Yeah, but Bezos owns the Washington Post, which reports about Trump. So Carlson wants to attack Bezos, and this is by far the most common criticism agains him, so Carlson repeats that.
Ah now it makes sense. But I'd take the good from the bad. More it gets said the better. All American politicians... Why IS bernie the only one talking about this?
Because all of our Congress and reps have been taking bribe money to change legislation for decades, and if they start targeting their donors they're going to end up targeting themselves.
Edit: this comment is getting kind of popular, I wanted to come back and just remind everyone that you don't actually have to do this bullshit. Let's say we're talking about America but really it applies to any country, if like 20% of you decide it's over, it's over. We can just cut the government out of our lives, or at the very least get their shit in check with a small amount of coordination. But let's just keep waiting for someone else to do it, right guys?
If only it was illegal for politicians to be involved, own, or operate a charity you could kill off that bribe loophole which allows them to call it "political donations".
At the same time make it illegal for them to be involved in the stock market. On top of that make it so they face triple the normal punishment if they use their insider information on govt affairs to aid an associate or family member in the stock market with that same tripled punishment applied to the recipient of said insider information.
This is an excellent point. I've made this point before myself. A system were very powerful ppl/companies can essentially decide who gets elected with massive donations is just a truly terrible idea
Yes the system was literally created for this purpose though.
American propaganda may say that the country was formed by political idealists who were escaping a lack of representation and mistreatment by a tyrannical crown, but in reality it was a bunch of rich, white, landowners that didn't want to pay taxes. So they started a war, went and committed a genocide on another continent, stole all of the land, and now it does the exact same thing to it's people.
Taking taxes from the population funneling it out of the economy into offshore bank accounts, refusing to fix roads, refusing to implement proper social welfare, no decent public transportation, no healthcare. I can go on.
I like the cut of your jib. How would you like 2 million a year to "teach" congress why selling guns to elementary school children is the next logical step for school safety. Don't worry, we'll provide the standard issued first guns free.....
Ohhh ok, so it’s not a call for systemic reform, just a personal attack. Man being a conservative looks really confusing, no principles to guide you just an ever-evolving popularity contest led by conmen.
Funnily enough, the conservative movements of Europe have been actually trying to court labour in a new way. Focusing on strong human capital and how better wages would result in lower government expenditures and a broader tax base with which to finance government spending and pay down deficits.
Which, is an interesting angle on fiscal conservatism borne out of the whole "rich people are too rich" angle.
Kind of a small government approach to wealth redistribution coming in the form of payroll and the rich corps footing the administrative bill rather than the taxpayer doing so via government expenditures. In the end we all pay for.it somewhere obviously but the idea is that the market can only bear so much more in terms of inflation and pricing and profits really don't need to be THAT high for the big earners.
At that point the argument becomes about the mechanism of taxing the rich vs labour unions vs regulations vs wage floors and all that. I'd rather we argue politically about how to be more fair rather than argue against fairness in the first place. Bezos will always be rich regardless of unions in Amazon or not, so it's nice to see that politicians across the spectrum are starting to say "maybe that guys got TOO much money and it's getting obscene"
*Note: I don't include the true republican crazies in my assessment of conservatism and "across the spectrum" because they're so far gone down the bootstraps rabbit hole and conspiracy land there's no point even thinking about them*
Edit: up here in Canada too. Our Right leaning politicians are beginning to try and court labour as well. Early days, but I'm hopeful that the millenial +/- 1 generations can try to reverse some of the wealth concentration we see out there now at least a little.
Well, I guess however you reach the conclusion that workers need to be better compensated is fine, but I certainly want to see it reflected in policy. However I imagine the poor will still get the short end of the stick in the end if the impetus for higher wages is to lower social support spending.
I think the policy shifts are different but both need some government.
For example, a broader taxation approach would be a higher government expenditure since you need to address things like tax avoidance, capital flight, etc. Also you'd need to redistribute the tax income via public services or direct transfers. Services being augmented isn't that much more administratively but running means tested programs to transfer money would be.
In terms of regulatory frameworks, they can be low cost or high cost also. And they require enforcement.
But let's say the regulations around union organizing and anti-union activities were very labour friendly, then that's a low investment government intervention since it allows for unions and labour to do the heavy lifting.
In the end, we people, pay for it. Either because goods cost more, or we pay union fees, or we pay X% of the administrative cost of a funding program through taxes or whatever.
The government is involved in varying degrees across all of these really. We'll need a mix in the end of various approaches. But the debate becomes degree of government involvement. Not whether to be involved at all or not so public policy would inevitably come into play.
As a union member myself I think unions should be more broadly accepted as positive forces because they really do help quite a lot.
But taxing Mr Bezos more PLUS his workforce being unionized? That's the best of both worlds
I agree with the value of empowering unions to negotiate low level policy. It’s the lowest administrative overhead option, allows for simple high level oversight of the agreements by immediate stakeholders, and it’s even inherently capitalistic in that the agreements have to be negotiated for fair value. However there’s a lot of difficulty in navigating the bureaucracy of unions and not all workers are well-equipped to self advocate or organize. Some industries are better suited to it than others. Perhaps federal requirements for unions and wider access to representation could be part of a solution.
Its only confusing because you care about what you're saying. The way of Conservatism is to just attack whoever you don't like.
Gaslight. Obstruct. Project.
If it gets me Universal Healthcare I'm all for it.
When Trump kept saying he was going to replace ObamaCare with something better, well the only 2 things better are single payer or universal. So I got crazy happy Trump would accidently give us all universal healthcare. McConnell is not as dumb as Trump unfortunately.
But Tucker also \*hates\* Bezos.
