Kim Kardashian says she is neither a Republican nor a Democrat

[Pamplemousse 303]

This.

I feel the same as u

[Pamplemousse 303]

1 hour ago, Rebel said:

Oh wow the privilege jumped out in some of these responses. 

This

[KORG 4,756]

4 minutes ago, HuffsAhoy said:

In middle school, every spring during the ACC Basketball Tournament, we were forced to do math projects predicting which team would win. It's ridiculous how high sports are revered in the USA.

That's not to say they're bad, like the arts, sports can be the only outlets kids have. But it shouldn't take precedence over education. 

It's military prep, essentially. Remember how obsessed the country is with guns & war...

[HuffsAhoy 7,433]

4 minutes ago, KORG said:

It's military prep, essentially. Remember how obsessed the country is with guns & war...

It also doesn't help I grew up (and live again) near the country's largest amphibious military base. 

[calpky 334]

These comments got me shook, are you all a bunch easily impressionable, closest conservatives? 

This woman is dangerously trying to destigmatize and perpetuate conservative views and ideas.

I'm from rural, midwest US, there's no reasoning or middle grounds with conservatives.

If you don't believe or know that we're in the middle of a fight for our basic human rights you must be incredibly privileged or willfully ignorant. 

 

[Fanta 5,019]

Kim has a talent of using a lot of words to say nothing. 

As for that bit about the MAGA hat, I mean...I am not for being 'neutral' when I see BS right in front of me. I guess because she has a platform (and considering how celebrity political opinions are a very touchy subject) she's trying to walk on eggshells here, but nothing ever got done by being neutral while idiots like Kanye continue to abuse their platforms with dangerous nonsensical ramblings.

There is nothing worse than enablers that hide being neutrality, which never seems to solve anything. Conservatives get to be conservatives undisturbed and unquestioned when they no longer get to challenge and disrupt the lives of anyone who isn't conservative. 

Someone like Kim shouldn't be given a platform to spout nonsense, but oh well, there's an ear for every loser's ramblings.

[gumzy3000 6,749]

I used to be someone who thought corporations and businesses should pay extremely high taxes because of how much money they make but I realized that these companies are creating jobs and breeding innovation. This actually helps society. Companies also manage money better than the government because they do not want to waste it, rather, they want to maximize thier returns.

Obviously at the same time, we should keep taxes low for the middle class so that they have extra income to buy more products and services which fuels the economy. 

I agree with Kim that lower taxes are beneficial for everyone. Why give your hard earned money to the government when as an individual, you can make the best decision for yourself with YOUR money. Handing your money to the government to make a decision on your behalf on what's good for you doesn't sit well with me as I get older (and the more I work do). 

I might sound like a Republican but I live in Canada and we have many political parties and people do change quite a lot which party they are voting for in each election. I feel as though Americans are such black and white thinkers when it comes to politic that you can not see that both side have good and bad. 

[HuffsAhoy 7,433]

1 hour ago, calpky said:

I'm from rural, midwest US, there's no reasoning or middle grounds with conservatives.

This is such a gross generalization, it borderlines on parody. I live in rural southeast North Carolina, all of my family and every one I know are conservatives. I have never once been in a situation where I've encountered people who are unwilling to listen to an alternative point of view. In fact, the only people I've ever met like that are liberals. You can't claim all conservatives are dumb hicks, especially when these so called closed minded conservatives threw my husband and I a gay wedding party back in September. Attitudes like yours are why the left is losing credibility fast across the nation. Serves you right, too. 

[SEANGT 4,785]

4 hours ago, xlx said:

Oh what a surprise, a rich person doesn't want to pay taxes 

this is the only good take on this lol.

[stvn 573]

1 hour ago, gumzy3000 said:

I used to be someone who thought corporations and businesses should pay extremely high taxes because of how much money they make but I realized that these companies are creating jobs and breeding innovation. This actually helps society. Companies also manage money better than the government because they do not want to waste it, rather, they want to maximize thier returns.

 

First, I want to say I respect your opinion on this and appreciate you taking the time to write it. With that said, I think this is a bit simplistic, and you have made some overly broad statements. In reality, there is unfortunately a lot more complexity. I think there is a place for capitalism and for large companies and I do think that within that framework innovation can be made, and I think that's important. But it's not really a binary choice, in my opinion, whether taxes on corporations are all bad or all good. I think it's about where you draw the line and at what point you draw the line and at which point in the cost-benefit analysis continuing to let corporations keep so much of their profits becomes more harmful than helpful. For example, we can't say that cutting taxes for corporations helps create innovation without saying what raising taxes from those corporations would do! Raising more taxes from those corporations would allow for more social programs, more equitable situations for people in the country, etc. So it's not as if there aren't benefits to both sides having money. It's just about where you draw the line, and I admit that is not an easy thing to decide. 

