Has nobody commented on how this flavor design would be A HUGE PAIN IN THE ASS TO EAT?
I wouldn’t buy it! Nobody wants to WORK for their ice cream! Sure the metaphor is great, but those who would embrace it are more likely to buy the ice cream in massive quantities and never eat it, hoarding it away as a ‘collector’s item’ rather than actually doing any of the things actually intended-- oh wait, that describes pretty well what the rich do to our economy too: they hoard it away and never contribute back proportionally what they reaped.
All in all my biggest concern about this is that most people, the mint of that ice cream combo, would totally miss the point. And that’s kind of a big deal: The work-a-day masses two paychecks away from oblivion don’t have time to mix ice cream. They’re too busy striving to just survive and make sure they’ll get that next mortgage payment in or else they’ll be foreclosed upon. The whole point of the bernie sanders movement is about trying to lessen the pressure. It’s about CHANGING the current situation, not embracing how shitty it is NOW.
… honestly i wanted something radical and spicy that is both a little bit scary but also enticing.
Ginger Chili Ice Cream, anyone? What’s wrong, don’t want to Feel the Bern?
True, it should be simple, and it’s not hard to be simple and still be progressive. Heck, just putting capital gains back in with the rest of the income tax would be worth a fortune (and for the top .1%+, that is NOT earned income.)
It still makes sense to have ‘motivational taxes’ (ones that encourage commerce in specific industries or real production), but you’re right, they’re crazy right now.
We can’t just ‘let them fail’ when they have the savings and pensions of millions in their fingers (often bought from somebody else, so you can’t blame the people on this one), and ‘not impeding them’ generally leads to crashes and hurts the middle/lower classes in the end. We could just start by returning the separation between Investment and Retail banking that was there for a reason. It wasn’t the only problem, but there’s no good reason for that to have been removed.
By the way, I was just replying to @lolipop_jones who asked if Bernie had made any specific proposals to confiscate wealth. My post was verification that yes, he indeed has, just not for the 1% (red herring, NOT the problem, plenty of regular but successful folks in there) and instead more specifically for the gilded class and the actual sources of the problem.
if you need interns, pitch it as a show to Discovery. A brief sampling of their lineup seems to indicate that they’ll throw cash at just about any random pair of yahoos that vaguely remind them of mythbusters
That’s totally cool, and I think Bernie’s by far the best of the bunch, but I think ancestry honestly is even less of something we should be concerned about the ‘historical significance’ of in a president.
I look forward to the day that we don’t bat an eye when a 4’3" transgender Native American Atheist gets a nomination.
And everybody’s going to be proud of ‘their team’, I was just disagreeing with the idea of any one team being ‘historically significant’ to everybody else based on their ancestry unless they’re of a statistically powerless and maligned group that does not historically hold power.
I’d like to see some actuarial numbers on the Social Security proposal. What’s the projected income and outgo, and the effect on the SocSec fund balance in, say, 2040??
