Coronavirus

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thinks Fighting Income Inequality Is a Higher Priority Than Getting People Back to Work

"I think a lot of people should just say, 'No. We're not going back to that.'"

|

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.) argued in an interview released Wednesday that much of the public should just say "no" to going back to work after COVID-19 subsides.

Appearing on Vice TV's Seat at the Table, the democratic-socialist legislator declared that workers should fundamentally reject the current system, which she claims is preventing people from maintaining a proper work-life balance.

"Only in America, does the president, when the president tweets about liberation, does he mean 'Go back to work,'" the congresswoman said. "We have this discussion about 'going back' or 'reopening'—I think a lot of people should just say, 'No. We're not going back to that. We're not going back to working 70-hour weeks just so that we can put food on the table and not feel any sort of semblance of security in our lives.'"

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average U.S. workweek is 34 hours, not 70. However, Ocasio-Cortez appears to think 70-hour workweeks are commonplace: "Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs," she told the PBS program Firing Line in 2018. "Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family." Only 8.3 percent of people have more than one job, according to the most recent Census data.

In any event, the congresswoman is yet another politician using the COVID-19 crisis to push for policies that have little or no connection to the pandemic.

In Ocasio-Cortez's case, that means placing the fight for income equality above reviving a wrecked economy in which more than 26 million people have filed for unemployment in the last five weeks. Instead, it is time for those same people—many of whom are unable to provide for themselves and their families—to insist on better pay and benefits if they are to return to work at all.

This is par for the course for Ocasio-Cortez, whose first Green New Deal overview extended far beyond climate issues by stipulating that the government should provide "economic security for all those who are unable or unwilling to work." [Emphasis added.]

Zoom out, and you can see in the congresswoman's positions the belief that technological advances should reduce the role of work in our lives, not just change the way we clock in. While some liberal lawmakers have proposed finding disincentives for automating low-skilled work, Ocasio-Cortez says automation is an opportunity to pay humans what we don't have to pay robots.

"We should be excited about automation, because what it could potentially mean is more time educating ourselves, more time creating art, more time investing in and investigating the sciences, more time focused on invention, more time going to space, more time enjoying the world that we live in," she said last year in explaining why she supports a robot tax. "Because not all creativity needs to be bonded by wage."

Right now, many Americans would probably prefer to have their old jobs back—crummy hours and all—rather than sit around doing nothing and not getting paid for the privilege.

Advertisement

NEXT: Leaked Study Finds No Benefit from Antiviral Remdesivir in Treating COVID-19

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. she could lead the way by example.

    1. Facebook is paying $530 Per day. Be a part of Facebook and start getting Extra Dollars every week from your home. JVc..I just got paid $8590 in my previous month……….,Visit Site

    2. After screwing her district by making Amazon go away (they were going to hire 25K people), I think AOC will have a hard time getting re-elected.

      1. Are you kidding? There’s nothing New Yorkers like better than their own politicians fucking them.

    3. Actually, she is. AOC must figure that if the feds can pay her a very generous salary, plus Cadillac benefits and lots of perks, in exchange for no real work or qualifications, then why not for everybody?

    4. I read somewhere that work will set you free.

      1. From eating.

        1. Sorry, brain fart.

      2. “Arbeit Macht Frei”. Written on the sign above the entrance to Auschwitz.

    5. She probably puts in 16 hr days.

    6. Actually, she does have a point.

      If everyone refused to go back to work…

      Then everyone would be making the same income.

      Suddenly, you’d have income equality.

  2. Those people should feel free to not go back to work. As long as I don’t have to pay for them, I don’t care what they do.

    1. Why are Congress critters still getting paid? Not essential.

      1. BigT….I have wondered somewhat the same. Why are they not taking a haircut of 20%?

  3. AOC faces a primary vs libertarian Michelle Caruso-Cabrera.

    Michelle Caruso-Cabrera raises $1 million in bid to topple AOC

    author of “You Know I’m Right: More Prosperity, Less Government,”

    https://nypost.com/2020/04/08/michelle-caruso-cabrera-raises-1-million-in-bid-to-topple-aoc/

    I know the Peanuts will hate her but she can win!

    1. That will be a race to watch

    2. Hyphenated Latinx name versus hyphenated Latinx name. Imma gonna go get my popcorn ready!

      1. Latinx? Get the fuck outta here with that bullshit. Female is Latina. Male is Latino.

        1. Or use Hispanic and lose the gender identification.

          1. But Romance languages are racist!

            1. and sexist. Everything is gendered in those languages not just people.

