Potenze
141127
3299
397
Seems to me that we are more so a corporate America than ever. Our president is a business man himself, that has no issues spending our money in ways that only benefit him and others in power with him.
I thought that the government was for the people, by the people. But at least now, it's for the rich, by the rich. As an American I feel I have no power or control, and my voice cannot carry far enough, am I the only one?
anticlifflemmingheretic
Public campaign financing would be good: your reps literally spend half their political careers raising money for re-/election.
iDigDinos
Yes.. because corporations are now the third party :(
TexTexTex
VOTE!!!!!!!!!! Register others to VOTE.
sarkastic
Corporations have too much power over government! Let's make government more powerful! /s
candiduscorvus
Absolutely agreed.
KingKoopasErectPenis
It's about maintaining the concentration of wealth and power. Anything other than that doesn't matter.
ValiantlyFlailing
It still is a gov't for the people. It's just that thanks to Citizens United (lol) corporations now count as people. Like, 1 billion people
FNHuskys
Ron Paul 2012
digitalballz
Important, but definitely not more important. Not even remotely close.
Flygirlgtomx
This is nothing new though. Many of our war were started or prolonged to gain power, monetary value or fear. You're lying to yourself if
Flygirlgtomx
you think otherwise. Money and greed are the only things that rule this world.
indyliberal
Citizens United officially ended that separation. Give the GOP another few months and the separation of church and state will also die.
BernieBorn
whoa, settle down there Marx
rockjock29
Church should include to the Church of Walmart, Goldman Sachs, etc etc. But corporations are people!
Cavalrysword
Corporations should not be allowed to spend money for political purposes. They cannot vote
PixelPixie007
Introducing Secretary of State, Big Oil, I mean Rex Tillerson.
Cereaza
He's perhaps the least corrupt person in the Executive branch, ironically enough.
TiredOfMyUsernameBeingMyActualNameSoIChangedIt
So state shouldn't regulate corporations at all? That sounds like a good idea. Oh wait, you mean keep corporations out of politics
Potenze
Yeah. As far as I know, we pay taxes, those taxes have gone to bail out big corps, so we invested in those corps but got no shares?
Dedrick427
"Hey, give me some of your money so I can go gamble... no you can't have any of the winnings"
AJCanuck
Maybe, except we need corporations...
gnuclear
We need corporations that have their power kept in check. Competition alone doesn't always force them to work in our interests.
AJCanuck
Agreed...I was just pointing out that we don't NEED religion, and they get just as many tax breaks
StrokeableRedBeard
Seeing as how the operations of the government are reliant on income from taxing businesses, they will never be separate.
whyteraven74
Actually the percentage of federal revenues that come from the corporate income tax has been declining over the last 60 years and also...
whyteraven74
putting corporations above people doesn't work.
RyanMcFlyin
It's because the US is essentially a corporate Oligarchy now.
frenchezz
Such an unpopular opinion, nobody will ever agree with this
MemeMyselfnI
Plantation owners, peanut farmers, baseball team owners, etc. Yep, this is defs the first time a prez was a business owner n it's bad, m'kay
MemeMyselfnI
Deflection fr the pt. Every prez n congressman (n many appointees) hand over control to someone else per the law.
whyteraven74
Carter sold his peanut farm when he became President, also he was governor of Georgia before he was President. George W. Bush was a very...
whyteraven74
small minority owner in the Rangers, was basically a vanity thing. And he sold it before he was President.
mericanidiocracy
offendineveryway
How about just revoking tax exempt status for religion--especially since they're so fond of telling the faithful how to vote
TheThingNoNotThatOne
Remove tax-exempt status from colleges, since professors are so fond of telling their students how to vote.
gnuclear
Isn't it supposed to be illegal for educators to solicit votes? Pretty sure it is in Australia.
DrMcTouchy
You should do some research into why this is a disastrously bad idea.
CrazyGuyOnABike
I cannot understand what's wrong with making them behave as non-profits. If they're genuinely helping, more power to them. If not, it;s
CrazyGuyOnABike
a small price to pay for the rest to show their P60s.
DrMcTouchy
Most churches already operate within the bounds of 501 (c) (3). You tax churches, they get equal representation. Want to see Westboros or...
DrMcTouchy
Scientologists formally back a candidate? It'll be worse than corporate backing we see now, as they'll have added ideology to the mix.
AvielMenter
The problem is that the best way to enforce this separation is via public campaign financing, which people hate.
InternationalPhoneticAlphabet
*libertarian throwing a fit about theft*
AvielMenter
It's more an issue of most people disliking the idea of giving public funds to politicians.
AvielMenter
But it's better that politicians be paid by the public than by special interests.
