They don't have money. They have debt and stock. Their money is a whole other tier of pretend that we're too poor to have access to.
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2025
1193 points (99.1% liked)
Political Memes
8904 readers
4388 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Stocks are assets are money.
The pretend we're collectively falling for is that you can't tax those assets because they're somehow not really there until they want them to be.
But is lead going to be bad for the groundwater?
Nothing but good to come out of that idea.
Liberté! égalité! fraternité!
Leeja Miller notes historically wealth accumulated by the aristocratic elite is never restored back to the public (that is, back to the state general fund, then used to sponsor roads, bridges, libraries, food programs, education, science, etc. which serve the public good) except through violence, e.g. the response of the French public after the États Généraux de 1789 )
So this, along wirh discussions of the kind of reprisal the Luigi Mangioni may not have done, all tracks, considering the escalating clime in the United States.
It'd sure be nice to find a nonviolent path to ~~restoring~~ creating public-serving government and a system that regards the personhood of absolutely everyone, but we very much cannot take violence off the table, especially when it comes to restoring wealth parity.
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
I’d watch that.
Can I be the guy that pours the lead?
I like it, but it needs some work to give it staying power. I say start with 1 billionaire, then once they've gotten a good, front-row whiff of the consequences, we start a blind bidding war for social services, a different one each episode. Whoever has the lowest bid gets a new and excruciating ending at the end of each episode. The one guy left standing at the end gives up his money for the final program, but gets to walk out alive.
Switched roles Squid Game
Online liberals will joke about eating the rich but get mad when protesters block traffic. Online liberals will joke about "the guillotine" but argue that destruction of property counts as "violence".
Because blocking traffic doesnt hurt anyone except other lower class people forced to drive for their livelihood.
Lets protest the rich by punishing the poor. Next well protest the rich by licking their boots. They'll hate that for sure... Makes no sense.
What's your opinion on strike action ?
I've started to reply to this a few times but I dont think there is a "good" answer. Me personally I think strikes and boycotts are functional protest methods. They hurt innocent people just trying to survive but the difference is that they dont "just" hurt those people. They also hurt the rich at their bottom line.
The real problem I have with traffic protests is that they dont actually do anything other than alienate the protesters. If you could do mass traffic protests so that it actually made a difference to outweigh the other side of the coin then it would be different. But you would need a nationwide organized protest. Which we are nowhere close to.
Thanks that makes some sense. I think the thing is they've been effective in the past, and not much else has. Maybe there has to be some sort of sacrifice to gain progress.
I guess some of the postwar progressive (economic) reforms - largely now abolished - were actually a product of democractic pressure rather than protest - but some of the other ones like anti-racism stuff still did require sacrifice and protest on top of that. And the prevailing economic conditions were quite extreme at that time. When people have less to lose there's less cost.
There will be a lot of blocked traffic if we ever bring back the guillotines. Just be honest and say you don't want to be inconvenienced.
Nah, im all for eating the rich but dont punish working people with stupid protests. Protests that inconvenience people who you want to be on your side just turns them against you. If you want to lose the fight make everyone who supports you stop supporting you.
You do you though.
How can we ever get to the point of eating the rich if we can't even block traffic without turning people away from the cause? The former is far more disruptive than the latter.
Mass protests in other countries have shut entire cities down. That's what it takes. If your sentiment is the popular one (and it appears to be), then Americans will never get to a place of actual resistance. I guess people just aren't mad enough yet.
If we're workshopping names, Boil the Billionaire has nice alliteration.
"I'm Mark Summers and Welcome to..."
Live Audience: "BOIL!"
Live Audience: "THE!"
Live Audience: "BILLIONAIRE!"
Instead of drowning then in molten lead, we could force-feed them enriched uranium and call it Let Them Eat (Yellow) Cake.
load more comments
(1 replies)
What about calling it "you can't do that on television" and ~~slime~~ boil them when they say "I do not recall" or similar while under oath
load more comments
(3 replies)
Who Wants to Bury a Billionaire?
There's no real entertainment in this...
let them fight to the death... and then let the animals in... If you want to know how to entertain MAGA folks... check out the ancient romans!
Winner gets a dog park named after them, because they were eaten by wolves released into the pit after they defeated the other billionaires
Sounds good!
But we get the lead back, right? Otherwise that's a bit of a waste.
I don't want billionaire poisoning in my lead.
Might need to do a little work to clean all the carbon garbage out of there, but yeah that should be no prob.
slag
We don’t need their money to pay for any of that, not providing them is an exclusively political choice.
The only justification needed to take their money is because them having it is an existential crisis for society.
It should be proportionally more expensive to remain rich.
"we can monetize the fall of billionaires"
view more: next ›