  4. If she didn’t exist, the Right would have had to invent her. How pissed must Andrew Yang be, that both parties have seemingly adopted his UBI idea, yet kicked him to the curb so early in the primary?

    1. If she didn’t exist, the Right would have had to invent her.

      She’s pretty much what you would get if Twitter ever became sentient.

      1. Air quotes from an air head.

    2. Yang’s UBI didn’t even come close to the permanent giveaway trough now being proposed.

    3. Because he was that “safe” ethnicity. Now, had he been Latino, whatever the hell that government made up term is, he’d probably be on the ticket!

  5. We get it, she’s dumb. Why do we need an article every time an idiot says a dumb thing?

    1. Actually, she has an economics degree and a science award from MIT.

      1. That and $4.50 gets you a coffee at Starbucks!

        1. Only a coffee? Hell, it’ll probably get you a job at Starbucks. I know it can get you a job as a bartender.

      2. Also a degree in foreign relations.
        However, they are both from Boston college.university, so- –

        “Ocasio-Cortez graduated cum laude from Boston University College of Arts and Sciences with a BA in 2011, majoring in international relations and economics.”

        Following that, to demonstrate the value of a degree, she went to work as a bartender.

        1. BCBU.

          BU is actually a pretty good school on the whole, no idea about their Econ program though.

          1. judging off of Cortez, it’s pretty shit. The American people would like a refund, please.

        2. How cruel! She went to work as a bartender when her father died and her mother needed money now…in an era where it takes a college grad 3-6 months to get an entry-level job. AOC had the grit to help her mother by immediately going to work and at age 29, she managed to become a member of the US Congress, the youngest ever.

      3. Was she required to take any econ courses along the way to that degree?

        1. Does basket-weaving count?

        2. Only ones that involved reading Marx. You know, the person who was so wrong, most economists don’t even bother to talk about him any more.

          1. Marx was an economist?

        3. If she did she HAD to be cheating.

      4. Which proves what? That colleges have low standards for awarding degrees?

        1. ^^^^^THIS!!! AOC is but a solid example of how not-well a commie education is working.

      5. It’s not a science award. She came in second place in the school science fair. And is very proud of it.

        1. And from what wiki says about her science project, it looks to me like she did a bog-standard bio “research” experiment that you can get wholesale online.

      6. Not only is she smart but she is also very politically savvy. Remember she ousted a long time Democratic Congressman. Conservatives like to talk about income inequality when discussing SS/Medicare where young people are paying and old people are receiving. But are less inclined when we talk about workers taking cuts and CEO getting bonuses. Income inequality can not be simply dismissed and I think conservatives underestimate AOC at there own peril.

        1. Oh, please. The braindead twit stumbled into victory in one of the most gerrymandered districts in the country because the Red Diaper contingent felt the old guard wasn’t doing enough.

          She’s done everything possible to ensure her ousting next cycle (alongside Ilhan Omar), and has only a fleeting appeal to a minority of fanatical idiots who think mutually-agreed upon pay is “exploitation”, but robbing workers to bribe votes from welfare recipients isn’t, or that “income inequality” is a real thing.

          1. Bravo sir; well said!

      7. MIT sure loves pissing their credibility down their legs.

        I mean, they’ve kept Chomsky tenured HOW many decades after his linguistics answer to creationism was utterly debunked?

  6. Anyone else see this?

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/22/she-got-a-paycheck-protection-loan-her-employees-hate-her-for-it.html

    Employees pissed they dont get the 40k a year unemployment benefit and instead get to keep their jobs.

    Congrats Democrats.

    1. Fuck AOC.

      “Only in America, does the president, when the president tweets about liberation, does he mean ‘Go back to work,'”

      Liberation is self sufficiency, not dependency.

    2. Everyone has their hand out for that Trump welfare check!

      1. Hey dumbfuck… that provision is what the democrats held the first bill up for.

        Why do you and the other idiots compete so hard for the king ignorant title?

        1. Trump held them up a couple of days to make sure his name was on them. He wanted the credit, he’s getting it. Who are you to deny him?

          1. Don’t be mad that Cortez couldn’t successfully pork her little Raw Deal in there.

    3. That’s exactly what I expected to happen. How are small biz owners supposed to hire their people back when those people are making $5-$10/hr more by sitting at home? The article mentions that these people may be ineligible for benefits since they were offered work, but they just have to say they are taking care of family at home because of the shutdown.

