Anonymous #25 12w

TIME TO GET HIGH AF FOR HIM❤️🥹😭

22

Anonymous nucifera 12w

finally something positive

8

Anonymous #8 12w

CONCRETE JUNGLE WET DREAM TOMATOOOO

162

Anonymous #34 12w

THERES NOTHING YOU CAN DO

67

Anonymous #40 12w

aight dude go back to charlie kirk podcasts

65

Do you make a $1 million+ annually dumb fuck?

160

Anonymous #12 12w

He almost said ‘bc thats the name of the next mayor of NYC’ 💀. I wish he did tho

29

Anonymous #43 12w

Dude, this is Yik Yak. No one here got that kinda money. A fraction of the world does. Tax increases on people who can actually afford to pay them are great!

436

Didn't he say it's like 2%, something like 20k per millionaire? Enough to increase the budget but not enough to cripple your precious millionaires, sounds fair to me

284

Anonymous #66 12w

Expand on this thought

20

Ah yes, US doesn’t do socialism never mind the very uni you go to, roads you drive on, social security you pay, and literally every public resource. But yes tell me more about how you have no idea what socialism means.

25

Anonymous #8 12w

I MILLY ROCK

20

Anonymous #6 12w

That’s right, he wants an additional 2% on top of the existing 7%, so it would be a 28% increase (from 7 to 9) in NYC tax rate for those people

52

“go move to pinochet’s chile if you like capitalism so much” cmon bruh

18

Welfare is socialism. Its not profit motivated like capitalism, where everyone makes the best choice for themselves. To each their own. Welfare is a direct result of capitalism’s market failure to actually give society what it needs (and not what it wants) bc whats good for everyone isnt affordable for everyone.

8

But yes, tell me more about how redpilled you are to not understand synonyms. Btw synonyms means when two or more words, or even a phrase mean the same thing. Had to clarify bc u seem to be clearly at your wits end quicker

4

Anonymous #44 12w

Capitalism needs consumers, and consumers need money to spend. Without income support, demand dries up and markets stall. Welfare keeps money flowing, especially during downturns, and prevents collapse. It stabilizes the system and reduces unrest. It’s not a failure of capitalism, but a core mechanism of it for supporting competition in a free market

8

Anonymous #77 12w

Oh my god! Those poor millionaires and billionaires! How will they ever afford to eat?!

244

Honestly I don't see why we don't just tax the bottom one percent more. If they aren't eating already, what good is the money to them?

90

Anonymous #6 12w

Good question

5

Why don't we just round up all the poor people (making below 400k a month) and put them in work camps

39

Just as long as we limit their investing power to stocks that will benefit hedge funds and US senators

19

Andrew Cuomo has lost to Zohran Mamdani. Would’ve been more space efficient for the database

-10

Anonymous #81 12w

Exactly bc the market proponents would always strive for more power. Powerful companies change laws based on their profit margins and shareholder value, which is more often than not detrimental to other components of the market. It would’ve stabilised the system as you said but only if there was proper taxation, thus maintaining a more equitable society. Free markets don’t work- standard oil, detroit big three, luxotica. Dont even get me started on private equity

1

Thats literally what socialism is, not profit motivated. Capitalist societies rely on these socialist elements which they deem as welfare but call it a form of socialism, neolibs like u lose their minds.

0

Anonymous #44 12w

I can't tell if you're purposely being funny but "don't even get me started on private equity" got me dead

2

Why do you think lobbying exists? Its literally legalised bribery. The fall of the American middle class started w the inception of lobbying. Its funny how ive sat at all these meetings doing MY JOB, just for some nobody on the internet to say they know better.

8

You’re right, im not. I come from a family of corporate lawyers, so thats why i dont have any idea how corporate america works behind the scenes. You know best obviously, mr fkn nobody with a finance degree

1

Social classes have been around for almost forever, given different names throughout history bc modern English didn’t exist. Lobbying is fairly recent like 400 years give or take. Wow, the ineptitude is high with this one

1

🤷🏽‍♂️🤷🏽‍♂️🤷🏽‍♂️

1

Anonymous #77 12w

Dear god 😭 they’ll practically be starving 😢 whomp whomp

6

Anonymous #77 12w

Finally someone hot and not another wrinkling looking old white man 😭

4

Only won against women lmao. Put him against another dementia patient and he'd be out

0

Anonymous #40 12w

You think all Muslims think the same? Do you think all Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and Catholics think exactly alike as well?

9

That’s just NYC tax, they also pay federal income tax like everybody else….

3

Anonymous #100 12w

Wait don't tell me that.... my god... I couldn't feel worse for them. They get so abused by this system 😢

5

Anonymous #96 12w

Why not?

3

Anonymous #83 12w

Holy no vocabulary

4

Anonymous #83 12w

he hasnt technically lost yet, zohran has to hit 50% of the vote through 8 rounds of eliminating least voted candidates, which will be revealed in like a week, but he had nearly 44% in the first round and thats like a guaranteed lock so cuomo admitted defeat (conceded)

9

Anonymous #102 12w

Oh no, functional public transit and reasonable rent? How awful

10

Anonymous #96 12w

Like rent freezing? How will that not work?

1

Anonymous #6 12w

You know what it means tard

-3

Anonymous #66 12w

No no no. Say it out loud so that everyone knows you’re a racist piece of shit

6

Anonymous #6 12w

It’s not that it’s the simple idea of it’s their money and they earned it and they shouldn’t be forced to lose that much of it whether it effects them or not

-3

Anonymous #97 12w

They’re all organized cults and have things in common. This guy’s also far left and has things in common with other commies

-6

Anonymous #40 12w

“Far left” not even fucking close

3

Anonymous #108 12w

Why? Because you can’t stand common sense policy?