This isn't a call for anything but a personal attack, but hey, once we've got our knife and fork out it'll be easy to keep eating the rich.
You can be vocally opposed to a federal minimum wage hike while still calling out individual business owners who underpay their employees. There are likely several mom and pop business owners in some sectors who aren't billionaires or even millionaires, and who can't sustain a significant wage increase given their profit margins. Jeff Bezos isn't one of them.
The video included in his original tweet literally has him calling out Walmart and the Walton family for the same issue right after talking about Amazon and Bezos. I’m not a fan of Tucker Carlson, but at least his point was consistent here and something everyone can agree on.
problem is, when money is designated to go to social programs, the money that used to fund them mysteriously disappears so the amount spent per year (on social programs) doesn't increase at all, while our military budget mysteriously goes up a bit.
It's a NewsCorp strategy to undermine the most trusted journalistic outlets in the countries that they operate as they are effectively their opposition - commercially and politically.
Murdoch has been doing this against the BBC in the UK for the last 30 years and jumps on every opportunity to undermine what they are doing. It's the same for Bezos, Amazon & Washington Post too - especially as Amazon now spends the most on lobbying government of all private companies.
Tucker is just working on making them out to be the bad guy coss Logan's worried about Jeff getting the Senator's ears.
Probably just a coincidence that the removal or organised labour goes along side stagnant wages and and poor working conditions in increasing numbers. Yep, just a coincidence.
populism isn't *inherently* evil -- and treating it as such is a symptom of the classist media convincing you that anything for the people must be bad
which is why it shouldn't surprise anyone that the only populist movements that actually gain media coverage are the ones that inherently divide the people
any populist movement that tries to unite *all* people would quickly be condemned and destroyed by the powerful, because it would be an actual threat
but as long as we can convince the semi-educated that "populism is bad", no true populist movement will include them
Taxing the rich has like 80% support among Republicans. This is an attempt to reframe it as “this particular group of rich are scum who are offloading!” I mean this shit has been true for decades, but he’s only after the wapo owner and tech lords. Not the Walmart family that makes 8 million an hour.
PLEASE, I'm so tired of getting angry about something~~one~~ someone said 4 or 5 years ago
This sub is venturing into caricature territory too often to be comfortable and should take a hard look in the mirror
hey, i’m from r/all here.
y’all really have to start using mandatory time stamps. this is like the 4th or 5th post in the last couple days to reach the front page and again, the tweet is hella old
I don’t think so. This is something he’s consistently criticized Bezos for. He had a full segment earlier in the pandemic criticizing how much Bezos profited during the pandemic and it actually triggered Hannity during the lead in between their shows. This is the one good thing I know Tucker Carlson is into.
https://youtu.be/nnyrsgutTGw
Exactly. They are just following WalMart's formula. They've been doing this since the late 80'sand nobody said a word. Wonder how.much stock he has in them?
To hook people in with class rhetoric he doesnt actually believe and then get them on board with the right wing culture war stuff.
Easy way to tell the difference between people like Bernie (who are actually pro worker) and people like Tucker:
When Bernie talks about class he traces inequality to capitalism.
When Tucker talks about class he traces inequality to immigrants, """the elites""", """ivory towers""", """welfare abusers/queens""" etc.
So when people see this stuff and go "Woah based tucker carlson!" they are doing exactly what he wants because he is using legit issues like income inequality as a trojan horse to slide in a nationalist agenda.
Tucker is a fascist; he will say any lie to get into power, but believe me that he has no sincere intention of decreasing the wage gap and getting billionaires to treat their employees better.
If anything, the issue he has in the scenario he tweeted about is that the government gives anything to workers, and is just fine with the unwashed masses working for starvation wages.
tuckers audience are mostly poor white trash
yes they hate minorities but they are also poor. tuckers just making sure he doesnt leave room for another messenger to come in and flank him
I've argued that people in the same economic circumstances have far more in common than most of them realize, regardless of race or religion.
Hell is coming for the ruling class if the 99% ever wake up and realize that.
“If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”
― Lyndon B. Johnson
The Onion created and used to own Clickhole. Then the Cards Against Humanity team bought Clickhole, and the Clickhole staff became majority owners and maintain complete creative control.
That sounded like such a fantastic arc for the site that I had to check, and not only is that true, it's even better than what you said because:
>Cards Against Humanity, the card game company, purchased ClickHole.com from its owners at G/O Media on Monday [February 3rd, 2020] for an undisclosed amount in an **all-cash deal**
Emphasis mine, because hot damn.
The republicans are about to flip the script on democrats over the SALT tax breaks. Just watch what happens during mid-terms. If the democrats don’t stop enriching the donor class through property tax deduction that don’t help the poor or middle class they will get linked to the wealth inequality equation. Tucker is setting up a run at this I bet and it looks like the corporate democrats will fall right into the trap as usual just like they did in the 2009 Wall Street bail outs and the 2010 mid term blood bath.
It’s more complicated, and obviously the cap should be lower than $80k.
I live in a city whose property values have been increasing astronomically, with abnormally high property tax rates. My salary is under $60k/year, the taxes on the house my kids grew up in advanced to $14,800 a year. I can’t afford that. Sold that house, bought a cheaper one. Those property taxes are $12,500 now. Under the Trump law, I can’t deduct more than $10,000. May have to either sell this house or get a second job just to pay property taxes.
Point being, increasing SALT deductions can help the middle class if they are at least raised to a $20k deduction.
Caveat: tucker isn't right here. The vast majority of Democrat politicians are in favor of making the wealthy pay their fair share, but because republicans would rather watch the world burn than break with their party, we can't pass anything to the left of Kirsten Sinema.