InternationalPhoneticAlphabet
NO, ITS HIGHWAY BANDITRY! MUH MONEY!!!!!1!!!
BluBoxx
@OP I disagree. Corporations should stay out of government, but government needs to regulate corporations. Seperate on would mean no regs
leodavinci1
Can't have your cake and eat it, too. Corporations get involved precisely because they are being regulated. Just like every other 1 of ?
leodavinci1
special interest. There's also the fact that, over time, a lot of regulatory agencies become protection agencies for the "regulated". 2 of 2
BluBoxx
They get involved to buy governance.... An extremely unethical and ludicrous notion for a "democratic" republic.
FukcTedCruz
This is too complicated for imgur's character limit. There are literally books trying ton convey your message and books trying to 1/2
FukcTedCruz
Convey that its cuz of regulation the market is unable to regulate itself. Either way corps are gonna play the game and infuence their side.
BigMistakeBigHUGE
I agree but ur description makes it sound like Trump is starting this. Obama did the stupid "bail outs" w/ our money. Been happening forever
Dayrest
https://www.thebalance.com/what-was-the-bank-bailout-bill-3305675 Passed OCT 3RD 2008. You may notice this as before Obama took office....
Dayrest
(1)He was president when they happened. If you look at when they were legislated, it was under bush. Obama had nothing to do with them.
Dayrest
(2)Much like how trump has nothing to do with the debt going down his first month in office. It's still obamas fiscal year.
Dayrest
It would literally have been illegal for Obama to stop them. Learn some history..... Or ignore and downvote......
BigMistakeBigHUGE
(I didn't downvote u) but this wasn't a republican vs democrat comment, just it's always been a thing.
Dayrest
(1)Fair enough. I just really don't like it when people attribute things to ANY president that they didn't do. I've (disgustingly) found
IronicUsername
It was an uninformed comment, which I'm starting to find more despicable than partisanship.
Dayrest
(2)myself having to debunk stupid shit about Trump too. I don't like the guy, but fuck, we don't need to make shit up about him....
HitandRyan
Campaign finance reform has to be the country's first priority. Until that happens, moneyed special interests will continue to dominate.
CammieCakes
CFR starts with being an educated consumer and choosing where you dollars go. That will never happen.
focusundrunkes
Apatheticism plagues me.
leodavinci1
As long as it doesn't entail public money being given to those seeking office.
Doonesman
Either that or term limits
Kierbear2g
nah first priority should be a full investigation into Trump's russia ties followed by impeachment proceedings.
BlackOpalGalaxy
And have Pence be president? I think we have different ideas on if that would actually be an improvement.
Kierbear2g
Eh, Pence would be bad for America, Trump is bad for the world, and I don't live in the US so it's a sacrifice I can live with.
arokitz
YESSS!
Churlish1
We must repeal Citizens United! It's imperative we to get our voice back.
AngryNixon
In addition we should reestablish the McCain-Feingold Act!
nghtvsion
Problem is I've been screaming this since at least 2005. Idk wtf to do.
liranbromberg
Look up an organization called WolfPac. It's not actually a PAC but a non-partisan group working within each state to circumvent washington
nghtvsion
Circumvent Washington? To what end?
liranbromberg
The idea is to have 2/3 of the state legislatures call for a Title V convention for the express purpose of repealing Citizen's United 1/X
liranbromberg
The Title V laws were put in place as a check to the power of the federal gov by the states so they could make necessary changes when 2/X
ICouldGoForSomePie
issue is the people that could make that change are the cause of the issue. we are basically in a closed loop.
Spongybunny
A lot of local government is actually made up of pretty decent people. Start locally and work up. Join Wolfpac to help get money out.
woodjoiner
HRC said that she would have appointed a supreme court justice that would repeal citizens united. But she did have an unhacked e-mail surver
CammieCakes
No were not. The one thing we all have in common is our wallet. We would just need to sink one company to set an example.
ICouldGoForSomePie
maybe, to do that would take a tremendous amount of team work across all factions. something that wont happen in the current climate
CammieCakes
Which is why Democracy sucks with 300+M people. It's just too many people for one government or society.
ICouldGoForSomePie
hell i want to see someone rally a group of 20 randomly selected people behind a single idea for more than 30 secs.
tinyhighlife
The problem with "sinking" a company is that you're also sinking everyone who works there. Not just the folks on top.
SoundFuture
Convention of the states as made possible by Article V would need zero Federal input and many states have been calling for it for years.
Sekai
There were two candidates that weren't drenched in corruption, but hardly anyone voted for them
Heracles4
Three candidates that weren't drenched in corruption*. HRC's alleged corruption is nearly nonexistent, if not entirely so.
