this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
111 points (99.1% liked)

politics

24209 readers
2615 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] xyzzy@lemm.ee 16 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Kind of bizarre they have a photo of Warren as the top image for the headline "Senate Democrats Help GOP Pass Crypto Bill" when she's been the most vocal one against passing it.

No one has been a bigger critic of the GENIUS Act than Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the ranking member on the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, who has warned that in addition to weak protections for consumers and financial stability, the bill allows tech companies to issue their own private currencies and "take control over the money supply."

She also said that the GENIUS Act mirrors the passage of the 2000 passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA), which deregulated derivatives and helped the product proliferate in the lead-up to the financial crisis of 2008.

[–] tonytins@pawb.social 6 points 11 hours ago

While Common Dreams is a very good outlet, the choice to display Warren with that headline was not the wisest of moves.

[–] PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social 50 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

All our legislators are in an organized crime syndicate

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 2 points 51 minutes ago

Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.); Cory Booker (D-N.J.); Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.); John Fetterman (D-Penn.); Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.); Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.); Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.); Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.); John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.); Andy Kim (D-N.J.); Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.); Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.); Alex Padilla (D-Calif.); Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.); Adam Schiff (D-Calif.); Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.); Mark Warner (D-Va.); and Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.).

Some surprises in there. Not shocked to see Booker in there, that guy sucks. Slotkin and Fetterman, no surprise at all. Ken Martin letting Slotkin give the state of the union rebuttal was pretty awful. He might just as well have picked fetterman. I hope Ken Martin is proud of himself.

[–] redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Not all but far more than there should be with stakes this high

[–] Bonesince1997@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago

Enough on both sides to keep the curious at bay.

[–] hungprocess 9 points 12 hours ago
[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 6 points 13 hours ago

Every last crypto pusher needs to have their balls in a vice grip. If they don't have balls get the ghost pepper concentrate and squirt it onto their genitals.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 10 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I hate crypto and the entire technology behind it is embarrassingly stupid but ngl, I bought Bitcoin as an investment and it was not a bad idea so far. Even if it falls to 50% of its today value before I pull out I'll still have multiples of what I invested.

Not trying to goad anyone into doing the same, just saying that I'm trying to make something good out of a bad situation

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 10 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

Spicy take. Blockchain and crypto are tools and not inherently bad.

My biggest issue with them are who currently controls them and what they're being used for.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Cryptology itself is neutral.

Blockchain is an inherently bad design for a distributed ledger. Bitcoin's proof of work algorithm is also an absolutely shit, environmentally destructive design.

[–] tar@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

how would you set up a distributed ledger to fairly distribute a deflationary currency? I think Blockchain is a fine way to solve this problem, or was from 2009-2012 or so.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 15 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

They are inherently bad. By design.

At the very basic level, everybody needs to execute eachothers transactions. This means that if a billion wallets make a single transaction that you end up with 10^18 transactions being calculated. To call it inefficient is the understatement of the year.

This, incidentally, is also the reason why the wallet data file is just ridiculously stupidly enormously big. I've been out of it for years now (minus the bit that I'm using now as an investment) but a real Bitcoin wallet required terabytes of data

All this culminates in Bitcoin using more electricity than a modern country to support a tiny fraction of the world's financial transactions, something you might want to think about with climate change and all.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Oh I don't disagree with your take on it on that front. What crypto is being used for and how it is being used is generally impractical. It does have legitimate uses. But as you said it's generally not the ones that's being used for.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 hours ago

What crypto is being used for and how it is being used is generally impractical.

Generally criminal, more like. It's good for money laundering and illicit payments, that's about it.

It does have legitimate uses.

Citation needed.