this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026
1257 points (99.6% liked)

Political Memes

12258 readers
1956 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 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works 114 points 4 days ago (9 children)

Because one of those things is contagious, impacting consumers and laborers and therefore halting commerce until addressed. It was determined to be more profitable to give away free shots. Yay capitalism.

[–] qualia@lemmy.world 37 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (7 children)

Yes, herd immunity is inapplicable to diabetes, cancer, or allergies.

Edit: Is there a way to generically refer to not OP but the original original poster? The guy, for example, who's confused in this post (Jum). Is OOP standard?

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 32 points 3 days ago (1 children)

OOP

Object Oriented Person

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Ornery and Officious Periodontologist

[–] SourDragon@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Orange Octagonal Polygon

[–] Gumus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] dalekcaan@feddit.nl 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Unless of course OP's comment refers to multiple other comments, in which case it's OOPS

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Fun fact: the Danish word for oops is "ups", which makes it fun to receive packages from United Parcel Service here 😁

[–] Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's the same in german, i was always saying i wouldn't get my parcel because ups!

(although GLS is far worse)

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Unfortunately I don't think that it is standard, people also use OP to refer to a commenter higher up a single comment thread, so then the normal OP becomes the OOP, meaning the OP in the post would become the OOOP. Or we could use "Pre-Original-Original-Poster"...

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

people also use OP to refer to a commenter higher up a single comment thread too

I've never understood that. That's literally not the OP. The original poster is the one who posted the post, not a comment.

Using the word that way is antithetical to its very meaning. It's like if I randomly started calling my cousin my grandfather, but unironically (side rant: "unironically" is used to mean "non-sarcastically," because people can't grasp the difference between sarcasm and irony 🤦‍♀️).

Anyway, you could refer to the "top-level comment," but I don't think there's an acronym for that. But I've seen OC used, it's just rare. OC can refer to any higher-level comment though as long as the context makes it clear which one it's in reference to.

But the one who posted the post is not OOP. That's OP. OOP is the one who posted the post that OP's post refers to.

I guess the POOP would then be any OOPs from OOP's post or prior...

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] djdarren@piefed.social 13 points 3 days ago (5 children)

I think I was always dimly aware of the notion, but one of the things that covid really highlighted for me was that people in power are able to put an actual cash figure on every human life.

"If we spend more than £X on a given solution to this problem, it will stop being financially worthwhile"

And £X+ was the point at which disabled people, or younger people, or both, or whoever, were just left to die. Governments spent a lot of money, for sure, but not a penny more than was necessary to keep the economy (somewhat) upright and their cronies in cocktails and bigger yachts.

[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Even worse, the £X is the short-term financial gains. Reducing poverty and homelessnes DOES profit over long run, but we don't have anyone at top competent enough to tradeoff it with "slightly less profit margins increased by next year."

[–] Rawrosaurus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 days ago

That each human being has an estimated cash value is something that was taught in school when I went at least. It was more related to how much a death costs estimated based on how much value the person could have brought in if alive.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

What's really wild is that every government has multiple numbers depending on what they're spending on. The amount that their departments associated with it will spend to rescue a citizen held hostage is different from the amount they'll spend to save a life from disease which is different from the amount any particular infrastructure related department will spend to save a life, which may all be different from each other, and may be different based on cause of death (my government will spend a lot more to save a life from a passenger train related death than from a freight train related death or an automobile death)

ETA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_a_statistical_life

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] jrubal1462@mander.xyz 46 points 3 days ago (8 children)

I don't frequently have these kinds of debates in public, but the closest I've ever gotten to talking a vaccine skeptic out of their position was when I came from the angle of, "these shots are free because insurance companies know they work, and they would rather eat the cost of 100 vaccines than have to pay for every hundredth person to be hospitalized with the flu for 3 days, which costs THEM $40k."

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

Yeppp, insurance companies want you to have to have health insurance, be perfectly healthy as long as possible, and die or recover quickly when you get something expensive like cancer. Vaccines are basically always going to be a good value proposition for them because most people should get them which spreads the cost of R&D and manufacturing out between most people in a way that hospital stays and designer drugs can'tm

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 3 days ago (2 children)

COVID shots also save the lives of other people because of reducing disease transmission (fewer people sick means less transmission), which is acceptable for the most simpleton "What's in it for me crowd".

Meanwhile the socialized healthcare things are only acceptable for people who don't want to see others suffer (i.e. who have empathy) and/or who can see how living in a country were other people have better lives also improves their own lives (i.e. who have social awareness) and/or who are aware than "one day I might be the one there" (i.e. reasonable intelligent and risk aware).

So it absolutelly makes sense that in countries were people are heavilly brainwashed to have simpleton zero-sum-game selfish views on social issues, COVID shots are an easier idea to sell (and even then, as we saw mainly in the US, it's pretty easy to swindle the dumbest of the "What's in it for me" crowd to think the COVID shots are actually bad for them and refuse to take them).

[–] HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Adding to your second paragraph, it also turns out that people who are healthy are more able to contribute to society, so even if you have zero empathy you're going to want to provide for many of the basics that the US has increasingly striven to make unaffordable.

load more comments (6 replies)

When smallpox was eradicated in the 1950s, it was achieved with something like 100 million doses of the vaccine, which was substantially less than the world population at the time (in the neighborhood of 2.5 billion). This is because scientists understood that the vaccine was not something for individual protection but was rather a weapon to protect the population as a whole (and annihilate the disease entirely) when coupled with a full understanding of how the disease spread.

[–] Smaile@lemmy.ca 35 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

the gov benefits from a healthy, non-pleage riddled populous.

the only reason America is different is because your culture idolizes money and a selfish level of individualism. thats why your health care system, much like other aspects of your economy and socity, is pay to win.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 days ago

Yeah turns out healthy people work more and pay more taxes, which the government likes

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

Completely unrelated to this meme, but does anyone have the meme of republicans not understanding hypotheticals that goes like

"Imagine you are [x]"

"But I'm not [x]? I'm [y]"

[–] Tenderizer@aussie.zone 7 points 3 days ago

There's also the fact that rich people buying insulin for themselves is enough to keep them safe. Rich people vaccinating only themselves though won't be anywhere near as effective.

Unvaccinated people just give a vaccine-resistant strain the chance to develop.

[–] areakode@riskeratspizza.com 16 points 4 days ago

To think the years we've been set back. The things society could provide for the people... It really makes me sad.

[–] brachiosaurus@mander.xyz 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

COVID shots weren't given away for free, the government paid corporations for it with public money.

Public trials for new therapies cost billions. Pfizer and Moderna got this stage for free.

Man discovers that the same government that doesn't pay for insulin or chemotherapy is willing to pay for COVID vaccine 🤔

[–] reka@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

man if seizures and hypoglycaemic episodes were contagious that medicine would be cheaper

[–] TheRealKuni@piefed.social 10 points 4 days ago

Thank you, Michael J Caboose.

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

time is merely mans attempt to control his environment. clocks sole purpose is to create controllable sequences of events

[–] AppleTea@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 days ago

is that also why the timestamps are conspicuously missing from this screenshot?

Im still thinking about the title, plainly it makes sense but idk what OP meant by it!

[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Because covid is contagious. If one thing is worse than death, it's death that spreads, also know as a plague. Orders of magnitude worse. They change everyone's history, not just your family's.

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Because diabetes isn’t contagious. It was never altruistic.

[–] m3t00@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

slavers just changed tactics. called employers on paper.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

But digital clocks are rectangular... 🤔

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›