$58 'Tax the Rich' Sweatshirt

[Milchshake]

Socialism has a big messaging problem in the US. Does an overpriced sweatshirt help the Revolution?

But I recall very serious people being APOPLECTIC over slogans and messaging just last week.

AOC's $58 'Tax the Rich' Sweatshirt Gets Ridiculed Mercilessly: 'You're Overcharging the Stupid'



... Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez launched a new set of merchandise on her campaign website on Wednesday. The set included three T-shirts and one navy blue sweatshirt with the slogan "Tax the Rich" written across the chest in bold white letters.

With the sweatshirt's hefty price tag of $58 a pop, many took to Twitter to ridicule the New York congresswoman. The sweatshirt was originally listed at $65 but has since been discounted. Purchases made on the site contribute to Ocasio-Cortez's campaign.

"At $58.00 for a sweatshirt, you're not taxing the rich, you're overcharging the stupid," said Darryl K in a December 2 tweet replying to Ocasio-Cortez.

I appreciate it's made with American labor. I just wish they also paid a graphic designer.

[Felya]

I appreciate it's made with American labor. I just wish they also paid a graphic designer.

Yeah, but how do you make the x to look like an e, so it reads ‘Eat’ backwards? It would have gotten endless promotion on Fox News...

[jonnysensible]

boomer thread for the daily mail readers

[JohnBrown1917]

Imagine that, clothing made by people who are unionized, get paid properly, and is intended to raise money for political purposes actually cost a lot more than cheap shirts made by South-east asians.


Also always find it funny that the right-wing still does not get the difference between social democracy(AoC and the squad) and Socialism.

[Dhrizzle]

I'm guessing people don't understand that promotions with this are more "donate x amount and get a sweatshirt for your trouble," they're not supposed to represent excellent value for money.

I know communication is meant to go both ways, but it always seems less like socialist policies have a messaging problem and more that USA audiences have a comprehension problem, like the people who hate socialist Obamacare but love getting healthcare through the Affordable Care Act.

- - - Updated - - -

Also always find it funny that the right-wing still does not get the difference between social democracy(AoC and the squad) and Socialism.

Schroedinger's Socialism
"We can't have free healthcare because that is socialist and therefore evil and bad and will make everyone miserable."
"What about the Scandinavian countries? If that's socialism then they are socialist and they seem pretty happy."
"That's not socialism, that's social democracy which is totally different and basically capitalism."
"Okay can we have that kind of free healthcare then?"
"We can't have free healthcare because that is socialist and therefore evil and bad and will make everyone miserable."

[Omega10]

I'm guessing people don't understand that promotions with this are more "donate x amount and get a sweatshirt for your trouble," they're not supposed to represent excellent value for money.

I know communication is meant to go both ways, but it always seems less like socialist policies have a messaging problem and more that USA audiences have a comprehension problem, like the people who hate socialist Obamacare but love getting healthcare through the Affordable Care Act.

McConnell is proposing the ultimate anti-socialist stimulus package. If the final compromise on a stimulus package is close to what he is proposing, and this is almost a certainty (if a stimulus package is passed at all), the stimulus will once again be almost fully spent on businesses and billionaires. Most likely America will pay a huge price for this by early next year.

And so the OP joins 74 million other Americans in saying ABSOLUTELY NO AID to middle class, working class, and poor Americans, which McConnell is implementing in his stimulus negotiations.

First the OP joins in the fun of verbally abusing socialists, then a fully anti-socialist government works with the business community and Trump supporters to defund non-billionaires, and later the OP will blame the resulting mess on socialists. Rinse and repeat.

Moving forward, hopefully EU and China will do a good job of leading the world.

- - - Updated - - -

Socialism has a big messaging problem in the US. Does an overpriced sweatshirt help the Revolution?

But I recall very serious people being APOPLECTIC over slogans and messaging just last week.

AOC's $58 'Tax the Rich' Sweatshirt Gets Ridiculed Mercilessly: 'You're Overcharging the Stupid'



... Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez launched a new set of merchandise on her campaign website on Wednesday. The set included three T-shirts and one navy blue sweatshirt with the slogan "Tax the Rich" written across the chest in bold white letters.

With the sweatshirt's hefty price tag of $58 a pop, many took to Twitter to ridicule the New York congresswoman. The sweatshirt was originally listed at $65 but has since been discounted. Purchases made on the site contribute to Ocasio-Cortez's campaign.

"At $58.00 for a sweatshirt, you're not taxing the rich, you're overcharging the stupid," said Darryl K in a December 2 tweet replying to Ocasio-Cortez.

I appreciate it's made with American labor. I just wish they also paid a graphic designer.

At least I know what you think of me.