Regarding companies spending money "well" and not "wasting" it and the government not spending money "well" and "wasting" it, that's also complicated and both true and untrue in different contexts and in different ways. We can acknowledge that the gov't and corporations have different motivations, right? That much is true. Corporations are in it for profit mostly, the government (when at its best) is *supposed* to protect and serve the public (I'm not saying that always happens, but it does sometimes, and that's my point). Let's use healthcare as one example. Private healthcare has the goal of making the most money -- this means that your health insurance provider has people who work for them whose whole job is to try to deny as many claims as possible. The way our private healthcare system works actually makes healthcare cost TWICE as much as it does in other developed countries for equal or slightly lesser results. So the argument that corporations are always "good" with money is very misleading. They are good with THEIR money, but that doesn't mean they aren't harming you. On the other hand, we have the government, whose main motivation is not profit, but to serve. I personally think there should be healthy debate around all these issues, and I personally think there should be a fair balance of power between corporations and the government because I think they both add something to the mix, and having them balance each other out keeps them BOTH in check. 

1 hour ago, gumzy3000 said:

Obviously at the same time, we should keep taxes low for the middle class so that they have extra income to buy more products and services which fuels the economy. 

 

I think most people agree that taxes should be lower for the lower and middle classes. Which is why the flat tax idea is BS in my opinion. But when we are talking about taxes, it really is about the rich. The Trump tax cuts passed by congress while he was in office were incredibly gaslighting. Basically what they did was pass a temporary tax cut for all (more for those on top). But here's the kicker -- the cuts for the lower and middle class were TEMPORARY and set to expire at which time they would go up to higher than they were before the tax bill was passed! People don't seem to know this. But guess what -- the tax cuts for corporations and the rich DO NOT EXPIRE. So anyone who voted for Trump or supported his "temporary" tax cuts got played. I have problems with both sides, but Democrats are at least more consistent in not wanting to add taxes to the lower and middle classes. It's hilarious to me that people think Trump/Republicans are the party of tax cuts when they make no money and the tax bill actually hurts them in the long run. Their marketing has worked, and it's sad. 

These corporations also benefit ENORMOUSLY from government funded subsidies, government funded infrastructure, government funded education, and MORE -- yet they do not want to pay back into the same system that allowed them to be so successful in the first place. Make sense?

Edit: To your point about fueling the economy, that would make sense IF the tax cuts were actually directed at the middle/lower classes, who WOULD spend the money and stimulate the economy. That unfortunately has not been the case with all tax cuts in recent memory. They are giving back money to the rich, and there is a lot of evidence that the rich hoard their wealth and don't put it back into the economy in the way lower classes do. So in theory, you are right, but that's not what's actually happening.

1 hour ago, gumzy3000 said:

I agree with Kim that lower taxes are beneficial for everyone. Why give your hard earned money to the government when as an individual, you can make the best decision for yourself with YOUR money. Handing your money to the government to make a decision on your behalf on what's good for you doesn't sit well with me as I get older (and the more I work do). 

 

Taxes and proposed tax hikes are always tied to specific programs because of how Congress works. They have PAYGO, first of all. Second, and I'll use Elizabeth Warren as an example, her tax proposals were always TO PAY for something else which would be a service. So if one of her proposed tax increases passed, that bill also says where that money goes. So while it seems obvious to say "low taxes help us all," we also have to think about what WE are getting in return when taxes do increase (btw, almost no democrat supports bills that add taxes to the lower and middle classes anyway). Why give your money away? Because it's a balance of power, because we believe in public land and public education and how that can balance with private situations. 

The thing that always baffles me about this argument is that people are so willing to vilify the government for telling them what to do with "their money" when the alternative is just another corporate power structure essentially telling you what to do with your money. But because it's "the government" it's all bad. So many people think the gov't should give up all oversight of corporations -- guess what that does -- it allows those corporations to oppress you instead of the govt. They both can oppress, and because of that, that's why I think there should be a balance of those powers so that both are held accountable. People *THINK* that if they don't have to pay taxes they will then be able to choose what to do with their money -- in reality, that's mostly not true. You will pay it in some form, and you'll likely pay more for it (see healthcare example). People do not have a CHOICE as to whether they need roads, buses, food, shelter, housing, education, etc. So taking those things away from govt purview only necessitates that you rely on a corporate power structure for the same thing (and that corporate power structure, as mentioned earlier, does not have the same interest or motive as the government).

1 hour ago, gumzy3000 said:

I might sound like a Republican but I live in Canada and we have many political parties and people do change quite a lot which party they are voting for in each election. I feel as though Americans are such black and white thinkers when it comes to politic that you can not see that both side have good and bad. 

I don't think you sound Republican. I agree wholeheartedly that it's not black and white. I wish we had at least 5-6 legit parties here.

The REASON people will come for Kim for this is not because they love Republicans or love Democrats. I criticize both sides and think that in some ways they can be 2 sides of one coin (which is why I work to change the status quo of the democratic party and support progressive candidates). But there is a difference between saying that both sides have flaws and saying whatever Kim just said. When I speak about both sides having flaws, I can point out examples of specific issues, I can say what I like and what I don't like. What Kim is doing is not that. What Kim is doing is standing for *nothing*. Like literally, she spent a long time saying nothing. And I can agree that people like Kanye have the *right* to wear a Maga hat, but she kind of went too far in defending him and again stood for nothing. So that's that on that.