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Nah dude, this ain’t about being against common sense, it’s about being against straight up reckless ideas. There’s nothing common sense about abolishing the entire NYPD and shutting down prisons like we don’t have real crime in NY. You seriously think banning all guns while taking away cops is smart? That leaves law abiding people defenseless while criminals run wild. And how is it “common sense” to kill off private health insurance with no clear backup plan?

2

Anonymous #108 12w

That’s how you crash a healthcare system overnight. Decriminalizing drugs, pushing injection sites, and ending cash bail might sound woke on paper, but in the real world, that’s how you get more addiction, more crime, and less accountability. Common sense is about balance and protecting the people, this dude’s plan is a complete teardown with zero blueprint for how to keep the city safe and functioning after. If that’s your idea of “common sense,” you might wanna check your definition.

1

Anonymous #58 12w

no because they can stand common sense policy

1

Anonymous #66 12w

If you're so openly ok with being racist, then why are you scared to say what you're actually thinking? Doesn't it make you want to reflect on yourself a little bit? I don't know maybe you're just some hillbilly with no empathy but you seem to carry at least some shame

6

Anonymous #107 12w

I literally couldn't care less. People are dying in the streets while these sacks of shit flush their money away

2

Anonymous #114 12w

"I am a racist!!!"

6

Anonymous #108 12w

So literally none of that is true

6

Anonymous #108 12w

"I don't know how to create real change so I surrender to conservative policies of trying to make everything like it was in the 30s"

5

Anonymous #108 12w

I get that a lot of Mamdani's policies sound radical if you're only hearing the headlines or the worst-case interpretations, but I think it's worth looking a little deeper before writing them off as reckless. I don’t think his ideas are reckless, I think they're about rethinking systems that clearly aren't working.

5

Anonymous #108 12w

No one's saying to abolish the NYPD overnight. the point is to invest more in mental health, housing, and education, which reduces crime long-term. People advocating for this also believe that mental health professionals could respond to certain 911 calls that police aren’t qualified to handle—thats the idea behind defunding the police

4

Anonymous #108 12w

And gun control isn't about leaving people defenseless, it's about keeping weapons out of the wrong hands (like most other developed countries already do). And the private healthcare system leaves millions struggling or in debt, seemingly for no reason other than profit. It also incentivizes the healthcare system to prioritize profit over actually helping people, which just doesn’t work

3

How does it only hurt civilians who follow the law? Gun control is about preventing people with violent records from accessing deadly weapons

3

You say that and yet the only country that has daily mass shootings is the one with no gun control

2

I have no heard him, or any democrat, say that they want to take guns away from people. They just want people with violent backgrounds to not be able to purchase deadly weapons

3

Anonymous #62 12w

not heard*

1

Those are mass shootings you fucking idiot

5

They literally can

5

There are major loopholes that allow them to. Anyone can buy guns at gun shows, private sales, and online

4

If the shooting kills or injures 4 or more people, its a mass shooting, regardless of if its gang related

4

There aren’t background checks at gun shows. There’s no mandatory waiting period. And again, gang shooting are also mass shootings. Wild to act like I’m the one listening to the media when you’re literally just regurgitating to same lies Fox News constantly spreads

4

Not true, federal law does not require background checks for all gun sales. There are major loopholes

4

No they aren’t. You do not have a background check for private sales or gun shows. Sorry you know nothing. Common sense gun control saves lives

1

Either way, if you are in support of background checks, that means you support gun control. So do you support gun control or whats your point?

2

No they do not. You’re objectively wrong. I’m done dealing with someone who would rather believe establishment lies than the truth

2

Anonymous #58 12w

Oh so I’m racist if I say #neverforget?

-3

Anonymous #66 12w

Stop playing the stupid semantics game you know what the hell you were doing.

12

Anonymous #40 12w

Dude you couldn't even tell me what communism is. So why don't you take your ridiculously weak propaganda talking points back to your truth social circle jerk and leave this app alone

-4

Anonymous #117 12w

Yeah, but this app isn't only for college students. I think this community allows for non-college individuals. That's probably where all the racists and anti-socialists are from.

3

never been more proud to be a texan

3

Anonymous #66 12w

If your response to a Muslim getting elected is to say #neverforget, then yes you absolutely are racist because you are implying all Muslims are terrorists and should be held responsible for 9/11. Really not that complicated

1

Anonymous #108 12w

1) litteraly no one said he would abolish the police. He said he is going to delegate the police to violent crime, while making a separate contingent of social workers who can handle problems like homelessness and suicidal individuals

1

Anonymous #108 12w

2) decriminalizing drugs is literally one of the best ways to end addiction, if proper steps are followed afterwards. The threat of prison only scares people into keeping it hidden and not reaching out for help, and then if they do get caught prison itself will only push them deeper, while isolating them by making it impossible to get work once they get out now that they have a “criminal history”. This has been tried over and over and the results are very consistent

1

Anonymous #58 12w

As someone who considers themselves quite moderate and even leans a tad left, this dude and his policies are super far left. You’re clueless

8

Anonymous #124 12w

Is it really racist when he supported the statement of “globalize the intifada,” and basically actively is supportive of the types of groups that caused 9/11?

0

Anonymous #58 12w

He’s radical radical radical left

7

Anonymous #118 12w

No. He’s just a Muslim, so racists keep calling him a terrorist without any basis. Ffs dude just look something up before you say it

5

Anonymous #124 12w

He supported the statement “globalize the intifada” in the bds movement. He’s a confirmed terrorist supporter at the very least, defacto antisemite.

-1

Anonymous #40 12w

So no one who adheres to any religion should ever be mayor or president?

-2

I’m sorry but I’m gonna have to assume you’ve never read the Bible lil man

2

Yea I’ve heard lefties say this for years in America. What you really mean by “global standards” is certain countries in Western Europe, basically. By actual global standards, like if we include the Middle East, the US is quite left of center. And he’s a democratic socialist, not a social democrat, that’s radical left even in western Europe. Not to mention Europe has been pushed a lot more right lately not even sure your narrative is even accurate anymore anyway.

