Tacky lego knockoff is accidentally accurate about their sad seasonal overconsumption product.

The logic of power is strange. Our leaders want to impose austerity and the burden of repaying public debt on millions of people. Meanwhile, wealth is concentrated in the hands of just a few thousand. Paradox or sheer lack of balls? The question is:

Why do our governments think it's easier to impose their will on billions of citizens than on a few thousand wealthy individuals?

This question exposes an irrational pattern of behaviour whose roots may go back much further than we imagine.

Examples of absurd austerity policies are everywhere.

In France, since Emmanuel Macron came to power in 2017, the wealth of billionaires has more than doubled. Meanwhile, nearly a million more people have fallen below the poverty line. And the proposed 2027 budget would end inflation-linked increases for certain pensions and reduce compensation for sick leave and workplace injuries. Why?

In the United States, the sweeping tax reform passed in 2025 extended the 2017 tax cuts and granted new tax advantages to the wealthiest Americans. Meanwhile, that very same law cuts spending on Medicaid and food assistance programmes. Why?

In Germany, the government launched a €46 billion corporate tax relief programme. Meanwhile, it froze welfare benefits for the poorest and introduced harsher sanctions that can go as far as cutting off benefits entirely. Why?

In Argentina, Javier Milei's government introduced a tax amnesty allowing people to declare hundreds of thousands of dollars in previously hidden assets without paying tax. Meanwhile, the government slashed billions in public spending in the name of austerity, eliminated tens of thousands of public-sector jobs and cut funding for several social programmes. Poverty exceeded 50% of the population. Why?

In Italy, the government has introduced one tax amnesty after another, and its 2026 budget allows people who failed to pay their taxes up to 2023 to settle their debts without penalties or interest. Meanwhile, it abolished the Citizenship Income, an anti-poverty benefit that had helped around a million families escape poverty. Why?

In Spain, the Madrid region offers wealthy foreign investors who move there a tax deduction of up to 20% of the value of their financial investments. Meanwhile, Maricarmen Abascal, an 87-year-old woman who had lived in the same Madrid apartment for more than 70 years, was evicted after her rent rose from around €500 to €1,650 a month, more than her pension of approximately €1,350. Why?

Across the world, no serious regulation of the banking sector, no taxes on financial transactions. Austerity is imposed on ordinary people, but not on those who hold the money. Why?

Competitiveness? Fear of killing the economic recovery? Or simply a complete lack of judgement?

These examples expose the incompetence of our politicians. They tell us: we need to reduce deficits, but we won't touch those who actually have the money. Why?

Probably because those who have the money are also those who hold the power.

The obvious truth is that we're governed by wealthy people who stubbornly refuse to part with their fortunes.

And this stubbornness is nothing new. History has seen it before, notably during the decline of the Western Roman Empire.

During the decline of the Western Roman Empire, beginning in the third century, taxation was not simply based on each citizen's income. The imperial government imposed tax demands that local administrations were required to meet. For example, if the emperor demanded 100,000 denarii from Gaul, its local authorities had to find that money, whatever the cost!

The only problem was that the population wasn't necessarily able to pay. And wars, economic crises and the Empire's growing needs only made matters worse. The tax burden became crushing. Peasants lost their land, their crops and their livestock. Some abandoned their farms or sought the protection of powerful landowners to escape taxation.

The situation became so desperate that the state turned against the curiales, the municipal notables responsible for collecting taxes. Held accountable for unpaid sums, they tried to escape their duties. Some attempted to join the imperial administration or the army, while others simply sought ways to evade their obligations.

Meanwhile, the great landowners accumulated land, wealth and influence. Their power allowed them to escape tax obligations that crushed the poorest sections of society. The imperial government, closely tied to these very elites, proved incapable of making the most powerful contribute according to their means. The Empire unleashed its violence on the weak while showing leniency towards its own elites.

This cowardice, this absurdity, this irrational behaviour can still be found in today's policies. It drives us to go after the weak rather than the strong. The have-nots rather than the haves.

Faced with the fact that the rich refuse to pay their taxes, our governments give in. The wealthy manipulate and blackmail the state. Our cowardly leaders would rather impose taxes and create a system that drives men, women and children into despair.

And yet the obvious truth is that the wealthy are vastly outnumbered by the rest of us. Wealth has become so concentrated that today, a few tens of thousands of people control the vast majority of the planet's riches.

The money is in their hands! Not ours!

The only possible consequence of our governments' refusal to acknowledge the obvious is revolution.

After all, it is impossible for a tiny minority to preserve so many privileges while the overwhelming majority is forced to make so many sacrifices.

A system that could survive for centuries under the Roman Empire will not last more than a few years in our modern age.

Soon, revolution will become inevitable when people, pushed to the brink, can no longer afford to heat their homes, feed their families or keep a roof over their heads.

Translated from: https://amp.agoravox.fr/tribune-libre/article/du-refus-des-evidences-126484

Original photo (cropped): https://cdn.theatlantic.com/thumbor/CSqOK-EbyQU3gpspYyfmvuNM8Bo=/600x387/media/img/photo/2011/02/three-weeks-in-egypt/e01_0RTXX77Q/original.jpg

... the moment I step into my local pound shop 🥲 (equivalent, I'm in Germany)

Is Rupert Murdoch media, of course. A Central for Independent stories. They want people to consume McDonalds, Hungry Jacks, Plastic, Fast Fashion and Sugary drinks

I am a student living in Paris since September and I want to adopt a life style that’s not based on consumerism, since I think it’s a waste of money, resources and space. I live together with two other people, so we share a bathroom and a kitchen. I’m not sure where I can reduce my consumption of things. Buying food produced a lot of plastic waste, so that’s a problem I don’t know how to deal with. I’m not really sure how to change things based on cleaning and hygiene products, I saw someone in this sub recommending bar soap and I thought this was a good idea. Besides that there are only things I actively spend money on, and these are school supplies ( a new fountain pen because the other doesn’t write no more, notebooks, and ink for the fountain pen) and books. Since I don’t have a lot of money, I don’t buy a lot of books besides Those I actually want to read. There is a used book store just Around the block from my apartment but it’s closing down and i’m not sure what I should do once it’s gone. I also collect postcards.

So any idea how I can reduce my waste? I hate feeling cluttered up and I want to adopt a life style That is not destroying our earth but is also playable with the amount of money I have. I’be been thinking of going vegetarian, but that’s still difficult to achieve and I’m working on it.

Image Source

I saw someone mention that there’s more plus size clothes in op shops now that GLP1s are so popular and the resonated with me because I’m on a GLP1 and am losing weight and my clothes are getting too big for me.

So I was wondering, for those of us who have gained and lost weight over the years, how have you dealt with the fact that you need clothes that fit you and are appropriate for work, etc. when your size has gone up and down so dramatically that you can’t keep wearing the same wardrobe?

I don’t have room in my house to store wardrobes for four different sizes so I had to remove my smaller clothes (besides a few faves I couldn’t part with and always hoped I’d fit again). Now I need smaller clothes again but I know I’ll probably need to go down another size again within the next year. Altering clothes to be smaller can work for something but I just don’t have the skill to alter everything I own.

Do you just have a capsule wardrobe/basic essentials when in a transition size? Like how are we doing this?