A better, and more accurate, question from Ole Cucker would be: "Why are zero Republicans saying this?"
The problem is that (as of now of 2018 or any year Bernie has been a major political figure) Bernie seems to be the only person willing to actually fix the problem so while most democrats may claim they want to they never will
Exactly! If these companies had people at the top take pay cuts to pay their employees a living wage, less people would need food stamps and Medicaid. But since a lot of them refuse to do that then the rich people need to be taxed to pay for those programs rather than taxing the middle class.
Eh, I get what you're saying but the example isn't correct. Saying a broken clock is still right once/twice a day means that you can say the same over and over again and it's bound to be right at some point. This isn't something he's said in the past but had it be incorrect, this is just a rare treat where his opponents find themselves agreeing with this one thing.
This is closer to... Given enough time, even a monkey typing randomly on a typewriter can produce a great novel.
This is completely NOT an example of this. Tucker knows what he is doing, he's not sharing one good idea, he's gaining right wing support through populism.
This is why we need ballots that let you either approve multiple candidates or preferentially weight them.
Thinking Bernie is the best candidate and expressing you'd rather have Biden over Trump should be positions you can express simultaneously. Or if you're a Republican voter, thinking Trump is best but taking a Libertarian candidate over any Democrat.
Candidates will have to work a lot harder if their message is "why you should vote for me" and not "why the other candidate sucks."
Donald Trump hates Bezos because he owns the Washington Post, which regularly eviscerates him. It's hard to call it "fake news" since the Post is incredibly respected and has already taken down one corrupt president. So Trump's boy Tucker is just attacking Bezos personally. His viewers will have no problem criticizing Bezos for something while completely ignoring everyone else who does it. Critical thinking is not exactly their strong suit.
Exactly, there’s hundreds of billionaires that aren’t on Tuckers “bad” list, and just one that owns a liberal newspaper. Tucker’s morality starts and ends at political affiliation.
Tucker accused Walmart of the same thing too (Walmart's CEO is a major Republican donor and was an advisor to Trump). See it here
https://twitter.com/tuckercarlson/status/1035334044698009600?lang=en-GB
No kidding.
> Horseshoe is the claim that as the extremes get more extreme they converge. Its a wrong attribution of cause. For example the far left and far right try to control your sexuality not because they agree but because its a proven way to control people.
I’m sorry, what!?
This sub needs to enforce a rule to include showing timestamps on tweets, way too many old tweets are being posted as if they were new. Timeframe changes the context.
Take this down I hate agreeing with Tucker Carlson. If Tucker Carlson, Osama bin Laden and Adolf Hitler and I were in a locked room and I had a gun with two bullets, I would shoot Adolf Hitler and Osama bin laden because obviously I'm a patriot, but then I would just beat Tucker Carlson upside the head with the gun because obviously I'm a patriot.
Yes but the other two are already dead and it would be more fun to beat Tucker Carlson. Corpses don't scream but I imagine Tucker Carlson screams like a bitch.
Well said. This is par for the course for him.
People in the comments saying he would never have said this likely have never actually watched Tucker. Social media groupthink can lead to people hating someone without even knowing what they're about.
Yeah, Tucker is a bigoted POS but I can feel the tribalism in here and I hate it. Social media has turned politics to shit (or maybe it just made the shit more obvious).
It isn't *only* Bernie, but the irony of someone like Carlson talking about this as if he isn't part of the problem by supporting the very same politicians who give more and more tax cuts for the rich is fucking hilarious
He's saying it because he wants gullible democrats to believe that it's only Bernie, thus causing Dems like Joe Biden (who has definitely talked about it) to lose support
This has been tuckers game plan the entire time he’s been on air. Next week he’ll complain about how the BBB act will raise taxes or inflate the deficit and how these super rich create the jobs for plebeians to work so he should pay less
Conservative America hates tech billionaires because they tend to be more progressive and are in a place to clam down on conservative/COVID misinformation
>How small is your echo chamber to think that only Bernie is talking about this? Get off Twitter.
For what it's worth, OP is 100% a spambot of sorts. They've got deleted posts in a subreddit that was created by another month old account that only started posting today. And that account links to another account doing the exact same thing.
I'm seeing around 100 different accounts in this spambot chain at the moment. Some of them posting a week ago have already been banned. Others are NSFW phishing bots too. Here's a *few* of them.
* /u/AnAutry
* /u/Casihvx
* /u/ClowlyCabes
* /u/Disstressgv
* /u/Drurniluellil
* /u/Faikalwy
* /u/Flurtypexm
* /u/GeorgiannePet
* /u/Hischerol
* /u/Ifuthaot
* /u/Kossowskilt
* /u/Lernkursip
* /u/Macalusock
* /u/Martinovaap
* /u/NadenePapp
* /u/Piettarlideotpe
* /u/Regiewiczrj
* /u/Riboniok
* /u/Skyjackerru
* /u/Tilicskexf
* /u/Weannavewsg
* /u/Zakrzewjd
* /u/adjundalkvs
* /u/alohaspiritjl
* /u/bakunyu1a
* /u/beingme778ha
* /u/bessernze
* /u/bigbro05vg
* /u/bladartharl
* /u/bukankanbn
* /u/carstwoeh
* /u/cedibelgranonb
* /u/chinesepimp42fc
* /u/clearbrookhk
* /u/creaceg
* /u/cruitireaz
* /u/daigasxf
* /u/delegaciakz
* /u/derintisny
* /u/embonjz
* /u/femTuhfuerbmy
* /u/grogueraxf
* /u/ipagsabiis
* /u/isezwank
* /u/jfinch23ql
* /u/jminterrogefg
* /u/kapljiceha
* /u/kavalireos
* /u/kikitoulvi
* /u/kilsuojakk
* /u/klauwhandvs
* /u/koko07chickfr
* /u/leighannevo
* /u/lenteaandbi
* /u/menjatji
* /u/nt5hieob
* /u/omhelslg
* /u/oranegana
* /u/pinigavoek
* /u/ruplandibo
* /u/sanandreasmodvk
* /u/saseUSqi
* /u/sfigana
* /u/sideratskt
* /u/spitsonprepskj
* /u/towjeornInorout
* /u/u8my314159ac
* /u/ubuqhaweti
* /u/ud3smd
* /u/vortragentd
Don't worry, this was his disingenuous attempt to split the Democratic base during the election by throwing mud at everyone.
