

This chain of comments is approaching Reddit levels of dumbfuckery.
This chain of comments is approaching Reddit levels of dumbfuckery.
No plan has ever come to fruition without a substantial amount of luck -Reality.
Except that the Nazi nation state no longer existed after World War two. It was dismantled and replaced with a new one, it wasn’t even contiguous it was carved up and divvied out to allies who had different ideas about what the new state should look like. The Nazi state didn’t have a right to exist, and neither does any nation state. They’re just legal constructs and should be discarded when they are harmful.
Saying that the nation state of Israel doesn’t have a right to exist isn’t the same as saying the people of Israel don’t have the right to exist. A nation state is just a legal construct, it doesn’t have human rights. The people who live in any region are not the nation state, and they have a right to exist, but they do not have the right to create and maintain an ethnostate that oppresses other people.
They could ban american trucks from shipping through that region, that would really sting.
Southern Central Valley of California about a 2 hour drive from LA.
Ok. How many votes do they need to change the rule governing how many votes a constitutional amendment requires?
It wasn’t covered at all in my area.
Why wouldn’t they? It’s an efficient design, and aside from the whole force thing they seem to be working with the same physics that we are. Why wouldn’t they invent philips head screws?
My family had a jolly laugh about that CEO. Several of them have worked with mental health patients and elders and hate the entire health insurance industry, my brother works for cooperate types and as a result has zero sympathy for corporate types and we share memes about it. Whatever other beliefs Luigi may have, he did us all a solid, so he’s ok in our book.
A society is only good as it’s incentives. Because there will always be a segment of the population that will only act when incentivized. How they act is determined by what is incentivized and what is not. We’re a society with a long list of really bad incentives. I agree with you that investment always prioritizes profit over ethical concern because we live under capitalism and that is what is expected and incentivized. The sad thing about capitalists is that they often argue against social programs because they think that people will always game the system, and it’s true. But there is a name for those people, and that name is capitalist. When they say things like “capitalism is just human nature” and that it’s natural to compete and try to gain the upper hand in all situations, they tell on themselves. It’s not human nature, it’s their nature, and they project themselves onto everyone else. I don’t think that capitalists will ever truly go away, that’s why we can’t seem to have nice things. Any society we create will have some capitalists in it. Some people are just competitive. And capitalism is a way of keeping score. It’s not true of all people, but it’s true of some. Enough to cause trouble. Any advanced society we may one day have will need a sort of pressure valve for capitalists that will allow them to feel like they’re gaining the upper hand over their fellow man. Without a way to indulge those impulses they will always undermine any collectivist society they find themselves in. They’re just something that needs to be managed. Investment can be innocuous, or it can be evil, it is almost never good. In the rare case that good does come from investment it is short lived because capitalism is corrosive. The intent to win at capitalism will always determine the decisions capitalists make, so over time everything good they create will ultimately turn to shit.
I don’t think a bunch of people pitching in to fund a company is in and of itself a bad thing, but there are several considerations that are extensions of that that stray into unethical territory. foremost is the matter of fiduciary responsibility. When a company is publicly traded they have a legal responsibility to put money in the investor’s pockets, and that shapes the behavior of that company in ways that can be very harmful. Intent shapes action, and the imperative to provide profits to investors changes whatever intention that company may have had when it was founded. It means if the company has a choice between fulfilling that imperative or doing something to reduce harm to the world around them they will always make the decision that fulfills the intention. Where if your intention is just to be the best at something, or to provide a service, you would make a different set of decisions. The biggest example that’s particularly central in public consciousness right now is the health industry. Health insurance companies have the ability to ensure that their customers are well taken care of and that healthcare is accessible, but providing healthcare isn’t the point. Providing profit to their shareholders is the point, so in every situation where the profit, and the doing the right thing, conflict they will always choose the former because that’s the whole reason they’re doing it in the first place. Even if the CEO wanted to lead the company in a more ethical direction they couldn’t do so without courting legal action, if the investors believe their decisions aren’t maximizing profits. Multiply this by time and companies gradually become worse, even if they started out great. Enshitification isn’t just for the internet. Often this leads to unethical ends, as in the health insurance example where it causes thousands of deaths each year. A lot of it depends on whether the demand for something is fixed or elastic. Say you wanted to purchase a lot of something as an investment, if that thing is FunCo Pop figurines and you’re hoarding them banking that they’ll increase in value due to scarcity could be sold later at a markup. People can take or leave FunCo Pops, They can choose not to spend their money on your marked up collectibles. Hoarding them would be a dick move, but not necessarily unethical. If the thing you’re buying up is water the landscape changes. People need water, every single person needs water. That demand is not elastic, people have to have it or they literally die. If you hoarded that resource so that you could sell it at a higher price, and that prices some people out of being able to access water, it’s more than unethical. It’s straight up wicked. Your intention isn’t to provide water. It’s to maximise your profits, and thus your decisions will always be guided by those priorities. It’s nuanced. But not very difficult to understand. The world could change for the better, but the profit margins are too slim to make it a worthwhile goal for a savvy capitalist.
Every house that is owned for an investment contributes to the high price of housing. People shouldn’t own homes if they’re not going to make them a home. It’s unethical in my view to hoard real estate.
I’ve got to be honest. It’s a non issue for me. I can’t figure out why people always get so pissed off about it, or why those people are usually the least likely to have interacted with an immigrant (legal or otherwise). Seriously, what do they care? I don’t think governments have any right to disrupt the natural flow of people from one place to another.
All the military guys i’ve ever met have been super racist so I’m not counting on it.
An unwitting psy-op asset is the best kind of psy-op asset. What Putin famously called, useful idiots.
Ok, so biden can officially order the assassination of the right wing supreme court justices and Trump, then appoint replacement judges and lobby congress for a constitutional amendment permanently stripping presidents of their absolute immunity. Since his orders would have occurred while he had immunity, he’d be in the clear, he’d have illustrated the flaw in the ruling, removed a dangerous individual, and prevented future abuses. Win.
Yes, because america falling into fascism would be a bad thing for literally everyone. If you think the USA is bad now, you haven’t seen anything yet.
I’ve used one called “manything” (Monitor anything). It turns your obsolete cellphones and tablets into a network of web accessible security cameras.
The Democrats are constantly cutting their own hamstrings by courting the conservatives base rather than their own base. That’s why they always lose. Too many Chuck Schumers, not enough AOCs. The mainstream dems can’t stop suckling the corporate teet long enough to notice they’re getting played.