1

Amen!

1

The Quran commands you to take on acts of violence, the Bible just has violence in it.

4

Anonymous #124 12w

Lmao wrong answer idiot, search up his rap song he made back in 2017 where he glorified 5 of the biggest terrorist supporters known to man...

-2

God makes commands to people in the Bible in the stories yes, in the Quran, god makes commands to YOU to act OUT. That’s the difference, COMPLETELY different and ALOT WORSE. That’s why one religion is a lot more violent.

1

He wants to do things like a 30 dollar minimum wage, a rent freeze, price controls, these are routinely disastrous communist policies, and we all want most of those things but it’s about the mechanisms by which he would attempt to achieve them which is when things get radical and insane. When a Nazi and a liberal say the sentence “we just want our country to be safe” do you think those things mean the same thing?

1

Remember why the crusades happened? Was it perhaps the Islamic caliphate that was attacking lol? 😂

3

Also notice how you have to go back to the crusades? I don’t with Islam, I can look right now, in the present

3

Anonymous #6 12w

Capitalism pain in the ass huh

7

Anonymous #6 12w

Get off tik tok bro this isn’t fucking Africa people aren’t dying in any streets

-1

Yes price controls and rent freezes are actually extremely radical and a core fixture in most communist governments that enforce centrally planned economies. Those are definitely socialist/communist policies absolutely. I’m not saying welfare or increasing taxes is communist, they aren’t, but those things ABSOLUTELY are communist, and ABSOLUTELY radical.

1

You know that people are considered homeless if they live in halfway houses and or shelters, right? How many people die a year? Idk bro seems like nobody’s really dying in the streets.

-7

Socialist and communist have lost their distinction frankly, call it socialist if the vibe seems more palatable I guess. And yea this guy is arguably the most radical person to hold a significant office in the United States, at least in the discussion for sure.

1

Yea obviously they don’t live as long, but it’s hardly due to a lack of resources or outreach, it’s drug addiction and overdosing 99% of the time. In other words: we don’t have homeless because there isn’t enough housing, or because they don’t have enough money.

-6

I guess I would ask you who you believe is more radical than him holding a serious office in the US? And also I can’t tell the difference because socialism and communism are both largely a hypothetical pipe dream (like comparing a unicorn to a leprechaun) and people that call themselves those things push for largely the same things.

-1

Anonymous #122 12w

Because drug abuse stems from a community with too much money and free healthcare

-2

Anonymous #6 12w

Drug abuse certainly doesn’t happen because of a lack of money or healthcare I can tell you that.

-3

There are.

-1

Anonymous #122 12w

The type of drug abuse you're talking about doesn't partially stem from poverty? The type that leaves you homeless, sick, and dying? Sure, mental illness is a big part but you can't say poverty has nothing to do with it

5

Chicken and the egg problem. Some of what you consider the core problem are actually symptoms. Lack of money is a symptom, the desperation is a symptom, the addiction is a symptom. The core problem is lack of opportunity, lack of motivation, poor family dynamics, likely high genetic prevalence of mental health issues, this CAUSES the poverty. I’m all for increasing accessibility to mental health outreach, surely, but throwing money or housing at the problem does nothing at all.

0

Anonymous #6 12w

Poverty is itself one of the symptoms, not one of the causes.

-2

Anonymous #122 12w

You act like his plan is to give homeless people houses. It's more about assisting the New Yorkers that are trying with the odds against them then feeding into people who have already given up

3

Anonymous #118 12w

If he was a criminal he would be in jail

1

Yes of course, I just do not believe that’s meaningfully happening, sorry. I’ve worked in Lawrence at a soup kitchen. The food pantry is over stocked, frankly we throw out tons of bad food, there’s excesses of it. Homeless don’t always want to be housed because they can’t attend to their addictions in halfway houses, they also hate regimented lifestyles of any kind. I’m not against solutions but we have to get real about how deep the problem is psychologically.

-1

Anonymous #62 12w

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

0

Absolutely

3

I love this ideology, it's like when you have to clean your room so you just shove everything in your closet and pretend it isn't there. If you're not going to take yourself seriously stop pretending to have a serious discussion

4

I’m definitely a “moderate” by us political standards, in global politics I’d be considered conservative. This dude is insanely far left, further than Biden and Kamala who would be considered somewhat moderate democrats

0

Anonymous #125 12w

And I voted for Kamala. If you can’t see how this dude is far left you have zero political awareness

0

Limiting people's freedoms is a dictatorship. That's why civilized people advocate for opening more opportunities. You said "tax everyone the same" not "increase everyone's taxes the same"

3

Anonymous #66 12w

Seeing a Muslim man and instantly trying to blame them for 9/11 is pretty fucking racist

4

Anonymous #122 12w

He literally said he wasn’t going to police free speech you right wingers are so fucking hypocritical because all I’ve heard since Biden beat Trump is that the right is the party of “true and absolute free speech.” But then a brown Muslim says he isn’t going to police free speech and you all use it as an excuse to get racist af on him. And Al-Qaeda carried out 9/11 when the fuck did he say he supports Al-Qaeda?

5

Anonymous #128 12w

Good

3

Anonymous #122 12w

Republicans are literally crashing and burning but you’re concerned about someone actually trying to help the American people

6

Anonymous #119 12w

It will literally make it better

2

Anonymous #117 12w

Republicans are not smart at all

3

Anonymous #58 12w

Are you saying that as a Democrat or a free thinker?