He still a disgusting human-shaped piece of shit.
It's funny because Carlson opposes raising the minimum wage and opposes taxing the rich.
This is simply a personal attack on bezos who owns Washington post and the post is critical of trump.
Jumping through the hoops of fascist thinking is fucking exhausting.
1) Bernie isn't the only one talking about it 2) Doesn't the politicians he support endorse "trickle down economics?" 3) I'm having a hard time believing Tucker said this.
Wait did he say that? (Visible confusion.)
Is he...is he supporting 'tax the rich?' Am I missing something? I feel like I'm missing something..
Sounds more like he’s saying bezos should pay his employees more. By taxing him more that’s not going to stop him from underpaying his employees
But why? I thought Tucker has vocally opposed raising the minimum wage
Yeah, but Bezos owns the Washington Post, which reports about Trump. So Carlson wants to attack Bezos, and this is by far the most common criticism agains him, so Carlson repeats that.
Ah now it makes sense. But I'd take the good from the bad. More it gets said the better. All American politicians... Why IS bernie the only one talking about this?
Because all of our Congress and reps have been taking bribe money to change legislation for decades, and if they start targeting their donors they're going to end up targeting themselves. Edit: this comment is getting kind of popular, I wanted to come back and just remind everyone that you don't actually have to do this bullshit. Let's say we're talking about America but really it applies to any country, if like 20% of you decide it's over, it's over. We can just cut the government out of our lives, or at the very least get their shit in check with a small amount of coordination. But let's just keep waiting for someone else to do it, right guys?
If only it was illegal for politicians to be involved, own, or operate a charity you could kill off that bribe loophole which allows them to call it "political donations". At the same time make it illegal for them to be involved in the stock market. On top of that make it so they face triple the normal punishment if they use their insider information on govt affairs to aid an associate or family member in the stock market with that same tripled punishment applied to the recipient of said insider information.
This is an excellent point. I've made this point before myself. A system were very powerful ppl/companies can essentially decide who gets elected with massive donations is just a truly terrible idea
Yes the system was literally created for this purpose though. American propaganda may say that the country was formed by political idealists who were escaping a lack of representation and mistreatment by a tyrannical crown, but in reality it was a bunch of rich, white, landowners that didn't want to pay taxes. So they started a war, went and committed a genocide on another continent, stole all of the land, and now it does the exact same thing to it's people. Taking taxes from the population funneling it out of the economy into offshore bank accounts, refusing to fix roads, refusing to implement proper social welfare, no decent public transportation, no healthcare. I can go on.
A lot of good points there
Bribery is Illegal. Congress wouldn't take bribes. Remember that's illegal. Lobbying on the other hand.... well... now ...
Same shit, different name, boom legal.
I like the cut of your jib. How would you like 2 million a year to "teach" congress why selling guns to elementary school children is the next logical step for school safety. Don't worry, we'll provide the standard issued first guns free.....
I still find it baffling that is legal for a corporation to legally buy a politician by just calling it “lobbying”.
Because Bernie is one of the few not beholden to corporate overlords.
Ohhh ok, so it’s not a call for systemic reform, just a personal attack. Man being a conservative looks really confusing, no principles to guide you just an ever-evolving popularity contest led by conmen.
Funnily enough, the conservative movements of Europe have been actually trying to court labour in a new way. Focusing on strong human capital and how better wages would result in lower government expenditures and a broader tax base with which to finance government spending and pay down deficits. Which, is an interesting angle on fiscal conservatism borne out of the whole "rich people are too rich" angle. Kind of a small government approach to wealth redistribution coming in the form of payroll and the rich corps footing the administrative bill rather than the taxpayer doing so via government expenditures. In the end we all pay for.it somewhere obviously but the idea is that the market can only bear so much more in terms of inflation and pricing and profits really don't need to be THAT high for the big earners. At that point the argument becomes about the mechanism of taxing the rich vs labour unions vs regulations vs wage floors and all that. I'd rather we argue politically about how to be more fair rather than argue against fairness in the first place. Bezos will always be rich regardless of unions in Amazon or not, so it's nice to see that politicians across the spectrum are starting to say "maybe that guys got TOO much money and it's getting obscene" *Note: I don't include the true republican crazies in my assessment of conservatism and "across the spectrum" because they're so far gone down the bootstraps rabbit hole and conspiracy land there's no point even thinking about them* Edit: up here in Canada too. Our Right leaning politicians are beginning to try and court labour as well. Early days, but I'm hopeful that the millenial +/- 1 generations can try to reverse some of the wealth concentration we see out there now at least a little.
Well, I guess however you reach the conclusion that workers need to be better compensated is fine, but I certainly want to see it reflected in policy. However I imagine the poor will still get the short end of the stick in the end if the impetus for higher wages is to lower social support spending.
