this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2025
685 points (99.6% liked)

Lefty Memes

6339 readers
986 users here now

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Serious posts, news, discussion and agitprop/stuff that's better fit for a poster than a meme go in c/Socialism.

If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.

Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low quality!

Rules

Version without spoilers

0. Only post socialist memes

That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme. Please post agitprop here)

0.5 [Provisional Rule] Use alt text or image descriptions to allow greater accessibility

(Please take a look at our wiki page for the guidelines on how to actually write alternative text!)

We require alternative text (from now referred to as "alt text") to be added to all posts/comments containing media, such as images, animated GIFs, videos, audio files, and custom emojis.
EDIT: For files you share in the comments, a simple summary should be enough if they’re too complex.

We are committed to social equity and to reducing barriers of entry, including (digital) communication and culture. It takes each of us only a few moments to make a whole world of content (more) accessible to a bunch of folks.

When alt text is absent, a reminder will be issued. If you don't add the missing alt text within 48 hours, the post will be removed. No hard feelings.

0.5.1 Style tip about abbreviations and short forms

When writing stuff like "lol" and "iirc", it's a good idea to try and replace those with their all caps counterpart

  • ofc => OFC
  • af = AF
  • ok => OK
  • lol => LOL
  • bc => BC
  • bs => BS
  • iirc => IIRC
  • cia => CIA
  • nato => Nato (you don't spell it when talking, right?)
  • usa => USA
  • prc => PRC
  • etc.

Why? Because otherwise (AFAIK), screen readers will try to read them out as actually words instead of spelling them

1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here

Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.

2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such

That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.

3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.

That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).

4. No Bigotry.

The only dangerous minority is the rich.

5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.

We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.

(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)

6. Don't irrationally idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.

Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.

  1. Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com
unruffled@anarchist.nexus
Comrade_Squid@lemmy.ml
685
Piñata economics (piefed.cdn.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 day ago by compostgoblin@piefed.blahaj.zone to c/leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

As of 2024, 806 people in the US control as much wealth as the bottom 50% of the population.

If every one of those billionaires has 10 billion dollars, thats equivalent to about 165 million people who each have ~49,000.

(EDIT: Each of) those 806, ten-billionaires then have ~204,082x as much wealth as any of those 165 million people.

However, I believe I can solve this problem for a fairly low cost.

Assuming each ten billionaire has approximately 10 close friends/relatives...and we want to just be super duper sure the problem is solved, so we'll buy 100 of those uh, investment options, per social contagion vector...

That works out to a total cost of around ~$310,000.

Split between those 165 million people, that's one fifth of a cent, per person.

Does anyone want to guess what my special purpose investment vehicle to achieve said disruption of the malignent social contagaion market is?

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

This is a good ... math exercise. However, you will likely need to add 10 or so more that will need to be contaminated before people actually stop investigating. That is the key ... making sure people are to afraid of those that are contaminated so the stay away and dont look around.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago

Shit.

Well ok then, add another 0.

5 whole cents per pinata partier.

Shame that everyone's so broke these days, eh?

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

where do you find pinatas for under five large? like, i wouldn't trust someone asking that little for a pinata. i'd assume they had, i dunno, smuggled drugs in the pinata and were trying to frame me to the fbi

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Uh... pinatabroker?

Failing that, your city or town probably has a pawn shop.

They probably feature pinatas for sale, from time to time.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

pawn broker is precisely where i expect to get set up by the feds for buying an unlicensed pinata

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

... Just get a legally licensed pinata?

And then learn how to have a pinata party that is fully invite only, and leaves no mess behind, then goes home and back to their business?

The uh, recent bad pinata party that's been in the news?

Dude got away.

The FBI has literally nothing on this person, aside of some basically useless, shitty footage, of a POI, not even a suspect.

This person is ... pinata party capable, and just... at large.

They have no idea who he is, where he is.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I'm high and confused and want candy

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 7 hours ago

Personally, I would not suggest attending a pinata party while high, that seems very irresponsible to me.

