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

politics

30600 readers
2424 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Shopify CEO Tobias Lütke, whose company commands a market capitalization near $154 billion, told his social media followers this week that a tax-tiered voting system—one that would strip voting rights from anyone who pays no income tax—would be a “good system.”

That two-word endorsement, dropped into a viral thread, has reignited a debate over wealth, power, and democracy that most Americans thought was settled more than a century ago.

The proposal would invert the founding American principle of “no taxation without representation” into something closer to “no representation without taxation”—and specifically, high taxation. Reactions online split sharply: Some framed it as a provocative thought experiment about aligning fiscal responsibility with political voice, while others called it a naked attempt to legitimize plutocracy by giving billionaires and multimillionaires a formal, multiplied vote over the laws that govern everyone else.

But it also revealed that America is grappling with a political economy debate, as a frozen housing market and an entrenched wealthy baby boomer demographic have many, not just Lütke, arguing that something big needs to change

At this point, their necks practically beg for the guillotine's blade. They keep reminding us:

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of . . . tyrants.

-Thomas Jefferson in November 13, 1787, letter to William Stephens Smith.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] desmosthenes@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

that blood tank needs tyrant blood refilling

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This leads to the old "lead based voting system".

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh, you mean the citizen's veto?

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

Third box reform, if you will.

[–] xenomor@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Does anyone have tips for how to identify (and avoid) sites that use shopify?

[–] Zier@fedia.io 9 points 3 days ago

I would like to "vote" for a system where businesses pay a minimum of 35% tax, no exceptions or deductions.

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

Because they want to run the company towns of the 2000s.

[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Eiri@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago

Is he trying to radicalize people? Damn, that's just comic book evil.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 days ago

Most "nouveau rich" want to keep their wealth forever and will burn everything down to make it possible. The "I got mine!" is strong with this group. The "old money rich" will eventually extract that wealth from them over time because they are "players" and this is old hat to them.

[–] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 5 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Whatever. That guy is a never nude.

[–] Jubei_K_08@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

I think most of us would be willing to try this if the more money you had, the further you are kept from politics.

[–] aproposnix@piefed.social 4 points 3 days ago

Why? Because he's a "CEO". Capitalism, including surveillance capitalism, will not save us.

[–] rozodru@piefed.world 4 points 3 days ago

wouldn't matter. these dudes don't pay income tax anyways and Lutke is a fucking moron, always has been.

Remember kids, there's a reason you shouldn't use Ruby on Rails. Lutke is one half of the reason, DHH is the other.

[–] lizzzy@feddit.uk 3 points 2 days ago

To rob the poor of quality of life

Why is a big dick acting like a dick?

[–] 13igTyme@piefed.social 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Reactions online split sharply.

Yeah, because most people are fucking stupid.

[–] Manjushri@piefed.social 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, because most people are fucking stupid

No. Most people on the internet are bot farms and shills paid to astroturf.

[–] 13igTyme@piefed.social 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You might be right, because I'm dumb enough to not know if I'm a bot according to many of these cloudflare verifications.

Checks box...spins.... Error, fuck it I didn't care that much anyways.

[–] 13igTyme@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I have to use Zoom, Teams, Google meet, or Webex when talking with clients. The amount of captchas I've failed is unsettling.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

LOL, why?

Because all of these assholes think they are just going to fuck off to Galt's Gulch or whatever.

[–] AshMan85@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

because oligarchs and nazis go hand in hand

[–] Abyssian@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

"Why did a $154 billion CEO just endorse stripping most Americans of voting rights—and taking us back to the 19th century?"

'Cause the ultra wealthy don't see the rest of us as being real people, and they should be (legally) killed.

[–] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Wild thing to say while living in a flammable house

brah can't maffs so he just avoided big numbers.

the better suggestion is "no voting rights for people that don't pay their fair share"

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›