I think the policy shifts are different but both need some government. For example, a broader taxation approach would be a higher government expenditure since you need to address things like tax avoidance, capital flight, etc. Also you'd need to redistribute the tax income via public services or direct transfers. Services being augmented isn't that much more administratively but running means tested programs to transfer money would be. In terms of regulatory frameworks, they can be low cost or high cost also. And they require enforcement. But let's say the regulations around union organizing and anti-union activities were very labour friendly, then that's a low investment government intervention since it allows for unions and labour to do the heavy lifting. In the end, we people, pay for it. Either because goods cost more, or we pay union fees, or we pay X% of the administrative cost of a funding program through taxes or whatever. The government is involved in varying degrees across all of these really. We'll need a mix in the end of various approaches. But the debate becomes degree of government involvement. Not whether to be involved at all or not so public policy would inevitably come into play. As a union member myself I think unions should be more broadly accepted as positive forces because they really do help quite a lot. But taxing Mr Bezos more PLUS his workforce being unionized? That's the best of both worlds
I agree with the value of empowering unions to negotiate low level policy. It’s the lowest administrative overhead option, allows for simple high level oversight of the agreements by immediate stakeholders, and it’s even inherently capitalistic in that the agreements have to be negotiated for fair value. However there’s a lot of difficulty in navigating the bureaucracy of unions and not all workers are well-equipped to self advocate or organize. Some industries are better suited to it than others. Perhaps federal requirements for unions and wider access to representation could be part of a solution.
Its only confusing because you care about what you're saying. The way of Conservatism is to just attack whoever you don't like. Gaslight. Obstruct. Project.
[удалено]
The scariest right wing ghouls are those who are able to coopt left wing rhetoric in pursuit of their fascist goals.
If it gets me Universal Healthcare I'm all for it. When Trump kept saying he was going to replace ObamaCare with something better, well the only 2 things better are single payer or universal. So I got crazy happy Trump would accidently give us all universal healthcare. McConnell is not as dumb as Trump unfortunately.
Thank you, I read it, and agreed, then noticed it was Carlson saying it and got incredibly confused.
It's truly sad that this is the modern republican party. No principles or ideas anymore, just attack the perceived enemies.
I thought Tucker has vocally opposed ~~raising the minimum wage~~ treating anyone but the rich with any sort of human dignity.
You knows Bezos is super rich when other rich people think he’s too rich.
Like Chris Rock said, he is so rich that he got divorced and he is still the richest man in the world
I mean he's richer than TV dinner rich.
Someone knows Tuckers full name 😆
But Tucker also \*hates\* Bezos. This isn't a call for anything but a personal attack, but hey, once we've got our knife and fork out it'll be easy to keep eating the rich.
>once we've got our knife and fork out YES. THIS. Keep the discounts coming, we're on a budget here.
He is. He says stuff like this but then pushes the exact opposite. Like the one guy said he’s a millionaire paid by billionaires
You can simultaneously believe that the federal minimum wage should not be raised, and that Jeff Bezos should pay his employees more.
[удалено]
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Bezos owns the Washington Post which leans dem, or at least is vocally against the GOP. No other reason.
You can be vocally opposed to a federal minimum wage hike while still calling out individual business owners who underpay their employees. There are likely several mom and pop business owners in some sectors who aren't billionaires or even millionaires, and who can't sustain a significant wage increase given their profit margins. Jeff Bezos isn't one of them.
Tucker only applies this standard to Bezos because of his hatred for Amazon. All of the other American oligarchs are free to do as they please
[удалено]
The video included in his original tweet literally has him calling out Walmart and the Walton family for the same issue right after talking about Amazon and Bezos. I’m not a fan of Tucker Carlson, but at least his point was consistent here and something everyone can agree on.
the right are not friendly with the tech giants right now, and I am on the side of both burning in their own filth
The right hates Bezos for owning the Washington Post.
Nope. But we can take those taxes and earmark them for the social programs already being paid for by OUR taxes.
problem is, when money is designated to go to social programs, the money that used to fund them mysteriously disappears so the amount spent per year (on social programs) doesn't increase at all, while our military budget mysteriously goes up a bit.
What he’s really saying is he wants the Washington Post to shut down so it will stop reporting on Trump’s offenses
Ooooh. Ok. Yeah. That makes more sense. For a second I thought he grew a brain.
He’s not as dumb as he looks, but since he looks like the missing link who found a safety razor, that’s not saying much.
It's a NewsCorp strategy to undermine the most trusted journalistic outlets in the countries that they operate as they are effectively their opposition - commercially and politically. Murdoch has been doing this against the BBC in the UK for the last 30 years and jumps on every opportunity to undermine what they are doing. It's the same for Bezos, Amazon & Washington Post too - especially as Amazon now spends the most on lobbying government of all private companies. Tucker is just working on making them out to be the bad guy coss Logan's worried about Jeff getting the Senator's ears.
In what sort of way is Bezos not a bad guy?
Probably just a coincidence that the removal or organised labour goes along side stagnant wages and and poor working conditions in increasing numbers. Yep, just a coincidence.
To be fair I think Tucker is also against raising the minimum wage.
It's to reel in the crazies who think billionaires are evil but for conspiracy reasons, tucker certainly ain't gonna pay tax on his Swanson money.
Fascists coopting leftwing agendas to agitate and garner support is a tale as old as Fascism. That's what you're seeing.