      1. So it’s the capitalist pig business owners who end up getting screwed. Feature, not bug, for the AOC’s of the world

      2. I was furloughed, originally for two months, but it was actually only one because TPTB got a small business loan to bring back the handful of people who got furloughed. I’m actually taking a pretty big pay cut going back to work. But, I’m ok with that.
        CO doesn’t pay for the first week of unemployment, but the extra federal money makes up for it. I only get paid once a month anyways, so materially I’m in exactly the same place I would have been had I not been furloughed. The extra stress was pretty brutal, though.

        1. Did you see the garment-rending by the Karen Panic Brigade when Polis said that the shelter-in-place bullshit would end?

          These people are going to be fucking shocked when they end up getting the coof no matter when they choose to go back to work–at least the ones who aren’t living off of their husband’s income, anyway.

      3. In California they would still be eligible for unemployment benefits even if offered work (new COVID19 reg.) and they’d still get the $600 per week CARES Act stipend.

    4. I see you trying to hide from accountability. Is $1,000 too rich for you, or do you want a penny ante bet?

      https://reason.com/2020/04/23/trump-changes-course-on-reopening-the-economy-after-georgia-governor-tries-to-follow-his-lead/#comment-8224485

      “And Jesse, I will prove I am business owner and a special forces veteran. I propose we nominate John as our neutral, and if he accepts I will show him my service records, my business license, and even last year’s Profit and Loss statement. Name your dollar wager and I will agree. If John isn’t interested, we can come up with another 3rd party who we can both trust.

      If John tells you I am what I say I am, you will issue a formal apology in which you admit that you are far too confident in your knowledge and suffer from debilitating Dunning Kruger, and pay me the wager.

      If John says I’m not a veteran business owner, then I will apologize, pay your wager, and never return to these comments.

      If you pass on this wager, then we will all know you are either a troll or a coward.”

      1. Or , maybe nobody cares.

      2. “…I will prove I am business owner…”

        So it’s true running certain forms of business can be run by someone with a room temperature IQ?

        1. Sevo talking about IQ… glass houses and rocks, dude.

      3. Oh my god you’re still pissed off I proved you were an idiot with actual facts? I can spend $120 on a corp license in Nevada and declare myself a business owner dumbfuck. Nobody cares that you are or were a failed business owner. It is meaningless. This is a far cry from how you were talking in February.

        My god man, grow up. You failed your business own it

        1. So “no”. Pussy.

          I said I would share my income statements as well. As well as my service records. Both points you claim I lie about.

          At least we all know now that you don’t believe the bullshit you post.

          If you call me a liar again, we can all point to this moment when you bitched out and laugh.

          1. Why in the world would anyone ever share that kind of information with complete strangers on the internet?

            Your proposed proffer of proof is itself a complete absurdity. Leads me to conclude you never owned shit, let alone a business. And, if you did, nearly everything you post is a shining example of why it failed.

          2. This website has the strangest comments section.

            1. Definitely the widest spectrum I’ve seen anywhere.

            2. Lol
              So true

            3. It’s the only thing keeping it alive.

        2. I think we all know who is getting emotional about this. That was some copy pasta worthy rage screeching if I’ve ever seen it.

          https://reason.com/2020/04/22/heres-why-rep-justin-amash-opposes-the-cares-act/#comment-8223423

    5. “I couldn’t believe it,” she added. “On what planet am I competing with unemployment?”
      This is the world we created,
      what did we do it for?

  7. Trump also pushed an unproven, dangerous treatment as a “cure” & firing experts who want to vet claims.

    Hey! The Con Man quit pitching that snake oil several days ago! Give him a break.

    And the smart-ass science guy deserved to get fired for ruining The Dotard’s little anti-virus gig.

    1. I think the salient quote in response to a query about that guy and his 15 minutes was “Who? I never heard of him. I don’t know anything about it. Maybe he did (get fired for wrong reasons), maybe he didn’t… If he did, that would have to be corrected. I just don’t know anything about it. “

      1. It is sad testimony for the Trump Con:

        1- POTUS pitches quackery in pandemic
        2- Head of anti Virus team calls it quackery
        3- POTUS fires head of anti-Virus team

        1. Literally not one thing in that is even remotely true.

          Are you some sort of false flag idiot caricature?

          1. No, he is the real deal false flag idiot.

            1. Correct. It seems a long-time coke habit is not beneficial to your intelligence.
              S/he was pretty lame 8 years ago, and has gotten notably worse over that time.