[–] no_pasaran@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Revolution and the end of capitalism aside, I have yet to find a Lib who can explain to me why it would be wrong to take everything from the rich except, say, 500 million. There would be no losers. The rich would still be rich, but we could do so much good with the money.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

100 million tops. 50 million ideally. These people buy governments for tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. No one should be wealthy enough to even consider buying elected officials, also all solitary positions of executive power should be split into councils of not less than 9 people, but always an odd number on the council.

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

One of the issues is that their value isn't fixed. A billionaire as relatively little in the way of liquid (or liquidatable) assets. Their company might be worth billions, but, by taking it, you will destabilise it. Its value will plummet.

In order to access that money, you need to syphon it off more slowly. Think of the goose that lays golden eggs. Cutting it open won't get you a glut of gold. The counterpoint is that you still need to collect the eggs!

In my opinion, we need a tax setup that forces individuals to regress to the mean. (Default is the rich and poor both move towards average when they are of average performance).

We also need to force companies to follow a power law. A few big companies, with the number growing as you move down. A tax setup that punishes forming big conglomerates, and so encourages more medium and small companies would be optimal. Have it adjust based on the overall industry. This both keeps industries competitive, and syphons money from those most able to bear it.

There is a huge difference between knowing what is needed, and how the fuck to implement it however!

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Kill the poisoned goose, see if it's children can function as democracies rather than dictatorships.

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Killing the goose blindly is just self destructive. We want to them to be able to die, but we need to reduce their size first. That way better options can take up the slack.

Answer me this. Collapse every company worth more than $1B simultaneously. What would happen to the quality of life of those at the bottom? It would be...bad.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Not much worse than the current system that has a planned economic meltdown every decade or so, to prevent the poors from ever gaining a foothold.

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

You massively underestimate the complexity and fagility of the systems supporting you right now. Food, power and good production would basically collapse.

The biggest problem is the megacorps, they are too big to fail and so need to be broken up. The best way to do that is to make it financially in their interest to shatter themselves. Power law taxes would help both so it now, and keep companies from growing to that level. It also controls the speed of the change, so the supply lines we rely on remain functional.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 13 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

"it would be wrong because one day i might have 500 million bucks and a penny and i'm not giving you that fucking penny" shitlibs i guess

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 6 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Can you show a single example of someone actually expressing this sentiment, though? I've seen "quotes" like this hundreds of times, but never anyone on the 'other side' ever actually make this argument.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

i could but i'm not doxxing the idiots i live near

[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

The rich own the people (and now, drones) that stand between you and taking it from them.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

There are roughly 50,000,000 of them that enforce the current system. There are over 8,000,000,000 of us. We don't need everyone, just 500,000,000 of us could topple them.

[–] Zorcron@piefed.zip 10 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (2 children)

I suppose the common response would be that preventing billionaires from hoarding insane amounts of wealth would remove incentive from them to “innovate and create jobs”. Not that I buy that as being true or worth the wealth disparity currently seen.

[–] slampisko@lemmy.world 12 points 21 hours ago

To that I'm thinking that humans have an innate desire to innovate, and we wouldn't need jobs if we had fair taxation of the ultrawealthy and UBI.

[–] FosterMolasses@leminal.space 2 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

So basically... the main argument against UBI? LMFAO

[–] Zorcron@piefed.zip 3 points 17 hours ago

Yeah, I mean whether you subscribe to the belief or not, that is the general liberal thinking. If they thought differently, they probably wouldn’t be liberals anymore.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

IMO the main argument against UBI is:

"I think all the money would go to landlords because I don't know what elasticity is but nonetheless feel qualified to speak about economics."

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

When you put it like that, the liberal brain implodes.

Don't ask me exactly how or why, it just does, they become emotional and irrational at that point.

Maybe pictures of dragons sleeping on piles of gold would help, stories about how they only leave them to terrorize nearby village folk, occasionally abduct a young girl and steal her away to a mythical island, for god knows what purposes.

[–] MarriedCavelady50@lemmy.ml 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

What would be the standards for getting an asset seizure? Would it be the individual or governments job to prove the asset? What would be the rules for conflict of interest? How does due process work? Who gets the money?