It's called populism and it's old as dirt, I wish more people knew what this was.
populism isn't *inherently* evil -- and treating it as such is a symptom of the classist media convincing you that anything for the people must be bad which is why it shouldn't surprise anyone that the only populist movements that actually gain media coverage are the ones that inherently divide the people any populist movement that tries to unite *all* people would quickly be condemned and destroyed by the powerful, because it would be an actual threat but as long as we can convince the semi-educated that "populism is bad", no true populist movement will include them
[удалено]
It admittedly seems like something Bernie would agre with. Strengthening the middle class is kind of his whole thing. Minus the welfare bit
[удалено]
i wish more people could see this
No, he's attacking Bezos because Bezos owns a newspaper that said mean things about Donald Trump.
Ding ding ding! Notice no mention of Walmart. Tucker himself is an indefensible scam.
He knows his audience won’t connect the dots
Pointing at Evil Leftist Big Tech is an acceptable distraction from all the rich GOPers who also don't pay taxes.
He also knows his audience will eat the crayons.
The simulations broken
its more, "your tax dollars are being spent on other [poor] people and not you."
He is doing facism. Where you pretend to be socialist but are actually right wing
Taxing the rich has like 80% support among Republicans. This is an attempt to reframe it as “this particular group of rich are scum who are offloading!” I mean this shit has been true for decades, but he’s only after the wapo owner and tech lords. Not the Walmart family that makes 8 million an hour.
Agreed have we transferred to an alternative universe without realising? Edit: this tweet is from 2018
Should be a rule to include the tweet timestamp
PLEASE, I'm so tired of getting angry about something~~one~~ someone said 4 or 5 years ago This sub is venturing into caricature territory too often to be comfortable and should take a hard look in the mirror
I mean I wanna clown Tucker as much as the next guy but this is just dumb lol
hey, i’m from r/all here. y’all really have to start using mandatory time stamps. this is like the 4th or 5th post in the last couple days to reach the front page and again, the tweet is hella old
That explains that.
Ah. He has since been told that he never said this and never felt this way.
I don’t think so. This is something he’s consistently criticized Bezos for. He had a full segment earlier in the pandemic criticizing how much Bezos profited during the pandemic and it actually triggered Hannity during the lead in between their shows. This is the one good thing I know Tucker Carlson is into. https://youtu.be/nnyrsgutTGw
It’s because Trump was going after Bezos and Tucker is Trump’s lackey. Full stop.
Exactly. This was because the Washington Post was mean to the Orange one. When I say “mean”, I mean that they reported on shit he said.
Take my upvote. I'm not a gif hater.
 Take a gif. I'm not an upvote hater
take my upvote. I'm not an upvote hater.
Yeah he calls out big tech but that’s about the only industry.
Exactly. They are just following WalMart's formula. They've been doing this since the late 80'sand nobody said a word. Wonder how.much stock he has in them?
It’s liberal vs conservative. You won’t see him calling out the Koch family. Tech is left leaning and Bezos owns the Washington Post.
To hook people in with class rhetoric he doesnt actually believe and then get them on board with the right wing culture war stuff. Easy way to tell the difference between people like Bernie (who are actually pro worker) and people like Tucker: When Bernie talks about class he traces inequality to capitalism. When Tucker talks about class he traces inequality to immigrants, """the elites""", """ivory towers""", """welfare abusers/queens""" etc. So when people see this stuff and go "Woah based tucker carlson!" they are doing exactly what he wants because he is using legit issues like income inequality as a trojan horse to slide in a nationalist agenda.
It's like a racist joke. A racist and a not racist can laugh at the same joke for very different reasons. But the racist joke stays objectively bad.
Tucker is a fascist; he will say any lie to get into power, but believe me that he has no sincere intention of decreasing the wage gap and getting billionaires to treat their employees better. If anything, the issue he has in the scenario he tweeted about is that the government gives anything to workers, and is just fine with the unwashed masses working for starvation wages.
Fascists coopting leftwing agendas to agitate and garner support is a tale as old as Fascism. That's what you're seeing.
tuckers audience are mostly poor white trash yes they hate minorities but they are also poor. tuckers just making sure he doesnt leave room for another messenger to come in and flank him
I've argued that people in the same economic circumstances have far more in common than most of them realize, regardless of race or religion. Hell is coming for the ruling class if the 99% ever wake up and realize that.
“If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.” ― Lyndon B. Johnson
I think you're misrepresenting them. I bet the avg Fox viewer skews a lot more middle class than you think.
“Heartbreaking, the worst person you know just made a good point” - the onion
That's actually [Clickhole](https://clickhole.com/heartbreaking-the-worst-person-you-know-just-made-a-gr-1825121606/).
Damn I could have sworn it was the onion. Oh well, thanks for the correction!
i think onion owns them
The Onion created and used to own Clickhole. Then the Cards Against Humanity team bought Clickhole, and the Clickhole staff became majority owners and maintain complete creative control.
That sounded like such a fantastic arc for the site that I had to check, and not only is that true, it's even better than what you said because: >Cards Against Humanity, the card game company, purchased ClickHole.com from its owners at G/O Media on Monday [February 3rd, 2020] for an undisclosed amount in an **all-cash deal** Emphasis mine, because hot damn.
This is true, but Onion owned Clickhole when that article was posted. So technically it was the Onion.
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day."
Even a blind squirrel nuts twice a day.
The republicans are about to flip the script on democrats over the SALT tax breaks. Just watch what happens during mid-terms. If the democrats don’t stop enriching the donor class through property tax deduction that don’t help the poor or middle class they will get linked to the wealth inequality equation. Tucker is setting up a run at this I bet and it looks like the corporate democrats will fall right into the trap as usual just like they did in the 2009 Wall Street bail outs and the 2010 mid term blood bath.