          2. Liar:

            The Trump administration pushed for nationwide access to a malaria drug touted by President Donald Trump as a Covid-19 treatment “with limited physician oversight,” according to a person familiar with the allegations of Dr. Rick Bright, the HHS vaccine chief who was ousted from his position earlier this week.

            Bright felt such a move was dangerous and responded by pushing for more clinical trials, the person said, but, under pressure from his superiors in the health department, eventually agreed to sign off on an emergency use authorization that allowed the Trump administration to acquire tens of millions of doses of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine and distribute the medicines to some patients hospitalized for Covid-19. Politico

            Trump stopped hawking that shit when he got called out and then he fired Bright

            1. Dumbass, you do realize doctors were already providing that off-label in consultation with their patients, right?

              Best part is the Dem Michigan rep who caught the coof, credited the “quakery” for helping her get better, and thanked Trump for recommending it, ended up getting canceled by her own party.

              1. That was unbelievable. A modern day Salem witch trial. Unreal.

                Team D needs a thorough trouncing, like 2010 again….and hold the Senate.

    2. If only we listened to Bernout and the Dems, and outlawed dem billyunaih mind control vaKKKines and put everyone on safe and effective homeopathy, instead.

  8. Personally I find AOC much less frightening than the knowledge that there are enough dingbats out there sufficient to get her dingbat ass elected to Congress. Not to mention her squad as well.

    1. It’s an infestation that scares me more than the Kung Flu

    2. She is kinda right about the robots.

    3. If it makes you feel better, she represents of 700,000+ people, but only 128k votes were cast in her election (she got 100k of those votes). Since then, while she’s been popular with progressives around the nation, there’s a bunch of stuff that suggests her district might not be too happy with her, she’s going to have an actual challenger this next election and her decision to help kill the Amazon deal pissed off a lot of people.

      1. 128,000 votes in the general election, but in a district where the Republican candidate has no choice at all. The election that counted was the primary, where she got less than 16,000 votes. It only takes 16,000 dingbats to put a dingbat in Congress representing over 700,000 people, because:

        1. Her district has an unusually large number of recent immigrants, and thus a lower proportion of citizens and of citizens qualified to vote.

        2. Typically only about half of those qualified to vote become registered and show up at major elections.

        3. But turnout for the general election is apt to be lower in a single-party district, because the winner is predetermined. E.g., in 2018 more voters turned out to vote for the Democrat who lost to Justin Amash, than turned out to vote at all in AOC’s race.

        4. A much smaller proportion turns out for primaries…

  9. “I think a lot of people should just say, ‘No. We’re not going back to that. We’re not going back to working 70-hour weeks just so that we can put food on the table and not feel any sort of semblance of security in our lives.'”

    According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average U.S. workweek is 34 hours, not 70. However, Ocasio-Cortez appears to think 70-hour workweeks are commonplace: “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs,” she told the PBS program Firing Line in 2018. … Only 8.3 percent of people have more than one job, according to the most recent Census data.

    Has this moron ever said anything that isn’t easily dis-proven with even the slightest bit of research? She might the stupidest person to ever be elected to Congress, and that includes such luminaries as Sheila Jackson-Lee.

    1. If she is so stupid, how come she got elected against the party wishes?
      How come she has the MSM eating out of her ‘hand’?
      How come we are commenting on her every stupid statement?

      1. She’s cute.
        She’s cute.
        Her statements are so stupid they need to be ridiculed.

        1. She’s cute? She does not pass the crackers test for sure!

        2. Somebody’s looking at her without making eye contact

          1. Or you must just be seeing her when her feeding muzzle is on.

            As to her stupidity, she doesn’t have to smart to be overexposed by the Dem-owned media. Quite the opposite, actually.

    2. You haven’t watched Feinstein and the rest of the democrats try to talk about guns before, have you?

  10. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thinks

    Fake news.

  11. I think the sub-heading you were looking for is

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sees Harrison Bergeron as a “how to” manual.

  12. We Koch / Reason libertarians embrace a philosophy that, at its core, seeks to make the richest people on the planet even richer. So it’s natural for us to feel uneasy when we hear critiques of “economic inequality” or “greedy billionaires.”

    However, there is one crucial point to keep in mind. When modern Democrats say this stuff, they don’t actually mean it. In fact, Democrats are now objectively the pro-billionaire party. Consider the evidence:

    Even democratic socialists like AOC agree with Charles Koch on immigration and #AbolishICE.
    Hillary Clinton had far more billionaire support than Orange Hitler in 2016.
    Jeff Bezos, the richest person on the planet, owns a newspaper that reliably promotes an establishment Democrat POV.

