Kichae

joined 2 years ago
[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago (7 children)

they got the A and B buttons backward

I can't tell if you're joking or what

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

No matter where you are on the political spectrum … the government will always pay for the poor.

They're OK with the government paying for the poor, so long as the government is paying them for the poor.

Private prisons. HMOs and private hospitals. Company towns. Privatized services.

The problem with basic income is that it keeps the power to choose in the hands of the person. They'd be all too happy to have the government foot the bill directly for things, with the rider that they're the one's being paid.

The issue is always one of control. Money is just a medium for exercising that control. UBI puts control into the hands of the receiver -- the poor, the unworthy.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 years ago

Yeah, the bit about people not being able to understand is an overly condescending way to phrase it, and is a cop-out. But we also see people at large completely missing the issue by trying to project their own experiences with The System onto the ultra wealthy.

Like, the number of times I've seen people astronomical income tax rates to deal with billionaires highlights both a misunderstanding of what income taxes actually tax, and how the economic elite generate their wealth.

No one is out there calling for a tax on unrealized capital gains, for instance. And while some people are lobbying for a wealth tax, the tax rates proposed are very small, which makes reactionaries quick to reject them.

It's not that we plebs cannot understand, it's that most of us just straight up do not understand, and choose to ignore that fact.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

That's not what they said at all. That's not even an uncharitable read of it. Indignant, impotent anger does in no way change the fact that costs are a deterrant, even to those who can pass the costs along, and that making certain business choices more expensive than others disincentivises those choices.

The simple fact is, we pay for the sins of those who come before us. We pay for the sins of those who voted for lax governance of business, reduction of environmental protections, the breakdown of antitrust protections, and the weakening of labour laws.

We pay figuratively, and we pay literally.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 years ago (6 children)

So, "no" then? Your answer is "no". Being a cranky fuckwad in your non-answer doesn't make it noy a non-answer.

What is your better idea for combating climate change? Because, from what I've seen, critics of the carbon tax are acting in bad faith even if they believe it's ineffectual, because they all choose to ignore the associated rebate, while also refusing to address climate change in any way.

So, what's your better plan?

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago

Also, corporations aren't "someones".

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This.

There's no "fediverse" to join. It's not an actual place with boundaries and codified rules, beyond those imposed by the communication protocol.

It's a free association content sharing network, and free association includes the freedom to not associate.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Feel more 1337 than everyone else.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 58 points 2 years ago (9 children)

The simple fact of the matter is, the Fediverse is public. It's a space specifically built on sharing. Finding your posts is trivial, and that's by design. Blocking another account from viewing your posts is an incredibly weak hurdle for someone to overcome, and it informs them that you have blocked them.

If anything, doing so risks the possibility of escalating or accelerating harassment.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But a federation is fragmentation. If the only thing that doesn't help reddit is another centralized system, then that's really just a claim that private ownership of the internet is good, actually, so long as we like the owners.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 27 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The only thing that seems to have changed is that he stopped pretending in public. Fired his PR people or something. Interviews with people who have... experienced him first hand point to his behaviour being consistent and repugnant since he was in his early 20s.

There is no mixed bag. Just the desire in people who once believed in him to pretend that they didn't enable a toxic narcissist.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

I run 90 minute sessions after supper for my step-son, and the breakdown is generally narrative update/skills encounter/battle, with the potential for overlap between neighbours. So, usually once per session.

view more: ‹ prev next ›