House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., have been calling state legislators about the map, which could affect control of Congress.
Fact: there are double the number of people in the country after than there were before.
Fact: social status tends to have generational inertia.
Specious: "misleading in appearance, especially misleadingly attractive."
It's absolutely specious, because you're somehow suggesting those policies failed because the absolute number of individuals went up, disregarding the fact that had those policies not been in place, the number would've been double what it is.
And I said at best, because it's far more likely you're just trolling. But, giving you the benefit of the doubt, let's work through this.
If a family in poverty that's 2 people, has 3 children, that's now 5 people.
If this is the only family that exists, 100% of people are in poverty. If one of those children winds up getting out of poverty, you've gone from 2 people in poverty, to 4 people in poverty. However, you've gone from 100% poverty to 80% poverty.
Again: because there's more PEOPLE than there has ever been. Yes, there is more suffering. I have no idea what you expect, the political climate is such that we can't just eradicate their suffering. But to pretend like these policies are a failure is going to cause more suffering. How do you not see that?
That 20% is the number that aren't suffering because of these policies. If you were to remove them, that 20% is the added suffering you are causing.
Is it perfect? Absolutely not.
Have they accomplished everything they set out to? Absolutely not.
Are they failing? Absolutely not.
I mean, what is an acceptable number of people living in poverty to you and when are there too many? Is it a percentage? Or is it a real number of real people?
See, in my world, percentages are real numbers of real people. I know, that's crazy. And I'm not going to pretend like there's some number that's acceptable, or enough, because that's not the point. The point is that the policies we're discussing have reduced the suffering.
You calling them a lie can only lead to more suffering. Hopefully you realize that some day.
the disagreements come in about what the right way to do that is.
I mean, when one side says "these things that help people are failures because they don't help enough people" and the other side says "but they're helping people", that's not about the right way.
At no point have you offered an alternative, you're simply saying "the other side is wrong" while using specious arguments to back it up.
Do you think conservatives are hatful little Devil’s just trying to hurt people?
Calling objectively successful policies failures is either extremely ignorant or actively trying to hurt people.
But for someone like me, who thinks helping people become self sufficient and get off of programs like welfare, the numbers don’t look like that’s what’s happening at all.
This has been proven not to actually help. You know what has? Giving cash to people. Just straight up giving them money. It's too bad conservatives refuse to believe that and insist on means testing everything and reducing benefits wherever possible.
There's another fun thing. One half of the people in this conversation actually listen to experts. The other half considers all experts suspect and presumes they're all politically motivated (to make them look bad, no doubt.)
And I like how you shared an article talking about how people in poverty have the highest marginal tax rate. Considering conservatives are constantly cutting tax rates, that's a delightful irony in your argument. Maybe if we quit giving ten times as much money to rich people and started using that money to support poor people, we could help them better.
Taxes are certainly an issue, but just giving people money is not the answer to poverty.
There's a lot of evidence that the solution to "people not having enough money to live" is, in fact, "giving people enough money to live".
It is the perpetual poverty machine keeping people impoverished
AKA Capitalism, sure. With how much you whine about leftists, I'd assume you were all for that. A pretty major plank of conservative platforms is "hurt people more efficiently".
Yep. By the experts. That do things like "research". Much better to listen to these other lies, that people that have a vested interest in the outcome want to tell me.
You know that lottery winners are more likely to go broke too, right? Did you ever wonder why that might be?
You are truly masterful at specious arguments. I wish some day I could attain your level of expertise at that. (And, for the record, that's specious with an e. Last time you tried to use it you said spacious, which doesn't make a lick of sense.)
I don't know how else to make you understand this. If you give enough money to survive to people in poverty, they stop being people in poverty. There's evidence of this all over the world, not just in the US. If people on welfare get "trapped by welfare", why does the poverty rate decline in every country that has welfare? Wouldn't it increase? How do you explain all the research that show things like UBI causes dramatic improvements in quality of life in many places?
Yes, giving a lifetime's worth of cash to someone that's been in poverty their whole life is a great way of completely destroying their life. I completely agree. It doesn't make sense to try and apply that to giving those same people a reasonable amount to survive on, though.
You’re actually hurting more people but thinking that you’re helping.
Again. Experts, research and reality all agree with me.
Having spent a lot of time on Mastodon... There are tons of people there talking about federated and self-hosted services, software freedom, censorship, encryption, tech regulation... A very narrow range of topics directly surrounding the fediverse get a lot of attention....
Of the top 10 posts currently on my front page, 2 are about the Fediverse, 1 is about Kbin specifically, and the other 7 are completely different topics including politics, space, video games and art.
Maybe you should look for magazines/communities other than /m/fediverse if you want to talk about things other than the fediverse.
No, this was on /sub, and I've been aggressively curating my subscriptions and blocking things I don't have any interest in.
Even looking now on /all with incognito, though, there's only 2 even about Lemmy. I do see a few from 196. There's posts about atheism, random tips from @youshouldknow, a Cosplayer, quite a few memes and shitposts, some political content about Florida, a nice flower, movie news, a couple antiwork posts, an article about a new Alzheimer's drug.
It's just not all about the Fediverse. Is it a popular topic? Hell yeah it is, especially considering Threads literally released yesterday, and the API blocks from Reddit are just now rolling out. It's not just popular, it's timely and current too. As those things age, it'll come up less.
I'm afraid half of those people signed in for a day and then left when nothing was happening.
I mean, sure. There's been days where I haunted Kbin/Lemmy then left. But currently, there's very little else that fills the gap of Reddit beyond this. So I keep coming back, and I keep talking. That's how it grows.
On the other hand this seems really strange to me and it just seems so insane to think that Reddit would even think of doing this.
Have you read about any of Spez's interviews? This feels entirely like something they would do. Don't forget, reddit was originally populated with bots.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Sunday warned of an “authoritarian expansion of power” by the Supreme Court after it released several controversial opinions in it’s last week of the…
Could popular forums implement ActivityPub and connect to the Fediverse? ( kbin.social )
Title
Alabama GOP refuses to draw second Black district, despite Supreme Court order ( www.nbcnews.com )
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., have been calling state legislators about the map, which could affect control of Congress.
Why Isn't Clarence Thomas Facing Impeachment Hearings? ( www.theroot.com )
The disgraceful Supreme Court justice should be held accountable for his actions but probably won't.
Can we please remember to talk about things on the fediverse besides the fediverse itself? ( kbin.social )
Having spent a lot of time on Mastodon... There are tons of people there talking about federated and self-hosted services, software freedom, censorship, encryption, tech regulation... A very narrow range of topics directly surrounding the fediverse get a lot of attention....
Reddit seems to be scrambling behind the scenes to try and limit the effects of the migration. Damage control: ChatGPT bots are spamming pro-admin, astroturfed comments ( i.imgur.com )
Apologies if this is a repost. They’re scared lol....
Ocasio-Cortez warns of ‘dangerous authoritarian expansion of power’ in Supreme Court ( thehill.com )
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Sunday warned of an “authoritarian expansion of power” by the Supreme Court after it released several controversial opinions in it’s last week of the…