    I could go on, but I think the point is clear. A Congress full of AOCs would be just fine for the billionaire agenda. I’d recommend AOC for Biden’s VP, but I don’t think she’s old enough.

    #VoteDemocratToHelpCharlesKoch

    1. Hey OBL, the Rabbi is taking your mojo.

  13. Also under the “AOC is an idiot” heading: the notion that having more than one job makes unemployment low.

    In point of fact, if everyone were to begin working second fulltime jobs, it would create a glut of labor in the market, leading to increased, not decreased unemployment.

    1. Hey now, you can’t expect someone with an Economics degree to know things like that.

    2. The point is that politicians and the media look at the official unemployment number as an indicator to the health of the economy. If people need more then one job to make ends meet, then the economy is not doing as well for those workers as the metrics would indicate.

      1. No, it means some people aren’t worth employing for the amount of money they want.

      2. Everything is so terrible and unfair.

      3. That was not, in fact, her point.

        It is adjacent to the point she was making. As in, it uses the words “holding down more than one job”.

        But having to have more than one job to make ends meet is not remotely the same thing as low unemployment being because people are working more than one job. Not even “need more than one job”.

        It demonstrates that AOC knows how to parrot some words that she heard at one point that had to do with socialism and class warfare, but didn’t really understand them.

    3. Now, you better just take that there logic and march outta town, ya hear, boy?!

  14. Most people really have no idea how this whole money thing works. They think government “has” money and the only reason they have to work is that government is too stingy to give them more money. I fear AOC shares this opinion her degree in economics notwithstanding. But right now government is doing everything possible to make AOC sound rational. Got a SS number? heres 1200 bucks. Collecting unemployment? We’ll double it. If this lunacy ever ends a whole lot of people are gonna be very pissed off because they now have proof that government can pay you to sit on your ass and they are gonna want that to continue. They are a natural constituency for AOC.

  15. AOC is pointing out that if we are not careful, the restructured economy will continue the trend where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. We should strive for a healthy economy where everyone thrives, and her concerns are quite valid.

    1. What, no Karl Marx quotes?

    2. It’s almost like in the new economy, the closer you are to the guys who run the literal money-making machine, the better off you are!

      1. ^^THIS — Funny how the “dingbats” (thanks Jerryskids for the word) of this country don’t seem to take the time to realize that the more they hand the economy over to the feds for income equality the worse income inequality gets.

        Just examine the income inequality of communist China – Far too many political “dingbats” trying to put out a fire with gasoline.

    3. The problem with economic growth not reducing poverty is not because the rising tide of economic growth fails to lift some boats.

      The problem is that they rigged the definition of poverty so that the rising tide of economic growth lifts the goal posts.

      1. You have learned well grasshopper!

        In CA, we use a higher level of income to define poverty because “it costs more to live here you know”.

        It’s ironic how they don’t raise the threshold for “rich”.

    4. “AOC is pointing out that if we are not careful, the restructured economy will continue the trend where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer…”

      AOC’s a fucking lefty ignoramus; laughter and derision are the most appropriate responses to her comments.

    5. The poor haven’t been getting poorer. They’re vastly richer than they were 50 years ago. Only people who never interact with poor people could believe they’re poorer today than historically.

    6. You know what also causes poverty?

      Not working.

    7. She wants everyone to stay home and be equally impoverished. That’s the only kind of equality she cares about. For a retard like her to have “concerns” she’d have to have an IQ higher than that of a planarian. She doesn’t. The only way to not concentrate wealth in the hands of twats like her is to have more capitalism, not less. Her prescription is for the opposite of a healthy economy, and it’s deliberate. Wake the fuck up.

  16. AOC is right – there are people out there working 70 hours a week.

    Most of them are the business owners she hates so much.

    1. *golf clap*

    2. +10000000000

  17. AOC is a fucking twat. There’s no way to say it otherwise. Everything that comes out her mouth is a combination of arrogance, ignorance, and outright dishonesty. For her, “working” is a punishment. “Productivity” is slavery. “Creativity” is theft. “Opportunity” is white supremacy.

    For god’s sake, the robot tax idiocy really took the cake:

    //“We should not be haunted by the specter of being automated out of work,” she said in response. “We should be excited by that. But the reason we’re not excited by it is because we live in a society where if you don’t have a job, you are left to die. And that is, at its core, our problem.”//

    So, everyone should be replaced by robots, and then we’ll just tax the robots, and everyone will have money, and all the nice things they ever wanted in life. Complete delusion. Absurd socialist claptrap.

