• crawancon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    151
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 day ago

    they all got more money for rich people. did any of them impose term limits, stop insider training, or impose any meaningful penalties for those that already have a lot of wealth? they got wealthier and so did all around.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      They literally didn’t, though. Clinton obtained surplus by raising taxes and by removing several caps which benefitted the wealthy.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Nope, they all deregulated, supported monopolies & tax loopholes.

      … all while the core infrastructure (healthcare, transit systems, tax systems, education, housing, etc) withered away by design.

      Not to mention the massive bail-outs via blank no-strings attached checks (if a gov has to give monies to a private company that usually means shareholders lose their value, but not in the USA, they just get free monies).

      And ofc war profiteering (& constantly killing some of the poorest civilians on the planet).

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      What about Sanders? How about Warren?

      We need congressional primary attendance to break 15% before we get to complain about term limits. If you don’t show up when you have a say, then you are responsible for the career politicians.

      We should be voting twice every two years, not once every four, for federal elections alone.

      • wpb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        21 hours ago

        I hope you’re aware that Sanders was never president. But also that he’s not a democra, which folks sometimes forget.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 hours ago

          They’re asking about enacting term limits. There is a presidential term limit, so I assumed they were talking about Congress.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          You asked about creating term limits. There are limits on presidential terms, so I assumed you meant congressional term limits. No? Am I missing your point?

          • crawancon@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            24 hours ago

            the OP posted Pic about presidents. my comment was did any of those presidents introduce term limits on congress or SCOTUS, etc.

            I’d have loved Warren or Sanders, but neither were president.

              • crawancon@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                23 hours ago

                I’m sure an executive order or thirty would have sufficed in leau of proper legislation.

                see: current administration

                • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  22 hours ago

                  Executive orders can just be repealed by the next administration. The most it could possibly affect is one House term.