Well the debate should be over whether the taxes cause things to be expensive or it’s corporate greed causing things to be expensive.
Next time you see one of the ubiquitous Poilievre ads claiming it’s taxes that’s making things unaffordable, think about where the problems actually are.
Yeah I was talking about TVs… we are discussing movies after all. Moreover, TVs that the average person has.
There’s a huge jump in quality between the TVs the average person has now compared to 20+ years ago.
Yeah but I’m a little old fashioned so I like to sit on my couch and watch things. And you can get a TV that’s insanely better than anything that existed a decade ago for the price of a good smart phone.
The huge improvements in TV screens have a lot to do with it too, I think.
When we only had CRT screens at home it was a big jump in quality to go to the theater. But when you have a 4K screen in your living room, there’s less reason to go to the theater.
Yup, the death of cinema has more to do with inconsiderate assholes and big screen TVs being affordable now.
Sorry to Marty Scorsese, but I’m not going to the cinema to see some septuagenarians talk about a hit they did decades ago for three and a half hours.
Yeah and I feel like the Balrog could sense the presence of a Maiar nearby.
But maybe that’s just a Star Wars Force thing, I don’t really know how magic works in LOTR.
Which world do you live in? People voted for Donald Trump, a guy who wanted to shoot BLM protestors and says he’ll let Israel do whatever they want.
The edgelord bullshit only makes you popular with people that agree with you. It has demonstrably failed to bring people to the causes you care about.
I am “what have the Romans ever done for us?”
Yeah and it was Vladimir Putin the year after that. So we had the Internet for a year until Putin came along and fucked it all up.
Then they had Zuckerberg in 2010, Trump in 2016, Musk in 2021. Nice reference to get a feel for optimism in certain times while also being able to track some things going to shit.
Getting some Pol Pot vibes from this. Ideology can lead to some really weird conclusions.
Somone like Taylor Swift isn’t destroying people’s lives and she’s not overworking other people to make that money.
Sure she has too much money, but that can be solved by having more sensible tax policies. Show me where she’s bribing congress and donating to the GOP to keep her taxes low.
These kinds of memes only exist to prove how edgy people are but they don’t accomplish anything. Saying “I’m so hardcore I even hate the billionaires people like” doesn’t do anything other than push people away from whatever movement you claim to support.
But congratulations, you’re the edgiest socialist edge lord on the internet. That sound you hear is the Swifties (who might otherwise care about the issues you care about) heading towards the door.
People like Elon Musk and Donald Trump divide people so they don’t think about what they’re doing. You’re helping them.
The gait stuff is good. But I feel like it might be easier to stash a change of clothes somewhere rather then sewing up something that converts into something else.
It sucks when playing by the rules too.
Last game of monopoly we played strictly by the rules with four players. So I’m coming around the board and can know the the most likely outcome is that I’m going to land on a property with a hotel and go bankrupt. According to the rules I’d have to hand over all of my properties to that person that person just won the game even though there would still be three players. There’s nearly zero probability that someone with a big pile of cash that owns half the properties with hotels on a bunch of them already will ever lose.
So before rolling the dice, I sold all of my houses. Band made a couple of deals with the youngest family member in the game. First deal, I bought the electric company for all the money I had. Second deal, I sold all of my property (including the electric company) for $1 to that same player. Rolled the dice and as expected, landed on a property with a hotel. Handed over the $1 I had and I was out. This is all fine to do within the rules.
It actually made for an interesting game after that because the players left were evenly matched. But not everyone saw it that way so we never played again.
Really the properties should go back to the bank if someone goes bankrupt, otherwise a game with more than two people is effectively over as soon as the the first person goes bankrupt. Still nothing you can do about someone just setting up someone else to win by making a bad deal (whether intentionally or not).
It’s just kinda a shit game no matter what you do.
Or maybe the Redditors are refugees and the lemmy nativists have convinced themselves they are eating their pets.
Yeah, Yoda became a parody of his character in ESB.
In ESB he comes across as someone that’s speaking in a second language. Sometimes he mixes up the grammar, especially when emotional and trying to speak quickly, but when he’s more relaxed and speaking slowly (or saying something simple) he usually gets it right.
In other portrayals it feels more like he’s got brain damage.
IMO it should even be hashed on the client side before being sent so that it doesn’t show up as plaintext in any http requests or logs. Then salted and hashed again server side before being stored (or checked for login).
But if someone got that hashed version they could hack the client to have client side hashing code just send that hashed value to the server. You’d want to have the server to send a rotating token of some sort to use for encrypting the password on the client and then validate it on the server side that it was encrypted with the same token the server sent.
Seems complicated to me… https is probably has good enough encryption, so eh, whatever.
Voting Green has the exact same effect as not voting. Yeah, it shouldn’t be that way, but it’s the way it is. There’s wanting the ideal system where third party votes matter and there’s pretending it already is an ideal system
You don’t get to an ideal system by voting for people that won’t have any power to change things. You make a difference by writing to and calling the people who do have power and ensure the people you call are at least sympathetic to what you want.
It is indeed not that complicated.
A ranked choice type system would mean a third party wouldn’t be just something that screws up elections. In fact it would probably really benefit Democrats as people who might not go to vote otherwise might go vote green as their top pick and then vote Democrat as their second pick. If the Green candidate won, that’s someone they could make some compromises with to get legislation passed. If the green candidate loses, then many of their votes would go to the Dem candidate making it more likely they would win.
Twice in this century a GOP candidate has won the EC without winning the popular vote. So it’s obvious why the Democrats would want to get rid of that.
But as it stands voting third party (or not voting) is just letting everyone else decide how things should be. The way it works now is you vote for the candidate most likely to care about your concerns (and who could feasibly win) and write to them and tell them what you want. Yeah it’s a pain in the ass to write to a representative, but it’s more likely to have an effect than anything you write on the internet. Be polite, tell them the things you want that can be reasonably be implemented. Also you’re probably going to have to vote in many elections to get what you want. But if it’s something you really care about you’re willing to vote in as many elections and write to your rep as many times as needed to get it done.
It takes time, but it’s more effective than doing nothing.
If you actually want a potential President Kamala Harris to have some good legislation to sign, you might want to consider voting for congressional candidates that will write the kind of legislation you want. And if you want to end the Electorial College bullshit, you might consider voting for state reps. And while you’re there, you may as well vote for Harris if for no other reason than you might someday say to your grandkids that you voted for the first woman President. That’s a better story to tell than explaining about how you were too angsty about “the system” to bother going out to vote.
Well the government can break up corporations which results in more competition. They can also enforce standards which also allows more competition. This gives people more options so they can’t just set prices in a monopolistic way.
Unfortunately there’s not much the Canadian government can do about Walmart and Microsoft as they aren’t Canadian companies. And Kamala’s opportunity economy has been cancelled so it doesn’t look there’s going to be any positive change in the US for foreseeable future.
But they could break up Loblaw’s at least.