And yet, about half of voting Americans will actively ignore those impulses and choose a party that openly campaigns on tax reductions while it drums up fears surrounding issues they largely agree with (when presented in a non-partisan context) so does it really matter what they say?
this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2025
993 points (99.3% liked)
News
30683 readers
3371 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
993
72% of Americans Say the Rich 'Have Too Much' as GOP Pursues Another Handout for Billionaires
(www.commondreams.org)
45% of voting age Americans didn't even fucking bother to vote
Well, a lot of them decided the genocide half way across the world was more important than the genocide they would help to trigger back home.
load more comments
(1 replies)
How any didn’t vote, and how many were removed from voter rolls or didn’t have the right ID or were gerrymandered or
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(14 replies)
6% said "the poor have too much"
wat
Are you not aware that poor people have smartphones these days? Back in my day being poor meant having absolutely nothing. I say we take their phones away and their shoes too for good measure. That way they’ll know what true poverty is like /s
Are 6% of respondents 12-year-olds that identify as "your dad's a cuck"?
Mentally, about 45 % of the voting population are exactly that.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The ones who organized the republicans
72% is way too low given how insane the current wealth distribution is. Fully 1/4 of the population have drunk the kool-aid
"I'm going to be rich, soon" they say while they're considering payment plans for a Taco Bell order.
In related news, 28% of Americans are complete and utter fucking morons.
Anytime there's a shitty statistic, it's often always around 25-35%
So 1/3 people completely fuckin sucks. This tracks with my anecdotal data
load more comments
(2 replies)
28% of Americans think they are billionaires that are just suffering a temporary financial setback.
load more comments
(1 replies)
friendly reminder, it would take 1,460,714,285 weeks of minimum wage to earn musks net worth. That's 27 million years.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Where the fuck were they during the election?
Dumbfucks believed the orange guy who was sitting in front of the billionaires. Lets not forget that a third of the us isn’t capable of reading above the 6th grade level.
It's more about lack of Critical Thinking Skills than anything else.
It ain't about "having too much". Billionaires shouldn't exist. Ipso facto, their very existence only shows that corruption and greed can influence anything to point that whatever that thing is only serves those corrupted. End it. There should be no Billionaires.
In other words, a billion is too much money for one person to have.
It's the POWER that a billion bucks holds that's dangerous. We now have numerous billionaires with enough money to negotiate their own terms with foreign governments, without regard to how it might affect America as a whole. Eventually, world-wide power will be held by the Sociopathic Oligarchs, and instead of countries regulating THEM, they'll be regulating the countries to suit their own selfish purposes.
And eventually, that will lead to Sociopathic Oligarchs making conflicting demands, and they'll end up going to war with each other, with countries and citizens caught in the crossfire.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The rich have too much by definition, but billionaires in America have an historically obscene amount of wealth. Wealth inequality in today’s America has surpassed pre-Revolution France.
load more comments
(12 replies)
The survey only involved like 950 people and it only defined it as, "the rich" which seems pretty vague. Given the survey also mentions Bezos and Musk it wouldn't surprise me if that is the group having too much on this survey, not humble millionaires like you and me.
Don't forget all of the people who will certainly be millionaires in the future! They will definitely not be middle class and delusional for the rest of their lives
Middle-class people will be millionaires.
$1M equates to $40k/year income in retirement at a 4% SWR (safe withdrawal rate). In 2025, that's not actually a lot, even if you have Social Security on top of it.
If you're not a millionaire by the time you're retired, you're damn near impoverished. The only way for that to count as "middle class" (in the "close to the median income" sense) is if the middle class is destroyed (in the "existing separate and distinct from the lower class" sense).
(INB4 somebody chimes in with "it never was separate and distinct" -- yeah, yeah, I know, working-class solidarity and all that. But you get my point, right?)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Be nice if they fucking voted that way.
There was no voting that way, that's the whole damn problem. Neither candidate promised to do anything substantial about wealth inequality.
Fucking reruns. I’ve seen this one before.
This is the one that ends with rich people’s heads in baskets.
No, this one ends with these same people continuing to vote for Republicans because they're awful people.
load more comments
(1 replies)
No they don't, their voting clearly shows the opposite.
"Donald Trump stands up for the little guy like you and me" - the mental giants we're dealing with
Voting doesnt mean shit.
Assuming the numbers aren't straight up fake and red team didnt cheat at the last mile.¹
Assuming everyone who wanted to got to²
And most people weren't so demoralized by every option that remotely represented them or ehat they wanted be ratfucked or blatant lies that just flipped and did the same old shit anyway³
You still have a shitty system made to disenfranchise people by choosing aristocratic proxies rather than members of their communities, keeping them alienated at every step from the actual decision making that effects their lives.
¹you'd have to be dumber than a box of disposable hammers
²delusional, bigoted or both
³have you talked to an american this century? Just read a history book?
Why do you have a bunch of unnecessary sourcing notes with no sources? What’s with the little ones and twos?
They're called foot notes¹, and while most often used for citing sources¹, they can also be used to include tangential or repeated information without breaking flow, as demonstrated here¹! Also for comedic or other effect.
¹you fool!
Yea I’m aware of foot notes. But you have no notes.
And they’re not comedic.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Only 72%?
I guess their solid grasp of racism and bigotry always wins
The other 28% are the rich
Not quite. The other 0.1% are the rich, and the remaining 27.9% are either just stupid or are delusional enough to think that they'll ever become the rich.
view more: next ›