-2

Anonymous #6 12w

Free thinker

2

Anonymous #58 12w

Nobody who leans heavy in either direction is too bright. Like most things the truth for how to best govern is likely somewhere in the middle, while idiots like you guys argue back and forth

0

Anonymous #125 12w

I don’t lean heavily in one direction but when shit has gone so far in on direction, being moderate sounds like extremism

3

Anonymous #58 12w

That’s a lazy argument. The political spectrum is always shifting back and forth historically and can be subjective. What’s seen as ‘extreme’ depends on where you’re standing and is subject to change. You can still gather the basic ideas of each sides policy and take good and bad from each without being brainwashed to either side

0

Anonymous #125 12w

Name a single time where the US has actually shifted the left. I have gathered enough to understand that I don’t agree with the current right wing

3

Anonymous #58 12w

Rent freezing and control literally never work as planned. One of the truest republican stances is that if you want to fix housing, de-regulate the hell out of it (one of the few industries that actually needs it). Put in place fewer zoning and property laws so more housing can actually be built and the market works itself out. See Austin Texas. This is the way.

1

Anonymous #58 12w

The 30s, 40s, and 60s this country swayed more left. New deal era with all the socialist programs, then civil rights era. YOU may not think it leaned left based off how you see the world today, but those are certainly times the country shifted left, and then inevitably shifts back. It’s a nuanced spectrum

-1

Anonymous #125 12w

And that’s only considering the 1900s. Id argue back half of the 2010s there was a shift left, and I haven’t even considered previous centuries and their political ideas

-1

Anonymous #125 12w

2000s* not 2010s

-1

Anonymous #125 12w

So you want to act like it’s “swaying back and forth” when it hasn’t been close to the left the since the 60’s? That’s my point. But let’s not act like giving black people equal rights is a “far left” position

3

Anonymous #125 12w

The 2000’s was not remotely left

3

Anonymous #58 12w

Post Bush Iraq shitshow with Obama? This country certainly swung left for a while. And like I said you’re looking at this through a 2025 lease, which is frankly brain dead. Obviously black people deserve equal rights, but back then it WAS a far left decision it’s not too hard to comprehend. Contrary to what you think it has swayed back and forth

0

Anonymous #58 12w

You’re clearly someone who leans left and I imagine you’re a pretty young person. Not everything is set in stone and just because something makes sense today, you have to realize how drastically different EVERYTHING was even as much as 20 years ago, nvm further back. I get that it’s tough to do but things were different, hence ideologies shift

1

Anonymous #125 12w

Ah yes the far left, begrudgingly voting for a center right candidate because the republicans put the entire country into a financial disaster. That’s not far left and to act like it is a complete joke. Sorry but thinking that “people should equal rights” is a common sense issue not a far left issue

3

Anonymous #125 12w

I don’t lean left. I’m barely on the left but because of how far right this country is I’m labeled a “radical leftist” by everyone including you. It’s not ideology shifting because that’s not how that works. People shift on the political spectrum but the spectrum itself doesn’t shift because if it did, the spectrum would mean absolutely nothing

2

Anonymous #58 12w

It’s common sense in 2025 you nimbus, half of the country could not comprehend that 80 years ago because THE WORLD WAS DIFFERENT. And did you call Obama center right? Maybe when compared to the government of like Sweden or the old ussr maybe, but you’re clueless

-2

Anonymous #125 12w

Btw what you’re describing is the overton window, not the political spectrum

3

Anonymous #125 12w

He’s literally a corporate democrat war hawk. Nothing he did could be described as “far left”

3

Anonymous #58 12w

I’m not calling you a radical leftist by any means I think you just have an odd understanding of humanity. The boundaries of what is considered left and what is right are always shifting depending on the direction on the world and the recent history.

-1

Anonymous #125 12w

No it’s not. Again you’re describing the Overton Window and using it to say that I’m a “radical leftist” and therefore dumb according to you

3

Anonymous #58 12w

You’re confusing the two. The Overton Window is about what’s socially acceptable to discuss or support in public discourse. The political spectrum is broader and covers actual ideologies, policies, and beliefs, not just what’s ‘sayable’ at a given time. I never called you a radical leftist, I said your logic seems off because you’re acting like anything outside your view is ‘extreme,’ when in reality the definitions shift with context.

-1

Anonymous #58 12w

And I’d say Obama was a decently central democrat. More left than Biden. He is CERTAINLY a left wing politician and even in Europe would be very central but based off socialist policies he advocated for they’d still say he’s left leaning

-1

Anonymous #125 12w

He’s not left leaning. Objectively he’s not. Being further left than Joe Biden is not a high bar to clear. What “socialist policies” did Obama enact?

4

Anonymous #125 12w

i gotta ask because youre saying x is radical y is communist z is far left: what is true left and what is true right here

4

Anonymous #125 12w

No they shift. That’s the Overton window. There is never going to be a time where being pro universal healthcare or pro gay rights are seen as “far right wing ideology”. And you keep trying to say that I’m a leftist when I’m not. And you said it yourself that anyone who’s on either end of the spectrum is stupid. You continue to try to label me as a leftist and therefore a moron

3

Anonymous #58 12w

You’re again misusing the Overton Window. And what was considered radical decades ago is mainstream now, and vice versa. Gay rights I can agree with what you said that’s pretty black and white. With universal healthcare it’s not so simple there’s a huge range from public options to hybrid systems. You can support parts of it without being some ideological purist. Universal healthcare was far left, but is growing more and more “moderate” by global standards. In the future it very well could be

-1

Anonymous #125 12w

A conservative idea, depending on how far into the future you go and what incomprehensible technologies and societal issues at stake.

0

Anonymous trophy 12w

True left and right is impossible to define like I said it shifts. You can grab generic policy points and attach it to each side sure, but there is enough nuance in these issues you can agree with some ideas from each, but it is always subject to shift

0

Anonymous #125 12w

What could possibly happen that would make Universal Healthcare, an objectively socialist system, far right? By your logic there is no such thing as the political spectrum at all because apparently everything can be far left or far right which isn’t at all how a political spectrum works. And given that this comment section is crying over accessible public transit, universal healthcare will never be moderate. But please tell me more about how I’m a “dangerous radical leftist” and that my opinion

3

Anonymous #58 12w

should be completely disregarded because according to you, I’m a moron because I don’t suck off Trump at every opportunity

3

Anonymous #125 12w

well then what is left or right at all to begin with?

