Fucking vote.
this post was submitted on 09 May 2024
69 points (94.8% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2614 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Reminder that Trump repealed 112 environmental regulations in one term. Over a decade of legislation lost, that will take over a decade to reenact.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks-list.html
Sabotage oil and gas infrastructure?
This one is probably bad but I actually really like it.
I’m really into the book “Ministry of the Future”. It has a lot of shit like that in it.
I read that last year, actually. Potential spoilers:
Just difference of opinion but I wasn't a fan. I obviously think the subject matter is interesting and I liked the sociopolitical basis of the story. But I felt it was bogged way down by an author who was trying to make several parts into some weirdly verbose report to give it a sense of realism (I seem to recall an entire chapter being a written-out list of fictional committee names that were being created to fight climate change). At the same time, when he was writing about the terrorist attacks like swarms of drones attacking infrastructure, it felt really vague and Hollywood, dare I say, even boomer-esque. Just a bit lofty for the sake of action.
You're in good company though, I remember reddit fuckin loved that book so it's probably just not for me. I'm also sensitive to hype and it didn't live up to it.
Yeah, not every book is for everyone. Doesn’t really change whether or not I liked the book.
The book has flaws for sure, but it seemed like it was almost as alarmist as it should be. It seemed utopian to me in the end. He completely missed out on how fascists are going to react to all this for instance.
Yeah, I agree. We need more books like it these days...
And animal agriculture
Have to be careful on this one as you don't want to cause more harm than good. Make sure it's all focused on disabling pumps and valves while not increasing the likelihood of releases.
Some idiots would go around blowing things up causing massive environmental damage when what we really want to do is just leave the stuff in the tanks it's already in, or in the ground it's already in.
Exclusively working from home since 2018 so I cut out 10 un-necessary driving trips a week. x2 since my wife is WFH now too.
Installed solar panels to run the house during the day, so our working hours are fully solar powered.
I guess that's all we can do for now.
If you're looking for other things to do:
- vote to address climate change (some people can only really vote to reduce the damage done slightly)
- Reduce meat consumption (doesn't even have to be zero meat)
- Reduce flying Regardless, thanks for driving less, and helping the cause!
Vote
If you do have to go out, use a bicycle instead of a car.
Not a good option for hauling groceries in the rain. But I get where you're coming from.
Been doing that all my life. For that you have water tight bags on your bike.
Also, you'll have much more smaller supermarkets dotted all over the place, instead of one Walmart for an entire city. You just go and quickly buy the stuff you will use that day.
It really isn't an issue
Voting is great, but lobbying, gerrymandering and PACs can subvert the democratic process. Historically, this is where protests have shown to be helpful.
The most powerful action? Make our politicians start investing heavily in bicycle infrastructure and public transportation infrastructure.
This car culture is insane
The best thing you can do to help the climate? Kill a billionaire.
Best legal thing? Idk... Vote I guess?
We need to go back to a 90% or higher tax rate on income over some threshold, and fix the loopholes that let wealthy people have income that doesn't count as income. Especially the "take a loan and pay that back and all the activity there doesn't count as income for tax purposes" bullshit.
And tax corporate profits more, and make a corporate tax system that rewards real R&D (while auditing to prevent fake tax shelter R&D), rewards higher employee salaries and better benefits (instead of taxing those), and rewards infrastructure investments like new factories but also investments in efficiency, water use reduction, etc.
Personal vehicles are the largest single source of emissions in the US.
If only denser housing structures and public transportation and work from home didn't all keep getting voted down and shouted down by NIMBYs so we had a better way. I get out and vote and write letters to elected officials. Not much more many of us can do.
Huh so you’re telling me most people want nothing to do with living in crammed apartment buildings?
Wow shocked pikachu face.
Wow. Way to show you have no understanding of neither the proposed solutions nor NIMBYs. The idiots voting them down don't care about what is actually being proposed, they care exclusively that it will lower housing costs. If there's enough housing for everyone their house suddenly isn't as precious a commodity and their retirement plan just withered away.
There's plenty of people who would happily move into new apartments.
Cool story bro. Have fun living in a crammed apartment building. Be sure to comment about how awesome it is and how everyone should do it.
... you realize the US has a huge housing problem where thousands of people are literally without a home? I bet a lot of people would choose to live in a "crammed" apartment building than be homeless. Right now, NIMBYs don't even want the free market to dictate whether dense housing should be created. There's zoning restrictions which don't allow the option for the creation of denser housing. What's happening now is home owners in those areas want to continue to disallow other people to build denser housing. Not even talking about 20 floor building, but sometimes even 2 story apartments or a location where more than 1 family can legally live. Its extremely regressive and helps their home prices increase, while making it harder for non home owners to gain a home.
It's possible to build nice apartments that have a good amount of space to live in. But that's not as profitable per sq ft for the property management companies that have been buying up all the land.
There's also some minor regulatory reforms that are probably needed to allow a little more flexibility in building design, specifically around the required number/type/location of stairwells. But we have to be careful about that one because we don't want to make death traps.
wow, didn't think that was the case, but based on 2021's numbers, its true. Transportation from vehicles, including personal vehicles, accounts for 29% of emissions. This is the largest source, right above electricity generation (25%). Thought transportation would be top 3 but that something else would overtake it. source
First thing to come to mind is: Voting. Wherever you are.
EDIT: Wow, guess i am not alone with that,
@[email protected] @[email protected]
Voting is a witchcraft mind-spell ritual in which the victim thinks his wish gives him power.
Transportation pales in comparison to heating and cooling homes and businesses. The single greatest thing we can do to reduce climate change from a policy standpoint involves reducing that. From work at home, to multi family zoning, to converting business skyscrapers into living space, to increasing efficiency and fossil fuels from energy production. And all that does a lot to improve transportation environmental costs as well.