deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This has the added benefit of being literally true.
Reinvesting in education is really the only way America is ever going to solve the foundational issues with its democracy. Unfortunately, education is now one of the most highly-politicized topics in American culture, so… yeah, not looking great.
I don’t think it’s fair to just dump all the blame on corporate media. The news media landscape hasn’t meaningfully changed since Trump was first elected, but despite having 8 years to formulate a sound media strategy the DNC is still campaigning like it’s 2015.
Like, sure, the Democrats are running with a handicap in the current media landscape, but that isn’t new, and it’s the responsibility of the DNC to figure out how to overcome that disadvantage — a task that the current leadership has proven itself woefully incompetent at.
I don’t think this would have the effect that you want in practice. One of the biggest obstacles Democrats face is getting their own voters to care enough to vote. Republicans, despite being less popular as a percentage of Americans, don’t struggle nearly as much getting their supporters to the polls.
Adding additional barriers to voting will decrease voter turnout across the board, and this will absolutely hurt Democrats more than it will hurt Republicans.
That’s not a choice any of us have.
Not voting is a choice.
Like it or not, this is what America chose. The only thing left to do is work to mitigate the damage and figure how to make more Americans take that choice seriously in the future.
Unfortunately “highly engaged voters” aren’t a large segment of the population. If you want to win elections, you have to cater to the voters who only hear the occasional sound bite and then just make a decision based on vibes and/or what their friends and chosen media propaganda factory tell them.
No, it’s not an ideal world, but it’s the world we live in, and it’s been that way for a long time — more than long enough that the DNC should have gotten it’s act together by now. And yet… here we are again…
I’m not so sure that’s going to matter this time around.
Again! Again!
What changed?
Probably the looming possibility of an American gulag for Trump’s political enemies.
Rad. Do Microsoft next.
“Blue collar capitalism”
¿Por qué no los dos?
It absolutely is, which is why MAGA lawmakers are gonna keep pushing it relentlessly.
This myth is probably prevalent because corporations have spent the last 40 years squeezing every cheat and every advantage they can out of the system — to the point where anything that even smells like a “good gesture” is rightfully met with suspicion and contempt from the people they’ve been so blissfully exploring.
It’s a marketing thing. Stuff like this creates the illusion that they’re good corporate citizens.
Of course, they could donate a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of their own profits and make a much bigger impact, but that would set a bad precedent! Giving away your money is only for the working class!
Kentucky tried to do something similar via a constitutional amendment this election cycle, but the voters soundly rejected it — in one of the most conservative (and religious) states in the country.
Nobody wants this, except for the conservative policy makers attempting to create the next generation of brainwashed youth.
This may come as a crazy shock to you, but, hear me out… You can just say stuff sometimes, for fun, without being super serious.
Not everything has to be a thesis, it’s also okay to just shoot the shit.
One big issue is that the term “free range” is essentially meaningless as defined by the USDA, and often gives consumers the false sense that products marked as “free range” come from animals who had a higher standard of living than non-free range, therefore making their farming more ethical. In reality, this is basically never true.
To qualify as “free range” an animal needs to have “continuous access to the outdoors for 50% of its life”. Sounds good on paper, but “outdoors” isn’t rigorously defined in this standard. This means that situations that no reasonable person would call “continuous access to the outdoors” still count. For example, you could cram 1000 chickens into a small barn to the point where they barely have space to move, but as long as there’s a hole in one wall that opens into a tiny one-foot-by-one-foot pen with no roof, it still counts. If that teeny tiny “outdoor” space can fit at least 1 chicken, then congratulations, all 1000 are now “free range”. As long as you cater to some very specific loopholes, you can get away with factory farming while still having the legal right to claim on your packaging that your animals were treated humanely.
Terms like “organic” and “pasture raised” are similarly deceptive to the point of being meaningless, and so it’s basically impossible to know what conditions your food was subjected to during it’s life based on the packaging alone. Of course you can always try to do your own research about individual companies (or if you’re lucky enough to have access, individual farms), but there are lots of laws on the books protecting them from having to disclose specific details to anyone but the USDA, so good luck getting any meaningful information. There have even been cases of farm workers and journalists being prosecuted for things like sharing pictures of farm conditions or publishing personal accounts of how livestock were treated on private farms. Fortunately the “ag gag” laws that allow these whistleblowers to be prosecuted are rarer than they used to be, but there are still a handful of states that have them (if you tried to guess which ones, you’d probably get most of them right).
In reality, the only way to know if an animal was raised to your own standards of ethics is to raise it yourself.