2

Anonymous #58 12w

Dude I didn’t even vote for trump you gotta cool it with the assumptions 😂

-1

Anonymous #125 12w

So then by your logic, you can completely disregard any opinion that disagrees with you because “that could be a radical idea and therefore you’re an extremist and shouldn’t be listened to because all radicals are dumb”

3

Anonymous trophy 12w

Two wings of the same bird

1

Anonymous #125 12w

You saw someone not hating one Mamdani and said that I’m an evil extremist. It’s pretty easy to see where you lie with this. I’m tired of the “you have to stop assuming things” when I’m literally right. If I can’t make a single assumption then I can’t have a conversation about anything because you can just go “I don’t believe what I believed 3 seconds ago so therefore you’re an idiot”

3

Anonymous #58 12w

No, I’m saying don’t just subject yourself to one pov. You might be surprised how much I am potentially on your side. For example this guy, love the free and upgraded transportation idea, the gov run grocery store is interesting and has potential. However, you can at the same time look at things like rent control and freezes (which are proven in markets not to work) and disagree. Every candidate has some good and some bad

0

Anonymous #125 12w

Objectively all of those things are good. People cannot live anywhere in a country that raises rent constantly because they can while also criminalizing homelessness

3

Anonymous #6 12w

thats partisanship, not political polarity

1

Anonymous #58 12w

I can tell by the way you respond to me that I am a mouth breathing all out Trumpy. You can have assumptions but if you’re wrong I’m gonna tell you lol especially if they’re about my own personal beliefs

-1

Anonymous #125 12w

I’m not subjecting myself to 1 POV at all btw

3

Anonymous trophy 12w

Is partisanship not moderate?

0

Anonymous #6 12w

Yeah guys, the far left and the far right are the exact same so therefore we should just keep voting for far right candidates

1

Anonymous trophy 12w

Besides being progressive or not, right and left wing US politicians agree on literally everything

1

Anonymous #125 12w

Yet you keep insisting that I’m an evil far left radical

1

Anonymous #58 12w

I wish we could abolish political parties all together. It doesn't even make sense besides making it easier to limit the public's ability to vote and be voted for

3

Anonymous #6 12w

Yes AOC and Donald Trump have so much in common

3

Anonymous #58 12w

I never once called you evil. I said it was stupid to be arguing with someone on the opposite side (as you were originally in this thread) when neither one of you are objectively correct even though you think you are

0

Anonymous #58 12w

Kamala and Trump have a lot in common but yeah, the buzzword politicians like Ted Cruz and AOC definitely stand out more

0

Anonymous #6 12w

Cool, have fun living under the president that got 3% of the vote because there were 400,000 candidates running

1

Anonymous #58 12w

That's why we have primaries??

1

Anonymous #125 12w

So again, you think I’m a far left radical that can’t be spoken to. And therefore evil

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Yeah dude we’d totally be in the same exact shit if Kamala was in charge, that makes sense. I don’t even like Kamala but acting like she’s the exact same as Trump is insanity

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Also nothing can be “objectively good” that’s way too simplistic. There are unforeseen social and economic consequences to each of the policies this guy has

0

Anonymous #6 12w

You can’t have primaries if there’s no parties to primary for

1

Anonymous #58 12w

I didn’t call you evil. I put you on the same exact level as the brain rotted republicans: you BOTH can’t be spoken to like adults

1

Anonymous #125 12w

What could possibly be bad about people being able to afford rent?

1

Anonymous #125 12w

Oh so I’m brainrotted? For what exactly? Not sucking off Trump at every possible instance?

1

Anonymous #125 12w

I am confused what #58 said that you are saying is incorrect. who were they arguing with and what were they arguing about

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Zero is bad about people affording rent. What is bad is assuming capping rent doesn’t just push the price back down onto the consumer. There is proof this doesn’t work

0

You can’t support it and also think that there’s a valid counter argument. If you think that argument is valid then that means you don’t support it. Why would you support something that you believe is wrong?

3

Anonymous #58 12w

You’re brain rotted for sucking off the Democratic Party as much as you think the republicans suck off their party. You’re all deluded this is the point

0

Anonymous #125 12w

oh nvm

1

Anonymous #58 12w

I don't know why you're tooth and nailing me on this where I have to fight every little variable when you yourself said you don't belong to the left or right. Surely you see the poison that a two party political system has become for us. I mean the last election was literally between a hedge fund celebrity and a brain diseased man's desperate attempt at diversity

0

Anonymous #125 12w

So instead we should all be forced to pay unpayable rent that nobody except for the ultra wealthy can afford? Where is the proof that it doesn’t work and where is the proof that letting landlords raise rent with 0 repercussions is going to help people

3

Anonymous #125 12w

Fuck the Democratic Party. Hating Trump is not the same as liking the establishment democrats that keep fucking us over and over again

1

Anonymous #125 12w

the problem is people making personal attacks on both sides. People don’t try to reach a common understanding in an empathetic way. we are all victims of our pride.

1

Anonymous #58 12w

See I don't get how you can say that and not support abolishing the shitty two party system

1

Anonymous #125 12w

“Installing rent control will only jack up the rent” that makes 0 sense

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Because until we get a better voting system, we’ll just keep getting shit where a candidate that only 10% of the vote will win because you only have one vote and the other candidates couldn’t get over 9%

1

Anonymous #62 12w

Why should I be empathetic to the people who refuse to show me any empathy at all? Clearly being a lying asshole is working since that’s all Trump did and he fucking won

1

Anonymous #58 12w

I mean, is that really worse than our choices being picked out for us?

