they were haranguing you for proof socialism works in the USA. I have the answer
they were haranguing you for proof socialism works in the USA. I have the answer
american socialist enclaves: the swamp maroons, the anabaptists
that’s not funding.
I seem to recall that the anonymity of car is based on obscuring transactions through bundling, but that method was deanonymized by poisoning wallrts somehow. this was like 10 years ago so my memory is fuzzy.
i came here from the modlog and i just want to say that i think the removal is fine(ish), and the comment to which i’m replying is, basically, wrong, but the mod’s explanation is also wrong and needs to be called out.
everything is political, even birth control, and it would be even if no one was trying to ban it (though i think it was inevitable that this is the case). birth control is a means by which people who can become pregnant can actively choose to prevent that. pregnancy comes with a variety of political expectations and consequences, and so choosing to prevent pregnancy is political.
as for the mask thing, i do think that there are some very-online right wingers who would have the same analysis as the user to whom i am responding, but, in fact, that reasoning is a desire to avoid political entanglement, so it is not actually an explanation of how masking is political. it’s also not the case that wearing the mask is carrying a banner for fauci, although i believe there are factions on the right who see it this way.
so, to reiterate, removing was fine (though probably unnecessary), the commenter is a dum dum, but the mod doesn’t know what “political” means and that is a really bad omen for this sub.
i thought monero’s mixer was show to be susceptible to poisoning.
His video on First Past the Post voting should be mandatory to watch.
he doesn’t actually state in that video what should be the biggest takeaway: strategic voting is what leads to consolidation of parties, so your best interest longterm is to vote your values, even if doing so has a likelihood of losing short term.
enough people going vegan would probably have a noticeable effect on the animal agriculture industry.
certainly, but perhaps not the effect you are expecting. your assertion that you know what their reaction would be, and that it would be to accept making less money, is just not likely true.
i think most people have degrees to all of their feelings.
has anyone else ever been able to repeat your results?
so your want is binary either you do want it, or you don’t, and there are no degrees?
it is never the less there.
this sounds like a statement of faith, rather than fact.
Yeah, I stopped, and it has had an impact.
great! can you show me on this chart?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/meat-production-tonnes?tab=chart&country=~OWID_WRL
can you see how your want is not quantifiable? how much did you want a hamburder? could you have wanted it less? would that have decreased the supply? this is pure storytelling.
I’d like to see evidence of the opposite happening to be honest.
gladly. despite the high value of faberge eggs, no more are produced. despite the high value of epipens, enough have not been produced to make them affordable to all who might want one. of course, this doesn’t actually quantify demand, and i’m still not sure how that can be done.
edit:
despite no demand for iphones in 2004, they were subsequently produced.
The goal of the business was to make money so when their product stopped making money they stopped producing it.
but they could have changed their values. they could have decided that the goal was not to make money, but to cover the earth, nay, the solar system with vcrs. but they didnt. they chose other values, and tried to act in a way that would uphold those values. they choose the values. they choose the action. i have no resposibility for others choices in this regard.
a moment of introspection here will show you that, in fact, this is about as close to the truth as you’re ever going to get. all economic theory is storytelling. you happen to like some particular stories better than others, and so you choose to believe them (and even repeat them as though tehy are true). but they are not True in an objective sense. there is no scientific experiment that can be constructed to test these claims which would satisfy the skepticism of a critical rationalist inquiry.
that’s fine. i believe (or act like i believe) lots of stories that i can’t prove the truth of, which are actually unprovable. we all do. just don’t try to pretend it’s science.
but global supply has increased since then. you also haven’t quantified demand.
you said they don’t make them, but that was a lie, and i called it out.
copying isn’t stealing