As tv ads continued to play, it affected how people thought about the proposition. Remember, people are really stupid and it’s really easy to change their opinions on things.
Propaganda is just very effective, even against intelligent people, and most people don’t have the extra time/energy or desire to investigate each prop. Which is a structural failure to not prioritize it, but that’s the point. There are systems in place to make political research feel both not important and also very exhausting. You live in a society full of very intelligent people, a slice of those intelligent people use their positions of power to add layers upon layers of friction to the political system so that they can retain their power.
You are not surrounded by idiots, but, you ARE ruled by criminals.
I guess to me, passing this seemed like a no-brainer and there isn’t any amount of propaganda that could sway me on that. How people are so confused about voting in their interests is surprising to me. But I think you have an interesting point.
That’s great, but just because you happen to be informed & engaged doesn’t mean the people that aren’t are stupid.
I’m in favor of a wealth tax as a corrective measure, which is how this prop was structured, but on as a broader recurring tax I am against it. If I was less informed on this prop or otherwise held a stronger “If it’s wrong to do it recurring then it’s wrong always” position, then I would have voted against it. It doesn’t take much effort to empathize with why people would be against new tax structures.
Yeah, that seems like a strange argument yo me when you look at wages over time adjusted for ibflation among the wealth classes. There really shouldn’t be much of an argument.
(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_California_Proposition_40)
As tv ads continued to play, it affected how people thought about the proposition. Remember, people are really stupid and it’s really easy to change their opinions on things.
Wrong. People are generally intelligent.
Propaganda is just very effective, even against intelligent people, and most people don’t have the extra time/energy or desire to investigate each prop. Which is a structural failure to not prioritize it, but that’s the point. There are systems in place to make political research feel both not important and also very exhausting. You live in a society full of very intelligent people, a slice of those intelligent people use their positions of power to add layers upon layers of friction to the political system so that they can retain their power.
You are not surrounded by idiots, but, you ARE ruled by criminals.
I guess to me, passing this seemed like a no-brainer and there isn’t any amount of propaganda that could sway me on that. How people are so confused about voting in their interests is surprising to me. But I think you have an interesting point.
That’s great, but just because you happen to be informed & engaged doesn’t mean the people that aren’t are stupid.
I’m in favor of a wealth tax as a corrective measure, which is how this prop was structured, but on as a broader recurring tax I am against it. If I was less informed on this prop or otherwise held a stronger “If it’s wrong to do it recurring then it’s wrong always” position, then I would have voted against it. It doesn’t take much effort to empathize with why people would be against new tax structures.
Yeah, that seems like a strange argument yo me when you look at wages over time adjusted for ibflation among the wealth classes. There really shouldn’t be much of an argument.