I think we need to look at housing as a technology to spread as opposed to an investment to horde. Then do the same thing with utilities.
Tons of reasons not to do it but it makes society less dependent on employment.
I think we need to look at housing as a technology to spread as opposed to an investment to horde. Then do the same thing with utilities.
Tons of reasons not to do it but it makes society less dependent on employment.
I'm trying to eliminate bias.
I'm looking at the whole pool of people who vote without making any assumptions.
If there is 2 parties and you switch relative to the last election you create a delta of 2.
Think of it this way converting rightwingers is twice as effective than persuading non voters.
I don't see the value of the "both sides" argument. I think vote blue no matter who may have the value of shifting the overton window. But the reality is many of the people on the far left are just non voters making post hoc rationalizations. So I don't really care about their opinion.
It's actually really simple. The coalition required to reform the government includes the right and republicans. They actually vote. Really we should be looking at the tactics used to convert people from the progressive era.
In this way you avoid counterfactual arguments and actually have a path to follow. As opposed to feeling like you have some magical solution if only you were president.
The corruption makes staying in power necessary.
I think the real hole in the market is a simple device that could replace the remote control.
People get too deep into conspiracy theories. Establishment politics is problematic but I think people need to engage with how things actually work.
The rich and powerful are going to petition the government and the government will have some corruption. So the how is important because it informs how we put them back in their box.