The video and its subsequent response sparked a significant reaction on social media, with numerous users rallying behind Sangwan's statement. However, some others disagreed, asserting that personal opinions should not be shared within classrooms.
I mean - I dislike financial inequality as much as the next person, but attributing the failing education system and polarization to “billionaires” will get us nowhere.
The vast majority of politicians, educators, propagandists and just insecure people are not billionaires. Don’t take away their responsibility, they are not mindless babies.
Except that the money flowing to the top 1% are the result of politics. The tax cuts which funnel money out of the public coffers and into billionaires’ pockets also require cuts to services, like education. Polarization is what’s required to motivate voters to continue to vote against their own interests. They’re very much connected.
The question then is why the 1% have such influence. Why is lobbying even legal when politicians are supposed to represent the people. Why are politicians allowed to trade stocks with inside information on policy. Why do we allow money to corrupt democracy.
Other countries have the problems of first past the post (and I’m it’s biggest critic) but I don’t think politics is as polarising like a team sport as in the USA, and monetary incentives like lobbying are illegal in most countries
I agree. In general, lobbying is a much bigger issue than the “billionaires”. Lobbying exists at all levels. You can have a dinner with a local politician for a very affordable fee ($3-5K), and meet the former or the future president (maybe even the current) for $200-300K. Lobbying is everywhere, it’s not limited to billionaires.
I mean - I dislike financial inequality as much as the next person, but attributing the failing education system and polarization to “billionaires” will get us nowhere.
The vast majority of politicians, educators, propagandists and just insecure people are not billionaires. Don’t take away their responsibility, they are not mindless babies.
Except that the money flowing to the top 1% are the result of politics. The tax cuts which funnel money out of the public coffers and into billionaires’ pockets also require cuts to services, like education. Polarization is what’s required to motivate voters to continue to vote against their own interests. They’re very much connected.
The question then is why the 1% have such influence. Why is lobbying even legal when politicians are supposed to represent the people. Why are politicians allowed to trade stocks with inside information on policy. Why do we allow money to corrupt democracy.
Other countries have the problems of first past the post (and I’m it’s biggest critic) but I don’t think politics is as polarising like a team sport as in the USA, and monetary incentives like lobbying are illegal in most countries
I agree. In general, lobbying is a much bigger issue than the “billionaires”. Lobbying exists at all levels. You can have a dinner with a local politician for a very affordable fee ($3-5K), and meet the former or the future president (maybe even the current) for $200-300K. Lobbying is everywhere, it’s not limited to billionaires.
deleted by creator
Being in 1% by income makes one barely a millionaire. Most likely not even that if they live in an expensive city and have a family.
0.1% is probably more accurate, but the general idea is the same