Does a mayor just get to seize assets rather than balance their city budget? Does the federal government get to pick and choose who gets inspected? If the taxpayers refuse to send bombs to Israel or Saudi Arabia, can the president run down a list of people who haven’t been inspected yet? Can somebody park the wealth in the Caribbean and do wire transfers multiple times a day? Since most of the wealth is imaginary numbers, what the fuck is a bureaucrat supposed to do with Nvidia stock inflated to the moon? Do we just dissolve companies where the populace cannot comprehend how it benefits the economy/society? Or disagree on the companies value? Taxpayers strongly believe both sides of AIs value (or potential) to the economy.

Civil asset forfeiture is bad regardless of who it happens to. We could fucking just prosecute them instead for corruption and pass more taxes for a bigger return of money. Make screwing over billionaires a sport on how to squeeze away all the profits they want to skim from the top.

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Taxes. The answer is taxes and actual audits. We've been doing that sort of thing for a very long time, it's just that the rich assholes have had access to the tax code.

A full audit every year, and then you simply tax any wealth over the 500M mark. It's that easy.

[–] ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 2 points 21 hours ago

I think the commenter above you is implying that if everyone knew that 500M was the cap, then every bubble would pop and the market would crash.

I think it's a good idea. If you can't survive the rest your life on 500M then you're doing things way too lavish for any society to support. (And that doesn't mean you couldn't invent and work and make more than you spend, keeping your worth at 500M indefinitely)

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world -1 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

A full audit every year, and then you simply tax any wealth over the 500M mark. It’s that easy.

If, hypothetically, those audits ended up costing more than the additional tax revenue they yield, resulting in overall tax revenue decreasing, would you still want to do it?

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

That's one hell of a hypothetical. Especially since on average every single dollar that any government puts into tax recovery yeilds an average of a $6 return on the lowest end, and when aimed against the rich frequently returns hundreds of dollars in profit.

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago

I'm actually betting that a full audit of everyone who even claims to be worth more than, say, 100 million, would send most of these fucks to jail for financial crimes. Which is worth it on its own.

[–] MarriedCavelady50@lemmy.ml 38 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This post has been placed under an Omega Google Security Watch List - Memetic threat & incitement of violence against citizens. Unregistered visitors may be subject to Amazon Enhanced Employment at the next available fulfillment center.

Quote of the day: Trust in the Bezos as he labors for you.

[–] otacon239@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

This feels like something straight out of Sorry to Bother You

[–] mortemtyrannis@lemmy.ml 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

The definition of trickle-down economics is incongruent with the image that’s being displayed. If the second image shows that it’s a Piñata being hit (matching the definition of piñata economics) the first image should show trickle down economics as it ‘should’ work, which is that the top glass spills over to the next glass and so on.

Yes I’m autistic, how did you know?

[–] Naia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

The first image is how trickle down actually is. None of the money actually "trickles", but pools at the top, or in this case gets siphoned to their tax shelters.

The only trickling that happens it the rich practically peeing on the rest of us.

[–] mortemtyrannis@lemmy.ml 1 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Yes, I agree that’s how trickle down economics works in real life but I looked at this meme and was like ‘it don’t make sense’.

If the caption was something like ‘how aspirational capitalists think trickle down economics works’ and showed a picture of the imagined way trickle down economics works and the second image was the one in this meme with the caption ‘how trickle down economics actually works’ it would make more sense.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

The way it works is how it's supposed to work. They called it "horse and sparrow," economics in the late 1800s. They changed the name because that is blatantly telling the rest of us to "eat shit."

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

Even aspirational capitalists don't think trickle down economics works the way you're describing. It's always supposed to be a grift. This has always been the goal. It's not that this is how it works in reality, it's that this is how it was always supposed to work.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Delivering swift and terrible justice to the gaggle of sociopaths and bigots that have channeled our collective wealth into institutionalized misery is cool and good.

But the wealth building doesn't come from taking a few bourgeois fucks out back to the wood chipper. Real wealth means building real infrastructure and bureaucracy that can sustain and improve the lives of your neighbors. I see a lot of progressive-ish folks who cheer guys like Luigi and whatisface the Charlie Kirk guy, then frown at the state bureaucrats in the AES states of Cuba and Venezuela and Sankara-era Burkino Faso. They lose track of the fact that the folks running the literacy programs and maintaining the train lines and working their way through the medical schools are doing 1000x more for their comrades than some vigilante in a western hellhole who got his lick in.