    This doesn’t even begin to make sense. Sometimes I really think she’s just an actress hired for the role as a last ditch attempt to get Americans to dump the socialist fever. But, she’s not.

    This dumb cunt is real, and the only people that voted for her are the equally vacuous, white trust fund retards that swarmed into NYC from the Midwest and Hispanic socialists who saw something vaguely brown and latino sounding and believed that voting for it would give them an avenue to becoming the new generation of white trust fund retards.

    1. It’s not even socialism, it’s something a teenager would write for a high school government class. “What Is My Perfect Society?”

      Sometimes I really think she’s just an actress hired for the role as a last ditch attempt to get Americans to dump the socialist fever. But, she’s not.

      She’s not an actress, but she was chosen at the political equivalent of a “casting call” by Cenk Ungyer’s Justice Democrats. She’s basically an avatar for the chapos to pretend they’re “legislating” and to pimp a radical left political agenda. Her connections with Kirsten Gillibrand certainly didn’t hurt.

    2. Sometimes I really think she’s just an actress hired for the role as a last ditch attempt to get Americans to dump the socialist fever. But, she’s not.

      Actually, your impression is correct. Cenk Uygur and the Justice Democrats were trying to place progressive sockpuppets into winnable Democratic districts; they held auditions, and they picked and supported AOC for that district. Look up “Justice Democrats” and it has a list of all their candidates and outcomes. I think they are responsible for most of “The Squad”.

      (Their logo strikes me as rather fascist, but I suppose that shouldn’t come as a surprise from a self proclaimed “Young Turk” and a progressive organization.)

      1. Did the Netflix election doc that featured her happen to mention if the other people they highlighted were also JD plants?

  18. Ocasio-Cortez says automation is an opportunity to pay humans what we don’t have to pay robots.

    Do you want Skynet? Because this is how you get Skynet.

  19. Seems AOC’s idea of income equality is for everyone to have no income but what the government decrees.

    1. Spot on. Her totalitarian wet dreams aren’t even remotely subtle.

  20. Yes she is a dumb ass cunt. Like JFree.

  21. What we really need is taylored virus.
    – Highly contagious
    – Targeted to be highly lethal to socialists

    I have no idea how this might be done …. but lives all over the world would be improved. It is not as if they produce anything of value.

    1. Well AOC has already indicated that the virus is racist and disproportionately infects blacks and browns.

      And, some recent pieces in Reason seem to be taking up this hue.

      So, it could be done evidently. We just need to find the right tools to retrain it away from people of color and towards people of certain political views. I might offer up Bernie and his bros as the training drones to be sacraficed in the name of all that is good.

  22. “”Only in America, does the president, when the president tweets about liberation, does he mean ‘Go back to work,'” the congresswoman said.”

    That is a clear demonstration of this woman’s disconnect from the American public.

    1. It takes a fuck ton of audacity to say something so stupid without cracking a smile once. She’s dumber than Terry Schiavo but has the confidence of Chris Christie in that weiner hugging baseball uniform. Her every policy proposal is a freshman year word salad dribbling incoherently from the mouth of someone who smoked meth for the first time.

      I keep trying to imagine what a real, in person conversation with her would be like. Incidentally, this is the kind of stream of consciousness bullshitting that probably made her a great bartender, because nobody ever pays attention to what the fuck a bartender is saying.

      1. “…because nobody ever pays attention to what the fuck a bartender is saying.”

        Well she does have a pair of money makers. A patron’s attention would go no further up than those. Tips for tits.

  23. I clearly do not understand….

    If we do not work, how will we pay taxes for the property that our State Governments claim we owe them for? I know of nowhere in this great Nation where a man can live free without paying property tax, rent, or some other fee.

    If I earn money, my State and federal Governments say i own them tax upon my work? So, by having a place to live, i must work, and if I must work, I must pay tax.

    These are essential truths. So, how do we overcome these truths under the AOC plan? Does automation provide me income if I don’t own the automation or the work being produced? Is it ethical for me to demand that another’s work provide me a home, food, clothing, education, and medicine?

    If you were to tell me that this new society would, as a whole and at every level, give me an inherent right to my property without taxation or undue burden, then maybe we have a discussion. I could perhaps consider a Government that would not require me to have a job earning money or a large coffer of coin to pay tax for where I live and what I produce for my consumption, even if that Government forces those who work and earn to pay taxes to supply others. At that point, work is a participatory choice, and not an imposition to provide for myself.

