this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2026
376 points (99.5% liked)

Political Memes

12030 readers
2462 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) 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.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

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

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Siegehammer85@lemmy.world 2 points 4 minutes ago

With such wealth they should fall under military rules, you run, you run with wealth stolen from the country and could become a threat to the country, you will be classified as a traitor and enemy and will be pursued militarily. Total loss off all assets and potentially terminated. That would be the solution.

[–] ViscloReader@lemmy.world 1 points 7 minutes ago

Fucking kill them already, they're killing my country! I hope they suffer a lot and that their corpses be thrown on some vomit/poop pit.

[–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 hour ago

Great, this way money will circulate in the economy again instead of getting hoarded by a small minority

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

Somehow this is really mesmerizing.

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 2 points 1 hour ago

It's got a strange This Is America choreography to it.

It's the shorts.

[–] switcheroo@lemmy.world 10 points 2 hours ago

The Epstein class deserve to be binned. They're worse than garbage. They're parasites.

[–] TheKaul@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 21 minutes ago (1 children)

If the US actually taxed someone like Bezos a fair amount to narrow the wealth gap, Bezos would just go to another country that will gladly accept his enormous amounts of money and help him move his assets & businesses over. The US would then lose a very large chunk of money, and as we all know, the US wants to be "The BEST country in the world", so that's not something they'd willingly let happen.

Maybe it's not that simple, but I think that's the general reason we haven't seen the ultra-rich tax increases we all want. The politicians like money, the rich like political power, and the US wants to be the biggest and bestest. Just like a peanut butter jelly sandwich, you can't seperate the peanut butter & the jelly once they're put together.

[–] scutiger@lemmy.world 2 points 11 minutes ago

The reason we haven't seen those tax increases in the ultra-rich is that they have a direct line to the legislators that the common folk don't have. They will spend a billion dollars if that will save them one dollar in expenses. It's cheaper for them to buy a senator than to pay a fair amount of taxes.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 hours ago

I say someone will replace them if their business is needed. If it's not needed then them leaving isn't a threat.

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 20 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Even if it were true who cares? If they aren't actually paying taxes then what is the point in having them?

[–] VeryInterestingTable@jlai.lu 5 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I think they view us as a bank. We need to make them money or they will transfer to another bank. Simple.

[–] skittle07crusher@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 minutes ago

That is very very apt

Plus sometimes banks have perks that keep the customer staying after all, and I believe I’ve heard of various scandinavian billionaires, for example, threatening to leave but then staying because their country offered them benefits beyond even their ungodly wealth

[–] GalacticSushi@piefed.blahaj.zone 17 points 3 hours ago

"But look at all the jobs we're creating!"

-Billionaire CEO who just announced a new round of layoffs

[–] heartSagan5@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

And abandon our, supposed, “world-class” hegemony? Nah, they’ll just putts around like they always do anyways.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 1 points 21 minutes ago

I think you meant "putz"

Derived from Yiddish, the verb means to waste time fooling around, doing nothing useful, to idle (or putter, which you could use, but it's less derogatory).

The noun means a penis or a fool.

[–] dan69@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

Where to another place where they will pay taxes to play..

[–] godsammitdam@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

American citizens can't escape the tax man. Unless you renounce your citizenship.

And if you're REALLY that scared of a myth, put a progressive exit tax on their wealth. 100% over 1 billion. They built that wealth by exploiting America and its working class, so it's just a repossession at that point.

[–] Nooodel@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

Love the idea. Don't even need to go after any personal wealth they have, just all the stocks. Chief exploitation manager leaving? Great. Get out. Take your Ferrari and your Villa. Keep it. But you get to stop exploiting people on the same day.

[–] PodPerson@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

There a clean version of the gif for memeing purposes?

[–] Zephorah@discuss.online 40 points 5 hours ago

They’re not doing anything for me. Let them leave.

[–] starik@lemmy.today 5 points 3 hours ago

Must be an expensive trash bag. I’d be picking egg shells off the lawn after trying that.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 18 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

WA’s rich are leaving? Another tax on wealth smashes records by tripling the amount coming in from last year

“This morning we got the updated numbers for fiscal year 2026 for capital gains … it came in at $1.5 billion,” economist Dave Reich told state lawmakers earlier this month. “So a very significant increase, quite a bit above our forecast from what we had before.”

This is understating things by a fair bit. Last year this tax raised $584 million. So the revenue, which is a preliminary figure pending delayed returns, appears to have nearly tripled in one year. It quadrupled from the year before that.

This is not what the critics of tax-the-rich schemes said should happen. They predicted tax proceeds would deteriorate as rich people moved away or structured their finances to avoid paying it.