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Rent control sounds good in theory but fails in practice. It discourages developers from building new housing and pushes landlords to convert rentals into condos or Airbnbs. Over time you get fewer available units, worse maintenance, and more competition for the same apartments which raises prices for everyone. If you want long-term affordability, the answer is building more housing which comes from deregulation. See how Austin fixed this issue in their city

0

Anonymous #62 12w

The democrats have been way too nice for a decade now it’s failed them every single time

3

Anonymous #58 12w

Read my other reply to you I’m not arguing with you #58 on two different comment threads😂

0

Anonymous #125 12w

no, partisanship is not moderate man, republicans vs democrats is not moderate

3

Anonymous #125 12w

That makes 0 sense because we already have that problem without rent control, rent is skyrocketing and builders refuse to build anything other than luxury apartments because those are the ones that turn a profit. All while non luxury apartments have the rent jacked up until people can no longer afford to live there so they can demolish the place and turn it into more luxury apartments that people are forced to rent because it’s the only option

3

Anonymous trophy 12w

im still here asking for what right vs left is, yall talk about it, but dems vs reps isnt right vs left

2

Anonymous #6 12w

At least we’re choosing something instead of the worst 10% of the population getting whatever they want

1

Anonymous #58 12w

A choice between a Democrat and a Republican is NOT a choice. Kamala would've been in Iran faster than Cuomo could fuck up Mamdani's name

0

Anonymous #6 12w

And what proof of that do you have?

1

Anonymous #58 12w

You’re not completely wrong about too much luxury housing but rent control doesn’t fix that, it often makes it worse. That’s part of why cities like San Francisco have insane rent prices despite rent control. If you want more affordable housing that isn’t targeted towards the extremes of rich OR poor, the answer is zoning reform and incentives to build more, not tighter price caps that kill supply.

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Fine whatever you want. I guess we’ll just keep voting for further and further right wing extremists because anyone that runs against them isn’t 100% perfect. You realize why the democrats keep pandering to the right? Because whenever they make something that could vaguely be described as “leftist” it gets trashed by conservatives for being “evil communism” and trashed by leftists for not being far left enough

3

Anonymous #125 12w

That’s just going to incentivize more luxury apartments that nobody can afford but will live in because it’s the only option. You can’t just let landlords raise rent with 0 consequences because why wouldn’t they just make more money off the infinite money maker they have? You’re asking them to keep rent low out of the goodness of their hearts when they have none

3

Anonymous #6 12w

So your solution to this is to vote for the people who hate Iran even more? How will that help

2

Anonymous #58 12w

They "pander to the right" because they are the right. They are paid by the same people to make the same decisions. "What people?" You ask? Corporations!!!! Anything to save a dollar. Maybe we have to sacrifice some city in the Middle East but at least Lockheed Martins stock price will go up

2

Anonymous #6 12w

So your solution is to vote for the people that are even further right? Democrats have literally said that is the exact reason they’re shifting the right because no matter what, nothing is good enough so might as well try to syphon votes from the only people that actually get up and vote

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Landlords can’t raise rent infinitely if we actually fix the supply side. If cities cut red tape, streamline permitting, and stop blocking multi-unit housing with outdated zoning laws, we’d have more supply and more competition. We should use tax incentives to reward developers for building affordable housing, not just luxury units. That’s literally half of what taxes are for, to guide behavior in the public interest. If people have more housing options, they aren’t forced into overpriced units.

0

Anonymous #58 12w

It seems like everyone read ONE article about deregulating housing (from a housing development group) and think that it's showing a proper perspective on rent control. Of course landlords don't want rent control... but that doesn't mean it won't work! It just means they can't fuck over tenants more than they already do.

2

Anonymous #58 12w

That's never what I said. I don't know if you forgot who you're arguing with but you seem kinda lost

1

Anonymous #121 12w

No… it’s basic supply and demand economic theory

0

Anonymous trophy 12w

anything on what is left and what is right or just vague vibes decide

3

Anonymous #125 12w

Fine I responded to your other one too. Just letting landlords do whatever they want will never work out well for tenants because what possible reason would they have for keeping prices low?

1

Anonymous trophy 12w

Generally today, if it benefits rich people, capitalism, and religion it's right; if benefits freedom of expression, poor people, and socialism, it's left.

1

Anonymous #125 12w

Yes just put more buildings up in a city. It’s not like there’s a limited amount of land or anything. There is 0 reason for landlords to keep rent low so why the fuck would they?

2

Anonymous #6 12w

That is what you said. You know why Trump won this election? It wasn’t because the right got more popular, it’s because nobody on the left went out and voted. So what should they do? Continue to try to push policies that are hated by the half of the population that actually votes in an attempt to get votes from people who refuse to vote for anyone that doesn’t 100% match their own personal beliefs or try to syphon off support from republicans by being slightly less worse than republicans because

1

Anonymous #58 12w

those are the only people that actually show up to vote

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Obviously there’s limited land but that’s not the issue it’s the zoning laws here and the preservation of certain historical sites that maybe have become obsolete. There is plenty of space to build more housing and as someone who seems quite progressive you should be able to stomach the need to build more housing at the cost of some old city space. And landlords have to lower rent if you generate a greater supply, as I said see Austin Texas where rents dropped after adding supply

1

Anonymous #58 12w

I don't remember saying that but ok.