SomeCrazyNerd
... Bernie Sanders anyone?
CrazyGuyOnABike
Well Johnson is an ass and would be literally worse than Trump, and Stein was less than competent.
Kierbear2g
johnson and stein were both idiots.
TheThingNoNotThatOne
Yeah, because they didn't get any of that sweet corporate money.
channelranger
No amount of money would have made them intelligent.
Kierbear2g
No because they're actually clueless fucking morons. Trump is too, but neither of them were a preferable candidate to Clinton.
TheThingNoNotThatOne
Chill brah, I'm just making a joke.
Kierbear2g
it's hard to tell these days.
stagg572
I voted Johnson but he really is an idiot.
TheThingNoNotThatOne
Seriously though, they're barely a step above Trump
[deleted]
[deleted]
Sekai
I'm talking about Gary Johnson and Jill Stein. Clinton won the popular vote by about 66 to 63 million. But she's as corrupt as Trump.
DavidMcclannahan
Stein and Johnson were wrong for other reasons though.
covertpetersen
They'd be better than Trump, but not by much for completely different reasons.
FragileReality
Bullsht. Multiple investigations were opened up into her and her various activities and nothing illegal or even close to chargeable found
Sekai
Riiight and because Trump hasn't been impeached that also means he hasn't done anything wrong either. Same for Bush/Cheney.
FragileReality
She was INVESTIGATED &theeeeen found to have been cleared. See, first you open the investigation. Find wrongdoing to charge, THEN charge-
SomeCrazyNerd
Nobody could prove anything criminal but they sure showed she was shady.
FragileReality
That's like how Trump legally evaded taxes. Fucking shitty, but not breaking the law
IronicUsername
No, she isn't. This stupid false equivalence by people too lazy to actually do any research is why we have Trump as president.
Sekai
Username checks out
FragileReality
Seriously. She wasn't squarely clean but at least everything was legal.
BlackManInABush
Blame media bias and making voting for anything other than far-left seem totally unfashionable to the young voters.
SomeCrazyNerd
You realize the Greens are further left?
gnuclear
The far left made voting for them unfashionable all on their own. And I'm not referring to Bernie Sanders himself here.
whatthehell13
Blame the voting public and the voting public alone. They voted without any scrutiny of their own. Instead trusted known false info outlets
BlackManInABush
Blame Canada
DamnIshouldreallybestudyingrightnow
American views of what constitutes "far left" are often as hilarious as victorian views of what counts as "lewd"
TheThingNoNotThatOne
And "European straight" is "American gay" because shit is different in different countries.
BlackManInABush
I'm referring to the fact that you could literally be ostracized by your friends/family if you don't share their views. Both sides guilty.
BlackManInABush
Far left was just an example for 140 characters sake.
FragileReality
Really? Dude knowing nothing of Aleppo and Jill Stein thinking wifi gives you cancer we're viable options?
FragileReality
Were*
BlackManInABush
It's the way people were groomed to be like "if ur a Trump/Hillary/Whoever supporter, ur racist/pussy/whatever!" Those types are the problem
FragileReality
I'm sorry, if you voted for Trump, you literally heard him say 'Mexico is sending us criminals' and repeated 'Muslim ban.' You're a racist
BlackManInABush
See, that's what I'm talking about. Didn't vote for Don, but I'd choose him over Hillary. Generalizing helps noone but yourself
Sekai
Trump probably still doesn't know where Aleppo is, and Hillary certainly dodged sniper fire there.
FragileReality
TivoMan
No one seems to understand that we don't live in a democracy.
GadenKerensky
From the looks of it, looks like you live in an Oligarchy.
AJCanuck
Well, we do...it's just not a very good one
tinnerz58
*Democratic republic or at least mostly
Zyrixion
We moved into plutocracy/corporatocracy at this point.
PutItInNeutral
I believe our government is best described as a republic with democratic institutions.
Cavalrysword
So you don't understand your own allegation?
acunninglinguist
Oligarchy
FunAlternativeFact
*Sigh*. Yes, we do. Our democratic republic is imperfect but it's not a dictatorship or a corporatocracy or whatever else. Not yet, anyway.
Verelse
Or even a Republic! After all we have a House (Democracy) and a Senate (Republic) with a Presidency (Imperial) and a Judiciary (Common) 1/x
Cereaza
You elect the President. He serves a term, is limited by the Constitution and other branches, and leaves. How Imperial is that?
FinallyRegistered
Dat username
Verelse
In other words, we are not one of the old things you can label with old words, we literally made this shit up.
dontlookidonthaveaproperusernameyet
Username doesn't check out
notyouraveragedingleberry
It's called an oligarchy.