[–] justaman123@lemmy.world 10 points 4 hours ago

Yeah, rich people do what they want to do, leaving isn't one of them. They make too much money where they are, why would they leave. They need us way more than we need them

[–] manxu@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago

What is it people say? "It doesn't hurt to ask." In this case, billionaires can save a pretty penny by paying a few "influencers" and "intellectuals" to doomsday the tax away. In reality, the pittance they pay in wealth tax is not reason enough for any of them to move.

Even if they have to pay a 5% one-time wealth tax (CA proposal), that's nothing compared to what ordinary people have to pay in taxes, and ordinary people actually need that money.

[–] takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 16 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

The amendment defines Retirement holdings, individually-owned assets, and other forms of personal savings to include "pensions; retirement accounts, including but not limited to 401 (k) accounts, 403(b) accounts, and all other individual retirement accounts; mutual funds; and all personal property, whether tangible or intangible, including but not limited to financial assets, investment accounts, business interests, digital assets, intellectual property, personal belongings, and other assets used to produce or collect income or savings for retirement or financial planning."

Jesus, that's an Orwellian bill name.

[–] lostme@piefed.social 1 points 25 minutes ago

At that point is there anything that doesn't fit this definition? xdd

I guess income that goes to luxury things such as groceries and bills would still get taxed

[–] takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 hours ago

My biggest concern is:

Ballotpedia has not located a campaign in opposition to the ballot measure. You can share campaign information or arguments, along with source links for this information, with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.

If no one is declaring opposition, this will definitively pass.

[–] _chris@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

There’s far fewer of them than us.

[–] skittle07crusher@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 minutes ago

Seriously. To the point that, any day now, there could be a movement that says, “we are not calling them billionaires any more, we’re calling them [insert appropriate opprobrium here]” and it would take

(since language is decided upon and endlessly evolved by the masses, whether we like it or not)

[–] ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago

Can we just skip to the eating billionaires part? There are clearly some lessons that need to be made so they may be learned.

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 4 points 4 hours ago

I'm even down for them to take their fake money with them, just gtfo

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

There's a simple truth that more people need to hear.

With a few exceptions, police and the military do not serve billionaires, they serve the State.

The billionaires know this, which is why they work so hard to control or dismantle the State. But they are all cowards and use proxies that can be replaced.

If the people manage to overcome the active resistance to take control of the state, there's very little the billionaires can do when the federal marshalls show up at their door.

[–] A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 56 minutes ago (1 children)
[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 1 points 19 minutes ago

See, the problem with the argument presented there, is that it completely ignores a bunch of what actually happened during that times frame.

The American Revolution was a complex time filled with compromise between those who actually believed in democracy, and those who were horrified by it.

And then the French Revolution happened, and the rich jackasses got scared. Well, the smart ones were scared.

Which is all meaningless because there have been 27 amendments since then, and those change the rules, letting more people have more of a voice.

Basically, the summation of the argument is thus, if voting didn't matter, then the rich assholes wouldn't be working so hard to keep you from doing it.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Then why aren’t federal Marshall’s showing at the door of every person in the Epstein files?

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

The billionaires know this, which is why they work so hard to control or dismantle the State. But they are all cowards and use proxies that can be replaced.

[–] abcdqfr@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

My knee would hurt for a month after a stunt like this.

[–] StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Almost all of the biggest billionaires' wealth is stock-based. You want to tax them? Raise the corporate tax rates and close loop-holes and exemptions.

It doesn't matter where they move. Any company that earns money in the country has to pay taxes on that revenue. Its the win-win we don't talk about.

[–] dvoraqs@lemmy.world 1 points 34 minutes ago (1 children)

Companies pay taxes on profits though, not revenue. It's easy to avoid taxes by spending down your profits.

[–] StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world 1 points 21 minutes ago* (last edited 7 minutes ago)

I may have used the wrong term. Still, that's where closing loop-holes comes in. If you want the government to be an engine that funnels wealth back down to the lower classes then you have to attack the upper economy that is the stock exchange. The easiest way to do that is corporate tax.

Individual taxes wont work because, again, most of their wealth is tied to investments by design. Same is true for retirement funds. God help us if they ever manage to get entitlements tied directly to index funds.

But anyway, corporate tax would decrease stock value, decrease billionaires net worth and put more debt pressure on billionaires I would assume, since their physical assets are usually purchased on credit granted based on their stock value. It would a a double whammy right? Their networth goes down and so does their credit score while theyre paying back the banks. Win-win

No matter how you slice it we have to cut through the bullshit and the first firewall protecting all that money is the low corporate tax rate and tax dodging.

[–] Switorik@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 hours ago

If we're not making money on them, why do we care if they stay? I say pay your part or good riddance!

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 3 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

That garbage bag will eventually rupture spewing its insides everywhere if you do this regularly so do you want that to happen to billionaires too??

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 2 points 1 hour ago

I would lick their intestines off the ground