Taxing the wealthy is the greatest thing for society.
We more critically need to break up the monopolies in the US and stop approving anti competitive mergers, spread ranked choice voting so that reasonable people have a chance to be elected and the country stops dividing, and implement single payer healthcare so that we aren’t bankrupting everyone the instant they get a little sick and generational wealth is not just for the rich.
Idk I’ve always struggled with generational wealth. Would you be interested in arguing some point for it in terms of overall societal benefit or do you lean toward solely individualistic-responsibility
This is great to see.
My biggest complaint about Democrats has always been their lack of balls, and weird cultish insistence that they always take the “high road” and try to work with Republicans in good faith.
Same. The democrats lack a spine and it’s always drove me fucking nuts.
Most of them are just looking out for different rich people.
Idk the “new gen” of democrats seem pretty ballsy to me. Maybe the other ones were just old and tired : )
Evers reduced the GOP income tax cut from $3.5 billion to $175 million, and did away entirely with lower rates for the two highest earning brackets. He also used his partial veto power to increase how much revenue K-12 public schools can raise per student by $325 a year until 2425.
Evers took language that originally applied the $325 increase for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 school years and instead vetoed the “20” and the hyphen to make the end date 2425.
I’m all for what he did, but with a power like this, he or any other future governor can veto “doesn’t” to “do” and “can’t” to “can”. Probably baiting the WI SCOTUS to strike down the power before dems loose the office.
Evers took language that originally applied the $325 increase for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 school years and instead vetoed the “20” and the hyphen to make the end date 2425
Now that’s what I’m talking about. I will gladly cheer on this kind of fuckery when it does good.
Love to see it, especially later in 2435.
Yeah, that’s not going to survive a court challenge.
Wisconsin allows this kind of partial veto by their governor. Scott Walker did a similar thing when he was governor preventing schools from adopting energy efficiency for hundreds of years
TIL. I’m surprised that this is allowed. Usually vetos are at most line-item, not down to individual characters.
Honest question if you have inside knowledge - doesn’t the Wis. Governors partial veto authority make this constitutional?
It almost certainly is. It comports with precedent and prior Wisconsin court cases have ruled in favor of this use of the veto.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-item_veto_in_the_United_States#Wisconsin
Plus, unless he’s done something inconsistent with the state constitution, the state Supreme Court will have a liberal majority in August. I can’t imagine this could be challenged by a lower state court and make its way to the state Supreme Court before then.
5D chess move. Love it.
Finally the do nothing dems actually did something
Every loss for the GOP/Nazi party is a win for everyone.
I fcking love this.
Finally the Democrats are fighting fascism with pettiness!
There’s no pettiness here. The changes he made are very good, positive help for our state, whereas veto of the entire budget would have been a disaster.
I’m all for this. It’s just a rarity that you see Dems do this kind of stuff. They try to play “by the book”
Everything he did was by the book.
I think what he means is, they usually play like they think the other guys are going to play by the rules.
Well, yeah, but that’s more a side effect of having morals and empathy.
Petty?
I mean it seems like a good use in this case but what? This is actually a thing that governors can do in Wisconsin? It reads like an onion article.
Apparently it’s a normal thing in Wisconsin. They did make it so they aren’t allowed to cross out individual letters to make entirely new words, also they can’t cross out parts of multiple sentences to make a totally new one. So there’s that! 🤷
Still utterly bizarre to me even if I happen to like the result in this case. Striking the 20 and hyphen hardly sounds less ridiculous.
Evers was unable to undo the $32 million cut to the University of Wisconsin, which was funding that Republicans said would have gone toward diversity, equity and inclusion — or DEI — programming and staff.
How on earth do you justify cutting funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion?? Are those not things we as a country want to promote?
I can’t tell if this is a serious question. I mean, have you met Republicans?
There’s a large base of people who think DEI initiatives are unnecessary. I agree with you in that the United States ought to strive for promoting these ideas, programs and staff - but there’s a huge push back from many people.
A common argument I’ll always fall into is the idea that if you work hard, you’ll be successful - no matter who you are and what you look like. We know this isn’t always true and it’s why we have DEI initiatives.
To the people who don’t want to promote it, I’m not sure how they can justify it.
I think some people fail to realize (or care) that not everyone comes from the same starting point. Imagine a foot race; if one person starts out 40 yards from the finish line, while another person starts 100 yards away, it doesn’t matter if the second person tries twice as hard and runs twice as fast, they still finish behind the first person. Unfortunately people from more impoverished communities and backgrounds tend to be like the second person with further to run.
Not if you are a conservative.
We cannot keep calling them “conservative.” Abolishing standards has nothing to do with conservatism.
They are the opposite of progressives. They are regressives.
The correct Term would be “reactionary”
Sort of, but they’re working so hard to undo progress that has already been made. They’re not just opposed to new things, they’re actively working to make things worse.
Equity is the problem. Replace equity with equality and I’d agree with you.
Well, that’s a ridiculous take.
If it was your job to hand out food to people who needed it, and you showed up to town and saw on your left a bunch of starving people on the verge of death desperately needing food and on the right a bunch of fat people sitting at a picnic table, eating tons of food.
Do you think it would be fair to give them both the same amount of food?
Yes, it would be equal, but it would not be equitable or moral, and that’s the difference between equality and equity. Equality is nice on paper, but nearly Impossible in an already unequal society.
Take from the rich, give to the poor.
Yes, that would be a form of equity, and if people would start seeing money as a tool instead of a real life global high score, we’d be so much better off.
Promote? Sure. Spend millions of tax dollars? Not necessary.
Seems like a waste of tax dollars to me. We can promote it without throwing money at it.
I know, this will upset those who want to get paid to do it.
This is hilarious! It’s also ridiculous that tactics like this is what government is.
Our children’s school desks should be gold plated. They deserve nothing less.
