This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

one of the worst decisions ever made. corporations aren’t human.ms with inalienable rights

This and Citizens United gave the rich and Russia all they needed to destroy democracy.

Fuck now we got trump crypto openly taking money as corrupt as possible from countries all over the world, especially Saudi Arabi.

If corporations are people, they should be arrested whenever they kill other people

Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.

Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.

And women used to have federally protected rights over their own bodies.

Things can change.

Expand the SC and revert this dipshit decision.

US laws: money is speech

People: OK, we'll just choose to not spend money with those we dislike

US laws: that's illegal

(Anti BDS laws)

The Supreme Court is illegitimate

And this is why we can "officially" be incorrupt, the very act of bribery is endorsed by the State!

Every time you see the word "donations" or "contributions" just swap it with "bribes".

Amazon and friends aren't "donating" millions of dollars out of charity.

Citizens United and Super PACs were the final nails in the coffin, today we are seeing the results of 50 years of unbridled bribery by corporations and robber barons.

And that's why minimum wage is seven bucks an hour and no universal healthcare and on and on and on and on.

They do allow us to argue about abortion and gay marriage though, as long as it doesn't affect the bottom line, so that's nice.

Personally, I think that if UBI and wealth caps are implemented, that people should be able to use money to support political speech...up to a limit. Say, a $1,000 limit per individual, each year. Corporations can't use money for speech, just citizens. Anyone caught selling their speech for favors, lose their citizenship.

By setting a visible and clear amount of 'maxing' a person can do, it sets a goal. A fair number of people would work towards filling that political bucket of money, since they know the goal is achievable, and that their speech actually matters. A billionaire can't put their finger on the scales, if their billions didn't exist in the first place. This is helpful for preventing a feeling of not mattering within the ordinary person.

When it comes down to it, many of society's ills come from the wealthy. Not just because of the influence they exert, but also because they demoralize people who otherwise would participate in democracy.

Even though I think it's a huge problem to consider pacs or donations speech, there are some legitimately thorny issues here. How do we define speech in a way that allows us to clamp down corruption but does not interfere with the free press? And if we do find a ruling or law that walks this line, do the rich simply find another avenue to exert influence?

Not that these fights don't matter--shifting the balance of power towards the people and away from the rich is a good thing. But I have come to believe that extreme wealth is simply incompatible with democracy. When you have enough time and money you can always find a way to subvert the rule of law, and it's usually in your interests to do so. But of course this leaves us with the question of how to destroy the political power of the wealthy in a political system that is now heavily rigged against us. I know what some people will say but I still haven't seen a really good answer to this question.

Maybe syndicalism, but labor tactics have been heavily restricted by federal and some state laws. So this would require more willingness on the part of unions to break the law, and a much clearer and more radical vision for our political system. Right now I don't see this has much popular support. And the time to build this support is limited as fascism tightens its hold and automation and AI threaten to undermine the bargaining power workers hold today.

And this is the point where everything went to shit.

Thanks, guys!

So where's my free money?

Grrr

Yes, but did the Court pay money to turn the words of its decision into legally-significant speech?

Because otherwise, it seems a bit self-refuting.

And then BOOM!
Four to five years later America was introduced to something known as The Great Depression

Edit: Just a bumbling idiot here, don't mind me lmao

I’m a free money maximalist.

We need a wealth cap

Nobody should be able to have a networth over 1 million dollars. NOBODY.

You go over the 1 million? All over 1M goes 100% to taxes. All income goes to taxes until your below again.

It's a simple rule that will change the world for the better.

Corruption is constitutionally protected in the USA.

Isn't that a fun sentence?

When one man, one vote became one dollar, one vote. Capitalism bought democracy.