[Endus]

Capitalism expects you to demand that foreign workers be obliged to work in poverty for a pittance, so that you can get cheaply-made crap clothing that falls apart in a year or two, and to reinforce that expectation they pay you way less than you're worth as well, so you need to buy the cheap-ass clothing because the better-made stuff is "overpriced" and too expensive for you.

And then they get you to get angry/worried about the poor bastards working in those overseas factories "stealing your jobs", so you don't pay attention to the capitalists buying a third yacht that goes inside their second yacht that also goes inside their first yacht.

Also, if you're making less than $1 million a year or so, you're not a "capitalist". You may support capitalism, but you're not one of the owners of the means of production who are exploiting the masses for personal gain. You're one of those masses being exploited, you're just complicit in that exploitation.


Also, Terry Pratchett is relevant here;

The reason that the rich were so rich...was because they managed to spend less money.

Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.

But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet."

This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.

[JohnBrown1917]

Wasn't Trump selling a single baseball for $88?

The stupid have been the victim of overcharging for generations....ya know, because they're stupid.

Also is $58 really all that crazy these days? I can go to the mall right now and find 5 other sweat shirts with similar prices I bet.

How can you overcharge for an donation?

[Shadowferal]

*shrugs*
Obviously not targeted towards those that appreciate the sentiment the most.

[Milchshake]

After thinking it over.

I think i have a better return on Taxing the Rich by donating $58 to Ossoff and Warnock right now.

[Machismo]

Considering hoodies at a football game cots $100, this isn't that outrageous.

Fundraising crap usually sells for way more than the actual value of the product, which is why Trump baseballs cost $30 more than that sweatshirt.

[Hadriker]

Well for one its made in the US by union workers and not some sweatshop in a country on the other side of the world. its also for fundraising and fundraising items always carry a premium anyways.

or you can continue buying made in china MAGA hats.

[Shadowferal]

Considering hoodies at a football game cots $100, this isn't that outrageous.

Fundraising crap usually sells for way more than the actual value of the product, which is why Trump baseballs cost $30 more than that sweatshirt.

So...Trump and AOC aren't different when it comes to fundraising?

[Themius]

Imagine that, clothing made by people who are unionized, get paid properly, and is intended to raise money for political purposes actually cost a lot more than cheap shirts made by South-east asians.


Also always find it funny that the right-wing still does not get the difference between social democracy(AoC and the squad) and Socialism.

Modern-day fashion with its high demand for cheap ever-changing styles if modern-day slavery. I generally don't tons of clothing, hell... I have a hella old jumper I've had since middle school, a bag for near a decade (shit was expensive though) and tons of jeans and suits and just well.. tons of shit that I have collected over the years that I don't think I need to replace just yet.

[Orange Joe]

So...Trump and AOC aren't different when it comes to fundraising?

Not sure the point of this comment. You could insert 2 completely random names and it remains the same. Why bring Trump into it?

[Machismo]

So...Trump and AOC aren't different when it comes to fundraising?

I think it's probably true for most politicians, school fundraisers, and even the Girl Scouts. The goal is the profit. Football jerseys cost far more than it costs to make them, because the teams are capitalizing on the loyalty (and ignorance) of tier fan base.

[Shadowferal]

Not sure the point of this comment. You could insert 2 completely random names and it remains the same. Why bring Trump into it?

Because his name was mentioned.

Make no mistake, I love the "union label." Particularly when I myself was in a union.
But such a thing has been intertwined with "protectionism," and for some reason that leaves me baffled, that has been condemned by those on the left in favir of the myth of free trade which translates to cheap goods and cheap labor and always at the expense of union jobs.

[Orange Joe]

Because his name was mentioned.

Make no mistake, I love the "union label." Particularly when I myself was in a union.
But such a thing has been intertwined with "protectionism," and for some reason that leaves me baffled, that has been condemned by those on the left in favir of the myth of free trade which translates to cheap goods and cheap labor and always at the expense of union jobs.

The point I was trying to get to you is fundraising = fundraising. The person behind it doesn't really matter. Your whole comment was just asinine.

[Blur4stuff]

It's important to remember that it doesn't matter what AOC does. The right is obsessed with her. They are going to find things to get pissy about no matter what. It's not like Hillary and Pelosi are going to live forever. AOC is their replacement drug.

[Shadowferal]

The point I was trying to get to you is fundraising = fundraising. The person behind it doesn't really matter. Your whole comment was just asinine.

As asinine as a $60 dollar sweatshirt.

- - - Updated - - -

It's important to remember that it doesn't matter what AOC does. The right is obsessed with her. They are going to find things to get pissy about no matter what. It's not like Hillary and Pelosi are going to live forever. AOC is their replacement drug.

That might come across better if she didn't say she was thinking of quitting politics because she doesn't like how she's being treated.