Cardi B goes off on Biden!

[Dennis 8,391]

2 minutes ago, stvn said:

I'm not suggesting Biden can wave a magic wand, I'm saying he isn't doing enough to actively move us in the right direction. The rot is late-stage capitalism, just to be clear. 

I'm not read up on the migrant situation, but I take your word for it. I find it irrelevant to the larger point (not that it's unimportant at all, just that the perspective I was coming from was not about that specific issue). 

I would disagree that it's all completely unrelated. 

I understand what you are saying about NYC, it's not a problem magically solved, and it's not in direct correlation to Joe Biden. But I think Cardi's sentiment was about a larger thing, she maybe didn't articulate it well, but that was the point I thought she was making. I'm not saying the mayor could have magically received money from Biden taken out of the war budget, but that was not ever my point. 

The reality is that people are fed up. Whether you think they are ignorant or not is not going to change the fact that we are in trouble if we are not allowed to ever criticize Biden. All Cardi did was ask a question. Our world doesn't make sense, and resources are not fairly allocated. THAT was the point. And Biden is not helping, he is status quo. I voted for him and I'll vote for him again if it's the option, but if we continue to be sycophants for terrible policy, we will lose in the long-term. I know Cardi isn't an expert, not claiming she is, and not claiming she knows the intricacies. I can only speak for myself. I just find it interesting how people get so triggered when anyone says anything about Biden. idk.

Well I agree with many things you said. But unfairly putting ALL the blame on Biden in this case doesn't help anyone but republicans. She doesn't even mention republicans. She just thinks that Biden can fix everything in this country. U.S Constitution doesn't work like that.

She's an influential person and she should be more responsible in how she words her complaints. Blaming Biden or Ukraine, rather than discussing the actual problems contributing to this situation is not constructive. Republicans are intentionally displacing all the migrants to blue cities to cause this kind of backlash against democrats and it's unfortunately working. So there has to be a discussion on how to solve this problem. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Dennis said:

Well I agree with many things you said. But unfairly putting ALL the blame on Biden in this case doesn't help anyone but republicans. She doesn't even mention republicans. She just thinks that Biden can fix everything in this country. U.S Constitution doesn't work like that.

She's an influential person and she should be more responsible in how she words her complaints. Blaming Biden or Ukraine, rather than discussing the actual problems contributing to this situation is not constructive. Republicans are intentionally displacing all the migrants to blue cities to cause this kind of backlash against democrats and it's unfortunately working. So there has to be a discussion on how to solve this problem. 

I wouldn't put all blame on Biden ever as I know it's more complex than that. So I understand and agree.

I actually do agree with you. Cardi clearly has a passion for politics and she's rich enough to spend the time to study and learn more before using her platform. I can 100 percent agree with that. Sorry if I came across harsh. I think we were coming at the issue from two different directions, but we probably mostly agree. 

[Economy 52,901]

12 hours ago, Dennis said:

I mean you chose an extreme example here, comparing a kid from africa asking a middle class american for money, to a 80M$ networth celebrity apparently complaining about her cousins struggling when she could easily bankroll them if she wanted to. I'm not sure why you're missing the point.

She was talking about her cousins struggling. You realize how ridiculous that sounds right? The fact that she's expecting the government to bail them out rather than help them herself. She has a collection of luxury cars that she doesn't need and complains about cousins needing a few hundreds/thousands? It sounds disingenuous.

If my net worth was 80M$, I wouldn't wait for the government to help my family. As a matter of fact they wouldn't be still "living in the hood" (as she claimed) to begin with. If you're that rich and you can't help your own family, don't lecture anybody on anything. Enjoy your wealth and keep quiet. Spare us the moral lessons.

The reason for the budget cuts is the immigration crisis in New York and has nothing to do with Ukraine or Israel. This is what the governor said. State taxes don't fund wars. She deflected on foreign wars because she's afraid of being canceled if she talks about the real reason. So if it's temporary because of the migrant influx, then people should help.

As for "oh let's not blame celebrities and only the government", why y'all coming at Drake and Taylor for overusing their jets then? It's not banned by the government?

You need to acknowledge that if everybody's gonna wait for the government to force them to put some of their wealth to good use, or protect the environment, or help the poor, then we're doomed.