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Yes and now the majority of the country hates him for it. The people who respected him for it won’t vote for him for some stupid reason they’ll come up with later

1

Anonymous #125 12w

Get rid of zoning, I’m all for that. But don’t act like it’s going to stop landlords from jacking up rent just because they can

1

Anonymous #58 12w

What is this obsession with Israel in America recently. Am I losing it? I swear I don't remember it growing up but now every politician seems to want to go over there and swear a blood oath to never disrespect Netanyahu

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Then what are you saying? Because to me it sounds like you want to vote for someone more left than the far right candidate but any time that candidate comes up, you refuse to vote for them because “well they’re not perfect” so why would they try to appeal to you when there’s no hope that you will ever vote for them

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Once again build more supply, which as you fairly stated cannot be luxury, this can be done with tax credits and incentives to developers. With a larger supply of “normal” housing rent goes down as demand goes down because more people have a house. If anything renters would rather rent control and ignore zoning so the supply issue is never fixed and then all that’s left are luxury condos

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Conservatives have spun the narrative that anyone that criticizes Israel committing genocide is antisemitic

3

Anonymous #125 12w

This is ignoring the problem that we are expanding cities outward when we need to shift to walkable cities. We need more places with taller but fewer buildings, bike paths instead of roads, and public transit if it gets large enough. The amount of space taken by roads and parking decks is about 50% of city space.

3

Anonymous #125 12w

Sorry, landlords would rather rent control*

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Oh true, the Iran shit made me forget about the Palestine shit

1

Anonymous #121 12w

I completely agree with you on walkable cities that’s why I heavily support this guys stance on the nyc congestion tolls

1

Anonymous #125 12w

And when that supply is built, who’s going to stop them from raising the rent again? There is 0 incentive to keep rent low. It’s the same shit as private insurance, why would they keep prices low when they could charge you more and you’re forced to pay what they want because there’s no other alternative

1

Anonymous #125 12w

But I’d say that’s lower on the list of issues contributing to high rent

0

Anonymous #58 12w

I'd rather I didn't have to pick between either and have a wider range of choices based on policy and not party

1

Anonymous #125 12w

No it’s not basic supply and demand because there’s 0 incentive to keep the prices down because you can’t just not live somewhere

1

Anonymous #125 12w

Well it increases cost of living... and it decreases quality of housing due to pollution and size constraints from roads.

2

Anonymous #58 12w

Unless every single landlord in the city colluded and made the same rent, than yeah they’d have no reason to. More supply is good and as long as there isn’t a monopoly on landlords they will be forced to at least somewhat lower prices if they are too high compared to the rest of the market

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Well if the prices are too high nobody will buy, thus the prices will fall to meet the needs of the consumer. Here I will agree that it's basic supply and demand. But I can't say i know enough about New York to say building more housing would work there

1

Anonymous #58 12w

More supply = lower demand = lower prices

1

Anonymous #6 12w

So then you’re stuck with 400+ candidates and the one guy that 200 votes wins and then nobody is happy with the winner. You can’t have multiple candidates with a 1 vote system

1

I happened in 2021 in Buffalo

1

Anonymous #58 12w

the fact that we are so split should show everyone that this isn’t the right guy

1

Anonymous #125 12w

But otherwise high rent often comes from landlords choosing to overprice apartments to squeeze every buck they can. I was recently searching for apartments and some were over 1700/m for less than 400sqft in Boston. And one of them was absolutely terrible. So I don't see why increased supply changes that. There are so many new apartments up there but they just charge more because they are newer. Demand for housing is too high in large cities, and prices are well above the affordable line.

3

Anonymous #121 12w

You are mostly correct it marginally decreases housing supply and quality, but I don’t see how you are quickly able to fix this. It would be a huge process taking many years. Id be more focused on trying to renovate outdated office buildings into residential buildings and pulling way back in zoning laws

0

Anonymous #125 12w

What’s to stop them from colluding? Absolutely nothing. Why would a new apartment come it at the half the rent of the other apartments when they could be the same price as everyone else and get twice as much money? Why do you insist that landlords will be good out of the goodness of their hearts?

1

Anonymous #58 12w

I mean, you could have more than 2 at least. That's a start. I'm not saying I want 200 names on the ballot, just more than two. And more than two "parties". Honestly it's more about the connotation of the candidate with their political party. They feel pressured to uphold certain policies and the people feel pressured to like them just because they're on one side or the other

1

Anonymous #121 12w

People just take what they can get and a new apartment structure would have to house thousands to be able to fix it. ORRR we need a massive surge of affordable purchasable homes to free up rentable space. That's the other problem: old people downgrading into houses that are more affordable which only leaves expensive properties available. And that is often a problem because our retirement system provides so little for people to live on. We need to bring back pensions.

3

Anonymous #121 12w

I’m from Boston and we have some of the worst and most outdated zoning and building laws. There is not enough supply here at all and I’ve been looking too, idk how you even found a place for 1700 hahaha

1

Anonymous #6 12w

If the prices are too high people will still buy it because they have to live somewhere. It’s the same shit as healthcare, you have a captive market that has to buy your product or they die

1

Anonymous #125 12w

Why would the new supply have lower prices when they could make significantly more by just being the same price as the other guys

1

Anonymous #58 12w

People can just go somewhere else... that's what happens. If you can afford rent you can afford a bus ticket

1

Anonymous #58 12w

The more landlords there are the harder this would be to collude. Id say there are plenty in New York. And they wouldn’t be doing this out of the kindness of their hearts It’s literally the exact opposite they are incentivized to undercut their competitions pricing and attract more renters than their comp

3

Anonymous #6 12w

The two party system is the natural result of the one vote system. We need rank choice or approval voting to support more parties. There are some good videos about this on YouTube. I think Veritasium did a video on it

5

Anonymous #121 12w

Interesting, thanks. I'll look into it when I'm not tired asl lmao. I never actually thought about it in practice tbh, always just hated the limitation

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Where would the limit of candidates come from? But let’s say for instance that 6 candidates ran, then you would have someone win with less than 20% of the vote. So over 80% of the voters hate that candidate

1

Anonymous #125 12w

However this theoretically only works with the appropriate level of supply, which we are far from

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Honestly bruh 😭 idk. Maybe I'm just being unrealistic but I have to believe there's something else that can be done over some Trump Biden type election cause holy fuck, what a disaster

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Usually in this case(as our government has written into law) you would eliminate the lowest candidate and revote again and again to bring it to a simple majority. So you should have a candidate that is more clearly the winner

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Until we change the voting system and people show that they want actual leftist representation, we’re stuck with this shit

1

Anonymous #58 12w

We need proper socialist or communist leaders. I'm sick of capitalists perpetuating their own wealth and stepping on the proletariat

1

Anonymous #121 12w

Do you realize how much time that would take? The American election is already over a year as it is. Could you imagine doing that constantly. You’d have to start campaigning the moment the election ended

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Holy cooked.