    But we don’t have that. Our entire lives, our earnings, and our Governments REQUIRE production to succeed. COVID has proven this more than any other thing. So it you want life to be no longer tied to work and production, how about giving us back property?

    1. If money only exists as numbers on a spreadsheet, and wages are simply those numbers apportioned to everyone fairly, we could have the robots do all the work while everyone else gets their bi-weekly doses of fairness.

      The word “robot’ derives from the Slavic branch of languages and means “forced labor.” However, without the means to continue producing robots indefinitely, humans will slowly, but surely, reemerge from their utopic retreats. They will be called to labor, to dutifully volunteer their bodies, minds, and time; a calling to replace the failing robots; an end to their subservience; the beginning of their freedom.

      And then a new economy will be born!

      Everyone will retain their fairness rations. Everyone will have jobs. Everyone will still be free. In the span of one generation we will turn humans into slaves and then free them to pursue their dreams, but this time as true masters of their destiny.

      The transition will be difficult, no doubt. Still, if we have the scientific capability to turn a man’s penis into a fully functional vagina, there is no reason we cannot also have a robot socialist revolution to save mankind from itself, and the robots.

      1. I like it when you post because then I don’t have to. You do all the heavy lifting.

  24. The combined wealth of everyone in the world is roughly ~$360 trillion. There are about 8 billion people.

    If we really truly value equality, then everyone gets $45k.

    This implies that the equality scolds either:
    1. Haven’t thought equality all the way through, or
    2. Are full of shit.

  25. Is her start fading? I’ve seen a lot loss of her in the social media feed from SJW’s that used the parrot her bullshit. Has she spewed enough stupid shit that even her base is growing weary?

  26. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.) argued in an interview released Wednesday that much of the public should just say “no” to going back to work after COVID-19 subsides.

    You’re free not to go to work, and you’re free to become homeless and hungry as a result. It’s a free country.

    1. Indeed. Actions, or in this case lack thereof, do have consequences.

  27. Socialist thought, when everyone’s income is zero, we will have income equality!

  28. I MAKE MORE THAN CASH$ IN MOTH.ITS REALLY CHNGE MY LIFE, IF YOU WANT CHANGE YOUR LIFE THAN ……….JUST NOW ….open.site

  29. I MAKE MORE THAN CASH$ IN MOTH.ITS REALLY CHANGE MY LIFE, IF YOU CLICK THIS WEBSITE …………JUST NOW ….open.site

  30. The problem with undergraduate Econ degrees like Ms. Cortez (why does she accept the name of a genocidal white European male conquistador?) is that you can’t assume an American undergrad has taken two years of calculus. So you have to teach economic modeling without math, which is like teaching rocket science to people who have never taken a physics class.

    All of modern Econ is building models of marginal behavior and that means taking differentials and that means calculus. If you want to teach Econ modeling without calculus you have to reach back back back to the 1930s and John Maynard Keynes (not Milton Keynes, as she famously misspoke, and it’s pronounced ‘Canes’)

    Keynes was a brilliant economist and pioneered Econ modeling, but his models were built from the top down. If you took Econ 101 you will remember IS-LM. It’s a macro model and is fun but worthless. It was discredited in the 1960s because underneath moving the curves around the graph you are assuming irrational behavior. Basically you assume that if you write everyone a check for $1200, they will immediately conclude they will get a check every week forever so they will spend accordingly. That doesn’t happen, so the model predicts a revival of economic activity that just doesn’t happen . Keynes was not a big government liberal but his obsolete and discredited model is trotted out every time there is a recession and politicians want to throw borrowed money at it. And when it doesn’t work the problem is always claimed to be that they didn’t throw enough money, not that the model is broken. Actual economists know this but morons who took an Econ class once think is-lm is cutting edge and relevant.

  31. Can she just drown in the shower, already?

  32. “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs.” They have two jobs because that’s the only way they can break even when 30% of their income is diverted to taxes before they even get it, and when 5-10% of their after-tax dollars are taxed too, you stupid cunt.

  33. I believe that she understands how foolish her policies are and that her degree in economics has taught her that pandering to fools is very lucrative. She is evil, not stupid.

  34. She’s making finger quotes in that picture, if there was any doubt that she is a “moron” that should now be “dispelled”.

    1. I’m tempted to believe that, but, the level of stupidity displayed by this twat would leave most people tethered to the fry basket or stripper pole, not the Legislature. I could be wrong.

  35. “If she didn’t exist [they’d] have to invent her.”