For all u know she did help her cousins anyway but shes just using their struggle as an example. It doesnt automatically mean she didnt help them after. We simply dont know and thats pure speculation. If she announced she was helping her family she could be accused of flaunting her "good deeds" for image purposes and so chose not to annnounce them. Not every helping hand has to be announced on twitter

 

As for my example, yes it was an extreme example but the point u brought out was also an extreme example as well. U literally compared her entire accumulated net worth over a decade to NYCs cuts over 1 single year as if she had to donate the entire thing to be able to speak (and as if it would solve the problem)

 

So as far as im concerned, u gave an extreme comparison first to try to make ur point. So i went the same level to prove mine

[Dennis 8,391]

5 hours ago, Economy said:

For all u know she did help her cousins anyway but shes just using their struggle as an example. It doesnt automatically mean she didnt help them after. We simply dont know and thats pure speculation. If she announced she was helping her family she could be accused of flaunting her "good deeds" for image purposes and so chose not to annnounce them. Not every helping hand has to be announced on twitter

 

As for my example, yes it was an extreme example but the point u brought out was also an extreme example as well. U literally compared her entire accumulated net worth over a decade to NYCs cuts over 1 single year as if she had to donate the entire thing to be able to speak (and as if it would solve the problem)

 

So as far as im concerned, u gave an extreme comparison first to try to make ur point. So i went the same level to prove mine

Well she said they're still living in the hood, so it doesn't sound like she helped them move to a better place despite all the wealth accumulated in the previous years? She's gonna supposedly help them now? Okay great.

And where did I say she has to donate all of her networth? I only pointed out her networth is more than half of the budget cut as a way to illustrate how wealthy these celebrities are and the fact that if they came together to help with certain causes they'd have a big impact. Because y'all keep saying they can't make a change.

So yes, if just 10-100 of these wealthy individuals came together and said we'll donate a few millions each to help NYC go through this temporary rough time caused by this immigration crisis, they could help solve the problem. And I think that's much better than blaming Ukraine and let russia destroy whatever country they want, which would have a much bigger negative impact on the world than whatever problems NYC has.

[Economy 52,901]

4 hours ago, Dennis said:

Well she said they're still living in the hood, so it doesn't sound like she helped them move to a better place despite all the wealth accumulated in the previous years? She's gonna supposedly help them now? Okay great.

And where did I say she has to donate all of her networth? I only pointed out her networth is more than half of the budget cut as a way to illustrate how wealthy these celebrities are and the fact that if they came together to help with certain causes they'd have a big impact. Because y'all keep saying they can't make a change.

So yes, if just 10-100 of these wealthy individuals came together and said we'll donate a few millions each to help NYC go through this temporary rough time caused by this immigration crisis, they could help solve the problem. And I think that's much better than blaming Ukraine and let russia destroy whatever country they want, which would have a much bigger negative impact on the world than whatever problems NYC has.

Maybe she did maybe she didnt. Id also argue how shameful it is for her not to help them also depends on how closely related someone is. I would not feel as obligated to help a 4th of 5th cousin as i would a 1st cousin and she didnt specify how close they were to my knowlege. And when ur talking someone of a high status, once u start giving money to those far removed suddenly everyone will be expecting checks. So its not unreasonable for celebs to also place their limits on who they will help. That doesnt mean she isnt allowed to talk about a systemic issue affecting those far removed with her voice

 

but If what u want is for ppl to say they can make a difference. Yes they can make a difference. No one says they cant

 

What were trying to say is realistically they wont. U have to change the system. Trying to get ppl to be generous with their surplus almost never works because it goes against human nature

 

Again, on a relative basis, most of us with a few exeptipns are much better off than starving africa and the vast majority of ppl dont bother to donate either

 

Yes, i know, "its an extreme example". But the principal still stands. Those that have to spare normally dont. Those below us can criticize us just as much as we criticize those above us. They point is those above u can always do more than u and normally dont or at least not a meanungful amount relative to their earnings.

 

U can run that principal thru the entire income spectrum and always get the same results. Theres individuals who are naturally kind hearted and are an exeption to this rule... but its never the majority no matter the income level

 

She may also be willing to pay more in taxes if everyone does it. For example, im willing to give up a portion of my inheritance for one of my siblings with MS who will need money more than me almost for sure. But I also want my other siblings to play their part and also sacrafice a portion of their inheritance as a general agreement. Why should I be the only one to give up some of what im legally entitled to when 2 of my other siblings have the same ability? I can still talk about the issue with my fam even if i want others to do their part before i comit to anything. 

 

My personal example may not be the exact situation but again, general principal is simmilar