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
@x_minus_t@mstdn.social I mean, Democrats were the ones relying on student debt to fund democratic programs.
It's a distraction to talk about Republicans when this was a Democratic plan that is now being attacked by Democrats.
@WarnerCrocker It's up to all of us.
If we decide differently, things will be different.
We should not accept disempowerment.
@dalfen there is absolutely no chance that MTG would become speaker.
She doesn't have support from either Democrats or Republicans to make that happen.
@WarnerCrocker Well like so many topics it comes from all of us, we need more education in the general population so that we can stop reelecting the same officials who keep failing us and demand better.
I suggest we educate all of us better.
So, you know, no, there's no optimism that things are going to get better any time soon 🙂
@micchiato@mastodon.social a legacy of respecting our ability to own things without the president being able to come in and just take them?
Workers being able to own things?
Heaven forbid!
Yes, that is a legacy worth upholding.
@SallyStrange Nice conspiracy theory you have there.
@mrcopilot Well it's more of an executive branch issue than judicial branch at this point.
@WarnerCrocker It's the difference between could versus will.
Yes, that political option is on the table. No, there's no realistic chance that the politicians that we have elected will take that option.
@newsopinionsandviews this is the kind of reporting that makes people lose faith in institutions like CNN.
We know that the whole backstory about overturning the election are incompatible with a basic civics education of the election process, and yet outlets like CNN promote the myth.
And so they lose the faith of the public
@WarnerCrocker Well of course it has a lot to do with politics since political decisions impacted the money supply which impacted the prices charged for that money.
@Sheril and this is exactly why we shouldn't be leaving such decisions up to such people in the first place.
And it's not how the system was designed.
So the problem is not that there's a lack of diversity among the decision makers. The problem is that these people should not be making such decisions in the first place.
@fkamiah17 Well that's a ridiculous perspective, kind of a gaslighty one, since clearly we are not responsible for multiple reasons.
Just not a factually possible position.
@dougiec3 No, that's not how the Supreme Court works.
The court isn't dragging out a decision. It's working through its normal process, this is a normal timeline for it. And you can contrast it with the rushed decision on the election ballot issue to see why it normally takes its time.
Speculation about things like that are unhelpful at best, and flat out misleading and conspiratorial at worst.
The Supreme Court is by design slow to act. There are two other branches that are meant to be quick, the Supreme Court is the counterweight to them.
@realcaseyrollins Oh God no TikTok is the worst.
In fact if I heard that a podcast was being advertised on tiktok, that would be a sign that it's not worth listening to, that it appeals to the same superficial audience that that platform appeals to.
I find podcasts mostly by reading articles and other sorts of reports, finding out that the authors of interesting reports participate in podcasts, and then checking them out.
Who's talking about ridiculousness? We're talking about the lack of hoarding, so if he is spending ridiculously instead of hoarding, then he's still not hoarding, which is the point.
You think it's ridiculous that he's not hoarding, well, sounds like that's something you need to work out in your own head.
I would say that it's a good thing such a ridiculous person just gave up a bunch of his money. Good thing that money is no longer sitting in the bank account of a ridiculous person.
So this is a sign that rich people don't hoard their money. You seem to think that this is a particularly ridiculous rich person, so even better that he's not hoarding his money.
@avlcharlie ridiculousness is certainly subjective
@rwg It's not about profit or non-profit, but about the way the act is written today already, it seems like there's a loophole that could be exploited based on statement of purpose.
I honestly don't care in the least about profit versus non-profit since in the real world so often that just comes down to accounting trickery. And it would be the same here with regard to social media.
This is exactly my point!
Notice how he spent? Instead of hoarded?
Bezos could have hoarded that money, but then he'd have lost out on the benefits of buying this property, which is exactly how our society gives very enticing alternatives to hoarding.
Bezos will never fill his moneypit because he has so much benefit in actually spending the money instead.
@KathyLK that sort of end run around the democratic process is what landed us in this position in the first place.
It's also just not a very successful strategy. This sort of thing has been tried plenty, and the 1st Amendment just doesn't work that way.
@jackiegardina it goes to emphasize that such compromise needs to come out of legislative branches to be durable, not through courts of unaccountable judges.
It was a compromise, but it didn't come from the branch of government with ability and responsibility for establishing compromises, which is part of why it failed.
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:
