Chetzemoka

Yeah but they might be pro antipsychotics after watching the Treason Caucus in action in the House

You wouldn't have support for the UAW, writer's, and Kaiser healthcare strikes, if the rail strike caused the general public to go without power and water. Blame the idiot people who favor their comfort over other people's lives, same as it ever was. But you absolutely would have seen the public turn against strikes, if that had happened.

And of course they walked away with only part of what they came in asking. That is how negotiations work.

The only thing I came away feeling from the whole situation is that if those rail services are so critical to the basic functioning of this country that we can't afford a strike and the government needs to step into negotiations, then we should be nationalizing this industry. Period. It should not be permitted to be in the hands of a corporation.

As a nurse who's currently working to bring a nursing union into our hospital, I love you guys. Thank you for the support.

The house my parents bought when I was a teenager had red shag carpet. You wanna talk about horrific

Every time you hear some edgelord on the internet suggest we exterminate all the world's poor people to "solve" climate change, always remember that Thomas Malthus was wrong:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism

I mean, we're fast approaching the 3rd anniversary of my first Covid vaccine dose, and I'm still waiting to drop dead the way they promised.

Exactly what I was just thinking. This exact realization is a significant plot point in the book

I believe science because I understand science, and I'm also religious. So no, it doesn't work like that lol. It's not one or the other. It's two different ways of making sense of the world that should only be applied to the arenas of life that are within their scope.

Animals exist, you know. Environmental damage from a wall comes from much more than just the construction phase. Environmental damage from a wall is also ongoing

It's a huge problem in the towns and cities immediately on the other side of the border and that's the primary concern here. Imagine where you live and 671 unhoused and unfed human beings walked into your town every. single. day. No local municipality in the world has the resources to deal with that. It has to be the federal government.

That's not to suggest that building walls in the wilderness is an effective intervention. But it is an unfortunately popular one. It must be coupled with federal programs to receive, house, and find work for the people arriving at areas not blocked by a wall.

But the people living in those border towns don't deserve to be burdened with a problem created by federal government policies. The feds need to fix the problem.

This tracks closely with my own personal mythology that sheep when seen from a distance on a hillside are actually unicorns.

The Center for Election Science disagrees and says that RCV is more likely to encourage extremist candidates:

"Tactical Voting

Approval voting performs rather well in the face of tactical voting. Like any voting method, approval voting does have tactics and strategy such as the “threshold strategy“. Under basic assumptions with tactical voting, approval voting elects beat-all winners (Condorcet winners) when they exist. Computer simulations using Bayesian regret calculations (shown at bottom) demonstrate better utility outcomes in elections using approval voting versus RCV even if all approval voters were tactical and all RCV voters were honest.

RCV is susceptible to tactical exaggeration. This is so much so that when voters are tactical, RCV can degenerate approximately into ordinary plurality voting. Note how approval does not degenerate into plurality. RCV’s tactical vulnerability can also mean voters do not rank their favorite candidate as first."

https://electionscience.org/library/approval-voting-versus-irv/