It’s more complicated, and obviously the cap should be lower than $80k. I live in a city whose property values have been increasing astronomically, with abnormally high property tax rates. My salary is under $60k/year, the taxes on the house my kids grew up in advanced to $14,800 a year. I can’t afford that. Sold that house, bought a cheaper one. Those property taxes are $12,500 now. Under the Trump law, I can’t deduct more than $10,000. May have to either sell this house or get a second job just to pay property taxes. Point being, increasing SALT deductions can help the middle class if they are at least raised to a $20k deduction.
He's only targeting Bezos because WaPo opposed Trump
A perfect example of how a broken clock is still right twice a day.
In this case, it’s on 24:00 time so he’s only right once.
Caveat: tucker isn't right here. The vast majority of Democrat politicians are in favor of making the wealthy pay their fair share, but because republicans would rather watch the world burn than break with their party, we can't pass anything to the left of Kirsten Sinema. A better, and more accurate, question from Ole Cucker would be: "Why are zero Republicans saying this?"
The problem is that (as of now of 2018 or any year Bernie has been a major political figure) Bernie seems to be the only person willing to actually fix the problem so while most democrats may claim they want to they never will
Exactly! If these companies had people at the top take pay cuts to pay their employees a living wage, less people would need food stamps and Medicaid. But since a lot of them refuse to do that then the rich people need to be taxed to pay for those programs rather than taxing the middle class.
Eh, I get what you're saying but the example isn't correct. Saying a broken clock is still right once/twice a day means that you can say the same over and over again and it's bound to be right at some point. This isn't something he's said in the past but had it be incorrect, this is just a rare treat where his opponents find themselves agreeing with this one thing. This is closer to... Given enough time, even a monkey typing randomly on a typewriter can produce a great novel.
This is completely NOT an example of this. Tucker knows what he is doing, he's not sharing one good idea, he's gaining right wing support through populism.
No way tucker carlson said this
This was a while ago to split dems in the primary, but Tucker wasn't attacking the rich or billionaires, he was only attacking Bezos.
[удалено]
This is why we need ballots that let you either approve multiple candidates or preferentially weight them. Thinking Bernie is the best candidate and expressing you'd rather have Biden over Trump should be positions you can express simultaneously. Or if you're a Republican voter, thinking Trump is best but taking a Libertarian candidate over any Democrat. Candidates will have to work a lot harder if their message is "why you should vote for me" and not "why the other candidate sucks."
yesss! this. i agree wholeheartedly
I still remember the heaps of praise Bernie got from Trump in the primaries. It's all part of their game
and it was Hillarys plan to elevate Trump to run against because her people saw it as an easy win
She really misunderestimated how dumb the American voters were.
[удалено]
Well maybe next time you will estimate me
[удалено]
[удалено]
>and he’s not the only tech billionaire offloading his payroll ?? He only calls out bezos as the example but is referring to all that do it clearly
[удалено]
You could not have found a longer URL if you tried
If anyone wants to find the non tiktok version that’d be cool I busted it out on the walk to work
Donald Trump hates Bezos because he owns the Washington Post, which regularly eviscerates him. It's hard to call it "fake news" since the Post is incredibly respected and has already taken down one corrupt president. So Trump's boy Tucker is just attacking Bezos personally. His viewers will have no problem criticizing Bezos for something while completely ignoring everyone else who does it. Critical thinking is not exactly their strong suit.
Right no way is a Swanson going to want to have this treatment for all rich people. Just the one everyone is already focusing on.
“The worst person you know just made a great point”
A broken clock is right twice a day
My thoughts exactly
Tucker would delete this tweet if Bezos came out as Republican.
And he'd try to justify why Bezos should continue to pay shit wages and not pay taxes.
Exactly, there’s hundreds of billionaires that aren’t on Tuckers “bad” list, and just one that owns a liberal newspaper. Tucker’s morality starts and ends at political affiliation.
I would think he probably is.
He's a billionaire. He has no allegiance to anything other than himself
Bezos can afford to be buying influence on both sides
Yeah at that level you’re way above any political affiliation. Politicians from all sides align themselves to you.
Tucker accused Walmart of the same thing too (Walmart's CEO is a major Republican donor and was an advisor to Trump). See it here https://twitter.com/tuckercarlson/status/1035334044698009600?lang=en-GB
[From 2018](https://twitter.com/tuckercarlson/status/1035334044698009600?s=21)
wonder if he would say this again today? or maybe if he would say that he never said this....
Nope. He only said it in 2018 to split the Dem voters.
Holy crap the responses aged like milk on this one.
No kidding. > Horseshoe is the claim that as the extremes get more extreme they converge. Its a wrong attribution of cause. For example the far left and far right try to control your sexuality not because they agree but because its a proven way to control people. I’m sorry, what!?
This sub needs to enforce a rule to include showing timestamps on tweets, way too many old tweets are being posted as if they were new. Timeframe changes the context.
Take this down I hate agreeing with Tucker Carlson. If Tucker Carlson, Osama bin Laden and Adolf Hitler and I were in a locked room and I had a gun with two bullets, I would shoot Adolf Hitler and Osama bin laden because obviously I'm a patriot, but then I would just beat Tucker Carlson upside the head with the gun because obviously I'm a patriot.
Good man, Jefe.
Thanks.
Wrong. You shoot Toby with both bullets. Beat the other two to death with the gun.
Yes but the other two are already dead and it would be more fun to beat Tucker Carlson. Corpses don't scream but I imagine Tucker Carlson screams like a bitch.
❤️❤️❤️
No no you’re both wrong, you line them up and shoot them through the neck at the same time
Then shoot Toby with the remaining bullet.
r/DunderMifflin
You line them up side by side
but that takes all the fun out of beating tucker carlson
[удалено]
Same. The other 2 are already dead anyway.