[stvn 573]

25 minutes ago, HuffsAhoy said:

This is such a gross generalization, it borderlines on parody. I live in rural southeast North Carolina, all of my family and every one I know are conservatives. I have never once been in a situation where I've encountered people who are unwilling to listen to an alternative point of view. In fact, the only people I've ever met like that are liberals. You can't claim all conservatives are dumb hicks, especially when these so called closed minded conservatives threw my husband and I a gay wedding party back in September. Attitudes like yours are why the left is losing credibility fast across the nation. Serves you right, too. 

I know I've probably not been so nice to you on this forum so far, but I agree with this. It is a generalization, and not listening to the needs of people in conservative areas further alienates them. Now, there are certain subgroups of conservatives that can't be reasoned with, but it's such a broad term so I agree with you here

[stvn 573]

4 hours ago, HuffsAhoy said:

Some things are a little more important than social justice  If it comes to me having to pay lower taxes you bet I'm voting for that choice.

You said earlier you make 38k, which first of all, I just want to say is criminal. Teachers are underpaid, and it's awful. Regardless of our differences, your job is very important, and you deserve more. 

I also appreciate that you said you would vote for either party. I appreciate the open-mindedness.

With that said, which actual party or candidate is going to lower taxes for someone making 38k? If you voted for Trump (no shame if you did, that's not my style) thinking he would lower your taxes at that salary, well, the actual policies don't really bear that out. There was a temporary tax cut for people in your bracket which in Trump's tax bill expires after a few years and then hikes your tax rate up to HIGHER than it was before Trump's tax bill. But the tax cuts for the super rich and for corporations in that Trump tax bill *do not expire*. My point being, the Republican party has done a great job marketing themselves as the lower tax party to people in the lower and middle class while actually screwing the lower and middle class and serving the rich. Period. It's not even a debate, it's in the policies. And despite my many problems with democrats, I don't think any prominent dems have supported raising taxes on your tax bracket (like Trump did). Except maybe Bernie, but under his plan you would still have more money because the slightly higher taxes you'd pay would mean NO insurance premiums and NO healthcare costs ever. So I don't want to make assumptions about how you've voted, but I'm just telling you that republicans are gaslighting people in your tax bracket when they tell you they are about low taxes. They are about low taxes for the rich and the corporations. They have/will raise yours while gaslighting you, and that's exactly what Trumps tax bill did. 

[Kitsch 499]

I mean, politics in the US is a running gag compared to most European countries. In the Netherlands, we are complaining that our voting ballot is too large (there’s more than 15 political parties in The Netherlands) and in the US, other than the Democrats and Republics, there’s not much going on. I find that a pity, because creating more political parties give people the sense of acknowledgment and it ends up giving this ‘mixed’ ideologies in some political parties. So I understand that she doesn’t want to align herself to one political party 

[calpky 334]

57 minutes ago, HuffsAhoy said:

This is such a gross generalization, it borderlines on parody. I live in rural southeast North Carolina, all of my family and every one I know are conservatives. I have never once been in a situation where I've encountered people who are unwilling to listen to an alternative point of view. In fact, the only people I've ever met like that are liberals. You can't claim all conservatives are dumb hicks, especially when these so called closed minded conservatives threw my husband and I a gay wedding party back in September. Attitudes like yours are why the left is losing credibility fast across the nation. Serves you right, too. 

I - 

[Kitsch 499]

53 minutes ago, HuffsAhoy said:

This is such a gross generalization, it borderlines on parody. I live in rural southeast North Carolina, all of my family and every one I know are conservatives. I have never once been in a situation where I've encountered people who are unwilling to listen to an alternative point of view. In fact, the only people I've ever met like that are liberals. You can't claim all conservatives are dumb hicks, especially when these so called closed minded conservatives threw my husband and I a gay wedding party back in September. Attitudes like yours are why the left is losing credibility fast across the nation. Serves you right, too. 

I understand where you’re coming from, in my opinion, talking with other left wing people can be a constant struggle. There’s always this need to ‘be better’ and make people feel like they’re dumb, instead of spreading their ideas and knowledge and opening people up to listen. This is my biggest issue with left wing people, there’s this constant need to prove people that they’re better than everyone. I used to be in this political party and people would not be afraid to start arguments over literally anything. You could say for example; “I like the sun” and they would turn it around like; “but you do realise that a lot of people are dying because of it, right?” and it seemed like they were too busy debating irrelevant topics instead of making the party stronger. Now, I am not a conservative, but I did have struggles speaking with people on the far-right (and that’s easy, considering the fact that my family used to be on the far-right) and in my situation, I’d try to be open, listen to their ideas, but every time if I’d said something, I would be a ‘neoliberal rat’, a ‘traitor’ or even gross racist and xenophobic comments would be made. But again, this is regarding people on the far-right. I do believe that it doesn’t matter if you’re left or right, there’s idiots everywhere, regardless of their political ideologies.