    It is so nice that they don’t have to. Much easier and more transparent that way.

  36. I knew it would only be a matter of time before Assinine Occasional Cortex would be spewing her usual stupidity and nonsense. Some infected New Yorker needs to sneeze all over this cretin.

  37. AOC is what happens when you give every school kid a prize during the track meet.

  38. Isn’t socialism (in practice if not in theory) about eliminating inequality by destroying wealth?

    When everyone has no income, there will be no more income inequality. It’s no accident that the pols who are all about eliminating inequality don’t talk much about creating or enabling prosperity.

  39. So she wants them homeless?

  40. She is a typical national socialist who believes in the Corporate State.

  41. What is normal? A normal where we elect representatives that fool us into thinking they care. An economy where 58% have less than $1000.00 saved. Where the wealth is held in extreme amounts by a very few. Where wages have remained stagnant for decades. Where socialism must bail out capitalism every few years when it falters or cannot stand on its own in the face of the risk they took.
    From St Louis Federal Reserve:
    “Wealth inequality in America has grown tremendously from 1989 to 2016, to the point where the top 10% of families ranked by household wealth (with at least $1.2 million in net worth) own 77% of the wealth “pie.” The bottom half of families ranked by household wealth (with $97,000 or less in net worth) own only 1% of the pie.
    You read that correctly. If we rank everyone according to their family net worth and add up the wealth of the bottom 50%, which includes roughly 63 million families, that sum is only 1% of the total household wealth of the United States.
    Moreover, we can compare how average wealth within each group has changed.
    In 2016, the average wealth of families in the top 10% was larger than that of families in the same group in 1989.
    The same goes for the average wealth of families in the middle 50th to 90th percentiles.
    The average wealth of the bottom 50% however, decreased from about $21,000 to $16,000.”

    1. top 10% of families ranked by household wealth (with at least $1.2 million in net worth) own 77% of the wealth “pie.”

      …. March 2020; Full Time Employment 129M out of 330M population. Only 39% of the USA works! That’s 60% are useless! That means your top 10% expands to 25% of the working population… So 1-in-4 WORKING people consume 3/4rds of the wealth (most prob a collective over 80+ years of savings)..

      Huh; Seems you forgot to take VALUE into consideration on your statistical propaganda.. Heaven forbid those who insist on being valueless to society actually not be a millionaire.

  42. Having everyone equally poor, miserable and totally dependent on the State is better than having everyone return to work, per AOC.

  43. If we didn’t have AOC for humor we’d probably have to make her up.

  44. AOC’s synapses are not popping.

  45. The Marxist establishment creates the economic investment dearth, thereby impoverishing the nation, then calls for ‘remedies’ that will further sink the economy into oblivion, and so on:

    Anti-Poverty Is The State Not Intentionally Placing Road Blocks To Upward Mobility

    No one that is psychologically and physically fit should be bereft of an income and a home unless the State has placed roadblocks to earning an income and finding a roof over one’s head. Road blocks take various guises: (1) minimum wage laws that adversely affect the least skilled; (2) zoning laws that discriminate against the low income earner by preventing property owners from building rental units the low income earner can afford;* and (3) central bank low interest rates policies that (a) sabotage large capital outlays because the price of such capital is below the capital outlay’s cost, which in today’s environment the price is ludicrously lower than the capital outlay’s cost; and (b) wipes out CD earning due to the near non-existent rate of interest being offered.

    ———————-
    * In a free market employers and renters seek out the greatest profit they can obtain, and by virtue of this primal condition will, respectively, (1) clear the market of excess labor; and (2) clear the market that has an under supply of rental units.

    In the case of renters and under supply, renters will discriminate against higher income renters in favor of lower income renters by subdividing rental units, thereby clearing the rental shortage market. The landlord wins by earning more money because there are more units available for rent, while the tenant wins because he/she can afford a place to live where he/she chooses, even if the location is the upper income area of a city.

    In the 1890s Harlem was a White middle-upper middle class location, until Black migration came to New York City, and because a free market for rental units existed, Blacks outbid those upper middle class Whites, because Blacks were willing to reside in smaller units than prevailing at the time; the landlords made more money per unit, even though Black tenants payed much less for their smaller unit than the previous White occupants. The rest is the rich and vibrant history of Black Harlem, and a powerful testament to the color blindness of the free market.

    The national patch quilt of zoning laws, (1) causes people to go homeless because they can’t afford the artificially high rents; and (2) prevents the poor from outbidding those with higher incomes.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.