volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
This image is flat out false. Their tax rate is much higher.
The question before the Supreme Court is not whether the student loan bailout is fair or not. The question is whether a president can act unilaterally against the laws passed by our democratic system.
I mean, it was the GOP that expanded the standard deduction so that the poor will get a tax break...
Yeah that's right. I'm a troll because I actually quote the Supreme Court when talking about what the Supreme Court may have said.
Be warned.
Facts, man, they troll you, they are inconvenient, sometimes they don't say what sensationalized media outfits try to sell, and that's annoying.
The ruling says the exact opposite, it says that because the wealthy elite have a fire hose of cash, the rest of us need a way to compete with that, so the ruling is 100% about addressing that issue.
Kennedy is explicit about this in the ruling.
In the ruling he points out that because of that fire hose the rest of us need more ability to compete, so because of that fire hose the government cannot stop us from joining forces and trying to compete against it.
The entire point of the CU decision is to counter the fire hose.
@lymphomation @TCatInReality @MaierAmsden
What in the world does Fox have to do with us reading the opinion directly from the Supreme Court's website?
What are you on about?
@MaierAmsden @lymphomation @TCatInReality
That's the opposite of what he wrote in the opinion, as he said the rest of us need to be able to fight against the wealthy.
@TheOldGuy no is emphatically opposite!
wtf are you talking about?
Just sharing memes doesn't convince anybody of anything
What do you think the party is, then?
I don't think I'm confusing the voters with the party. I think I am emphatically embracing the difference to say that the party has not had the plank that you think.
That's the one.
She makes very very good content that I really appreciate.
What are you talking about? Afraid to reject him? No they flat out voted against his people. They weren't afraid they said no, loudly as can be.
Oh what's her name, the armor lady. She had really good content and then curiosityStream decided to drop her.
So I was out.
What are you talking about? The GOP rejected him in the elections which is part of why his candidates lost so many.
Me, I canceled my #curiositystream subscription when they showed themselves to be so intolerant.
I often think about how I do wish we had the word idiot to describe somebody who is uninformed or otherwise simply incapable of making good public policy decisions.
I'd like it to be not even a judgmental word. I think government should be a thing that works, so that most people don't even have to think about it at all. Most people can go about their lives, reading books, seeking fulfillment, and just living without thinking about whatever's happening in capitols. That's the ideal.
So yeah, reclaim idiot! It doesn't mean a dumb person, it just means a person who's not up to date on politics and therefore doesn't really have informed opinions!
Ah well, that's not going to catch on.
Well that's stupid.
The long standing hostility toward the very idea of home rule in DC has a lot to do with the idea of that no local government should control the place that the entire national assembly meets to discuss national issues.
It has nothing to do with race. It has to do with the practicalities of running a national government.
How in the world do you get from the Supreme Court's position that we should all be allowed to speak truth to power to the idea of steamrolling speech?
The Citizens United decision was fundamentally about the exact opposite, saying that we should all be able to speak up, that we should not leave the speech to the elites.
Kennedy was explicit about this in his writing in the decision.
He specifically said that the elites can already speak, but it's the rest of us who get our microphones taken away under the rules that were in question here.
@MaierAmsden @lymphomation @TCatInReality
What specific language abuse did Kennedy commit?
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
