this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2025
267 points (98.9% liked)

Political Memes

9335 readers
758 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes 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 misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow 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
 
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] brown567@sh.itjust.works 11 points 8 hours ago

Rich people don't abuse the system, they use it as intended (the system has been meticulously engineered to ferry wealth from the neediest mouths to the greediest ones)

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 17 points 10 hours ago

Basic income for poor people: lazy people want a handout

Government backed interest account for rich people: perfectly reasonable.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

We as a collective just hate the poor.

OP is right in that it's hypocritical, but people don't care and never will. (Unless you're Finnish, where homelessness has been solved.)

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Homelessness can't ever be truly solved without forcibly institutionalizing a portion of the population.

But solving it for economic hardship is totally doable.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Homelessness can’t ever be truly solved

Absolutely it can, and has been.

That some people choose a nomadic lifestyle doesn't change that.

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 hours ago

The second half of my sentence that you left out is the important part. Severely mentally ill people aren't "choosing to live a nomadic lifestyle".

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 12 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

when a rich person does it: "they're smart and also who wouldn't take advantage of it if you were in their position?" ... when a poor person does it: "they're lazy and just want things for free"

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 7 hours ago

Its "different"

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago

If you stack all the abuses from poor people it probably won't even be a small fraction of abuses by a couple billionaires.

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 7 points 14 hours ago

Worse: when rich people do it it's considered a feature, not a bug of the system.

[–] Lembot_0004@discuss.online 16 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

It is forbidden to abuse the system that was invented to abuse you.

[–] vzqq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 17 hours ago (1 children)
[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 1 points 4 hours ago

It is widely used by systems theorists, and is generally invoked to counter the notion that the purpose of a system can be read from the intentions of those who design, operate or promote it. When a system's side effects or unintended consequences reveal that its behaviour is poorly understood, then the POSIWID perspective can balance political understandings of system behaviour with a more straightforwardly descriptive view.

Reminds me of that one nerd's online signature: "A program will never do what you want, only what was implemented"