volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@CindyWeinstein sounds notably lacking in self-awareness...

@SouthBaySwingLeft

Well right, plans for healthcare need to be developed in the other branch of government with support from professional expertise outside of the White House.

God help us if the White House ever has a plan for healthcare....

@adamasnemesis

The way Trump works, some low-level uninformed person within his earshot had to say it, and he just jumped on it without any thought as to how it would be done or what implications it would have.

So we haven't heard about it before because it's not a plan that was particularly developed, just the latest thing to pop into his head and fall out of his mouth.

It's his normal pattern.

@askans funny, the video won't play here saying "sorry, can't get the video due to follow constraints" or something like that.

It's like Fediverse is protecting itself!

But really I probably agree, we do have algorithms here, we just pretend like chronological is not an algorithm.

@askans funny, the video won't play here saying "sorry, can't get the video due to follow constraints" or something like that.

It's like Fediverse is protecting itself!

But really I probably agree, we do have algorithms here, we just pretend like chronological is not an algorithm.

@lispi314 have you checked out IPFS?

@Snoro meh. The science says otherwise.

@Zardoz probably because the opportunity costs of locking up capital for that loan are just not really practical.

@moira citation needed

@markmetz this really doesn't make much sense considering that both Trump and Vance have been pushing for Congress to fund SNAP.

@FluentInFinance But the bank also loses because the money it loans out can't be used for other investments.

A diversion of capital for half a century is worth something after all.

@yogthos can you be specific as to how it has enabled genocide?

Yeah... right...

@LevZadov Well more importantly, I didn't realize they had asked the third question that actually did involve overturning the previous decision.

I suspect that they will not accept the third question, if they accept the case at all, but we shall see.

The third question is a bit of a reach outside of the main issue being brought before the Court.

@museumphile a lot of the things that he said here are just not factually true, though.

This is sensationalism, we need to call it out when we see it.

Heck, we have a real problem in the US right now with the public losing faith in experts, and this sort of thing does not help.

@fromjason What in the world?

I think you missed when I said there's a whole lot of people who see through the snake oil.

Oh it's not just me, and that's the whole point as to why this stuff doesn't fly in the rest of the country.

It's not that people don't want things to be better. It's that there are A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE who know better than to believe politicians selling the same old policies that necessarily end up being so regressive.

New York seems to have a history of electing politicians who really can't get the job done. Just look at Democratic leadership in Congress right now. We could be doing so much better, except for some reason we keep electing these guys who can't seem to manage anything.

Democrats could be running Congress right now, except we keep electing these guys who really don't know how the world works.

@LevZadov No that is not what's happening in this case.

The legality of same-sex marriage is not at all being questioned by this case. Instead it's a case about procedures and penalties to be applied under state law toward ministerial offices. It has nothing to do with whether same-sex marriage is legal.

Unfortunately there are a lot of very misleading sensationalized headlines going around.

@Slyence No, that is not at all what the Supreme Court is weighing.

Yes, there have been a lot of clickbait headlines, but that's not the question before the Supreme Court. They are not talking about overturning that ruling at all.

They are talking about a procedural issue involving a lower court engaging with a particular ministerial punishment. Completely different thing.

@fromjason sometimes the reason we don't do things is because they are actually harmful, and stand in the way of doing the things that will make things better.

That's the case there.

The things that they are proposing in NYC will actually make things worse for every day New Yorkers because they don't understand how the world works or how we got here in the first place.

We absolutely can make things better. Unfortunately, that administration doesn't understand the problem, and so instead of making things better, they will be made worse.

We've tried those solutions before, and they didn't work, and they're not going to work this time either.

@fromjason

We all want affordable housing and healthcare.

It's just that most of us realize that Mamdoni is selling snake oil and plans that, should they be implemented, will make these problems even worse.

If the voters of NYC are so naive that they would elect the guy, well I guess that works there, but other parts of the country see through him and would reject him.