this post was submitted on 27 May 2024
481 points (97.2% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3565 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

President Joe Biden is taking fresh steps to help keep gas prices from climbing. For Republicans to see this as “disgusting” and “disgraceful” is bizarre.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 98 points 5 months ago (39 children)

I actually just want permanently higher gas prices like in Europe to facilitate the move to EVs. The US needs to break the addiction to oil.

[–] stormesp@lemm.ee 28 points 5 months ago (3 children)

A lot of people will be even poorer increasing the price of gas in Europe, most working class people cant switch to an EV just because,my family (myself included, but now i live in a big city where i dont need a car anymore) purchase usually 15+ year old cars, and there is no decent public transportation in that zone. I know you just want easy upvotes saying stupid things like that, but really, viewpoints like that are harmful towards the working class, if you want to facilitate the move towards EVs what you need is cheaper EVs, and tbh, fuck that bullshit and instead push toward better public transportation in rural areas instead of keeping the push in personal vehicles that are as wasteful.

[–] vividspecter@lemm.ee 7 points 5 months ago

Ideally, you tax the hell out of fossil fuels then redistribute it to the poor. The rich and middle class cut their usage and/or switch to EVs and the poor can get by while viable alternatives to driving are implemented and EV prices come down.

[–] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

Also EV structures in the cities are not good because most people live in places with no garages or driveways. Better public transportation is the way.

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

viewpoints like that are harmful towards the working class

News flash: The working class in most of Europe is doing much better than the working class in the US. And that's with much higher gas prices and higher taxes.

They also drive more EVs and have a heck of a lot higher quality public transportation.

[–] stormesp@lemm.ee 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (13 children)

Hm so if the median working class as a whole in the EU is doing better than the working class of the USA its okay the fuck the working class of the rural zones in spain which as i said lack public transportation or access to expensive EVs? Lmao.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works 20 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The US needs better public transit everywhere, not just EVS.

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Definitely agree. But there are a lot people in the US who have been conditioned to whine about "communist public transportation" every time it's brought up, so it never really happens. EVs are a good middle ground to get many of these people onboard with more environmentally friendly transportation.

[–] kava@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago (4 children)

That is an inverse progressive tax. The lower income you are, the higher % of your income you pay.

It's essentially a tax on the poor trying to subsidize renewables. If the US had viable alternatives, maybe I'd support this. I don't think the poor need more taxes right now, though.

[–] pearable@lemmy.ml 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The word you're looking for is regressive

[–] kava@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago
[–] RustyEarthfire@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

If you return the tax to everyone as a dividend, then it becomes progressive, while still encouraging less polluting options

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago

What other countries do is build viable public transportation to counter.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How much will climate change cost the poor?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 4 points 5 months ago

That comes after the election.

load more comments (35 replies)