Llohr
I would argue that we live in a plutocracy. I mean, you can say that's inflammatory or conspiracy-theory but the signs are all easy to see.
Verelse
Well, that's what the founding fathers seemed to have in mind. Look at them and their lives.
fuck123456789
a republic is a type of democracy dipshit
superbob201
Not necessarily: Iran is a republic but not a democracy
Cereaza
It's a Theological Republic. You can elect your leaders, but there's a Priest King who can overrule it all. Not very democratic.
SexPiss
You tell that to the North Koreans
Cereaza
They are not a Republic. Just cause it's in the name, doesn't mean it's so. Like Rhode Island is neither a Road nor an Island.
SexPiss
That was my point...
Cereaza
We don't call ourselves the Democratic Republic of the United States. Just the USA. The actual descriptor is Democratic Republic.
HughJaction
A democratic Republic is...
fuck123456789
representative democracy
fuck123456789
which the US is
CammieCakes
True democracy wouldn't work any better than Socialism or Communism or anything else, so no, we don't.
FunAlternativeFact
Actually, most in most instances socialism works very well. How's that for an unpopular opinion?
Cereaza
Because Socialism is an idealism like Populism or Militarism. It's not a strict form of government as much as a set of priorities.
AvielMenter
I don't know why people keep saying this, but it isn't true. The US is a democracy. With some flaws, but still a democracy.
pokepoketopa
People don't appreciate the democracy and freedom that we do have. Let's appreciate it while we can.
SherMattLockSmith
Because it isn't a true democracy, it is a democratic republic. It is even in the pledge of allegiance. "And to the republic, for which..."
Cereaza
Ok, we don't live in a system where every person gets together to decide everything in a big room.
AvielMenter
This is just a no true scotsman fallacy. Democratic republics are still democracies. It's in the name.
sergeanttbag
That's because that guy doesn't know it's called a representative republic....
CirclejerqueDuSoleil
I think the point is that it should be direct democracy and not representative
SherMattLockSmith
Not at all, a dwarf planet is not a planet. In our system many positions are appointed, not elected, so it is not a true democracy.
AvielMenter
Your argument doesn't work linguistically. A democratic republic is a democracy and a republic. A dwarf planet isn't a dwarf and a planet.
Cereaza
There are no true democracies by your definition. It's an empty idea to hold up. There are no pure *insert form of governement* anywhere.
AvielMenter
Can you cite a commonly accepted definition of democracy that requires the direct election of every government position?
sergeanttbag
Is this meme now called popular opinion puffin?
Varenvel
im more displeased tiger meme got literally castrated , lots people got banned , and now we hardly ever see it , and mostly very tame jokes
GGNbatv
may as well be
superpatito
"now"
segoart
That's what I was thinking.
Whwat
I guess it's better than them having used the `am I the only one who...'
deamonsatwar
Idk. I used it once correctly and got downvoted to oblivion.
GadenKerensky
There's actually a popular opinion puffin meme. It has the Puffin sitting on a bluff looking regal.
TheRealDurdan
I think it should just be called opinion puffin
WhatTheDormouseSaid
Yes
GymratBrony
Yep
KeeleonOhms
Any puffin that makes it to FP is used wrong. Its basicalky just an ironic name at this point.
DoYouWantUsToGetAntsBecauseThatsHowYouGetAnts
Potenze
Seems that way, but heck, you win some you lose more and upvotes are upvotes. Do we have ants now? =(
DoYouWantUsToGetAntsBecauseThatsHowYouGetAnts
That is how you get ants ...
danishjuggler21
Actual unpopular opinions get downvoted, therefore you never see them on front page. Simple.
Nobody7713
Probably because people have emotional attachment to their opinions and do see one that you deeply disagree with makes you angry.
TiredOfMyUsernameBeingMyActualNameSoIChangedIt
Yeah, I don't get it. Everyone who agrees with this needs to drop a downvote, but nope, this will hit the fp
Nobody7713
Just drop a downvote either way because it's a shit meme
TiredOfMyUsernameBeingMyActualNameSoIChangedIt
That's my new policy, it doesn't start debate, it's just a polished shitpost
Potenze
Had no idea it was a popular idea. =\
pr0nty
Really? You thought imgur was full of rich bigwigs running multinational corporations with government interest? Really?
hoofherrightinthefrontbutt
I don't believe you
Vegapunk
I have a silly theory, but dang it: (1/2)
Vegapunk
I reckon this meme ripened into mainstream since a few aged unpopular ideas gained more praise as of this A.D. XD (2/2)