food stamps are a recent invention compared to the history of the country. Not that recent, but they came around just about when the boomers (for some of us, our parents. For others, grandparents) were about to be born.
So, when the framers got together to design the Constitution, food stamps did not exist (they weren’t even an idea of the time) and they were deathly afraid of a powerful government (a mix between the circumstances leading up to the Boston tea party and the slavery question/compromise between the North and South). So, under that framing, the founders were dead set on having the power of the purse being under as many people’s representation as possible. That is why the power of the purse and the allocation, of which the allocation of food stamps would fall under, is in Article 1 (Congressional powers) of our Constitution.
Yeah it can’t get its shit together but, at the same time, with the jackass we have now, putting the food stamps (or any allocation of the budgetary allotments) under the control of someone so petty is actually a godsend.
I don’t know what fail safes Canada has, so I can’t speak to that. However, does our Constitution need some amendments? YES As to what those are/would be, I cannot say because the list is too long. I think one of the reasons we are having such issue now is because our political system has been so captured since Regan that half the country feels like its living with a crazy lady in the attic, and they don’t want to feed the insanity any more than necessary. Is that a bad way to keep a country going? Probably
Shutdowns have terribly little to do with the Constitution or Founding Fratboys. They’re mostly the result of the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (and then repealing the “Gephardt rule” in 1995).
Having a debt ceiling is idiotic. Congress passes a budget to decide what to spend, so why would they need to pass another bill to fund the spending they already passed? Literally, the answer to that is “So they can shut down the government.”
This isn’t an issue of “the power of the purse” or checks and balances. It’s political grandstanding. Republicans are determined to break the country.
Shutdowns have terribly little to do with the Constitution . . … They’re mostly the result of the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (and then repealing the “Gephardt rule” in 1995).
What ever restrictions that Congress puts on its budgets and developing budgets are well within its power of the purse under Article 1 Section 8, which expressly states:
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
If Congress chooses to express that limitation within a statute, that is well within its rights. So, whether or not it is actually about political grandstanding is moot under the constitution because it is expressly within Congress’s power of the purse.
My point is that nothing in the Constitution requires government shutdowns. Your comment about “the power of the purse” was fairly off base/misleading because it’s all political grandstanding.
This country existed for ~225 years with no government shutdowns. Yes, it has always been within Congress’s rights to be dumbasses, I didn’t suggest otherwise. I just want to be clear that nobody is forcing them.
Shutdowns are not caused by the Constitution or any quirk of American procedure. Newt Gingrich passed a law so he could hold the government hostage, and Republicans have gotten worse ever since.
I mean, the main failsafes we have in Canada are pretty simple.
First, there is no debt calling. Once a budget is passed it remains in effect until a new budget is passed. Government departments are funded until specific actions are taken to make them not be funded.
Second, and this is the main one; budgets are considered confidence votes. That means if you ever fail to pass one, you’re done. Hand over the keys to country, you don’t get to drive it anymore. Either the opposition forms a government if they’re united enough to do so, or we go to the polls and elect a new one.
The first part means that during this process the basic mechanisms of state all continue to function. No one misses a paycheck. It can be annoying having to go to the polls again, maybe a few times in a row even if political deadlock is particularly bad, but ultimately its the voters who get to decide the outcome, not the politicians.
Anyway, thanks for the detailed answer.
Is that a bad way to keep a country going? Probably
You know I said something like this to my therapist once. I ended up with a lot therapy in a short amount of time
Well, in the context of sovereign states, the equivalent of a therapist would probably be another nation invading the US and rooting out the Nazis. But, would that happen today? No. So, the crazy lady in the attic, while heavily a US problem, is also a global problem.
We don’t need to be invaded, we are actually capable of rooting out the Nazis ourselves. But around a third of white people are white supremacists and another third get more mad at the suggestion their friends are white supremacists than their friends being white supremacists, so…
I don’t know the official reason, if such a thing even exists. My heads screwed on just wrong enough to hazard a guess:
The empathy of inconveniencing and materially harming their constituents (or the fear of their electoral retribution) would be such a driving force that the government would seek to end any shutdown before it came to that.
Of course, any well-meaning intent withers in the face of monsters willing to kill, and let others die, for the facade of politics they don’t even truly subscribe to.
any well-meaning intent withers in the face of monsters willing to kill, and let others die,
for the facade of politicsbecause their donors told them toFTFY
No. It doesn’t make sense and it is not a good system.
It benefits the oligarchs who control our government, certainly not the people. This is working as intended. Republicans have been trying to dismantle the government for 60 years and they’ve just about got it.
hahhaha, wait, Canada, gov worker, missed cheques not a thing??? Have you heard of the phoenix payroll system??
I mean, the US is currently missing pay periods due to a conflict between their political leaders – but for us, our gov workers missed paycheques due to sheer incompetence. The people responsible for that shitshow weren’t even fired / held accountable for screwing it up. I don’t disagree that the US system has some issues, but I also don’t think we’re in that great a position to comment haha
As you point out, the Phoenix issue was incompetence, and the impact was uneven. Some didn’t have issues, others missed paycheques, yet others still got paid more than they expected.
But the US situation is a function of US Government that results in massive impact against the more vulnerable members of their society. I believe the comment remains valid.
But that’s not a built in feature of the political system, is it? Like, you do see the difference, right?
Fuck ups happen everywhere. Canada has plenty of them. But what’s happening in the US is apparently just how the system is designed. Hence the question; why design it that way?
Both sides.
BOOoOoTh SiIiiiiIIiiiiiiDESssssssssSsS!!
Biden is old, you see, and there was also a woman who wasn’t exactly adamant about Israel, so you have to starve now. But don’t worry, if you starve enough, something will surely happen. And if not, at least there will be a civil war, isn’t that great? You get to die in a random shootout, isn’t that wonderful? So glad we didn’t vote so this lady didn’t win.
True, but as for the last part -
we didn’t vote
We actually did. The even more depressing reality is the last three presidential elections had the highest turnout of registered voters and young voters in American history.
What’s fucked up is that exit polling showed that most people were entirely tuned-out and saw no difference between the candidates because most people don’t watch the news or politics, most people are uninformed on basic science and reason, most people have curated social media feeds that push attention-span erosion and right-wing propaganda, and a good QUARTER of the adult population of America is functionally illiterate. Meaning studies have shown that 22% or more of adults in the US cannot read more than a couple words strung together or have to piece together sentences contextually. They can work, they can answer text messages, but are incapable of assembling paragraphs and forming complex abstractions.
We’re fucked on a level that is hard to convey.
the highest turnout of registered voters and young voters in American history.
This is one of the problems with how we’ve pushed the messages like “rock the vote”, that you should vote, no matter what, or you’re being a bad citizen.
If you can’t be bothered to actually try to be informed, then you shouldn’t feel pressure to vote. Sure, you should be allowed to vote no matter what, but no one should be pressuring you to vote even with lack of interest.
We should be emphasizing you should get to know the candidates up and down the ballot, not just getting your mark on a ballot.
We should be emphasizing you should get to know the candidates up and down the ballot
*we should have been
this was probably the last election in a long time
The erosion of our education system and attention spans is a feature of the system, not a bug. They wanted this all along, and have been working on it for decades. There’s a reason the right has hated PBS since it came out, and it’s not just because Bert and Ernie are a same-sex couple.
deep breaths
Oh I’m sorry… What I meant was:
deep breathes
Also there’s statistical evidence that the vote was manipulated…
https://electiontruthalliance.org/2024-us-election-analysis/
