Not quite as simple as checkboxes, but the ability is there to some degree!

We recommend four widely applicable high-impact (i.e. low emissions) actions with the potential to contribute to systemic change and substantially reduce annual personal emissions: having one fewer child (an average for developed countries of 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent (tCO2e) emission reductions per year), living car-free (2.4 tCO2e saved per year), avoiding airplane travel (1.6 tCO2e saved per roundtrip transatlantic flight) and eating a plant-based diet (0.8 tCO2e saved per year). These actions have much greater potential to reduce emissions than commonly promoted strategies like comprehensive recycling (four times less effective than a plant-based diet) or changing household lightbulbs (eight times less).

^{https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541/pdf}

stoicism

https://existentialcomics.com/comic/69

Agreed. This is not a wealth tax, this is the rich realizing that they’ve squeezed nearly all they can out of the lower classes. They must now pivot to squeezing the middle class harder to continue building their dragonesque hoard.

Will? They have feasted upon us.

All this time I thought we’d eat the rich. Turns out they’ll eventually just eat each other instead.

The main difference is who owns the means of production. In communism, the government does. In socialism, the people do.

What would we call a hybrid system in which the government is made up of the people and owns the means of production? Direct Democratic Communism?

Edit to add:

A federation (also called a federal state) is an entity characterized by a union of partially self-governing provinces, states, or other regions under a federal government (federalism). In a federation, the self-governing status of the component states, as well as the division of power between them and the central government, is constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision, neither by the component states nor the federal political body without constitutional amendment.

Seems relevant considering “The Federation”.

Anomie is a real word and it is fascinating to read about, if you’re into sociology.

Thank you for mentioning FairEmail, and thank you @wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world, for elaborating on what makes it great.

Thanks to your recommendations I installed it last night and paid the $6 one-time license fee to unlock the advanced features. Being able to set custom notification sounds per sender is a feature I’ve been wanting on my phone for years. I finally have it now and it’s already changing my life for the better.

This is some top tier mental gymnastics. Holy shit, I hope you’re a troll. You’re literally on the internet discussing your plans to commit fraud. Mensa-level shit, here.

People are going to buy CP one way or another… that means you should make it and sell it to them, right?

Grow the fuck up, and maybe train a LLM on ethics, you’re going to need some education on the subject if you hope to stay out of prison.

Even if you wanted to vote for Biden you won’t be able to because he’s not going to be on the ballot either.

Edit: Obviously Biden is going to be on the ballot, I made this comment just to see how the person I was replying to would reply. Their original post is a lie (Trump will still be on the ballot), and their reply to my comment confirms that they’re either a failing comedian or intentional misinformation spreader.

I’m not sure about that, as I’ve seen conflicting information. Medicare has existed for around 60 years, and not only have patients been more satisfied with their care on average than people with private insurance, the costs have also been lower than private insurance overall. Couple those factors with metrics from the most recent study I was able to find on the cost of single payer, and the picture seems a bit muddier than you’re presenting it.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8170543/

https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/how-much-more-than-medicare-do-private-insurers-pay-a-review-of-the-literature/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/universal-health-care-could-have-saved-more-than-330-000-u-s-lives-during-covid/

https://ysph.yale.edu/news-article/yale-study-more-than-335000-lives-could-have-been-saved-during-pandemic-if-us-had-universal-health-care/

Okay, thank you. I wasn’t sure. Why couldn’t they just pay them 50k and lobby for single payer to save money? It seems like you’re suggesting that they’d have to raise wages if single payer was implemented? Maybe I’m still confused, because it still seems like they’d save money in the long run?

Please forgive my ignorance on the topic. You seem to know a lot about it. Are you saying that they save more money than the insurance costs them?

Wow! Companies could sure save a lot of money if they lobbied for single-payer! I wonder why they don’t! 🤔

👍

Let’s discuss this:

Belittling people is rarely a good dialectical tactic, and speaks to your own level of maturity. If this is the type of discourse employed by green party supporters and campaign volunteers, I’ll be staying away.

Based on what I’ve seen of your post history here, you’re a combative ideologue who’s not interested in building anything other than ill-will, with seemingly zero desire to talk about anything that doesn’t give you an opportunity to aggressively proselytize. You seem to turn every conversation you have into an abrasive display of your moral superiority, repeating the same talking points ad nauseum while abandoning any points that shift out of your favor.

Perhaps you hope that you can activate non-voters with your accusatory, venomous, divisive rhetoric, but I struggle to see how that strategy will be beneficial should a Green candidate make it to the Presidency. Coalition building with the Democratic party will absolutely be necessary to get Green legislation through congress early on; It seems short-sighted to belittle and alienate those who vote closest to your interests on the political spectrum by equating them with those who vote furthest from your interests. Ideals are important, but game theory underpins all political action and must be considered.

Further, RCV does not require the Green party to be implemented. Many states have been experimenting with RCV (and other alternative voting systems) without leadership from the Green party (source). That trend has been picking up steam across the nation.

There’s a lot to unpack with that quote, and a full analysis requires us to consider the functions that opium served at the time Marx wrote. Asprin would not be invented for another 15 years after Marx died. Laudanum and morphine, both opiates, were extremely common pain-management tools of the era.

The full quote (supposing you like this particular translation), sheds some light on the context:

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

While I feel that the modern interpretation of (the snippet of) his quote is apropos, I think it’s also good to analyze what he was actually trying to say. These days I interpret Marx to be trying to essentially say “Religion serves as a painkiller for people exploited and/or alienated by a capitalist society.”

But I’m interested in hearing other perspectives, if you disagree!

Here’s some further reading on that particular quote. Bear in mind, I don’t necessarily agree with all the perspectives presented by them:

https://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2015/01/karl-marx-on-religion/comment-page-1/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_of_the_people

https://cunninghamjeff.medium.com/karl-marx-was-a-capitalist-8a71138418fd#

https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2021/04/identity-politics-opium-of-the-people

You caught me. I still daily drive Chrome. I am an on-again off-again Firefox user and have been for nearly 2 decades.

That said, I appreciate that input. I’ve been working on switching over to using Firefox as my daily driver, but it’s going to take some time for me to fully transition, unless you know of an extension or script that can migrate all my chrome tabs over to Firefox. I’m curious to see if it can handle my full browsing habits, now that they’ve evolved into what most would consider “tab hoarder” behavior.

Reposting a comment I wrote in another thread that explains it:

Bookmarks are for things I’ll need to reference again and again in the coming years. I do keep a tightly-curated bookmark collection, I just don’t want it clogged up with a bunch of stuff I can’t foresee needing in the long term.

Tabs are for things I’m working on right now and don’t need bookmarking for the long term. And, for what it’s worth, most of the browser windows are custom-titled, so the windows themselves are a lot like bookmark folders, while the tabs are like temporary bookmarks.

Plus, the ability to search through tabs by hitting Ctrl+Shift+A means that it ends up being faster to search through my tabs than my bookmarks, without using the mouse. ex: Ctrl+Shift+A, Type needed page, up/down arrows if needed, then hit enter to move to the tab. With Ctrl+Shift+O, you don’t get the same ease of scrolling the results without tabbing through a bunch of junk first.

There are other reasons, including neurological ones surely, but those are my primary justifications.