364

The most striking proposals were for the elimination of medical debt for millions of Americans; the “first-ever” ban on price gouging for groceries and food; a cap on prescription drug costs; a $25,000 subsidy for first-time home buyers; and a child tax credit that would provide $6,000 per child to families for the first year of a baby’s life.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 141 points 2 months ago

I can already hear the crabs who didn't get this in the past trying to yank down the other crabs who will qualify for it back into the bucket. Happens every time there's a discussion about minimum wage.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 86 points 2 months ago

Fuck them crabs. I bought my first house in April and don't want children (vasectomy ftw), I support these policies 1000%. Improving the lives of the people around me is an improvement to my life.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 55 points 2 months ago

Improving the lives of the people around me is an improvement to my life.

I wish more people understood this.

[-] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 17 points 2 months ago

Improving the lives of the people around me is an improvement to my life.

A rising tide lifts all boats. When the poor, disenfranchised, the marginalized, and more do well, we all do well.

[-] SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

BuT i ShOuLdNt HaVe To PaY fOr OtHeR pEoPlEs ChOiCeS

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] jumjummy@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Every time I hear these arguments, I remember the analogy with cancer treatment and it makes it so clear what a terrible position it is to oppose this for others.

Imagine if a cancer cure came out today and then making the argument of “that’s not fair, my mom had cancer and she suffered and died last year, how come your mom can get a cure?”

[-] Bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

I bought my first house like 2 years ago, i wish i had this proposed 25k assistance. I want it implemented for other people. I know 2 people who cannot afford to buy a house complain about the proposal

[-] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 12 points 2 months ago

What people don't realize, is that at some point you will need to sell your house. Wouldn't it be nice to know you'll have a higher chance to sell when people have a $25k assistance to help with the buying.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] greenskye@lemm.ee 9 points 2 months ago

Most of those crabs (myself included) are benefiting from very low interest rates on their mortgages. Low enough rates to more than fully offset this one time incentive. So they should just chill and be happy they aren't paying 8% interest or whatever it is these days.

[-] blandfordforever@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

Maybe I'm missing somethng here. I'm not just asking this because I'm upset about the possibility of other people getting money and not me: Wouldn't we expect the home buyers' subsidy to only increase demand and drive up the cost of houses? Then the money would end up in the hands of those who already own one or many houses. Isn't this just giving money to people who are already well-off? Wouldn't it be better to create a program focused on building more houses instead?

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 51 points 2 months ago

Damn I just missed it but I'd still support it for all the newer parents out there. Its a struggle and that would really help.

[-] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 41 points 2 months ago

It also includes restoration of the child tax credit, just like we had during the pandemic when monthly checks were sent out to all parents and the child poverty rate was cut in half overnight. This is just an even bigger payment for the year they are a newborn.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 40 points 2 months ago

Capping Groceries is COMMUNISM even though 100% of Current Astronomical Profits are going DIRECTLY to the CEOS and I can't afford Groceries!

[-] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 2 months ago

"We should instead impose a $6,000 annual tax penalty on childless cat ladies!" -J. D. Vance, probably /s

[-] EvilBit@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

The important part being that the proceeds of that tax will be given as subsidies on yacht purchases for… reasons.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 30 points 2 months ago

I'll pour one out for all the idiots on here who have been crying about how she doesn't have any policies.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] greenshirtdenimjeans@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 months ago

Already bought my first house and not planning on having kids. I’m cool with this.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 months ago

How many newborns can we redeem at one time for the credit? Asking for a friend.

[-] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Ladies, line up. We're going to red lobster

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Tujio@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

One per day. For some reason the service is based in Germany, so it renews at 6pm EST.

[-] Daxtron2@startrek.website 4 points 2 months ago

Can I choose death runes instead of the cash? Trying to level my magic rn

[-] jaschen@lemm.ee 11 points 2 months ago

In Taiwan the government gives you something like 300usd a month until your child is 6. Even more if you have more than 1 kid.

This is how we take care of our citizens.

[-] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Canada has the child tax credit. I don’t have any kids so I’m not sure how much it is, but as a childless Canadian I approve.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] SeaJ@lemm.ee 6 points 2 months ago

Vance should be in favor of this, right? Although I'm guessing he would only support it if it went to the right type of person...

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
364 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4670 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS