this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2025
956 points (97.4% liked)
Political Memes
7483 readers
3744 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, I agree if something made by ai it shouldn't be posted in anyway
load more comments
(13 replies)
I'm not opposed to the message, but did it have to be an AI generated picture?
I’m torn on whether this is AI. The AI detectors I put it in say no, and the letters being consistent (all T’s looking like all other T’s, etc) says real person to me rather than machine generated. The wood grain is also consistent beneath the lettering, and it and the chain link fence don’t meander or disappear in any weird ways that I see.
That said the building in the background looks weird to me, as does the lighting. And the combination of the wood grain plus the texture on the lettering does give it that weird quality that AI text tends to have, it immediately made me question it as well. I just can’t decide if it’s a weird artifact of real textures clashing or not.
Its edited/manipulated in some way. The E's are all the same, even the bump on the bottom part is there for all of them.
Might be photoshop moreso than ai
Yeah, them all being the same is what makes me think person; when you look at those AI images with legible text, the text wiggles and is inconsistent when you compare something like one A to another A. But if you’re a person using linocut stamps or duplicating things in photoshop, letters will look the same.
There’s other little things too, like the knot in the wood that the paper dips into, that make me lean more towards ‘real but strange looking photo.’
I'd lean more towards real photo but photoshopped and the original text was something else
You can see the line artifacts around each repeated characters are the same despite the letters themselves being different sizes, so I'm leaning towards they just cut and scaled letters from the original text or something similar. You can see for example each T has a line artifact on the bottom left and each E has one on the top. Plus, if it was an irl letter stamp, they wouldnt have different sizes for the letters, at least not to this degree
I don’t know why people seem to forget about photoshop. Late night hosts were using photoshopped pictures in bits 30 years ago.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The US doesn't want to addtess its spiraling homelessness problem because giving them homes means they now treat homeless people better than the people who work 40hrs a week to barely pay for a home.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yep, it's literally in the name unhoused/homeless. Will giving someone a home fix mental health and/or addiction issues? Probably not. But providing permanent, stable housing is a necessary first step.
load more comments
(5 replies)
I have more respect for someone who goes "I hate homeless people, I think they're scum" and pushes for actually housing them because they don't ever want to see them again, over someone who goes "Oh those poor dears! We really should do something!" and then just likes a social media post about hostile architecture and leaves it at that.
I have a cousin from a wealthy family who chooses to be homeless. He can’t be committed against his will and he doesn’t want the responsibility of just having a room in his parents house or with relatives.
A lot of people have this idea that housing everyone will fix the people who just aren’t gonna do it without it being forced on them
Is the goal here to provide everyone with access to a home or to force everyone into a home?
One of the biggest issues when talking about homelessness is conflating the two different groups - people who are homeless through unfortunate circumstances, and people who are incapable of living in society. One side thinks all homeless are the former group, the other side thinks all homeless are the latter group. Truth is, both exist. You can't take a schizophrenic drug addict, throw them in a house, and then declare victory. However, there ARE some homeless for whom that's all they need.
Ending homelessness requires a granular, personal approach. And that shit is EXPENSIVE.
Ending homelessness requires a granular, personal approach. And that shit is EXPENSIVE.
But generally less expensive than letting the problem fester. Police, medics, sanitation, and so on is expensive as hell.
People are notoriously bad at comparing a single large dollar amount with a large number of smaller dollar amounts.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(14 replies)
A given % of the homeless are capable of finding housing and actively avoid it. That number is not 100%, but it is not 0% either.
It's also funny to me when people say they are Christian but don't want to help the poor. The good Samaritan is very clear. So is the bit about the sheep and the goats.
But you can use the Bible to justify anything, I guess.
Love thy neighbor as thy self, because let's be real, they can just fend for themselves, and if they don't, well, fuck the poor. I mean, why should I have to take care of all these lazy bums? They're always begging for scraps anyway. It's like, if you can't handle a little poverty, then maybe you shouldn't be living here. Fuck the poor.
load more comments
(17 replies)
view more: next ›