1

Anonymous #6 12w

I literally agreed with you on that and now I’m the problem

1

Anonymous #58 12w

That's why we have primaries. It's effectively the same concept but held by our two most popular parties.

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Actually now that I think about it, wouldn't the better solution to be limiting the power of the federal government and giving it to the state governments so local elections mean more than presidential ones.

1

Anonymous #6 12w

We’re already borderline 50 separate countries at this point with all the cultural differences. This would basically solidify that lol

3

Anonymous #121 12w

We already have primaries and we’re already in this problem. You want to add 800+ parties to the mix

1

Anonymous #125 12w

Oh wait a minute I have a better one. After I get my degree I get a job anywhere else other than America and watch it eat itself alive

0

Anonymous #6 12w

Get your bag here for a few years first then move. Despite the shitshow this country is you’ll never have better earning potential and purchasing power in other places than with usd. At least for now

1

Anonymous #6 12w

If you are a stem degree you might have a good shot at Germany.

1

Anonymous #6 12w

States rights is the exact problem. We have women dying from pregnancy because they live in the wrong state

3

Anonymous #125 12w

I'd rather live comfortably in an ethical environment than lavishly on a pile of corpses

3

Anonymous #58 12w

Yeah if we turn loose the states half of them will be theocratic.

3

Anonymous #6 12w

Good luck getting a job anywhere because nobody in another country will hire American educated people because our education system sucks. That’s why I’m stuck here in this god forsaken country because I can’t leave because nobody would hire an engineer from the US

1

Anonymous #121 12w

Germany would never hire people educated in America. That’s where I want to go but my engineering degree would be useless there

0

Anonymous #121 12w

They already are

1

Anonymous #58 12w

Welp, if you can't beat em join em I guess. Tomorrow I'm buying my red hat and applying to Black Rock

3

Anonymous #6 12w

It’s harder than u think to live comfortably in other places. A 30000 a year McDonald’s salary puts you easily in the top 1% of global income. Even the worst of the worst us states earn on par if not more than places like Germany, Australia etc. The usd affect is real. Id save while you can it helps more than you think but I wish you luck

0

Anonymous #125 12w

Don't people work way less in most of those countries tho?

3

Anonymous #6 12w

They definitely do. Not saying it’s bad in the long run, I’m saying the usd will give you a huge leg up depending on where u go

1

Anonymous #6 12w

Until the usd someday inevitably collapses, which hopefully won’t be soon

5

Anonymous #125 12w

Oh yeah I get what you mean. Nah I'll prolly end up living here for a while but it's sad to think there's really no purpose in political debate in this country

1

Anonymous #6 12w

I mean they’re both involving Israel just attacking people for no reason

2

Anonymous #125 12w

Top1% is a massive stretch. Also most countries have substantially lower cost of living then US. So 30,000 in US won't cover food and housing, but it can get you at least somewhere to live and something to eat in Europe. You don't need to earn as much elsewhere, and you will often make similar wages there too. Just not as many positions near 100k and above

1

Anonymous #58 12w

They are poaching scientists right now... my friends that work in labs talked about it.

2

Anonymous #58 12w

you say that now. just wait

0

Anonymous #121 12w

Top 1% estimates are about 34,000 which makes sense considering every country. And I’m not exactly sure why you’re telling me cost of living is lower, obviously this is true and part of the reason usd is more valuable? It’s more purchasing power than the local currency, in a country with lower cost of living. This helps prove my point that saving usd would be useful so I’m not sure what exactly you’re getting at.

1

Anonymous #121 12w

I know foreign students at my school, one particularly from Spain, he is pretty desperate to get a job here in the US for the money he can send back home. And that’s Spain not Cambodia. It’s legit.

1

Anonymous #125 12w

Source? I'm seeing 70,000 annual https://daadscholarship.com/how-much-money-need-to-earn-to-join-top-1-of-the-world-in-2025/

1

Anonymous #121 12w

You’re correct I saw a figure from 2020. So it’s closer to the top 2.5% the sentiment is the same. Your usd will convert into an amount of euros that would be significantly more valuable to you in Germany or Spain than in the USA, due to the cost of living like you said which is obviously implied for this whole scenario to work. My point is a year or two of trying to save in this country before moving will get you further than just moving out there and saving. That’s all I was telling this guy

1

Anonymous #58 12w

You have to be fucking kidding me

-1

Anonymous #121 12w

So in other words this app is only for liberals ?

1

People who support this guy aren’t liberals, they’re far left. Generally this is also true of yik yak it seems.

-4

Anonymous #122 12w

It's true of young people, the same thing always happens. Young people grow up accepting the world they're born into and then get old and reject modernity out of fear.

1

I live in NYC. I voted. I ranked Zohran #1 and did not rank Cuomo. Who wants to touch me?

1

Anonymous #36 12w

I mean, if I have to

1

Anonymous #132 12w

Cuomo was pure nepotism dumbass

7

Anonymous #11 12w

What

1

Anonymous #123 12w

NYC is happy you don’t live anywhere near here too.

4

Anonymous #36 12w

have fun dealing with your new mayor! you’ll love it!

-4