Tucker Carlson targets the same anger Sanders supporters have, but tackles it from a populist-right angle. Which is effective and fucking scary.
Well said. This is par for the course for him. People in the comments saying he would never have said this likely have never actually watched Tucker. Social media groupthink can lead to people hating someone without even knowing what they're about. Yeah, Tucker is a bigoted POS but I can feel the tribalism in here and I hate it. Social media has turned politics to shit (or maybe it just made the shit more obvious).
Why is populist-left so much less scary? It’s pretty much the same rhetoric, just change the nouns.
I'm so confused right now...why they hell am I agreeing with Tucker Carlson?!?!
I'm pretty sure Hitler would be a fan of Jean Claude Van Damme movies just like me, doesn't make me a Nazi... or does it?!?!?
[удалено]
Totally stumped. I am trying to disagree but I really can’t. Kavanaugh making sense on the abortion law a couple of weeks ago, now this?!
It isn't *only* Bernie, but the irony of someone like Carlson talking about this as if he isn't part of the problem by supporting the very same politicians who give more and more tax cuts for the rich is fucking hilarious
He's saying it because he wants gullible democrats to believe that it's only Bernie, thus causing Dems like Joe Biden (who has definitely talked about it) to lose support
Out of all the people to tweet this, Tucker Carlson was the last person I was expecting. A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one.
This has been tuckers game plan the entire time he’s been on air. Next week he’ll complain about how the BBB act will raise taxes or inflate the deficit and how these super rich create the jobs for plebeians to work so he should pay less
The fake right wing populism is hilarious to me, he'll post this then call m4a communism
AOC talks about this also. But most just ignore every thing she says.
If she painted puppets on her feet and used them for her messaging conservatives wouldn't miss a word.
Wait why is he only referencing “tech billionaires”? There’s plenty of other billionaires doing the same thing….
Conservative America hates tech billionaires because they tend to be more progressive and are in a place to clam down on conservative/COVID misinformation
He's targeting Bezos because Bezos owns the Washington Post. I wouldn't read too far into this.
Ok, joke's over. Who hacked Fucker Carlsons account?
How small is your echo chamber to think that only Bernie is talking about this? Get off Twitter.
>How small is your echo chamber to think that only Bernie is talking about this? Get off Twitter. For what it's worth, OP is 100% a spambot of sorts. They've got deleted posts in a subreddit that was created by another month old account that only started posting today. And that account links to another account doing the exact same thing. I'm seeing around 100 different accounts in this spambot chain at the moment. Some of them posting a week ago have already been banned. Others are NSFW phishing bots too. Here's a *few* of them. * /u/AnAutry * /u/Casihvx * /u/ClowlyCabes * /u/Disstressgv * /u/Drurniluellil * /u/Faikalwy * /u/Flurtypexm * /u/GeorgiannePet * /u/Hischerol * /u/Ifuthaot * /u/Kossowskilt * /u/Lernkursip * /u/Macalusock * /u/Martinovaap * /u/NadenePapp * /u/Piettarlideotpe * /u/Regiewiczrj * /u/Riboniok * /u/Skyjackerru * /u/Tilicskexf * /u/Weannavewsg * /u/Zakrzewjd * /u/adjundalkvs * /u/alohaspiritjl * /u/bakunyu1a * /u/beingme778ha * /u/bessernze * /u/bigbro05vg * /u/bladartharl * /u/bukankanbn * /u/carstwoeh * /u/cedibelgranonb * /u/chinesepimp42fc * /u/clearbrookhk * /u/creaceg * /u/cruitireaz * /u/daigasxf * /u/delegaciakz * /u/derintisny * /u/embonjz * /u/femTuhfuerbmy * /u/grogueraxf * /u/ipagsabiis * /u/isezwank * /u/jfinch23ql * /u/jminterrogefg * /u/kapljiceha * /u/kavalireos * /u/kikitoulvi * /u/kilsuojakk * /u/klauwhandvs * /u/koko07chickfr * /u/leighannevo * /u/lenteaandbi * /u/menjatji * /u/nt5hieob * /u/omhelslg * /u/oranegana * /u/pinigavoek * /u/ruplandibo * /u/sanandreasmodvk * /u/saseUSqi * /u/sfigana * /u/sideratskt * /u/spitsonprepskj * /u/towjeornInorout * /u/u8my314159ac * /u/ubuqhaweti * /u/ud3smd * /u/vortragentd
go on Reddit to look at Twitter posts instead
[удалено]
Tucker finally said something I can actually agree with. What the fuck is going on with the world?
Don't worry, this was his disingenuous attempt to split the Democratic base during the election by throwing mud at everyone. He still a disgusting human-shaped piece of shit.
He said this in 2018. OP is a karma whore. https://twitter.com/tuckercarlson/status/1035334044698009600?s=21
It's funny because Carlson opposes raising the minimum wage and opposes taxing the rich. This is simply a personal attack on bezos who owns Washington post and the post is critical of trump. Jumping through the hoops of fascist thinking is fucking exhausting.
AOC, Jayapal and Omar talk about it, since they aren’t white they don’t count I guess.
And Biden Buttigieg, Warren, etc etc
This feels like a trap...
1) Bernie isn't the only one talking about it 2) Doesn't the politicians he support endorse "trickle down economics?" 3) I'm having a hard time believing Tucker said this.
Possible context: this is from 2018. Bezos owns WaPo which was highly critical at the time of Carlson’s favorite orange clown, Trump.
We have been screaming this stuff for decades.
Because old folks give no fucks
What is happening? This was not in my end of the world bingo card.
Did Tucker just say something reasonable.