Yes because employers will totally not automatically take it out of the paycheck. Cause they’re all about getting in trouble for their employees.
The only ones who can not pay taxes are the ultra wealthy or those who are only classified as contractors. And the contractors will get fucked a lot harder if they don’t pay
Even when you’re a captive tax payer you can do things differently. I think you mean to say she has power to do things more effectively? which brings us back to debating the efficacy of her tactics
Apologies for offering my understanding of what you said, I really don’t understand your expectations here. That all politicians stop playing the game starting with AOC? And that will somehow bring down the two party system? But again, here we are talking about what is a better strategy which you insist is not the case.
That all politicians stop playing the game starting with AOC?
If it is to be stopped, it has to stop with someone. The AOC of today is not the AOC of the first campaign, and that’s by design of the game. Not faulting get that out happened, but she’s been in the game long enough to know only billionaires and corpos are winning by these rules.
Are we expecting her to dismantle the master’s house with the master’s tools by throwing away the tools? My expectation is that she will use the tools to do harm reduction so that organizing lasting change becomes possible.
If you’re paying taxes you’re playing the game as well. It’s not much of a choice.
Yes because employers will totally not automatically take it out of the paycheck. Cause they’re all about getting in trouble for their employees.
The only ones who can not pay taxes are the ultra wealthy or those who are only classified as contractors. And the contractors will get fucked a lot harder if they don’t pay
Truth
Oh yes, the captive functioning of society is as bad as the optional “can’t do anything differently” dysfunction. 🙄
Even when you’re a captive tax payer you can do things differently. I think you mean to say she has power to do things more effectively? which brings us back to debating the efficacy of her tactics
Apologies for offering my understanding of what you said, I really don’t understand your expectations here. That all politicians stop playing the game starting with AOC? And that will somehow bring down the two party system? But again, here we are talking about what is a better strategy which you insist is not the case.
If it is to be stopped, it has to stop with someone. The AOC of today is not the AOC of the first campaign, and that’s by design of the game. Not faulting get that out happened, but she’s been in the game long enough to know only billionaires and corpos are winning by these rules.
A drop => a trickle=> a stream=> a flood
Are we expecting her to dismantle the master’s house with the master’s tools by throwing away the tools? My expectation is that she will use the tools to do harm reduction so that organizing lasting change becomes possible.
Naïve optimism is blind folly.
And not embracing a diversity of tactics is leaving power at the table for the capitalists to take.
That’s why Democrats today are right of Reagan.
No apologies needed, thanks anyway
In your opinion, Is AOC to the right of Reagan?